1 00:00:01,920 --> 00:00:07,200 Speaker 1: Welcome to brain Stuff production of iHeart Radio, Hey brain Stuff, 2 00:00:07,240 --> 00:00:12,880 Speaker 1: Lauren Vogelbaum. Here Before, relatively few people had ever heard 3 00:00:12,920 --> 00:00:16,079 Speaker 1: the word intersectionality, even though it was first coined in 4 00:00:16,800 --> 00:00:20,320 Speaker 1: nine as a legal term to describe intersecting areas of discrimination. 5 00:00:21,280 --> 00:00:26,600 Speaker 1: But today it's neither obscure nor uncontroversial. In some circles, 6 00:00:26,600 --> 00:00:30,480 Speaker 1: it's a politically polarizing buzzword. So how did this happen? 7 00:00:31,560 --> 00:00:35,200 Speaker 1: Let's start at the beginning. The term intersectionality was first 8 00:00:35,240 --> 00:00:38,880 Speaker 1: coined by Kimberly Crenshaw, a lawyer, law professor, and civil 9 00:00:38,920 --> 00:00:42,839 Speaker 1: rights activist. In nine she wrote an influential paper that 10 00:00:42,880 --> 00:00:46,920 Speaker 1: identified a glaring hole in anti discrimination law. The law 11 00:00:46,960 --> 00:00:51,120 Speaker 1: recognized categories such as racial discrimination and gender discrimination, but 12 00:00:51,240 --> 00:00:53,840 Speaker 1: was blind to the situations in which two or more 13 00:00:53,880 --> 00:00:57,960 Speaker 1: of those categories overlapped. Take the case of de graph 14 00:00:58,000 --> 00:01:01,160 Speaker 1: and Read versus General Motors, which Crenshaw cited in a 15 00:01:02,080 --> 00:01:04,559 Speaker 1: TED talk as an example of where the law fell 16 00:01:04,600 --> 00:01:08,440 Speaker 1: short of delivering justice. In this case, a black woman 17 00:01:08,520 --> 00:01:10,840 Speaker 1: named Emma degraffin Reed was denied a job at a 18 00:01:10,840 --> 00:01:14,240 Speaker 1: local car manufacturing plant, and she sued on the basis 19 00:01:14,240 --> 00:01:17,760 Speaker 1: of discrimination. The judge throughout the case, citing that the 20 00:01:17,760 --> 00:01:20,759 Speaker 1: plant had a record of hiring both black people and women, 21 00:01:21,080 --> 00:01:25,240 Speaker 1: so she had no grounds to sue. But Crenshaw argues 22 00:01:25,319 --> 00:01:28,919 Speaker 1: the judge missed the point. Yes the plant hired black people, 23 00:01:29,040 --> 00:01:32,200 Speaker 1: but those were all black men hired for industrial or 24 00:01:32,240 --> 00:01:36,240 Speaker 1: maintenance work. And yes the plant hired women, but those 25 00:01:36,280 --> 00:01:40,039 Speaker 1: were white women who worked as secretaries. But black women 26 00:01:40,200 --> 00:01:43,800 Speaker 1: didn't fit into either of those narrow hiring categories, so 27 00:01:43,840 --> 00:01:48,520 Speaker 1: they were effectively barred from employment at the plant. Since 28 00:01:48,560 --> 00:01:51,680 Speaker 1: there wasn't a word yet for this overlapping of identities 29 00:01:51,720 --> 00:01:56,280 Speaker 1: that combined to form new hybrid categories of discrimination, Crenshaw 30 00:01:56,320 --> 00:02:00,800 Speaker 1: invented one, and she called it intersectionality. We spoke with 31 00:02:00,840 --> 00:02:04,559 Speaker 1: Crenshaw and she said intersectionality was a prism to bring 32 00:02:04,600 --> 00:02:08,560 Speaker 1: to light dynamics withindiscrimination law that weren't being appreciated by 33 00:02:08,560 --> 00:02:12,120 Speaker 1: the courts. In particular, courts seemed to think that race 34 00:02:12,200 --> 00:02:15,359 Speaker 1: discrimination was what happened to all black people across gender 35 00:02:15,680 --> 00:02:18,799 Speaker 1: and sex discrimination was what happened to all women. And 36 00:02:18,960 --> 00:02:21,440 Speaker 1: if that is your framework, of course what happens to 37 00:02:21,480 --> 00:02:23,960 Speaker 1: black women and other women of color is going to 38 00:02:24,000 --> 00:02:29,320 Speaker 1: be difficult to see. So In its original sense, intersectionality 39 00:02:29,440 --> 00:02:32,800 Speaker 1: was a legal framework for seeing people whose identities and 40 00:02:32,840 --> 00:02:37,000 Speaker 1: lived experiences are more complex and who deserve equal treatment 41 00:02:37,080 --> 00:02:41,600 Speaker 1: under the law. Starting in the nineteen nineties, academics began 42 00:02:41,600 --> 00:02:46,480 Speaker 1: incorporating intersectionality theory into these social sciences. Up until that point, 43 00:02:46,680 --> 00:02:50,520 Speaker 1: there was a tendency to study the experiences of different racial, ethnic, 44 00:02:50,680 --> 00:02:55,120 Speaker 1: or religious groups as homogeneous blocks. We also spoke with 45 00:02:55,160 --> 00:02:58,320 Speaker 1: Mary Romero, a professor of Justice studies and social inquiry 46 00:02:58,360 --> 00:03:02,399 Speaker 1: at Arizona State University. She said the essentialist approach said 47 00:03:02,400 --> 00:03:05,680 Speaker 1: that all Latinos are like this, without considering that there 48 00:03:05,680 --> 00:03:09,919 Speaker 1: are all of these intersections of age, citizenship, sexuality, and disability, 49 00:03:10,240 --> 00:03:15,560 Speaker 1: so there's not a monolithic experience. By examining the specific 50 00:03:15,560 --> 00:03:20,359 Speaker 1: experiences of Latin X people who are lgbt Q, undocumented, rich, 51 00:03:20,480 --> 00:03:23,639 Speaker 1: and poor, social scientists came up with data that could 52 00:03:23,639 --> 00:03:27,639 Speaker 1: be used to inform important public policy decisions like immigration. 53 00:03:28,560 --> 00:03:31,560 Speaker 1: Romero said, if we're going to look at immigration policy 54 00:03:31,680 --> 00:03:33,720 Speaker 1: and see the ways in which it needs to be changed, 55 00:03:33,919 --> 00:03:37,120 Speaker 1: we have to take into consideration all the various conditions. 56 00:03:37,480 --> 00:03:40,160 Speaker 1: The argument would be, if you want to be inclusive 57 00:03:40,200 --> 00:03:42,960 Speaker 1: and you want to be just the policy has to 58 00:03:43,040 --> 00:03:47,680 Speaker 1: exist without privileging one group over another. Crenshaw may not 59 00:03:47,800 --> 00:03:51,360 Speaker 1: have invented the word intersectionality as a call for social justice, 60 00:03:51,800 --> 00:03:54,400 Speaker 1: but even she has come to see it that way. 61 00:03:54,600 --> 00:03:57,800 Speaker 1: In her TED talk, Crenshaw spoke about violence perpetrated against 62 00:03:57,840 --> 00:04:00,680 Speaker 1: black women and how this violence is often invisible in 63 00:04:00,720 --> 00:04:05,000 Speaker 1: the national discussion about implicit racial bias and policing. She 64 00:04:05,040 --> 00:04:08,440 Speaker 1: asked why Michael Brown and Tamua Rice were household names 65 00:04:08,720 --> 00:04:13,040 Speaker 1: but not Michelle Qusseau or Tanisha Anderson, two unarmed black 66 00:04:13,040 --> 00:04:18,760 Speaker 1: women also killed by police. Again, Crenshaw explained how intersectionality 67 00:04:18,800 --> 00:04:22,200 Speaker 1: provides a prism or frame in which to see people 68 00:04:22,320 --> 00:04:27,560 Speaker 1: whose experiences are often overlooked. She said, without frames that 69 00:04:27,600 --> 00:04:30,839 Speaker 1: allow us to see how social problems impact all the 70 00:04:30,839 --> 00:04:33,440 Speaker 1: members of a targeted group, many will fall through the 71 00:04:33,440 --> 00:04:37,000 Speaker 1: cracks of our movements, left to suffer in virtual isolation. 72 00:04:38,320 --> 00:04:41,039 Speaker 1: The idea of intersectionality has been taken up by a 73 00:04:41,040 --> 00:04:45,480 Speaker 1: lot of progressive organizations fighting for social equity and social justice. 74 00:04:45,880 --> 00:04:48,520 Speaker 1: There's a growing recognition that not all of the members 75 00:04:48,560 --> 00:04:51,720 Speaker 1: of an activist group fall into the same tidy categories 76 00:04:51,960 --> 00:04:55,440 Speaker 1: or share the same experiences in the world at y 77 00:04:55,560 --> 00:04:58,400 Speaker 1: W Boston, a community organization that grew out of one 78 00:04:58,440 --> 00:05:00,880 Speaker 1: of the nation's oldest chapters of y w c A, 79 00:05:01,600 --> 00:05:05,640 Speaker 1: they say that intersectionality is crucial to social equity work. 80 00:05:06,360 --> 00:05:10,239 Speaker 1: One post on their blog explains quote without an intersectional lens, 81 00:05:10,400 --> 00:05:13,440 Speaker 1: events and movements that aim to address injustice towards one 82 00:05:13,480 --> 00:05:17,279 Speaker 1: group may end up perpetuating systems of inequities toward other groups. 83 00:05:18,560 --> 00:05:21,920 Speaker 1: As an example, it's cited the seventeen Women's March, which 84 00:05:22,080 --> 00:05:24,839 Speaker 1: caught flak from transgender members of the movement because of 85 00:05:24,839 --> 00:05:28,839 Speaker 1: its vagina centric messaging. Some slogans chanted or written on 86 00:05:28,920 --> 00:05:33,279 Speaker 1: signs or t shirts or online focused on the vagina. Further, 87 00:05:33,520 --> 00:05:36,880 Speaker 1: some people both inside and outside of the march interpreted 88 00:05:36,920 --> 00:05:40,240 Speaker 1: the pink hats that many protesters war as representing female 89 00:05:40,320 --> 00:05:45,400 Speaker 1: outer genitalia. Y W Boston wrote, assuming that all women 90 00:05:45,440 --> 00:05:48,280 Speaker 1: have vaginas or are defined by their bodies is an 91 00:05:48,320 --> 00:05:52,320 Speaker 1: oversimplification that erases the experience of those who exist beyond 92 00:05:52,400 --> 00:05:55,960 Speaker 1: the gender binary. By avoiding language that assumes our own 93 00:05:55,960 --> 00:05:59,200 Speaker 1: experiences are baseline, we can open ourselves up to listening 94 00:05:59,240 --> 00:06:03,240 Speaker 1: to others points of view. The embrace of intersectionality by 95 00:06:03,240 --> 00:06:05,800 Speaker 1: the left has led to a backlash on the right. 96 00:06:06,440 --> 00:06:08,800 Speaker 1: Critics of intersectionality don't see it as a way of 97 00:06:08,839 --> 00:06:13,440 Speaker 1: including or seeing a broader diversity of experiences, but as 98 00:06:13,480 --> 00:06:17,960 Speaker 1: a type of political correctness on steroids. As conservative pundits 99 00:06:18,000 --> 00:06:21,520 Speaker 1: like Ben Shapiro see it, The goal of intersectionality is 100 00:06:21,560 --> 00:06:23,800 Speaker 1: to pit people against each other in a kind of 101 00:06:23,880 --> 00:06:28,720 Speaker 1: oppression olympics. He said in a video. Intersectionality is a 102 00:06:28,760 --> 00:06:31,440 Speaker 1: form of identity politics in which the value of your 103 00:06:31,440 --> 00:06:34,640 Speaker 1: opinion depends on how many victim groups you belong to. 104 00:06:35,240 --> 00:06:37,200 Speaker 1: At the bottom of the totem pole is the person 105 00:06:37,360 --> 00:06:40,680 Speaker 1: everybody loves to hate, the straight white male. The more 106 00:06:40,720 --> 00:06:43,960 Speaker 1: memberships you can claim and oppressed groups, the more aggrieved 107 00:06:44,000 --> 00:06:48,760 Speaker 1: you are, and the higher you rank. Conservative writer Andrew 108 00:06:48,760 --> 00:06:53,440 Speaker 1: Sullivan called intersectionality a new religion imposed on liberal college campuses. 109 00:06:54,240 --> 00:06:58,279 Speaker 1: He wrote, intersectionalities version of original sin is the power 110 00:06:58,360 --> 00:07:01,760 Speaker 1: of some identity groups over others. To overcome this sin, 111 00:07:01,960 --> 00:07:05,039 Speaker 1: you first need to confess i e. Check your privilege, 112 00:07:05,360 --> 00:07:07,760 Speaker 1: and subsequently live your life and order your thoughts in 113 00:07:07,760 --> 00:07:11,160 Speaker 1: a way that keeps the sin at bay. He says 114 00:07:11,200 --> 00:07:13,880 Speaker 1: that the result of this is that anyone not sufficiently 115 00:07:14,080 --> 00:07:20,680 Speaker 1: quote woke is shunned and their voice silenced. Romero at 116 00:07:20,720 --> 00:07:24,440 Speaker 1: Arizona State says that both campus activists and their critics 117 00:07:24,560 --> 00:07:28,080 Speaker 1: often missed the point of intersectionality. Romero says that she's 118 00:07:28,160 --> 00:07:31,200 Speaker 1: definitely had students who misuse it as a way of 119 00:07:31,240 --> 00:07:36,400 Speaker 1: separating the oppressed from the oppressors. Romero said, I've always 120 00:07:36,480 --> 00:07:39,360 Speaker 1: corrected them by using myself as an example. There are 121 00:07:39,400 --> 00:07:42,120 Speaker 1: times when I'm disadvantaged and other times when i have 122 00:07:42,200 --> 00:07:45,520 Speaker 1: advantages over other people. It's very rare to find somebody 123 00:07:45,520 --> 00:07:51,040 Speaker 1: who has absolutely no advantages in any situation. Romero explains 124 00:07:51,080 --> 00:07:54,640 Speaker 1: that the target of intersectionality shouldn't be an individual person, 125 00:07:55,040 --> 00:07:58,480 Speaker 1: but the structure in which that individual lives, works, or studies. 126 00:07:59,080 --> 00:08:02,000 Speaker 1: Is the structure designed to allow only one type of 127 00:08:02,040 --> 00:08:05,320 Speaker 1: person to succeed or does it give everyone equal access? 128 00:08:06,600 --> 00:08:09,760 Speaker 1: Seen that way, even the straight white male, who Shapiro 129 00:08:09,840 --> 00:08:13,600 Speaker 1: says is vilified benefits from some of those intersectional policies. 130 00:08:14,200 --> 00:08:16,760 Speaker 1: For example, a straight white male who comes from a 131 00:08:16,760 --> 00:08:19,840 Speaker 1: low income family, or one who has a learning disability 132 00:08:20,120 --> 00:08:22,840 Speaker 1: or a disorder like a d h D or PTSD. 133 00:08:24,680 --> 00:08:29,000 Speaker 1: Romero said, what's the white male's age, their class, their citizenship? 134 00:08:29,560 --> 00:08:32,400 Speaker 1: As we get older. For example, we have certain structural 135 00:08:32,440 --> 00:08:37,160 Speaker 1: disadvantages that we share with people who are disabled. In 136 00:08:37,360 --> 00:08:40,360 Speaker 1: the most just and equitable version of our world, we 137 00:08:40,440 --> 00:08:43,080 Speaker 1: all hope that there would be policies and institutions in 138 00:08:43,160 --> 00:08:46,560 Speaker 1: place that see us in the various circumstances of our 139 00:08:46,640 --> 00:08:50,000 Speaker 1: lives and give us all a fair crack at life, liberty, 140 00:08:50,120 --> 00:08:57,960 Speaker 1: and the pursuit of happiness. Today's episode was written by 141 00:08:58,000 --> 00:09:00,319 Speaker 1: Dave Ruse and produced by Tyler klang Or. More on 142 00:09:00,400 --> 00:09:02,240 Speaker 1: this and lots of other topics, visit how stuff works 143 00:09:02,280 --> 00:09:04,800 Speaker 1: dot com. Brain Stuff is production of I Heart Radio. 144 00:09:05,000 --> 00:09:07,760 Speaker 1: For more podcasts my heart Radio, visit the iHeart Radio app, 145 00:09:07,800 --> 00:09:10,520 Speaker 1: Apple Podcasts, or wherever you listen to your favorite shows.