Insights & Innovation: For Gen Z, Identity is What They Make It, by Julia Goorin and Rachel Baumgarten in Vox Media

Friends:

I don’t usually present on a topic like this, namely, Gen Z and brand identity, but this piece truly captures something vital about where we are headed as a society — especially through the lens of Gen Z.

Julia Goorin and Rachel Baumgarten offer an illuminating view into how this generation is not merely accepting diversity, but actively redefining identity itself. For Gen Z, born in or after 1997, identity is not something assigned by society, but something deeply personal and intersectional — built through passions, values, relationships, and self-reflection. They are co-creating the cultural frameworks they want to live in.

As someone rooted in education and policy, what I generally see lacking in this literature are robust analyses through the lenses of gender, sexual orientation, race, ethnicity, and structural power. I also fail to see international perspectives on Gen Z, as well, even as I fully grasp how cultural identities are shaped by global forces such as migration, colonial legacies, economic precarity, and transnational media flows that complicate and enrich how young people come to know themselves and others.

While this report nods to the complexity of Gen Z’s makeup, it stops short of naming how racism, settler colonialism, and intergenerational inequality have shaped the very conditions Gen Z is responding to. Understanding Gen Z requires not just attention to identity as a construct, but also an interrogation of the forces that have historically policed, commodified, and erased these identities.

Still, I see this piece as a powerful call to all of us — educators, scholars, advocates, and cultural workers — to reflect, adapt, and honor the complex humanity of our youth. There is wisdom here, and also urgency. Gen Z is inviting us into a deeper conversation — one that resists binaries, embraces nuance, and demands authenticity. The future is not binary. It’s beautifully plural.

–Angela Valenzuela

Insights & Innovation: For Gen Z, Identity is What They Make It

By Julia Goorin and Rachel Baumgarten | Apr 4, 2023 | VoxMedia

Gen Z is made up of pre-teens, teens, and young adults born between 1997 and 2012, and what makes this generation unique is its position as the most diverse ever in terms of race, ethnicity, and gender. Based on the latest US Census, those under 18 are nearly two times more likely to identify as two or more races, and Gen Z will likely be the last generation that is predominantly white. Many Gen Z-ers grew up with President Obama in office and bore witness to historical events like the legalization of same-sex marriage. For them, the concept of identity is not straightforward; not only do Gen Z-ers accept and embrace their own differences, but what makes others different, too.

Vox Media partnered with Horowitz Research on a survey of 800 Gen Z-ers ages 14-24 to understand how the intersection of race, ethnicity, sexuality, gender, and other variables affect their perception of identity, the role media plays in shaping their points of view, and what it takes to build brand trust among this highly informed and connected audience. Gen Z-ers recognize how powerful media can be in driving acceptance, but feel there is room to improve within the advertising industry. Media and brands are being held accountable for shaping the way society thinks about gender, sexuality, and race, and they’re responsible for creating an environment that promotes inclusivity — but it must be done via an honest dialogue about brand ethos that’s backed up with real policy, practice, and people. In many ways, there are parallels between the way Gen Z thinks about their own personal identity and a brand’s identity.

According to a 2021 Bloomberg article, Gen Z has a disposable income of $360 billion, but their approach to spending is nothing like what we’ve seen from previous generations. It’s essential for marketers to understand this complex and intersectional generation as they step into their own and hone their spending power. Knowing Gen Z continues to prioritize both self-expression and conscious consumerism, our learnings will provide a guide for brands to build meaningful relationships with young consumers and outperform competitive brands whose messaging feels forced, crafted, off-brand, or who are more narrow-minded and binary-oriented in their targeting.

According to Gen Z, marketers should recognize that:Labels should be chosen, not given, with identities being built based on a collection of intersectional attributes. Gen Z rejects the constraints society has previously placed upon gender binaries and gender roles and places less judgment on the identities other people choose for themselves.
Media is responsible for promoting awareness and driving Gen Z down the “acceptance funnel” with acceptance as the basis for inclusion. Gen Z’s personal and intersectional approach to identity means wider representation and diversity on screen is critical.
Brands have a responsibility in shaping thinking about racial and cultural diversity. Gen Z-ers are proud to be conscious consumers, which means they make deliberate purchase decisions to support brands they perceive as having a positive impact.
Creative messaging that spotlights social values that are not intrinsically and authentically connected to a brand’s identity, actions, and policies will be rejected.
Media publishers that have developed genuine bonds with Gen Z are the ideal partners for consumer brands, offering an opportunity to both be seen and heard and to build brand trust and authority.

LABELS SHOULD BE CHOSEN, NOT GIVEN, AND THEY INTERSECT TO FORM UNIQUE PERSONAL IDENTITIES

Gen Z self-identifies based on a collection of intersectional attributes and describes society’s labeling as much more siloed. Gen Z believes society assigns labels by characteristics such as gender, race, and physical characteristics, while Gen Z-ers identify themselves first and foremost based on their personality traits, hobbies, interests, and passions. In general, 66% of Gen Z-ers say society assigns labels based on demographic characteristics, while 81% would prefer to be defined by more personal attributes like personality traits or hobbies.

Gen Z-ers’ preference for a more personal construction of identity underscores the normalization of an intersectional and multi-faceted approach to identity. There is a shift from being told who you are to wanting to be asked who you are, with two in five saying that labels should be assigned by the individual, not society.



This shift towards self-identification has implications for marketers. Rather than targeting consumers based on rigid demographics (e.g., gender, age, etc.), Gen Z expects marketers to consider passion points and communities, which will certainly have an impact on brand messaging, imagery, language, etc. Taking affinities into account before demographics will allow for a more inclusive, dynamic conversation.

GEN Z REJECTS THE CONSTRAINTS SOCIETY HAS PREVIOUSLY PLACED UPON GENDER & GENDER ROLES

44% of Gen Z believe gender is not a binary, compared to 34% who say gender is binary.

The majority of Gen Z-ers are less attached to labeling historically gendered activities as “appropriate” for only one gender. There is an expectation that, regardless of identity, everyone can do the same things, shifting concepts of who can be strong, empowered, overtly sexual, emotional, nurturing, and vulnerable. For example, six in ten Gen Z-ers feel that using makeup or wearing dresses is OK for both men and women. This contrasts with Gen Z-ers’ perceptions of what is most often accepted by society.

MEDIA PLAYS AN ACTIVE ROLE IN PROMOTING AWARENESS AND DRIVING GEN Z DOWN THE ACCEPTANCE FUNNEL

Media — especially social media — has become a catalyst for unprecedented conversations on identity, diversity, and inclusion for this generation. Six in ten Gen Z-ers believe that the media has had a big influence on the way they think about gender identities and sexuality. Content from media publishers has encouraged awareness and exploration and led to acceptance and advocacy. Over 50% of Gen Z-ers recognize that media promotes acceptance, which is important as acceptance is ultimately the foundation for inclusion. This proves how powerful media can be in propelling society forward and promoting allyship.

Aside from talking with friends, social media has had the biggest positive influence on views of gender and sexuality among Gen Z. Social media has more of an impact than physically knowing people who are LGBTQ+. Unlike the generations that came before, Gen Z has an ability to create and share content at the drop of a hat. This feeling of empowerment associated with being content creators or influencers fosters a more interactive relationship between the Gen Z consumer and the content they consume. In many ways, social media offers a window into the world, connecting people who might never ordinarily meet and passing the mic to people who have historically felt unheard, which over time promotes awareness and opens minds to new ways of thinking.

BRANDS ARE EXPECTED TO WALK THE WALK WHILE STAYING TRUE TO THEMSELVES

As consumers, Gen Z-ers make deliberate purchasing decisions with the intention of making a real impact, whether that be social, economic, or environmental. This generation is leading the charge of conscious consumerism, where brand values are placed on the highest pedestal, guiding decisions on both what to buy and what to avoid. Gen Z-ers recognize that every time they make a purchase, they have an opportunity to promote change, which is why this generation carefully researches and weighs their options before choosing which brand(s) to buy.

According to Gen Z, brands have a specific responsibility to shape society’s thoughts about diversity, including race, gender identity, and sexuality. How a brand supports and commits itself to diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives directly influences Gen Z-ers’ perception, attitude, and relationship with the brand. One in two appreciate when brands leverage advertising to help foster an open dialogue between people.

That being said, Gen Z has a negative reaction to messaging that promotes progressive social values that are not intrinsically and authentically connected to a brand’s identity, actions, and policies. Less than 40% of Gen Z-ers believe advertising is an effective tool for companies to use to correct past mistakes. Even more importantly, one in two will call out brands for pandering if they create advertising that has nothing to do with the brand or its core initiatives. Gen Z expects brands to own up to who they really are and, if needed, put in the work to make real changes from the inside out. This generation thinks about brand identity the same way they think about their own identities; brands must be true to themselves, and only then will Gen Z truly support them.

Certain types of brands are perceived as having a greater responsibility in shaping how people think about gender identity or sexuality. Beauty & personal care brands and clothing & accessory brands, in particular, are viewed as having the biggest responsibility — which is not totally surprising, given how connected they both are with outward appearances and how a person is physically perceived. Alcohol brands, financial services brands, and auto brands are thought to have the least responsibility, but there’s an opportunity for brands in these categories to rise to the occasion and build a company, offering, and marketing that will deeply connect with this next generation of consumers.

As media evolves from its previous role as a reinforcer of traditional tropes and instead takes ownership of uplifting, shaping, and defining the next generation, brands must choose media partners carefully to prove they’re sharing this responsibility. Effective media partnerships will encourage brands to think about their own identity as if they were human — they should look in a mirror to figure out who they really are, and ultimately stand proud in their beliefs and tell their story loudly.

STRATEGIC PARTNERSHIPS CAN HELP MOVE THE NEEDLE FOR ADVERTISERS

While the majority of Gen Z-ers feel that there is at least some media content that does a good job at reflecting their identity and lifestyle, traditional advertising is less likely to resonate with Gen Z. One in four feel there is no advertising that truly reflects Gen Z’s identity or lifestyle. This represents a huge opportunity for consumer brands to partner with media publishers who have developed meaningful relationships with the younger generation to build brand trust and authority.

VOX MEDIA’S GEN Z AUDIENCE SEES THEMSELVES REFLECTED IN CONTENT

Compared to non-users, Vox Media’s Gen Z audience is significantly more likely to say there is a lot of media content that does a good job reflecting their identity and lifestyle. This underscores Vox Media’s efforts to tell stories that resonate deeply. It’s also a testament to the individual brands within the Vox Media portfolio. For example, according to Gen Z users, New York Magazine is perceived as “on the pulse,” Polygon is described as “modern and innovative,” and NowThis helps “unite audiences around shared passion points.”



Vox Media’s strength in telling stories that authentically resonate with Gen Z has a halo effect for advertisers. Compared to non-users, the Gen Z Vox Media audience is significantly more likely to also believe that advertising does a good job reflecting their identity and lifestyle. On the other hand, non-users are significantly more likely to say they have yet to see advertising that accurately depicts who they are.



Ultimately, brands must learn from how Gen Z constructs their own personal identities — not how society assigns labels — to effectively craft their own brand identity. Once this foundation has been established, marketers can and should lean on media partners to amplify their messaging, sharing the responsibility of shaping the way society thinks about diversity. With a proven track record in authentic storytelling and a Gen Z audience that already sees the good in advertising, Vox Media is an ideal partner for brands looking to capture Gen Z’s attention and meaningfully promote inclusivity.

About Horowitz Research:

Horowitz Research is a leading provider of consumer market research specializing in consumers and their relationships to media, content, and technology with a particular expertise in cultural insights among America’s Black, Latinx, Asian, LGBTQIA+, and Gen Z and Gen Alpha audiences. The company offers a full suite of à la carte syndicated reports as well as custom quantitative and qualitative consumer research for companies ranging from small start-ups to Fortune 500. For more information, visit www.horowitzresearch.com

Fight the School Culture Wars by Embracing Parents [and Supporting Ethnic Studies]

This piece provides good food for thought. I agree with BloombergQuint columnist, Andrea Gabor, that McAuliffe sent the terribly wrong message that "parents shouldn’t be "telling schools what they should teach.'” Such a terrible message to send in a democracy. We all pay the taxes that fund our schools. We all have a voice. I also agree that parents, school districts, and school boards shouldn't take the bait by people who enter these spaces with the intention of polarizing and weaponizing discourse.

As mentioned herein,  school-family partnerships and partnerships with community-based organizations, in general, can provide excellent vehicles through which to address parents' concerns.

Regrettably, Gabor fails to mention that parents, educators, and community are indeed speaking up throughout the country and they are advocating for Ethnic Studies curricula so as to be more culturally inclusive of children's lived experiences, cultures, and identities. Why is it so hard even for liberals to vocalize this, much less lend their support?

Ethnic Studies is a positive agenda that liberals themselves need to understand so that they can more effectively "talk back" to what really is a contrived agenda that seeks to limit the teaching of the truths of history. 

If we can't name racism, classism, sexism, ableism, or homophobia or their intersectionalities, we'll not only shut down honest conversations and explorations in what it means to be human, we'll be forever condemned to our toxic, polarizing thoughts and emotions. And what a massive disability for our youth, all of whom must be prepared to navigate a multiracial democracy in an increasingly complex, highly diverse, and yes—polarized, world.

-Angela Valenzuela

Fight the School Culture Wars by Embracing Parents 

Andrea Gabor 06:30 PM IST, 13 Nov 2021 01:10 AM IST, 13 Nov 2021

(Bloomberg Opinion) -- When Republican Glenn Youngkin won the gubernatorial election last week in Virginia, the first statewide GOP victory there in more than a decade, it was widely seen as vindication of a political strategy to weaponize the school-board culture wars. In truth, the school-board warriors around the U.S. weren’t as successful as some high-profile Democratic defeats suggest. Even in red states like Missouri and Wisconsin, many candidates who advocated bans on mask mandates and the supposed teaching of what culture warriors tendentiously call “critical race theory” were defeated.

But there’s no denying that Virginia parents were angry at Democrats. That was partly because a former Democratic governor had rebuffed their demands to reopen schools during the pandemic, even as children from neighboring Maryland, and even New York City, returned to classrooms with little ill effect.

Most galling of all, though, was the incendiary and misguided statement by the eventual losing Democratic candidate, Terry McAuliffe,  that parents shouldn’t be “telling schools what they should teach.”

To suggest that parents have no place in school decision-making is to deny the fundamental role of public schools as places for the teaching and practice of democratic values. Schools should want more parental involvement, not less, a matter of equal concern on both sides of the cultural divide. For example, in New Orleans, the nation’s first all-charter-school city, where charter organizations ba

To suggest that parents have no place in school decision-making is to deny the fundamental role of public schools as places for the teaching and practice of democratic values. Schools should want more parental involvement, not less, a matter of equal concern on both sides of the cultural divide. For example, in New Orleans, the nation’s first all-charter-school city, where charter organizations backed by Democrats and Republicans sought to marginalize parent and community engagement in schools, the backlash has been fierce.

Read more at: https://www.bloombergquint.com/gadfly/culture-war-in-the-schools-fight-back-by-embracing-parents
Copyright © BloombergQuint

Rudy Ramirez is a brilliant theater director and we are so fortunate to have him here in Austin.  His equally brilliant and beloved mother, Dr. Blandina "Bambi" Cardenas, too.  Due in great part to the existence of the black-white binary—where race for these groups stubbornly equates to "black" or "white," invisiblizing Latinx peoples—we who are Latinx know just how woefully under-recognized in all our complexity we are in society, politics, and the arts.  Through his award-winning theater, Rudy is helping to change this.  And how better than through theater and the arts?  I love this quote from this piece:

"It's necessary to tell stories that say, 'Our beauty doesn't come from fitting into the idea of what a citizen or a woman should be, but rather, our absolute inability to be contained by those words.'" 

To get a taste of his magic, consider attending the FuturX  theater & performance festival next week at the VORTEX Theater.

Congratulations, Rudy! We love all that you do. By attending to our multiple marginalities, your raise silent voices and un-mute unspoken topics that promise to liberate, even as they complexify. Godspeed!

-Angela Valenzuela

Rudy Ramirez's FuturX Festival Puts Latinx Performance Center Stage

The theatrical Renaissance man moves Latinx performance out of the margins

BY TREY GUTIERREZ, FRI., NOV. 1, 2019

Rudy Ramirez (Photo by David Brendan Hall)

Representation.  Its importance is a hot topic among theatremakers. But when the conversation shifts toward actually achieving it, Rudy Ramirez believes a lot is left unsaid. "People don't tend to think about diversity within communities of color. They don't think it's there." As a member of both the Latinx and queer communities, the award-winning director has time and time again found meaningful onstage inclusion either lacking or nonexistent. "I realized if I was going to talk about Latinx experience in a non-simplified way," Ramirez says, "it'd have to be from my own perspective."

In recent years, Ramirez has led a charge for broader Latinx visibility in Austin's performance scene. Doing so across several mediums, the artist's most notable push began in 2018 in the form of the FuturX Festival, a multi-day showcase of forward-thinking, Latinx-penned performances, including solo shows, plays, improv, and a host of avant-garde work.

Described by collaborators as a "theatrical Renaissance man," Ramirez seems the ideal candidate to organize this event. Since beginning his tenure as Vortex Repertory Company associate artistic director in 2011, the artist has earned a reputation (as well as five B. Iden Payne Awards and a Chronicle "Best of Austin" award) for staging fresh, challenging work. "Rudy has this ability to recognize and summon people's internal power," says actor/playwright Krysta Gonzales. "When you invite people in to see what they have to offer, magic happens."

At its core, FuturX is just that: an invitation to experiences typically hidden from the mainstream. "I'm interested in highlighting the margins of Latinidad," says Ramirez. "Latinx identity in dialogue with, say, indigenous, African American, trans, or queer identity." Considering their affinity for inclusive narratives – the artist is currently directing three: one for bilingual theatre company Teatro Vivo and two for FuturX – it's telling that until 2015, Ramirez hadn't staged a Latinx-written show: "There was no real opportunity to do anything that spoke to my background. Even when I found ostensibly 'Latinx' work, I wasn't connecting with it specifically."

Like many creatives of Mexican descent, Ramirez's heritage isn't exactly simple. Their father descended from a long line of working-class Tejanos and his mother from 20th-century Mexican landowners fleeing political unrest – leaving their son with a complicated understanding of class and race that never aligned with propagated Latinidad narratives. "Chicano theatre is often about certain experiences: being an immigrant or migrant worker. There are experiences of Mexicanidad that I'll never know – and to stage those stories would be appropriative." It doesn't help that these narratives are frequently resolved in predictable ways. "I've always been chafed at those plays that culminate in the embrace of family and tradition – 'Always trust what abuelita says.' As a queer person, I can't readily look at tradition as 'that's where home is.' The home I've mostly made for myself is with friends: my chosen family."

Ramirez would chase his own representation through playwriting, performing their solo piece Promised Land: A Radical Queer Revival in 2009 and the duo show Footnotes for People Who Don't Speak Spanish with Beliza Narvaez in 2011. Then, in 2015, things finally clicked. While directing Tanya Saracho's El Nogalar, a loose adaptation of Anton Chekhov's The Cherry Orchard set against the backdrop of Mexico's drug wars, they saw reflections of their family's unique backgrounds: namely, their father in the hardworking, class-conscious character Lopez. "[Nogalar] addresses prevailing attitudes in upper-class Mexican culture vs. working-class culture. It felt like two halves of myself meeting for the first time."

Today, El Nogalar remains a blueprint for Ramirez's FuturX planning, not only for its thematic freshness, but for how Saracho's writing refuses easy answers. "As terrifying as the drug cartels have been, they're one of the few opportunities for working-class folks to gain wealth in a segregated, caste-like society. Classism is always racism in Mexico, and there's nowhere near enough work about the racism we put on each other." Ramirez's eagerness to complicate conversations surrounding Latinidad would similarly draw them to directing FuturX's first headline performance, (Un)Documents, Jesús I. Valles' poetic solo show that, in addition to foregrounding queer Latinx intersectionality, balanced the question of "Why fight for citizenship if, to exist, it must delegitimize?" against "What happens without it?"

"Tension is one of my favorite words in theatremaking, saying, 'Neither answer is right, so let's sit in that neither-is-right-ness and experience the pull.' Maybe there we'll find something new." This year, in staging Krysta Gonzales' new play Más Cara at FuturX, the director aims to bring that same dramatic tension to another rarely seen experience: Latina womanhood. A fantastical dissection of gender expectation and tradition, 2019's flagship show follows headstrong Latina Alma on a lifelong journey toward self-respect. Her quest is aided by Mexican folklore goddesses Coatlicue, La Llorona, and Tonatzin – themselves representing archetypes of Mexican femininity. "While [Más Cara] is about empowerment for women, it refuses to say, 'And that's when I left my husband, lived my best life, got remarried ....' Sometimes you don't find somebody else, but nevertheless, respecting yourself necessitates that sacrifice."

As each passing rehearsal brings FuturX 2019 closer, Ramirez has been reflecting on how these performances shaped their up-and-coming festival. "It's necessary to tell stories that say, 'Our beauty doesn't come from fitting into the idea of what a citizen or a woman should be, but rather, our absolute inability to be contained by those words.'" While Ramirez will be the first to tell you that representation is a complex, multifaceted subject, it seems that so many of their efforts center on that basic idea of resisting containment, be it in the form of easy answers, tired narratives, or someone else's expectations. "When you're Latinx, so often you're told, 'You're just too much, too emotional, too sexual, too needy ...' I think sometimes the 'too much' is them saying, 'There's too many of you.' Look at some theatre seasons, and apparently, yeah, even one Latinx program is too much." Clearly, there's work to be done, but where better to begin than affording voice to unheard perspectives?

"We want to create work that says, 'I'm not too much. I'm enough,'" says Ramirez. "'And if you don't think so, you'd better get out of the way.'"

Interesting piece by Kory Stamper on the evolution of the term, "intersectionality." This piece also uses the word, "subtractive." Wonder where she got it from? Maybe "subtractive" has also morphed into a buzzword. As the author of Subtractive Schooling (1999), I can't help but be curious.

-Angela Valenzuela

A Brief, Convoluted History of the Word ‘Intersectionality’

How an academic term morphed into a buzzword

Ashley Judd, Annabella Sciorra, and Salma Hayek. Photo: 

Kevin Winter/Getty Images

By Kory Stamper

The third act of Sunday’s Oscars featured a pre-taped segment that celebrated and encouraged diversity in Hollywood, introduced by Ashley Judd, Salma Hayek, and Annabella Sciorra — three women who had accused Harvey Weinstein of sexual misconduct and assault. They had a message for the Academy about the new paradigm of speaking up and expecting change. “We work together,” said Judd, “to make sure that the next 90 years empower these limitless possibilities of equality, diversity, inclusion, intersectionality — that’s what this year has promised us.”

“Intersectionality” in its modern use dates back to a 1989 paper by Kimberlé Crenshaw, a legal scholar and civil-rights activist who founded the African American Policy Forum at Columbia University. The paper is a scholarly critique of antidiscrimination theory and how, in practice, it fails black women by denying that they face unique discrimination due to their overlapping identities:

I argue that Black women are sometimes excluded from feminist theory and antiracist policy discourse because both are predicated on a discrete set of experiences that often does not accurately reflect the interaction of race and gender. These problems of exclusion cannot be solved simply by including Black women within an already established analytical structure. Because the intersectional experience is greater than the sum of racism and sexism, any analysis that does not take intersectionality into account cannot sufficiently address the particular manner in which Black women are subordinated.

Later in the paper, and perhaps in anticipation of critique, Crenshaw explains intersectionality literally. Imagine an intersection, she says. Imagine that traffic flows through it from all four directions. Imagine being a person standing in the middle of that intersection. Danger can hit you from any side.

Crenshaw’s “intersectionality” was an instant hit among academics, where it was broadened beyond the scope of black women’s experiences. It showed up in queer theory, feminist legal theory, studies on race and gender and sexuality. It was a useful word, one that provided a framework for discussing broader patterns of oppression, power, discrimination — but one that remained in academia for years.

Though “intersectionality” peeked its head above the parapets of the ivory tower occasionally, its first major appearance in general press was around the 2017 Women’s March on Washington. The March was surrounded by debates about which women it was for, and “intersectionality” became the go-to word to explain the aims and goals of the March. Nearly overnight, major newsoutlets published explainers on intersectionality and intersectional feminism.

So far, lexically speaking, so good. The way that English grows is by spreading outward from an originating point, like a ripple in a pond. Words move from thought to speech to writing to other people. But that transmission isn’t always smooth. There are other currents to contend with.

Before “intersectionality” had its moment in the sun, its meaning was already being moved further afield of Crenshaw’s definition. A 2014 movie review in the Washington Post defines “intersectionality” as something that “seeks to describe how identity is conditioned, not by one reductive quality, but by multiple tastes, impulses, desires and fears.” The traffic through this intersection is entirely different: tastes and desires rather than identities. “You can also just call it ‘life,’” writer Ann Hornaday sums up — not inaccurately, but not entirely accurately, either. In 2015, writer Rich Lowry glossed “intersectionality” as “membership in two or more historically oppressed groups,” which isn’t technically incorrect, but the broader context in which he gives his definition confuses things:

The political benefit of what feminists call intersectionality — membership in two or more historically oppressed groups — is not having to choose which accusation of bias to make. One day, it can be racism; the next it can be sexism. Or, different people can make different charges of an -ism on the same day. The possibilities to mix and match are endless.

Lowry makes intersectionality a cafeteria from which you object to whichever bias seems tastiest at that moment. This contradicts exactly the force of Crenshaw’s “intersectionality”: that bias and discrimination are additive, not subtractive.

The confusion continues, even after primers on intersectionality appeared in places like Teen Vogue and USA Today. Art influencer JiaJia Fei was quoted recently in Vogue as saying Telfar Clemens’ 2018 show at Fashion Week was “a total work of art: music, fashion, and art. There was a lot of intersectionality, not just in identity but also in creativity.” Can creativity be “intersectional” in the traditional sense of the word? What is the traditional sense of the word? Explanations everywhere, and yet the top Google searches for “intersectionality” all have to do with its definition.

That may be because the connotative force of the word is outstripping the academic meaning of the word. Lexicographers reiterate that it is entirely expected and natural that, as a word moves farther away from its originating point, its meaning changes. This is a part of healthy language growth. But when the word is one like “intersectionality,” this gets complicated. Latoya Peterson, formerly of Racialicious and now at ESPN’s the Undefeated, wrotein 2015 that the word “intersectionality” was losing its punch: it was becoming a label that feminists could claim as their own, which absolved them of any of the hard work required by intersectionality. “Unfortunately,” she writes, “when I encounter conversations about intersectionality online, the term is often uttered merely as cultural shorthand, the social justice equivalent of ‘You go girl!,’ ready to be GIFed, Tumbled, or tee-shirted.” Crenshaw herself objects to this hashtaggable use of “intersectionality.” “Intersectionality can get used as a blanket term to mean, ‘Well, it’s complicated,’” she says in a 2017 interview.“Sometimes, ‘It’s complicated’ is an excuse not to do anything.”

When words move from a specialized arena into the mainstream, they often get a little flabby: their sharply delineated corners blur a bit as the word is passed down a long line of speakers. Crenshaw likens the confusion over what “intersectionality” means to “a very bad game of telephone,” but that is exactly what language growth looks like most of the time. There will be those who dig in and hold fast to the academic meaning “intersectionality” originally had, and then there will be those who lump it in with other terms they perceive to be a wave in a particular direction: diversity, equality, systemic oppression, privilege. Sometimes words lose potency as they gain traction.

While the fight for “intersectionality” and its meaning intensifies among the intelligentsia, however, the word continues its slow march forward, quietly breaking new ground. The week opened with “intersectionality’s” appearance at the Academy Awards, and closes with its supporting-actress turn during International Women’s Day, describing the day’s Google Doodle.

---

Kory Stamper is the author of Word by Word: The Secret Life of Dictionaries, now out in paperback.