Poder, privilegio y desventaja: teoría interseccional y representación política

Eline Severs, Karen Celis, Silvia Erzeel

Resumen


Este artículo revisa críticamente la extensa literatura sobre la representación política de los grupos sociales y destaca las ventajas de la teoría interseccional para estudiar esta cuestión. Se argumenta que el mérito de dicho enfoque puede ser encontrado en su ontología del poder. La teoría interseccional está basada en la concepción relacional del poder político que ubica la constitución de las relaciones de poder en las interacciones sociales, como la representación política. Por ejemplo, la teoría interseccional impulsa el conocimiento que se encuentra como ocurre en la representación política tras del estudio de las desigualdades en la representación (que están conectadas, presumiblemente, a posiciones sociales estables) para, con ello, considerar los medios por los que dicha representación reproduce las posiciones de privilegio y desventaja.

Citas


Archer, Margaret S. (1995): Realist Social Theory: The Morphogenetic Approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Baca Zinn, Maxine y Dill, Bonnie Thornton (1996): Theorizing difference from multicultural feminism. Feminist Studies, nº 22 (2), 321-331.

Bowleg, Lisa (2008): When black + lesbian + woman ≠ black lesbian woman: The methodological challenges of qualitative and quantitative intersectionality research. Sex Roles, nº 59 (5-6), 312-325.

Celis, Karen y Erzeel, Silvia (2015): The complementarity advantage: Parties, representativeness and newcomers’ access to power. Parliamentary Affairs. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.1093/pa/gsv043 [Consulta: 31 de marzo de 2017]

Celis, Karen; Erzeel, Silvia y Mügge, Liza (2015): Intersectional Puzzles: Understanding Inclusion and Equality in political recruitment. Politics & Gender, nº 11 (4), 765-770.

Choo, Hae Yeon y Ferre, Myra Marx (2010): Practicing intersectionality in sociological research: A critical analysis of inclusions, interactions, and institutions in the study of inequalities. Sociological Theory, nº 28 (2), 129-149.

Crenshaw, Kimberlé (1989): Demarginalizing the intersection of race and sex: A black feminist critique of antidiscrimination doctrine, feminist theory, feminist theory, and antiracist politics. University of Chicago Legal Forum, nº 3, 139-167.

Dhamoon, Rita K. (2011): Considerations on mainstreaming intersectionality. Political Research Quarterly, nº 64 (1), 230-243.

Disch, Lisa (2011): Toward a mobilization conception of democratic representation. American Political Science Review, nº 105 (1), 100-114.

Dovi, Suzanee (2002) Preferable descriptive representation: Will just any woman, black or Latino do?. American Political Science Review, nº 96 (4), 729-745.

Foucault, Michel (1978): History of Sexuality, vol. I. Sheridan: Penguin Books.

Hancock, Ange-Marie (2007): When multiplication doesn’t equal quick addition: Examining intersectionality as a research paradigm. Perspectives on Politics, nº 5 (1): 63-79.

Hardy-Fanta, Carol (2007): Intersectionality and Politics: Recent Research on Gender, Race, and Political Representation in the United States. Binghamton: Haworth Press.

Hayward, Clarissa R. (2013): How Americans Make Race: Stories, Institutions, Spaces. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Hill Collins, Patricia (1990): Black Feminist Thought: Knowledge, Consciousness, and the Politics of Empowerment. Boston, MA: Unwin Hyman. hooks, bell (1989): Talking Back: Thinking Feminist-Thinking Black. Boston, MA: Sheba Feminist Publishers.

Hugues, Melanie M. (2011): Intersectionality, quotas and minority women’s political representation worldwide. American Political Science Review, nº 105 (3): 604-620.

King, Deborah (1988): Multiple jeopardy, multiple consciousness: The context of a black feminist ideology. Signs, nº 14 (1), 42-72. Severs et al. 9

Krook, Mona Lena y O´Brien, Diana (2010): The politics of group representation: Quotas for women and minorities worldwide. Comparative Politics, nº 42 (3): 253-272.

Lépinard, Eléonore (2014): Doing intersectionality: Repertoires of feminist practices in France and Canada. Gender & Society, nº 28 (6), 877-903.

Lloyd, Moya (2013): Power, politics, domination, and oppression. En: Waylen G., Celis K, Kantola J et al., eds, The Oxford Handbook of Gender and Politics, 1-26. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Lukes, Steven (1974): Power: A Radical View. London: MacMillan.

Lutz, Helma; Herrera Vivar, María Teresa y Supik, Linda (2011): Framing intersectionality: An introduction. En, Lutz H, Herrera Vivar M. T. y Supik, L., eds., Framing Intersectionality: Debates on a Multi-Faceted Concept in Gender Studies, 1-24. London: Ashgate.

McCall, Leslie (2005): The complexity of intersectionality. Signs, nº 30 (3): 1771-1800.

Manin, Bernard (1997): The Principles of Representative Government. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Mügge, Liza y Jong, Sara (2013): Intersectionalizing European politics: Bridging gender and ethnicity. Politics, Groups and Identities, nº 1 (3): 380-389.

Prins, Baukje (2006): Narrative accounts of origin. A blind spot in the intersectional approach? European Journal of Women’s Studies, nº 13 (3): 277-290.

Ruedin, Didier (2013): Why Aren’t They There? The Political Representation of Women, Ethnic Groups and Issue Positions. Colchester: ECPR Press.

Saalfeld, Thomas y Bischof, Daniel (2013): Minority-ethnic MPs and the substantive representation of minority interests in the House of Commons, 2005-2011. Parliamentary Affairs, nº 66 (2): 305-328.

Saward, Michael (2006): The representative claim. Contemporary Political Theory, nº 5 (3), 297-318.

Severs, Eline (2012): Substantive representation through a claims-making lens: A strategy for the identification and analysis of substantive claims. Representation, nº 48 (2): 169-181.

Severs, Eline; Celis, Kareen y Meier, Petra (2013): Representative claims and beyond: A study of Muslim women’s inclusion in the Flemish headscarf debate. Politics, Groups and Identities, nº 1 (3): 433-450.

Smooth, Wendy (2011): Standing for women? Which women? The substantive representation of women’s interests and the research imperative of intersectionality. Politics & Gender, nº 7 (3), 436-440.

Squires, Judith (1999): Gender in Political Theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Squires, Judith (2008): The constitutive representation of gender: Extra-parliamentary representations of gender relations. Representation, nº 44 (2), 187-204.

Strolovitch, Dara Z. (2006): Do interest groups represent the disadvantaged? Advocacy at the intersections of race, class and gender. The Journal of Politics, nº 68 (4), 894-910.

Waldner, David (2002): Anti anti-determinism: Or what happens when Schrödinger’s cat and Lorenz’ butterfly meet Laplace’s demon in the study of political and economic development? Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, 29 de agosto—1 de septiembre. Disponible en: http://people.virginia.edu/~daw4h/Anti-Anti-Determinism.pdf (Consulta: 31 de marzo de 2017).

Weldon S. Laurel (2011): When Protests Make Policy: How Social Movements Represent Disadvantaged Groups. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.


Texto completo: PDF

Refbacks

  • No hay Refbacks actualmente.





Investigaciones Feministas
ISSN-e 2171-6080

© . Universidad Complutense de Madrid
Biblioteca Complutense | Ediciones Complutense