In any form of social activism, consideration of all unique identities and their related oppressions is required to ensure a holistic approach to justice. This is accomplished through studying injustice through an intersectional lens, which is a critical perspective developed by feminist sociologists Kimberlé Crenshaw and Patricia Hill Collins. Intersectional theory views oppression as a combination of different social factors, including racialization; this oppression then shapes unique, non-normative experiences for each racialized group, thereby warranting a methodology of justice that differs from avenues that would be considered useful by the mainstream. 

​

Feminism has long represented this granularity of oppression. However, if insufficient space is provided for racialized groups to speak of their own unique oppression, feminism risks emphasizing racist hegemonic ideals and exacerbating the present oppressions of its racialized members. It is therefore crucial that feminism adopts and maintains an intersectionally conscious approach to justice, understanding and accommodating the unique struggles and objectives of its racialized inner groups. 

​

Steckley defines intersectionality as the process in which social factors “combine to shape the negative experience of a minoritized group,” The degree of an individual’s oppression is directly related to the number of marginalized social identities they possess. An intersectional perspective also recognizes that the type of oppression experienced differs by identity, and is therefore unique to each individual. The case of feminism is emphasized: contrary to the assumptions held by early white liberal feminists, not all women experience gender-based oppression in the same way. Indigenous women, for instance, have greater difficulty obtaining city housing, making them more vulnerable to homelessness and abuse. An interlocking matrix of domination is used to reflect this layered nature of oppression, making it clear that oppression experienced by women is neither linear nor limited by gender. 

​

Patricia Hill Collins criticizes similar general assumptions in feminism, which she argues is in need of rethinking. Feminism, Collins states, echoes several racist, hegemonic assumptions, since it is a movement organized in the context of a society that is systematically oppressive of marginalized identities. Intersectional oppression is dismissed, and any existing oppressions faced uniquely by black women (or any other non-normative members) are exacerbated. In order to rethink feminism, Collins suggests a means of freeing one’s mind from hegemonic manipulation: analyzing black women’s experiences and oppressions instead of only those of normative groups. Only then can the intersectionality of women’s oppression become apparent and begin to inform holistic approaches in feminist activism. 

​

Intersectional oppression is intensified when performed systemically. Collins writes that hegemonic domination is a form of power that persists through its ability to manipulate the consciousnesses of social institutions, especially schools. Non-inclusive, and by extension, racist teachings are recycled into society’s understanding of social affairs, reaching into even social movements. Since mainstream white feminist movements historically derive from societal systems and institutions – and develop solutions from them – hegemonic, racist notions are perpetuated by their activism. Another consequence is the widespread assumption that all women experience gender-based oppression in the same way, which often leads mainstream feminists to encourage actions that are inaccessible or harmful to racialized women.

​

The knowledge of diverse cultural contexts and biographies are crucial to dismantling this cycle of oppression: black women’s oppression in the west is rooted in racist laws and perceptions; Indigenous women have experienced oppression through the imposition of patriarchal colonial traditions. Developing strictly general solutions necessitates the dismissal of unique forms of oppression, reducing activism to an extension of the hegemonic society it seeks to reconstruct. Collins emphasizes the need to diversify the concerns that shape feminist goals. Placing non-normalized voices at the center of feminist analysis, so that their historical contexts and intersectional oppressions are made apparent, will free feminism from the aforementioned consciousness manipulation. 

​

Constructing new knowledge is the second step in making mainstream feminism more intersectionally conscious. Cultural context is key again: racialized movements’ ideals are fundamentally developed in resistance to an oppressive society. Institutional transformation is also crucial to racialized activism and the rethinking of mainstream feminism, since racialized groups differ in pedagogical and value understandings. On all levels, generalizing feminist activism to represent the goals of all racialized women serves only to reproduce intersectional oppression; the solution is to allow racialized voices to speak of their own oppression, ideals, and activism, ensuring that feminist approaches to justice are holistic and intersectionality conscious. 

​

Intersectional awareness is a key to any social movement that aims to be holistic. In order to accurately and helpfully represent non-normalized members, an understanding of their unique identities and oppressions is necessary – particularly in the case of racialized individuals in feminism. The differences in oppressions, historical contexts, and identities warrant a route to justice that differs from that used by the normative mainstream; otherwise, feminism risks emphasizing racist ideals and exacerbating the present oppressions of its racialized members. Feminism must therefore adopt and maintain an intersectionally conscious approach to justice, ensuring that its methods represent the situations and concerns of all women.