Intersectionality in Policy

If we develop an understanding of oppression without any hierarchies, as Audre Lorde sketches, we can form an idea that the ones hit the hardest by it are individuals that find themselves at an intersection of multiple oppressions. Hence, there is a multiplicity of oppressions and not just one oppression. Naturally then, the questions one can consider are related to categorising such problems before addressing them. Putting it less crudely; one needs to think about the primary, secondary and simultaneous problem. I will attempt to briefly analyse the usefulness and importance of the ideas of intersectionality in the field of public policy.

Crenshaw’s article explains the dynamics of intersectionality by showing the interaction between racism and patriarchy. She describes the “location” of women of colour in this interaction of oppressions. Women of colour find themselves dealing with racism and patriarchy at the same time. This position is particularly troublesome because anti-racial and white-feminist discourses are not accepting of the other. It would go to the extent of male writers (of colour) stressing on the need for patriarchy or merely brushing its issues away by considering them minor. One clarification that must be made here is that minor oppressions should be understood as minor expressions (of a greater oppression). The victims find themselves in a position where there is no place to reconcile the different kind of oppressions that they are facing. Hence, one always comes out to be louder than the other. However, this does not mean that the other is not cruel enough; it just was not expressed loud enough.

Since it is difficult to answer what is more important in such situations, the results often fail to provide any relief to these victims. Crenshaw points towards the inability of the law to consider the fact that there may be several cleavages in any plan devised to solve such issues. These cleavages often result in worse consequences for the victim. Therefore, it becomes absolutely necessary to consult the ideas of intersectionality for policymakers. Nevertheless, the concept is relatively new and has not been explored well enough. In the following paragraph, I will state and reflect on a few approaches put forth by Dr. Olena Hankivsky in her paper on intersectionality and public policy.

The first approach is of the need to situate analysis to study how power relations interact. Including a “spatial dimension” in policy study is a useful methodology of doing so. The argument essentially is to use space as a way of “contextualising” policy analysis so power relations are better understood. The idea of space, as opposed to context, is “relational, interactive, fluid and constantly under construction”. This would give help in highlighting the subtleties that would otherwise be missed. Moreover, this would lead to a need to clarify theoretical understandings of power with regards to any policy issue.

The second approach is of an intersectionality policy process analysis. It is an effort to systematically integrate intersectionality into every phase of the policymaking process. This would, without doubt, expose any hidden fallacies/flaws that may come with a policy. This approach can be understood as being divided into four stages; agenda setting, policy formulation, policy implementation and policy evaluation. One can assume that a systematic understanding and integration of intersectionality (intersectional policies) in each of these stages would lead to better outcomes. Since in such a scenario, policies will not be forced on the already marginalised without taking into account their effects/side-effects.

Lastly, the article discusses the Multi-Strand Project. This relates to a “six-strand” approach covering gender, race, sexual orientation, age, disability and religion. It is acknowledged that catering to different forms of oppressions can pose difficulties, it is then required for us to develop a design that “can incorporate and manage the differences in origin and outcomes between strands”. For a policy based on this approach, each strand holds equal importance in contrast to any specific strand based approach. Such an approach may be able to ensure that a course of action directed towards one marginalised group does not oppose any other. An approach that is directed at only one form of oppression might undermine another.

Public policy studies are attempting to develop models to relieve the oppressed. However, since most of these policies are not intersectional in nature, they are often counterproductive and lead to worse outcomes. Therefore, it is imperative that while devising (policy) solutions to such issues, intersections of oppressions should be preferred instead of holding one form of oppression more urgent than another.