"My fullest concentration of energy is available to me only when I integrate all the parts of who I am, openly, allowing power from particular sources of my living to flow back and forth freely through all my different selves, without the restriction of externally imposed definition. Only the can I bring myself and my energies as a whole to the service of those struggles which I embrace as part of my living.” - AUDRE LORDE,

SISTER OUTSIDER

Listening to the Experiences of Women of Color Activist Students at CSU

Chris Linder Director, Women’s Programs & Studies, CSU Katrina Rodriguez Assistant Professor, Higher Education and Student Affairs Leadership, University of Northern Colorado

Objectives

 Understand the complexity of the intersections of identity and the role intersectionality plays on our campus.  Better understand the experiences of some self identified women of color activists as related to race, gender and sexual orientation at CSU.  Gain some strategies for creating safe spaces related to the intersections of race, class, sexual orientation and other identities.

Context of the Study

 White Privilege and Racism in Feminism  Intersectionality Theory & Critical Race Feminism  College Student Identity Development Theory

White Privilege and Racism in Feminism

       Discouraged from expressing anger (Hasseler, 1999; Washington, 2001) Minimization and de-legitimization of experiences of women of color (Hurtado, 1996) Separation of gender from other identities (Kim, 2001; Hurtado, 1989; McDonald, 2003) Additive vs. Intersectional approaches to identity (Kim, 2001) Use of the “neutral woman” to create support services (Crenshaw, 1991) Re-centering the dominant group in the process of addressing oppression (Alcoff, 1998; Kruks, 2005) Not addressing white women’s relationships to white men (Hurtado, 1989)

Intersectionality

 Roots in Black feminist thoughts critiquing second-wave feminism: resisting essentialism by asking “

which

women?” (Collins, 1990; Crenshaw, 2003; hooks, 1988; Lorde, 1984; Morága & Anzáldua, 1983; Wing, 2003)  Integrative, rather than additive identities  Identities are fluid, but experienced as stable (Shields, 2008)  All multiple identities – not just marginalized identities  Centering the experiences of marginalized populations benefits everyone (Crenshaw, 2003)

Intersectionality

 Intersectional invisibility – heterocentrism, ethnocentrism, androcentrism (Purdie-Vaughns & Eibach, 2008)  Interesectionality methodology requires understanding experiences, not identities  “Requires that we think about social categories in terms of stratification brought about through practices of individuals, institutions, and cultures rather than primarily as characteristics of individuals” (Cole, 2008, p. 445)  Examples: librarian’s dilemma; “women and minorities”

College Student Identity Development Theories

 Linear development models based on the experiences of elite white men  Moved toward linear models based on the experiences of “women”  Multiple identity development – grounded theory approach with 10 lesbian women (Jones 1997)  Student Development as “fluid” process, analyzed from critical perspectives (including queer theory)

Study Design

Grounded in Critical Cultural Theory  Empowering way to address structural inequalities in society  Co-create knowledge – critical lens  By giving power to people who experience oppression through action-based research, change occurs as the research is conducted (Brookfield, 2005)

Purpose & Research Question

 By talking with college women who self-identify as activists for social change and women of color, we seek to better understand the ways the feminist movement continues to marginalize people from non-dominant populations, with a specific focus on women of color.

 How do self-identified women of color activists experience racism and observe white privilege (within the feminist movement?) on a college campus?

Methods

 Narrative Methodology     Collection & co-construction of stories from participant perspectives Researcher draws out themes from stories Accurately “restory” phenomenon or lived experiences (Creswell, 2007, p. 56) Qualitative – seeks transferability, not generalizability  Series of 7 individual interviews and a focus group    Where can you bring your whole self?

What makes a safe space?

How do you experience your identities (race and gender specifically) at CSU?

Participants

 Seven participants: Self-identification  Seniors (4), junior (1), sophomore (1), first year (1)    African American (2), multi-racial (1), Latina (4) Bisexual (2), queer (1), “hetero, I think…” (2), straight (2) Womyn with a “y”  Most did not separate race from gender • • “African American woman” “Latina”

         

Campus Involvement

Campus Step Up: A Social Justice Retreat Student Diversity Programs & Services: Women’s Programs and Studies, El Centro Student Services, GLBT Student Services Key Academic and Key Service Learning Communities SHADES Student Organization for Multiracial Students Sororities Created their own organizations: INCITE!, Multicultural Sorority “Mainstream” and “Radical” involvement Art Ethnic Studies/Women’s Studies Volunteering: Alternative Spring Breaks, Tutoring Programs

Feminism & Social Justice

 Definitions   Similar definitions for Feminism and Social Justice Includes eradication of all oppression – not just gender  Exclusivity in assumed safe spaces  Feminism about white women  Speak for everyone in my race in feminist spaces

Unsafe Spaces

 Hostile environments – feel like I’m exaggerating or over-reacting  Classrooms, Residence Halls, Campus in general, Community  Tokenization  Asked to speak for my race  Invisibility  Ignored in lines, walking across campus and in classrooms

Fit and In-Group Dissonance

 Internal vs. expectations  I don’t act like…  Multiple Identities  Navigating intersectionality in various communities  Phenotype  “You’re not brown enough…”

Safe Spaces & Allies

 Allies do their own work  Build community to address lack of community  Starting own organizations  Ally support based on Knowledge and Education

Discussion

 General reactions of the data?

 What are the implications of this research?

Implications

 Unsafe campus (classrooms included) – leads to poor retention, not safe to learn & to risk  Internalized oppression  Limited developmental opportunities – can’t be “whole” in many spaces  Dissonance in identity development – expectations from others vs. internal expectations  Shifting identities to match expectations

Implications

 Constant negotiation of environments leads to burnout or exhaustion  Students don’t seek out resources when they need them – “is this real? Am I too sensitive”?

Strategies

 Validate what is happening to another person; do not try to rationalize it  Embrace anger as a legitimate response to experiences  Create programs and classroom experiences with the intention of ensuring that people explore multiple identities, not just one  Educate yourself about your dominant identities and history  Understand the significance of identity politics

Strategies

 Stand up against situations that are wrong, even if you are not the target  Pay attention to “process and product”  Create groups with parity at every level in the organization – but not at the risk of tokenizing other people  Do not attempt to deflect privilege – use it wisely!

 Acknowledge complexities and ambiguities that make us who we are

Discussion

 How have you seen these play out?  How might you implement them in your daily experiences?

 What other strategies would you suggest?

Contact Information

 Chris Linder, Women’s Programs and Studies, CSU  970-491-6384  [email protected]

 Katrina Rodriguez, Higher Education and Student Affairs Leadership, University of Northern Colorado  970-351-2495  [email protected]