Feminist geographers are urging their fellow scholars in academia to think twice before citing a research paper written by a white man, claiming it contributes to “white heteromasculinity”.
Rutgers University professor Carrie Mott and University of Waterloo professor Daniel Cockayne have penned an academic journal article arguing that scholars ought to consider an author’s gender, race or sexuality before citing their work.
The professors suggest, according to Campus Reform, that not citing certain groups of people, like white male scholars, is an effective “feminist and anti-racist technology of resistance that demonstrates engagement with those authors and voices we want to carry forward.”
Mott and Cackayne claim research that is cited by fellow scholars has long-lasting implications for promotions, tenure and influence. For that reason, citing only white men in your research betrays and “does a disservice to researchers and writers who are othered by white heteromasculinism.”
According to the authors of the article, “white heteromasculinism” is “an intersectional system of oppression describing on-going processes that bolster the status of those who are white, male, able-bodied, economically privileged, heterosexual, and cisgendered.”
The article ends up urging researchers to practice “conscientious engagement” when citing someone else’s work as “a way to self-consciously draw attention to those whose work is being reproduced.”
Professor Mott spoke with Campus Reform, claiming “white men tend to be cited in much higher numbers than people from other backgrounds.
“When it is predominantly white, heteronormative males who are cited, this means that the views and knowledge that are represented do not reflect the experience of people from other backgrounds.
“When scholars continue to cite only white men on a given topic, they ignore the broader diversity of voices and researchers that are also doing important work on a that topic.”