Cyborg Goddess: Intersectionality and Assemblage Theory

2/3/2016
AccessProvidedbyRutgersUniversityat02/23/1311:51PMGMT
Thisisthehtmlversionofthefilehttp://www.jasbirpuar.com/assets/JKP_CyborgGoddess.pdf.
Googleautomaticallygenerateshtmlversionsofdocumentsaswecrawltheweb.
Page1
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:http://www.jasbirpuar.com/assets/JKP_CyborgGoddess.pdf
1/23
2/3/2016
Page2
Iwouldratherbeacyborgthana
goddess
BecomingIntersectionalinAssemblageTheory
2/23
2/3/2016
JasbirK.Puar
GridshappenwritesBrianMassumi,atamomentinParablesforthe
Virtualwhereoneistemptedtobesweptawaybytheendlessaffirmative
becomingsofmovement,flux,andpotential,asopposedtobeingpinneddown
bytheretroactivepositioningofidentity(2002,8).Forthemostpart,Massumi
hasbeenlessinterestedinhowgridshappenthaninaskinghowtheycan
unhappen,ornothappen.Whatthetensionbetweenthetwopurportedly
opposingforcessignals,atthisjunctionofscholarlycriticism,mightbethought
ofasadialoguebetweentheoriesthatdeploythesubjectasaprimaryanalytic
frame,andthosethathighlighttheforcesthatmakesubjectformationtenuous,
ifnotimpossibleorevenundesirable.Ihaveseenthistensionmanifestacutely
inmyownworkonintersectionalityandassemblagetheory.OntheonehandI
havebeenastaunchadvocateofwhatisnowcommonlyknownasanintersec
tionalapproach:analysesthatforegroundthemutuallycoconstitutiveforces
ofrace,class,sex,gender,andnation.Numerousfeministthinkersconsider
intersectionalitythedominantparadigmthroughwhichfeministtheoryhas
analyzeddifferenceLeslieMcCallarguesthatintersectionalitymightbe
consideredthemostimportanttheoreticalcontributionthatwomensstudies,
inconjunctionwithotherfields,hasmadesofar(McCall2005,1771).Inter
sectionalanalysisisnowaprevalentapproachinqueertheory.1Atthesame
time,encounteringapoststructuralistfatiguewiththenowpredictableyetstill
Page3
necessarydemandsforsubjectrecognition,Ialsoarguedinmybook,Terrorist
Assemblages:HomonationalisminQueerTimes,thatintersectionalityasanintel
lectualrubricandatoolforpoliticalinterventionmustbesupplementedif
notcomplicatedandreconceptualizedbyanotionofassemblage.Following
Massumiontheretrospectiveorderingofidentitiessuchasgender,race,and
sexualorientationwhichbackformtheirreality,inTerroristAssemblagesI
write,[I]ntersectionalidentitiesandassemblagesmustremainasinterlocutors
3/23
2/3/2016
intension...intersectionalidentitiesarethebyproductsofattemptstostill
andquelltheperpetualmotionofassemblages,tocaptureandreducethem,to
harnesstheirthreateningmobility(Puar2007,213).Subjectpositioningona
gridisneverselfcoincidingpositioningdoesnotprecedemovementbutrather
itisinducedbyitepistemologicalcorrectivescannotapprehendontological
becomingsthecomplexityofprocessiscontinuallymistakenforaresultant
product.2
SincethepublicationofTerroristAssemblages,inresponsetoanxietiesabout
myapparentprescriptiontoleaveintersectionalitybehind(asifonecould),
Ihaveoftenbeenaskedtoelaborateonthepoliticalusagesofassemblagesand
assemblagetheory.AprominentconceptintheworkofGillesDeleuzeandFelix
Guattari,assemblageseemstoinspiredoubtaboutitspoliticalapplicability,
whileintersectionalityseemstoholdfastasasuccessfultoolforpoliticaland
scholarlytransformation.Partoftheassumptionatworkinthesequeriesis
thatrepresentation,anditsrecognizedsubjects,isthedominant,primary,
ormostefficaciousplatformofpoliticalintervention,whileaDeleuzian
nonrepresentational,nonsubjectorientedpoliticsisdeemedimpossible.
Perhapsthesequeriesalsorevealconcernsabouthowtheymightbesomehow
incompatibleorevenoppositional,despitethefactthatintersectionalityand
assemblagearenotanalogousintermsofcontent,utility,ordeployment.As
analytics,theymaynotbereconcilable.Yettheyneednotbeoppositionalbut
rather,Iargue,frictional.
Inwhatfollows,Ioffersomepreliminarythoughtsonthelimitsand
possibilitiesofintersectionalityandassemblageandwhatmightbegainedby
thinkingthemthroughandwitheachother.Whatarethestrengthsofeach
intherealmsoftheory,politicalorganizing,legalstructures,andmethod?
Throughhighlightingtheconvivialcrossingsofthesetwodifferentiatedbut
notoppositionalgenealogies,Ioffersomethoughtsonepistemologicalcorrec
tivesinfeministknowledgeproductionwhichhasbeendriven,sometimes
singlemindedly,bythemandateofintersectionalanalysistoseewhatkinds
offuturesarepossibleforfeministtheorizing.Irereadtheformativeconcept
thatfueledthemetaphoricinvocationofintersectionality,specificallyKimberl
Crenshawsuseofthetrafficintersection,toshowwhereintersectionality,as
thatwhichretroactivelyformsthegridandpositionsonit,andassemblage,as
thatwhichispriorto,beyond,orpastthegrid,notsomuchintersect(though
50 philoSOPHIA
Page4
4/23
2/3/2016
Iamtemptedtomakethepun)butratherresonatewitheachother.Thatis
tosay,whatfollowsaspirestoanaffirmative,convivialconversationbetween
whathavegenerallybeenconstruedasoppositionalsetsofliteratures:thatof
womenofcolorintersectionalfeministtheory,andfeministtheorythathas
beeninvestedinpostrepresentational,posthuman,orpostsubjectconceptu
alizationsofthebody.Myaimhere,then,isnottoevaluatethelimitsand
potentialsofintersectionalityforthesakeofrefiningintersectionalityitself,
nortoweighinondebatesaboutwhetherintersectionalityisoutmodedand
outdated(Tayloretal.2011,3),buttoputintersectionalityintandemwith
assemblagetoseehowtheymightbethoughttogether.
IntersectionalityandItsDiscontents
IthasbeenmorethantwentyyearssinceKimberlCrenshawwroteherground
breakingpiecetitled,DemarginalizingtheIntersectionofRaceandSex:
ABlackFeministCritiqueofAntidiscriminationDoctrine,FeministTheory,
andAntiracistPolitics(1989),which,alongwithher1991pieceMappingthe
Margins:Intersectionality,IdentityPolitics,andViolenceagainstWomenof
Color,wentontobecomeseminaltextsforthetheorizationofintersection
ality.Thetwentiethanniversarywasmarkedbyanumberofspecialjournal
issues,editedbooks,andconferencescommemoratingCrenshawscontribu
tionanddiscussingtheimpactofintersectionalfeministtheorizing,perhaps
generatingaresurgenceofinterestinthetopic,asanniversariesarewontto
do.Asactivistandtheoreticaldiscourseaboutdifferencedevelopedover
severaldecadesbyblackfeministsintheUnitedStatessuchasAudreLorde,
bellhooks,AngelaDavis,andTheCombaheeRiverCollective,theterm
intersectionalitywasintroducedbyandbecamesolidifiedasafeministheuristic
throughCrenshawsanalysisofU.S.antidiscriminationlegaldoctrine.Cren
shawmappedoutthreeformsofintersectionalanalysisshedeemedcrucial:
structural(addressingtheintersectionofracismandpatriarchyinrelationto
batteringandrapeofwomen)political(addressingtheintersectionofanti
racistorganizingandfeministorganizing)andrepresentational(addressing
theintersectionofracialstereotypesandgenderstereotypes,particularlyin
thecaseof2LiveCrew).Herinterventionintomutuallyexclusiveidentity
paradigmsisoneofrethinkingidentitypoliticsfromwithin,inparticular,from
withinsystemiclegalexclusions.3
WhileCrenshawspecificallytargetedtheelisionsofbothcriticalracepara
digmsandgendernormativeparadigms,intersectionalityemergedfromthe
strugglesofsecondwavefeminismasacrucialblackfeministinterventionchal
lengingthehegemonicrubricsofrace,class,andgenderwithinpredominantly
whitefeministframes.Pedagogically,sincetheemergenceandconsolidationof
intersectionalityfromthe1980son,ithasbeendeployedmoreforcefullyasa
Iwouldratherbeacyborgthanagoddess 51
5/23
2/3/2016
Page5
feministinterventiontodisruptwhitenessandlesssoasacriticalraceinterven
tiontodisruptmasculinistframes.Thus,preciselyintheactofperformingthis
intervention,whatisalsoproducedisanironicreificationofsexualdifference
asa/thefoundationalonethatneedstobedisrupted.Sexualandgenderdiffer
enceisunderstoodastheconstantfromwhichtherearevariants,justaswomen
ofcolorareconstructedindominantfeministgenerationalnarrativesasthe
newestarrivalsamongthesubjectsoffeminism.Thispedagogicaldeployment
hashadtheeffectofresecuringthecentralityofthesubjectpositioningof
whitewomen.
Howisthispossible?Thetheoryofintersectionalityarguesthatallidenti
tiesarelivedandexperiencedasintersectionalinsuchawaythatidentity
categoriesthemselvesarecutthroughandunstableandthatallsubjectsare
intersectionalwhetherornottheyrecognizethemselvesassuch.Inthesuccinct
wordsofArunSaldahna,usingVenndiagramstoillustratehispoint,The
theoryofintersectionalityholdsthatthereisnoactualbodythatisamember
ofonlyoneset(Saldanha2010,289).Butwhatthemethodofintersectionality
ismostpredominantlyusedtoqualifyisthespecificdifferenceofwomenof
color,acategorythathasnowbecome,Iwouldargue,simultaneouslyemptied
ofspecificmeaninginitsubiquitousapplicationandyetoverdeterminedinits
deployment.Inthisusage,intersectionalityalwaysproducesanOther,and
thatOtherisalwaysaWomanofColor(nowonreferredtoasWOC,to
underscoretheoverdeterminedemptinessofitsgratuitousness),whomust
invariablybeshowntoberesistant,subversive,orarticulatingagrievance.4
Morepointedly,itisthedifferenceofAfricanAmericanwomenthatdominates
thisgenealogyofthetermwomenofcolor.Indeed,Crenshawisclearthatshe
centralizesblackwomensexperienceandpositsblackwomenasthestarting
pointofheranalysis(Crenshaw1991,1243).Thus,theinsistentconsolidation
ofintersectionalityasadominantheuristicmaywellbedrivenbyanxieties
aboutmaintainingtheintegrityofadiscreteblackfeministgenealogy,one
thatmightactuallyobfuscatehowintersectionalityisthoughtofandfunctions
differentlyindifferentstrandsofblackfeministandwomenofcolorfeminist
thought.Forexample,whileCrenshewsworkisaboutdisruptingandrecon
cilingwhatareperceivedtobeirreconcilablebinaryoptionsofgenderandrace,
AudreLordesseminalpieceAge,Race,Class,andSex:WomenRedefining
Differencefrom1984readsasadynamic,affectivelyresonantpostulationof
inchoateandsometimescontradictoryintersectionalsubjectivities.5
ThisironicotheringofWOCthroughanapproachthatmeanttoalleviate
suchotheringisexacerbatedbythefactthatintersectionalityhasbecome
cathectedtothefieldofwomensstudiesastheparadigmaticframethroughwhich
womenslivesareunderstoodandtheorized,aproblemreifiedbybothWOC
6/23
2/3/2016
feministsandwhitefeminists.6McCallnotesthatfeministsareperhapsalone
intheacademyintheextenttowhichtheyhaveembracedintersectionality...
52 philoSOPHIA
Page6
asitselfacentralcategoryofanalysis(McCall2005,1771).Thisclaimto
intersectionalityasthedominantfeministmethodcanbeproducedwithsuch
insistencethataninterestinexploringotherframes,forexampleassemblage,is
renderedproblematicandevenproducesWOCfeministsinvestedinmultiple
genealogiesasracetraitors.7Thisaccusationofcoursereinforcestheimplicit
understandingthatintersectionalityisatooltodiagnosespecificallyracial
difference.Despitedecadesoffeministtheorizingonthequestionofdifference,
differencecontinuestobedifferencefrom,thatis,thedifferencefromwhite
woman.Distinctfromaframethatprivilegesdifferencewithin,difference
fromproducesdifferenceasacontradictionratherthanasarecognizingit
asaperpetualandcontinuousprocessofsplitting.Thisisalsothenanironic
reificationofracialdifference.MaliniJoharSchueller,forexample,arguesthat
mostscholarshiponWOCisproducedbyWOC,whilemanywhitefeminists,
althoughhailingintersectionalityasaselfevident,primarymethodological
rubric,continuetoproducescholarshipthatpresumesgenderdifferenceasfoun
dational.WritesSchueller:Whilewomenofcolortheorizeaboutaparticular
groupofwomen,manywhitefeministscontinuetotheorizeaboutgender/
sexuality/womeningeneral.Andlater:Indeed,ithasbecomealmostagiven
thatworksingenderandsexualitystudiesacknowledgemultipleaxesofoppres
sionorinvokethemantraofrace,class,genderandsexuality(Schueller2005,
64).8Muchlikethelanguageofdiversity,thelanguageofintersectionality,its
veryinvocation,itseems,largelysubstitutesforintersectionalanalysisitself.
WhatIhaveelsewherecalleddiversitymanagementcanmorerigorouslybe
describedasatendencytodisplacetheconceptofintersectionalityfromany
politicalpracticeandsocioeconomiccontextbytranslatingitintoamerely
theoreticalabstractionofslippingsignifiersofidentity(Ereletal.2011,66).
Politicalpracticeandsocioeconomiccontextareshiftingmetricsthatrequire
ahistoricizationoftheeventofintersectionality,itsemergence,andthe
thoughtthatitmovedandgenerated.Furtherquestionsaboutpracticeand
contextarisewhenintersectionalityissituatedwithinthechanginghistorical
andeconomiclandscapeofneoliberalcapitalismandidentity.Whatdoesan
intersectionalcritiquelooklikeormoretothepoint,whatdoesitdoin
anageofneoliberalpluralism,absorption,andaccommodationofallkindsof
7/23
2/3/2016
differences?Ifitisthecasethatintersectionalityhasbeenmainstreamedin
thelasttwodecadesawaytomanagedifferencethatcolludeswithdominant
formsofliberalmulticulturalismisthequalitativeforceoftheinterpellation
ofdifferenceitselfalteredoruncertain?Shouldintersectionalityhaveto
accountforanythingbeyondthecontextofthelegaldoctrinefromwhichit
wasdeveloped?Letmequalifythatmyconcernisnotabouttheformative,
generative,andnecessaryinterventionofCrenshawswork,butaboutboth
thechangedgeopoliticsofreception(onethatpurportstoincluderatherthan
excludedifference)aswellasatendencytowardreificationinthedeployment
Page7
ofintersectionalmethod.Hasintersectionalitybecome,asSchuellerimplies,
analibifortherecenteringofwhiteliberalfeminists?Whatisapoststruc
turalisttheoryofintersectionalitythatmightaddressliberalmulticultural
andpostracialdiscoursesofinclusionthatdestabilizetheWOCasamere
enablingprosthetictowhitefeminists?
Suchquestionsabouttime,history,andtheshiftsfromexclusiontoinclu
sionalsobringtotheforethedynamicsofthespatializationofintersectional
analyses.If,asAvtarBrahandAnnPheonixhaveargued,olddebatesabout
thecategorywomanhaveassumednewcriticalurgency(BrahandPheonix
2004,76)inthecontextofrecenthistoricalevents,suchasSeptember11th
andtheoccupationofAfghanistanandIraq,transnationalandpostcolonial
scholarspointoutthatthecategoriesprivilegedbyintersectionalanalysisdo
notnecessarilytraversenationalandregionalboundariesnorgenealogical
exigencies,presumingandproducingstaticepistemologicalrenderingsof
categoriesthemselvesacrosshistoricalandgeopoliticallocations.Indeed,many
ofthecherishedcategoriesoftheintersectionalmantraoriginallystarting
withrace,class,gender,nowincludingsexuality,nation,religion,age,and
disabilityaretheproductsofmodernistcolonialagendasandregimesofepis
temicviolence,operativethroughaWestern/EuroAmericanepistemological
formationthroughwhichthenotionofdiscreteidentityhasemerged.Joseph
Massadquiteastutelypointsout,inhisrefinementofFoucauldianframingsof
sexuality,thatthecolonialprojectdeployedsexualityasaconceptthatwas
largelyinternalizedwithinintellectualandjuridicalrealmsbutwasnotdistilled
asawidespreadhegemonicproject.Whileonemightworry,then,aboutthe
developmentandadaptationofthetermsgayorlesbianortheglobalizationof
thetermqueer,Massadhighlightsthegraverproblemofthegeneralizationand
8/23
2/3/2016
assumedtransparencyofthetermsexualityitselfatakenforgrantedcategory
ofthemodernistimperialproject,notonlyanimposedepistemologicalframe,
butalsoontologicallypresumptuousorinfact,anepistemologicalcaptureof
anontologicallyirreduciblebecoming(Massad2009).
Theseproblemsofepistemicviolencearereproducedinfeministandgayand
lesbianhumanrightsdiscourses,asintesectionalityisnowwidelyunderstood
asapolicyfriendlyparadigm.Inherpiecedetailingtheincorporationofthe
languageandtheconceptualframeofintersectionalityintoUNandNGO
forums,NiraYuvalDavispointsout:Theanalysisandmethodologyofinter
sectionality,especiallyinUNrelatedbodiesisjustemergingandoftensuffers
fromanalyticconfusionsthathavealreadybeentackledbyfeministscholars
whohavebeenworkingontheseissuesforlonger(YuvalDavis2006,206).
YuvalDavisalsonotesthattherelativelyrecentspreadofintersectionalityin
Europehaslargelybeenattributedtoitsamenabilitytopolicydiscussions,an
attributionsheargueselidestheworkonmigrantfeminismsinEuropeand
particularlythescholarlyinterventionsofblackBritishfeministsinthe1970s.
54 philoSOPHIA
Page8
Tofurthercomplicatethetravelsofintersectionaltheorizing,intheUnited
Statesintersectionalitycamefromaveryspecificsetofsocialmovements,
whereasinEurope,wherethetermiscurrentlybeingwidelytakenup,the
interestinintersectionalitydoesnotemergefromsocialmovements(andin
fact,asYuvalDavispointsout,withtheexceptionperhapsofBritain,the
effortsofmigrantwomentochallengedominantfeministframeswentlargely
ignored).Rather,thisnewfoundinterestinintersectionalitysignalsabelated
recognitionoftheneedtotheorizeracialdifferenceitalsofunctionsasa
methodforEuropeanwomensstudiestocatchupinstitutionallywith
U.S.womensstudies.Thecategorynationthereforeappearstobetheleast
theorizedandacknowledgedofintersectionalcategories,transmittedthrough
aformofglobalizingtransparency.TheUnitedStatesisreproducedasthe
dominantsiteoffeministinquirythroughtheuseofintersectionalityasa
heuristictoteachdifference.Thus,theEuroAmericanbiasofwomensstudies
andhistoryoffeminismisironicallyreiteratedviaintersectionality,elidingthe
maininterventionoftransnationalandpostcolonialfeministscholarssince
the1990s,whichhasbeen,inpart,aboutdestabilizingthenationcentered
productionofthecategoryWOC(KaplanandGrewal1994).
TheissuesIhavesketchedoutreflectissuesaboutknowledgeproductionand
9/23
2/3/2016
suggestthatintersectionalityisaviablecorrectivetoepistemologicalviolence,
shouldtheselimitationsregardingsubjectpositioningbeaddressed.Buta
differentcritiquesuggeststhatintersectionalityfunctionsasaproblematic
reinvestmentinthehumanistsubject,inparticular,thesubjectX.ReyChow
hasproducedthemostdamningcritiqueofwhatshecallspoststructuralist
significatoryincarceration,seriouslyquestioningwhetherthemarginalized
subjectisstillaviablesitefromwhichtoproducepolitics,muchlesswhether
thesubjectisanecessaryprecursorforpolitics(Chow2006,53).Difference
producesnewsubjectsofinquirythattheninfinitelymultiplyexclusioninorder
topromoteinclusion.Differencenowprecedesanddefinesidentity.Partof
Chowsconcernisthatpoststructuralisteffortstoattendtothespecificityof
Othershasbecomeauniversalizingprojectthatisalwaysbeholdentotheself
referentialityofthecenter,ironicallygiventhatintersectionalityfunctionsas
acallforandaformofantiessentialism(BrahandDavis2004,76).Thepost
structuralistfatigueChowdescribesiscontingentonthefollowingtemporal
sequencing:SubjectXmaybedifferentincontent,butshowsup,timeand
again,asthesameinform.(Examplesmightbefoundintherelativelyrecent
entranceofbothtransidentityanddisabilityintotheintersectionalfray.)
CyborgsandOtherCompanionateAssemblages
Theliteratureonintersectionalityhasbeenbolsteredbythefocusonrepre
sentationalpoliticsscholarsconcernedwiththeimpactanddevelopmentof
Page9
representationalpoliticsrarelycomeintodialoguewiththoseconvincedofthe
nonrepresentationalreferentofmatteritself.Therehasyettobeaserious
interrogationofhowthesetheoriesonmatterandmatteringmightanimate
conceptualizationsofintersectionality.Iamspeakingbroadlyoftheworkof
DonnaHaraway,ElizabethGrosz,ElizabethWilson,KaranBarad,Patricia
Clough,DianneCurrier,ClaireColebrook,VickyKirby,MiriamFraser,and
LucianaParisi,tonameafew.Whilethisgroupisanartificialconstructionof
myownmakingandreflectsmanydivergentinterestsanddifferenttheoretical
orientations,afewnoteworthycommonalitiesrunacrossthem.Divestedfrom
subjectformation(butfordifferentreasonsthanChow),thesefeministscholars
inscienceandtechnologystudies,someinflectedbyposthumanism,othersby
Deleuzianthought,havegenerallyarguedthattheliminalityofbodilymatter
10/23
2/3/2016
cannotbecapturedbyintersectionalsubjectpositioning.Theyprofferinstead
thenotionthatbodiesareunstableentitiesthatcannotbeseamlesslydisag
gregatedintoidentityformations.ElizabethGrosz,forexample,foregrounding
itsspatialandtemporalessentializations,callsintersectionalityagridlock
modelthatfailstoaccountforthemutualconstitutionandindeterminacyof
embodiedconfigurationsofgender,sexuality,race,class,andnation(Grosz
1994).Theycanbelooselydescribedasfeministmaterialistsorfeminists
investedindecenteringlinguisticsignificationandsocialconstructionism
thatstilltakesadivisionbetweenmatteranddiscourseasthestartingpoint
fordeconstructivecritique.9
Harawayhasarguablybeenthemostinfluentialofthisgroup.Inaleading
textfromthisliteratureshefamouslystated,astheverylastlineinher
groundbreaking1985essayAManifestoforCyborgsthatshewouldrather
beacyborgthanagoddess,favoringthepostmoderntechnologizedfigure
oftechnohumanoverthereclamationofaracialized,matriarchalpast,thus
implicitlyinvokingthisbinarybetweenintersectionalityandassemblage
(Haraway1985).SeveraltheoristshavecritiquedHarawaysuseofthetropeof
womanofcolortodenoteacyborgparexcellence,includingChelaSandoval
andSchueller(whohasarguedthatwomenofcolorfunctionasaprostheticto
thecyborgmyth,which,asIpointoutearlier,isnotunlikehowWOCfunction
inrelationtointersectionality)(Sandoval2000Schueller2005).Eventhough
Harawayscyborgsaremeanttounderminebinariesofhumansandanimals,
ofhumansandmachines,andoftheorganicandinorganicacyborgactually
inhabitstheintersectionofbodyandtechnology.DianneCurrierwrites:In
theconstructionofacyborg,technologiesareaddedtoimpactupon,andat
somepointintersectwithadiscrete,nontechnologicalbody....Thus,insofar
asthehybridcyborgisforgedintheintermeshingoftechnologywithabody,
inaprocessofaddition,itleaveslargelyintactthosetwocategories(human)
bodyandtechnologythatprecededtheconjunction.Currierarguesthat
despiteintendingotherwise,thetheorizationofcyborgswindsupunwittingly
56 philoSOPHIA
Page10
reinscribingthecyborgintothebinarylogicofidentitywhichHarawayhopes
tocircumvent(Currier2003,323).Harawaydoesnotactuallyapproacha
human/animal/machinenexus,thoughmorerecenttheorizationsofthenature/
culturedivide,byLucianaParisiforexample,demarcatethebiophysical,the
biocultural,andthebiodigital(Parisi2004,12).Still,thequestionofhowthe
11/23
2/3/2016
bodyismaterialized,ratherthanwhatthebodysignifies,isthedominantone
inthisliterature.
AssemblageisactuallyanawkwardtranslationoftheFrenchtermagence
ment.TheoriginalterminDeleuzeandGuattarisworkisnottheFrench
wordassemblage,butagencement,atermthatmeansdesign,layout,organi
zation,arrangement,andrelationsthefocusbeingnotoncontentbuton
relations,relationsofpatterns(Phillips2006,108).Inagencement,asJohn
Phillipsexplains,specificconnectionswithotherconceptsispreciselywhatgives
themtheirmeaning.Conceptsdonotprescriberelations,nordotheyexist
priortothemrather,relationsofforce,connection,resonance,andpatterning
giverisetoconcepts.AsPhillipswrites,thepriorityisneithertothestate
ofaffairs[whatonemightcallessence]northestatement[enunciationor
expressionofthatessence]butratheroftheirconnection,whichimpliesthe
productionofasensethatexceedsthemandofwhich,transformed,theynow
formparts(ibid.,108).TheFrenchandEnglishdefinitionsofassemblage,
however,bothrefertoacollectionofthings,acombinationofitemsandthe
factofassembling.TheproblematicthathauntsthistraversalfromFrench
theoreticalproductiontoU.S.academicusageisaboutthegenerativeeffects
ofthismistranslation.Phillipsarguesthattheenunciationofagencementas
assemblagemightbejustifiedasafurthereventofagencement(assemblage)
wereitnotforthetendencyofdiscoursesofknowledgetooperateasstatements
aboutstatesofaffairs(ibid.,109).
Oneproductivewayofapproachingthiscontinentalimpassewouldbetoask
notnecessarilywhatassemblagesare,butrather,whatassemblagesdo.What
doesassemblageasaconceptualframedo,andwhatdoestheirtheoretical
deploymentassuchdo?Whatisapracticeofagencement?Forcurrentpurposes,
assemblagesareinterestingbecausetheydeprivilegethehumanbodyasa
discreteorganicthing.AsHarawaynotes,thebodydoesnotendattheskin.
WeleavetracesofourDNAeverywherewego,welivewithotherbodies
withinus,microbesandbacteria,weareenmeshedinforces,affects,energies,
wearecompositesofinformation.Assemblagesdonotprivilegebodiesas
human,norasresidingwithinahumananimal/nonhumananimalbinary.
Alongwithadeexceptionalizingofhumanbodies,multipleformsofmatter
canbebodiesbodiesofwater,cities,institutions,andsoon.Matterisan
actor.FollowingKarenBaradonhertheoryofperformativemetaphysics,
matterisnotathingbutadoing.Inparticular,Baradchallengesdominant
notionsofperformativitythatoperatethroughanimplicitdistinctionbetween
Page11
12/23
2/3/2016
significationandthatwhichissignified,statingthatmatterdoesnotmateri
alizethroughsignificationalone.WritesBarad:
Aperformativeunderstandingofdiscursivepracticeschallengestherepre
sentationalistbeliefinthepowerofwordstorepresentpreexistingthings.
Performativity,properlyconstrued,isnotaninvitationtoturneverything
(includingmaterialbodies)intowordsonthecontrary,performativity
ispreciselyacontestationoftheexcessivepowergrantedtolanguageto
determinewhatisreal.Hence,inironiccontrasttothemonismthattakes
languagetobethestuffofreality,performativityisactuallyacontestation
oftheunexaminedhabitsofmindthatgrantlanguageandotherformsof
representationmorepowerindeterminingourontologiesthantheydeserve
(Barad2003,802).10
Baradsisaposthumanistframingthatquestionstheboundariesbetween
humanandnonhuman,matteranddiscourse,andinterrogatesthepractices
throughwhichtheseboundariesareconstituted,stabilized,anddestabilized.
Significationisonlyoneelementofmanythatgiveasubstancebothmeaning
andcapacity.InhisbookANewPhilosophyofSociety:AssemblageTheoryand
SocialComplexity,ManuelDeLandaundertakestheradicalmovetomake
languagelast(DeLanda2006,16).Inthispostpoststructuralistframing,
essentialism,whichisusuallypositedastheoppositeofsocialconstructionism,
isnowplacedsquarelywithintherealmsofsignificationandlanguage,what
DeLandaandothershavecalledlinguisticessentialism.KarenBarad
writes:Languagehasbeengrantedtoomuchpower.Thelinguisticturn,
thesemioticturn,theinterpretativeturn,theculturalturnitseemsthat
ateveryturnlatelyeverythingisturnedintolanguageorsomeotherform
ofculturalrepresentation....Thereisanimportantsenseinwhichthe
onlythingthatdoesnotseemtomatteranymoreismatter(Barad2003,
801).Categoriesrace,gender,sexualityareconsideredevents,actions,
andencountersbetweenbodies,ratherthansimplyentitiesandattributesof
subjects.Situatedalongaverticalandhorizontalaxis,assemblagescome
intoexistencewithinprocessesofdeterritorializationandreterritorialization.
InAThousandPlateaus,DeleuzeandGuattariproblematizeamodelthat
producesaconstantinordertoestablishitsvariations.Instead,theyargue,
assemblagesforegroundnoconstantsbutrathervariationtovariationand
hencetheeventnessofidentity(DeleuzeandGuattari1987).DeLandathus
arguesthatraceandgenderaresituatedasattributesonlywithinastudy
ofthepatternofrecurringlinks,aswellasthepropertiesofthoselinks
(DeLanda2006,56).Usingthenotionofassemblage(notethetranslationof
agencementasarrangementhere),Guattarielaboratesthelimitsofmolar
categoriessuchasclass:
58 philoSOPHIA
13/23
2/3/2016
Page12
Takethenotionofclass,ortheclassstruggle.Itimpliesthatthereare
perfectlydelimitedsociologicalobjects:bourgeoisie,proletariat,aristocracy.
...Buttheseentitiesbecomehazyinthemanyinterzones,theintersections
ofthepetitebourgeoisie,thearistocraticbourgeoisie,thearistocracyofthe
proletariat,thelumpenproletariat,thenonguaranteedelite....Theresult:an
indeterminacythatpreventsthesocialfieldfrombeingmappedoutinaclear
anddistinctway,andwhichunderminesmilitantpractice.Nowthenotionof
arrangementcanbeusefulhere,becauseitshowsthatsocialentitiesarenot
madeupofbipolaroppositions.Complexarrangementsplaceparameterslike
race,sex,age,nationality,etc.,intorelief.Interactivecrossingsimplyother
kindsoflogicthanthatoftwobytwoclassoppositions.Importingthisnotion
ofarrangementtothesocialfieldisntjustagratuitoustheoreticalsubtlety.
Butitmighthelptoconfigurethesituation,tocomeupwithcartographies
capableofidentifyingandeludingcertainsimplisticconceptionsconcerning
classstruggle.(Guattari2009,26)
RereadingIntersectionalityasAssemblage
OneofCrenshawsfoundationalexamplesthatofthetrafficintersection
doesindeeddescribeintersectionalityasanevent.Crenshawwrites,Consider
ananalogytotrafficinanintersection,comingandgoinginallfourdirections.
Discrimination,liketrafficthroughanintersection,mayflowinonedirection,
anditmayflowinanother.Ifanaccidenthappensinanintersection,itcanbe
causedbycarstravelingfromanynumberofdirectionsand,sometimes,from
allofthem.Andlater:Butitisnotalwayseasytoreconstructanaccident:
Sometimestheskidmarksandtheinjuriessimplyindicatethattheyoccurred
simultaneously,frustratingeffortstodeterminewhichdrivercausedtheharm.
Inthesecasesthetendencyseemstobethatnodriverisheldresponsible,no
treatmentisadministered,andtheinvolvedpartiessimplygetbackintheir
carsandzoomaway(Crenshaw1989,149).
AsCrenshawindicatesinthisdescription,identificationisaprocessiden
tityisanencounter,anevent,anaccident,infact.Identitiesaremulticausal,
multidirectional,liminaltracesarentalwaysselfevident.Theproblemofhow
thetwopreexistingroadscomeintobeingnotwithstanding,thereisemphasis
onmotionratherthangridlock,onhowthehaltingofmotionproducesthe
demandtolocate.Theaccidentitselfindicatestheentryofthestandardizing
needsofthejuridicalisthereacrimetakingplace?Howdoesonedetermine
14/23
2/3/2016
whoisatfault?Asametaphor,then,intersectionalityisamoreporouspara
digmthanthestandardizationofmethodinherenttoadisciplinehasallowed
ittobetheinstitutionalizationofwomensstudiesintheUnitedStateshasled
todemandsforasubject/s(subjectX,infact)andamethod.
Page13
Howeveranimatedthesceneoftheaccidentatthetrafficintersectionmight
read,itstillremains,Iwouldargue,primarilytrappedwithinthelogicof
identity.IwanttoturnnowtoamomentinBrianMassumisParablesforthe
Virtualwherehereadsanincidentofdomesticviolencethroughwhathecalls
thehomeeventspace(Massumi2002,81).Forhim,theeventisnotdefined
asadiscreteactorseriesofactionsoractivities,butratherthefoldingof
dimensionsoftimeintoeachother(ibid.,15).Thisfoldingofdimensionsof
timeisaresultoftheconversionofsurfacedistanceintointensity[which]
isalsotheconversionofthematerialityofthebodyintoanevent(ibid.,14).
Interestedintheclaimregardingapurportedincreaseindomesticviolence
duringSuperBowlSunday,Massumiwrites:
Thehomeentryofthegame,atitscrestofintensity,upsetsthefragile
equilibriumofthehousehold.Thepatternsofrelationsbetweenhouseheld
bodiesisreproblematized.Thegameeventmomentarilyinterruptsthepattern
ofextrinsicrelationsgenerallyobtainingbetweendomestictypes,astyped
bygender.Astruggleensues:agenderstruggleoverclashingcodesofsoci
ality,rightstoaccesstoportionsofthehomeanditscontents,andrituals
ofservitude.Thesociohistoricalhomeplaceconvertsintoaneventspace.
Thetelevisionsuddenlystandsoutfromthebackgroundofthefurnishings,
imposingitselfasacatalyticpartsubject,arrayingdomesticbodiesaround
itselfaccordingtothedifferentialpotentialsgenerallyattachingtotheir
gendertype.Foramoment,everythingisupintheairandaroundtheTV
set,andbetweenthelivingroomandthekitchen.InproximitytotheTV,
wordsandgesturestakeonunaccustomedintensity.Anythingcouldhappen.
Themalebody,sensingthepotential,transducestheheterogeneityofthe
elementsofthesituationintoareflexreadinesstoviolence.Thegameis
riggedbythemalesalreadyconstitutedpropensitytostrike.Thetypical
patternofrelationsisreimposedintheunityofmovementofhandagainst
face.Thestrikeexpressestheempiricalrealityofsituation:recontainment
bythemaledominatedpowerformationofthedomestic.Theeventshort
15/23
2/3/2016
circuits.Theeventisrecapture.Thehomeeventspaceisbacktotheplaceit
was:acontainerofasymmetricrelationsbetweentermsalreadyconstituted
accordingtogender.Foldingbackontodomestication.Codedbelonging,no
becoming.(ibid.,8081)
Sowhattranspiresinthisassemblageoftheeventspace?Thereisaninten
sificationofthebodysrelationtoitself(onedefinitionofaffect),producednot
onlybythesignificanceofthegame,SuperBowlSunday,butbythebodily
forceandenergygivenovertothissignificance.Thedifferencebetween
significationandsignificance(sense,value,force)isaccentuated.Thereisa
focusonthepatternsofrelationsnottheentitiesthemselves,butthepatterns
60 philoSOPHIA
Page14
withinwhichtheyarearrangedwitheachother.Theplacementswithinthe
spaceitselfhavenotnecessarilyaltered,buttheintensifiedrelationshave
givennewcapacitiestotheentities(Thetelevisionsuddenlystandsout).
NotAssemblage,butAgencement.Househeldbodiesarenotorganicbodies
alone:thetelevisionisanactor,amatterwithforce,conveying(notdetermin
istically,butsuggestively)whomoveswhereandhowandwhen.Thetelevision
isanaffectiveconductor:InproximitytotheTV,wordsandgesturestake
onanunaccustomedintensity.Thereisasenseofpotentiality,abecoming.
Anythingcouldhappen.Itisamomentofdeterritorialization,alineofflight,
somethingnotavailableforimmediatecaptureeverythingisupintheair,
andquiteliterally,theairischargedwithpossibility.Intersectionalidentity
comesintoplay,asthe(white)maleisalwaysalreadyideologicallycodedas
morepronetoviolence.Finally,thestrikehappens:thehandagainstface.The
lineofflightisreterritorialized,forwardintothesocialscript,aclosingoffof
onebecoming,routedintoanotherassemblage.
Massumiwrites:Thepointofbringingupthisissueisnottoenterthe
debateonwhetherthereisanempiricallyprovablecausallinkbetweenprofes
sionalsportsandviolenceagainstwomen.Theoutpouringofverbalaggression
provokedbythemeresuggestionthattherewasalinkisenoughtoestablish
thetheoreticalpointinquestionhere:thatwhatthemassmediatransmitis
notfundamentallyimagecontentbuteventpotential(Massumi2002,269n5).
Thus,thisreadingofMassumisisnotatextualanalysisofthepossibility
thatwatchingviolenttelevisionproducesviolence,orviolentsubjects.Itis
notatheoryofspectatorshipidentification,butofaffectiveintensification:
16/23
2/3/2016
themeetingoftechnology(goodoldtelevision,noneedtoalwaysprivilege
theInternet),bodies,matter,molecularmovements,andenergetictransfers.
Massumihasbeencriticizedforaestheticizingviolence,butIwouldargue
thatwhatheconveyssowellistheinterplaybetweensignificationandsignifi
cance,movementandcapture,matterandmeaning,affectandidentity.Unlike
Crenshawsaccidentatthetrafficintersection,thefocushereisnotonwhether
thereisacrimetakingplace,nordeterminingwhoisatfault,butratherasking,
whataretheaffectiveconditionsnecessaryfortheeventspacetounfold?Inthe
mostbasicoffeministterms,wecanreadMassumisinterestinunravelingthe
scriptasofferingadifferentwayofthinkingaboutthequestions,whatcauses
domesticviolenceandhowcanwepreventit?
***
Theresobviouslymuchmoretosayaboutsuchanexamplecertainlyone
cannote(onceagain)thatMassumialsopresumessex/genderdifferentiation
astheprimaryonethatlocatesbodiesonthegrid.ButinrereadingMassumis
example,onesees,asSaldanhaargues,usingtheDeleuzianconceptsofmolar
andmoleculardifferences,thatintersectionalityasaconceptisonlymeant
forthemolarlevel...molecularforcescontinuallyupsetthetopological
Page15
localizabilityofabody(Saldanha2010,290).Inclosing,andasaneffortto
signpostthelinesofflightthisessaycannotfullyfollowgivenspacerestrictions,
myownconcernsaboutintersectionalframeworksgofarbeyondrethinkingits
contextualspecificity(thisisnotonlyaboutepistemologicalincongruenceor
correctives,butmoreimportantly,ontologicalirreducibility).AsIhavearguedin
TerroristAssemblages:Nomatterhowintersectionalourmodelsofsubjectivity,
nomatterhowattunedtolocationalpoliticsofspace,place,andscale,these
formulationsthesefinetuningsofintersectionality,asitwere,thatcontinue
tobedemandedmaystilllimitusiftheypresumetheautomaticprimacyand
singularityofthedisciplinarysubjectanditsidentitarianinterpellation(Puar
2007,206).Myinterestininterrogatingthepredominanceofsubjecthooditselfis
drivenpreciselybythelimitationsofpoststructuralistcritiquethatReyChowfore
grounds,theconcernsaboutthenature/culturedivideandquestionsoflanguage
andmatterthatthetechnoscienceandmaterialistfeministshaveoutlined,and
theattentiontopowerandaffectthatassemblagetheoristscentralize.
Iwanttomakeonefinalconnectionbetweenintersectionality,assemblage,
andthedebatesondisciplinarysocietiesandsocietiesofcontrol,derivedfrom
17/23
2/3/2016
theworkofMichelFoucaultandDeleuzesextensionofit.Whilediscipline
worksatthelevelofidentity,controlworksatthelevelofintensityidentityis
aprocessinvolvinganintensificationofhabituation,thusdisciplineandcontrol
aremutuallyentwined,thoughnotnecessarilycompatible,witheachother.
Inthe2007EnglishtranslationofMichelFoucaults197778lecturestitled
Security,Territory,andPopulation,Foucaultdistinguishesbetweendisciplinary
mechanismsandsecurityapparatuses,whatDeleuzewouldlatercometocall
controlsocieties.Onthedisciplinaryorganizationofmultiplicity,Foucault
writes:Disciplineisamodeofindividualizationofmultiplicitiesratherthan
somethingthatconstructsanedificeofmultipleelementsonthebasisof
individualswhoareworkedonas,firstofall,individuals(Foucault2007,
12).Manyrelationsbetweendiscipline(exclusionandinclusion)andcontrol
(modulation,tweaking)havebeenproffered:one,asvariousoverlappingyet
progressivestagesofmarketcapitalismandgovernmentalitytwo,ascoexisting
modelsandexercisesofpowerthree,controlasaneffectofdisciplinaryappa
ratusescontrolastheepitomeofadisciplinarysocietyparexcellence(inthat
disciplinaryformsofpowerexceedtheirsitestoreproduceeverywhere)and
finally,asFoucaultsuggestsabove,disciplinaryframesasaformofcontroland
asaresponsetotheproliferationofcontrol.
Itseemstome,andIposetheseasspeculativepointsthatIcontinueto
thinkthrough,thatintersectionalcritiquehasbothintervenedinthelegaland
capitaliststructuresthatdemandthefixityoftherightsbearingsubjectand
hasalsosimultaneouslyreproducedthedisciplinarydemandsofthatsubject
formation.AsNormaAlarconprescientlyasked,in1984,inherresponsetothe
publicationofThisBridgeCalledMyBack,arewegoingtomakeasubjectofthe
62 philoSOPHIA
Page16
wholeworld?(Alarcon1990,361).If,asBrahandPhoenixargue,akeyfeature
offeministanalysisofintersectionalityis...decentering...thenorma
tivesubjectoffeminism(BrahandPhoenix2004,78),thenhowdofeminist
thinkersaddresstheproblemthattheconstructofthesubjectisitselfalready
normative?Atthisproductiveimpasse,then,isthisconundrum:theheuristic
ofintersectionalityhasproducedatremendousamountofworkonWOCwhile
concomitantlyexcusingwhitefeministsfromthiswork,recenteringgender
andsexualdifferenceasfoundationalandprimaryindeed,thisamplification
ofknowledgehasinsomesensesbeenatthecostofWOC.Yetwe(thiswe
alwaysunderduressandcontestation)mightbereachingapoststructuralist
18/23
2/3/2016
fatiguearoundthenotionofthesubjectitself.Thelimitsoftheepistemological
correctiveareencountered.
Therefore,todismissassemblagesinfavorofretainingintersectionaliden
titarianframeworksistodismisshowsocietiesofcontroltweakandmodulate
bodiesasmatter,notpredominantlythroughsignificationoridentityinterpel
lationbutratherthroughaffectivecapacitiesandtendencies.Itisalsotomiss
thatassemblagesencompassnotonlyongoingattemptstodestabilizeidentities
andgrids,butalsotheforcesthatcontinuetomandateandenforcethem.That
istosay,gridmakingisarecognizedprocessofagencement.Buttorender
intersectionalityasanarchaicrelicofidentitypoliticsbypassesentirelythe
possibilitythatforsomebodieswecancallthemstatisticaloutliers,orthose
consignedtoprematuredeath,orthoseonceformerlyconsidereduselessbodies
orbodiesofexcessdisciplineandpunishmaywellstillbeaprimaryapparatus
ofpower.Therearedifferentconceptualproblemsposedbyeachintersection
alityattemptstocomprehendpoliticalinstitutionsandtheirattendantforms
ofsocialnormativityanddisciplinaryadministration,whileassemblages,in
anefforttoreintroducepoliticsintothepolitical,askswhatispriortoand
beyondwhatgetsestablished.Sooneofthebigpayoffsforthinkingthrough
theintertwinedrelationsofintersectionalityandassemblagesisthatitcan
helpusproducemoreroadmapsofpreciselythesenotquitefullyunderstood
relationsbetweendisciplineandcontrol.
Toreturntothetitleofthispiece,andthejuxtapositionthatHaraway
(unfortunately,butpresciently)renders,wouldIreallyratherbeacyborg
thanagoddess?Theformerhailsthefutureinateleologicaltechnological
determinismculturethatseemsnotonlyoverdetermined,butalsoexcep
tionalizesourcurrenttechnologies.Thelatternatureisembeddedinthe
racializedmatriarchalmythosoffeministreclamationnarratives.Certainlyit
soundssexier,thesedays,tolayclaimtobeingacyborgthanagoddess.But
whydisaggregatethetwowhentheresurelymustbecyborgiangoddessesin
ourmidst?NowthatisabecomingintersectionalassemblagethatIcould
reallyappreciate.
RutgersUniversity
Page17
Notes
1.Foracomprehensiveoverviewofthesedebatesinqueertheory,seeTayloret
al.,2011.
19/23
2/3/2016
2.ForthefullreadingofMassumionmovementandmyinterpretationofit
regardingdebatesonintersectionality,seePuar2007,21126.
3.Disruptinghegemonicframesofraceandgenderseemstobetheinitialimpetus
formanyintersectionalanalyses,whileotheroppressionsfollowforexample,
theCombaheeRiverCollectivewrites:Acombinedantiracistandantisexist
positiondrewustogetherinitially,andaswedevelopedpoliticallyweaddressed
ourselvestoheterosexismandeconomicoppressionundercapitalism(Combahee
RiverCollective,TheCombaheeRiverCollectiveStatement,1979).
4.Mypointhereissimple:intersectionalityrarelyreferstoworkonwhitesubjects,
withtheimportantexceptionofwhiteworkingclasswomen.Andmoregener
allyitrarelyreferstoworkaddressingprivilegedsubjects,forexample,white
upperclassmen.Whilethestudyofthesesubjectsmaywellindeedinvolvean
intersectionalanalysisorapproach,theclaimtothetermitselfissuturedtoa
referentthatleadstoracialessentialization.
5.AsLordewrites,AsafortynineyearoldBlacklesbianfeministsocialist
motheroftwo,includingoneboy,andamemberofaninterracialcouple...
(1984,120).
6.Thisisdespitethefactthattherearewidegeopoliticaldifferencesintheinterest
inintersectionality.AssomeonewhoworkswithgraduatestudentsatRutgers,
Iencounteravarietyofunevenresponsestotheimportanceofintersectionality,
determinedinpartbyvariationsamongwomensandgenderstudiesprograms
andgeographicalregionsfromstudentswhoarewellschooledinthelexicon
ofintersectionalityandpresumeatakenforgrantednessofitsnecessity,tothose
whohaveneverencountereditintheirundergraduateschooling.
7.Thisisanobservationbasedonresponsestomyworkaswellasanecdotal
evidencefromseveralWOCwithwhomIhavediscussedtheseissues.
8.Schuellersoverallprojectexaminestheuseofracialanalogyaswayofresta
bilizingwhitewomenasthepropersubjectoffeminism,whatsheterms
incorporationbyanalogy.
9.Therehavebeenmanyvariedstrandsofmaterialistfeminismandnotallofthese
thinkerswoulddescribethemselvesassuch.Foragoodoverviewofwhathas
beenrecentlyhailedasthenewmaterialisms,seetheIntroductiontoCoole
andFrost2010.
10.WhileIfindBaradveryusefulinthinkingabouthowperformativityhascometo
signalapredominantlylinguisticprocess,thedangerofhernotionofontological
realismisthattheefforttodestabilizelinguistessentialismmaywellprivilege
anessentializedtruthproducedthroughmatter,asortofontologicalessentialism
ormaterialistessentialismthatusesalinguisticframeperformativitytoshore
64 philoSOPHIA
Page18
20/23
2/3/2016
upthedurationaltemporalitiesofmatter.Asimilarconundrumappearsinthe
workofJaneBennetsVibrantMatter:APoliticalEcologyofThings.Herotherwise
instructivetheorizationofthevitalityofmatterisundercut,inmyopinion,by
theuseofagencyassomethingthatcanbeaccordedtocertainformsofmatter.
Agencyasithashistoricallybeendeployedreferstothecapacitiesoftheliberal
humanistsubject,ananthropocentricconceptualizationofmovement.
References
Alarcon,Norma.1990.Thetheoreticalsubject(s)ofThisbridgecalledmybackand
AngloAmericanfeminism.InMakingface,makingsoul/haciendacaras:Creativeand
criticalperspectivesbyfeministsofcolor,ed.GloriaAnzaldua,35669.SanFrancisco:
AuntLuteBooks.
Barad,Karen.2003.Posthumanistperformativity:Towardanunderstandingofhow
mattercomestomatter.Signs:JournalofWomeninCultureandSociety28,no.3:
80131.
Brah,Avitar,andAnnPhoenix.2004.AintIawoman:Revisitingintersectionality.
JournalofInternationalWomensStudies3:7586.
Chow,Rey.2006.Theageoftheworldtarget.Durham:DukeUniversityPress.
CombaheeRiverCollective.1979.TheCombaheeRivercollectivestatement.
Coole,Diana,andSamanthaFrost.2010.Newmaterialisms:Ontology,agency,and
politics.Durham:DukeUniversityPress.
Crenshaw,KimberlWilliams.1991.Mappingthemargins:Intersectionality,identity
Politics,andviolenceagainstwomenofcolor.StanfordLawReview6:124199.
.1989.Demarginalizingtheintersectionofraceandsex:Ablackfeminist
critiqueofantidiscriminationdoctrine,feministtheoryandantiracistpolitics.
TheUniversityofChicagoLegalForumVolume1989:FeminismintheLaw:Theory,
PracticeandCriticism:13967.
Currier,Dianne.2003.Feministtechnologicalfutures:Deleuzeandbody/technology
assemblages.FeministTheory3:32138.
DeLanda,Manuel.2006.Anewphilosophyofsociety:Assemblagetheoryandsocial
complexity.LondonandNewYork:Continuum.
Deleuze,Gilles,andFelixGuattari.1987.Athousandplateaus.Trans.BrianMassumi.
Minneapolis:UniversityofMinnesotaPress.
Erel,Umut,JinHaritaworn,EncarnacionGutierrezRodriguez,andChristianKlesse.2011.
Onthedepoliticisationofintersectionalitytalk:Conceptualisingmultipleoppressions
incriticalsexualitystudies.InTheorizingintersectionalityandsexuality,ed.Yvette
Taylor,SallyHines,andMarkE.Casey,5678.NewYork:PalgraveMacMillan.
Foucault,Michel.2007.Security,territory,population:LecturesatthecollegedeFrance,
197778.Trans.GrahamBurchell.NewYork:Picador.
Grosz,Elizabeth.1994.Volatilebodies:Towardacorporealfeminism.Indianapolis:
UniversityofIndianaPress.
21/23
2/3/2016
Page19
Guattari,Felix.2009.Iamanideathief.InSoftsubversions:Textsandinterviews
19771985,ed.SylvereLotringer,trans.ChetWienerandEmilyWittman,2233.
LosAngeles:Semiotext(e).
Haraway,Donna.1985.Manifestoforcyborgs:Science,technology,andsocialist
feminisminthe1980s.SocialistReview80:65108.
Kaplan,Caren,andInderpalGrewal.1994.Scatteredhegemonies:Postmodernityand
transnationalfeministpractices.Minneapolis:UniversityofMinnesotaPress.
Lorde,Audre.1984.Sisteroutsider:Essaysandspeeches.Berkeley:CrossingPress.
Massad,Joseph.2009.HownottostudygenderintheArabworld.LectureatOberlin
College.
Massumi,Brian.2002.Parablesforthevirtual:Affect,movement,sensation.Durham:
DukeUniversityPress.
McCall,Leslie.2005.Thecomplexityofintersectionality.Signs:JournalofWomenIn
CultureandSociety30,no.3:17711800.
Parisi,Luciana.2004.Abstractsex:Philosophy,technology,andmutationsofdesire.London
andNewYork:Continuum.
Phillips,John.2006.Agencement/assemblage.Theory,CultureandSociety23,no.23:
108109.
Puar,JasbirK.2007.Terroristassemblages:Homonationalisminqueertimes.Durham:
DukeUniversityPress.
Saldanha,Arun.2010.Politicsanddifference.InTakingplace:Nonrepresentational
theoriesandhumangeography,ed.BenAndersonandPaulHarrison,283303.
Surrey,UK,andBurlington,VT:AshgatePublishing.
Sandoval,Chela.2000.Themethodologyoftheoppressed.Minneapolis:Universityof
MinnesotaPress.
Schueller,MaliniJohar.2005.Analogyand(white)feministtheory:Thinkingrace
andthecolorofthecyborgBody.Signs:JournalofWomeninCultureandSociety
30,no.1:6392.
Taylor,Yvette,SallyHines,andMarkE.Casey,eds.2011.Theorizingintersectionality
andsexuality.NewYork:PalgraveMacMillan.
YuvalDavis,Nira.2006.Intersectionalityandfeministpolitics.EuropeanJournalof
WomensStudies13,no.3:193209.
22/23
2/3/2016
66 philoSOPHIA
23/23

Cyborg Goddess: Intersectionality and Assemblage Theory

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Cyborg Goddess: Intersectionality and Assemblage Theory

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

2/3/2016

You might also like