« Intersectionality / Intersectionnalité : Marginal Sources and the Intersection of Race, Class and Gender Norms: The Liberal Consensus and Its Transgression in the United States from 1945 to the 1970s

International audienceTransgressing Norms: Marginal Sources for a History From the MarginsRace, Class, and Gender in the United States, from the post-War period until the 1970sIn the United States, the post-World War II era has largely been characterized as a period of liberal consensus. As such, it is perhaps one of the most pertinent eras to analyze in terms of social norms. Norms, though heavily debated in sociology, could broadly be defined as the informal rules that guide social interaction (following in the vein of Steven P. Dandaneau). They are the products of socially dominant values. The transgression of a norm operates in relation to its counterpart as transgressions violate and sometimes modify the very norms they contest.After WWII, American society seemed more than ever to reinforce ethno-racial, gender and class norms. The persistent assignment (despite its being constantly questioned) of specific groups (women, African-Americans, etc.) – in both the public and private spheres – to subordinate positions not only produced social and cultural norms, but provided a unequivocal model to react against. The social production of gender and its respective social attributes that created distinctly defined masculine and feminine groups constructed binary as well as heterosexual norms that assured the continuity of a gendered social and cultural model. Ethno-racial divisions were also significant at this time as the concept itself takes one back to the process of racialization, a process that is constantly in the becoming and by which ethno-racial groups see an essentializing identity being attributed to them, an identity in which they would not have formerly recognized themselves. Social stratification was also reinforced at this time as any deviation from the socioeconomic model inspired by the American Dream was stigmatized.Despite the power of these norms, they were far from establishing any kind of “universal” culture. They could be subverted, displaced, erased/forgotten, or even overcome. Their intentional disruption by individuals and groups during this era denounced the injustice of “one” homogenous and homogenizing culture. But these transgressions could themselves be subverted; the adaptability of the American model in the face of criticism has revealed a large capacity to integrate protest, in fact, in some cases, subversive elements have been elevated to the ranks of new social norms. This process of cooptation takes place notably through iconization, or the transformation of dissent into a cultural symbol that is absorbed by dominant culture and rendered neutral.Despite the frequent questioning of norms and their transgressions, political history has tended to be the privileged lens of analysis. This vision has usurped much consideration that would look closer at social and cultural practices.La société américaine de l’après-guerre conforte plus que jamais les normes ethnoraciales, genrées, ou sociales. Ces normes sont loin de parvenir à une uniformisation. Elles peuvent également être outrepassées, déplacées ou supprimées. Des perturbations intentionnelles d'individus et de groupes dénoncent l'injustice d'« une » culture homogène et homogénéisante. Mais cette contestation est elle-même subvertie. L’adaptabilité du modèle américain face à la contestation se révèle dans cette capacité à intégrer la contestation, voire même à l’élever au rang de nouvelle norme. Cette cooptation de la subversion passe notamment par l’iconisation, la transformation en symbole, et l’absorption dans la culture dominante des objets de la contestation, ainsi neutralisés