Rubin 1

Sarah Rubin

Dr. Judd

GWSS 300

24 January 2016

The Case for Representational Intersectionality

Intersectionality is critical to feminism in both theory and praxis, but it does not

always fully make the transition from word to deed – in other words, intersectionality is a

term that is thrown around in certain academic feminist circles, but rarely do these groups

pay sufficient attention to how it can actually be implemented through concrete action.

White feminists dominate the mainstream dialogue, trans-exclusionary “rad-fems” actively

seek to exclude trans women from the very movement they helped create (while many cis

women do the same, though perhaps less overtly), and feminist events remain largely

inaccessible for people with disabilities. Clearly, feminism on a broader scale in the U.S. has

a long way to go before it can be considered intersectional. Kimberle Crenshaw breaks

intersectionality into three categories: structural intersectionality, political

intersectionality, and representational intersectionality. Using this framework, the absence

of intersectionality in mainstream U.S. feminism can be more constructively addressed.

Though ideally the focus would be on all three of these elements simultaneously, resources

are always limited. Which element should be used first as a tool to address the current

state of crisis for multiply marginalized people in the U.S.? In this essay, I will argue that

representational intersectionality would be the most effective place at which to start.

In her article “Mapping the Margins: Intersectionality, Identity Politics, and Violence

Against Women of Color,” Crenshaw explores the differences between structural, political,
 Rubin 2

and representational intersectionality. To view intersectionality through a structural lens is

to acknowledge that the experiences of women of color are fundamentally different than

those of white women (and of men of color) due to their “location […] at the intersection of

race and gender” (1245). Political intersectionality involves taking a critical look at “how

both feminist and antiracist politics have, paradoxically, often helped to marginalize the

issue of violence against women of color” (1245). Representational intersectionality deals

with the ways in which women of color are perceived both by themselves and by society,

and how those perceptions are shaped by culture. While each of these elements is critical

for a fully intersectional approach to feminism, they have their limitations when viewed in

isolation. Change on a political level cannot reach fruition without some measure of societal

support, though privilege plays a large role in determining whose concerns are taken into

consideration during the formation of public policies and political agendas. If we focus

solely on intersectionality in the political sense, we risk ending up with a gap between de

jure progress and de facto progress. For example, a lack of understanding in regards to

structural intersectionality led many people to believe the fight for LGBTQ+ rights ended

with the Obergefell v. Hodges ruling in 2015; meanwhile, trans women of color continue to

be murdered in disproportionate numbers each week. Starting with structural

intersectionality, however, comes with its own problems. If we address structural issues in

isolation, we risk simply treating the symptoms of a larger problem without necessarily

changing things at the root level. Increasing services for domestic violence and rape

survivors does not mean that harmful stereotypes and stigmas will disappear as a barrier

preventing people from accessing those services. Starting with representational

 Rubin 3

intersectionality would aid in tackling the manifestations of oppression that are engrained

in our everyday interactions, our perceptions of others, and our concepts of self.

In her essay “Invisibility is an Unnatural Disaster: Reflections of an Asian American

Woman,” Mitsuye Yamada argues that minorities can contribute to their own stereotyping.

She describes how, while attempting to “practice passive resistance while being

stereotyped,” she inadvertently reinforced the racist stereotype of Asian American women

being passive and obedient (36). Yamada goes on to describe how such behaviors in

women and minorities are engrained from a very young age “through a long conditioning

process” that begins in childhood and continues throughout adulthood (37). In this way,

culture can perpetuate the invisibility of minority groups (and specifically women of color).

When people “have been trained not to expect a response in ways that mattered,” only

visible representations of successful resistance can alter that narrative (39).

Representational intersectionality could be an effective tool to address the lack of space for

Asian American women (and other marginalized groups) in the feminist movement.

Cultural values can be transmitted as strongly as genes from one generation to

another, and these values often inform our perceptions of ourselves. In “La Prieta,” Gloria E.

Anzaldúa is led to wonder: “Where did it begin, the pain, the images that haunt me?” (221).

Anzaldúa reflects on the ways in which her mother and grandmother taught her to be

ashamed of her dark skin, including religious dialogue that confirmed the relationship

between her lesser status and her appearance. She describes how we internalize the

labels/images that others project onto us, as she remembers how “in the eyes of others I

saw myself reflected as ‘strange,’ ‘abnormal,’ ‘QUEER.’ I saw no other reflection” (222).

Furthermore, Anzaldúa was exposed to racism in media representation quite literally at

 Rubin 4

age seven or eight when she read a western given to her by her father and all the Mexican

characters were villains, servants, or prostitutes (222). This tangible example of racism

serves to illustrate the importance of representative intersectionality; the images we take

in as children stay with us our entire lives.

As long as the mainstream feminist movement fails to center the voices of women of

color, it will be ineffective. Practicing intersectional feminism is the only way the

movement can hope to continue, and women like Kimberle Crenshaw have put forth

framework with which we can conceptualize the work that needs to be done in order for

this change to take place. By incorporating political, structural, and representational

intersectionality into feminist theory and practice, we can create a movement that

empowers, rather than contributes to the oppression of, the very people on whose backs it

was formed. While it is crucial to consider all three of Crenshaw’s categories of

intersectionality, the most urgent need lies in the realm of representational

intersectionality. Only when we make fundamental changes to the cultural values we instill

in our children, project onto others, and cultivate in ourselves, can we begin the work of

transforming the ways in which the feminist movement continues to fail marginalized

populations.
 Rubin 5

Works Cited

Crenshaw, Kimberle. "Mapping the Margins: Intersectionality, Identity Politics, and

Violence against Women of Color." Stanford Law Review 43.6 (1991): 1241. Web.

Moraga, Cherríe, and Gloria Anzaldúa. This bridge called my back: writings by radical women

of color. 2nd ed. New York: Kitchen Table, Women of Color Press, 1983. Print.