Intersectionality Approach: Interlocking Inequality And

The accurate definition for ‘Intersectionality’ would be the concept often used in critical theories to describe the best ways in which oppressive institutions (racism, sexism, homophobia, transphobia, ableism, classism, etc) are interconnected and cannot be examined separately from one another. An intersectionality structure came out during the late 1980s with roots in critical race, ethnic studies, and feminism. This developed interdisciplinary structure of theory and practice focus attention mainly on the simultaneity of oppressions. Collins (21:18) addresses that ''oppression cannot be reduced to one fundamental type, and that oppressions work together in producing injustice.'' Within this framework ''there are no gender links as such,
but only gender relations as built by and between races, cultures, and classes'' (1995: 80). By focusing more on how methods of inequality are cross-cutting this framework draws attention to differences among women (or among men).
This tradition understands systems of oppression as rooted in relational power differentials. Men's superiority is thus linked to women's inferiority and the status of poor women of color is related to the status of wealthy white women. Thornton Dill (1997) recognized five basic claims familiar to intersectionality approaches: the existence of interlocking systems of inequality and oppression, the necessity for historically specific, local analyses to understand interlocking inequalities, the rejection of an a priori assumption that women constitute a unified category, the recognition of the interplay of social structure and human agency, and the conceptualization of gender and race as structures and not simply individual
traits

Gender and race are understood as structures, discourses, or sets of enduring relations rather than simply individual characteristics. Gender and race are seen as social constructions rather than predetermined, transhistorical, biological or natural phenomena. The changing meanings of gender and racial categories across time and place substantiate the fluid, social character of gender and race.

The logical category of ''women'' in the society is not presumed to be a uniformed, unite group of people or group who experience a common oppression and not considered prior to an investigation. Women picturized as sharing structural location as women is not enough for understanding their experiences and struggles of gender inequality. Mohanty. (1995: 57) claims that ''sisterhood cannot be assumed on the basis of gender; it must be forged in concrete historical and political practice and analysis.''

An intersectionality viewpoint considers that individuals' lives are impacted within and afflicted by intertwining systems of inequalities based on race, class, sexuality, and gender.
Individuals take numerous and often different status positions that affects their lives in both negative and positive way . This ''matrix of domination,'' as described by Collins (2001), embraces a both/and model of inequalities rather than an additive model of inequalities or binary oppositions. A woman's gendered experiences are always put into the context of her class and racial locations. Using this approach let researchers to (1) highlight how ranking positions are related such that positions of advantages and privileges and disadvantage are linked together; and (2) understand far-reaching differences among women (or among men) rather than solely differences between women and
men.

Intersectionality highlights the interaction of communal structures and human organization and thus allows for social change. The focus is often on the actions of creative resistance that women engage to thrive and survive in oppressive situations rather than limelighting women's powerlessness and dependency on men.

Intersectionality academic scholars do not simply examine or explore, public political activity, but rather focus on the less visible diplomatic activities that are taken up by inferior and subordinated groups.
The basic belief of intersectionality involve the need for historically specific, local examinations that allow for the description of the difficulties of particular methods of structured power correlation. It is through such studies that theoretical classes can be developed from within the situations being analyzed. Intersectionality academic scholars deny globalizing and ahistorical methods that try to explain, for example, patriarchal society and organization for all places at all times.