Progress report

Progress in Human Geography

2019, Vol. 43(5) 937–947
Social geography I: Intersectionality ª The Author(s) 2017

Article reuse guidelines:

sagepub.com/journals-permissions
DOI: 10.1177/0309132517743677
journals.sagepub.com/home/phg
Peter Hopkins
Newcastle University, UK

Abstract
Intersectionality is an approach to research that focuses upon mutually constitutive forms of social
oppression rather than on single axes of difference. Intersectionality is not only about multiple identities but is
about relationality, social context, power relations, complexity, social justice and inequalities. This report
reflects upon the use of intersectionality in social geography and emphasizes the complex histories of
intersectionality that are often overlooked in geography. I argue for a greater embrace of the contribution of
black feminists and some of the earliest work in geography taking an intersectional perspective. I also argue
for intersectionality to be used ethically and with care in geography, rather than it being deployed in a way
that unwittingly reproduces a white, colonialist, racist and masculinist discipline. I explore possible avenues
for future research about intersectionality in social geographies including a focus upon residential segrega-
tion, transnational migration and embodiment.

Keywords
anti-racism, black feminism, intersectionality, power, relationality

I Introduction that adopts an approach informed by intersec-

tional thinking also tends to be overlooked in
Intersectionality is the focus of my first progress
much social geography research about intersec-
report on social geography. Geographers have
tionality. Overall, geography could usefully
not been as attentive to the contested histories of
adopt a more sensitive interdisciplinary
intersectionality as they should have been;
approach to intersectionality that acknowledges
greater care is needed not to invisibilize the
more clearly the role of black feminism in its
contributions of black and anti-racist feminist
development.
academics and activists who have been so cru-
cial to shaping the field of intersectionality (e.g.
Anthias and Yuval-Davis, 1982; Brah, 1996; II What is intersectionality?
Brah and Phoenix, 2004; Davis, 1983, 2016; Crenshaw (1989) observed that the dominant
Collins, 2000, 2013, 2015; Crenshaw, 1989, approach to discrimination tends to focus on
1991; Hancock, 2007; hooks, 1982; Yuval- exclusions occurring along a single categorical
Davis, 2006). I emphasize three key points in axis. She observed that this ‘erases Black
this report: first, intersectionality emerged from
activist and academic black feminism; second,
Corresponding author:
this first point is often omitted from work in
Peter Hopkins, School of Geography, Politics and
geography, which leads to the reproduction of Sociology, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne,
our discipline as white, racist and colonialist; NE1 7RU, UK.
third, some of the earliest work in geography Email: peter.hopkins@ncl.ac.uk
938 Progress in Human Geography 43(5)

women in the conceptualization, identification agendas. Representational intersectionality

and remediation of race and sex discrimination focuses on how images of women of colour –
by limiting inquiry to the experiences of and debates about these – tend to overlook the
otherwise-privileged members of the group’ intersectional interests of such women.
(Crenshaw, 1989: 140). For Crenshaw (1989), Although applied to the experiences of black
simply adding racism and sexism together does women, Crenshaw (1991: 1296) notes that
not address the ways in which black women are ‘intersectionality might be more broadly useful
marginalized. Since this early intervention, as a way of mediating the tension between asser-
intersectionality has been used in a variety of tions of multiple identity and the ongoing neces-
different ways by different scholars: as an ana- sity of group politics’.
lytical framework for social justice (Hancock, Some are concerned that ‘the word
2016), a political orientation, epistemological “intersectionality” triggers use, misuse, and cri-
practice, and ontological framework (May, tique in ways that reinscribe the very political
2015); and an approach and a way of framing relations intersectionality scholarship critiques
interactions (Crenshaw, 1989, 1991). Other ver- and sets to transform’ (Hancock, 2016: 4, see
sions include it being regarded as an emerging also Carbado, 2013; May, 2014, 2015). For this
or major paradigm (Collins, 2013; McCall, reason, misuses and critiques of intersectional-
2005), a feminist theory (Davis, 2008) and an ity require critical scholarly interrogation. Inter-
analytic sensibility (Cho et al., 2013). Cho et al. sectionality has a historical legacy that needs to
(2013: 786) note that ‘it is more a heuristic be acknowledged and it also has a set of com-
device than a categorical one’ and clarify that mitments that require in-depth engagement
‘praxis has been a key site of intersectional cri- (May, 2015). One criticism is that there is no
tique’. Although there are varying and contrast- specific method or methodology associated
ing definitions of intersectionality, it is with intersectionality (Nash, 2008; Phoenix and
important to be aware of the ways intersection- Pattynama, 2006). As Jordan-Zachery (2007)
ality is being employed in contemporary work, points out, intersectionality researchers have
why, and to what ends. Indeed, the diverse use used survey data, content analysis, autobiogra-
of intersectionality has led to it being identified phical and biographical approaches, in-depth
as a ‘buzzword’ (Davis, 2008) which is an interviews, narratives as well as discourse anal-
important part of its popularity and political cur- ysis. Researchers using intersectionality are
rency (Collins, 2015) urged not to adopt an additive approach and
Crenshaw (1991) is often credited with intro- instead to look at how specific forms of inequal-
ducing intersectionality into academia through ity are mutually constitutive; yet sometimes the
her research about black women’s employment methods used result in an additive approach
experiences; she differentiated between struc- being used (Jordan-Zachery, 2007; Lewis,
tural, political and representational intersection- 2009). Walby et al. (2012) also point to specific
ality. Structural intersectionality is about the challenges around the place of social class, the
ways in which black women have to deal with balance between stability and fluidity of
‘multi-layered and routinized forms of domina- inequalities and focus on marginalized intersec-
tion’ (Crenshaw, 1991: 1245) such as those tions whilst keeping the role of the powerful in
associated with housing inequalities or employ- view. A further challenge is often presented
ment practices. Political intersectionality around what is meant by ‘interlocking’ (Han-
focuses on the ways in which black women cock, 2007; Jordan-Zachery, 2007) as intersec-
belong to at least two marginalized groups and tionality is often described as being about
so often have to engage with different political ‘interlocking’ forms of oppression with it not
Hopkins 939

always being clear what this means. Puar (2012) able-bodied men and how this often plays out
points to some of the limitations of intersection- in citation practices; they argue for ‘conscien-
ality becoming mainstreamed, questioning tious engagement’ with the politics of citation,
whether it now enables white liberal feminists seeing it as a ‘feminist and anti-racist technol-
to maintain their central position. An important ogy’ (Mott and Cockayne, 2017: 3).
concern about the employment of intersection- A review of geography’s deployments of
ality in a wide variety of contexts and disci- intersectionality suggests four key issues at
plines – and one that I follow up on in this stake. First, intersectionality has a far more
report – is a serious concern about the displace- complex and diverse history than is often repre-
ment of race as a key consideration of intersec- sented in much geographical scholarship.
tional analysis (Bilge, 2013). Despite these Many accounts of intersectionality start in the
criticisms, intersectionality is referred to regu- late 1980s or early 1990s, yet outside of
larly and is familiar to many social science dis- academia what Hancock (2016: 24) calls
ciplines, including geography. ‘intersectionality-like thought’ was being
developed by racially minoritized women’s
activist groups and social movements in differ-
III Challenges in using ent parts of the world (e.g. Combahee River
intersectionality Collective, 1983; Nash, 2011). Hancock
Cho et al. (2013: 785) note that there is ‘a bur- (2016) traces ideas of intersectionality back to
geoning field of intersectional studies’ and Han- as early as 1831 to Maria Stewart in Boston,
cock (2016: 12) expresses concern about while Collins and Bilge (2016) refer to the
‘intersectionality’s travel (both geographic and 19th-century work of Savitribai Phule, a first-
disciplinary) as replicating the very hegemonic generation Indian feminist, and to Frances
politics that intersectionality was created to Beal’s (1969) ‘Double Jeopardy: To Be Black
fight against’ (see also Carbado, 2013; Lewis, and Female’. Significantly, there was Global
2013). I am sensitive to Hancock’s (2016: 23) South engagement with ideas of intersectional-
discussion of ‘an interpretive community’ ity without necessarily naming it as such (Col-
which has been ‘entrusted with the care of such lins and Bilge, 2016; see also hooks, 1982).
a precious and complicated phenomenon like Second, related to this, intersectionality is too
intersectionality’; geographers are permitted to singularly associated with one specific field,
use intersectionality but must do so ethically year and person (Alexander-Floyd, 2012; Col-
and with care. To ignore the origins of intersec- lins and Bilge, 2016). Crenshaw’s (1991) work
tionality and its relationships to black feminism is often cited as the source of intersectionality,
would contribute further to the problematic yet others were working with the ideas of inter-
reinforcement of geography as a white, racist, sectionality well before this as Crenshaw herself
colonialist, masculinist discipline and risk the is quick to acknowledge (Guidroz and Berger,
passive ‘shrugging of the shoulders’ response 2009; Phoenix, 2006). Collins and Bilge (2016:
to accusations of geography being white (Mah- 83) observe that the oft-made claims that Cren-
tani, 2014). Geographers needs to pay more shaw ‘coined’ the term ‘not only routinely
attention to the origins of intersectionality in neglect the writings and activities of many peo-
black feminism and not only cite the work of ple who came before Crenshaw, but also mis-
white women and men. Mott and Cockayne read the full extent of Crenshaw’s arguments’
(2017) refer to ‘white heteromasculism’ bolster- (see also Tomlinson, 2013). Crenshaw ‘put a
ing the status of already-powerful white, name to ways of theorising that black feminists
middle-class, heterosexual, cisgendered and had long advocated and that working class and
940 Progress in Human Geography 43(5)

lesbian feminists had promoted’ (Phoenix, connects intersectionality to gender studies

2006: 21). That being said, her 1991 piece is rather than to antiracism and so centres gender
a significant contribution, particularly given rather than race as the focus of inquiry when the
its commitment to social justice, its focus on origins of intersectionality sit within both fem-
relationality, its emphasis on how ‘mutually inism and antiracism rather than only in the for-
constructing systems of power produce dis- mer. The whitening of intersectionality is, as
tinctive social locations for individuals and Blige (2013: 418) suggests:
groups within them’ (p. 82) and its attention
to lived and embodied experiences (Collins . . . a grim irony: a tool elaborated by women of
color to confront the racism and heterosexism of
and Bilge, 2016).
White-dominated feminism, as well as the sexism
Third, as intersectionality has been used and and heterosexism of antiracist movements,
applied in different contexts – often based on becomes, in another time and place, a field of
shallow misreadings or misunderstandings of expertise overwhelmingly dominated by White
it – there are concerns that the concept is depo- disciplinary feminists who keep race and racia-
liticized, separated from its social-justice lized women at bay. (Bilge, 2013: 418)
focused origins (Bilge, 2013), and ‘flattened’
as people’s lives are being separated from My main point in all of this is that geogra-
their political situations (Fine, cited in Guidroz phers need to show more sensitivity to the ori-
and Berger, 2009). Such depoliticization gins of intersectionality within black feminism.
encourages the superficial employment of inter- To ignore this issue risks intersectionality
sectionality. This ‘ornamental intersectionali- becoming depoliticized, flattened out and whi-
ty . . . allows institutions and individuals to tened, reinscribing rather than challenging geo-
accumulate value through good public relations graphy as a white, masculinist, colonialist
and “rebranding” without the need to actually discipline. As a ‘gathering place’ (Cho et al.,
address the underlying structures that produce 2013: 788), social geographers need to be
and sustain injustice’ (Bilge, 2013: 408). ethical, respectful and sensitive to the complex
Fourth, visibility and inclusion are impera- histories of intersectionality.
tives for using intersectionality; yet, scholars
have expressed anxieties about the whitening
of intersectionality as the work of black femin- IV Intersectionality in geography
ists and other minoritized scholars are over- Around the time that intersectionality was being
looked (Bilge, 2013). Here, the concern is that introduced into socio-legal studies and anti-
intersectionality is seen to belong to disciplinary racist feminist sociology in the late 1980s and
feminism which displaces the key role of race. early 1990s, a small group of geographers were
‘Claiming that feminism is responsible for cre- doing similar work. I highlight this work to
ating intersectionality has become a normative, make the point that social geographers have
perfectly naturalized, taken-for-granted femin- been thinking about issues relating to intersec-
ist practice’ (Bilge, 2013: 413); this requires tionality for some time. For example, Peake
challenging in order to recognize intersection- (1993) investigated the entanglement of sexual-
ality’s important connections with critical race ity and race in understanding patriarchal urban
theory and racialization processes. Geographers spaces, Kobayashi and Peake (1994) discussed
need to be particularly cautious of this. Valen- the connections between race and gender, Jack-
tine’s (2007) paper, for example, addresses fem- son (1994) wrote on gender, sexuality, race and
inist geography and locates intersectionality the body, and Ruddick (1996) explored the
within feminist social science. This essentially intersections between race, gender and class.
Hopkins 941

Moreover, in a progress report on social geogra- explored the intersections of sexuality and reli-
phies in this journal, Smith (1990) discussed the gion and belief through a focus on the Anglican
tensions associated with only focusing on gen- Communion Lambeth conference. Brown
der to the exclusion or marginalization of mat- (2012) provides a useful overview of the
ters connected to race and class. Valentine’s intersections between gender and sexuality in
(2007) paper is often cited as one of the first an earlier review in this journal (see also
in geography to focus upon intersectionality Johnston, 2016).
even though her paper acknowledges some of Geographers interested in masculinities have
this earlier geographical work. Longhurst and also applied intersectionality to their work
Johnston (2014) provide a useful overview of (Hopkins and Noble, 2009, Meth and McCly-
some of this earlier work, particularly in relation mont, 2009). Intersectionality has been identi-
to gender, sexuality and the body, and Peake fied as a key mechanism from advancing
(2010) has an excellent overview of the inter- geographies of age (Hopkins and Pain, 2007;
sections of gender, sexuality and race. Since this Pain and Hopkins, 2010) and has been used in
early work, the use of intersectional approaches work about young people (O’Neill Gutierrez
in geography has continued to grow. In the late and Hopkins, 2014) and to explore the intersec-
1990s and early 2000s a number of social geo- tions between masculinities and older age (Tar-
graphers focused on the intersections of, for rant, 2010). Work about racism and black
example, youth, gender and religion (Dwyer, geographies also employs intersectionality;
1999; Hopkins, 2007) and youth, gender and examples here include Shabazz’s (2015) study
class (Nayak, 2006). of black masculinity in Chicago, Joshi et al’s
Despite the concept being routinely (2015) critical engagement with whiteness and
employed by many social geographers, my microaggressions experienced by graduate stu-
argument is that we could be far more sensitive dents and faculty, and Eaves’ (2017) insights
to the activist and intellectual (albeit contested) into the queer Black South in the US. Bastia
origins of intersectionality and treat it with more (2014) provides an excellent overview of the
care in our work. Some geographers tend to import that intersectionality has in debates
overlook both the origins of intersectionality about migration and development (see also Bas-
in black feminism as well as the earliest work tia et al., 2011) and intersectionality has also
in geography. Yet amongst the main contribu- been employed in research focusing on issues
tions to intersectional geographies are notable relating to water, nature and ecology (e.g.
examples that acknowledge the origins of inter- Nightingale, 2011; Thompson, 2016). More
sectionality and pay attention to both gender recently, Gökariksel and Smith (2017) provide
and race whilst also being attentive to matters an insightful justification for the need for inter-
of inequality and politics. sectional feminism in the era of Trumpism.
Work in feminist geography and studies of A particularly notable contribution in geo-
sexuality in social geography often adopts inter- graphy is Mollett and Faria’s (2013) conceptua-
sectional approaches. For example, Schroeder’s lization of postcolonial intersectionality which
(2014) work looked at the intersections of sexu- they develop in relation to feminist political
ality, religion and class in relation to the cultural ecology (see also Mollett, 2017). They note that:
politics of LGBT neighbourhoods in Ohio,
Rodó-de-Zarate (2014, 2015, 2017) has Postcolonial intersectionality acknowledges the
advanced geographies of intersectionality way patriarchy and racialized processes are con-
through mapping young lesbians’ use of space sistently bound in a postcolonial genealogy that
in Catalonia, and Valentine et al. (2010) have embeds race and gender ideologies within nation
942 Progress in Human Geography 43(5)

building and international development pro- attentiveness to political issues and to inequal-
cesses. This concept reflects the way women and ity. In so doing, they avoid the omissions in
men are always marked by difference whether or some geographical work that risk whitening and
not they fit nicely in colonial racial categoriza- depoliticizing intersectionality.
tions, as cultural difference is also racialized.
(Mollett and Faria, 2013: 120)
V Pathways forward
Another important contribution to the geogra- If geography is to challenge and overcome its
phical literature is Hovorka’s (2012, 2015) work racist and colonial tendencies and to ensure that
about feminism and animals. Referring to the intersectionality is not depoliticized and whi-
case of Botswana, men and women are ‘associ- tened, what are some ways forward? For me,
ated with and have access to certain animals that, this is about ensuring that matters of race,
in turn, come with particular opportunities and/or racism and racialization are not displaced. Col-
constraints’. Hovorka (2015) observes that cattle lins and Bilge (2016) identify both social con-
are associated with higher socio-economic status text and relationality as two of the key
and can shape land-use as well as providing a characteristics of intersectionality, alongside a
source of employment; she points out that they focus on social inequality, social justice, com-
tend to be associated with men ‘who hold birth- plexity and power. It strikes me that in relation
rights to and benefit from cattle ownership’ to social context and relationality in particular,
(Hovorka, 2015: 5). In contrast, chickens have social geographers have a potentially significant
a lower status and tend to be more associated contribution to make. Collins and Bilge (2016:
with women. Hovorka (2015: 6) finds intersec- 197) clarify that ‘social context has many inter-
tionality useful as it ‘expands the nodes from pretations’ and they point to the importance of
which it is possible to unpack how power works factors such as historic context, states and their
in society by taking seriously species as a driver use of power as well as social institutions as all
of social construction, experience formation, dif- contributing to ‘social context’. Notably, they
ference and inequality’. point out that ‘the academy is an important insti-
A final example is Fisher (2015), who argues tutional context for intersectionality’ (p. 197) as
that the focus on the intersections of gender and well as the ways in which politics shapes how
race in geography has tended to conceptualize everyday places are constructed and arranged.
race and processes of racialization in relatively Placing greater emphasis on the specifics of
narrow terms. Based on her negotiations of her social context of ‘local, regional, and national
positionality as a student conducting fieldwork geography would provide a more nuanced dis-
in the Philippines whilst being from New Zeal- cussion of global processes’ (Collins and Bilge,
and and studying in Australia and of mixed eth- 2016: 199). This is where social geographers
nicity (Maori and Pakeha), she uses an have a significant role to play.
autoethnographic approach to explore how There are a whole host of knowledges, the-
readings of her racialized body changed in dif- ories and approaches that geography could
ferent contexts. This work draws attention to the bring to bear on the issue of social context and
ways in which race, context and subjectivity are relationality in intersectionality. Whether it be
important when it comes to discussions about about understandings of scale, appreciations of
positionality and intersectionality. These three place or time-space relations, spatial belonging
examples in particular all explore both raciali- and identities, social geography could usefully
zation and gendering processes, are sensitive to help to advance how intersectionality is theo-
the origins of intersectionality and show rized, applied in research and used in practice.
Hopkins 943

I now consider three areas that future work migrants’ connections with multiple places and
about intersectionality could productively focus localities. Kynsilehto (2011) presents a rich
upon: ethnic residential segregation, transna- insight into the ways in which intersectionality
tional migration, and embodiment and can be used to understand the labour market
belonging. strategies of highly-skilled Magherbi women
migrants. Anthias (2001, 2008, 2009, 2012) has
1 Ethnic residential segregation and the city discussed the idea of ‘translocational position-
ality’ drawing upon her research with Greek
Collins and Bilge (2016: 65) note ‘in the con-
Cypriot youth in the UK. Although Anthias is
fines of racially and ethnically segregated
a sociologist, many of the ways in which she
neighbourhoods and communities in the late
frames her work will appeal to social geogra-
1960s, women of colour were in conversation/
phers and could usefully be employed to
tension with the civil rights, Black Power, Chi-
develop further geographical work about inter-
cano liberation, Red Power, and Asian-
sectionality. For Anthias (2002: 499), narratives
American movements’. The study of ethnic and
of location, dislocation and translocation are
religious residential segregation has a long his-
‘essentially stories about time and place’; they
tory in social geography (e.g. Smith, 1989), yet
are also not fixed and unmovable but are ‘emer-
the primary concern of such work continues to
gent, produced interactionally and contain ele-
be about mapping, measuring and monitoring of
ments of contradiction and struggle’ (Anthias,
patterns of ethnic and religious diversity and
2002: 500). Such narratives are also often about
change. Reference to intersectionality within
disassociation or denial, i.e. about rejecting
debates about residential segregation remains
what one is not a part of. Anthias (2008) refuses
curiously absent and, at best, mentioned only
to see issues of migration and mobility as being
in passing. A useful exception is Parker’s
only about dislocation. These ideas focus on
(2016) ‘feminist partial political economy of
location, translocation, dislocation and posi-
place’ approach to urban research based upon
tionality in the lives of migrants. She suggests
her work in Milwaukee, USA. Parker finds that
we focus on these issues in relation to gender,
analyses of race and gender remain lacking in
ethnicity, nationality, class and race (Anthias,
urban political research and ‘intersectionality
2008). Moreover, she suggests that the shifting
often lies unexamined’ (2016: 1343). This
locales of individuals’ lives – and the move-
approach includes focusing on both individual
ments, mobilities and flows associated with this
and intersectional structures of inequality and
– will offer enriched understanding of migrants’
power, and crucially brings in the different
multiple locations and understandings of the
components of intersectionality identified by
world.
Collins and Bilge (2016). A focus upon the eth-
nically segregated neighbourhoods from which
ideas about intersectionality initially emerged 3 Embodiment and belonging
provides fruitful ground for studies of intersec-
My third and final suggestion is for intersection-
tionality in social geography.
ality to be employed in work about embodiment
and belonging. Yuval-Davis (2011) employs an
2 Migration and translocational positionality intersectional framing to think through the pol-
A second area where geographers could use- itics of belonging. In focusing upon contesta-
fully employ intersectionality is through our tions over belonging and how these are
work about transnational migration and mobi- embodied and disembodied, geographers could
lity, in particular to enrich our understanding of usefully move beyond the simplistic assumption
944 Progress in Human Geography 43(5)

that intersectionality is only about multiple careful not to depoliticize and whiten intersec-
identities. Yuval-Davis (2011: 13) notes that tionality; this means neither flattening it out by
‘different locations along social and economic overlooking power relations nor ignoring the
axes are often marked by different embodied many minority women scholars who have con-
signifiers, such as colour of skin, accent, cloth- tributed to its development. I conclude by sug-
ing and modes of behaviour’ (Yuval-Davis, gesting that it could be useful to take
2011: 13). The politics of belonging is also intersectionality back to its origins – the practi-
about social location and emotional attachments tioners, poets and activists who started to use
and how these are assessed ethically and polit- ideas about intersectionality before it became
ically. Considering these ‘embodied signifiers’ written into academic work – and suggest that
may involve focusing upon issues of race, class, social geographers are ideally placed to think
gender and sexuality, but it may also be useful to both about the academic import of intersection-
consider matters of embodiment such as those ality and also to work collaboratively with prac-
associated with disposition, habit, recognition titioners to do so (Collins, 2015).
and style (see, for example, Noble, 2009). Tse
(2014) discusses work on geographies of reli- Acknowledgements
gion that has adopted an approach informed by Many thanks to Sharlene Mollett and Rachel Pain for
intersectionality; this builds on earlier work constructive feedback on an earlier draft and to Pau-
about religious youth that adopted intersectional line McGuirk for her insightful editorial comments.
thinking and links this with debates about the
Declaration of conflicting interests
embodiment of lived religion. He notes: ‘to
study lived religion is to accord individuals The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of inter-
est with respect to the research, authorship, and/or
within religious communities the agency to
publication of this article.
compose their own intersectional subjectivities’
(Tse, 2014: 211). Funding
The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following finan-
VI Conclusion cial support for the research, authorship and/or publi-
cation of this article: Research funding from the Arts
I have argued that geographers are at risk of and Humanities Research Council (grant number AH/
reinforcing our discipline as white, masculinist K000594/1) enabled me to write this report.
and colonial unless we treat intersectionality in
a more sensitive and ethical way which includes References
paying more attention to its activist origins in Alexander-Floyd NG (2012) Disappearing acts: Reclaim-
black feminism. Ignoring the origins of inter- ing intersectionality in the social sciences in a post-
sectionality in black feminism and activism as black feminist era. Feminist Formations 24(1): 1–25.
well as associating intersectionality with femin- Anthias F (2001) New hybridities, old concepts: The limits
ism only work to reproduce geography, and the of ‘culture’. Ethnic and Racial Studies 24(4): 619–641.
Anthias F (2002) Where do I belong? Narrating collective
concept of intersectionality, itself as white. My
identity and translocational positionality. Ethnicities
suggestions for future research point to research
2(4): 491–514.
areas that foreground matters of race, ethnicity, Anthias F (2008) Thinking through the lens of transloca-
gender and locality – residential segregation, tional positionality: An intersectionality frame for
transnational migration, and embodiment and understanding identity and belonging. Translocations:
belonging – thereby making it difficult for the Migration and Social Change 4(1): 5–20.
antiracist and activist roots of intersectionality Anthias F (2009) Translocational belonging, identity and
to be overlooked. Geographers need to be generation: Questions and problems in migration and
Hopkins 945

ethnic studies. Finnish Journal of Ethnicity and Migra- doctrine, feminist theory and antiracist politics. Univer-
tion 4(1): 6–15. sity of Chicago Legal Forum 140: 139–167.
Anthias F (2012) Intersectional what? Social divisions, Crenshaw K (1991) Mapping the margins: Intersectional-
intersectionality and levels of analysis. Ethnicities ity, identity politics, and violence against women of
13(1): 3–19. color, Stanford Law Review 43: 1241–1299.
Anthias F and Yuval-Davis N (1982) Racialized Bound- Davis A (1983) Women, Race and Class. New York: Vin-
aries: Race, Nation, Gender, Colour and Class and the tage Books.
Anti-racist Struggle. London: Routledge. Davis A (2016) Freedom Is a Constant Struggle: Fergu-
Bastia T (2014) Intersectionality, migration and develop- son, Palestine and the Foundations of a Movement.
ment. Progress in Development Studies 14(3): 237–248. Chicago: Haymarket Books.
Bastia T, Piper N and Prieto Carron M (2011) Geographies Davis K (2008) Intersectionality as buzzword: A sociology
of migration, geographies of justice? Feminism, inter- of science perspective on what makes a feminist theory
sectionality, and rights. Environment and Planning A useful. Feminist Theory 9(1): 67–85.
43: 1492–1498. Dwyer C (1999) Veiled meanings: Young British Muslim
Beale F (1969) Black Women’s Manifesto: Double Jeo- women and the negotiation of differences. Gender,
pardy: To Be Black and Female. New York: Third Place and Culture 6(1): 5–26.
World Women’s Alliance. Eaves LE (2017) Black geographic possibilities: On a
Bilge S (2013) Intersectionality undone: Saving intersec- queer Black South. Southeastern Geographer 57(1):
tionality from feminist intersectionality studies. Du 80–95.
Bois Review 10(2): 405–424. Fisher KT (2015) Positionality, subjectivity, and race in
Brah A (1996) Cartographies of Diaspora: Contesting transnational and transcultural geographical research.
Identities. London: Routledge. Gender, Place and Culture 22(4): 456–473.
Brah A and Phoenix A (2004) Ain’t I a woman? Revisiting Gökariksel B and Smith S (2017) Intersectional femin-
intersectionality. Journal of International Women’s ism beyond US flag hijab and pussy hats in Trump’s
Studies 5(3): 75–86. America. Gender, Place and Culture 24(5):
Brown M (2012) Gender and sexuality I: Intersectional anxi- 628–644.
eties. Progress in Human Geography 36(4): 541–550. Guidroz K and Berger MT (2009) A conversation with
Carbado DW (2013) Colorblind intersectionality. Signs: founding scholars of intersectionality – Kimberle Cren-
Journal of Women in Culture and Society 38(4): shaw, Nira Yuval-Davis and Michelle Fine. In: Guidroz
811–846. K and Berger MT (eds) The Intersectional Approach:
Cho S, Crenshaw KW and McCall L (2013) Toward a field Transforming the Academy through Race, Class and
of intersectionality studies: Theory, applications, and Gender. Raleigh: University of North Carolina Press,
praxis. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society 61–80.
38(4): 785–810. Hancock AM (2016) Intersectionality: An Intellectual His-
Collins PH (2000) Black Feminist Thought. London: tory. New York: Oxford University Press.
Routledge. Hancock AM (2007) When multiplication doesn’t equal
Collins PH (2013) On Intellectual Activism. Philadelphia: quick addition: Examining intersectionality as a research
Temple University Press. paradigm. Perspectives on Politics 5(1): 63–79.
Collins PH (2015) Intersectionality’s definitional dilem- hooks b (1982) Ain’t I a Woman?: Black Women and
mas. Annual Review of Sociology 41: 1–20. Feminism. London: Pluto Press.
Collins PH and Bilge S (2016) Intersectionality. Cam- Hopkins P (2007) Young people, masculinities, religion
bridge: Policy Press. and race: New social geographies. Progress in Human
Combahee River Collective (1983) The Combahee River Geography 31(2): 163–177.
Collective Statement. In: Smith B (ed.) Home Girls: Hopkins P and Noble G (2009) Masculinities in place:
A Black Feminist Anthology. New York: Kitchen Table Situated identities, relations and intersectionality.
Press, 272–282. Social and Cultural Geography 10(8): 811–819.
Crenshaw K (1989) Demarginalizing the intersection of race Hopkins P and Pain R (2007) Geographies of age: Think-
and sex: A black feminist critique of antidiscrimination ing relationally. Area 39(3): 287–294.
946 Progress in Human Geography 43(5)

Hovorka AJ (2012) Women/chickens vs. men/cattle: methods approach. Social and Cultural Geography
Insights on gender-species intersectionality. Geoforum 10(8): 909–925.
43: 875–884. Mollett S (2017) Irreconcilable differences? A postcolo-
Hovorka A (2015) Feminism and animals: Exploring inter- nial intersectional reading of gender, development and
species relations through intersectionality, performa- human rights in Latin America. Gender, Place and
tivity and standpoint. Gender, Place and Culture Culture 24(1): 1–17.
22(1): 1–19. Mollett S and Faria C (2013) Messing with feminist polit-
Jackson P (1994) Black male: Advertising and the cutlural ical ecology. Geoforum 45: 116–125.
politics of masculinity. Gender, Place and Culture Mott C and Cockayne D (2017) Citation matters: Mobiliz-
1(1): 49–59. ing the politics of citation toward a practice of ‘con-
Johnston L (2016) Gender and sexuality I: genderqueer scientious engagement’. Gender, Place and Culture
geographies? Progress in Human Geography 40(5): 24(7): 954–973.
668–678. Nash JC (2008) Re-thinking intersectionality. Feminist
Jordan-Zachery JS (2007) Am I a black woman or a Review 89: 1–15.
woman who is black? A few thoughts on the meaning Nash JC (2011) ‘Home truths’ on intersectionality. Yale
of intersectionality. Politics and Gender 3(2): 254–263. Journal of Law and Feminism 23(2): 445–470.
Joshi S, McCutcheon P and Sweet EL (2015) Visceral Nayak A (2006) Displaces masculinities: Chavs, youth and
geographies of whiteness and invisible microaggres- class in the post-industrial city. Sociology 40(5):
sions. ACME: An International e-Journal for Critical 813–831.
Geographers 14(1): 298–323. Nightingale AJ (2011) Bounding difference: Intersection-
Kobayashi A and Peake L (1994) Unnatural discourse: ality and the material production of gender, caste, class
‘Race’ and gender in geography. Gender, Place and and environment in Nepal. Geoforum 42: 153–162.
Culture 1(2): 225–243. Noble G (2009) Countless acts of recognition: Young
Kynsilehto A (2011) Negotiating intersectionality in high men, ethnicity and the messiness of identities in
educated migrant Maghrebi women’s life stories. Envi- everyday life. Social and Cultural Geography
ronment and Planning A 43: 1547–1561. 10(8): 875–891.
Lewis G (2009) Celebrating intersectionality? Debates on O’Neill Gutierrez C and Hopkins P (2014) Introduction:
a multi-faceted concept in gender studies: Themes from Young people, gender and intersectionality. Gender,
a conference. European Journal of Women’s Studies Place and Culture 22(3): 383–389.
16(3): 203–210. Pain R and Hopkins P (2010) Social geographies of age
Lewis G (2013) Unsafe travel: Experiencing intersection- and ageism. In: Smith SJ, Pain R, Marston SA and
ality and feminist displacements. Signs: Journal of Jones JP (eds) The Sage Handbook of Social Geogra-
Women in Culture and Society 38(4): 869–892. phies. London: Sage, 78–97.
Longhurst R and Johnston L (2014) Bodies, gender, place Parker B (2016) Feminist forays in the city: Imbalance and
and culture: 21 years on. Gender, Place and Culture intervention in urban research methods. Antipode
21(3): 167–278. 48(5): 1337–1358.
Mahtani M (2014) Toxic geographies: Absences in critical Peake L (1993) ‘Race’ and sexuality: Challenging the
race thought and practice in social and cultural geogra- patriarchal structuring of urban social space. Environ-
phy. Social and Cultural Geography 15(4): 359–367. ment and Planning D: Society and Space 11: 415–432.
May VM (2014) ‘Speaking into the void’? Intersectionality Peake L (2010) Gender, race, sexuality. In: Smith SJ, Pain
critiques and epistemic backlash. Hypatia 29(1): 94–112. R, Marston SA and Jones JP (eds) The Sage Handbook
May VM (2015) Pursuing Intersectionality, Unsettling of Social Geographies. London: Sage, 55–77.
Dominant Imaginaries. London: Routledge. Phoenix A (2006) Interrogating intersectionality: Produc-
McCall L (2005) The complexity of intersectionality. tive ways of theorising multiple positioning. Kvinder,
Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society Kon and Frorskning 2–3: 21–30.
30(3): 1771–1800. Phoenix A and Pattynama P (2006) Editorial: Intersection-
Meth P and McClymont K (2009) Researching men: The ality. European Journal of Women’s Studies 13(3):
politics and possibilities of a qualitative mixed- 187–192.
Hopkins 947

Puar J (2012) ‘I would rather be a cyborg than a goddess’: Tarrant A (2010) ‘Maturing’ a sub-discipline: The inter-
Becoming intersectional in assemblage theory. Philo- sectional geographies of masculinities and old age.
SOPHIA 2(1): 49–66. Geography Compass 4(10): 1580–1591.
Rodó-de-Zarate M (2014) Developing geographies of Thompson JA (2016) Intersectionality and water: How
intersectionality with relief maps: Reflections from social relations intersect with ecological difference.
youth research in Manresa, Catalonia. Gender, Place Gender, Place and Culture 23(9): 1286–1301.
and Culture 21(8): 925–944. Tomlinson B (2013) To tell the truth and not get trapped:
Rodó-de-Zarate M (2015) Young lesbians negotiating Desire, distance and intersectionality at the scene of
public space: An intersectional approach through argument. Signs: A Journal of Women in Culture and
places. Children’s Geographies 13(4): 413–434. Society 38(4): 993–1018.
Rodó-de-Zarate M (2017) Who else are they? Conceptua- Tse JKH (2014) Grounded theologies: ‘Religion’ and the
lizing intersectional for childhood and youth research. ‘secular’ in human geography. Progress in Human
Children’s Geographies 15(1): 23–35. Geography 38(2): 201–220.
Ruddick S (1996) Constructing difference in public Valentine G (2007) Theorizing and researching intersec-
spaces: Race, class, and gender as interlocking systems. tionality: A challenge for feminist geography. The Pro-
Urban Geography 17(2): 132–151. fessional Geographer 59(1): 10–21.
Schroeder CG (2014) (Un)holy Toledo: Intersectionality, Valentine G, Vanderbeck RM, Andersson J, Sadgrove J
interdependence, and neighbourhood (trans)formation and Ward K (2010) Emplacements: The event as a
in Toledo, Ohio. Annals of the Association of American prism for exploring intersectionality: A case study of
Geographers 104(1): 166–181. the Lambeth Conference. Sociology 44(5): 925–943.
Shabazz R (2015) Spatializing Blackness: Architectures of Walby S, Armstrong J and Strid S (2012) Intersectionality:
Confinement and Black Masculinity in Chicago. Chi- Multiple inequalities in social theory. Sociology 46(2):
cago: University of Illinois Press. 224–240.
Smith SJ (1989) The Politics of ‘Race’ and Residence. Yuval-Davis N (2006) Intersectionality and feminist poli-
Cambridge: Polity Press. tics. European Journal of Women’s Studies 13(3):
Smith SJ (1990) Social geography: Patriarchy, racism, 193–209.
nationalism. Progress in Human Geography 14: Yuval-Davis N (2011) The Politics of Belonging: Intersec-
261–271. tional Xontestations. London: Sage.