We Can Only Help You If You Speak English and Promise to Assimilate
Feminism That Ignores Structural Intersectionality
Have you ever been in a position where you lacked the resources or knowledge for a job, healthcare, housing, or even just to get the help that you need? Have you ever been deemed “unqualified” because of something that you could not control or was forced upon you? Surprisingly, some forms of feminism, that aim to help, exclude and turn away groups of people because they do not fit the “criteria” to get help or assistance. Those forms of feminism that are exclusive have failed to understand and incorporate structural intersectionality in their practices. If not properly addressed, feminism has the ability to become a system of power and oppression, even if it aims to “help” others.
If someone tells you that you can only identify with either your race, gender, nationality, religion..etc which category would you choose? For most individuals, this decision is not easy and it should not be a decision any individual should ever have to make in their life. The idea of having a fluid identity built from categories (such as race, gender, sex, nationality, language, religion…etc) and having all of them mesh together, without clear cut margins and divisions is the idea of intersectionality. In addition, intersectionality is driven by the oppression of these categories. An individual’s experience of each category is unique and must not be silenced in any way in attempts to focus solely on another category. One must also acknowledge that these same analytical categories are not sufficient in describing or labeling individuals which is why these categories create inequality. In the case of domestic violence, women of color walk the line between having to choose their race over their own safety as a woman. In addition, their class also affects the resources and knowledge about those resources that can help them. Quite often, women of color do not report domestic violence because they do not want to draw attention to the stereotype of being a “battered woman” and also in order to keep their private lives private so that it is not subject to public ridicule. White women also refrain from seeking help because they have been conditioned to think that their race and class cannot have the “battered woman” and that they weren’t supposed to be it. Having to worry about a stereotype that was constructed by those in power to oppress others instead of seeking protection is something that has been ingrained in those same individuals who are marginalized by stereotypes and categories. No one should turn away part of their identity just because the other part is deemed more “important” or a “greater” issue.
In her article Mapping the Margins, Kimberle Crenshaw discusses a situation where a Latina woman and her teenage son were in dire need of shelter because her husband was physically abusing them. Even when she stated her critical condition she was turned away from shelters because she was not English-proficient. The shelter’s justification was that the woman would feel “isolated” and could not attend a support group “properly”.
“The point is not that the shelter’s image of empowerment was empty, but rather that it was imposed without regard to the disempowering consequences for women who didn’t match the kind of client the shelter’s administration imaged.” — Kimberle Crenshaw
Essentially, the shelter itself constructed its own criteria of who is allowed to stay and who is not. The administrations imposed their standards which were insensitive to the structural intersectionality of women who are seeking help in order to get out of dangerous environments. The feminist thinking behind the support group was essentially useless if the shelter could not include everyone and was not accessible to those with different languages. Ignoring intersectionality is where organizations such as those for domestic abuse enter the slippery slope of either being inclusive or exclusive. Many times white feminist organizations will only help if you fit their mold. They will rarely if not ever take into account your beliefs. You have to conform to their beliefs, their language, their culture or else you do not get any help or acknowledgement. Furthermore, those in charge of feminist movements also have the power to determine what aspect of intersectionality they want to include in their mission statement. Therefore, they have the ability to decide whether one category is more important than another. Feminism that ignores intersectionality entirely is the most dangerous feminism there is because it hides behind the curtain of acceptance yet it is ultimately another power structure which imposes standards on women and men.
You may have heard white and non-white people say “let’s not make it a race thing…” but they themselves are perpetuating racial hegemony in ignoring the fact that race has an equal part in someone’s experience, especially if you are not white. One cannot simply ignore an analytical category such as race because they will risk being anti-categorical which is essentially trying to solve the problem by ignoring it. This simply does not work. In order to better understand individuals and their unique experiences, feminism needs to first understand how insufficient analytical categories are in order to avoid essentializing someone’s life. In doing so we can finally move forward with building a feminism that incorporates the many nuances of intersectionality and ultimately address inequality properly.
