ABSTRACT

This article empirically charts how a discursive construction of the separation of race and racial justice organizing, and “intersectionality” serves to uphold white supremacy and efface intersectional marginalization among people of colour. Undertaking the first-study of how UK policymakers and practitioners in equality organizations understand and operationalize “intersectionality”, it maps “generic intersectionality”, which is delivered to benefit “all”. Through empirical examples, its detrimental effects for racial and intersectional justice are demonstrated. First, it is used as a rationale for a relinquishment of a focus on race/racism; racial justice organizations are constructed as uniquely incapable of doing intersectionality. Second, “neutral”, “unspecific” representatives are constructed those capable of knowing about and doing intersectionality. Intersectionally marginalized people are constituted as non-credible knowers and doers of intersectionality. Generic intersectionality is a novel use of intersectionality, which gives a new name to liberal sameness and constructs its beneficiaries as a monolithic, white “everyone”.

摘要

本文从经验上说明种族和种族正义组织的分离的话语结构和“交叉性”如何维护有色人种的白人至上和消除交叉边缘化。对英国政策制定者和平等组织中的从业者如何理解和实施“交叉性”进行了首次研究，它绘制了“通用交叉性”，将其交付以使“所有人”受益。通过经验例子，证明了其对种族和交叉司法的不利影响。首先，它被用作放弃对种族/种族主义关注的理由；种族司法组织的构建是独一无二的，无法做到相互交叉。其次，构建了“中立”，“非特定”的代表，他们能够了解并进行交叉。处于边缘地位的人被认为是不可信赖的知识分子和交叉行为者。通用交叉性是交叉性的一种新颖用法，它为自由相同性赋予了一个新名称，并将其受益者构造为一个整体的白人“所有人”。