Considerations on Mainstreaming Intersectionality
Abstract
This article identifies five key considerations for adopting and mainstreaming intersectionality: the language and concepts that are used; the complexities of difference and how to navigate this complexity; the choice of focusing on identities, categories, processes, and/or systems; the model that is used to explain and describe mutually constituted differences; and the principles that determine which interactions are analyzed. The author argues that in the process of mainstreaming intersectionality, it is crucial to frame it as a form of social critique so as to foreground its radical capacity to attend to and disrupt oppressive vehicles of power.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 48 · Cited by 647
- Authors
- Dhamoon, R. K.
- Affiliations
- University of the Fraser Valley (CA)
- Corresponding author
- Dhamoon, Rita Kaur
- Venue
- Political Research Quarterly
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2010-09-22
- Volume
- 64
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 230-243
- ISSN
- 1065-9129 (ISSN-L)
- 1938-274X
- OpenAlex
- W1993559288
- Cited by
- 647
- References
- 48
- Citations by year
- 2026: 21 · 2025: 50 · 2024: 46 · 2023: 64 · 2022: 46 · 2021: 35 · 2020: 70 · 2019: 91 · 2018: 48 · 2017: 29 · 2016: 40 · 2015: 31 · 2014: 26 · 2013: 34 · 2012: 13
- FWCI
- 38.76
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Political Research Quarterly (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Feminist Theory and Gender Studies
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Gender, Health, and Social Inequality
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Feminism, Gender, and Intersectionality
- Keywords
- intersectionality, social criticism, oppression, power, identity, social categories, systemic oppression, social interaction analysis
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
