2.5 Intersectionality
2.5.1 Locating Intersectionality Approach within Critical Feminist Theory
Irene Browne and Joya Misra (2003:488) convincingly argue that the development of intersectionality is rooted in the work of scholars who were interested in Black feminist theory, a body of research within post-colonial feminism in the late 1990’s (see Knudsen 2010:61). As a construct that has been in women’s studies for over thirty years, Nash (2008) in her “Re-Thinking Intersectionality” establishes that the concept of intersectionality has been used in recent gender research as a primary analytical tool dominant not only for theorising oppression but also as a way of conceptualizing identity. In this way, Leslie McCall (2005:1771) and Jennifer Nash (2008:1) have stressed the importance of intersectionality describing it as “...the most important theoretical contribution that women’s studies, in conjunction with related fields, has made so far.” Stephanie Shields (2008:301) contends that, as an analytical tool, intersectionality is a critical feminist theory for our present understanding of gender, transforming how gender is discussed.
Therefore, intersectionality not only aids our understanding of gender, but calls for our thoroughness in analysing what informs construction of gendered identities.
There are varied understandings of what feminism is all about:
First, Ann Clifford (2001), contends that feminism is to be understood as a perspective of life, seen as social activism rooted in women’s experiences of sexually based discrimination and oppression. Any feminist movement has a role to end oppression, discrimination, and violence directed against women based on the conviction that women need to acquire full human dignity and equality with men (Clifford 2001 and Rakoczy 2004). Hence, Elisabeth Schüssler Fiorenza (2011:1) argues that the analysis of domination and struggle must be central to a critical feminist approach while Musa Dube
(2002:103) refers to feminism as a movement of women and men seeking to understand the construction of women as secondary citizens and seeking to fight to empower women.
Second, feminism is understood as an academic method of analysis being used in nearly every discipline (Clifford 2001:17). As an academic method of analysis, feminism is critical, liberative and constructive (Rakoczy 2004:11), seeking to reconstruct human societies, social structures and religious institutions as well. According to Joann Wolski Conn (1991:217), feminism is a critical evaluation of the experienced, patriarchal world.
As a critical theory, Saskai Wieringa (1995:5) posits that feminism is a discursive process, a process which produces meaning of undermining representations of gender and recreating new representations of gender, womanhood, of identity and collective self.
Pushing the argument further, Wieringa (1995) shows that feminism carries multiple meanings, limited neither to recent movements, nor in public outbursts and in the struggles in the private domain, for these private struggles are always expressions of the external collective process.
This is informative to my study in two ways. First, the individual and collective processes within structures of power dynamics influence how masculinities are represented and reproduced. I contend, for instance, based on the context of this current study, for the need of critical awareness of the cause and effects of patriarchy as domains of power.
Important to note is that the patriarchal world is reproduced and maintained possibly as men happen to be at the “intersections” of collective socio-political, cultural, religious and economic forces as realities which contribute to create and shape ‘ideals’ of manhood as men renegotiate their masculine identities. This patriarchal world is then experienced harshly mostly by women, but also at varied levels by subordinate males who cannot live to achieve “hegemonic” categories of manhood. Second, and important, is that feminism seeks to challenge biological essentialisms/determinism attached to universal perceptions of gender identities associated with men and women, a tendency that defines womanhood as “different” and “inferior” to manhood which is seen as superior. This kind of gender binary describes men and women in a hierarchical pattern where socialised gender behaviours define what is considered ‘authentic’ masculinity and femininity. For example, women are emotional and men must be rational. In such situations, feminism as a critical and analytical framework discursively engages ways of
recreating alternative representations of gender identity which are not oppressive but inclusive. This indispensable character of feminism as a critical theory has been engaged in this study in seeking to ascertain whether feminist approaches (and specifically feminist theology) within Christian theology could assist with exploring alternative counter images of masculinities which are not patriarchal but life affirming. In this case, feminist theology as a strand of feminism remains significant to my study.
To my knowledge, very limited academic work, if any, has covered the link between feminist theology and theories of intersectionality. However, a critical look at feminist theological work illustrates an inclination to intersectional perspectives either directly or interactively. As such, feminist theology engages various intersections which impacts societies, beginning their discourse with women’s experiences. This, however, does not mean that issues of masculinity do not feature as important to feminist theologians.
When men and women reflect on issues of feminism from a Christian theological perspective, the end product is feminist theology, of which Christian feminist theology is an example. The overriding contour of feminist theology as pointed out by Pamela Young (1990:11) is that feminist theology draws on the broader project of feminist theory. Like feminist theory rooted in the women’s movement of the late 1960s and 1970s in North America, Jones (2000:13-14) shows that “feminist theology” can refer, as well, to any type of feminist “spiritual” thinking about God. With its distinctive interest in Christian theology, Jones contends:
This kind of feminist theology takes special interest in the lives of women bringing their experiences into the drama of the Christian message and explores how Christian faith grounds and shapes women’s experiences of hope, justice and grace as well as instigates and enforces women’s experiences of oppression, sin, and evil. It is a theology that articulates the Christian message in language and actions that seek to liberate women and all persons, a goal that Christian feminists believe cannot be disentangled from the central truth of the Christian faith as a whole (2000:14).
At the centre of this Christian message are masculine figures who have contributed in shaping its scope for ages. Representations of masculinities have been at the centre of Christianity history, a fact that cannot be easily refuted. The reason why the Christian message enforces women’s experiences of oppression, I would argue, could be because
the history of this message (as most feminists would argue) is shaped by and is often from a masculinist worldview. For Rosemary Ruether (1993:13), the use of women’s experience in feminist theology calls into question the basis of “universal theology”
which is largely based on male experience.
Central to the quest of Christian feminist theology is the interrogation of how patriarchal perceptions are created and maintained in religious contexts, thereby informing articulation of Christian theology and life practices among men and women. In seeking to assist the church to see with renewed clarity, the intersections of Christian traditions, doctrinal beliefs and the interpretation of scriptures that sanction certain practices as
“divinely” ordained by God must take central emphasis in examining contextual constructions of gendered identities within Christian faith communities. Clifford (2001:30) has argued that Christianity is not exempt from criticism where sexism, racism and classism are concerned. Therefore, I would argue that the means through which these “isms” interlock require thorough analysis while investigating constructions of masculinities.
Fiorenza (1994, 1999) for example notes the importance of interrogating the concept of kyriarchy which construes structures of inequality and domination emanating as a result of socialisation within categories of race/ethnicity, gender, class, religion, nationality and sexuality. As a concept, kyriarchy depicts the rule of emperor, master, lord, father, husband over subordinates, indicating a complex pyramid of dominations and subordinations (Fiorenza 1994:14). Putting forward kyriarchy as interlocking and multiplying systems of domination and submission, Fiorenza (2002:125) critiques Western postcolonial white feminists for focusing on gender alone. She argues that this constructs a dual system of patriarchy and imperialism which does not consider the intersectional analysis of the interconnectedness of various forms of oppression.
Kyriarchy remains crucial in the context of my study as I examine constructions of masculinity within Charismatic/Evangelical Christianity in a postcolonial context. This is important when dealing with kyriarchal powers and hierarchies which arise from the intersections of religious beliefs and Christian theologies and other socio-cultural categories within my scope of inquiry. In applying suspicion in my analysis, it is interesting for instance, to explore how the effects of kyriarchal histories of Christian
traditions continue to enforce masculine domination in order to influence ‘ideal’ forms of contemporary representations of masculinities within CEPC. These are addressed in later chapters of this thesis.
The intersection of religion, culture and theology must not only remain important while theorising oppression of women in Africa as most scholars would advance, but also proves informative in understanding how various factors interconnect with other categories contributing to masculine construction. This requires attention especially when theorising men’s representations of ideal masculinities in an African context.