Intersectionality, Oppression, and Social Justice Theme Analysis

In So You Want to Talk about Race, author Ijeoma Oluo argues that people are oppressed for many reasons in the United States beyond race, including gender, sexual orientation, class, ability, physical appearance, and more. These aspects of a person’s identity and socioeconomic status intersect and create different challenges for different people. Oluo warns against assuming that all marginalized people face the same general experience of oppression. For instance, a straight black man, a non-heterosexual white man, and a trans black man will experience oppression in different (though sometimes overlapping) ways that all need to be addressed. Oluo thinks that it’s important for the fight for racial justice to be intersectional: it must consider “all of the intersections of identity, privilege, and oppression that people face.” Oluo thinks that when intersectional differences are ignored, social justice movements inadvertently marginalize certain people by glossing over important differences. She also warns against confusing or mistaking one form of oppression for another.  For instance, when somebody says an issue isn’t really about race but about class—in such cases it’s likely about both, meaning both need to be addressed, and addressing one won’t solve the other. For Oluo, taking an intersectional approach—thinking about all sources of oppression in a society—is vital to eradicate social inequality overall. 

Oluo stresses that oppression and privilege aren’t only divided along racial lines—U.S. society discriminates against people for many reasons. For example, people can marginalize others because of their gender: typically, trans and gender-non conforming people are most oppressed, followed by women. Ableism also marginalizes people, meaning it can be harder for people with disabilities to get jobs in buildings that aren’t accessible, and it can be harder for people who aren’t neurotypical to receive the same standard of schooling as others. Media representations also tend to normalize heterosexual relationships over non-heterosexual ones. Class and poverty have a profound effect on oppression as well: it’s much harder for people to succeed in U.S. society if they come from a poor background. All in all, this means a poor, heterosexual, disabled white man is disadvantaged in different ways than a poor, non-heterosexual, able-bodied black woman (like Oluo). The many factors that contribute to oppression thus make conversations about social justice much more complicated.

Oluo argues that when people overlook intersectionality, they tend to mischaracterize oppression, so it’s important to remember that addressing one dimension of oppression (e.g., class) will not resolve issues in other forms of oppression (e.g., race). For example, when the fight for women’s equality focuses primarily on white women, there’s still additional work to do to ensure justice for women of color as well. Similarly, Oluo admits that she often overlooks Asian Americans in her fight for racial justice, because of the “model minority myth” which falsely depicts all Asian Americans as successful high-achievers. To Oluo, all aspects of oppression merit attention. Oluo suggests thinking of each form of oppression as a specific type of cancer to explain that each social problem needs to be addressed to heal a society: “Disadvantaged white people are not erased by discussions of disadvantaged facing people of color, just as brain cancer is not erased by talking about breast cancer. They are two different issues with two different treatments, and they require two different conversations.” Overall, Oluo argues that it’s essential to factor in intersectionality—that is, to address all the ways a person is oppressed—when striving to achieve social justice.