20/11/2025
This morning's SI Coffee Morning discussed indexing feminist texts and feminist indexing. Ruth Martin's brilliant introduction explained what we mean by feminist texts.
These are books - about law, science, art, anything really - that involve criticism from a feminist standpoint. They are often complex, exploring ambiguous meanings and ideas, and questioning doctrine in all its forms. They can be difficult to understand and often explore a plurality of meanings with fluid terminology. Often this comes from the use of intersectional criticism, discussing overlapping identities and forms of discrimination.
To index these texts, we can make use of the plurality and complexity, engaging with conceptual terms to form headings. Indexers may feel like they are over-indexing, but this can be a good strategy. Index structure is particularly important to represent a complex book's interrelated topics - cross-references may well play a major role. Because of the complexity and detail required, indexers will need to think carefully about the fee and the time available for the indexing project.
We also discussed the idea of feminist indexing. Dale Spender's Women of Ideas attempted to reconceptualise the index because "conventional indexes make women's experience and priorities invisible" (quoted in Bell, Hazel K., ‘Bias in Indexing and Loaded Language’, The Indexer, 17.3 (1991), p174). We may not want to go so far. But indexers will recognise such feminist language issues as male-as-default terminology, the exclusion of women or topics relating to women as passing or minor mentions, and the very different meanings of near-synonyms that vary a great deal in their impact. Is a person who has experienced an assault a survivor, a victim or a complainant?
One topic of discussion was the status of index entries for "women". If there is not a similar entry for "men", is that perpetuating male-as-default language? If, for that reason, there is no entry for "women" but there is discussion of the topic as it relates to women in the book, has the indexer made it harder for the reader to find the information they want? How should we deal with people who might potentially be excluded from the term "women"? These areas of discomfort and difficulty are a good indicator that as an indexer you need to think more about these questions.
Of course, indexers will always strive to reflect the author's usage in the text, but it is important to be aware of these dilemmas to avoid status quo thinking. Peer reviews - where a group of indexers index the same text and compare their outcomes - can be a fantastic way of evaluating how you handle complex and sensitive issues in indexes. As indexers, we always understand that the correct indexing decision is based on our judgement - the answer to most indexing queries is "It depends" and, Ruth suggests, that "It depends" can be a space for feminist indexing.
Thanks as always to Ruth, and to our friends from CIEP and CILIP's Metadata & Discovery group, who joined us for this session and shared experiences of cataloguing and editing feminist texts. Next month's Coffee Morning, on 11 December, will look at indexing games and puzzles, as a pre-Christmas treat.