Intersectional Vs Trickle Down Feminism

When we speak or think about feminism we often think about the women’s suffrage and the second wave of feminism in the sixties. One thing that both these movements have in common is the focus on the oppression of privileged white women. While their experience becomes the standard, many forgot or chose not to include those who experience oppression in a different way. In this paper I will argue the importance of intersectional feminism and how inclusive it is to the different levels of oppression compared to “trickle-down feminism”. I will also mention women that have tried to use the intersectional approach in the past. Intersectional feminism is a “description of the way multiple oppressions are experienced” by women (Smith). The term, intersectionality,

Trickle-down feminism makes breaking the “glass ceiling” a priority (Jaffe). With the focus on a small group of women, those who do not fit into that group like the working class, are also marginalized. Trickle-down feminism does not take into the account the hardships of the working class, with women of color being most affected (Jaffe). During the recession, women lost 60 percent of their jobs and were only able to regain 12 percent of the jobs lost, while men regained 63 percent (Jaffe). “Women’s work” is also seen as inferior by the upper class women (Jaffe). “The Feminine Mystique” by Betty Friedan is a great example of this because she only focused around “the problems of middle class, college-educated women” (Smith). Betty Friedan believed that all the “janitorial chores” are for “feeble-minded girls” (Jaffe). Trickle-down feminism does not work because there are still women who are fighting for equal wages or for better working conditions, even though we now have women CEO’s. Only a few feminists have supported union efforts and the teacher strike, like Gloria Steinem, but many “gave little or no space to the strike” (Jaffe). The working class women continues to be ignored even though they have been fighting for their rights and striking since the 1820’s (Davis

The Grimke sisters were some of the very few white women who knew that excluding Black women was wrong and were against organizations like the “New York Female Anti-Slavery Society for failing to involve Black women in their work.” (Davis 58). While planning for the National Female Anti-Slavery Society Convention, Angelina Grimke took it upon herself to have “more than a token presence of Black women.”(Davis 57). Sarah Grimke would go on to give a speech at the convention, when no one else would, that was directed towards “the free Black People of the North.” (Davis 57). Angelina Grimke also acknowledged the struggles of the working class in her “Address to the Soldiers of Our Second Revolution” and insisted that women’s equality goes hand in hand with Black Liberation (Davis 69). Another important figure that used an intersectional approach was Sojourner Truth. She helped white women at the National Convention on Women’s Rights while also speaking out about her and other Black women’s experiences. She helped white women by standing her ground and facing the male hecklers at the convention, which was a brave thing to do at that time (Davis 61). Her speech, “Ain’t I a Woman?”, revealed the struggles of being a Black women and having her womanhood questioned because she was Black and of a different class (Davis 64). Sojourner Truth was able