If Your Feminism Ain’t Intersectional, I Don’t Wanna Talk
With all of the instances of protests occurring nationwide, I can’t help but observe how much progress is still to be made in the United States in the context of feminism and women’s rights.
There is no doubt that the immeasurable number of people who participated in the Women’s March on Washington, held earlier this year, was an inspirational act of rebellion against the implementation of the 45th Administration. In the name of ‘womanhood’ (whatever that means), women across the country congregated; but why have little to no protests of this magnitude occurred in the name of womanhood that is not strictly heterosexual, white middle-class?
When protests in the name of the trans-women of color needed a voice, where were these crowds of people? When BlackLivesMatter protests, rallying against the state-sanctioned murders of unarmed Black individuals, were happening, why did this version of peaceful congregation attract violence and arrests by law-enforcement, despite the crowds consisting of fewer numbers than the Women’s Marches and behaving just as peacefully?
While these are just two instances, I believe that these protests centering around people of color and non-conventional gender identities do not gain as much traction simply because they are not prioritized in the mainstream feminism that attracted such numbers for the Women’s March. The problems faced by women of color that are not also faced by white women are either ignored or dismissed, and in order to work towards productive change in our society, conversations about these issues with the women that face them must happen.
Centering a movement claiming to liberate all around only a particular group is not only hypocritical, but it is a disservice to those it claims to advocate for. No one should have to sacrifice parts of their identity in order to be accepted by the feminist movement — that is not what feminism is about. The fact that many have to specify that they are intersectional or inclusive is redundant; feminism should always be inclusive and intersectional — otherwise it is not feminism, but a movement with an agenda prioritizing a particular group of people.
While I am not trying to deny the Women’s March’s achievement in raising awareness about the unknown fate of women’s rights under the 45th administration, I do want women to push beyond a feminism that only benefits them and women who look and behave like them. bell hooks in “The Imperialism of Patriarchy” from Ain’t I a Woman: Black Women and Feminism points out this need for acknowledging non-white issues. The Women’s March was impressive, but just as hooks details, “there was little discussion of the impact of sexism on the social status of black women” (87). Despite the importance of women coming together and fighting against oppressive systems, oversimplifying issues in order to achieve success in abolishing these systems may seem tempting, but success achieved at the expense of someone else’s identity is no success at all. Malcolm X, one of the most iconic figure of the black power movement, has said in a speech given at a funeral of a victim of state-sanctioned violence:
“The most disrespected person in America is the black woman. The most unprotected person in American is the black woman. The most neglected person in American is the black woman.”
Although hooks might disagree with some of Malcolm X’s opinions, what he says above in quotes can be argued as true, even in contemporary times. The evident disparity in amount of support between movements for the lives of people of color (in this case, black lives) and movements such as the Women’s March, where gender is the unifying quality over other aspects of identity is very much disappointing. The issue of this oversimplification is discussed in Chandra Talpade Mohanty’s “Sisterhood, Coalition, and the Politics of Experience” from Feminism Without Borders. Mohanty analyzes the “problematic” opinions of Robin Morgan about universal sisterhood, which consists of her making “assumptions about women as a cross-culturally, singular, homogeneous group with the same interests, perspectives, and goals and similar experiences (110). Mohanty further elaborates on Morgan’s problematic viewpoints, iterating that her “particular notion of universal sisterhood seems predicated on the erasure of the history and the effects of contemporary imperialism” (110–111).
Both hooks and Mohanty emphasize the importance of acknowledging each individual’s unique experience; by choosing to erase these differing experiences, one is choosing to perpetuate and contribute to the oppression of non-conventional identities. The Women’s March was amazing, but it is simply a starting point in the direction where feminism needs to go. Conversations that prioritize the needs of heterosexual, white middle-class women will not produce effective change for every woman — and heterosexual, white middle-class women must unlearn the threat they feel once the conversation no longer prioritizes them.
