Intersectionality is an analytical framework a term that was coined by Kimberlé Crenshaw (1989) in response to the need to expose how Black women, who accumulate the marginalization of being women and being Black, were invisible in politics and the legal sphere when dealing with gender and race in isolated categories. Intersectionality argues that experiences of discrimination cannot be understood from a single axis, for example, only treating it as sexism or racism. Building on this foundation, Patricia Hill Collins and Sirma Bilge (2021) expanded the concept into a comprehensive analytical framework. From this perspective, intersectionality goes beyond additive models, such as simply adding race and gender, and functions as a lens to analyze how the complexity of power relations shapes individuals’ lives in different ways. The theory posits that race, gender, sexuality, class, and others are correlated and interconnected, shaping experiences simultaneously and interrelatedly, not independently. These categories do not operate in isolation but merge into what they define as a “matrix of domination.” In this matrix, identity is not a sum of separate parts but a unique social position in which privilege and oppression coexist and shape each other.
The following sections detail the “matrix of domination” through practical examples of systemic inequality. This includes discussions on sensitive topics such as police surveillance, medical bias, and the specific vulnerabilities faced in sex work, including mentions of social stigma and physical violence.
Framing & Perspectives
For Collins and Bilge (2021), intersectionality is not a fixed definition and can be better understood through six central ideas:
- Social Inequality – Shifts the focus of analysis from the individual and their individual characteristics to the structures that produce inequalities in society.
E.g. When analyzing wage differences, look not only at individual career choices, but at how the system may historically devalue the work done by women or racialized people.
- Power – In addition to a hierarchy enforced by the government, there are four interconnected areas that shape people’s experiences. Here the “matrix of domination” comes into place and is formed by:
- Structural: The laws, economic policies, and institutions (schools, religion institutions) that organize oppression (e.g., discriminatory housing policies or unequal labor laws).
- Disciplinary: The bureaucracy and management that enforce these rules (e.g., police surveillance, or the bureaucratic management that acts as a “gatekeeper,” using administrative screenings to filter access to rights).
- Cultural: The ideas, symbols, and ideologies that manufacture “common sense” and justify inequalities (e.g., stereotypes in the media that criminalize specific groups).
- Interpersonal: The everyday interactions where prejudice is experienced and reinforced between people (e.g., a doctor dismissing pain due to implicit bias).
A wide view example of the “matrix of domination” can be seen in the following situation: For women in sex work, these domains merge: criminalization (structural) is enforced through police control (disciplinary), legitimized by the moral idea of the “fallen woman” (cultural), and felt in the contempt or direct violence of a client (interpersonal), laws, bureaucracy, media, and everyday relationships (e.g., a person faces not only legal barriers, but also stigmas and prejudices linked to culture and discrimination by peers).
- Relationality – This idea rejects the idea of separate identities (e.g., one cannot be just a woman or just black); the categories are interconnected and mutually shape individuals’ experiences.
- Social context – Intersectionality is always situated, meaning that the geographical location and time period in which one lives alter the dynamics of power (e.g., experiences of racism and immigration differ from a left-wing European country and the United States, but also shift historically within the same nation, as evidenced by the changing political climate from the Obama administration to the Trump era).
- Complexity – Social problems are complex, so simplistic explanations cannot be given (e.g., to understand the situation of a homeless person, it is necessary to look at issues of racism, mental health, housing, etc).
- Social justice – Intersectionality is not just a theoretical tool, but exists to foster practical action. Challenge the status quo and correct inequalities (e.g.,Create policies that acknowledge the barriers to resources faced by different populations and their unique needs, in order to provide vulnerable populations with fairer chances and access).
By adopting this multidimensional perspective, it is possible to advance the understanding of the interconnected reality of experiences.
Relevance
Intersectionality has a unique potential to unite research and practice. In a world where societies fail to protect the most vulnerable by treating discrimination in isolation, intersectionality emerges as a critical literacy tool necessary to decode these injustices and break power structures.
However, it is important to note that the term is often used only as a buzzword, which, on the one hand, has allowed for greater dissemination, but on the other hand, is used in a vacuous way, without really being used(Davis, 2008). Silma Bilge, co-author of the leading book on intersectionality as analysis and practice, warns of “Intersectionality Undone,” where the term is used by neoliberalism to depoliticize and empty it of meaning, using it only as institutional diversity management, focusing on the individual and removing the structural focus that should be used(Bilge, 2013). For example, a company might celebrate having a few diverse leaders to improve its brand, while still keeping low wages and poor conditions for most of its workers. By doing this, they use intersectionality to support the idea of meritocracy. This is the belief that success comes only from an individual’s talent and hard work, ignoring the fact that wealth and social class still give some people a huge head start. This follows a neoliberal logic: a way of thinking where making a profit is more important than achieving social justice.
Claiming intersectionality today also means resisting this neutralization of the term’s roots and, beyond recognizing multiple identities, we need to expose the existing “matrix of domination”. The greatest power of intersectionality is to disrupt dominant structures, provoke change, and cause unease. It serves as a tool to challenge the system and demand social justice, refusing to be reduced to nothing more than a slogan.
Keywords: Intersectionality, Matrix of Domination, Neoliberalism, Social Justice
Connected terms: Classical Feminisms, Waves of Classical Feminism, Acronym “LGBTQIAPN+”, AFAB/AMAB, Bodily Autonomy, Queer Theory, Xenophobia, Whitewashing, White Defensiveness ( Mechanisms),Body Liberation,
References
Bilge, S. (2013). INTERSECTIONALITY UNDONE: Saving Intersectionality from Feminist Intersectionality Studies1. Du Bois Review: Social Science Research on Race, 10(2), 405–424. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1742058X13000283
Collins, P. H., & Bilge, S. (2021). Interseccionalidade. Boitempo.
Crenshaw, K. (1989). Demarginalizing the intersection of race and sex: A Black feminist critique of antidiscrimination doctrine, feminist theory and antiracist politics. University of Chicago Legal Forum, 1989(1), 139–167.http://chicagounbound.uchicago.edu/uclf/vol1989/iss1/8
Davis, K. (2008). Intersectionality as buzzword: A sociology of science perspective on what makes a feminist theory successful. Feminist Theory, 9(1), 67–85. https://doi.org/10.1177/1464700108086364
