Adding an adjective to your feminism is like putting super in front of your name, it shows you're not just 'ordinary' or mainstream. However the big difference being that super doesn't necessarily give you super powers, while adding an adjective can be a total game-changer. A popular and much used adjective for feminism is 'intersectionality'. But what does it actually mean when I write in my Insta bio that I'm an intersectional feminist?

The term intersectionality was first coined by Kimberlé Crenshaw in 1989. As a legal scholar she pointed out the unrecognised intersection and therewith oppression black women experienced in regards to racism (seen as oppressing black men) and sexism (seen as oppressing white women) within law. As their position was measured through these inequalities their specific location -and thus specific oppression- was ignored as it didn't took into account how these inequalities intersect and interrelate. So looking seperately at the ways racism and sexism were at play in the lives of black women couldn't identify how both systems oppressed and disadvantaged them.

The importance of looking at intersections

The concept of intersectionality isn't new as similar theories and ideas have surfaced many times before. Think for instance about Sojourner Truth and her famous speech 'Ain't I a Woman?' (1851). In this speech Truth points out how her position as a black woman is ignored within women's rights movements and showcases how their arguments are problematic as it relies on racist and gendered assumptions. For instance creating a specific notion of womanhood as the experience all women identify with, struggle with, will fight for and eventually will overcome. But surprise, surprise, this notion and generalisation of women as a monolithic group (read: based on a white, middle-class, Western identification and assumption that this identity is universally applicable and desirable) isn't something for everyone.

You can split intersectionality up in structural and political. Structural intersectionality focuses on how identities are formed and influences the way we see ourselves and others; while political intersectionality focuses on (political) inclusion and exclusion within society and how for instance the struggle to gain inclusion are handled. That's to say: most activist groups focuses their struggle on one axe (racism or sexism) and -if their demands are met- will start thinking about adding 'the rest'. Good example: the Suffragettes fought for the right to vote, but this right only included white women. Although this is a 0-1 for sexism, it reinforces racism and an assumed hierarchy which, you know, is VERY problematic.

Questioning your position

With intersectionality you can point out assumptions and different notions of oppression and privilege as it, on a methodological level, makes you ask 'the other question'. This idea of 'asking the other question' -put forward by Mari Matsuda in Beside My Sister, Facing the Enemy (1991)- further opens up Crenshaw's concept of intersectionality from gender and race to sexuality, class, enthnicity, religion and so on. Asking the other question isn't however the first step to undertake, as it's important before you start firing question after question, to point out where 'you' are. This ties in with Politics of Location, named by Adrienne Rich in 1984, which makes you critically (re)think about the position from which you speak.

Politics of Location thus is meant to make you conscious of your position, how this influences the knowledge you produce and makes you accountable for your knowledge production. This concept is once again not something new and can mainly be situated within black feminism. There are also other similar concepts such as Standpoint Theory by Sandra Harding or Donna Haraway's Situated Knowledge, but Politics of Location is generally referenced in this situation. Even though it comes with its problems: 1) it suggests that your 'location' is a fixed identity while in actuality it can change and be pluralistic and even contradictory and 2) it also suggests that by writing in your Insta bio you're a white, Western, heterosexual, atheist and female who loves chocolate, gains you the right to just blatantly write backhanded 'Feminist' captions that reinforces racism underneath a picture of your breakfast as you've claimed your position. Which, just to be clear, doesn't give you this right.


So by writing I'm an intersectional feminist in my Insta bio I say I'm...

• ...aware of the different axes (gender, race, sexuality, class, ethnicity, religion etc.) and how they intersect and interrelate;
• how these intersections define and influences specific notions of oppression and privilege (disclaimer: not in a 1+1=2 or 2-1=1 kinda way);
• which makes me -when dealing with, analysing or wanting to come into action- ask the other question: how do the different axes influence this subject and the way I'm handling it?;
• and what my position is when asking those questions.

It's not exactly the same as wearing a cape and dramatically standing on top of a building overlooking the city, but adding an adjective like intersectionality (and naturally act upon it) you at least -in my eyes- deserve a badge of honour. Or a badge that says 'I try to reduce worldsuck, please send help'.

Would you define yourself as an intersectional feminist? Let me know in the comments below!