Privileging Oppression: Contradictions in Intersectional Politics

Abstract

Background and Introduction Race, class, gender, sexuality, sexual orientation, physical ability, native language, immigration status and more make up the complex mosaic that is identity politics in the United States. In the social sciences, differentiation is the term used to signal that differences exist. These differences are often identified, experienced, and quantified. They also serve as markers of separation that become convenient labels or constituents in larger social structures. Identity politics is what happens when differentiation is privileged. Related to this, stratification is that delicate, yet sometimes impenetrable, process of morphing difference into hierarchy--not simply allowing gender differences to exist, for example, but insisting that men are better than women, and in terms of sexual identity, that heterosexual is better than bisexual, or when looking at racial existence, that White is better than Latina/o. When identity politics and stratification merge, intersectionality is present and social identities become magnified, adding to the complexity. How have social scientists documented and analyzed the presence of coexisting social identities? This paper explores sociological investigations on role strain and its relationship to feminist definitions of intersectionality. Coexisting social identities have been used to forward understandings of how complexity appears in our lives. Though the proliferation of roles and identities accentuates possibilities, viewing these through the lens of multiple oppressions also contributes to a need for changing the overall social structure. In addition, this paper draws upon the intersectional imagination (Pastrana, 2006), a term used to describe the analytic process that occurs when examining individual- and group-level oppressions based on identity. Starting with an understanding that individuals and groups are more than the sum of their parts, that each individual characteristic or constituent has the capacity to affect different outcomes, the intersectional imagination attempts to describe the ways that identities come together and are pulled apart. Ultimately, this paper asks: How do lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) leaders of color manage their personal intersectional politics and how does this affect or influence their work within the larger field of LGBT social movement organizing? Throughout this paper, the term "LGBT" is used to refer to lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender individuals, populations, and social movement organizing efforts. Though each of these groups has its own rich and vast history of organizing, this paper is concerned with efforts that conceptualize this population as a collective group. Further, "non-White" and "people of color" will be used interchangeably and will refer to people who do not readily identify as White. Research participants in this paper, for instance, include people who identify as Asian, Black, Latina/o, and Middle Eastern. Findings reveal that in placing their own racial identity at the center, research participants talked about how experiences of racism, homophobia, and discrimination within LGBT populations and within their own respective racial group affected their identities and their activism. Participants also talked about how their racial identities contributed to such things as increased visibility, ease of access to communities of color, and other such enabling effects. These forces also contributed to the formulation of newer and more innovative ways of doing the work of organizing and for realizing the links between coexisting identities and a call for social change. Literature Review There is much debate on the impact and function of intersectionality. Historically, the social sciences have all but celebrated the positive impact of coexisting identities. Borrowing from Georg Simmel's (1955) concept of "crosscutting social circles" that individuals navigate in their social interactions, Peter Blau and Joseph Schwartz, for instance, argue that "[c]rosscutting social differences put individuals at the intersection of a web of group affiliations that exert diverse and often counteracting pressures, weakening the hold any one group has on its members, widening the options of individuals, and increasing their freedom" (1984, p. …