Social stratification, or the division of members of
societies, can occur in a variety of ways, but the most common means of
division is based on the identities of individuals (e.g. gender, ethnicity,
race, sexuality, occupation, religion, etc.).
Typically, when one thinks about social stratification the focus is on
one type of identity, but this is too simplistic and unrealistic. All individuals have multiple
identities. For example, I (the author)
am a woman, a daughter, a sister, a professor, etc. It is the combination of these identities and
their importance within society that dictates how an individual is
treated. In my case, I am treated
differently from a man because I am a woman, and our society favors men. I am also treated differently because of my
occupation as a professor versus if I were a waitress.
This trend was noted by Kimberle Crenshaw, who formally
identified what is known as intersection theory, which is the analysis
of the interplay of various types of identity often resulting in multiple
dimensions of disadvantage. In other
words, individuals who hold multiple minority (less powerful) statuses will be
treated more poorly and have greater social disadvantages as compared to those
who do not have any or as many minority statuses attached to their overall
identity. Crenshaw believed it was
important to acknowledge the effects of multiple identities, particularly among
women, because the disadvantages felt by one minority group (e.g. women) will
vary greatly within the group. She
pointed out that the disadvantages of white women will be different from those
of an African American, Hispanic, or Asian women because these individuals
would be more disadvantaged based on their status as women and racial/ethnic
minorities. Since Crenshaw’s initial
identification of intersection theory, cultural scholars have expanded the
definition to not just focus on the insectionality of women and their
identities but to any individual considered to have a minority status/identity.
But how exactly does intersection theory work? If we look at Crenshaw’s original idea,
intersection theory & gender, in American society we can find some
distinctive views about the gender roles of men and women. A simple web search on the topic turned up
that women are expected to want to marry to fulfill roles as wives and desire
to bear and raise children. Women are
expected to put the family’s welfare above their own self-interests. They are to be loving, compassionate, caring,
nurturing, sympathetic, and emotional. They
are also supposed to strive to well kempt and always strive to be beautiful as
a matter of attracting a male mate, to whom they must be submissive. Men, on the other hand, are expected to be
the “bread winner”, the financial provider.
Men are expected to be assertive, competitive, independent, courageous,
and career-focused. They should never be
emotional, and they should be the sexual aggressor, seeking the companionship
of a woman of their choosing.
But will all women (or men, for that matter) be expected to
fulfill these roles? Are there factors
that may affect how or the overall ability of women and men to fulfill these
roles? The correct answer is yes, there
are. As intersection theory states, it is
the combination of multiple identities that affects how a person is treated, so
an examination of an additional form of identity, race or ethnicity, in
addition to gender demonstrates this point by providing the following gender
stereotypes by race or ethnicity (again through a web search):
- White men: Breadwinners, Providers, Family Men
- White women: Domestic goddesses, mothers, homemakers
- Black men: Gangsters, Lazy vagrants, criminals
- Black women: Aunt Jemima, Crack Whore, welfare mothers, gold diggers
- Hispanic men: Greasers, Lazy, Latin Lovers, Drug Dealer/Bandito
- Hispanic women: Maids/Domestic Workers, Fiesty Latinas, Harlots
- Native American men: Medicine Men, Drunk, Violent or Noble Savage
- Native American women: Squaw, Princess
- Asian men: Gangsters, Nerds, Controlling, Powerful, Wise Man
- Asian women: Geishas, Submissive, Dragon lady
And careful analysis of these stereotypes demonstrates that
men, particularly minority men, are depicted as powerful in some way (e.g.
gangsters, drug dealers, leaders, aggressors), while women, particularly
minority women, are continually depicted in a more negative manner (as
submissive, dumb, sexually available).
 |
| Figure 1: US Bureau of Labor Statistic Salary Differences by Gender & Race/Ethnicity |
But how does intersection theory work in the real
world? Does it really matter? Studies on income disparities seem to suggest
that there is a correlation between holding multiple minority statuses and
feeling more social disadvantage. Income
earnings data from 2011 as collected by the Bureau of Labor Statistics
(division of the US Department of Labor) demonstrates that men, on average,
make more than women, even when men and women work in the same or similar
occupations. On average, women make 88%
as much as men’s weekly income. But this
income disparity situation gets worse when income differences are further
broken down by gender and race (Figure 1).
Women continually make less than men, but minority women make far less
than white women and even less than white men.
Overall, these data demonstrate that Whites and Asians, who
are associated with positive stereotypes, are economically advantaged as
compared to Blacks and Hispanics, who are associated with negative stereotypes,
and are economically disadvantaged. Many
may claim that this economic disparity is not surprising due to various factors
(e.g. level of education), but other sources report that even in cases where
minorities have professional degrees, they make far less than Whites and Asians
with professional degrees. Minorities
with professional degrees usually make a wage/salary similar to Whites & Asians
with bachelors or associates degrees and the same male/female economic
disparities exist.
In addition, NPR published an article on a study about African American female students being far more likely to ve suspended in school than their male counterparts and Caucasian females and males. You can read the article here. This is another example of intersection theory as applied to real life, further demonstrating the levels of discrimination and inequality felt by minorities.
Another way to think about intersection theory as a whole is to think of it in the following manner:
Imagine that it is a hot day, but due to social norms you still have to wear clothing. Some people get to wear very few pieces of clothing (e.g. shorts and a t shirt), whereas other people are required to wear multiple layers of clothing (e.g stockings, socks, pants, shirts, sweaters, etc.). Each layer of clothing that a person is required to wear is a different identity that someone has, be it voluntarily or involuntarily accepted identity. Because it is a hot day those with less clothing will be more comfortable than those forced to wear multiple layers of clothing, and those with fewer layers of clothing will have less difficulty accomplishing tasks, even simple tasks, than those who are wearing multiple layers of clothing. You can probably understand the difficulties faced by those who are forced to wear multiple layers of clothing versus those who are not, and that is exactly what happens in society on a daily basis in regards to their identities.
In addition, NPR published an article on a study about African American female students being far more likely to ve suspended in school than their male counterparts and Caucasian females and males. You can read the article here. This is another example of intersection theory as applied to real life, further demonstrating the levels of discrimination and inequality felt by minorities.
Another way to think about intersection theory as a whole is to think of it in the following manner:
Imagine that it is a hot day, but due to social norms you still have to wear clothing. Some people get to wear very few pieces of clothing (e.g. shorts and a t shirt), whereas other people are required to wear multiple layers of clothing (e.g stockings, socks, pants, shirts, sweaters, etc.). Each layer of clothing that a person is required to wear is a different identity that someone has, be it voluntarily or involuntarily accepted identity. Because it is a hot day those with less clothing will be more comfortable than those forced to wear multiple layers of clothing, and those with fewer layers of clothing will have less difficulty accomplishing tasks, even simple tasks, than those who are wearing multiple layers of clothing. You can probably understand the difficulties faced by those who are forced to wear multiple layers of clothing versus those who are not, and that is exactly what happens in society on a daily basis in regards to their identities.
In conclusion intersection theory is the study of different
layers of identity, specifically minority identities (including but not limited
to race, ethnicity, gender, class, sexuality, and religion), that when combined
perpetuate further oppression and discrimination. It is important to acknowledge the effects of
these multiple layers of identity since the combination of these minority
identities will cause more or less oppression and discrimination. We see the point of intersection theory in
income disparities among racial/ethnic and gender minorities, as well as with
racial and ethnic minorities and women (another minority group) on average
making less weekly income but ethnic/racial minority women making far less than
ethnic/racial minority men. Intersection
theory is a very real phenomenon and one that cannot and must not be ignored.
Works Cited
Sociology, John
Macionis, Prentice Hall, 13th edition.
