Open Access

Helma Lutz

• In my paper I take issue with proponents of ‘intersectionality’ which believe that a theoretical concept cannot/should not be detached from its original context of invention. Instead, I argue that the traveling of theory in a global context automatically involves appropriations, amendment and changes in response to the original meaning. However, I reject the idea that ‘intersectionality’ can be used as a freefloating signifier; on the contrary, it has to be embedded in the respective (historical, social, cultural) context in which it is used. I will start by mapping some of the current debates engaging with the pros and cons of the global implementation of the concept (the controversy about master categories, the dispute about the centrality of ‘race’, and the argument about the amendment of categories). I will then turn to my own use of ‘intersectionality’ as a methodological tool (elaborated in Lutz and Davis 2005). Here, we shifted attention from how structures of racism, class discrimination and sexism determine individuals’ identities and practices to how individuals ongoingly and flexibly negotiate their multiple and converging identities in the context of everyday life. Introducing the term doing intersectionality we explored how individuals creatively and often in surprising ways draw upon various aspects of their multiple identities as a resource to gain control over their lives. In my paper I will show how ‘gender’ or ‘ethnicity’ are invariably linked to structures of domination, but can also mobilize or deconstruct disempowering discourses, even undermine and transform oppressive practices.