Diversity: Advancing an inclusive feminist psychology.

Abstract

Feminist theory puts forth a general analysis of societal inequities that are based on gender oppression. It further posits that those inequities are a basic cause of mental health problems in women. Understanding those societal circumstances and their effects is a major focus of feminist therapy and research. The task of unraveling the conundrum of diversity in feminist therapy theory, research, and practice appears deceptively simple, if we assume that gender is the primary locus of oppression for all women. In reality, however, we know that this is not so. In considering the nexus of diversity and feminist psychology on all levels, we are compelled to ask questions that go beyond our understanding of oppression simply as a function of gender. The more that we are aware of the diversity of women's lives and experiences, the more cognizant we become of the need to consider how the intensity and effects of sexism vary or interact with other forms of oppression and privilege experienced by an individual. Our inquiry must also include an examination of the ways that feminist psychology I 73

Race, Class, and Gender: A Constellation of Positionalities With Implications for Counseling

“…Ignoring the differences of race, class, and other experiences between women and the implications of those differences (Lorde, 1992) specific content in counseling. The greater counselors' awareness is of the diversity of women's lives and experiences, the more cognizant they become of the need to consider how the intensity and effects of sexism interact with other forms of oppression and privilege an individual experiences (Greene & Sanchez-Hucles, 1997). Warwick (1999) offered the following scenario to illustrate the implications of race, class, and gender differentials in counseling.…”

“…Thus, it is imperative that counseling training programs include race, class, and gender (e.g., diversity) as routine and not tangential features of training. This goal can be accomplished in several ways: a separate course on diversity; infusion of diversity, through immersion, in all courses; or a combination of these approaches (Greene & Sanchez-Hucles, 1997;Harley et al, 1996;Herr, 1999;Leal-Idrogo, 1997). However, because the full impact of these approaches is not known, more research is needed to affirm or challenge their effectiveness (Middleton et al, 2000).…”

A Preliminary Analysis of Counseling Students' Attitudes Toward Counseling Women and Women of Color: Implications for Cultural Competency Training

“…Relatedly, it is particularly crucial that counselors and counselors in training learn to examine the multiplicity of social realities faced by diverse clients. Diversity has often been viewed along unidimensional linesfocusing on issues of gender, race, or sexual orientation-without recognition that many clients are faced with multiple challenges in day-to-day life that drastically affect their sociopolitical realities (&pin, 1995;Greene & Sanchez-Hucles, 1997: Reid & Comas-Diaz, 1990). An assessment of undergraduate students' attitudes has particular relevance for the present-day counseling field.…”

Integrating Gender and Ethnicity into Psychology Courses

“…As psychologists, we certainly know that relevance promotes learning, particularly among undergraduate students who may be at levels of cognitive development that make refined abstraction difficult (Belenky, Clinchy, Goldberger, & Tarule, 1986;McKeachie, 1986;Perry, 1981). Students who perceive that psychology is about someone other than themselves-who never see their experiences as women, as members of ethnic minorities, as lesbians, gays, bisexuals, or as disabled people represented in their psychology courses-are likely to have difficulty engaging in course material or applying it to their own lives (Chin & Russo, 1997;Greene & Sanchez-Hucles, 1997;Kimmel & Worell, 1997).…”

“…This tends to lead to the "mix and stir" approach to includlng gender and ethnicity in the curriculum: bits of research about ethnic minority women are tacked on without considering the possible conceptual transformation such research might provoke. It also may encourage focusing exclusively on stereotypic group differences (Greene & Sanchez-Hucles, 1997;Landrine, 1995a;Morawski & Bayer, 1995).…”