Three.

JOHNNELLA E. BUTLER

Intersectionality and

<A m

>

o uJ 0. (A

I n t e r s e c t i o n a l i t y , w h e n a p p lie d b r o a d ly a n d c r it ic a lly , c a n b e a p a t h w a y t o w a r d m u c h - n e e d e d c o m p l e x i t y in h ig h e r e d u c a t io n in q u ir y a n d p r a x is

In fact, in our age o f media-produced attitudes, the ideological insistence o f a culture drawing attention to itself as superior has given way to a culture whose canons and standards are invisible to the degree that they are “natural,” “objective," and “real."—Edward Sa id , The World, the Text, and the Critic

1 am speaking as a member of a certain democracy in a very complex country which insists on being very narrow-minded.

Simplicity is taken to be a great American virtue along with sincerity. — James Baldw in, I A m N ot Your Negro

Intersectionality— an integrated approach to analyzing the complex, matrix-like inter­ connections among patterns of discrimination

based on race, gender, and other social iden­ tities, with the goal of highlighting how re­ sulting inequalities are experienced— has many implications for exploring the relation­ ship between knowledge

and experience and for understanding identity and its role in scholarship and teaching. Over- archingly, it has the potential to reveal the power dynamics w ithin the m elting pot, whose hege­ monic place in the A m erican imagination has continually thwarted our achievement of a com ­ plex, pluralistic, relational national identity. Building such a n atio n al identity is necessary if we, as a country, are to realize the generative diversity th a t arises from the conflictual and com plem entary complexities of democracy.

In this short article, I explore the significance of intersectionality to a liberal education curric­ ulum in both general education and the major, at two- and four-year colleges and universities, and its potential for undoing what I call the violent conundrum of our national identity. To paraphrase Edward Said, quoted in the epigraph above, th a t v io len t conundrum has becom e

JOHNNELLA E. BUTLER is professor of comparative women’s studies at Spelman College.

“natural,” “objective,” and “real” in its insistence on a binary understanding of people, their iden­ tities, and their ideas as either superior or inferior.1 By denying the contextual, interconnected, and relational dimensions of individual, group, and national identities, such an approach facilitates the dismissal of those identities as signifiers of essentialist identity politics, ultimately distorting the hum anity of all. W hile n o t a panacea for binary thinking, intersectionality is a necessary framework for methodological and pedagogical engagement with complexity and conflict. It allows us to embrace diversity— in teaching, research, and scholarship; in student and faculty development, recruitm ent, and retention; and, ultimately, in our everyday political experiences as citizens.

To many, intersectionality is a troublesome term. In a recent Chronicle of Higher Education article, Ange-M arie Hancock, a scholar of the topic, is quoted as saying that the term “shape- shifts so much as to no longer be recognizable as anything other than a meme gone viral.”2 As sociologists Patricia Hill Collins and Sirma Bilge discuss in their definitive work, Intersectionality: Key Concepts, it has been criticized for being separatist and fragmentary; for placing more value on cultural recognition and narrow interests than on economic redistribution and the social good; and for fostering victimhood. In their detailed, explanatory, and accessible study, Hill Collins and Bilge respond to these critiques by analyzing how simplistic, individualistic, and essentialist inter­ pretations of identity politics infect our political discourse and obstruct much of our understanding of one another. “Collectively,” they demonstrate, “these arguments against intersectionality’s claims to identity only work w ithin narrow understandings of intersectionality th at simulta­ neously emphasize intersectionality as a form of abstract inquiry and neglect intersectionality as a form of critical praxis as it actually happens.”3

As the Baldwin epigraph above reminds us, we cannot solve the problems of our democracy with a narrow-m inded simplicity— no m atter how sincere.4 Intersectionality, w hen applied broadly and critically, can be a pathway toward m uch-needed complexity in higher education inquiry and praxis.

3 8 L i b e r a l E d u c a ti o n S u m m e r / F a l l 2 0 1 7

Liberal Education

2 ‘t *

fe lK ' S m! - M L > ' v -.vL V ' a |p

i ilKPife BPS

L £ MB « H i 1P*V, £?.1;

o UJ

Q.

</> OS UJ

0.

Intersectionality has come to serve as a key point of connection across disciplines

Origins and uses of intersectionality While intersectionality can provide a frame- work for integrated analysis of the intercon­ nected realities of many social identities, it historically has involved particular attention to the central roles of race and gender. In a 2015 contribution to the Washington Post titled “Why Intersectionality Can’t Wait,” Kimberle Williams Crenshaw, the legal scholar whose 1989 article “put a name to the concept,” succinctly explains how a 1976 discrimination suit against General Motors prompted her, as a young law professor, to define the “profound invisibility [of black women] in relation to the law.” She explains:

Racial and gender discrimination over­ lapped not only in the workplace but in other arenas of life; equally significant, these burdens were almost completely absent from feminist and anti-racist advocacy. Intersec­ tionality, then, was my attempt to make feminism, anti-racist activism, and anti­ discrimination law do what I thought they should—highlight the multiple avenues through which racial and gender oppression were experienced so that the problems would be easier to discuss and understand.

Her delineation of the case demonstrates the complexity of how race and gender interact, and clarifies how considerations that rely on racism alone can obscure the function of gender discrimination.5

While Crenshaw’s work has proved founda­ tional to our understanding of intersectionality, the concept’s origins can be traced back at least

as far as Sojourner Truth’s 1851 “Ain’t I a Woman” speech. In fact, scholars throughout the years have proposed similar approaches to analyzing race and gender, although often circumscribed

by the silos of their own disciplines or inter­ disciplinary fields. The 1977 Combahee River Collective Statement, for example, clearly signaled intersectionality:

The most general statement of our politics at the present time would be that we are actively committed to struggling against racial, sexual, heterosexual and class oppres­ sion, and see as our particular task the devel­ opment of integrated analysis and practice based upon the fact that the major systems of oppression are interlocking. The synthesis of these oppressions creates the conditions of our lives.6

In the 1980s, feminist scholarship took what one might now call an intersectional approach, with a focus on expanding the “women” in women’s studies. For example, in their 1984 book Women’s Place in the Academy: Transforming the Liberal Arts Curriculum, Schuster and Van Dyne called readers to “pay meaningful attention to intersections of race, class, and cultural differences within gender” (bold in original);7 similar calls appeared in Culley and Portuges’s 1985 volume Gendered Subjects: The Dynamics of Feminist Teaching.8

If similar delineations of intersectionality predated Crenshaw’s foundational 1989 work, interest in the topic has only continued to grow in the decades since. In 1991, arguing for the potential of ethnic and women’s studies to transform the liberal arts curriculum, I recom­ mended beginning any curricular change by teaching about the experiences of women of color, which reveal how race, class, ethnicity, and gender modulate one another: “The cat­ egories of race, class, ethnicity, and gender are unified; likewise their related ‘-isms’ and their correctives.”9

The fall 2011 volume of New Directions for Institutional Research, entitled “Using Mixed- Methods Approaches to Study Intersectionality in Higher Education,” provides examples of intersectional analysis applied to researching the faculty experience, college access and equity, racial “hyperprivilege,” student experiences, and mixed-race identity, among other topics.10 More recently, in their 2013 fact sheet “Inter- sectionality in Sociology,” Jones, Misra, and McCurley identify intersectional sociology as occurring most frequently in journals focused on feminist, ethnic, and racial issues and those discussing social problems.11

Indeed, intersectionality has come to serve as a key point of connection across disciplines. In literary studies, Ketu H. Katrak posits that “intersectionality precedes interdisciplinarity, the former method leading and informing the latter.” She states that the theoretical category of intersectionality

includes the analysis of a growing intersection of categories that are crucial in interpreting ethnic literary texts: the centrality of race and ethnicity as intersected and modulated by gender, sexuality, class, the state, and increasingly, by nationality, immigration laws, and diasporic concerns. I assert further that intersectionality, in terms of the deployment

4 0 L i b e r a l E d u c a t i o n S u m m e r / F a ll 2 0 1 7

of the categories of race, gender, and class, along with nation and diaspora, informs the use of interdisciplinarity. In contemporary reading practices for literary texts, scholars rely primarily on intersecting categories of race, gender, class, and nation, among others. The intersecting categories then guide scholars in their use of other disciplines such as history or politics.12 As this small selection of examples illustrates,

intersectionality has been deeply influential across a range of areas of scholarship. A t the same time, I would argue, it still stands to be integrated more fully across the content and pedagogy of the undergraduate curriculum. W hat, then, can intersectionality' contribute to liberal education, and what is its connection to the quest for equity and inclusive excellence?

In te r s e c tio n a lity ’s tra n s fo r m a tiv e p o te n tia l In their recent volume, Hill Collins and Bilge define intersectionality as having become

a way of understanding and analyzing the complexity of the world, in people, and in hum an experiences. T he events and

conditions of social and political life and the self can seldom be understood as shaped by one factor. They are generally shaped by many factors in diverse and mutually influencing ways. W hen it comes to social inequality, people’s lives and organization of power in a given society are better under­ stood as being shaped not by a single axis of social division, be it race or gender or class, but by many axes th at work together and influence each other. Intersectionality as an analytic tool gives people better access to the complexity of the world and of themselves.13

Hill Collins and Bilge g o o n to identify six “core ideas” of the intersectional framework: (1) social inequality, (2) power, (3) relationality, (4) social context, (5) complexity, and (6) social justice.14

These core ideas are consistent with the implicit aspiration in the word veritas, which appears so often on the institutional seals of our colleges and universities to signal our shared search for truth. These ideas also resonate with the challenge often rightfully posed to higher

M an c h e ste r C om m unity College

V)

111

> t- O

111

Q. <0

111

Q.

L i b e r a l E d u c a t i o n S u m m e r / F a ll 2017 41

University of M ichigan

The fa ls e b o u n d a rie s o f k n o w le d g e p re v e n t us fro m re co g n izin g , and e v e n a llo w us t o deny, how p o w e r fu n c tio n s

education: th a t our work should better the h u m an condition, and th a t the liberal educa- tion we provide should grow our democracy by enhancing civic engagem ent among our gradu­ ates. Each of these core ideas is essential to the transformative work th at intersectionality can bring to liberal education. But one idea in particular— relationality— holds special promise for th e work of educating for democracy.

W hy is relationality so im portant? In brief, it is im portant because holding concepts, iden­

tities, experiences, and knowledge in relation to one an o th er requires a both/and thought process th at enables one to identify and analyze complex co n ­ nections. Relationality

allows for th e interconnected interrogation of difference, identity, and power relations and the conflicts they entail. Furthermore, it chal­ lenges the idea th a t categories of difference, identity, and power exist in binary opposition to each other, w hen in fact th e relationships among these categories involve varying degrees o f opposition th a t result in com plicated power dynamics and injustices. R elationality allows

us to com prehend th e “m atrix-like in te ra c ­ tio n s” of race, class, gender, sexual identity, a n d o th e r categories of identity, suggesting a nonhierarchical m ethodology th a t bursts open the oppressive order imposed by individual and institutional “-isms. ” 15

If relationality— or, in th e co n tex t of under­ graduate education, encouraging relational thinking in our curricular and cocurricular peda­ gogies and in our scholarship— is so critical to com bating oppression in society, w hat are the implications for our approach to liberal learning? In short, relationality requires a pedagogy th a t encourages students to acquire knowledge of social co n tex t and power dynamics so they are able to recognize social inequalities and equipped to pursue social justice for all, a necessary requirem ent for our democracy to continue and flourish. As I have written elsewhere, such a peda­ gogy “would refuse primacy to either race, class, gender, or ethnicity, demanding instead a recogni­ tion of their matrix-like interactions.” Indeed, the interactions among these categories are as critical as the categories themselves; for, “speaking gen­ erally, the sexism that the black woman experi­ ences, whether instigated by white or black males, is reinforced and defined in its nature by the

42 Li be ral Education S u m me r / F all 2017

racism and ethnocentrism of the oppressors. Class, of course, creates additional variations.”16

There are challenges involved in im plement­ ing a pedagogy based on such a nonhierarchical methodology. A m ong these challenges is the possibility that such a methodology, in disrupting long-established approaches, “increases in whites the fear of displacem ent from the center, the locus of control,” even as it simultaneously “increases the fear of being relegated to the periphery” for people of color, “who are fighting for validation within the traditional norms.” In short, even after decades of theoretical develop­ ment, implementing intersectional approaches continues to challenge the established order. To a degree, th e words I wrote in 1989 remain true today: “All of us trained traditionally, even as we challenge, experience an uneasiness with interdisciplinary approaches as they defy the (false) boundaries of knowledge.”17

T he false boundaries of knowledge prevent us from recognizing— and even allow us to deny— how power functions. T hey allow us to ignore how racism forged th e connection betw een rich and poor whites th a t Lillian S m ith wrote about in th e m id-tw entieth-century S o u th ,18 and to overlook, when debating whether Harriet Tubm an should replace A ndrew Jackson on th e tw enty-dollar bill, th a t Jackson’s Trail of Tears essentially led to th e expansion of slavery and the forced takeover of N ative lands.19 They obscure these and o th er histories th a t informed the shouts of white nationalists in Charlottesville this summer: “We will not be replaced!” and “Jews will n o t replace us!” T h e boundary betw een class and social co n tex t obliterates th e fact th a t the “working class” extends beyond white m en and women, while simultaneously being m odulated by race and gender.

W hile liberal education does n o t focus solely o n issues of identity per se, th e relationship betw een identity and power— sometimes called the politics of identity or identity politics— arguably shape w hat is taught and to whom; whose histories are told and n o t told; who is defined as object and not subject. This is true of literature and th e arts, but it is also true of the social sciences and STEM disciplines. In our work to transform liberal education so that it meets our students’ changing intellectual and skill-based needs, we are im plem enting new programmatic structures th at may well be transformative. However, if these structures lack relationality and complexity-— two defining dimensions of

intersectionality— their transformative potential will be severely limited.

A truly transformed liberal education would involve interdisciplinary modules im plem ented w ithin disciplinary courses to help students understand th e interconnectedness of and relationality among disciplines, knowledge, and experience. Such an education would involve comparative, intersectional, and interdisciplinary study in history, philosophy, religious studies, literature, and political science. It would ch a l­ lenge students to engage w ith the core ideas of intersectionality, including social inequality, power, relationality, social context, complexity, and social justice. These core ideas— including, especially, relationality and complexity— emerge from the hum an experience and are key to defining th e liberal education of th e twenty- first century, just as th e relationship betw een identity and power— although circumscribed by binary thinking about different hierarchical categories of identity, such as slave and free, male and female— was integral to the foundational concepts of liberal arts and liberal education.

The high s ta k e s fo r o u r fu t u r e a s a n a tio n As alluded to above, the U n ited States faces a violent conundrum of national identity th at often seems continuous and unsolvable. E thno­ centrism, racism, classism, sexism, homophobia, ableism, and religious intolerance, functioning at the systemic and individual levels, combine with a lack of a shared understanding of our past, resulting in a national failure to contend with our complex history. This conundrum in- tmdes upon dialogues across and about diversity at all levels; it hampers the inclusion of knowledge and of people needed to transform our disciplines, fields of study, and pedagogies. Moreover, the violent conundrum of national identity chal­ lenges, impedes, and even distorts efforts to embrace diversity through a com m itm ent to equity and inclusive excellence. T h e ultim ate result is an obliteration of shared aspirations toward the Com m on Good.

H istorian Jill Lepore observed in a May inter­ view that “all politics is really an argument about th e relationship betw een the past and the future. A nd the more polarized our politics has become, the more polarized th e past.”20 It is w orth remembering th a t in the 1990s, projects aimed at introducing race, gender, and class analyses into the curriculum were met with vicious opposition n o t unlike w hat intersectionality

L i b e r a l E d u c a t i o n S u m m e r / F a l l 2 0 1 7 4 3

San Jose S ta te University

faces today. Critics now describe intersectionality, as many th en described ethnic studies and wom­ en’s studies, as “a quasi religion, one th a t stifles free expression on college campuses and threatens democracy itself’ or as “advancing the view that ‘identity politics trumps all. ’” 21

To th e contrary, intersectionality offers a critical framework for understanding th e inter- active dynam ics of race, class, gender, and o th er categories of identity, thus providing the space to grapple w ith inequality and inequity and to tell the tru th of our national history. It

also reveals th e possibility for and potential avenues toward social justice, as new scholarship unearths th e complex, conflic- tual, connected stories th a t constitute our national narrative. Learning and accepting this com plicated narrative in all its beauty and ugliness is the only

way we can exorcise the horrors of the past and truly aspire to be the dem ocratic republic we imagine ourselves to be.

Intersectionality as a concept and practice is rooted in the politics of identity— the multiplicity of identity, the social location of identity, and the power inequities m aintained by defining identities as disconnected from their social, political, and econom ic locations. T h e politics of identity operates at th e individual, group, regional, and n atio n al levels. O ur challenge,

Our c h a lle n g e is t o e m b ra c e a n a tio n a l h is to ry t h a t is r e la tio n a l and p lu ra lis tic — t h a t s e e k s th e g e n e ra tiv e in o u r d iffe r e n c e s and s triv e s t o c o rre c t o u r p o w e r in e q u itie s

as I see it, is to embrace a n ational history th at is relational and pluralistic— that seeks the genera­ tive in our differences and strives to correct our power inequities. Embracing th at history requires us to approach our scholarship, pedagogy, and institutional and policy research in an intersec­ tional, relational way, allowing us to embrace and examine complexities w ith greater atten tio n to their details and, ultimately, greater understand­ ing. A t the pedagogical level, such an approach will equip our students to help guide our nation away from the apparently unsolvable conundrum of national identity toward the complex whole­ ness th a t is necessary to us as individuals, to our communities, and to our nation. □

To respond to this article, email [email protected], with the author’s name on the subject line.

N O T E S 1. Edward Said, The World, the Text, and the Critic (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1983), 9. 2. Tom Bartlett, “W hen a Theory Goes Viral,” Chronicle of Higher Education, May 21, 2017, http:// www.chronicle.com/article/The-Intersectionality- Wars/240095. 3. Patricia Hill Collins and Sirma Bilge, Intersectionality: Key Concepts (Cambridge and Malden, MA: Polity Press, 2016), 129. 4 . 1 Am Not Your Negro: A Major Motion Picture, directed by Raoul Peck from texts by James Baldwin (New York: Vintage Books, 2017), 77. 5. Kimberle Crenshaw, “Why Intersectionality C an ’t W ait,” Washington Post, September 24, 2015. In this article, Crenshaw succinctly describes the case in question: “In 1976, Emma DeGraffenreid and several other black women sued General Motors for discrimi­ nation, arguing th at the company segregated its workforce by race and gender: Blacks did one set of jobs and whites did another. According to the plaintiffs’ experiences, women were welcome to apply for some jobs, while only men were suitable for others. This was of course a problem in and of itself, but for black women the consequences were compounded. You see, the black jobs were men’s jobs, and the women’s jobs were only for whites.... [T]he court believed th at black women should no t be permitted to combine their race and gender claims into one. Because they could not prove that what happened to them was just like what happened to white women or black men, the discrimination that happened to these black women fell through the cracks.” 6. “The Combahee River Collective Statem ent,” 1977, http://americanstudies.yale.edu/sites/default/files/files/ Keyword%20Coalition_Readings.pdf.

4 4 L i b e r a l E d u c a t i o n S u m m e r / F a l l 2 0 1 7

7. Marilyn R. Schuster and Susan R. Van Dyne, Women’s Place in the Academy: Transforming the Liberal Arts Curriculum (New York: Rowman and Allanheld Publishers, 1984), 28. 8. Margo Culley and Catherine Portuges, eds., Gendered Subjects: The Dynamics of Feminist Teaching (New York: Routledge, 1985). 9. Johnnella E. Butler, “Transforming the Curriculum: Teaching about Women of Color,” in Transforming the Curriculum: Ethnic Studies and Women’s Studies, ed. Johnnella E. Butler and John C. Walter (New York: SUNY Press, 1991), 67-87. 10. Kimberly A. Griffin and Samuel D. Museus, eds., “Using Mixed Methods to Study Intersectionality in Higher Education,” New Directions in Institutional Research 151 (October 2011). 11. Katherine Castiello Jones, Joya Misra, and K. McCurley, “Intersectionality in Sociology,” Sociolo- gists for W omen in Society Fact Sheet, 2013, http:// www.socwomen.org/wp-content/uploads/swsfactsheet_ intersectionality.pdf. 12. Ketu H. Katrak, “Literary Matters: Research Methods in Reading Ethnic Literatures,” in Ethnic Studies Research, Approaches and Perspectives, ed. Timothy P. Fong (Lanham, MD, and Plymouth, UK: AltaM ira Press, 2008), 264.

13. Hill Collins and Bilge, Intersectionality, 2. 14. Ibid., 25-30. 15. Johnnella Butler, “Difficult Dialogues,” The Women’s Review of Books 6, no. 5 (February 1989): 16. 16. Ibid. 17. Ibid. 18. Lillian Smith, Killers of the Dream (New York: W.W. N orton, 1949, 1994), 175-90. In the chapter “Two Men and a Bargain,” Smith, in the form of a parable, explains how rich white men in the South convinced poor whites to distinguish their own condi­ tions of poverty and brutal work circumstances from those of blacks— for example, by making common economic and racial cause with poor whites to keep wages low, by reminding poor whites that “any job’s better than no job at all,” and by implicitly supporting lynching. 19. See Ronald Takaki, A Different Mirror: A History of Multicultural America (Boston: Little, Brown, and Company, 1993), 84-97. 20. Jill Lepore, “Americans A ren’t Just Divided Politically, They’re Divided Over History Too,” NPR Morning Edition, May 17, 2017, http://www.npr. org/2017/05/23/529634859/americans-aren-t'just- divided-politically-they-re-divided-over-history-too. 21. Bartlett, “W hen a Theory.”

B A N D W ID T H R E C O V E R Y H elping S tudents Reclaim C ognitive Resources

Lost to Poverty. Racism, and Social M arginalization

C i a V e r s c h e l d e n Foreword by Lynn Paiquerella

P a p e r b a c k , $ 2 7 . 5 0 | e B o o k , $ 2 1 . 9 9

P u b lis h e d in a s s o cia tio n w ith

A A \sm

Association o f American Colleges and Universities

B a n d w id th R e c o v e ry Helping Students Reclaim Cognitive Resources Lost to Poverty, Racism, and Social Marginalization

Cia Verschelden M.S.W., Ed.D. Foreword by Lynn Pasquerella

This book presents a variety of evidence-based

interventions that have been shown, through

implementation in high schools and colleges,

to help students to regain mental bandwidth.

They are intended for application both inside

and outside the classroom and address not only

cognitive processes but also social-psychological,

non-cognitive factors that are relevant to the

college environment as a whole.

“ B a n d w i d t h R e c o v e r y p r o v i d e s a

r o a d m a p f o r r e v e r s in g t h e c u r r e n t

t r e n d , w h e r e b y o n l y o n e in t w o h ig h

s c h o o l s t u d e n t s f r o m l o w - i n c o m e

f a m i l i e s e n r o lls in c o l l e g e in t h e f i r s t

p la c e , a n d t h e c o m p l e t i o n r a t e f o r

t h o s e a t t h e lo w e s t s o c i o e c o n o m i c

r u n g s c o n t in u e s t o la g f a r b e h in d

t h e i r w e a l t h i e r p e e r s . B y d r a w i n g

a t t e n t i o n t o t h e p e r s i s t e n t e c o n o m ic

a n d c u l t u r a l b a r r ie r s t h a t c o n t in u e t o

t h w a r t t h e e q u i t y i m p e r a t i v e u p o n

w h i c h t h e A m e r i c a n D r e a m is b u ilt ,

V e r s c h e l d e n b r in g s us c lo s e r t o b e i n g

a b l e t o f u l f i ll t h e t r u e p r o m i s e o f

A m e r i c a n h ig h e r e d u c a t i o n — t h a t o f

e d u c a t i n g f o r d e m o c r a c y . ”

— L y n n P a s q u e re lla . President o f the Association o f American

Colleges and Universities

AAC&U members receive 25% OFF at www.styluspub.com. Use co d e B A N D 25 a t ch e cko u t. O ffe r e xp ire s N o v e m b e r 3 0 th , 2017.

Connect with Stylus Online! 13 (D E3 You® @ S tylu sP u b TO ORDER: CALL 1 - 8 0 0 - 2 3 2 - 0 2 2 3 FAX 7 0 3 -6 6 1 -1 5 0 1 E -M A IL S ty lu s M a il@ P re s s W a re h o u s e .c o m W EBSITE w w w .S ty lu s p u b .c o m

P U B L I S H I N G , L L C .

L i b e r a l E d u c a t i o n S u m m e r / F a l l 2017 45

Copyright of Liberal Education is the property of Association of American Colleges & Universities and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.