Intersectionality examines how a person\u2019s identities, such as their gender, ethnicity, and sexuality, affect their access to opportunities and privileges. First coined in 1989, the theory has since been applied to employment, housing, healthcare, and so on. In this article, we\u2019ll define what intersectionality is, explain the facts everyone should know, and provide examples of the concept in action.<\/p>\n
Intersectionality is an analytical framework used to study how societies treat people based on their various social and political identities, such as their gender, ethnicity, and sexuality. Depending on those identities, a person may be privileged or oppressed.<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n To understand intersectionality, we must first discuss feminism. In its first and second waves, feminism focused on the goals of cisgender, white, middle-class women. Priorities like the right to vote and the right to own property mattered, but women of color, women living in poverty, and other disenfranchised women faced other struggles, some more urgent than others. Mainstream feminism tended to neglect these concerns.<\/p>\n While mainstream feminists focused almost exclusively on gender, others wanted to recognize and address how race impacted a person, as well. In the 1970s, a group of Black feminists established the Combahee River Collective in response to how white feminists and the Black Liberation movement (which was dominated by men) ignored this fact. In their 1977 statement, the group wrote<\/a> that they saw their task as \u201cthe development of integrated analysis and practice based upon the fact that the major systems of oppression are interlocking.\u201d<\/p>\n In 1989, legal scholar Kimberl\u00e9 Crenshaw coined the term \u201cintersectionality\u201d to define the exclusion faced by Black women. In 1990, academic Patricia Hill Collins introduced the theory of \u201cthe matrix of domination\u201d in her book Black Feminist Thought<\/em><\/a>. <\/em>The matrix describes how social classifications like ethnicity, gender, age, and even religion are interconnected. Thanks to this matrix, people can experience oppression in a variety of ways related to their classifications. Intersectionality and the matrix of domination are closely connected.<\/p>\n Curious about feminism? Here\u2019s our <\/em>Feminism 101 article<\/em><\/a>.<\/em><\/p>\n Intersectionality is complex, but here are five of the most important facts you should remember:<\/p>\n The term \u201cintersectionality\u201d was coined in 1989, but people had been experiencing its impacts long before. Consider the story of Ida B. Wells-Barnett. She was a journalist and activist in both the suffrage and civil rights movements. As a Black woman, she was fully aware of how having multiple identities affected her experience in the world.<\/a> When she began a campaign to elect the first Black alderman in Illinois, some Black men protested the involvement of women. Around that same time, Wells-Barnett also faced opposition from southern women in the National American Woman Suffrage Association. These women were white supremacists, but because they represented a powerful bloc, NAWSA would not publicly denounce their beliefs. Through experiences like these, Wells-Barnett faced both gender and racial discrimination.<\/p>\n One common misconception about intersectionality is that it defines someone\u2019s value. Some think it means that multiple marginalized identities make a person more moral, credible, and important than those who don\u2019t have as many. Intersectionality starts to feel like a competition where people argue about which identities are more oppressed and therefore superior. This is a grave misunderstanding of intersectionality. The theory is centered on discrimination and oppression by the state. It\u2019s not making any claims about an individual\u2019s or even a group\u2019s worth, credibility, or morality. Rather, it\u2019s a framework focused on how power and discrimination work when someone has intersecting identities. The person is not inherently better or more important; their identities simply affect their access to opportunities.<\/p>\n Intersectionality has many critics. Some argue that categorizing people based on different identities oversimplifies how power and discrimination work. Others say that emphasizing identity will inevitably lead to divisions and tension within human rights movements, as some will feel certain identities are prioritized over others. The more extreme criticisms, often from people who want to deny the existence of widespread sexism and racism, go so far as to call intersectionality a cult or even a religion. It can be difficult to parse the good-faith criticisms from the bad-faith ones, but in general, it seems that most people won\u2019t deny that characteristics like race and gender do affect how oppression works. What they disagree with are its \u201cimplications, uses, and most importantly, its consequences.\u201d<\/a><\/p>\n For years, the term \u201cintersectionality\u201d was restricted to the scholarly and legal world. As its prominence increased, the definition became warped and watered down. In an article for The Cut<\/em>, Kory Stamper wrote that when words meant for a specific purpose enter the mainstream, they can get \u201ca little flabby: their sharply delineated corners blur a bit as the word is passed down a long line of speakers.\u201d<\/a> While intersectionality once specifically described discrimination against Black women, it now covers a vast array of identities such as sexuality, class, age, and so on. Kimberl\u00e9 Crenshaw agrees that intersectionality can be used to examine identities beyond race and gender, but she\u2019s noticed that people often use intersectionality as shorthand for \u201cit’s complicated.\u201d<\/a> In her mind, that can be an excuse to not act. When words lose their meaning, they also lose their power.<\/p>\n When certain critics call intersectionality a cult or religion, they\u2019ve misunderstood the concept\u2019s purpose. Intersectionality is a lens, and while it can be used to make sense of society in general, it was designed for lawyers arguing discrimination cases. In an interview, Kimberl\u00e9 Crenshaw says<\/a>, \u201cSome people look to intersectionality as a grand theory of everything, but that\u2019s not my intention.\u201d Intersectionality is a tool, and like all tools, we can decide what situations it\u2019s most useful for.<\/p>\nWhat is intersectionality and where did it come from?<\/strong><\/h2>\n
What five facts should everyone know about intersectionality?<\/strong><\/h2>\n
#1 The roots of intersectionality go deeper than 1989 <\/strong><\/h3>\n
#2 Intersectionality is not about a person\u2019s moral superiority <\/strong><\/h3>\n
#3 Critics say intersectionality is oversimplified and divisive <\/strong><\/h3>\n
#4 As it becomes more well-known, intersectionality becomes more watered down<\/strong><\/h3>\n
#5 Intersectionality is not a theory of everything <\/strong><\/h3>\n