Intersectionality of Multiculturalism

The articles by Han Geon-Soo, Kim Hyun Mee and Taeyon Kim all approached the question of “multiculturalism” from an intersectional lens, and I found the explorations of intersecting ethnicity, gender and class positions very interesting in their analyses. 

In the Canadian context, the ways in which I have talked about multiculturalism largely correspond to Arjun Appardurai's theories. Appadurai argues that multiculturalism (as it exists in white settler states) stems from the idea that whiteness is in the centre of our society and that all Other "cultures" extend from that centre. Therefore, the commercialized idea of multiculturalism appears to be a beautiful flower (excuse the allegory) but whiteness still remains to be the pistil.

It is interesting for me, then, to think and talk about a concept of multiculturalism that is not essentially based on racial difference.

In "Multicultural Korea," Geon-Soo argues that the process of migration itself is feminized. And this is evident as we read the reasons for which women are typically encouraged or forced to migrate - due to oppressive circumstances in their home country, cultural indoctrination in the ideal of a “better future” elsewhere, etc. Geon-Soo also shows that in the specific example of unskilled migrant workers in late 20^th-century to early 21^st-century Korea, lower-class men are also feminized/emasculated due to the class-based oppressions that they face. 

It is also interesting to think about “multiculturalism” as a concept that primarily fulfills political agendas. Geon-Soo demonstrates that official multiculturalism policies imposed by the government actually have very little relevance/significance for the social and cultural realities of oppression and intolerance experienced by migrants; “their actual problems are concealed by the discourse on multiculturalism that focuses on discussing cultural diversity or intercultural exchange and understanding” (Geon-Soo 47). 

So how can policies regarding multiculturalism navigate the hegemonic power of the government while creating space for the needs/desires of migrants/the common people? How can civic and non-profit organizations play a productive role in this?

The articles by Geon-Soo and Hyun Mee specifically examine multicultural subjectivity - in other words, “who are and should be the leading players in making cultural exchanges happen, and help develop a multicultural state” (Geon-Soo 44). Hyun Mee argues that women who migrate to Korea for purposes of marriage are solely considered to be objects by the state. As such, they are used for political purposes, such as restoring the patriarchal order in rural communities and increasing the national birth rate. In a way, Hyun Mee characterizes the state-functional “multiculturalism” as a way of regulating and policing migrant bodies. 

Both Geon-Soon and Hyun Mee argue that we need to break out of the mono-cultural imagination of the “multicultural family.” Instead, it is important to examine how this family structure exists and is reproduced in pluralistic ways. I would add that the very process of family-making also needs to be analyzed further, not just its products.

When examining this question, Kim’s article on Neo-Confucian body techniques is very useful. Under Neo-Confucian ideology, the female body has always been characterized as merely a vessel through which the patrilineal line could be perpetuated. Clearly, the specific ways in which the Korean female body is policed extend to historical narratives. But it is always important to consider: how can healing take place in the present?