Introduction: The Implications for Theory and Practice of Comparing the Treatment of Intersectionality in the Equality Architecture in Europe

Mieke Verloo · Sylvia Walby

29 citations0/0 files storedSocial Politics International Studies in Gender State & Society

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Discrimination and Equality Law Feminist Theory and Gender Studies Gender, Health, and Social Inequality

Abstract

Intersectionality has become an important issue in feminist theory and practice. It has been much debated theoretically, and to some extent even positioned as the normative ideal, but empirically informed analyses—as well as reflections back on theory—are less common. While the criticism of conceptions of discrimination that think about subordination as disadvantage occurring along a single categorical axis (Crenshaw 1989) is clear, the implications for new legal and policy practices are altogether less obvious, and certainly complex. This set of papers engages with theoretical questions and with policy practice on intersectionality: not only assessing the implications of empirical findings for theory, but also the implications of theory for practice. Here, comparative analysis within the European Union (EU) offers a major contribution to theory and practice. In the context of the EU and its 27 Member States, many new legal frameworks and institutional arrangements for dealing with multiple inequalities have recently been introduced and put to the test of practice. More specifically, in the EU context, the significance of the intersection of multiple inequalities has been deployed to argue for the rapid restructuring of the equality architecture—including women's policy bodies, gender machinery—in the last few years. The Member States of the EU have been engaged in what is effectively experimentation in the form of equality architecture, within a legal framework that to some extent is shared. In this, they address a range of inequalities that at least includes gender, race/ethnicity, age, religion or belief, (dis)ability, and sexual orientation. In this issue, some papers also accentuate how class inequality is included in the equality institutions (notably Walby, Armstrong, and Strid 2012).

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 29 citations exist upstream.

References

1991Mapping the Margins: Intersectionality, Identity Politics, and Violence against Women of Color 2018Demarginalizing the Intersection of Race and Sex: A Black Feminist Critique of Antidiscrimination Doctrine, Feminist Theory, and Antiracist Politics [1989]2005The Complexity of Intersectionality 2007When Multiplication Doesn't Equal Quick Addition: Examining Intersectionality as a Research Paradigm 2012Intersectionality: Multiple Inequalities in Social Theory 2006Multiple Inequalities, Intersectionality and the European Union 2009Globalization and Inequalities: Complexity and Contested Modernities 2009The Discursive Politics of Gender Equality

Cited by

2016Interrogating violence against women and state violence policy: Gendered intersectionalities and the quality of policy in The Netherlands, Sweden and the UK 2021Not additive, not defined: mutual constitution in feminist intersectional studies 2018Stories from the Front Lines: Making Sense of Gender Mainstreaming in Canada 2019Fish Fingers and Measles? Assessing Complex Gender Equality in the Scenarios for the Future of Europe

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.