Intersectionality and Feminist Activism

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Table of Contents

Introduction
Research Question
Presentation of Literature and Key Concepts
Definition of Key Concepts
Analysis
Conclusion
Reference List

Introduction

Nowadays, much attention is paid to the discussion of social discrimination in order to better understand its causes, manifestations, and ways to combat it. Most theories view racial and gender discrimination as inherent, while the experiences of people belonging to affected groups remain poorly understood. For example, African American women often face police violence. However, like in the instance of George Floyd, whose killing provoked massive demonstrations in the United States, society is unaware of this reality (Blue, 2020). At the same time, the identities of the African American women who have been beaten, defeated, and slaughtered are not generally recognized. This example demonstrates how some persons may be subjected to two or more forms of prejudice at the same time without being capable of defending themselves. I decided to write about intersectionality in relation to feminism, as this topic is not sufficiently discussed in academic research and the media.

The theory of intersectionality refers to conceptualizing the links between the systems of oppression that affect the most vulnerable populations. Focusing on the concepts of power and privilege, intersectionality in the feminist theory studies how minority women struggle with social, racial, age-related, and domestic prejudices. Crenshaw (2016) stated that it is impossible to address if a problem is not clearly formulated. The topic of intersectionality and feminist theory should be explored to better understand its role in informing the necessary policies to help those who need some strategies to improve their lives. Therefore, I hope to study the academic literature to discuss the existing tendencies and difficulties to contribute to the understanding of the identified topic in terms of gender and female studies.

Research Question

What influence does intersectionality have on the formation of feminist theory and activism? Intersectionality has provided a paradigm for studying the self-supportive crossovers of gender, race, sexuality, wealth, as well as other social divides. It has given a hugely complex criticism with social and philosophical consequences for feminist ideology and the more extensive social studies. While racial and gender discrimination is widely studied as a problem in the literature because of its social significance, most studies look at discrimination only from the perspective of men. Furthermore, intersectionality offers a lens through which to formulate a theory and use a unified vocabulary to investigate the link between gender, ethnicity, sexual preference, nationality, and health in order to bridge gaps. The use of intersectionality is helpful for problem-solving because it provides an analytical framework for conceptualizing social injustice and interpreting women’s specific experiences. By applying this approach, I hope to clarify the intersection of systems and institutions that lead to multiple forms of discrimination. I also look forward to contributing to the synthesis of relevant examples and concepts that will help solve the problem, facilitate interventions and policies to address social inequalities in the United States.

Presentation of Literature and Key Concepts

In this critical essay, I will primarily rely on academic sources to shed light on the role of intersectionality in feminist theory and activism. First, the ideas of Crenshaw (2016) will be used to refine the definition of intersectionality and define its role in informing feminist research. A cursory examination of this material reveals that it will be helpful in comprehending the underlying trends addressed by one of the most influential proponents of the target concept. Secondly, Crenshaw’s (1991) essay appears to be crucial for understanding racial politics and violence towards women. Thirdly, Lycke (2006) effectively explores the relevance of intersectionality for feminist studies, focusing on intersectionality’s capacity to integrate diverse forms of prejudice to build a new narrative. In addition, Gill and Brah (2014) study the case of the parents of Shafiley Ahmed, where parents killed their daughter in so-called “honor” violence. In addition, Ang (1995) draws attention to women and postnational feminism”, a survey of which helps to understand this Asian author’s vision of feminism. Taken together, these resources will provide a different perspective on a chosen topic to discuss the premises and effects of intersectionality in terms of their role in feminist theory and activism.

Definition of Key Concepts

In this article, intersectionality is a key concept associated with feminism. It occurred as a result of different minorities’ struggles to preserve their rights and combat societal injustice. Societies of lesbian, homosexual, bisexual, and transsexual (LGBT) persons, disabled people, and people of other ethnicities, in particular, have difficulties in asserting their rights (Lykke, 2006). Professor Kimberly Crenshaw gave the name to this feminist sociological theory in 1989 (Crenshaw, 1991). Intersectional feminism advocates claim that there is no one and universal women’s experiences and that the battle for female issues is inextricably linked to the fight for the LGBT society’s equality, as well as the struggle for equality and authoritarianism.

The struggle for equality of all groups of society without exception has become an integral part of the human history of the modern period. Feminism can be seen as the most massive movement against traditional discrimination. In its development, the struggle for women’s rights has given rise to a large number of sociological theories. I will use the definition of intersectional feminism given by Crenshaw (1991). This author’s definition is that intersectionality is that a person can have multiple social identities that form a single whole. The criteria for belonging to some groups are based on race, ethnicity, gender, financial well-being, mental and physical illness. According to this theory, African American women in the United States remain poorly understood compared to other parts of society because the unique identity of African American women is formed by the intersection of two or more elements.

The concept of patriarchal absences, which will explain intersectionality, is widely accepted in society. This means that when considering racial or other minority issues, the scope primarily includes men expected to care for their children. In a speech titled On Intersectionality, Crenshaw (2016) argues that with the current structure that views discrimination through the lens of patriarchal absence, it is nearly impossible to eradicate intersectionality from women’s lives. According to Crenshaw (2016), “it is essential to point out that little attention is paid to women and their specific security, family, and employment issues.” In other words, the current structure does not allow for qualitative improvements and should be adjusted accordingly.

Honor Based Violence (HBV) is violence against a family member by relatives who are convinced that the member has caused dishonor. In this context, it usually means acts of a sexual nature that are prohibited in this culture: adultery, premarital sex, rape, or homosexual behavior (Gill and Brah, 2014). However, reasons may also include non-sexual relationships, such as a wife’s complaint against her husband, who beats her and her children, and seemingly “inappropriate behavior” when she sat down or dressed incorrectly. Despite these differences, the vast majority of victims of honor-based violence are women, and the perpetrators are most often male relatives. According to Gill and Brah (2014), “honor is defined as a virtue or character trait associated with honesty, morality, and altruism” (p. 72). It is a symbolic and rhetorical construction, the meaning of which is constantly contested, as it has different connotations depending on cultural and linguistic groups.

Analysis

In this part of the article, I will structure the analysis according to the research contributions of the mentioned authors. There will be two components, one dealing with the relevance of intersectionality in feminist ideology and the other with feminist theory. Also, I want to discuss the theories and concepts of gender studies, taking into account the analysis of auxiliary literature. As the founder of intersectionality, Crenshaw’s ideas will receive more attention, but the assumptions of other scientists will also be duly examined.

Intersectionality focuses on connecting human identities, while intersectional feminism looks at how women from different backgrounds face discrimination. It is sometimes simpler to think and explain that everyone feels the same way or that LGBTQ+ individuals have the same perspective, but this is not the case. People must realize that all distinct identities, particularly those involving many overlapping forms of oppression, are legitimate. From the outset, the Western feminist movement focused primarily on middle-class white women. However, the women’s movement cannot make a difference without paying attention to the needs and concerns of all women. According to Lykke (2006), “25 to 50 percent of women experience gender-based violence in their lifetime” (p. 151). However, when statistics are presented without explaining how differences in living conditions affect outcomes, they obscure or confuse different levels of oppression. Bisexuals and people of color, for instance, are more likely to be victims of abuse than white or heterosexual individuals. In other words, all women are at risk of gender-based violence, but some are at much greater risk, depending on their race, sexual orientation, and life experience.

Advocates of intersectionality in social work argue that without network operators consider intersectionality, they will be less valuable to various parts of the community, such as those experiencing domestic abuse or disabled victims of abuse. According to an intersectional concept, the exercise of spousal abuse advisors in the United States imploring all people to report their perpetrators to police is of little use to women of color due to a heritage of racially charged police misconduct, and those advisors should make adjustments their counseling services for people of color.

Key concepts:

Interlocking matrix of oppression;
Standpoint epistemology and the outsider within;
Resisting oppression.

Speaking about the essence of Crenshaw’s research, one cannot fail to mention the tendencies towards oppression and discrimination of various social groups. According to Crenshaw (1991), “chauvinism can never be selective, which means sexism, racism, religious intolerance, and homophobia are closely related” (p. 1241). The author believes that all forms of discrimination are part of a single system of oppression adopted in the state. If society allows the restriction of the rights of a specific group, this trend is likely to spread to members of other minorities in the future. According to the logic of intersectional feminism, African American homosexual women are the most disadvantaged segment of US society, as they have the maximum number of characteristics that become typical causes of persecution.

Studying the practice of American shelters, Crenshaw (1991) found that their work does not consider the specifics of the life experience of people of color: they are more likely than white people to become victims of domestic violence and face poverty and unemployment. They are more dependent on their couple, less knowledgeable, or unable to take advantage of the available conflict resolution opportunities. These social status characteristics are not considered when organizing assistance, and people of color are especially vulnerable in difficult life situations. Crenshaw’s research demonstrates that while racism and sexism constantly intersect in the daily lives of American citizens, anti-discrimination feminist and anti-racist projects are separate from each other and do not account for the complex impact of multiple power mechanisms on the disposition of opposing groups (Crenshaw, 1991). As a result, despite the government’s efforts to help them, the programs do not work, and their situation remains challenging.

The intersection of discrimination theory is emerging as a new tool for analyzing the concept of African American feminism. An intersectional approach shapes and reinforces the vision that separates black feminism from the rest of the feminist movement. The division of American feminism into black and white leads to a revision of bourgeois feminism as universal. Intersectionality discredits white feminists and denounces their privileged position. At the same time, it brings together initiatives to create a holistic feminist movement based on the fight against racism.

Ignoring distinctions is a critical challenge in the situation of violence towards women because the aggression that many women experience is frequently determined by other aspects of their identity, such as color or class (Crenshaw, 1991). The work of feminists to politicize women’s experiences and anti-racists to address non-white experiences frequently continue as if the issues and perspectives they express are mutually incompatible. Although racism and sexism regularly intersect in real life, they seem to exist separately in feminist and anti-racist practices. As an example, the author cites the problems she encountered in the course of her research. Crenshaw (2016) describes how anti-racist and feminist practices often fail to address the privacy concerns of non-whites. For example, they do not study the phenomenon of violence: second-wave feminists do not raise this issue, realizing the possibility of discrediting themselves. Some anti-racist fighters believe that talking about violence can be viewed as a purely national factor.

Political intersectionality is another issue that should be discussed in this document, as it provides a broader perspective on the causes of the identified problem. There is a lack of protection for public institutions, with disproportionate consequences for communities. As a result, the courts cannot accept the issue and contribute to similar cross-cutting issues faced by minorities. The shift of resources to group management from service delivery is another negative outcome associated with individual punishment. Instead, it seems rational to argue that structural and institutional reforms would be more helpful in achieving social justice. In other words, political intersectionality emphasizes the interdependent nature of institutions and vulnerable groups. The former has power, and the latter must treat them individually without assistance from courts and agencies.

An emphasis on masculinity and masculine power lies at the heart of political intersectionality. In Crenshaw’s (2016) source, it is clear that the speaker opposes considering social gender and racial discrimination only in terms of male dominance. It has been argued, in particular, that an intersectional fallacy is to think that African American men are in trouble just because they are not socialized enough to take responsibility for their families and communities. It should be agreed that it is unacceptable for a discourse on social injustice to be based solely on “patriarchal absence,” as Crenshaw (2016) suggested. For example, Obama’s My Brother’s Keeper Alliance aims to help men of color bridge opportunity gaps and ensure they have sufficient resources to support their families. However, there is no program for African American women, as there is no paradigm for including them in discourse. Some programs target both men and women in terms of poverty or employment, but a gender approach to solving specific problems of women is not accepted and is not implemented in practice.

When examining the gender social structure, it is clear that the state plays a vital role in the development and preservation of gender disparities and injustice. The state pursues social, demographic, and family policies, in some cases supporting specific parental roles and a balance of gender prescriptions. However, it should be emphasized that the state is not a monolith in policy implementation. It is also not the only source of strength, and the resistance, challenges, and conflicts of various agents are recognized as the essential subject of research in feminist sociology. As a system of male domination, patriarchy is reproduced through the state, family, division of labour, religion, education system, and other social institutions. Researchers call the mind to the matter that, despite legislation and policy and the massive participation of women in paid employment, their disadvantaged status remains in a variety of situations (Crenshaw, 1991). Gender inequality is being reproduced despite quotas, women’s parties are being created, programs of equal opportunities in various institutions. The woman’s secondary status is preserved; there are cultural contexts where sexism, control, and prescription of gender roles are still acceptable and not criticized.

The solution proposed by Crenshaw (2016) refers to seeking a prism for a deeper understanding of the difficulties people face. Namely, the many ways African American people are excluded from social, political, and economic life, and employment must be studied in detail to find an appropriate solution. The author emphasises the importance of a loud voice for the affected people, as their experience should become evident to society. By clearly identifying the difficulties and differences that distinguish a particular person, you can make actions more effective. Moreover, knowledge production is viewed as a situational process generated by the position of the researcher. Researchers are called upon to capture multiple voices, explore multiple positions, realising their privileges and limitations within a complex matrix of dominance (Crenshaw, 2016). The plight of the oppressed does not necessarily give rise to the political prospects of liberation, but it does give rise to their vision of reality.

Intersectionality is not limited to identity issues; research questions and level of analysis may vary. The effects of ethnicization and feminization of social discrimination were determined based on statistics and field research. There is a correlation between ethnicity and gender in the social situation of economically disadvantaged women, who remain one of the most stable and densest socially vulnerable groups in Australia. Intersectionality has drawn attention to the socio-cultural mechanisms that make them vulnerable, as well as to interdependent ethnic and gender characteristics.

Intersectionality can be understood as an emotional attachment to the social whole, manifested in communicative practices, and it can remain unconscious and latent until a certain point. When it is politicized from below or from above, it becomes an essential resource for collective action. Hegemonic forms of belonging are citizenship and ethnicity, and they can be organized everywhere. However, in modern society, aspects of social belonging, such as religion or cosmopolitanism, are increasingly becoming factors of consolidation within the framework of political initiatives. For example, in the feminist movement, ideas about the ethics of dealing with people can be noted—the politicisation of belonging leads to fundamentalist and human rights movements. The intersectional approach allows the author to understand how various political projects construct the positions of their potential supporters, denote their position in a complex power structure, and appeal to categories of solidarity based on race, class, gender, and ability.

According to Lykke (2006), a Swedish researcher, the recognition of intersectionality in gender studies and its influence outside of academic feminism is related to several circumstances. This approach redefines old research problems and contributes to conflicting empirical research results. In addition, it brings together different paradigms of social knowledge that recognize a plurality of power mechanisms in the context of domination and oppression. Moreover, the concept of intersectionality becomes public, integrates into political discourse, and thus acquires social significance. The media use it to become familiar and understandable to different audiences and travel through scientific disciplines. The category of intersectionality is integrated into a contemporary global discourse on human rights and is debated internationally and regionally when it comes to multiple forms of discrimination. Currently, intersectionality is especially actively used in research on identity formulation and life strategies (Lykke, 2006). At the same time, forming identities around people’s perspectives is complex, and they are the target of contextually relevant changes. For example, analysis of autobiographical narratives demonstrates how storytellers change their position and re-formulate their identities.

In terms of feminist activism, intersectionality promises to overcome contemporary social and racial segregation. Ang (1995) suggests that this success is possible because intersectionality has been transformed into a common language that unites a wide range of feminists, even those who were suspicious or openly critical of it. Therefore, as Crenshaw (1991) suggested, the intersectionality appropriated by mainstream feminists in the United States has not been used to analyze differences within the feminist movement. Nevertheless, she began to play the role of a theory that unites everyone to understand the existing differences and attract society’s attention. As a result of this transition, it became possible to rewrite significant conflicts within the feminist movement in this new common language. He presented these as minor differences in the overall structure of Crenshaw (2016). The collapse of conflicts means that the unity of the feminist movement can be reborn; those who remain outside the consensus may be excluded. The function of a universal language has become a dominant discourse that can rethink and redefine the relationships of different strands of feminist theory. An example of such an operation to rethink and resolve conflict is the relationship between intersectionality and poststructuralism and feminism.

It should be noted that there are some methodological difficulties in using intersectionality in empirical research. Much of the work in this area is based on qualitative methodology and, in particular, on case study methodology. Typically, the research object is a group with harmful privileges, experiencing lawlessness, oppression, and exploitation. The subject of research is usually the multiple mechanisms of power that generate the studied experience. Observations and interviews are used as narrative data. The immediate units of the empirical analysis are texts in which various categories are voiced corresponding to a complexly organized experience. Despite these limitations, intersectionality has become an integral part of feminist debates and gender politics. Researchers explore specific contexts for the generation of situational knowledge and reflect on their unique position in this process. Finally, intersectionality allows us to focus on critical axes of power, including factors of social division, which are denoted by several categories, such as gender, ethnicity, age, sexuality, and citizenship. However, depending on the historical and cultural context, as well as the research problem, other parameters of distinction and stratification can be actualized.

The study and prevention of honor-based violence is another area of feminist activism discussed in the literature. It seems necessary to focus on one striking example when the British court found the parents of 17-year-old Shafiley Ahmed guilty of the murder of their daughter, committed in 2003 on the basis of the so-called “family honor.” went missing in 2003, and her remains were found the following winter. During the investigation, the police suspected that her parents, who had come from Pakistan, had been killed. Her lifestyle did not fit into the traditional norms of this community, as Shafileya refused to marry of convenience, which her parents insisted on. After that, they began to claim that their daughter “shamed” the family. The parents were charged with murder only in 2010, when their second daughter, who witnessed the murder, revealed the truth.

The testimony of the murdered woman’s younger sister became the main proof in this challenging case. As the prosecutor explained, the girl was killed by her parents because, in their opinion, she disgraced her family in front of everyone, and they were disappointed. The girl wanted to meet young people like her peers, but her parents did not share her views. In this case, HBV is expressed in forced marriage. In many traditional cultures, it is taken for granted that marriage is primarily a matter of relations between relatives. However, in Europe and the United States, it is generally accepted that forced marriage against will is a much more serious violation of human rights than even rape. In some communities, families use forced marriage to try to suppress behavior they consider dishonorable. If a young immigrant refuses to marry at the behest of the family, a cycle of violence can begin.

However, the intricacies of HBV are often lost when trying to sort out cases. Translations of terms encompassing honor rarely convey their entire cultural interpretation, distorting their meaning. For instance, the Urdu term “izzat,” which means to “honor” in English, alludes to the many socio-cultural links and linkages that bind families and communities groups together (Gill and Brah, 2014). Despite the fact that the term “honor” has many good connotations, it is frequently used to excuse violence, harassment, and even killing. Its significance in inciting and justifying gender-based violence must be made more transparent to successfully combat such crimes. It is crucial to remember that honor violations do not necessarily result in sexual violence, and people are not the only victims. However, the vast majority of cases involve violence perpetrated by men against women in order to obtain and maintain the social construct of “honor” (Gill and Brah, 2014). Accordingly, in the case of Shafileyah Ahmed, concerns about protecting families from dishonour caused by violations of the current code of honor outweigh concerns about the value of life and women’s autonomy.

The murder of Shafilei Ahmed reflects the problem of domestic violence as well as cultural and social hardships. The fact that the girl was from a Pakistani family is closely related to beliefs about Islam, alleged barbarism, and human rights violations against women. At the same time, this is a simplified approach to explaining such cases, only linking them to the cultures of South Asia, which are primarily defined as those that practice HBV and violence against women. However, domestic violence is not well understood as it depends on individual perpetrators. As Gill and Brach (2014) rationally pointed out, HBV occurs not only in Asian cultures but also in Western and immigrant families, emphasizing the need to promote multiculturalism and pay attention to the cultural characteristics of families and communities. It is inappropriate to blame minorities for being responsible for HBV, as criticism of illegal and harmful practices differs from community to community.

The Australian feminist perspective is applied in the article by Ang (1995), who argues that feminism is a multicultural nation with cultural differences. It is essential to be aware of the characteristics of specific countries and population groups. For example, in Australia, Aboriginal women face discrimination from the white population and are also socialized. According to Ang (1995), “the hegemony of white and Western people is expressed in a discourse in which women are considered for more than 500 years of historical development” (p. 57). This hegemony predominantly views Aboriginal women as a population that cannot gain power, making them feel like foreigners in their own country. The current world system was created by whites, which creates asymmetry in society. For example, Australian women are often categorised as non-English speaking women, but whiteness is considered the norm. Consequently, there is no duality and diversity in the interpretation of feminism in Australia.

White feminists insist that they are fighting for equal rights with men in education and the workplace and against domestic violence, while issues of race and sexual orientation are outside the scope of their programs. Ang (1995) notes signs of deep divisions between white feminists and indigenous peoples. This happens not only in Australia but also in America, Canada, and some other countries. While the feminist movement in Australia is powerful, Indigenous Australians continue to suffer persecution both within and outside their families. The vast influence of white feminism among Aboriginal women is undeniable, but according to Ang (1995), Aboriginal Australians are still excluded from mainstream feminist discourse in their country. Australia’s social security indicators reflect a situation in which Aboriginal women are at the bottom of the socioeconomic ladder, making them one of the most socially marginalized and vulnerable groups.

Concerning Crenshaw’s idea of intersectionality, it must be noted that African American people in the United States and Minority peoples in Australia suffer numerous forms of prejudice at the same time. Ang (1995) develops ideas of intersectionality, although the term is not used in this author’s work. In particular, the author argues that whiteness is not a biological category but a political one. For example, they were white, and being “black” is not the same in the US, UK, and Australia. The relationship between white female hegemony and local populations must be de-universalized to reveal the unique experiences of women (Ang 1995). In this regard, the author mentioned above and Crenshaw (2016) look the same as both contribute to a paradigm shift through which feminism should be viewed. Differences must be viewed with care and understanding to formulate an approach based on bias rather than inclusiveness, as a generalization of experience has proven ineffective in achieving equity and social justice.

Conclusion

In conclusion, it should be clarified that intersectionality asserts that women from racial, ethnic, and social minorities can simultaneously face different types of discrimination. The interaction of domestic violence, cultural prejudice, disability, and other related issues has not been adequately explored in the literature, so it is essential to understand this theory in feminism. This article has shown that Crenshaw is one of the critical researchers and promoters of intersectionality. Based on several real-life examples of violence against women, an intersectional approach has been found to address pressing issues of feminism and gender studies. This approach allows maintaining the political orientation of gender studies. It promotes convergence and study of inequality challenges by focusing on specific culturally defined contexts.

Discussions of honor-based violence and the hegemony of white feminism in Australia have shown that intersectionality is inherent in the culture, historical context, and relationships with dominant powers. In general, the key to overcoming multiple forms of discrimination is to rethink the paradigm for de-universalizing women’s experiences so that courts, politics, laws, and social and political institutions protect them. Thus, intersectionality defines both the theory and activism of feminism, stating that the current paradigm cannot reflect the accumulation problems faced by women. At the same time, intersectionality suggests overcoming them by focusing more on learning from unique experiences and introducing more innovative policies.

Reference List

Ang, I. 1995. “I am a feminist but…: “other” women and postnational feminism’, in Caine, B., and Pringle, R. (eds) Transitions: New Australian feminisms. Allen and Unwin: St Leonards, pp. 57-73.

Blue, V. J. 2020. ‘What we know about the death of George Floyd in Minneapolis’.The New York Times.

Crenshaw, K. 1991. ‘Mapping the margins: intersectionality, identity politics, and violence against women of color’, Stanford Law Review, 6, pp. 1241-1299.

Crenshaw, K. 2016. ‘On intersectionality.’ Keynote, WOW – Women of the World Festival, 2016, Southbank Center, London, UK.

Gill, A. K., and Brah, A. 2014. ‘Interrogating cultural narratives about ‘honour’-based violence’, European Journal of Women’s Studies, 2(1), pp. 72-86.

Lykke, N. 2006 ‘Intersectionality – a useful concept for feminist theory?’, in. Pavlidou, T.- S. (ed.)Gender studies. Trends/tensions in Greece and other European countries. Thessanoliki: Zitis, pp. 151-160.

Click Here To Order Now!