Theory of Intersectionality

Welcome to Sunday Morning Coffee! I trust you’re enjoying your Sunday morning with a favorite beverage and people you love or in blissful solitude. Whichever suits your soul today.

I was ‘chatting’ with one of my former students who is currently in a federal BOP facility, and we somehow got into a discussion of intersectionality. If you’re unfamiliar, the theory of intersectionality is a framework for understanding how different social identities, such as race, gender, sexuality, and class, intersect and interact with one another to shape an individual's experiences of privilege and oppression. It emphasizes the importance of considering multiple forms of identity and their unique impacts on individuals and communities. When Columbia Law School professor Kimberlé Crenshaw coined the term 30 years ago, it was a relatively obscure legal concept, but it’s gained a lot of traction recently, especially on college campuses, which is where I first learned about it. During my doctoral studies, we took a course called, simply, The College Student. Our professor was young, energetic, and into very passionate discussions. You really need to read Crenshaw’s original work. Today I’m going to talk about how our professor presented the theory, which may or may not be spot-on with Crenshaw’s version. I’m not claiming to be an expert, so hang with me.

The theory, as presented to our cohort, revolves around this idea that a person's various social and political identities combine to create different modes of oppression and privilege (or advantage/disadvantage). Examples of these factors include gender, gender identity, race, ethnicity, religion, disability, economic status, level of education, sexual orientation, physical appearance, etc…Being white is associated with privilege, non-white…oppression. Straight? Privilege. Other than straight? Oppression. Male? Privilege. Female? Oppression. In the U.S., Christian is associated with privilege, other than Christian with oppression. Middle class and above? Privilege. Living in poverty? Oppression. Educated? Privilege. High school drop out? Oppression. You get the picture.

So our professor pitched this thought to us that how you view yourself through the lens of these social identities can influence your life experience. He posited, for instance, that if you are a white gay man with a Ph.D. who is Jewish (which he was), then if you largely identify yourself as a white man with a Ph.D., if these are the traits that you use to introduce yourself to the world and center your daily life around and value as traits that will propel your career forward…your experience will be much different than if you focus on the fact that you’re gay and Jewish. He asked us if we thought the way we see ourselves through social constructs is as important, or perhaps more important, than how society itself sees us. He wasn’t talking about down-playing or hiding aspects of you that are associated with oppression or disadvantage, but rather that the lens through which you see yourself focuses on aspects of privilege or advantage.

I’m not going to get into a theoretical discussion about intersectionality, because I’m not that well-versed on it. But his question made me think. And boy, if he intended to get a rise out of our cohort, he was successful. Our doctoral cohort ran the gamut of gender, gender identity, race, nationality, sexual orientation, and economic status. The only thing we all absolutely had in common was education level. The conversations were heated and varied, and it was a hotbed of what higher ed is all about…provocative thought.

Here’s where I’m going with this today…my former student suggested that having a criminal history is definitely a social identity that would be associated with oppression. Hypothetically, let’s say that an individual comes from poverty, has no education or vocational training, is a person of color (if we want to keep stacking it up we could say a woman of color), and on top of all that has no familial support or social/professional network…what’s the outlook for them at reentry?

What if we can offer incarcerated individuals and returning citizens the opportunity to attain their high school diploma/equivalency and postsecondary degree and career skills with a credential, help them embark on a career with a sustainable living wage, provide a social and professional network, and encourage them to see themselves as talented, educated, and empowered? What would reentry and thereafter look like for them, in comparison to going through the world believing social constructs of oppression?

I realize it’s not that easy, but if we could change the way we view ourselves and push through teaching society to see traits such as lived experience as a social identity associated with privilege, wouldn’t that be a start in changing the world for better? Teaching others to believe in themselves as much as WE believe in them…that’s powerful stuff. And opening the doors of opportunity to add aspects of privilege/advantage to their situation could be life-changing.

The Theory of Intersectionality is more complex than this, and you really should study it in its original context and content. These were just thoughts that my former student and I were messaging about this week, and his views, some of which are reflected here, were really interesting to me, and as always, I immediately think, “how could this be helpful?” If nothing else, I think we should take away the fact that the more we learn, the more questions we ask, and the more provocative our thoughts can be, the more we move the needle in understanding each other and reaching epic levels of empathy and compassion. Not just for others, but also for ourselves. It’s uncomfortable sometimes, but without the discomfort of provocative questions, nothing changes.

Cheerio my friends. I hope you have a wonderful week. Go forth and change the world!