Feminist Interventions:
In North America, this is known as
French Connections
SOPHIE LOUARGANT
Grenoble Alpes University, France
SOPHIE LOUARGANT
CNRS-Pacte, France
CONCEPTUALIZING OUR RELATION
TO THE WORLD FROM A GENDER
PERSPECTIVE
Space is not an even, neutral production; it
reflects men’s and women’s social, cultural,
political, and economic constructs. There is
nothing new about the question of women, as
a subject and object for conceptualizing and
designing lived space, cities, and metropolitan
areas (Hanson 2010; Hanson and Han-
son 1980; McDowell 1999; Massey 1994;
Garcia-Ramon, Ortiz Fabia, and Prats 2004;
Fainstein and Servon 2005). But only recently
has gender become a working perspective for
observing the city, and all the more so for
conceptualizing and building metropolitan
areas. In the English-speaking world, it has
been an integral part of work designing activ-
ities and spaces since the 1970s. Feminist
issues – and more widely the questions raised
by gender-oriented research – have never-
theless long featured in the French-speaking
world, contributing to an increasingly intel-
lectual approach to feminist thinking on the
“second” sex (De Beauvoir 1949). Historians
and researchers in human and social science
(Duby and Perrot 1990), sociology (Delphy
1998), and philosophy (Cixous 1970; Deleuze
and Guattari 1980; Derrida 1986; Foucault
1976; Irigaray 1974) started analyzing the
effects of gender inequality in the 1970s as
well as exploring sexual behavior in various
The Wiley Blackwell Encyclopedia of Urban and Regional Studies. Edited by Anthony Orum.
© 2019 John Wiley & Sons Ltd. Published 2019 by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
DOI: 10.1002/9781118568446.eurs0096
societies.
“French theory” (Lotringer and Cohen 2001;
Cusset 2003).
Several reasons may explain this delay. In
particular we should stress the lack of dia-
logue between English- and French-speaking
geographers (Fall and Rosière 2008). Research
and teaching on spatial design and its orga-
nization was for long a predominantly male
preserve. Women researchers in this field
tended to be marginalized. Furthermore, the
influx of large numbers of women into this
field has done little to substantially increase
allowance for gender studies focusing on geo-
graphical subjects and objects. Other, more
epistemological misgivings have recently
emerged. Criticism has, for instance, focused
on the scientific veracity of feminist and
gender studies. A gender-based approach is
condemned by its detractors as overly militant
or subjective. “Genre,” the French translation
of the word “gender,” is seen as an unaccept-
able neologism that cannot be used in French.
Moreover, the communitarian nature of this
approach is highlighted as a possible threat
to universalism, which prefers classical dis-
tinctions. So, gender upsets categories which
view spaces and the means of action from
a perspective inherited from structuralism,
despite the fact that gender enables us to
analyze inequality between individuals, while
deepening our understanding of inequality in
space and territory. Since the turn of the cen-
tury, recognition of gender issues has gained
greater traction in France. Geographers,
economists, political scientists, and sociolo-
gists working in the field of local (territorial)
or international development and urban stud-
ies have seized upon this idea. In particular,
it has prompted the organization of scien-
tific conferences (Gender and Geography
2 F E MI N I ST I N T E RVE N T ION S : FRE NC H C ONNEC T IONS
symposium) and the launch in 2012 of the
Institut du Genre, an academic institution
of national importance. We may legitimately
claim that a French “connection,” of topical
interest, is taking shape. It is driving debate
and action on development, drawing in par-
ticular on connections with North America.
In the following we propose five points
to explain how feminist and gender-related
approaches have been taken up in France.
THE MIRROR EFFECT: A SPACE LOOKS
DIFFERENT, DEPENDING ON GENDER
In the United States, there are obvious links
between academics and feminist or les-
bian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT)
campaigners. In France, on the other hand,
upholding a concern for scientific objectivity,
a distinction tends to be drawn between
research and militant action. However, since
the 1970s, some academics have become
involved in feminist groups, supporting
campaigns for women’s rights with regard to
abortion, divorce, contraception, harassment,
domestic violence, and unequal pay. These
struggles, and the ensuing debate, contributed
to the gradual organization of feminist fields
of research, mainly driven by (women) his-
torians and sociologists primarily interested
in social and educational policies rather than
the development of rural and urban spaces.
In the 1980s, a single figure stands out:
Jacqueline Coutras. A pioneering geogra-
pher, she revealed the existence of gender
itineraries (Coutras 1996). Meanwhile, in
Quebec province, Canada, geographers
explored the spatial effects of the organiza-
tion of women’s jobs in Montreal. Their work
overcame the hurdle of inoperative classifica-
tions in which “women” simply represented
a demographic and economic variable that
could also be spatialized. Building on this
work, research looked at feminism and the
construction of gender-based social relations
in geography, territorial development, town
planning, and architecture. The principle of
“gender geography” appeared for the first
time in a PhD thesis, funded by the French
Ministry of Higher Education and Research,
“Rereading Territory in the Light of Gender”
(Louargant 2003). Two prime influences from
the English-speaking world were apparent in
this work: on the one hand, a revision of the
categories underpinning a reading of social,
cultural, and human geography, inspired
by Linda McDowell, Geraldine Pratt, and
Susan S. Fainstein; on the other, a women
and development approach applied at local,
regional, and international levels (Boserup
1970; Momsen 2004). Any consideration
of the diversity of gender research in France
leads to the sad conclusion that there was little
synergy between work and action, in univer-
sities and society itself, until the 2000s. Even
now it is difficult to claim that a “school” of
feminist thought exists in France, but there is
nevertheless a French connection on gender,
operating through a network of researchers
(of both sexes) with various lines of attack.
This network has primarily explored three
perspectives: everyday time management and
mobility; local development (capabilities,
empowerment); and the postcolonial cultural
approach.
A reappraisal of categories rooted in space,
time, and mobility: Gendered practices
and women’s strategies
Analysis of space and territory has given
rise to typologies which tend to treat women
as a statistical variable, leaving little scope
for highlighting links between gender and
space. Yet we need to acknowledge gender in
order to grasp the many ways of relating to
city, space, and territory. Gender enables us
to read manners of inhabiting, working in,
and using increasingly metropolitan spaces.
Individual gendered practices reveal the
 FEM I NI ST I NT ERVENT ION S: FRENC H C ONNEC T IONS
modus operandi and organization of social
subjects in their use of and relation to place
and time. Time geography has demonstrated
that women may adopt several strategies
in their relation to space. Analysis of how
they manage activities and schedules in
the Grenoble urban area, southeast France,
qualified women living with a partner as
“turbo-nomads,” tasked with organizing
their family’s schedule and movement. Their
“territorial zapping” behavior also reveals
strategies, trade-offs, and arrangements
within households underpinned by new
forms of gender territoriality. In the light of
this work, analysis of gender and mobility in
a context of metropolitan growth – in Paris
or Turin, Beirut or Cairo (Cattan 2008) – has
proved instructive for grasping how big
cities operate and are organized, and for
considering their future development.
INSTITUTIONALIZING THE GENDER
DIMENSION IN PUBLIC
POLICY-MAKING
Applying gender to local planning policy
The European Union (EU) specifically cited
feminist approaches and the principle of
equality between men and women in the
1957 Treaty of Rome. Their appearance on
the political agenda led to mainstreaming
of gender equality in the 1960s and appli-
cation of this principle to all public policies
implemented by the European Community.
In France, action to mitigate inequality
initially focused on organizations promoting
women’s rights and preventive measures
(family planning, counseling centers). In
1990–2000, a wide range of measures were
taken in EU member states as part of struc-
tural funding targeting poorer regions,
focusing on education and action to reduce
economic and social inequality between men
and women.
3
The issue of discrimination only appeared
in EU directives in the 2000s and was treated
separately from the issue of gender inequality.
The scope of actions promoting equal rights
was, however, broadened.
In France, Italy, and the Netherlands,
in particular, action to promote gender
equality addressed three different concerns:
Urban/URBACT plan; local development
policies (European Social Fund); and spa-
tiotemporal policies. These initiatives sought
to combat gender stereotypes, encourage
local women’s cooperatives (Louargant
2003), set up women’s networks at a local
level, uphold women’s rights, and promote
political parity and/or women’s access to
leadership positions in policy-making.
Gender equality policies have taken root
in specific territories in the EU since the
2010s, following the launch of the European
Charter for equality of women and men in
local life. It has the merit of existing, but with
fluctuating resources and dithering on the
part of the European Commission, member
states, and local authorities, which were
supposed to put the charter into practice,
some of the proposed initiatives have already
been shelved and its outcomes have been
distinctly uneven, depending on member
states and specific territories. Of particular
note are Rennes and Grenoble in France, and
Barcelona, Milan, and Vienna.
In 2013, the French authorities set up a
High Commission for equality of women and
men. They have also funded various hori-
zontal projects, which, despite their stated
ambition, have failed to have much impact on
the gender dimension of urban and planning
policies.
Women’s groups and networks,
empowerment, and capabilities
During the decade from 2000 to 2010 the
launch of specific scientific branches gath-
ered speed, powered by work on gender
4 F E MI N I ST I N T E RVE N T ION S : FRE NC H C ONNEC T IONS
analyzing the role of women as a vector in
local development. In particular, this research
highlighted women’s part in managing eco-
nomic and environmental resources but also
creating social and economic activities driv-
ing development. Work focused on issues of
deployment (creation of micro enterprises),
support (micro credits), and organiza-
tion, with particular reference to women’s
business cooperatives in Morocco, India, and
Cameroon. The results also showed the effects
of action by international organizations tar-
geting women subjected to the combined,
intersectional effects of ethnic, gender, and
caste domination. Attention focused too on
the tools deployed by international organi-
zations and nongovernmental organizations
(focus groups, pooling of resources, value
matrices, and gender budgeting), promoting
an approach hinging on empowerment and
capabilities (Sen 1987). These tools are now in
use in Europe, and France, as part of gender
approaches and urban policies. Thinking
on development has been confronted with
postcolonial theory, revealing widespread
international uptake of work on gender in
the field of development, particularly since
1995 and the Fourth World Conference on
Women in Beijing, prompting gender to be
taken as a valid approach to development.
THE AFFINITIES EFFECT: URBAN
STRUGGLES AND RECOGNITION
An alternative response: militant acts
In France, after the feminists of the 1950s–
1970s who advocated women’s rights,
then their 1970s–1980s sisters demand-
ing equality, came the third wave of activists
(1980–2000). Reflecting a stronger North
American influence, their action focused
more on recognition for minorities. This shift
prompted militants (of both sexes) to voice
their demands and demonstrate on the street
and more generally in public spaces, which
became the arena for feminist and LGBT
struggles. Observation of such active expres-
sion of their demands prompted researchers
in human and social sciences, primarily
urban studies, to examine the social con-
struction of these new forms of urban life.
The issue of our right to the city (Harvey
1973), and more specifically the right to the
city of women or homosexuals (Cattan and
Leroy 2013), encouraged certain cultural
geographers to question the place of “others,”
otherness, and intimacy in the construction
of spatialities. Their debate and work are
part of a radical approach to their discipline,
critical of mainstream urban thinking and
determined to recognize the specific features
and demands of diversity. This move toward
greater recognition triggered further work on
the place of the body, on heteronormativity
(Butler 2006; Blidon 2011), on different forms
of sexuality (Bell and Valentine 1995), virility
and otherness (Hancock 2013), and exoticism
and nudity (Staszak 2009) in urban space.
This work echoed through militants
rooted in earlier social movements such
as Osez le féminisme!, La Barbe, and the
Fédération LGBT. The resulting multiform
self-expression generated has pumped new
life into militant action, its form and locus.
By investing the street, public spaces, and
buildings, our whole relation to the city and
its institutions has been called into question.
Performance art and acts
Starting in the 1970s, artistic events gradually
shifted feminism and LGBT struggles into
public space. In some cases, this involved
“happenings” such as those staged by Adrian
Piper or the Guerrilla Girls; in others, works
by Niki de Saint Phalle, aka Nana, or Ana
Mendieta. All these creative gestures – acts of
militant feminism – invested the public space
and cityscape.
 FEM I NI ST I NT ERVENT ION S: FRENC H C ONNEC T IONS
Since the mid-2010s, such artistic expres-
sion, hinging on bodies and struggle, has
drawn new strength from its urban man-
ifestations. In Europe and elsewhere we
are witnessing the emergence of a femi-
nist counterculture, which started in street
art, epitomized by people such as Miss.Tic
in Paris or Afghan graffiti artist Shamsia
Hassani. This form of intervention on city
walls reveals another way of marking space
with a visual and performative language.
Other forms of expression have appeared
in universities and public bodies. Rachele
Borghi (Borghi 2013), a geographer at
Paris University but also a queer militant
and advocate of feminist porn, proposes
a postporn approach to geography, carry-
ing on from the performances of Annie
Sprinkle.
Artistic and cultural alternatives of this
sort contribute to mediatizing struggles,
while revealing new ways and strategies for
mobilizing support. These situated interven-
tions draw on and are inspired by North
American references embodying feminist
and LGBT struggles.
THE BOOMERANG EFFECT OF FRENCH
THEORY
Since the turn of the century, “French the-
ory” and poststructuralism have come to
the fore in the scientific arena, thanks to
deliberate reappropriation of key work on
relations, rights, and access to the city. Work
on Foucault’s “dispositifs” and Henri Lefeb-
vre’s relation to the city led to postmodern
criticism of the place of city-dwellers in the
thinking of states. Translation of this work in
North America and its reception by (women)
geographers and planners prompted anal-
ysis of allowance for gender in these fields.
At present, with these theories returning to
France, a critical reading of the urban is taking
5
shape, which accommodates gender. Fresh
questions are thus being raised about urban
thinking and how to overcome domination
in its many forms.
Research in France also reappropriated
ideas from the work of their North Ameri-
can fellows and their impact on society. For
example, black feminism and intersectional
approaches (Crenshaw 1989) informed both
the work of researchers focusing on race bias
in social and spatial norms, and the forms of
militant expression upholding the demands
of specific interest groups. In particular,
such borrowing led to militant marches: “la
marche des Beurs” in 1983 for equality and
against racism in poor housing estates; and
“la marche des Indigènes” in 2009 demanding
recognition for immigrant minorities.
The same boomerang effect has prompted
recent work on migration and borders
(Amilhat-Szary, Giraut, and Scriven 2015),
and more largely on social vulnerability,
in particular among women migrants. The
many concepts covered by care theory, also
conceived in the United States, have gradually
been taken up in France and are now being
extended in geography, development, and
society at large.
THE SNOWBALL EFFECT
OF TRANSATLANTIC LINKS
Hybrid intervention by experts, consultants,
and researchers
The arrival of a new generation of researchers,
reaping the benefits of input by previous
generations and established networks, has
recently prompted renewed interest in the
full range of research on feminism, gender,
and sexuality. Issues of equality have also
resonated in society, though not without
dispute, with debate in the media, among
militants, and in institutions on topics such
as equal opportunity, urban violence, and
6 F E MI N I ST I N T E RVE N T ION S : FRE NC H C ONNEC T IONS
harassment on public transport. This new
departure, in research and militant action, has
also prompted the formation of coalitions,
collectives, and forums where researchers,
and consultants such as Genre et Ville, in
Paris, and Col ⋅ lectiu Punt 6, in Barcelona,
are building up urban expertise on gender.
Finally, work on observation, study, and
assessment integrating gender is gaining
ground in public bodies. Various initiatives by
the High Commission for equality of women
and men, and regional policies – in Aquitaine,
the Paris area, and Rhône-Alpes – have
encouraged the introduction of gender anal-
ysis in planning practice (urban development
policy, civic engagement). Progress is being
made on reviewing tools used for the plan-
ning and observation of territories, projects,
diagnosis, and assessment in the light of
gender approaches. The authorities, primarily
at a local and metropolitan level, are seeking
expert advice on this subject (from specialists
of both sexes), notably in the diagnostic of
usage, in Bordeaux, and natural spaces, in
Grenoble. Among the tools most commonly
used are urban walks, video, participatory
maps, gender budgeting, and focus groups.
They are being used for work on mobility,
gendered use of the city, and the place of
men and/or women in local public bodies.
The whole process is testimony to the grad-
ual adoption and deployment of urban and
regional policies on gender equality.
NEW CHALLENGES FOR GENDER
The recent article “Thinking the Metropolis
with Gender” (Louargant 2015) calls for sev-
eral major issues to be taken into account:
• To observe the city from a gender per-
spective and develop tools to extend our
knowledge, understanding, and observa-
tion of gender, in order better to deploy
territorial actions. This involves rein-
forcing existing territorial observation
systems, which are not sufficiently
specialized.
• To make the city with gender, whether this
concerns managing or building the city,
or designing its future. Gender must be
a component, systematically taken into
account in the conception of urban and
metropolitan projects. Urban practices,
mobility, vulnerability, security, culture
and leisure, public spaces, and democracy
are among the many, resolutely gendered
subjects, which should enable us to build
more emancipated, egalitarian cities.
• To innovate with gender: innovation in
technology or services facilitating access
to a sustainable city must also be designed
with gender in mind, lest we fall into the
trap of being exclusive. The world of con-
nected innovation and the information
society makes no sense if it remains the
preserve of young, fully employed males.
• To train with gender: in town planning,
sustainability, innovation, and demo-
cratic empowerment there is a glaring
lack of gender training for professionals
and society. This relates to professional
qualifications, among other things, such
as those developed in Bordeaux, Lyon,
Paris, and Grenoble. The aim is to trans-
mit assets and to enable their renewal,
while building them into concrete action.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
My thanks go to my translator, Harry Forster,
of Interrelate, Grenoble.
SEE ALSO: Feminist Interventions:
Anglophone World; Feminist Interventions:
Central and Eastern Europe; Gendered Aspects
of the Everyday; Gendered Space; Regional
Planning; Right to the City; Spatial Justice;
Territory/Territoriality; Urban Justice
 FEM I NI ST I NT ERVENT ION S: FRENC H C ONNEC T IONS
REFERENCES
Amilhat-Szary, A. L., F. Giraut, and M. Scriven,
eds. 2015. Borderities and the Politics of Con-
temporary Mobile Borders. London: Palgrave
Macmillan.
Bell, D., and G. Valentine, eds. 1995. Map-
ping Desire: Geographies of Sexualities. London:
Routledge.
Blidon, M. 2011. “Seeking Recognition: Spatial Jus-
tice versus Heteronormativity.” Spatial Justice, 3.
Borghi, R. 2013. “Post-Porn.” Rue Descartes, 3(79):
29–41.
Boserup, E. 1970. Woman’s Role in Economic Devel-
opment. London: Earthscan.
Butler, J. 2006. Gender Trouble: Feminism and the
Subversion of Identity. London: Routledge.
Cattan, N. 2008. “Gendering Mobility: Insights
into the Construction of Spatial Concepts.” In
Gendered Mobility, edited by T. Priya and T.
Creswell. Farnham: Ashgate.
Cattan, N., and S. Leroy, eds. 2013. Atlas mondial
des sexualités: Libertés, plaisirs et interdits [World
Atlas of Sexuality: Freedoms, Pleasures and the
Forbidden]. Paris: Autrement.
Cixous, H. 1970. Le troisième corps [The Third
Body]. Paris: Grasset.
Coutras, J. 1996. Crise urbaine et espaces sex-
ués [Urban Crisis and Gendered Spaces]. Paris:
Armand Colin.
Crenshaw, K. 1989. “Demarginalizing the Inter-
section of Race and Sex: A Black Feminist Cri-
tique of Antidiscrimination Doctrine, Feminist
Theory and Antiracist Politics.” University of
Chicago Legal Forum, Article 8.
Cusset, F. 2003. French Theory: Foucault, Derrida,
Deleuze & Cie et les mutations de la vie intel-
lectuelle aux États-Unis [French Theory: Fou-
cault, Derrida, Deleuze & Co. and the Mutations
of Intellectual Life in the United States]. Paris:
Éditions La Découverte.
De Beauvoir, S. 1949. Le deuxième sexe [The Second
Sex]. Paris: Gallimard.
Deleuze, G., and F. Guattari. 1980. Capitalisme et
schizophrénie 2: Mille plateaux [Capitalism and
Schizophrenia 2: Thousand Plateaus]. Paris: Édi-
tions de Minuit.
Delphy, C. 1998. L’ennemi principal: économie
politique du patriarcat [The Main Enemy:
The Political Economy of Patriarchy]. Paris:
Syllepse.
7
Derrida, J. 1986 La loi du genre [The Gender Law].
Paris: Galilée.
Duby, G., and M. Perrot, eds. 1990. Histoire des
femmes en Occident [History of Women in the
West]. Paris: Éditions Perrin.
Fainstein, S. S., and L. J. Servon, eds. 2005. Gen-
der and Planning: A Reader. New Brunswick, NJ:
Rutgers University Press.
Fall, J. J., and S. Rosière. 2008. “Guest Editorial: On
the Limits of Dialogue between Francophone
and Anglophone Political Geography.” Political
Geography, 27(7): 713–716.
Foucault, M. 1976. Histoire de la sexualité [History
of Sexuality]. Paris: Gallimard.
Garcia-Ramon, M. D., A. Ortiz Fabia, and M.
Prats. 2004. “Urban Planning, Gender and the
Use of Public Space in a Peripheral Neighbour-
hood of Barcelona.” Cities, 21(3): 215–223. DOI:
10.1016/j.cities.2004.03.006.
Hancock, C. 2013. “Invisible Others: Muslims in
European Cities in the Times of the Burqa Ban.”
Treballs de la Societat Catalana de Geografia, 75:
135–148. Accessed January 16, 2018, at http://
publicacions.iec.cat/repository/pdf/00000196/
00000070.pdf.
Hanson, S. 2010. “Gender and Mobility: New
Approaches for Informing Sustainability.”
Gender, Place and Culture, 17(1). DOI: 10.1080/
09663690903498225.
Hanson, S., and P. Hanson. 1980. “Gender and
Urban Activity Patterns in Uppsala, Sweden.”
Geographical Review, 70: 291–299.
Harvey, D. 1973. Social Justice and the City. Lon-
don: Edward Arnold.
Irigaray, L. 1974. Speculum de l’autre femme [Specu-
lum of the Other Woman]. Paris: Éditions de
Minuit.
Lotringer, S., and S. Cohen, eds. 2001. French The-
ory in America. London: Routledge.
Louargant, S. 2003. “L’approche de genre pour
relire le territoire” [“The Gender Approach to
Rereading the Territory”]. PhD dissertation,
Université Joseph-Fourier, Grenoble.
Louargant, S. 2015. “Penser la métropole avec le
genre: l’exemple des parcs de nature et de loisirs
de l’agglomération de Grenoble” [“Thinking the
Metropolis with Gender: The Example of Nature
Parks and Recreation of the Agglomeration of
Grenoble”]. Revue Genre, Travail et Sociétés,
1(33): 4–66.
8 F E MI N I ST I N T E RVE N T ION S : FRE NC H C ONNEC T IONS
Massey, D. 1994. Space, Place and Gender. Cam-
bridge: Polity Press.
McDowell, L. 1999. Gender, Identity, and Place:
Understanding Feminist Geographies. Min-
neapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Momsen, J. H. 2004. Gender and Development.
London: Routledge.
Sen, A. 1987. Commodities and Capabilities.
Oxford: Oxford India Paperbacks.
Staszak, J.-F. 2009. “Other/Otherness.” Interna-
tional Encyclopaedia of Human Geography,
edited by R. Kitchin and N. Thrift. Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
FURTHER READING
Friberg, T. 1993. Everyday Life: Women’s Adaptive
Strategies in Time and Space. Swedish Council
for Building Research, Stockholm.
Hanson, S., and G. Pratt, eds. 1995. Gender, Work,
and Space. London: Routledge.
Momsen, J. H. 2008. Gender and Development:
Critical Concepts in Development Studies. Lon-
don: Routledge.
Stanek, L. 2011. Henri Lefebvre on Space: Archi-
tecture, Urban Research, and the Production of
Theory. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota
Press.