当前位置: X-MOL 学术Communication Theory › 论文详情
Our official English website, www.x-mol.net, welcomes your feedback! (Note: you will need to create a separate account there.)
Embracing Intersectionality in Co-Cultural and Dominant Group Theorizing: Implications for Theory, Research, and Pedagogy
Communication Theory ( IF 4.111 ) Pub Date : 2021-05-08 , DOI: 10.1093/ct/qtab002
Robert J Razzante 1 , Robin M Boylorn 2 , Mark P Orbe 3
Affiliation  

It can be difficult to identify consequential social identities when both conversation participants feel culturally disadvantaged. This phenomenon is especially present in intercultural interactions that are power-laden, but are also present when there are multiple perceptions of social disadvantage at play within a given interaction. Depending on the saliency of a cultural marker such as race or sex, for example, an African American man may feel disadvantaged more or less than a European American woman during the same exchange, depending on which cultural marker they each deem most prominent (Orbe & Roberts, 2012). Most people maintain both privileged and marginalized identities, but when someone claims to be more or less privileged/marginalized than someone else, a paradox of intersectionality emerges. A paradox of intersectionality (Boogaard & Rogaland, 2010; Nash, 2008) recognizes that not all oppression is experienced the same, and claims there is no distinct hierarchical manifestation of marginalization. We explore the benefits of embracing an intersubjective ontology that is historically situated, but not determined, to suggest that intersubjectivity and intersectionality (Crenshaw, 1989) is central to co-cultural and dominant group theorizing (Razzante & Orbe, 2018). Intersubjectivity reminds us that “who we are in the world is based on the beliefs that we are not separate individuals (entities) but we are always in relation with others—with particular persons, communities, history, culture, [and] language” (Cunliffe, 2016, p. 742). We believe this interconnectedness of identity informs co-cultural and dominant group theory and therefore expands the possibilities for its theorization.

中文翻译:

在共同文化和主导群体理论中拥抱交叉性:对理论,研究和教学法的启示

当两个参加谈话的人都在文化上处于不利地位时,很难确定相应的社会身份。这种现象尤其存在于充满权力的跨文化互动中,但在给定互动中对社会处境不利的多重看法也存在。例如,根据种族或性别等文化标志的显着性,非裔美国人在同一次交流中可能比欧洲裔妇女或多或少感到处境不利,这取决于他们各自认为哪种文化标志最突出(Orbe&罗伯茨(Roberts),2012年)。大多数人同时保留特权和边缘化身份,但是当某人声称比其他人或多或少享有特权/边缘化时,就会出现交叉的悖论。交叉性的悖论(Boogaard&Rogaland,2010; Nash,2008)认识到并非所有的压迫经历都相同,并声称没有明显的边缘化等级表现。我们探讨了采用主体间的本体论的好处,这种主体间的本体论在历史上是定位的,但尚不确定,这表明主体间性和交叉性(Crenshaw,1989)对于共同文化和主导群体理论化至关重要(Razzante&Orbe,2018)。主体间性提醒我们:“我们在世界上的信念是,我们不是独立的个体(实体),而是我们始终与他人(特定的人,社区,历史,文化和[和]语言)联系在一起”( Cunliffe,2016年,第742页)。
更新日期:2021-05-10
down
wechat
bug