Marjolein Dennissen

68 The Herculean task of diversity networks I started my data analysis by reading through all my empirical material. I identified the fragments that made some reference to multiple identity categories. In doing so, the data were reduced to those fragments that involved multiple identities in networks. This selection resulted in the material that is central to this chapter. I noted how little awareness there is with regard to multiple identities in networks. Only a minority of fragments referred to the intersections of multiple identity categories explicitly. Next, I made a distinction between fragments that related to structural intersectionality and fragments that related to political intersectionality. The following analytical questions guided the analysis: 1) with regard to structural intersectionality: where do individual network members talk about their multiple identities; how do they talk about their multiple identities in relation to diversity network membership; and 2) with regard to political intersectionality: where do diversity networks collaborate or talk about collaborating; what does this collaboration entail; what hampers collaboration? This helped to identify patterns in identity negotiations related to membership of multiple networks (structural intersectionality) and in collaboration and coalition-building between different diversity networks (political intersectionality). The patterns related to structural intersectionality involved three different strategies how individual network members dealt with the single category structure: complying to the single category structure, problematizing the single category structure as an individual problem, and challenging the single category structure. By categorizing these strategies, I noted how the single category structure of diversity networks was linked to processes of privilege and disadvantage. I therefore turned to the literature on privilege and derived the analytical concept of intersectional marginalization; i.e., the marginalization of people with multiple subordinate identities relative to those with a single subordinate identity (Crenshaw, 1989). By looking at the role of privilege and intersectional marginalization in diversity networks, I noted a pattern of systematic exclusion of members with multiple disadvantaged identities and analyzed this as the dynamics of structural intersectionality in diversity networks. Analyzing the patterns related to political intersectionality, I noted how interviewees mentioned that collaboration between diversity networks was desirable, yet actual collaboration did not occur or remained limited. The observation material and documents allowed me to connect what was said in the interviews to what actually happened during network events and meetings. I observed that also during events multiple identity categories and their intersections were not addressed. When collaboration did occur, this was limited to categories that are similar, such as a collaborative event organized by two women’s networks. Even during meetings between different diversity networks, the focus was largely on sharing information rather than actual collaboration and coalition building. Due to this realization I delved deeper into why collaboration remained limited. My attention was drawn again to the single category structure and the processes of privilege and disadvantage. To understand these dynamics, I returned to the literature on privilege and political intersectionality. Going back and forth between the theory and the data, I identified a business case rationale for