Search results

The objective of this discussion is to present an intersectional framework to better inform our reading and understanding of contemporary reports of sexual assault and sexual harassment. I posit that contemporary incidents of sexual violence must be read within the historical framework of slavery, where plantations served as the first site of sexual exploitation that has provided the ideological and practical scaffold for the continued erasure of the abuses of Black women and men in the workplace and under the law. This legacy, nonetheless, has yielded a coded language for according visibility to the “deep story” of rape and race in the United States.

Work-life research has been critiqued for focusing on the experiences of middle and upper class, younger, White, western and heterosexual women. The purpose of this paper is to provide a critical lens to conceptualizations that take an intersectionality approach, or at least consider multiple identities, in examining work-life conflict and balance.

A brief review of the current status of intersectionality research within the work-life realm is provided before discussing the implications of primarily using a single-identity approach to work-life issues. The advantages and challenges of adopting a multiple identity approach are discussed.

This paper highlights the problems of a lack of an intersectional focus in terms of unidentified needs, ignored values, unresolved conflicts and unhelpful advice. Tensions inherent in trying to adopt an intersectional perspective when dealing with practice and policy issues, particularly with regard to visibility and authenticity, are noted. The paper concludes with a discussion of how considerations of identity and power in work-family research connect to the broader concept of inclusion in the workplace, noting the possible challenges of stereotyping and ambiguity in doing so.

Applying an intersectionality lens to efforts to promote work-life balance in organizations can increase inclusivity, but there are tensions and pitfalls associated with this that are particularly of note for practitioners and policy. A research agenda is outlined as a starting point for addressing these issues.

This chapter analyzes the intersectionality of inequalities based on class, gender, sexual orientation, and gender identity within the Indignados (indignant or outraged people) movement of Spain. By analyzing the interpretative frames and organizational practices of the movement, we looked for influencing factors and the degree to which the movement has incorporated an intersectional perspective into its interpretative frames. Some of the frames did attend to the various inter-related forms of inequality. The factors influencing an intersectional perspective included: the presence of coexisting or inclusive forms of expressing the collective identity of the movement, mechanisms implemented to balance asymmetries among actors, and the confluence of three of the four dominant frames within the movement.

Analyses focusing on the intersecting forces of race, class, and gender have been around much longer than theorists in the traditions of social science and the humanities have acknowledged. As early as the 19th century, Sojourner Truth and Anna Julia Cooper began to voice many of the sentiments that continue to shape the discourse around race, gender, and class that is occurring in this new millennium. They anticipated today's debate over the inadequacy of reliance on single categories of race, gender, or even class, to capture the complexities of lived experience (Lemert & Bahn, 1998; Painter, 1990). Their awareness of the importance of the intersection between race, gender, and class made their spoken perspectives on gender inequality unique at a time when the “cult of true womanhood” reigned supreme. Despite this fact, much of the literature utilizing this intersectional framework of analysis emerged just after the Civil Rights and Women's Liberation movements of the 1960s. Memorable pioneers of this paradigm of analysis are Angela Davis’ Women, Race & Class (1981), Audre Lorde's Sister-Outsider (1984), and Paula Giddings’ When and Where I Enter (1984). These crucial texts and speeches call for us to be mindful of the intersections of experience that are instrumental in the formation and maintenance of families and that are so often ignored in discursive theory and research, which treats race, gender, and class, sexuality, etc. as mutually exclusive social forces.

Heteronormativity and cisnormativity are dominant perspectives ensuring that social structures, including educational systems, operate with a bias for heterosexual, cisgender people. Gender and sexual minority (GSM) children worldwide attend schools where they are excluded and harassed because of their gender identity and/or sexuality. While many education professionals would not tolerate such discrimination perpetrated on the basis of minority ethnicity, race, or religion, relatively little attention is given to the marginalization of GSM students. The term ‘context paralysis’, coined here, describes a reluctance to engage with issues when the cultural context may make doing so difficult. Gender and sexuality are indeed sensitive and provocative topics, deeply connected to cultural norms and customs. However, to dismiss discrimination against GSM people in the name of local traditions is to be complicit in a tradition of bigotry. This chapter calls upon comparative and international education (CIE) scholars to employ their aptly nuanced training and expertise to elevate the visibility of issues barring GSM students from equal participation in school, to disseminate findings about effective interventions and policies that protect and support GSM students, and to interpret and adapt this research for application across cultural and geographic settings. Indeed, it is those in the field of CIE who may be best suited to carry out the sensitive implementation of educational research across borders and are, thus, particularly well-positioned to overcome context paralysis on behalf of GSM children worldwide.

Rich research discussion that occurs at conferences is rarely made accessible after the event. This paper aims to report on two “equality diversity and inclusion” (EDI) conferences held in Auckland, New Zealand, in 2008 and 2011. It summarises, compares and contrasts the processes and content of the conferences as well as identifying research trends and suggesting future research directions.

Text from the abstracts and transcribed audio recordings of conference discussions and presentations were analysed for similarities and differences. Two of the authors completed individual analyses of each of the conferences before reaching consensus on the overall themes.

Enduring EDI concerns over the two conferences were: identity, change practices and context. At the 2008 conference, three linked categories permeated discussion: methodologies, identity and practices for effective change. Over the intervening three years, research volume grew and differentiated into speciality areas. At the 2011 conference, methodological enquiry was less visible, but was intertwined through content areas of differentiated identities (sexuality, ethnicity, and gender), roles (leadership and management) and context (country, sport, and practice).

This paper distils research trends from two conferences and suggests directions for research.

The paper provides a bounded overview of developments and changes in the EDI sub‐discipline. Rich research discussion often occurs informally at conferences but is not made widely available. This paper aims to share conference discussions, research trends and potential directions for research.

This introduction by the volume editors discusses the multiple ways in which visibility and erasure of gender are manifested in social life. Following that discussion, the 12 chapters included in this volume are grouped in ways that demonstrate the relationships among them and are briefly summarized.

As the population ages in the United States and globally, health-care demands are rising and varied, including the growth of home health care. Small, regional, qualitative studies indicate both satisfaction and exploitation in home health-care work. These intimate, caring relationships with clients may be especially challenging for minorities due to client prejudice and structural marginalization. This study broadens the scope of current research by addressing issues facing home health-care workers using large-scale, nationwide data.

Using nationally representative data of home health aides in the US, the National Home Health Aide Survey (NHHAS), we evaluate which features of work are related to overall satisfaction. The prevalence and sources of discrimination and working conditions are examined according to workers’ intersectional gender, race, ethnicity, and class identities.

Satisfaction was highest for those who were extremely satisfied with challenging work, learning new skills, and were most supported in their caring labor. Salary was the area with the most frequent dissatisfaction. Support for reproductive and caring labor was often inadequate. Black women and men reported the highest levels of discrimination (about 28.0%), followed by Hispanic women and men (16.5% and 10%, respectively). The largest source of discrimination was patients (80.4%). There were differences in job outcomes according to intersectional identities of race, class, and gender.

Discrimination, low wages, and not having enough support for both reproductive and caring labor are problems for home health aides. Improving home health aide work is also likely to improve patient outcomes.