-
Hoffart, Amund Rake
(2024).
Boksamtale under lanseringen av monografien Interpreting Intersectionality.
-
Hoffart, Amund Rake
(2024).
Interpreting Intersectionality.
-
Hoffart, Amund Rake
(2023).
Jakten på erfaringsbasert teori.
Agora.
ISSN 0800-7136.
41(4),
p. 221–227.
-
Hoffart, Amund Rake
(2022).
The Quest for the Right Intersectional Metaphor.
Global Dialogue: Magazine of the International Sociological Association.
ISSN 2519-8688.
12(3),
p. 24–25.
-
Hoffart, Amund Rake
(2022).
Intersectional intersectionality?
-
Hoffart, Amund Rake
(2022).
Om interseksjonell interseksjonalitet.
-
Hoffart, Amund Rake
(2022).
Familielikheter.
-
Hoffart, Amund Rake
(2022).
The quest for the right metaphor in metacommentaries on intersectionality.
-
Hoffart, Amund Rake & Stuen, Eivind August Westad
(2022).
Is the term ‘intersectionality’ being misused?
[Internet].
Kilden kjønnsforskning.no.
-
Hoffart, Amund Rake
(2022).
Butlers helhetlige prosjekt?
Agora.
ISSN 0800-7136.
40(1),
p. 348–355.
-
Hoffart, Amund Rake
(2021).
Blir interseksjonalitetsbegrepet misbrukt?
-
Hoffart, Amund Rake & Stuen, Eivind August Westad
(2021).
Blir begrepet «interseksjonalitet» misbrukt?
[Internet].
Kilden kjønnsforskning.no.
-
Hoffart, Amund Rake; Jers, Johanna & Lööv, Anna Olovsdotter
(2020).
Den postdoktorala situationen för genusdoktorer: Vad händer efter festen?
Tidskrift för genusvetenskap (TGV).
ISSN 1654-5443.
41(3),
p. 91–93.
-
Hoffart, Amund Rake
(2019).
The quest for the right metaphor: A mapping of alternative metaphorizations of intersectionality.
-
Hoffart, Amund Rake
(2019).
Knowing, doing and undoing: Exploring the interplay between three modes of engagement with intersectionality.
-
Hoffart, Amund Rake
(2018).
On intersectionality and additivity.
-
Hoffart, Amund Rake
(2018).
Feminist intersectionality theory and the aim of theorising from experience: Some reflections.
-
Hoffart, Amund Rake
(2017).
Fagtermer i kjønnsforskning: om arbeidsmetoden.
-
Hoffart, Amund Rake
(2017).
Terminologi og kjønnsforskning.
-
-
Hoffart, Amund Rake
(2016).
Intersectional intersectionality: Presentation of ongoing PhD research.
-
Hoffart, Amund Rake
(2016).
Conceptualising intersectionality: Some ideas.
-
Hoffart, Amund Rake
(2016).
Gender research terminology: Methods and challenges.
-
Hoffart, Amund Rake
(2016).
Feminist boundary-drawing: Intersectional theory and the case of additive analysis.
-
Hoffart, Amund Rake
(2015).
Doing terminological work in gender research: Experiences from Norway.
-
Hoffart, Amund Rake
(2014).
Wittgenstein og feminismens problematiske kvinnebegrep.
-
Hoffart, Amund Rake & Pettersen, Tove
(2014).
Ti år med emnet Kjønn og filosofi.
[Business/trade/industry journal].
Bulletine, nr. 2, 2014.
-
Hoffart, Amund Rake
(2021).
Intersectional Intersectionality? Interpretative Politics in Metacommentaries on Intersectionality.
Örebro Universitet.
ISSN 9789175294001 .
6.
Show summary
The claim that intersectionality has become a dominant paradigm for feminist scholarship and activism constitutes the backdrop to this study. One central arena for making such claims is the genre of metacommentaries on intersectionality. This genre often responds critically to the development of intersectionality into a paradigm and focuses on how the dispersal of intersectionality into ever-new contexts carries with it a series of missteps and breakdowns. The paradigmatisation of intersectionality is seen as problematic: its successes lead to failures; its popularity to a loss of radical edge; its travels to uprooting. This critique instigates a form of storytelling that attempts to bring intersectionality back to where it belongs. In this study, three responses to the paradigmatisation of intersectionality are identified. All work to pin it down and shape it as a proper object: to define its meanings, connect with its roots and realise its potential. These responses are read as themselves contributing to paradigmatisation, positioning the genre of metacommentaries as both “against” and as an important part of this process.
This thesis develops a critique of the gestures of correction inherent in the metacommentary responses. A central finding is that the construction of a proper form of intersectionality is contrasted against an improper other, known as “additivity”, a way of conceptualising the relationship between social categories as separate and independent, making it possible to add them to each other. More importantly, additivity serves as a conceptual placeholder for a long list of methodological no-go areas, such as essentialism, exclusion and binary thinking. Thus, in the metacommentaries, a starkly oppositional relationship is constructed: through making additivity into a pejorative, intersectionality becomes an imperative. A paradoxical effect of overstating this binary is that it reinforces the very theory/practice gap that is singled out as causing missteps and breakdowns in intersectional scholarship. Instead of struggling to resolve the problem of additivity at a metatheoretical level, it is suggested that we need to dissolve the exceptionalism that guides the corrective impulse and to acknowledge our collective implication in additive modes of thought.
-
Hoffart, Amund Rake
(2012).
Feminismens problematiske kvinnebegrep.
Universitetet i Oslo.
