Intersectionality

Introduction

Intersectionality is both an analytical framework and a political methodology for understanding how multiple systems of oppression—including race, class, gender, sexuality, disability, and nation—interact, overlap, and co-constitute one another. Rather than treating these as separate, additive categories (race plus gender plus class), intersectionality examines how they are mutually constitutive, producing qualitatively distinct experiences of privilege and oppression that cannot be understood through single-axis frameworks.

The concept emerged from Black feminist theory and critical race legal scholarship in the 1980s-90s, though the insights it formalized have much longer histories in antiracist feminist organizing. Kimberlé Crenshaw coined the term “intersectionality” in her landmark 1989 legal article analyzing how antidiscrimination law failed Black women by treating race and gender as mutually exclusive categories. If you experienced discrimination as a Black woman, courts asked: was it because you’re Black or because you’re a woman? This forced choice erased the specific ways Black women experience discrimination that is simultaneously raced and gendered.

Intersectionality has become one of the most influential frameworks in contemporary critical theory, social movements, and activist organizing, though it has also generated significant controversy and misunderstanding. Critics on the right attack it as divisive “identity politics” that fragments solidarity. Some on the left worry it displaces class analysis and economic struggle. Yet intersectionality’s core insight remains crucial: systems of power are irreducibly multiple and mutually constitutive. Any analysis or politics that treats them as separate inevitably reproduces exclusions and fails to grasp how domination actually operates.

Key Figures

Related Thinkers:

• Kimberlé Crenshaw (1959-present) - Coined “intersectionality” (1989)
• Patricia Hill Collins (1948-present) - “Matrix of domination,” Black feminist thought
• Angela Davis (1944-present) - Race, class, gender interconnections
• bell hooks (1952-2021) - “White supremacist capitalist patriarchy”
• Combahee River Collective (1974-1980) - “Interlocking systems of oppression”

📖 Essential Reading: Kimberlé Crenshaw, “Mapping the Margins: Intersectionality, Identity Politics, and Violence against Women of Color,” Stanford Law Review 43, no. 6 (1991): 1241-1299

Historical Roots

19th Century Black Feminism

While Crenshaw coined the term, intersectional analysis has deep roots in Black women’s organizing and thought. Sojourner Truth’s famous 1851 “Ain’t I a Woman?” speech challenged both racist exclusion from humanity and sexist exclusion from womanhood. White feminists fought for “women’s” rights while tacitly meaning white women; abolitionists fought for “Black” rights while tacitly meaning Black men. Truth’s rhetorical question exposed how both movements erased Black women.

Anna Julia Cooper’s A Voice from the South (1892) articulated sophisticated intersectional analysis decades before the term existed. Cooper argued that Black women occupied a unique standpoint—experiencing both racism and sexism while being fully recognized by neither movement. This “double bind” provided critical perspective on interlocking oppressions invisible to those experiencing only one.

Ida B. Wells’s anti-lynching campaigns (1890s-1930s) revealed how racial and gender violence are inseparable. Lynching was justified through white supremacist myths of Black male sexual threat to white womanhood—simultaneously deploying racism, sexism, and sexual violence. Wells showed that combating lynching required analyzing race, gender, and sexuality together rather than separately.

The Combahee River Collective

The Combahee River Collective Statement (1977) provided foundational articulation of intersectional politics. This Black lesbian feminist collective argued that “the major systems of oppression are interlocking”—not separate structures but interconnected systems that must be fought simultaneously. They rejected the “ranking of oppressions” where different movements demand prioritization of their particular struggle.

The Collective emphasized their standpoint as Black lesbian feminists as politically generative. Being multiply marginalized wasn’t just accumulation of disadvantages but provided unique perspective on how power operates. “If Black women were free, it would mean that everyone else would have to be free since our freedom would necessitate the destruction of all the systems of oppression.”

This statement challenged both mainstream feminism (predominantly white, middle-class) and Black liberation movements (predominantly male-centered) to recognize interlocking oppressions. It established intersectionality’s political claim: the most marginalized perspectives are most valuable for understanding—and challenging—systems of domination.

Audre Lorde and the Master’s Tools

Audre Lorde’s essays (1970s-80s) powerfully articulated intersectional politics through poetry, personal narrative, and theory. Her famous 1979 essay “The Master’s Tools Will Never Dismantle the Master’s House” criticized white feminist conferences for excluding women of color and ignoring racism. Lorde argued that single-issue politics—feminism that ignores race, antiracism that ignores sexuality—ultimately serves power by fragmenting resistance.

Lorde emphasized difference as resource rather than threat. Rather than seeking homogeneous unity, movements should embrace differences to build coalitions that don’t require erasing specificity. This challenged both liberal inclusion (add marginalized people but don’t change frameworks) and certain radical unity politics (differences must be subordinated to revolutionary unity).

Patricia Hill Collins: Matrix of Domination

Patricia Hill Collins’s Black Feminist Thought (1990) systematized intersectional analysis through the concept of matrix of domination. Rather than discrete systems (racism, sexism, capitalism, heterosexism) that sometimes overlap, Collins described a unified matrix where all oppression is intersectional. Race, class, gender, and sexuality are “co-formative”—each is constructed through and with the others.

Collins distinguished three levels of oppression:

• Structural: how institutions systematically organize oppression (legal systems, labor markets, education)
• Disciplinary: how bureaucracies and organizations manage and surveil populations (prisons, social services, medicine)
• Hegemonic: how culture and ideology justify and naturalize oppression (representations, common sense, socialization)

This multilevel analysis showed intersectionality operates across scales, from individual experience through institutional practice to cultural hegemony. Fighting oppression requires engagement at all levels simultaneously.

Kimberlé Crenshaw: Legal Intersectionality

Kimberlé Crenshaw’s 1989 article “Demarginalizing the Intersection of Race and Sex” introduced “intersectionality” to legal scholarship. Analyzing employment discrimination cases, Crenshaw showed how antidiscrimination law’s single-axis framework failed Black women. Courts compared Black women to white women (on gender) or Black men (on race) but never recognized discrimination specific to Black women.

In DeGraffenreid v. General Motors (1976), Black women sued for discrimination. The court rejected the claim because GM did hire women (white women in secretarial roles) and did hire Black people (Black men in industrial roles). Black women’s claim—that they faced discrimination distinct from either white women or Black men—was ruled invalid. This exemplified how single-axis frameworks render certain experiences legally unintelligible.

Crenshaw distinguished three types of intersectionality:

• Structural intersectionality: how multiple systems shape lived experiences
• Political intersectionality: how political agendas marginalize multiply oppressed groups
• Representational intersectionality: how cultural representations erase intersectional subjects

Her 1991 follow-up article on violence against women of color showed how domestic violence interventions failed women of color through racially and class-biased assumptions. Shelters designed for white middle-class women; immigration concerns made undocumented women unable to report abuse; cultural stereotypes blamed communities of color for violence. Effective intervention requires intersectional analysis.

Key Concepts

Multiple Jeopardy vs. Intersectionality

Early frameworks spoke of “double jeopardy” (being Black and woman) or “triple jeopardy” (adding class or sexuality). This additive model—oppression as accumulation of separate burdens—is precisely what intersectionality rejects. Oppressions aren’t separate weights piled on; they interact, producing qualitatively distinct experiences.

A Black woman doesn’t experience racism (as Black men do) plus sexism (as white women do). She experiences something distinct—anti-Black misogyny, a specific form of oppression targeting Black women. Similarly, a queer working-class Latina doesn’t face sexuality discrimination plus class plus race plus gender. She experiences these as unified, inseparable structure shaping her specific subject position.

Mutual Constitution

Intersectionality’s theoretical core is mutual constitution—categories like race, gender, and class don’t just overlap or intersect but constitute one another. “Woman” is always raced and classed; “Black” is always gendered and classed; “working-class” is always raced and gendered. No identity category exists in pure form; all are always-already intersectional.

This challenges liberal frameworks that treat identities as modular components you can analyze separately then combine. Gender studies that focus on white middle-class women aren’t studying “gender alone”—they’re studying white, middle-class, heterosexual gender while falsely universalizing it. Critical race theory focused on Black men isn’t studying “race alone”—it’s studying male, often heterosexual, often middle-class Blackness while falsely universalizing it.

Standpoint Epistemology

Intersectional analysis draws on standpoint theory—the claim that social position shapes what you can know. Those in dominant positions tend to have limited, distorted understanding because their privilege is invisible to them. Those in subordinate positions develop “double consciousness” (W.E.B. Du Bois)—understanding both dominant culture and their own subordinated perspective.

Multiply marginalized standpoints are epistemologically privileged not because oppression automatically produces insight but because navigating multiple systems of power requires sophisticated analysis invisible to those comfortably positioned. Black feminist standpoint sees what white feminism and male-centered Black studies both miss. This isn’t identity essentialism but recognition that position structures possibility for knowledge.

Coalition Politics

Intersectionality reframes political organizing from identity-based single-issue movements toward coalition politics. Rather than separate movements for racial justice, feminism, LGBTQ+ rights, disability justice, etc., intersectionality suggests these struggles are inseparable. Effective organizing must address multiple oppressions simultaneously.

This doesn’t mean everyone experiences everything—straight people don’t experience homophobia, men don’t experience misogyny. But it means recognizing how systems interconnect. Fighting patriarchy requires fighting racism because patriarchy operates differently across race. Fighting racism requires fighting capitalism because racial exploitation is central to capitalist accumulation. Coalition politics based on intersectional analysis rather than identity sameness.

Anti-Essentialism

Intersectionality is fundamentally anti-essentialist—rejecting the idea that identities have fixed, transhistorical essences. There’s no universal “woman’s experience” or “Black experience.” Experiences are always historically specific, shaped by particular intersections of multiple systems. This challenges both liberal identity politics (that assumes shared identity automatically produces shared interests) and certain nationalist politics (that claim authentic cultural essence).

Yet anti-essentialism doesn’t mean identities are infinitely fluid or purely individual. Categories like race, gender, and class are socially real—they have material effects, shape life chances, and structure institutions. The point isn’t that categories don’t matter but that they only exist in intersectional forms, never pure.

Contemporary Applications

Criminal Justice and Mass Incarceration

Intersectionality is crucial for analyzing mass incarceration. Standard analyses focus on racial disparity (Black people imprisoned at 5x rate of white people) or gender (90% of prisoners are men). Intersectional analysis examines who is imprisoned and why across multiple axes.

Black women are fastest-growing prison population, driven by “war on drugs” that criminalizes survival strategies poor women of color use. Michelle Alexander’s The New Jim Crow (2010) analyzes mass incarceration’s racial dimensions but has been criticized for centering Black men. Beth Richie’s Arrested Justice (2012) provides intersectional analysis of how Black women are criminalized differently—through domestic violence prosecution, child welfare system intervention, and drug enforcement.

Trans women of color, especially Black trans women, face astronomical rates of police violence, imprisonment, and murder. Standard LGBT rights frameworks centered on white middle-class gay men long ignored this. Intersectional analysis reveals how transphobia, racism, and policing interact to produce what CeCe McDonald called “trans/misogyny noir”—specific violence targeting trans women of color.

Reproductive Justice

Mainstream reproductive rights movements (focused on abortion access) have been critiqued for centering white middle-class women. “SisterSong” and reproductive justice movements developed intersectional framework recognizing multiple dimensions:

1. Right NOT to have children (abortion access, but also freedom from forced sterilization that targeted Black, Indigenous, disabled, and poor women)
2. Right TO have children (reproductive technologies, adoption, but also freedom from child removal through foster care systems disproportionately targeting Black and Indigenous families)
3. Right to raise children in safe, healthy environments (addressing poverty, environmental racism, police violence, immigration enforcement)

This reframes reproduction from individual choice to collective conditions requiring justice across race, class, disability, and nation. Abortion access matters, but so does ending forced sterilization, immigration detention of pregnant women, and child removal from marginalized communities.

Labor and Economic Justice

Class analysis requires intersectionality. The “working class” isn’t homogeneous—it’s racially, nationally, and gender stratified. “Women’s work” is devalued (care work, service work, domestic labor). Racialized workers are concentrated in most precarious, dangerous, lowest-paid sectors. Migrant workers face additional vulnerabilities from immigration status.

The concept of social reproduction—the unwaged labor of care, domestic work, and community maintenance—became central to intersectional feminist economics. This work, disproportionately performed by women of color, enables capitalist production but remains invisible in standard economic analysis. Recognizing social reproduction’s value requires intersectional lens.

Racial capitalism (Cedric Robinson) describes how capitalism from inception has relied on racial hierarchy. Slavery wasn’t pre-capitalist but foundational to capital accumulation. Colonialism wasn’t external to capitalism but central mechanism. Contemporary global supply chains rely on racialized and gendered labor hierarchies. You cannot understand capitalism without analyzing race; you cannot understand race without analyzing capitalism.

Digital Platforms and Algorithmic Bias

Safiya Noble’s Algorithms of Oppression (2018) applies intersectionality to technology. Search algorithms, facial recognition, predictive policing, and hiring algorithms encode and amplify intersectional biases. Google searches for “Black girls” historically returned pornography; facial recognition works poorly on Black women; predictive policing targets neighborhoods of color; hiring algorithms trained on male-dominated fields discriminate against women.

These aren’t neutral technical glitches but intersectional oppression automated and scaled. Algorithms trained on biased data reproduce that bias; “colorblind” or “gender-blind” systems ignore how neutrality preserves existing hierarchies. Effective intervention requires intersectional analysis of how technology encodes multiple, interacting oppressions.

Climate Justice

Climate change’s impacts are deeply intersectional. Global South nations (least responsible for emissions) suffer worst effects. Within nations, poor communities and communities of color face higher exposure (proximity to polluting industries, lack of air conditioning, inadequate infrastructure). Indigenous peoples face displacement and cultural destruction.

Gender dimensions compound this: women (especially in Global South) perform much subsistence agriculture and water collection, making them more vulnerable to drought and flooding. Climate disasters exacerbate domestic violence and sexual assault. Climate migration puts women at increased risk of trafficking.

Climate justice movements adopt intersectional frameworks, connecting environmental issues to colonialism, capitalism, racism, and patriarchy. This rejects corporate “green capitalism” solutions that ignore justice dimensions, instead demanding systemic transformation addressing interlocking oppressions.

Healthcare Disparities

Health outcomes demonstrate brutal intersectional inequalities. Black maternal mortality is 3-4x higher than white maternal mortality in the US, even controlling for education and income—meaning race itself (through stress, discrimination, differential treatment) impacts health. Black women with graduate degrees have worse maternal outcomes than white women who didn’t finish high school.

Disability justice movements argue disability cannot be separated from race, class, gender, and sexuality. Disabled people of color face compounded discrimination in healthcare, employment, and policing. Deaf Black men are disproportionately killed by police who interpret sign language as threat. Disabled trans people struggle to access both transition-related and general healthcare.

COVID-19 starkly revealed intersectional health inequalities. Death rates were highest among Black, Indigenous, Latino, and Pacific Islander communities. Essential workers (disproportionately people of color, immigrants, and women) faced highest exposure. Disabled and elderly people in institutions experienced catastrophic outbreaks while remaining invisible in public discourse.

#SayHerName and Police Violence

Kimberlé Crenshaw’s #SayHerName campaign (2014-present) addresses how police violence against Black women remains invisible in public consciousness. Black Lives Matter emerged from protests over police killings but centered Black men (Trayvon Martin, Michael Brown, Eric Garner). This erasure isn’t incidental—it reflects how both racism discourse (centered on men) and feminism (centered on white women) render Black women invisible.

Sandra Bland, Breonna Taylor, Korryn Gaines, Atatiana Jefferson—Black women killed by police—receive far less attention than comparable cases involving Black men. #SayHerName demands recognition of Black women’s specific vulnerability, including sexual violence by police, which male-centered analysis ignores.

Trans Justice and Transmisogyny

Julia Serano’s concept of transmisogyny describes specific oppression facing trans women—combining transphobia and misogyny. Trans women face higher rates of violence, discrimination, and poverty than trans men or cis people of either gender. Yet trans politics often centered transmasculine people (more visible in queer communities) or gender-neutral “trans” category that erased gendered dimensions.

Intersectional analysis reveals transmisogyny differs across race and class. White trans women face transmisogyny but retain white privilege; Black trans women face anti-Black transmisogyny; poor trans women face compounded economic vulnerability and criminalization. Trans justice requires intersectional frameworks addressing multiple, interlocking oppressions.

Critiques and Debates

Depoliticization and Liberal Cooptation

Intersectionality has been criticized for liberal cooptation—becoming diversity consulting buzzword rather than radical political framework. Corporations embrace “intersectional leadership training” while maintaining exploitative labor practices. Universities create “intersectionality initiatives” while adjunctifying faculty and policing protests.

This “diversity” version of intersectionality focuses on representation (more diverse boards, elected officials, media images) while ignoring material redistribution. It becomes way to manage oppression through inclusion rather than transforming systems producing oppression. Critics argue this betrays intersectionality’s radical roots in Black feminist organizing.

Displacing Class Analysis

Some Marxist critics (Vivek Chibber, Adolph Reed Jr.) argue intersectionality has displaced class analysis and material struggle in favor of identity-based recognition politics. They contend that while identities matter, fundamental axis of exploitation is economic, and intersectionality fragments working-class solidarity.

Intersectional feminists respond that this critique itself reflects the single-axis thinking intersectionality challenges. Class cannot be separated from race, gender, and nation—capitalism is racial capitalism, organized through patriarchy and colonialism. The “working class” isn’t homogeneous; pretending it is reproduces exclusions. Effective class politics must be intersectional.

Identity Oppression Olympics

Critics worry intersectionality creates “oppression olympics”—competition over who is most marginalized, fragmenting solidarity. If oppression is infinitely intersectional, can any collective organizing happen? Does claiming marginalized identity become political capital, generating incentives to emphasize victimization?

Intersectional theorists respond that this misunderstands the framework. Intersectionality doesn’t rank oppressions but analyzes how they interact. The point isn’t determining who suffers most but recognizing different positions require different analyses and strategies. Coalition politics must account for differences rather than demanding false unity.

Intersectionality vs. Class

Recent debate between Crenshaw and Reed exemplifies tensions. Reed argues Black inequality is primarily class-based; race is real but secondary to economic structure. Solving economic inequality would largely solve racial inequality. Focusing on intersectional identity differences distracts from class struggle uniting all workers.

Crenshaw and others respond that racial capitalism cannot be reduced to class. Slavery, colonialism, and ongoing racial hierarchy aren’t byproducts of capitalism but foundational. Black middle-class people still face racism; eliminating class inequality wouldn’t eliminate racism. Moreover, “class-first” politics historically has meant prioritizing white male workers while marginalizing others. Intersectional class analysis is necessary.

Applicability Beyond the United States

Intersectionality emerged from US Black feminist experience—can it apply globally? Critics note race operates differently in Latin America, Europe, or Asia than in US; gender systems vary across cultures; importing US frameworks risks imperialism.

Proponents argue intersectionality’s core insight—multiple, mutually constitutive oppressions—is universal even if specific configurations vary. Indian Dalit feminism, Latin American Black feminism, Palestinian feminism all develop intersectional analyses appropriate to local contexts. The framework is transportable; specific categories and histories differ.

Men and Privilege

Does intersectionality only apply to marginalized groups? Can privileged people have intersectional identities? A white working-class man experiences class oppression but race and gender privilege. How does intersectionality analyze privilege?

Collins’s matrix of domination suggests everyone is positioned within multiple systems, experiencing both privilege and oppression depending on context. Yet the framework emerged from analysis of multiply marginalized people because their experiences revealed systems’ interactions most clearly. Extending intersectionality to analyze privilege is valid but must center those most marginalized.

Political Implications

Beyond Single-Issue Organizing

Intersectionality demands moving beyond single-issue movements. Environmental justice cannot ignore race and class; labor organizing must address gender and immigration status; feminism must center race and disability. This isn’t adding issues but recognizing their inseparability.

In practice, this means coalition-building across movements, centering most marginalized voices, and rejecting hierarchies of oppression. It also means strategic analysis: which struggles advance liberation across multiple axes? Which reproduce hierarchies?

Centering the Most Marginalized

Intersectionality’s political claim is that centering the most marginalized produces most liberatory politics. If we organize around needs of Black trans women, disabled immigrants, or poor single mothers, we necessarily address multiple systems. If we organize around needs of straight white men, we likely reproduce hierarchies.

This isn’t moral claim about who deserves focus but strategic one about analysis. Multiply marginalized people must navigate multiple systems, generating knowledge about how power operates that single-axis analysis misses. Their liberation requires transforming multiple systems simultaneously.

Transformative vs. Reformist Politics

Does intersectionality lead to reformist focus on representation and inclusion, or transformative politics demanding systemic change? Both possibilities exist. Liberal versions seek diverse leadership within existing institutions. Radical versions demand dismantling institutions that produce interlocking oppressions.

The Combahee River Collective’s statement remains key: “If Black women were free, it would mean that everyone else would have to be free.” This suggests intersectional liberation is necessarily revolutionary—it cannot be achieved through inclusion in oppressive systems but requires transforming those systems entirely.

Abolitionist Intersectionality

Contemporary abolitionist movements—seeking to dismantle prisons, police, borders, and carceral systems—adopt intersectional frameworks. Abolitionism recognizes these systems cannot be reformed because they foundationally produce racialized, gendered, classed violence. Abolition requires addressing interlocking oppressions simultaneously.

Mariame Kaba, Ruth Wilson Gilmore, and Angela Davis articulate abolitionist intersectionality. Defunding police requires addressing domestic violence through non-carceral means; abolishing prisons requires mental health and addiction support; dismantling immigration enforcement requires economic justice. Abolition is intersectional project requiring transformation across multiple systems.

Further Reading

Foundational Texts

• Combahee River Collective. “A Black Feminist Statement.” 1977. In All the Women Are White, All the Blacks Are Men, But Some of Us Are Brave, edited by Gloria T. Hull, Patricia Bell-Scott, and Barbara Smith. Feminist Press, 1982.
• Crenshaw, Kimberlé. “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 (1989): 139-167.
• Crenshaw, Kimberlé. “Mapping the Margins: Intersectionality, Identity Politics, and Violence against Women of Color.” Stanford Law Review 43.6 (1991): 1241-1299.
• Collins, Patricia Hill. Black Feminist Thought: Knowledge, Consciousness, and the Politics of Empowerment. Routledge, 1990.
• Collins, Patricia Hill, and Sirma Bilge. Intersectionality. Polity, 2016.

Historical Roots

• Truth, Sojourner. “Ain’t I a Woman?” Speech, 1851.
• Cooper, Anna Julia. A Voice from the South. 1892. Oxford University Press, 1988.
• Lorde, Audre. Sister Outsider: Essays and Speeches. Crossing Press, 1984.
• hooks, bell. Ain’t I a Woman: Black Women and Feminism. South End Press, 1981.
• Davis, Angela Y. Women, Race, & Class. Random House, 1981.

Contemporary Applications

• Alexander, Michelle. The New Jim Crow: Mass Incarceration in the Age of Colorblindness. The New Press, 2010.
• Richie, Beth E. Arrested Justice: Black Women, Violence, and America’s Prison Nation. NYU Press, 2012.
• Noble, Safiya Umoja. Algorithms of Oppression: How Search Engines Reinforce Racism. NYU Press, 2018.
• Kaba, Mariame. We Do This ‘Til We Free Us: Abolitionist Organizing and Transforming Justice. Haymarket Books, 2021.
• Taylor, Keeanga-Yamahtta. How We Get Free: Black Feminism and the Combahee River Collective. Haymarket Books, 2017.

Feminist Theory

• King, Deborah K. “Multiple Jeopardy, Multiple Consciousness: The Context of a Black Feminist Ideology.” Signs 14.1 (1988): 42-72.
• Hancock, Ange-Marie. Intersectionality: An Intellectual History. Oxford University Press, 2016.
• Nash, Jennifer C. Black Feminism Reimagined: After Intersectionality. Duke University Press, 2019.
• Carbin, Maria, and Sara Edenheim. “The Intersectional Turn in Feminist Theory: A Dream of a Common Language?” European Journal of Women’s Studies 20.3 (2013): 233-248.

Critical Perspectives

• Reed Jr., Adolph L. “Marx, Race, and Neoliberalism.” New Labor Forum 22.1 (2013): 49-57.
• Ferguson, Roderick A. Aberrations in Black: Toward a Queer of Color Critique. University of Minnesota Press, 2004.
• Puar, Jasbir K. Terrorist Assemblages: Homonationalism in Queer Times. Duke University Press, 2007.

See Also

• Black Feminism
• Critical Race Theory
• Standpoint Theory
• Matrix of Domination
• Racial Capitalism
• Transmisogyny
• Reproductive Justice
• Disability Justice
• Coalition Politics
• Abolition