Feminist community psychology: the dynamic co-creation of identities in multilayered contexts

Abstract

In this special issue, we view the development of feminist community psychology (FCP) as an ongoing project that must be co-created. This is reflected in articles that focus on authors' unique social locations inside and outside organizations in which they work, critical reflections on their multilayered identities, feminist methodological and pedagogical concerns, and the power of mentoring and social support. Authors discuss ways that critical reflexivity, feminist identities, and pedagogies can influence and be influenced by the practice of community psychology (CP). The intersectionality of identities is highlighted based on marginalized statuses from race/ethnicity, class, and sexuality to motherhood and “otherhood.” Authors also describe FCP practices including efforts to critique structural power asymmetries, reduce hierarchical professional relationships, and incorporate innovative interventions. We argue that these practices have libratory potential capable of creating social change consistent with the values and goals of FCP in particular and CP generally. © 2011 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

This special issue focuses on the continued co-creation of feminist community psychology (FCP). Historically, community psychology (CP) has had a slow, steadily evolving FCP presence. The Society for Community Research and Action (SCRA) Task Force on Women was established in 1978 and its success led to the founding of the permanent Committee on Women in 1986. Soon thereafter, the connections and tensions between feminism and CP were identified (Mulvey, 1988). Although the inclusion and visibility of FCP has increased (e.g., Gridley & Turner, 2010; Riger, 2000; Sabina, Cuevas, & Shally, 2011), we contend that more integration of distinctive feminist theories and practices would strengthen CP.

FCP originally grew out of the second wave of the U.S. women's liberation movement from which participatory methods and practices emerged in research. Furthermore, “lived” experiences (i.e., daily, ordinary activities and perceptions) became valued epistemological stances and critical ingredients for social change. Like other forms of feminist scholarship, FCP has conceptualized gender as a “central organizing category for understanding power imbalances” (Bond & Mulvey, 2000, p. 601) and has been defined as “consciousness of gender issues, gender-stratified power imbalances and contextual analyses of gender” (Angelique & Culley, 2003, p. 189). However, as Campbell and Wasco (2000) pointed out, there are many ways to analyze women's oppression as it intersects with other marginalized and privileged statuses. Increased attention to the centrality and inseparability of gender, race, class, and other socially structured inequalities is necessary for re-visioning and transforming FCP theories, methods and practices.

The origins of this special issue were three-fold. First, it has been a quarter century since the only Journal of Community Psychology (JCP) special issue on feminist frameworks was published (Mulvey, D'Ercole, & Blair, 1988). Second, it has been more than a decade since two special issues of the American Journal of Community Psychology(AJCP) on FCP were published (Bond, Hill, Mulvey, & Terenzio, 2000a,b). Third, in 2009, a symposium that focused on multifaceted identities of feminist community psychologists was organized by Susan Wolfe and the Committee on Women for the 12^th SCRA Biennial Conference. Presenters of varied age cohorts, ethnicities, sexual identities, and class backgrounds shared stories of their challenges and successes using their own feminist lenses (Wolfe, Levin, Mulvey, Primavera, & Angelique, 2009). As a result, it became clear that an ever-emerging FCP should explore multifaceted identities as they shape and are shaped by community, political, and interpersonal change.

In short, we believe that critical reflection is an essential component for the ongoing dynamic co-creation of FCP. The articles in this issue not only support our belief but also illustrate why and how our identities are related to our work with three different foci: (a) narratives in which the authors analyze work-related dynamics and identity shifts related to their unique social locations and those of community members with whom they worked; (b) retrospective stories and reflections that describe marginalized aspects of identities as they are related to the pursuit and practice of FCP and CP; and (c) FCP teaching-learning models that center lived experiences, attend to power dynamics, and prioritize the inclusion and affirmation of diverse individuals and groups.

Subthemes that are visible across the topical areas include: (a) the intersectionality of identities; (b) approaches to FCP practice; and (c) feminst social change as central. Included here are articles with a particular focus on race/ethnicity, class, and sexuality, as well as the representation of diverse countries and their respective cultures: Afghanistan, Australia, Canada, Ireland, and the United States.

UNIQUE SOCIAL LOCATIONS WITHIN DIVERSE ORGANIZATIONAL SETTINGS

The authors in the first set of articles examine their unique social locations vis-à-vis organizations in which they had direct involvement. Reflecting upon who we are in relationship to specific professional contexts can help to unpack the multiple layers of influence that we have within community settings to explore how personal and professional identities affect people in those settings.

In the first article, Sarah Reed, Robin Miller, Maria Valenti, and Nkiru Nnawulezi illuminate the importance of praxis and the need for critical personal reflection in their work in a community center with young Black lesbians, bisexuals, transgender, and transsexual persons (LBTT). Each author describes her own decision-making process about how much to “out” herself regarding her identities in terms of sexuality and other marginalized or privileged statuses during the process of implementing an HIV prevention project. The authors describe mixed reactions from the LBTT group members and analyze how decisions to publicly acknowledge different aspects of themselves affected their research relationships as well as their own evolving identity development. They also describe the complex identities and social power dynamics within this LBTT community between studs, femmes, and stemmes (individuals with changing gender representations). The authors pose challenging questions about how identities may be used to improve and/or restrict research endeavors, concluding that this sort of “uncomfortable reflexivity” is necessary for conducting “socially conscious research.”

In the second article, Catherine D'Arcy, Colleen Turner, and Belinda Crocket describe their experiences as mothers working with other mothers in three different community settings. They ask, “Where is the feminism in mothering?” Through their analyses with co-author Heather Gridley, they identify specific challenges for feminists such as individualistic concepts of motherhood and judgments about what constitutes a “good” mother. They pay careful attention to power-related dynamics and recognize their privilege relative to the nonprofessional women program participants. They focus on multiple sociopolitical levels, including macro-level concepts such as social policies, and individual-level concepts such as their own conflicted feelings and sense of powerlessness as mothers. They advocate for formal and informal support systems for mothers as well as institutional support for the complex and varied needs that women experience as mothers.

In the third article, Elaine Shpungin, Nicole Allen, Colleen Loomis, and Mary Ellen Dello-Stritto describe an intervention at a SCRA Biennial Conference that used creativity to give voice to experiences of SCRA members in different social locations within CP settings. Conference attendees read narratives written by members of marginalized groups to raise awareness of multiple forms of “silencing” in specific role relationships and organizational settings. While the original goal was to “address gendered silencing” within SCRA, the authors shifted their focus in the process of developing the project to “unveil and transform organizational norms.” Drawing on storytelling theory in organizations, they describe the immediate and more long-term successes of this methodological approach. The authors discussed how storytelling led to more complex understandings of their own experiences of being silenced and an awareness of their complicity in silencing others.

RETROSPECTIVE REFLECTIONS: FEMINIST IDENTITY DEVELOPMENT AND COMMUNITY PSYCHOLOGY

In the second series of articles, authors use retrospective autoethnographic accounts to examine how gender intersects with other marginalized statuses to affect their career paths in CP. Each article describes pivotal experiences in which people in positions of relative authority influenced the authors' educational and professional journeys in positive or negative ways.

In the first article, Bianca Guzman presents her journey of becoming a Latina community psychologist by reflecting on her interwoven identities of immigration status, culture, and gender. Describing her childhood in Guatemala, Bianca notes, “I did not yet understand that how an individual looks phenotypically could influence the type and amount of education that they could potentially obtain in the United States.” She describes her educational journey as a young child from Guatemala to Southern California, where she witnessed corporal punishment for speaking Spanish in public schools and received the message that higher education was not possible for her. She notes that other Latinas served as role models who were important to her success and argues that there are still many ways in which Latinas are dismissed within the educational system. Bianca describes her leadership role in SCRA's Committee on Women, ambivalence toward CP in terms of her academic work, and ways that CP continues to be her professional home.

In the next article, I (Holly Angelique, first author) use a critical feminist lens to analyze the intersection of class and gender as it relates to my position within a university setting to “challenge some of the dominant narratives in academia.” My experiences illustrate some of the stresses associated with stigma management and that academicians from working-class backgrounds live in two worlds but may feel like an outsider in both. I contend that class is embodied, literally “inscribed” on our bodies and figuratively represented in concrete bodily actions. I contend that higher education often reproduces systems of power and privilege rather than critically examining and challenging the structural institutions that maintain societal power imbalances. I conclude that a covert, forced code of “passing as middle-class” should be challenged in university settings as well as within CP.

Similarly, in the following article, Susan Wolfe describes how her working class socioeconomic location influenced decisions regarding the pursuit of college and graduate study worked against identifying as a feminist, and was associated with ambivalence regarding her feminist consciousness and unrealistic expectations of “sisterhood” in the second wave of feminism. She describes tensions between her lived experiences (e.g., loving the color pink) and those of her feminist colleagues throughout her graduate training. Susan also discusses conflicts between internalized expectations and working-class values related to motherhood, to marriage, and to expectations within graduate school, the resulting feelings of being “an imposter,” and how these tensions affected her professional careers inside and outside the academy. She asserts that the label “feminist” is far less important than the work that we do.

While Bianca Guzman, Susan Wolfe, and Holly Angelique all discuss the role of motherhood, Michele Schlehofer focuses specifically on the challenges posed for single mothers forging academic careers in CP. Juxtaposed against advice received in graduate school that she should, “Get tenure first, then have your children. And, time it so they are born in early June,” Michele describes her path from graduate student to tenure-track faculty member that ran parallel to becoming a single mother. She lays the groundwork for the conflicts between expectations of motherhood and academia that have not been adequately addressed in CP and describes aspects of university settings that are hierarchical, patriarchal and not well-situated to supporting work-life integration. Michele describes other challenges as well, including her observations of the differential treatment of men and women and the sometimes contentious relationships of childless women and women with children. She calls for structural changes in the academy generally, and CP specifically, to support the diversity of needs motherhood and single motherhood present for academics.

FEMINIST PEDAGOGY IN COMMUNITY PSYCHOLOGY

The third set of articles focuses on education across both academic and nonacademic settings. They expand upon the discussion of feminist pedagogical practices and their implications for the lives of women, as well as their potential for enriching CP. Finally, this special issue closes with a historical account of FCP that honors the contributions and mentorship of Barbara Dohrenwend, an early leader of the field.

In the first article in this section, Melissa St. Germaine-Small, Richard Walsh-Bowers, and Terry Mitchell discuss the importance of feminist pedagogy in CP graduate training in Canada. They provide overlapping and differing analyses from the perspectives of a non-traditional female graduate student, a pro-feminist senior male professor and a feminist female professor. They assert that “feminist pedagogy … attend[s] to women's situated, intersectional and multidimensional experiences as performed through their gender, class ethnicity, sexuality and appearance.” Arguing that student-professor power dynamics are potentially reciprocal, the authors illustrate ways that their graduate training program is a community of students and teachers all of whom are knowledge holders. They provide strategies for incorporating feminism into graduate training including personal and political components in course curricula, reflective learning through writing assignments, and teaching practices that foster embodied knowing. They argue that FCP pedagogical practices must attend to structural power imbalances to be a psychology of social change.

In the next article, Geraldine (Ger) Moane and Aideen Quilty describe two community-based courses offered by an Irish university. Situated in a working class community, the first course led to a certificate in Women's Studies and provided opportunities for continued education and employment. Modeled on the first course and offered in a lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender community setting, the second course led to a certificate in lesbian and queer studies. Both courses involved analyses of macro-level conditions, internalized oppression, and activism for feminist social change. The authors describe specific feminist curricula designed to facilitate critical thinking and libratory education based on Friere's (1970) concept of “conscientization” (action-reflection-action). Ger and Aideen argue that participatory processes, critical thinking, lived experiences, and value-informed social change are fundamental to feminist pedagogies and should be adapted for many educational settings.

Focused on the Revolutionary Association of Women of Afghanistan (RAWA), the next article in this special issue also draws on Friere's work (1970) and illustrates links between consciousness-raising, political awareness, and education. In a qualitative study of over 100 interviews with RAWA members, Anne Brodsky, Galina Portnoy, Jill Scheiber, Elena Welsh, Gitika Talwar, and Amy Carillo explore various educational pathways and describe the evolution of feminist identity from passive acceptance of oppression to a commitment to fight for social change among arguably one of the most politically oppressed groups in the world today. Comparing western and RAWA pedagogical practices, the authors describe striking contrasts between risks and resources, and between RAWA's commitment to providing some education for all community members versus extensive education for some and little for others.

The last article in this section is a boundary spanner chronicling the early history of FCP and recommending future directions. In doing this, I (Anne Mulvey, second author) honor Barbara Snell Dohrenwend by describing the powerful influence that she had as my mentor and by highlighting her significant contributions to FCP and CP research, theory, and practice. I describe experiences with John Martin, Barbara's research assistant, that illustrate radiating effects and interrelationships across forms of mentoring. Incorporating mutuality, emotionality, sensitivity to contexts, and affirmation of stigmatized aspects of identities into our work would allow us to recognize that “not only peers … but also those in positions of less social power” may be mentors. Advocating greater inclusion of multilayered dynamic identities in CP and FCP theory, research and action, I describe indirect ways that mentoring may occur across time, cultures, and statuses.

CONVERGENCE OF THEMES

Taken together, the articles in this special issue locate FCP in an international context spanning the personal, political, past and present. Themes that were threaded throughout the sections converged around three areas: (a) intersections of marginalized identities; (b) approaches to FCP practice; and (c) the convergence of individual and collective change goals.

Intersections of Marginalized Identities

Many articles analyzed multilayered aspects of oppression and privilege at the intersections of gender and ethnicity/race (Guzman; Reed et al.; Shpungin et al.), class (Angelique; Wolfe), and sexual orientation (Reed et al.; Shpungin et al.; Moane & Quilty; Mulvey). These articles shed light on the myriad ways that intersecting identities manifest, illustrating the inseparability of gender, and other aspects of identity. We were disappointed that articles centering gender and disabilities, mental health, and other marginalized statuses were not among those submitted as they also enrich FCP.

In addition to focusing on the ubiquitous areas of diversity (race/ethnicity, class, gender, sexual orientation), the themes of motherhood and “otherhood” were central to many articles. We were surprised that mothering was a major focus across multiple articles (Angelique; D'Arcy et al.; Guzman; Schlehofer; Wolfe), but because most women face decision making related to motherhood at some point in their lives, perhaps we should not have been. By choice or circumstance, women continue to be defined and confined by expectations of motherhood. Being a mother continues to be de-legitimized in different yet convergent ways in both the private and public spheres. It is still used as a rationale for women's marginalization in the workplace. In economic terms, it is barely compensated whether caring for one's own children (maternity leave) or the children of others (childcare workers). Together, the articles of this special issue make the case that motherhood should be a feminist concern, and illuminate the importance of solidarity with, and social action for, mothers. FCP should fight for macro and micro changes in the public and private spheres to support women as mothers in their common struggle.

Another unexpected theme was “otherness” experienced across settings and developmental phases. A number of authors described feelings of “otherness,” or they had the perception that their identities or social locations left them positioned as outsiders in universities and other professional and community settings (Angelique; Guzman; Mulvey; Reed et al.; Schlehofer; Wolfe). Related to this were feelings of self-doubt (Guzman; Mulvey; Schlehofer; Reed et al.) and the fear of being, or appearing to be, less intelligent or acceptable than peers, colleagues, or community members (Angelique; Guzman; Mulvey; Wolfe). The frequency and variety of experiences of “otherness” point to a dynamic power relationship that denotes “insiders” versus “outsiders” in particular settings. One response to this was the perceived need to rise above and beyond other colleagues in order to “prove” oneself (e.g., trying to become a superwoman was dubbed “Clara Kent” in Michele Schlehofer's autobiographical reflection). Although community psychologists have been attentive to marginalized statuses when working with groups outside the academy, we have not been cognizant enough of our own social power dynamics within the field.

Approaches to Feminist Community Psychology Practice

Many articles focus on FCP practice in terms of personal conviction, research and action, and education. Authors describe innovative methodological approaches, such as appreciative inquiry (D'Arcy et al.), performance art as an intervention strategy (Shpungin et al.), story-telling, and autoethnographic narratives (Angelique; Guzman; Mulvey; Schlehofer; Wolfe).

With regard to personal conviction, the notion of risk-taking around self-disclosure (Angelique; Guzman; Mulvey; Reed et al.; Schlehofer; Wolfe) is a theme woven through many articles. Perhaps Shpungin et al. exemplified this best with their account of storytelling based on painful experiences of being silenced during professional conferences and meetings. Despite fears that these personal accounts would not be accepted or respected, the feminist value of sharing personal stories in communal settings and the conviction that lived experiences were a valuable source of knowledge and data prevailed.

Many authors reflect on their graduate education as a pivotal point in their identity development and, consequently, very influential for their ensuing career paths in CP. They describe differential treatment on the basis of gender, sexuality, or in relation to feminist perspectives, such as harsh judgments among women, tensions within feminist communities, and discouragement from within CP as a field (Angelique; Guzman; Mulvey; Schlehofer; Wolfe). In contrast to negative experiences, many authors had very positive relationships with mentors, received advice and support from supervisors and peers, and were encouraged by female and male role models (Guzman; Mulvey; St. Germaine-Small et al.; Wolfe). Authors also reflected on the traditional hierarchical, sometimes sexist, nature of professions and educational settings, including CP, and offered ways to reduce hierarchy and to challenge sexist, racist, and classist practices (Angelique; Brodsky et al.; Moane & Quilty; Mulvey; Reed et al.; Schlehofer; St. Germain-Small et al.; Wolfe).

Many articles “bridge” the campus, the profession and the community (Brodsky et al.; Guzman; Moane & Quilty; Mulvey; Reed et al.). Articles illustrate a large array of settings in which FCP is being co-created, ranging from those where community psychologists are working with women from low-income communities (Brodsky et al.; D'Arcy et al.; Moane & Quilty), ethnic and sexual minorities (Guzman; Moane & Quilty; Mulvey; Reed et al.), situations of repression and war (Brodsky et al.), as well as the profession of CP and SCRA as an organization (Angelique; Guzman; Mulvey; Schlehofer; Shpungin et al.; Wolfe). It is clear that power is differentially structured in these settings and that interpersonal interactions and group processes reflect and sustain power differentials. Who we are and our professional interactions merit further attention given the interconnections of the academy, the profession, and community research and action.

CONCLUSION AND CONTINUITY: SOCIAL CHANGE AS CENTRAL

In accordance with CP and FCP goals, all of the articles in this special issue have a social change agenda. Using a rich mix of reflection, theorizing, researching, acting, educating and further reflection, authors assert and illustrate that the reduction of structural power asymmetries is needed. Across all of the sections, authors provide specific strategies for effecting social change in accordance with feminist values. Many want their efforts to be accessible to wider audiences (D'Arcy et al.; Guzman; Mulvey; Shpungin et al.; Wolfe). The importance of “embodied” knowing and lived experiences is communicated explicitly and implicitly (Angelique; Moane, & Quilty; Mulvey; Schlehofer; St. Germaine-Small et al.; Wolfe). There are calls to “practice what we teach” (Mulvey; Schlehofer; St. Germaine-Small et al.) and to engage in radical critiques of the field (Angelique; Mulvey; St. Germaine-Small et al.) to develop critical lenses that attend to social power dynamics, especially those organized around marginalized and oppressed statuses.

The consciousness-raising and libratory effects that are possible with FCP converged and emerged as a unifying theme. Connecting the personal and the political through consciousness-raising, the second wave of feminism challenged gendered power relations; this was a central focus in earlier phases of FCP. The third wave of feminism challenges us to unpack multilayered identities and explore their relationships to our work. Despite the precarious epistemological position of this approach within CP, we must conduct our scholarship in ways that are congruent with the values and goals of both feminism and CP. If we wish to become change agents rather than agents of dominant cultural discourses, we must be full members of the CP community and the communities in which we work. We assert that reflexivity in the context of critical scholarship will continue to co-create FCP in ways that will challenge social inequalities and draw on the power of mutuality. Through theoretical expansion, increased attention to the complexities of identity and diversity, and methodological pluralism, the power of FCP lies in its potential to enhance our CP practice in whatever we do.