Intersectionality Resource Guide, pages 8 – 14 (https://www.unwomen.org/sites/default/files/2022-01/Intersectionality-resource-guide-and-toolkit-en.pdf)
Watch “The urgency of intersectionality” Ted Talk (https://www.ted.com/talks/kimberle_crenshaw_the_urgency_of_intersectionality#t-173089)
How to do Intersectionality (https://narrativeinitiative.org/blog/how-to-do-intersectionality/)
I was not familiar with intersectionality as an analysis, mostly because I see it often depicted as an identity, like Sen mentions in “How to do Intersectionality.” Sen points out that intersectionality is not a process of mitigation, similar to the Intersectionality guide, which I have also heard as a common description. Instead, it seems like the true meaning of the term is more useful, especially when looking at collaboration between different marginalized groups. Like the example Sen gives—of LGBT advocates and Latino farmers working together—a broader scope of social issues would do good for every group experiencing some type of discrimination, since the backing force becomes much larger. One question from these types of coalitions may be: “How do groups engaging in civic collaboration retain their original goals while also actively supporting others?” In essence, does a collective mission mean that everyone gets equally large benefits or equally small ones? What are other examples of intersectionality benefiting collectives?
Reflecting on my exposure to discussing frames of intersectionality, I found that what experience I had had from the past was little to none. I believe that the cause of this was best explained by someone in class on Monday who mentioned something that I believe connects very well to today’s discussion: when it comes to discussing topics that are seen as difficult but necessary––like topics regarding race or class––those who are in the role of the informant tend to focus on what is the easiest to explain and/or discuss first to make their message easier for a larger audience of people to understand. Intersectionality is a concept that is anything but simple, and so large topics of discussion and media coverage that largely intersect tend to be separated.
A question that has come to the forefront of discussion in class in the past is: many racist, homophobic, ableist, and classist issues are being discussed in-depth, so how do we address and work toward resolving or at least mitigating these problems from persisting? This is a good and valid question to ask, but what this question does not consider is how most if not all of these issues are intertwined together, and that to solve or mitigate the prevalence of one, we must address and fix them all. As Sen mentioned in their article, to pursue all of these important issues, “we can get to them fastest with a consistent and deep practice of, quite simply, looking at systems through multiple lenses.”
One topic of discussion that particularly stuck out to me in Sen’s article was when they were discussing feminists against domestic violence against women. They mentioned that even though they claimed to be advocating for all women, in reality, they were advocating for all white middle-class women. Another topic that connects to this is when Crenshaw was discussing Emma DeGraffenreid’s court case being dismissed due to the judge’s failure to look at her issue through the proper intersectional frame. The judge argued that the employer hired both women and black people, so her case was invalid but failed to consider that she was denied the job because she was both. In both of these cases, the proper frame was missed by those who were reviewing/advocating for reform of the current issue of discussion. These problems will be properly addressed when we begin to finally look at each issue as something impossible to be stand-alone. Classism, sexism, ableism, and so many other isms are connected to race, and everything in between, and we need to realize that. Yes, it is good to discuss these topics by themselves, but when we do that, we must at least acknowledge that these problems within our society are not one-dimensional.
During my time at Grinnell College, I have become accustomed to intersectional analysis and how the intersection of different kinds of discrimination can result in disparities between marginalized groups. However, as Rinku Sen discusses in their article “How to do Intersectionality,” terms like intersectionality have “become a buzzword,” where there is much confusion on what the term actually means. During my philosophy courses, it has been discussed how frameworks of thought developed in academia eventually enter mainstream thought, affecting how people think about different aspects of their lives. As Kimberle Crenshaw points out in their 2016 TED talk, the considerations made by people are very much affected by frameworks developed by philosophers, anthropologists, sociologists, and more developed in academia. However, as academics communicate these frameworks to mainstream audiences, there does appear to be difficulty in communicating what these frameworks entail. For example, Sen’s article mentions how many people conflate the idea of intersectionality with simply identity or believe there is a direct correspondence between having multiple marginalized identities and privilege. These ideas capture the main conclusion of intersectional analysis: that those at the intersection of multiple marginalized ideas experience discrimination in a different manner, but popular conceptions of intersectionality tend to fail to understand the kind of analysis that intersectionality promotes. Of course, part of this communication issue can be a result of how academics communicate their ideas, potentially prioritizing their communication with other academics through journal articles. At the same time, I believe it is in part due to online mediums of communication intentionally or unintentionally encouraging the spread of short, inflammatory content because short, inflammatory content tends to encourage user interaction with the social media platform. Thus, it is important that social media platform developers consider how they organize content on their websites and its effects on users.
A good point that stuck out to me was that intersectionality is not an identity. That distinction was definitely flying under my radar, and it feels like it’s an important one to make. It was also cool to hear about how the farmworkers group and the LGBTQ Group met and discussed the forces at play behind both of their issues. I would not have guessed there would be an overlap between the two, it is interesting that they were able to find some common enemies. I’d be interested in hearing more about other examples.
My favorite academic projects to date are the ones that address some sort of intersectionality between two different areas of research that I am interested in, so it’s cool to hear that intersectionality is important and useful for social change as well.
As a history major, it is always sort of shocking to see the range of years that such critical academic disciplines are considered to have “emerged.” It stunned me, for example, when I learned that social history only hit its stride in the 1960s, and that women’s history became distinct only shortly after in the mid-70s. Similarly shocking to me was that this idea of intersectionality was not really a recent one but was constructed not long after these periods of radical explosive growth in the field. Though any interest in theory/academic history will lead you headfirst into the idea of intersectionality, I feel that the framework has only been part of the public consciousness for a short while, and not because people have begun to accept it and try to view life through that expanded lens. I remember Ron DeSantis, just at the beginning of this year, citing “intersectionality” as a reason to ban AP African American studies from Florida classrooms. Just as the readings say, the long-held complexes about who can face racism, sexism, or discrimination are well retained. To say that queer theory has no place in the study of African American culture and history is just as ridiculous as saying there are no people that are in both communities. Both are dangerous lies. To disallow children to tangle with these more complicated concepts of identity and discrimination will make it all the more challenging to address them when they are in power themselves.
At Grinnell, I believe that we are each familiar with some understanding of intersectionality. However, as the beginning of Kimberlé Crenshraw’s TED Talk showed, Grinnellians and society do not always think intersectionally. The readings, do an excellent job of explaining the importance of intersectional analysis and additionally help explain how to do it. Crenshaw gave an excellent example of how intersectional analysis is important. I like many people in the crowd was unable to pick up on most of the names of the black women who were killed by police. Trickle-down social justice, I believe, must be increasingly on the rise with social media. We hear one name and say one name rather than researching the other names that are certainly out there. Those other names “slipped through our consciousness because there are no frames for us to see them” (Crenshaw, 2016, 03:13).
The frames of our society are formed by policy and as mentioned in the Intersectionality Resource Guide, policy is usually catered toward one identity. We as humans usually fall victim to seeing things as one-dimensional because it is easier for us to think, process, and act upon decisions that way. The fact is, however, no one is one-dimensional, especially in a society of privileges. Limiting ourselves to policy and thinking that promotes one-dimensional solutions and answers to injustice allows injustice to continue. I liked the way the readings and Crenshaw addressed this, for intersectional analysis is needed for justice and progress in policy and the expansion of our frames.
This is the first time I read about intersectionality and it is really interesting. The examples from the UNPRPD showed a lot of issues and showed several factors that affected those. It is important to understand that several social oppressions such as racism, sexism, etc. cause problems in society. Society needs comprehensive solutions for social problems and the intersectionality theory can be a great help for policy implementation.
We have been discussing issues of intersectionality since the first reading discussing disabilities, but it is definitely an important point brought up in the ted talk that this idea is relatively new. Maybe not for us at Grinnell now, but in terms of discourse on issues of race and gender issues, we have only had an accepted term for this idea since Kimberlé Crenshaw coined the term in 1989 as the “Intersectionality Resource Guide” points out. Meanwhile, the discussions about race and gender have been a well discussed issue in U.S. public discourse for a while longer.
I found the “How to do Intersectionality” blog brought up some wonderful discussion points around intersectionality. It mentioned how these intersectional ideas can be used to push agendas for many groups that often overlap forward together. I often find myself falling into the thought that intersectionality and sometimes otherize people and make them feel like they belong to both but neither group, like was the case in the hiring court decision in the ted talk. The black woman was both black and a woman, receiving this double discrimination that neither black men nor white women could relate to. However, the discussion around the coming together of LGBT activists and farmworkers in the blog shows how we can use intersectionality to create a bigger front for change, which was very inspiring.
I have read a few articles on intersectionality for my sociology classes and what always strikes me about intersectional analysis is that not only does it allow us to address social issues through policy in a holistic manner, but it is also a theory that can be widely applicable in the identification of avenues for possible interest convergence between groups that seem too dissimilar at first glance (because every identity is uniquely intersectional). This, then, makes it an extremely useful theory in enacting social movements. Despite it coming to be a sort of buzzword in academia as Sen mentions, Crenshaw’s development of this lens (informed by numerous other black feminist scholars) as a means to allow legal avenues against race and gender based discrimination imbues it with a great amount of practical use in almost every realm of social life. I think intersectionality rails against the ‘simplest explanation’ idea we were talking about last class and ensures that individuals are not reducible to any one of their identities.
Intersectionality is a term that most of us might have heard at some point during our time at Grinnell. I was surprised to learn that such an important term is relatively recent, taking into account how helpful it can be. However, I wasn’t aware of the misconception that intersectionality is an identity when it truly is a form of analysis.In the article “How to Do Intersectionality,” Rinku Sen mentions what I consider the core of conducting an intersectionality analysis. He says, “The qualities and skills that matter most for intersectional leadership are curiosity, listening, openness, and creativity. By asking questions, we can look at a problem not just through the lens of our own experience but also those of others whose identities might make them vulnerable to harm.” Curiosity, openness, and creativity are qualities that also apply to a good leader. I think that beyond just using this idea of intersectionality to study different real-life scenarios, this concept serves as a tool to be more empathic and aware of the situations of people that we might not take into account. In other words, the concept of intersectionality is a powerful tool for identifying problems, and once a problem is identified, better solutions can be developed.
Sen is a woman : https://narrativeinitiative.org/team-board/
(I don’t mean to call you out, but also I do! I love catching our assumptions about gender/race in the wild.)
In training for my job as a senior interviewer (the people who interview Grinnell applicants and help add some human context to the most numerical and sometimes a bit detached written application) we had an anti-bias training, and while intersectionality was brought up, I feel that even the readings and video that we had to do for this class provided a better understanding and basis to work from in addressing my own biases. For example, although not all of the 8 proposed “enablers” from the UN document are applicable, I feel that breaking it down into those steps will allow for a more consistent application across all of the different people that I might interview. I also thought that the examples in all parts of life that were presented in Sen’s article helped me better understand what intersectionality even is (as many have mentioned, that it’s not an identity, but even beyond that our view of who’s the “most marginalized” is affected and warped by our own biases and experiences which come from the privileges that we’ve had in our lives). It concerns me that I walked away from computer science class’s readings feeling like I understand the basic dynamics of intersectionalism better than the training I did (which isn’t to criticize the training, which I think did a great job addressing biases but just wasn’t given time to address all the things that we should have).
The two reading materials provide valuable insights into the concept of intersectionality and its practical applications in addressing various forms of discrimination and inequality. Both materials emphasize the importance of understanding intersectionality as a tool for analyzing and addressing social inequalities. The reading by Rinku Sen underscores the need to view intersectionality as an analytical framework rather than an identity in itself. Intersectionality acknowledges that individuals possess multiple identities, such as race, gender, class, sexual orientation, and disability, which intersect and interact in complex ways, influencing their experiences and opportunities. The other reading provides a more structured approach to understanding intersectionality within the context of human rights instruments and international law. It highlights the increasing recognition of intersectionality in international human rights treaties and conventions. The reading emphasizes the need to address multiple forms of discrimination that individuals may experience based on the intersection of various factors such as disability, gender, race, and socioeconomic status. One of the key takeaways from this reading is that an intersectional approach helps identify hidden structural barriers and allows for a better understanding of how individual experiences differ even within marginalized groups. By examining intersectional inequalities, policymakers and practitioners can create tailored solutions that address the specific needs of diverse populations.
After being in this class for a week, for some of these readings I was like I was aware of this problem just didn’t know how severe it was or how it seriously can affect people. However, after this reading, I was very surprised by the idea of intersectionality. I was aware of sexism, ableism, racism, etc., but the fact that these could be intertwined never crossed my mind for some reason. After watching the Ted Talk I was very surprised by the number of people who knew of African-American women’s wrongful deaths. Crenshaw mentions the reason for this is because of the fact that they are mainly disregarded by the people. When it comes to the idea of African Americans, Crenshaw says we think of African-American men, while for women, it is white women. We then see that African-American women are not part of either category. This Ted Talk really opened my eyes to the possibility of combined identities. It makes me realize that we shouldn’t judge someone based on their one identity, but rather consider the collection of identities that make the person who they are. I really loved the idea of how intersectionality is an analysis and not an identity. Calling someone intersectional, I believe is too ambiguous and just not clear enough. Calling it an analysis makes more sense, as we are observing the different identities of a person and making an idea of how we can achieve substantive equality. I really liked the order of the readings. We first go over ableism, racism, and then sexism. Then we go into intersectionality which is able to combine all of these ideas to create a person, as each one we went over was an identity. We are now able to create the whole person on their variety of identities and are able to pick out what is wrong in society and what does not need change.
Like many others have noted, intersectionality is something we talk a lot about at Grinnell; in our class, it came up on the very first day when we discussed disability and has come up in every discussion of identity since. However, for a term so closely associated with identity, intersectionality is not an identity in and of itself, as Sen mentions in “How to Do Intersectionality”. Sen instead frames intersectionality as a method for analysis, which makes a lot of sense because every identity we individually hold is still an identity in its own right, and intersectionality describes how they interact. Since everyone has multiple identities, if intersectionality were an identity, it would be one we all hold.
I had heard of the term intersectionality before but hadn’t known what it referenced. It is not clearly defined, and based on our comments so far, it seems like we all have slightly different interpretations of it. I agree that intersectionality is not an identity, it is an overlap between marginalized groups in which one benefits and the other is hurt. I appreciate how intersectionality, from what little I understand of it, includes a holistic view of sociopolitical problems. But I am unsure as to how intersectionality can be applied? Is this a sociological theory? If so, I would be wary of relying on it as a measure of anything. Academia is not really in-tune to the struggles of marginalized groups.
I think the media we read and watched did a great job distinguishing intersectionality as an analysis, and not as an identity. Often, in prior schooling, intersectionality was defined as an analysis, but the point of it not being an identity itself was never really communicated in the classroom; rather, it was something I had to learn myself. The examples regarding the case of Emma DeGraffenreid as well as the 1986 Marriage Fraud Amendment demonstrate the importance of examining and creating policies through an intersectional lens. In the first example, DeGraffenreid’s source of income used to support her family was affected due to the judge’s failure to consider her simultaneous identities of being both black and a woman. Regarding the second, the failure of approaching domestic violence policies through an intersectional analysis neglected those whose other identities (in this case, the identity of being an immigrant) that were not “White, middle class women.” This ends up harming, more than helping many victims of domestic abuse.
Rinku Sen makes a great point that intersectionality is not an identity. This quote particular stood out to me, “In domestic violence policy and practice, for example, feminists insisted that violence affects all women equally to prevent domestic abuse from being dismissed as a minority problem. “All women” were actually White, middle class women; policies created to address domestic violence assumed access to services that poor women of color did not have.”
I think in America, at least in my experience, this idea of agency is almost paramount to everything else. A lot of conversations about violence and injustice center around how a group’s agency is limited because of harmful systemic constants. I work at RISE as a victims service advocate for victims of domestic abuse on the Meskwaki settlement, and learning about the tribal justice system has really opened my eyes to how one’s identity can define agency. For example, a victim may not want to seek a robust legal remedy outside of the settlement for assault because that is not as restorative for them as their perpetrator partaking in a cleansing ceremony. Initially, it may not read as “enough” or fit into our idea of justice, but that is also not for anyone else to decide.
I thought the Equality Institute’s version of the intersectionality wheel was really interesting. I really liked the visualization of overlapping ellipses that darken as more identities intersect. I had a conversation about race with a professor, who said he tries not to use race as a noun, and rather the term racism, because race is not a useful concept, or even worth discussion, outside of racism. People are raced as Black, or white, or Asian, and I think this language is essential for intersectional analysis of discrimination and justice. Acknowledging the diversity of identities people hold and how they all /actively/ function to inform their lived experience, rather than operating as static, separate identities, is essential to imaging reform and just futures.
Ooo Sira, thank you for your notes about language in the last paragraph. It feels very important to distinguish that “people are raced”. I know that I will struggle to switch my language around this but I will be actively practicing this going forward.
The intersection of ethnicity, gender, and accessibility is what people easily ignore. Just like in the TED talk video, the presenter mentioned that you are able to imagine a feminism with female figure, but when it comes to the figure of anti-racism, the figure is more likely to be black men who is advocating. The ignorance of the intersecting group would lead to the bigger social issue remains unsolved. Such as when we read “In Thick: Dying to be Competent” , Tressie McMillan Cottom talks about how as a black women have been badly treated when facing the healthcare system. As a pregnant woman, her ill have not been taken seriously. Plus, the black identity makes her even harder to be well-treated, as when other white women are able to sit in well-designed room and have a rest when visiting the doctors, she has to wait outside and have been rejected to sit inside. Besides, the same thing happens for the black students that were studied in Ukraine. The schools have been destroyed by the bombs and all those black students have become the refugees. However, with their black identity, they are not able to get enough aids in food and housing. I feel bad that the intersection is still a less systematic ideology when thinking about the social inequality, but it is a really essential point that is needed for further discussion.
I think that Crenshaw’s presentation did a great job of summarizing the ‘what’ and ‘why’ of intersectionality. In particular, I think the example of Emma DeGraffenreid succinctly encapsulates the legal need for intersectionality. Most of the talk, however, is not focused on intersectionality as a legal precedent, but instead as a social or political idea. The #SayHerName movement uses intersectionality as a basis for why learning about police violence against Black women is so urgent.
One aspect that I wish the talk spent more time on is the particular reason for why intersectionality is critical to the stories of the women mentioned in the talk. Crenshaw mentions that violence against Black women doesn’t fit the usual narratives of media and politicians with respect to police violence. But I wish she were more explicit: what do these existing narratives consist of, and how do they exclude the stories of Black women? I think that understanding the specifics of their exclusion will help us better incorporate intersectionality into the story of social justice.
Sometimes I think about how strange it is that before college I was engaged in conversations about politics, race, and oppression without having an understanding of what intersectionality is. The idea that the combination and connections between multiple identities can affect you uniquely sounds obvious when stated, but still, in many aspects of life intersectionality is not considered. I think these readings did a good job of explaining the importance of looking at things through an intersectional lens. People have been discriminated against, hurt, or killed without being heard due to a lack of intersectional thinking. One of my favorite examples from the Narrative Initiative reading was with the PCUN in Oregon: an understanding between two communities and how they intersect affected positive change for everyone in the area.
The Ted Talk with Kimberlé Crenshaw displayed how intersectional thinking can change the national narrative to include more people previously unseen. I was surprised with myself how I knew the names of the men mentioned, but not the women. I was especially shocked, and kind of ashamed, how I didn’t know the names of the women at the end included from Michigan, one from my home town. I’m not sure how I didn’t know this injustice took place where I lived; I was young at the time, but it never came up in school or at home. The injustices committed towards Black women in this country are too often unheard of. Intersectionality and intersectional thinking are ways in which we can reveal stories that deserve to be heard.
The reading for the dissection of intersectionality was really interesting in terms of making me think of intersectionality more deeply. Kimberle goes into detail about what intersectionality is, why it matters, and the 8 enablers for applying an intersectional lens. As Kimberle stated, “Intersectionality is a way of thinking about identity and its relationship to power”. (Kimberle Crenshaw 2015), which is a really good definition of intersectionality stands for.
Learning about intersectionality as a tool and notion for analysis and not identity got me thinking about the story of the deaf prisoner that we previously learned about. Similar to how the deaf prisoner has a hard time following the rules and commands of his guards and communicate his struggles, the pregnant woman with a black identity introduces additional hardships to her situation and nuances to how she is perceived by the people around her. It is also interesting to think about the fact that when we say “all” people in a generalized group, we might not be thinking about these nuanced identities and how they intersect and compound on one another.
Thanks for the comment Anh, I’m glad you found connections to our past readings. I challenge you in the future to use the names of the authors when referencing their stories.
Intersectionality has been covered in many of the courses I have taken at Grinnell, starting with the Intro to Sociology course I took in my very first semester. I’ve seen the theory presented in so many different ways that it’s hard to not nitpick at the way certain articles present the topic. I personally have come to understand intersectionality as the idea that any given intersection of one or more identities, social categories, or factors has qualities and consequences that are not equivalent or reducible to the sum of its parts, and I feel as though some presentations overcomplicate this point. Don’t get me wrong; the implications of intersectionality are quite complicated, and intersectional analyses and frameworks are complex because they aspire to recognize, appreciate, and respond to the many many possible intersections of social factors. However, intersectionality itself is a profoundly simple concept, and I think presentations of intersectionality that start off by trying to explain intersectional approaches and frameworks may miss out on leveraging the intuition that this concept provides.
That being said, the readings did have some good points that I hadn’t entirely heard before. I appreciated the comment about the pledge to leave no one behind remaining aspirational in the absence of an intersectional approach; it reminds me how nice-sounding sentiments like “leave no one behind” are useless without praxis, and praxis is informed by a theoretical framework. Studying the implications of intersectionality and developing the framework that informs an “intersectional approach” is necessary to make leaving no one behind possible.
Before these readings I was very familiar with intersectionality as a lens/ framework/ analytical tool, and had seen the Crenshaw ted talk a couple of times. I am most excited for the discussion in class today, because I think in learning what was new or interesting or difficult for classmates who may not be as familiar with the topic, I will be able to reexamine and reconceptualize my own understanding. Similar to one of the articles, in a theory and methods of GWSS class, we discussed the buzzword-ification of “intersectionality” (and to that point feminism), that abstracts the meaning and importance of the concept.
It was nice reading about Intersectionality because I think that’s a really important thing about a person to understand. I’m very empathetic so I question the role of someone’s Intersectionality within their life that led them to certain decisions or actions I think it’s almost impossible to truly understand someone without understanding their Intersectionality of identities. Then in the Ted Talk video, it was sad to see all of those stories about black women being killed due to Intersectionality that they cannot control. I think the stories show how complex the concept of Intersectionality is. Especially within the story about the black woman who tried to sue a company that didn’t hire her because she was black and a woman then the company wrongfully defended itself by saying they hired Black people and women mutually exclusively. Which does not align with her intersectionality identity. The Intersectionality Resource Guide summarized this issue well by explaining, “Applying an intersectional lens helps to connect human rights instruments to address the multiple forms of discrimination that people experience. Only by doing this will we be able to achieve equal outcomes for all.” (12)