Patricia Hill Collins and Sirma Bilge argue in their book, Intersectionality (Key Concepts), that though there are “varied and sometimes contradictory answers” to “What is intersectionality?,” “[m]ost would probably accept the following description”: 1/
2/ "Intersectionality is a way of understanding and analyzing the complexity in the world, in people, and in human experiences. The events and conditions of social and political life and the self can seldom be understood as shaped by one factor. They are generally shaped by many
3/ "factors in diverse and mutually influencing ways. When it comes to social inequality, people’s lives and the organization of power in a given society are better understood as being shaped not by a single axis of social division, be it race or gender or class, but by many axes
4/ "that work together and influence each other. Intersectionality as an analytic tool gives people better access to the complexity of the world and of themselves." (p. 2)
To be clear, intersectionality is and was constructed in opposition to additive models.
To be clear, intersectionality is and was constructed in opposition to additive models.
5/ This is crystal clear throughout intersectionality scholarship (see, for example, Patricia Hill Collins, Black Feminist Thought, pp. 270, 292).
An intersection is in fact an intersection:
An intersection is in fact an intersection:
6/ "[I]ntersectionality references the critical insight that race, class, gender, sexuality, ethnicity, nation, ability, and age operate not as unitary, mutually exclusive entities, but rather as reciprocally constructing phenomena." (Collins)
7/7 And I apologize, but as soon as I hear reference to additive metaphors like "layers" or "double" and "triple" oppressions or the like, I tune out.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
