Standing in the Intersection: Feminist Voices, Feminist Practices in Communication Studies ed. by Karma R. Chávez, Cindy L. Griffin (review)

Early iterations of feminist rhetorical scholarship have received criticism for focusing primarily on the concerns of white, middle-to-upper-class, heterosexual, cisgendered women. Karma Chávez and Cindy Griffin’s collection, Standing in the Intersection, poses intersectional scholarship as a method to ameliorate this challenge. This collection of eight essays also addresses concerns for the rhetorical discipline at large; namely, the problematic tendency to focus on identity as an isolated point of study. Thus, as the volume bears relevance to feminist scholarship, it also bears relevance for all rhetorical scholars. It invites us to question thoughtfully the scholarly “push for conceptual neatness” and the discipline’s focus on “individual communicators, and the communication of homogeneous groups” (20). The authors seek not to prevent feminist scholarship from addressing the needs of white, middle class, heterosexual women entirely, but rather to challenge the centrality of this configuration of identities.

Following a foreword from Marsha Houston, the introductory chapter establishes intersectional studies as a heuristic to critically examine interlocking systems of oppression. The editors posit this form of scholarship as a productive alternative to what Elizabeth Spelman refers to as “pop-bead metaphysics,” or scholarship that understands race, class, sexuality, and gender as compartmentalized entities that are simply added on one another without influencing each other (7). The introduction provides both a comprehensive account of the various ways to envision the “intersections” metaphor as well as guidelines for performing intersectional scholarship. Consistent with the goals for intersectional research, which invite scholars to address their own privilege, the editors acknowledge that despite their best efforts the pool of authors included in the volume “lacks significant representation of women of color” (20). However, the rhetors and audiences included as subjects of analysis represent a wide range of overlapping, fluid identities primarily within the United States.

The first section of the book introduces various theoretical approaches for “entering” intersectional studies. The first two chapters show how intersectional scholarship contributes to and informs rhetorical analyses of style. Shana Rose Reid-Brinkley analyzes the “feminine style” of Carol Moseley Braun, demonstrating that Braun’s style is not only “feminine” but also informed by the various components of her identity, including her race, sexuality, and disability. Reid-Brinkley articulates the ways by which this style simultaneously served as a limitation and a possibility. Kate Zittlow Rogness studies the free love discourse of Victoria Woodhull, Voltairine de Cleyre, and Emma Goldman. She illustrates the relevance of these historical activists for contemporary theorization, demonstrating that they provide a model for intersectionality by presenting styles characterized as impropriety, play, and possibility. These fluid characteristics allow such rhetoric to resist concrete manifestations of “womanhood.”

A key component of intersectional scholarship is the embrace of contradiction and messiness. Performing this goal, various essays within the collection contradict one another, but the collection accomplishes this while remaining thoughtful and provocative rather than disorganized and incoherent. Grounded in various texts of analysis, each essay provides a unique lens through which to view intersectionality. As one example, Carly S. Woods questions viewing the “intersection” metaphor as one static point, or place in which to stand, as occurs in the volume’s title. Instead, she welcomes an approach that focuses on movement and fluidity rather than space and location. An essay by Sara Hayden and D. Lynn O’Brien Hallstein cautions feminist scholars against taking intersectional studies to the extreme. The authors cite scholarship that focused so broadly on social justice concerns that they excluded issues related to gender. They remind us that an intersectional approach should augment gender studies while still allowing the critique of problematic patriarchal structures, especially in cases of gendered violence, reproductive rights, and gender-based discrimination.

The second part of the collection incorporates essays that invite rhetorical scholars to revise their concept of...