In a time with racism, far-right-parties and the ever so often correlating discriminating mindsets on the rise, fighting for everyone’s human rights and equality is again as important as it should ever be. Understanding the concept of intersectionality in this relation is an indispensable necessity for comprehending and ultimately dismantling reigning institutions of oppression such as sexism, racism or heteronormativity and so forth.
The precise term “intersectionality” itself was developed and coined by United States (US) civil rights activist, critical race theory scholar and professor of law KIMBERLÉ WILLIAMS CRENSHAW in her influential essay “Demarginalizing the Intersection of Race and Sex: A Black Feminist Critique of Antidiscrimination Doctrine, Feminist Theory and Antiracist Politics.” published in the year of 1989. She used the notion to describe the ways in which social identities overlap, and how that factors into distinct experiences of oppression of individuals since repressive institutions (e.g. racism, sexism, transphobia, xenophobia, classism, etc.) are interconnected as well and hence cannot be examined separately from one another.
CRENSHAW specifically introduced the term to describe the peculiar situation of African American women and how they usually uniquely suffer from both sexism and racism in multifaceted and intercorrelated ways. In the footnotes in her following work “Mapping the margins: Intersectionality, identity politics, and violence against women of color. “(1991) CRENSHAW states that her analysis of how the concepts of race and gender connect was an attempt to “suggest a methodology that will ultimately disrupt the tendencies to see [them] as exclusive or separable” (CRENSHAW 1991, p. 1244).
Table of Contents
1. Introduction
2. Defining Intersectionality
3. Brief Historical Outline of The Development of Intersectionality
4. Intersectionality and its context in CRENSHAW’s work (1989)
4.1. Case 1: DeGraffenreid v. General Motors (1976)
4.2. Case 2: Moore v. Hughes Helicopter, Inc. (1982)
4.3. Case 3: Payne v. Travenol Laboratories (1976)
5. Intersectionality in Modern Development
6. Conclusion
Objectives & Core Topics
The primary objective of this paper is to examine the development of the intersectionality concept, as coined by Kimberlé W. Crenshaw in 1989, and to analyze its modern relevance in understanding overlapping systems of oppression. The work investigates how the "single-axis framework" in legal and social discourse fails to address the unique experiences of Black women and explores the necessity of an intersectional approach for achieving social justice and human rights.
- The historical evolution of intersectional thought from early feminist movements to the present.
- A critical analysis of the "single-axis framework" within legal and antidiscrimination doctrine.
- In-depth examination of three foundational discrimination lawsuits analyzed by Crenshaw.
- The role of intersectionality as an analytical tool in contemporary human rights and social policy.
- Critiques of the original concept and modern advancements in intersectional theory.
Excerpt from the Book
4.1.Case 1: DeGraffenreid v. General Motors (1976):
In this first case CRENSHAW analyzed (conf. CRENSHAW 1989, pp. 141) five black women claimed that their employer, General Motors (GM), discriminated against black women by laying off employees on the basis of seniority during the 1970 recession. This was motivated because GM did not hire black women before the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and as a consequence all of the black women hired after 1970 lost their jobs. The court eventually ruled in favor of the defendant and stated that: “The plaintiffs have failed to cite any decisions which have stated that Black women are a special class to be protected from discrimination. The Court's own research has failed to disclose such a decision. […] Thus, this lawsuit must be examined to see if it states a cause of action for race discrimination, sex discrimination, or alternatively either, but not a combination of both.” (DEGRAFFENREID, 413 F Supp at 143, as in CRENSHAW 1989, p. 144.). In this verdict the refusal to recognize compound discrimination against black women becomes painfully obvious. Furthermore, it functions as an example of the “single-axis framework” that CRENSHAW pointed out, as the court viewed the plaintiffs’ sex and race as exclusive categories. This led to their sex discrimination claim being refused due to white women employment before 1964 which to the court made the seniority system seemingly non-sexist to women in “general”. One can clearly see a white normative sex discrimination perspective that obscured the distinctive discrimination the black women faced and ultimately lead to their claims being dismissed.
Summary of Chapters
1. Introduction: Outlines the rise of discriminatory mindsets and establishes the necessity of intersectionality as a tool to dismantle systems of oppression.
2. Defining Intersectionality: Defines intersectionality as a theoretical framework, analytical methodology, and social justice instrument that addresses layered social identities.
3. Brief Historical Outline of The Development of Intersectionality: Explores the historical context of intersectionality, highlighting the contributions and limitations of early feminist movements regarding Black women.
4. Intersectionality and its context in CRENSHAW’s work (1989): Analyzes Crenshaw’s critique of the "single-axis framework" through three legal discrimination cases.
4.1. Case 1: DeGraffenreid v. General Motors (1976): Discusses how the court failed to recognize the compound discrimination faced by Black women in a seniority-based layoff scenario.
4.2. Case 2: Moore v. Hughes Helicopter, Inc. (1982): Examines how the court dismissed discrimination claims by applying a rigid, single-axis focus on either race or sex, ignoring the intersectional reality.
4.3. Case 3: Payne v. Travenol Laboratories (1976): Reviews the court's refusal to allow Black women to represent the interests of all Black employees, further illustrating the failings of single-axis doctrine.
5. Intersectionality in Modern Development: Discusses the contemporary relevance of the concept and mentions academic criticisms regarding the "axis" terminology and the need for deconstructive measures.
6. Conclusion: Summarizes the importance of applying intersectional thought in human rights advocacy and educational institutions to counteract systemic discrimination.
Keywords
Intersectionality, Kimberlé Crenshaw, Black Feminism, Antidiscrimination, Single-axis framework, Social identities, Human rights, Oppression, Legal discourse, DeGraffenreid v. General Motors, Moore v. Hughes Helicopter, Payne v. Travenol Laboratories, Social justice, Privilege, Identity politics.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the primary focus of this work?
The paper explores the concept of intersectionality, detailing its origins in the work of Kimberlé Crenshaw and its critical importance in identifying and addressing the compounded forms of discrimination faced by individuals, particularly Black women.
What are the central themes discussed in the study?
The central themes include the historical development of feminist and anti-racist thought, the legal failure to address compound discrimination, and the evolution of intersectionality as both an academic theory and a practical analytical tool.
What is the core objective or research question?
The paper aims to show how Crenshaw's 1989 concept remains a vital, evolving tool for analyzing how multiple systems of oppression (like racism and sexism) overlap and how the legal system has historically obscured these realities.
What scientific or academic methods are applied?
The author employs a literature review and a retrospective case study analysis, examining three specific US legal cases to demonstrate the practical implications of the "single-axis framework" versus intersectional analysis.
What topics are covered in the main body?
The main body moves from theoretical definitions and historical background to a detailed examination of three specific court cases (DeGraffenreid, Moore, and Payne), concluding with a discussion of modern applications and critiques of the theory.
Which keywords best characterize this work?
Key terms include intersectionality, Kimberlé Crenshaw, Black feminism, antidiscrimination, legal discourse, and social justice.
How does the "single-axis framework" function according to the author?
The author describes it as a narrow legal and theoretical approach that treats categories like race and gender as mutually exclusive, which prevents the legal system from recognizing the unique discrimination experienced by Black women.
Why does the author critique the use of the term "axis" in the modern context?
The author notes that some critics argue the metaphor of "intersecting axes" might imply that systems of oppression are static, whereas they are actually dynamic and highly influenced by changing socio-historical contexts.
- Citar trabajo
- Melina Gerdtz (Autor), 2019, Demarginalizing the intersection. Intersectionality of race and gender, Múnich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/906841
