Defining it, a brief history, and why it’s not actually “divisive”

Defining Intersectionality

Intersectionality — a term first coined in 1989 by Columbia law professor and one of the nation’s leading critical race theorists Kimberlé Crenshaw, refers to the interconnecting and often overlapping systems of oppression.

Originally the term intended to address the “multiple avenues through which racial and gender oppression (are) experienced…” (Crenshaw). The term has evolved, however, to be inclusive of factors beyond race and gender.

Class, race, sexual orientation, gender identity, ability, religion, age, and immigration status among many other elements are often included as well.

It is important to address these intersections because to truly liberate women, we must take into account and fight against the oppression(s) all women face — not just those of the most privileged within the movement (i.e. our straight, white, cisgender, upper class, able-bodied sisters).

A History of Exclusion

The importance of intersectionality initially arose when Crenshaw noticed the lack of visibility Black women faced within the mainstream feminist movement which, to this day, remains largely centered on the experiences of upper class heterosexual white women.

While Crenshaw was the first to put a name to the term, the concept of intersectionality existed long before the 80’s, being discussed by the likes of Sojourner Truth, Gloria Anzaldúa, Audre Lorde, and many other women of color active in the movement.

For decades, mainstream feminism decided that the only problems which mattered were that of the most privileged within the group.

Mainstream feminism, or what has been rebranded as white feminism, fails to acknowledge the issues of “People of color within LGBTQ movements; girls of color in the fight against the school-to-prison pipeline; women within immigration movements; trans women within feminist movements; and people with disabilities fighting police abuse,” notes Crenshaw in her Washington Post piece.

This is what intersectional feminism is trying to combat.

“What people don’t seem to get is that “White Feminism” is feminism for white people, and never exclusively feminism by white people. It’s more about who it benefits exclusively than who is perpetuating it exclusively. … a word for the institution we’re trying to separate ourselves from.” -TheWhistlingFish

Crenshaw, like many other Black women and women of color, faces racism in addition to sexism, and therefore saw the importance of addressing the fact that “women experience oppression in varying configurations and in varying degrees of intensity.”

Thus carving out a space with both anti-sexist and anti-racist politics was important to Crenshaw.

Sexism, racism, homophobia, transphobia, classism, ableism, xenophobia and other systems of oppression are intertwined, and thus we cannot dismantle one without dismantling all the rest.

Case in point: without dismantling other interconnected systems of oppression, women's liberation cannot be fully realized.

It’s Not About Dividing Us

The resurgence of intersectionality has given rise to critics who decry that recognizing our differences only “divides” us further and is actually weakening the movement from within.

Some even claim it is akin to segregation which, in itself, does a huge disservice to those who actually had to live through Jim Crow-era laws.

The ‘divisive’ narrative is an age-old diversionary tactic employed by white feminists who’re uncomfortable getting their privilege challenged — to derail conversations about inclusivity and maintain their comfort at the expense of others’ suffering.

“We have been taught to either ignore our differences or to view them as causes for separation and suspicion rather than as forces for change. Without community, there is no liberation... But community must not mean a shedding of our differences, nor the pathetic pretense that these differences do not exist.” -Audre Lorde

Challenging our own biases within the movement will not weaken it. On the contrary, it will only make stronger the structure.

If we can get past the uncomfortable stage of recognizing that we may carry certain societal privileges, listening when the marginalized talk about their experiences, and committing ourselves to be conscious of the way we may unintentionally harm others, we can strengthen the movement from within and accomplish more than we ever could’ve before.

In order to see true progression in the movement, our feminism must be intersectional. In order to see progression in any social movement to end domination, oppression, and the subsequent exploitation that follows, our framework must be intersectional