Revision as of 23:35, 10 May 2018

While intersectionality can be harmful for vegan outreach, it is entirely possible to find middle ground with other social movements.

Intersectionality

The term intersectionality was coined in 1989 by law professor Kimblerlé Crenshaw, and is the belief system that various social categorizations intersect and overlap to form interdependent spheres of oppression or discrimination. Intersectionalists posit that all supposed evils of the world (sexism, racism, homophobia etc.) interconnect through what is known as the matrix of domination. Due to interconnecting nature of all forms of oppression, intersectionalists assert that none of these issues can be solved individually.

There are a number of social categorizations that allot certain 'advantages' & 'disadvantages':

• Sex & Gender
• Race
• Sexual orientation
• Socioeconomic status
• Religion
• Body type
• Educational background
• Language status

Intersectional Veganism

Some vegans add speciesism as an axis of oppression, and assert that because speciesism is eternally bound to all other forms of oppression, vegans must effectively advocate to end all forms of discrimination simultaneously. Intersectional veganism is the belief that the subjugation of animals is inextricably linked to the subjugation of other humans, and that one cannot be solved without advocating for the other.

Template:Cquote

Intersectional veganism means that we do not just seek to end animal agriculture as it takes the lives of billions of animals every year. It means that we also seek to advocate for farm workers that grow our plant-based foods in conditions that are horrendous and anything but “cruelty free”. It means that environmental and food injustice related to animal agriculture is accounted for and actively sought to be dismantled. [1]

Alienating to non-intersectionalists

Although in theory intersectionality is a helpful tool for being sensitive to the unique challenges people may face in going (and staying) vegan, intersectionality in practice can be quite alienating for potential recruits, and can hinder our outreach. While being cognizant of the way in which animal agriculture disproportionately affects different populations can be an affective way to convince our audience of the severity of animal agriculture, mixing and mashing different social causes into one only muddles the philosophical integrity of veganism, and impedes our ability to incite any social or legal change. Adding an ever-growing list of social demands until people sign-on to our movement is completely unrealistic, and intersectional campaigns tend to attract a much smaller base of support, funds, and resources than single-issue campaigns do. [2].

Focus on subjective narratives

Because intersectionality relies so heavily on personal subjective experience, there exists no standard of evidence to validate claims of oppression. Any person can claim an axis of discrimination, and anyone who challenges this claim is dismissed as a racist, sexist, "part of the problem" etc. Such a belief system, which relies solely on personal subjective experiences to validate claims of oppression, exposes itself to numerous self-contradictions, and fosters cult-mentality. Since victims are not required to provide evidence, any person who claims to be oppressed is beyond reproach.

Middle Ground

That being said, vegans shouldn’t dismiss or shrink other social movements, because they may too be addressing prevalent issues of our time. It is entirely possible to respect and even support other social causes without harming our own activism. While campaigning for animal rights causes, vegans should recognize the legitimacy of other movements and take great care not to contribute to the problems that they are avidly advocating against. Vegans can acknowledge and support the severity of world hunger, sexual assault, and racism without letting those issues obfuscate the direction of our own campaign toward reducing animal suffering.