Remembering My Hat

7th July 2015

iages conference: Part 4

Filed under: Uncategorized — rememberingmyhat @ 15:09

See previous posts for earlier sessions and disclaimers

Session 5: Intersections


(cc) Amafirlian

Ieva Stoncikaite, Spain

Erica Jong: No fear of ageing and sexuality

Zipless fuck as an encounter without objectification. Self-fulfilment and liberation through sex.

1994 Fear of Fifty problematises this former project. 2007 ‘Beyond the “Zipless Fuck” with Erica Jong suggests older women should have sex with women and decentre phallus in sexual practices. Sex less important but still significant. Jong’s writing about sex has changed as she has aged.

Has a new book coming out in September 2015 Fear of Dying

Neal King, Virginia Tech

Knowing hegemony among intersecting relations

How to recognise hegemony in an intersectional framework? Acceptance of subordination = hegemony. Epistemology of the closet. Sexuality is closeted, gender recasts submission as love, age does it through denying for a long time (you’re not old) and then recasting as love (stepping aside for the next generation)

Age relations are therefore a really good site for thinking about hegemonic masculinity. Ceremonial citations! People really just mean masculinity – list of traits or norms (strength, power, sexual drive, assertiveness etc.)

Connell’s original definition explicitly said ‘in ways that gain the consent to subordination’ (Gramscian). Hegemonic masculinity is about the effects – the consent of the dominated. But harder to get data on this.

How can we get data on this? Look at the diminishment of masculinity and status with older age. Study with Finnish data too – respondents tend to accept ageing will reduce status because of loss of physical and professional status. Buy into neo-liberal imputation of individual responsibility – your fault when you age. Accepting personal responsibility means accepting subordination.

Allows you to look at the actual hegemony, not just lists of traits. People hold themselves responsible, that is hegemonic masculinity.

Chryssy Hunter, London Met

Issues around identity, sexuality an economics in the context of trans* and sexgender nonconforming ageing.

T is not just an adjunct to LGB. Cis as a way of making privilege visible. But it gets reified to suggest that people are either cis or trans – this sets up another binary, which is not helpful.

Sexgender nonconforming is a term she has only started using more recently, previously just used T. [lovely Venn diagram – can’t represent it here].

LGB communities have always done gender differently e.g. butch and femme lesbians, camp gay men. Significance of historical context to which identities are claimed and claimable. Respondents saying they would have identified differently if born at a different point. Sexuality gets recast as gender [one of the Looking Both Ways interviewees reported this too].

T and sexgen nonconforming people’s experiences different from LGB – ‘back into the closet’ while far from ideal, may not even be possible. Legal protections still very limited [also the case for poly people]. Poverty a very unprotected characteristic, indeed demonised, and a particular issue for T and sexgen nonconforming people.

Andy King

Intersecting what? Exploring intersection of ageing, gender, sexualities in talk-in-interaction

Work in progress, not yet a paper.

Picking up Neal’s term of ‘ceremonial’ use of terms. Wants to avoid ceremonial approach to intersectionality [yes, really important project].

Putting intersectionality together with Conversation Analysis, specifically MCA.

Intersectionality foreground the matrix and contextual effects – fits nicely with CA. Lesley McCall 2005 taxonomy of three intersectional approaches:

  1. Anticategorical – deconstructs singular categories to illustrate their effects, like my paper yesterday.
  2. Intracategorical – takes a single category and examines complexity within the group Jill Willken’s paper yesterday
  3. Intercategorical – Mark Hughes paper yesterday

Sociological problem – a dance of constraint and resistance. Raises a methodological dilemma – how do we show it empirically, not just say it exists. How do people do intersectionality in talk, CA is the answer [surprise surprise!]

[summary of ethnomethodology,  CA and MCA] Recipient-designed i.e. radically contextual. Categories predict actions.

[account of research project and resulting sociological queasiness]


Leave a Comment »

No comments yet.

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Create a free website or blog at

%d bloggers like this: