Sometimes one knows
that an idea has finally made it into the public consciousness only
when newspaper articles appear and attack it. For me, after years of
slogging away in silence, the sudden fuss about intersectionality is
itself rewarding. But though it is now visible, it is still poorly
understood, and it's a shame to see so many smart people floundering
over it. It's also a shame to see it being treated as antithetical to
solidarity, when in fact they are mutually supportive concepts.
Perhaps the mos bizarre
part of the debate has been the argument that use of the term
intersectionality is inherently problematic because it excludes the
uneducated. The very fact that this debate is going on means it can
hardly continue to be considered obscure. Furthermore, much of said
debate is being conducted across a vast international network of
computers which would seem to offer the option of just going and
looking it up. It's pretty insulting for any of us to suggest our
readers aren't capable of doing so. And whilst I'm not about to
suggest we all start writing like Judith Butler, she has a point when
she notes that sometimes we need to be precise about concepts. Not
everything can be effectively explained in words of under three
syllables.
I also find it bizarre
that intersectionality is supposed to be such a difficult concept to
grasp. I've now seen several people argue that people are being asked
to waste time trying to understand it when they could be devoting
themselves directly to The Struggle. That's like advising an army to
go to war without wasting time on training. Anti-intellectualism is
never pretty but in this case t borders on the ridiculous. The public
is now largely familiar with the concept of people potentially being
members of stigmatised groups. The average person understands that
some people have a harder time in life because they're female or
because they have dark skin. Is it so tricky to grasp that a woman
might be black or that a gay man might be disabled? Is it so hard to
understand that we all have advantages and disadvantages, and that
these might sometimes compound each other? The angst about privilege
obscures the real point – that if you're not a dick to people, and
if you apologise when you upset someone unnecessarily, you'll get along
just fine. Want to avoid causing accidental upset in the first place?
Then, as journalists should know, there's this thing called research.
It's particularly
ironic that the most recent fuss should have kicked off over trans
issues because this is actually one of the easier areas in which to
get it right. My charity, Trans Media Watch, is always ready to give
free advice and support in this area. We have lots of resources for
journalists on our website. We don't expect the people who come to us
to understand everything at the outset and we don't get offended if
people use clumsy language in their approaches to us. Whilst there
are naturally disagreements about things like language between
different trans individuals, we can let you know what the majority
think and where there are areas of sensitivity. We're not saying that
working with us is proof against getting shouted at – there's
always someone on the internet looking for a fight – but most
people will cut you some slack if they know you've made an effort.
Among other things, we
can advise on how trans issues intersect with other areas – for
instance, what it might mean to be trans and elderly or trans and a
Muslim. These are not trivial issues, not silly little details
getting in the way of some greater agenda. They can each bring up
specific problems that limit people's ability to participate in wider
society – and, if they are so inclined, to participate in political
activism.
As a disabled person, I
find myself at the sharp end of this quite a lot. I've often been
excluded from political events simply because I haven't been able to
access the venues where they've been held. When there are a limited
number of venues for lgbt people in my home city of Glasgow, it
matters that I can't get into most of them. I can't be part of a
wider movement if it's shutting me out and this – often in subtler
ways – is what happens to a lot of people with intersectional
issues. Faced with this, it’s pretty frustrating for us to see
ourselves treated as the butt of jokes – examples of Political
Correctness Gone Mad – first by the right wing press and now by the
left. This crops up everywhere from hiring decisions to health
service access to safety discussions around 'non-lethal' weapons. We
are treated as if, because there are fewer of us, our rights don't
matter. The irony is, of course, that whilst there might be fewer of
us in any one group, together we constitute the majority of the
population.
If we are the majority,
we are asked, why do we need special treatment? The answer is that
rather than crafting rules with multiple exceptions we need to be
better at creating simple rules in the first place – a good rule
will take into account people's varied needs. Much of it simply comes
down to respect and good manners, and to asking people when we're not
sure about things – but there is an underlying responsibility and
that is the responsibility to be aware of the diversity of human
experience. To not simply assume that one's own experience can be
extrapolated to everybody else. To apply a little sensitivity – not
just for the sake of trying to look good, but for the sake of
becoming better at social interaction.
What works for the
individual works for the movement. When we talk about solidarity and
the importance of togetherness, we need to understand what that
togetherness means. Feminists have complained for a long time about
approaches to inclusion that expect women to behave just like men –
approaches that take no account of the differing issues they are
likely to have to deal with in life. Such approaches end up excluding
women and the movements that use them thereby end up missing out on
the talents individual women might contribute, as well as the
perspective their shared difference of experience might bring. This
weakens those movements. An inclusive movement – one that
acknowledges and makes room for diversity – is a stronger movement.
This is real togetherness.
It is time for people
to realise that there need be no conflict between recognition of
social minority issues and of class issues, between fighting or
social change and upholding liberal values. The belief that such a
conflict is necessary has been a gift to the traditionalist right. It
is not giving due consideration to intersectionality that divides us
– it is getting into petty arguments over it. The way to avoid this
is not to shut down minority voices but to listen, learn, and move
on. To respect that those voices matter, that they are part of us. To
show solidarity.
