Intersectional solidarity

This template is not to be used in article space. This is the sandbox page where you will draft your initial Wikipedia contribution. If you're starting a new article, you can develop it here until it's ready to go live. If you're working on improvements to an existing article, copy only one section at a time of the article to this sandbox to work on, and be sure to use an edit summary linking to the article you copied from. Do not copy over the entire article. You can find additional instructions here. Remember to save your work regularly using the "Publish page" button. (It just means 'save'; it will still be in the sandbox.) You can add bold formatting to your additions to differentiate them from existing content. Bibliography sandbox

See Intersectionality for details.

See Solidarity for details.

One example is Chandra Talpade Mohanty, a feminist scholar who provides an interesting example of how the logic of intersectional solidarity needs acceptance by recognizing common struggles and natural differences between individuals or groups. Solidarity, Mohanty says, is not a state of being but an achievement, one that requires the ongoing process of making universality based on particularity. It illustrates the need for a political struggle to produce coalitions and solidarities among many borders under what are often presented as radically unequal possibilities for action.

According to Mohanty, solidarity is not static and must be seen as a process. Part of that process is to recognize the diversity among different communities and approach them respectfully while finding areas for collaboration on shared objectives. Mohanty also stresses the importance of coalition-building, thus emphasizing working together by sharing resources or strategizing collectively toward a goal to reach social justice. This method is even better than a bond, cementing the foundation of movements and providing more solution-based approaches against systemic inequities.

An equally significant point in this respect is Mohanty's transnational view, which informs of the global dimensions of intersectional solidarity. As the world becomes increasingly globalized, the struggle against oppression cannot be understood in isolation, so solidarity cannot stop at geographical boundaries. The praxis that Mohanty supports is simply about activists knowing other cultures and fighting in unity but with consideration of their environment. This comprehensive perception of counter-partnership strengthens feminist communication and activism, inspiring a more equal and just community.

Sociologist Patricia Hill Collins, in her foundational text on Black feminist thought, reframes the concept of solidarity for social movements as "politics of empowerment." She argues that solidarity is not an outcome of effective activism but rather a prerequisite for a wider social transformation. All this work is meant to reflect on doing more with an awareness of common struggles and the fact that people will gain strength as a movement.

Collins' conceptualization is centered on critical self-reflexivity. These contemplations of identity, lived experience, and the historical tensions between solidarity and wartime collaboration provide a generative mechanism by which people inside and outside a group deepen their empathic understandings of one another. This sort of reflective avenue not only strengthens individual commitment to the journey but also affirms the movement's solidarity. Additionally, it reminded attendees that continuing their work to grow and, in relation, brings the perspectives they each uniquely hold, enriching conversations about struggles for justice with more nuanced approaches.

Collins also reinstates the role of coalitional politics in building solidarity. It unites activists across their overlapping social identities, gathering more people to reinforce each other in voices that can be a more powerful opposition against oppression. It is a coalitional framework that recognizes the intertwined suffering of oppressed communities and strives for more than economic reforms—through the arrangement of shared objectives. It strives to bring about necessary radical social change.

Kimberlé Crenshaw's original work on intersectionality has focused on understanding how multiple forms of oppression interplay and act accordingly (i.e., intersectional solidarity). Crenshaw explains that to understand the nature of power, a framework that illuminates how different social identities—such as race, gender, and sexual orientation—are needed to merge to produce new modes of domination. This is about viewing issues as not isolated because people’s identities overlap, so they cannot be understood entirely through a single axis.

An integral part of intersectional solidarity is accepting single-issue approaches. Crenshaw’s perspectives also remind one that approaches to addressing injustices in social systems must consider the complexities of multiple oppression or plight. For example, a policy addressing racial inequality only would not reach Black women, as they are affected by racism and sexism. Recognizing these intersectional margins will allow advocates to create more holistic plans that alleviate systemic oppression and cultivate an even more inclusive movement.

Thus, intersectional solidarity is the shift needed in daily life. It advocates while amplifying marginalized voices and allows spaces where everyone from all walks of life can be at the center stage. It calls on people and institutions to participate in a more informed conception of social justice, where all areas of identity are factored into struggles against oppression. Adopting this approach opens the door to creating a more just society that respects the complexity of humanity and the layered amounts of injustice.

Political scientist A. M. Hancock has defined intersectional solidarity as a concept that considers the intersections of various social movements. This is a crucial framework since people often fight for justice on multiple fronts. Although alliance politics roots itself in a specific starting point, this understanding of coalition-building broadens the concept by encouraging different identity groups to work together against multiple forms of oppression. This pragmatic approach is needed to galvanize communities and drive natural, social, and transformative change.

Oppressions are mutually constitutive, a central theme in Hancock's definition. This point of view is based on the understanding that oppressive systems, racism, sexism, and classism do not act independently; they intersect, shape, and inform each other. Recognizing their unique relationships can help activists resist, as they know how to engage each group, especially those receiving justice. This intersectional lens is essential to breaking down the types of dynamics that lead to the "Oppression Olympics," which often pit marginalized communities against one another.

Most importantly, collaboration is emphasized across differences, one of the foundations for intersectional solidarity. Hancock's system invites dialogue and relationships between people (and organizations) at identity extremes from one another. This spirit of teamwork not only supports movements but also nurtures compassion and insight within different communities. By creating a new normal where the struggles are recognized and valued as interconnected, intersectional solidarity creates the pathway toward an equitable society.

In her seminal work, the legal scholar Matsuda discusses "asking the other question" to approach social injustices. This method enables people to consider how different forms of subordination are interconnected. She challenges a simplified concept of oppression by redirecting the focus and asking about the broader context. Matsuda’s approach emphasizes asking questions and demonstrating accountability for social change. Her approach identifies these intersectionalities, viewing problems collectively rather than in silos alone. If one studies sexism, one should be able to ask questions about heterosexism as well because the two often overlap at some point. This engagement with the entire spectrum of injustice invites a deeper conversation about equality and solidarity. Ultimately, the way Matsuda conceptualizes serves as a helpful reminder that all parts of oppression must be noted and dealt with in passing. Building a more effective and inclusive social change movement can be done by understanding that different kinds of oppression are interconnected. "Ask the other question" is a great call; it encourages diving into the complexities of our world and brings about a better understanding of the struggles for justice as a collective.

Yuval-Davis conceptualizes an idea of transversal politics in her elusive work on intersectional solidarity. This method is based on the premise that unique positionality informs each perspective, offering a layered understanding of social issues. Yuval-Davis points this out because she believes that engaging with one’s experiences in a richer way means recognizing that knowledge from a one-sided perspective is always limited. The ethos of transversal politics is such that dialogue across differences, not sharing common ground, is its sine qua non. This dialogue goes beyond who is in what role, as it responds to messages and not necessarily identities. In this way, transversal politics moves away from focusing on who is in the room and finds ways to create space for all perspectives that might be useful to create richer conversations regarding social justice and solidarity.

In the final analysis, Yuval-Davis encourages reconsidering how one interacts across differences. It questions the assumption that commonalities of identities are premises of solidarity and promotes instead a focus on the struggles people have in common based on the messages they share. Viewed this way, intersectional solidarity is a dynamic process based on mutual understanding and shared collaboration that prepares the path toward more effective collective action against systemic inequalities.

At the heart of intersectional solidarity is the awareness that a person or group can face multiple intersecting oppressions. This idea stresses that social injustices cannot be studied in isolation and must be done with an intersectional approach to identity. The experiences of women of color, as illuminated by Kimberlé Crenshaw in her landmark writing, "Mapping the Margins,"^[4][10] are a prime example of how racism and sexism converge to produce specific challenges that must be addressed through an intersectional lens in advocacy and support. Through her own analysis, Crenshaw shows how one must approach oppression holistically and consider the multiplicity of issues that oppressors face. Moving away from these narrow perspectives can help one see how classism, ableism, homophobia, and other forms of discrimination are intertwined. Such an approach is necessary to create viable solutions that respond to the needs of previously marginalized groups, and no one in justice can be left behind. In the end, an understanding of the interrelatedness of oppressions brings about a more inclusive and, thus, effective solidarity. By recognizing the complexity of lived experience and that these are systemic rather than individual issues, people can foster intersectionality that gives power to every voice.

Intersectional solidarity is more a state for which to constantly reach than it could ever be a state of existence. It requires dedication and participation, whether from individuals or communities. As noted by Mohanty in her seminal text, "Feminism Without Borders,"^[1] solidarity is not: "a romantic agreement; it has to be practiced as the result of ongoing collective struggle" (p. 268). It is doing so precisely because this interdisciplinarity allows for reflecting the complexities within identities and experiences—diversity becomes a condition for unity. To build authentic bonds, grappling with the complexity of the struggles people who look different from themselves are going through is crucial. This creates space for people to be continually challenged, to suspend their ego in hearing and learning about what shapes the lives of other individuals while building a greater appreciation for how different forms of social justice work are connected. And with this fluidity, solidarity will transform to tackle the tide of social challenges. Furthermore, the idea that solidarity is a process, not an end, makes solidarity a lifelong engagement, not a one-time achievement. Creating genuine coalitions across diverse communities requires continuous commitment, conversation, and contemplation. However, one cannot understand this phenomenon in a vacuum; the nature of social justice is complex and intertwined, as is one’s ability to form intersectional solidarity, which requires resources of perseverance, integrity, and faith in collective change.

Critical reflection on the self is an essential element of creating intersectional solidarity, for it encourages people to analyze their own positionality within systems of power. In her classic, "Black Feminist Thought,"^[2] Patricia Hill Collins stresses that awareness builds understanding of the world around people and is a necessary precursor to all serious involvement in social movements. Recognizing their own privileges allows people to understand and relate to other experiences, ultimately making the collective fight for justice more valuable. In addition, one must also be open to challenging oneself and recognize one's own prejudices as a necessary milestone on the road of reflection. As Collins points out, tearing down systems of oppression requires individuals who actively question their assumptions and stereotypes. It takes a humble, open approach because it can result in some rather uncomfortable self-awareness. Finally, critical self-reflection itself is a continuous cycle of growth and learning. This requires one to be aware of the need to monitor one's ideas, actions, and the environment in which one is living.

With the rise of a more diverse society, intersectional solidarity is key to uniting identity groups. Recognizing that identity is nuanced, one can understand the power dynamics between people of color and each other, making room for more inclusive conversations. According to Yuval-Davis (1999)^[9], the phrase 'transversal politics' refers to a framework that can be used to hold dialogue with other people who differ from you in some way. It is based on two main concepts: "rooting," connecting with one's identity/live experiences, and "shifting," connecting/empathizing with the experiences of others. Collectively, these principles support a more nuanced understanding of identity and the importance of positionalities in dialogue. There are some essential attributes to be practiced if honest dialogue across differences is to occur. Simple communication is critical here, as it builds trust and promotes genuine participant input. Equal readiness to listen and learn about other perspectives is essential to creating the space for complex discussions. Creating spaces that push for these things will allow people to have the difficult conversations necessary and create solidarity across different types of identity.

One crucial piece of intersectional solidarity is coalition building, which brings different identity groups and social movements together to strive toward shared goals and experiences. This joint endeavor is grounded in the understanding that diverse knowledge, perspectives, and approaches can enhance one’s social justice work. In elaborating on the need to think outside one in coalition work, Reagon (1983)^[11][12] reminds one that coalition work has to be done out there in the streets, not on an individual basis. This declaration illustrates the need to act together to solve systemic problems. Another hallmark of effective coalitions is the formation of strategic alliances. These are coalitions formed by organizations that often have different identities and priorities but where a common goal can make them formidable forces for change. Combining common goals, coalitions can raise their volume and influence within social justice movements.

However, tensions and conflicts often arise in coalitions, which are one of the enduring challenges that activists should navigate. This can result in fight roots or differences over time, but at the very least, some conflicts can act as stepping stones for growth and reconciliation. At its heart, the effectiveness of coalition building is grounded in a commitment to collaboration—with representatives of other movements, identity groups, and sectors—and a shared vision for an equitable society.

Power analysis is one of intersectional solidarity's staples that incorporates systems thinking into social movement theories. However, knowing these dynamics is unbearably vital for creating authentic solidarity because it enables individuals and movements to see the power differentials that make collective action impossible. Acting like the interests of one group naturally interest another will not only create conflict but serve to exclude many who genuinely need advocates. By acknowledging the complexities of power relations, activists can work towards creating more inclusive and equitable movements that represent those marginalized communities where they exist. Cho, Crenshaw, and McCall (2013)^[13] elaborated on the importance of intersectionality in understanding how power operates through different axes of identity, including race, gender, and class. Their research highlights the need to scrutinize ways that type of oppression overlaps and interacts with existing power systems. Through an intersectional lens, this highlights that some of the challenges certain groups face are more complex and that injustices can go across multiple demographics. Recognizing these layers of oppression means solidarity movements can find better ways to advocate and create change. Fundamental solidarity movements should adopt strategies that tackle the root causes of inequality when attempting to overthrow and rechannel power.

Intersectional solidarity and a praxis-oriented approach demonstrate the need to translate theoretical bases into an action plan that can contribute to real change. This view stresses that understanding intersectionality is not simply a theoretical question but a critical, practical instrument for social movements whose goal is always to link and confront the many sides of oppression. For example, Laperrière and Lépinard (2016)^[14] show in their research on the Québécois women's movement how those principles were enacted through organizing practices. Their findings suggest that the movement tried to make intersectional theory a part of its foundational strategies, using an identity-based frame emphasizing representation and inclusion. The movement hoped that creating specific organizing techniques to center intersecting identities' voices and lived experiences could be more impactful and reach a wider audience. Without thinking about what real-world, social-change-oriented outcomes are produced by intersectional solidarity and considering all the potential pitfalls, this concept will not be sustainable in the long term. This makes the movement even more powerful and fosters a sense of collective responsibility vital to any participatory movement's foundation, where voice and worth are made accessible in social justice.

Intersectional solidarity probes essentialist beliefs that frequently collapse intricate identities into one-dimensional plots. Intersectional solidarity creates a more accurate representation of marginalized communities by recognizing the different experiences and lenses of being part of one. Through this, recognition is vital in forming coalitions that respond to the particular experiences and struggles of people within these communities. For instance, in her first literature review of intersectionality, Nash (2008)^[15] criticizes simplistic applications of intersectionality that ignore the differences between groups. She argues for the need to accurately understand the context of these differences for proper advocacy and activism. Without being limited by monolithic representations of the identity categories, one can better appreciate the nuances of how different subgroups’ experiences are lost in conversations. Doing so makes one’s understanding of identity more prosperous and productive in enforcing solidarity. In the end, intersectional solidarity allows for more equitable outcomes by amplifying the voices and experiences of subgroups.

Intersectional solidarity also means considering how particular historical, cultural, or geographical contexts shape social categories such as race, gender, class, and sexuality. Anthias (2012)^[16] has elaborated a "translocational" perspective of intersectionality, emphasizing the need to consider how these dimensions or social categories interrelate and transform across different contexts. This makes it possible to present a more contextually aware perspective of identity that acknowledges both local and global factors. Aspects of this framework are the multiplicity of cultural and political contexts, attention to context sensitivity, and the view that the importance of intersections may vary across space and time.

Confined to piecemeal reforms or narrow-focused advancements, intersectional solidarity is concerned with deep social change and a steadfast commitment towards those aims and what that means for transformational approaches. It is aware of the multi-faceted nature of social problems and that they are not solved in a vacuum, as best practice suggests. In "How We Get Free: Black Feminism and the Combahee River Collective," Taylor (2017)^[17] notes that the members of the Combahee River Collective made a statement of what we now refer to as intersectionality—that liberation can only happen when all forms of oppression (economically, socially, racially, and many more) are discussed together—and if one form is undealt with, then none can find freedom themselves. The Combahee River Collective contends that single-issue or reformist solutions are reductive in failing to capture the complexities of individual lived experiences shaped by intersecting and often competing systems of oppression; thus, a holistic vision is required for social justice. This framework centers on intersections of race, gender, sexuality, and class, intending to achieve greater inclusivity in equitable ways. Taylor's interviews uncovered that members of the Collective knew that reforms without addressing root causes of oppression were insufficient, later felt ineffective, and ultimately enshrined more paradigms based on inequalities. The Combahee River Collective Notes: "If we were free, it would mean that everybody else has to be free," reminds us that liberation is not done in a vacuum; rather, every aspect of oppression needs to be tackled together where each and everyone is heard on the road to justice.

Both touch upon a central component of intersectional solidarity, which addresses the emotional bandwidth one creates to bridge different communities. In her study of ACT UP, Gould (2009)^[18] claims that when activists unite or find consensus in moments of trauma or loss, their emotional labor is paramount to being on the same page and board with acting as a single unit. This illustrates the importance of de-stigmatizing the emotional impact of doing social justice work, which we never explicitly talk about but is intimately connected to successful struggles. Emotional labor is a feature of care work, both paid and unpaid, but more damaging is the fallout from the decision to speak out, lest we forget that activism takes many forms, but talk has been everything. Focusing on all these aspects allows movements to create conditions where individuals feel appreciated and supported, thus promoting their commitment to the cause. The result is a mutual caring that deepens ties among activists and cushions against the emotional fatigue one may feel after too long of working in difficult social justice work. Recognizing and addressing the emotional toll of activism is critical for organizations to build long-term buy-in and prevent burnout. The movements that practice care prepare better for supporting distress situations in these omitted lives. By applying self-care and community care, a framework surrounding intersectional solidarity can be more inclusive and effective. It meets the challenges of intersecting oppressions and identities and recharges activists to keep on with their essential work in an uncertain social justice context.

Intersectional solidarity not only adds volume and depth but also enriches the continuous awareness of how different forms of oppression are related; this makes for a fuller, more amplified movement. It focuses on uniting diverse identities and advocating for the prominence of oppressed people in the discussion. Intersectional solidarity uplifts the lived stories of individuals at the intersections of identity, facilitating a context for dialogue where each person's collective stories are given measure, nuance, and significance^[19]. And even more, it tries to deconstruct repressive structures within movements of hierarchy where only some persons get to contribute and lead—making a fair and equitable foundation for action together^[20]. This holistic way of addressing the concern reinforces the movement and fosters contributions toward empathy and understanding among its participants.

Within the framework of transformative praxis rather than in a wholly supportive role, intersectional partnerships go beyond simply embracing competition among all identities to carry out the counteractivity and demonstrate collective resistance. Such organizations may adopt integrative practices to address the underutilization of resources and ensure representation amongst members^[19]. In addition, how these movements articulate issues is unique because it attempts to reflect how systems of oppression—different types and forms—are intertwined^[21]. Using an intersectional lens towards challenges and solutions, these movements offer a fuller scope of social justice—with equity in mind for every voice being raised in unified resistance.

Grounded in coalition building, intersectional solidarity creates a space for providing support across groups and movements to enhance collective understanding^[22]. One example of such an intervention is that of Black and White Men Together (BWMT), where these networks promote mutual solidarity to enable action between different identity groups. Finally, the idea of a dimensionality-gender coalition, also illustrated by BWMT, calls for and represents an opportunity to close the gaps between traditionally discrete organizations (i.e., gay men and feminist lesbians of color), allowing conversations about identity expression and providing the foundation for which shared struggle can take place^[23]. This approach strengthens solidarity and gives marginalized voices the support they need to be heard.

In intersectional solidarity, centering those most affected helps to focus on the importance of elevating narratives often silenced in systemic inequity discussions. This recourse to black feminist methods is an indispensable frame of reference. These argue for an intersectional approach through which the multifaceted nature of global alienation, oppression, or exploitation can be explored and interpreted. Using these techniques will help movements ensure that marginalized communities' voices can be heard and included as part of the conversation, creating a more impactful and holistic approach to activism that recognizes social inequities are intersectional^[24].

Intersectional solidarity is a comprehensive approach to social justice that recognizes the interconnectedness of different social issues and the need for holistic answers to various problems simultaneously^[25]. One of the best illustrations is the work surrounding reproductive justice, in which this coalition addresses reproductive rights issues and interweaves issues of race, class, gender, and economic inequality^[19]. Solidarity based solely on individual issues does not create space for the well-rounded, complex citizens that people are. It thus does not necessarily adjoin people any closer to a fair society where every citizen has an equal voice intermeshing in life.

Intersectional solidarity is built on self-reflection, so activists in many movements take the time to look at their own biases and actions and can grow a culture of inclusiveness that healthy movements can^[26]. Although it shines light on the need to manage tensions that often accompany organizing across differences through understanding the nuance in different experiences—and even skepticism about goals or strategy—this is important because it instills a spirit of love and care. This way, activists can discuss alternative ideas and have fights to process things and move ahead of those think tanks, ensuring social justice.

This interwoven nature of social justice issues means that the nature of intersectional solidarity is transnational in scope and practice. This way of thinking seeks to create not only solidarity but action around the globe by centering the struggles that so many different groups face^[27]. As such, intersectional solidarity aims to forge a robust basis for collaboration, drawing on the recognition of not only ones' mutual endangerment in the face of global oppression and inequality modal but also an understanding that any group groping to bring about change has goals overlapping with other groups^[26]. This sense of solidarity provides a platform for underheard voices while simultaneously encouraging an understanding of injustice in terms of systems and what needs to be done for the diversity and inclusion of all members of society.

Acknowledge Intersectionality in Identities^[28]: Recognize that identities are not just Black and White. While much of the violence referenced against our community is binary at best, more often than not, we exist within multiple marginalized identifiers who need to be recognized and reflected on at the individual, bond, and systemic levels. A case in point would be a person who is both Black and Queer, meaning they have the challenges of being marginalized due to the multiple aspects of their identity. This varies by intersection, and people need to understand the systemic reasons why at these intersections.

Large Understanding of Systemic Relations^[29]: The systems of oppression interact and thus are not separate. These are not separate systems. They are connected when one is low, and the rest of the systems tend to be also. Realizing these connections gives advocates the power to tackle the root causes of oppression instead of just responding to its symptoms.

Historical Context Awareness^[30]: Knowledge of history specifically is necessary to comprehend how and why these various forms of oppression unfold systematically and what enduring impact this has on wider social formations and people individually.

Continual Education^[31]: Lastly, pursuing intersectional awareness requires training us constantly through learning and reflection. Nonetheless, this understanding of the complexities surrounding intersecting oppressions must evolve and shift along social dynamics. Continuous learning is necessary for creating a more equitable society.

Common Objectives^[32]: Groups must construe and imprint that there are common objectives in the struggles against oppression. Such acknowledgment is vital because the forms of oppression may vary between groups, but it provides solidarity and a unified front in activism and resistance.

Respecting unique experiences^[33]: Moving Toward Collective Action When There Are Many Needs The realization of individual differences lays the foundation for all voices being heard and, thus, for every group-only solution urging complexities to be played out in the dialogue form and strategies applied to counter all forms of oppression.

Refusing an Op-/Sub-Oppression Hierarchy^[34]: A key component of recognition is the refusal to arrange different oppressions in a hierarchy. Instead, one must understand how different oppressions intersect and compound. These dynamics are encoded in and operative on systems of undeclared policy—which include writing, imagery, law, and social practice—so that individuals can understand unwanted conditions or states but also see an inclusive or targeted advocacy as a deeply variable priority vis-à-vis the foregoing representation to argue against crises relative to diversity.

Emotional Resonance^[35]: Emotional resonance goes far beyond sympathy; it is a compassionate bond. It allows people from different cultures to feel and experience each other with empathy. This deeper consciousness creates a true connection and belonging to rich communities. Through empathic connection, individuals can improve social intimacy—shattering our isolation and improving their understanding of others and themselves, thus forging stronger bonds between people from different backgrounds.

Common Narratives^[36]: Achieving a group identity based on inclusion and diversity requires recognizing and carefully negotiating differences among group members. This will necessitate engaging in good-faith dialogues and meeting others where they are—especially those with whom one disagrees. By articulating these narratives, communities can forge a kind of solidarity that strengthens their own identities with each other and the articulation of an agenda that speaks to every community citizen, enhancing social cohesion.

Rituals and Symbols^[37]: Conducting rituals and using symbols that embody common values and beliefs are basic practices aimed at uniting the members of a group with an identity. These not only enable bonding among members but also create a common sense of purpose, which is crucial in developing a strong collective identity. These symbolic actions articulate and perpetuate the ideals of the community, strengthening the emotional and cultural bonds between people.

Difference Negotiation^[37]: Achieving a group identity based on inclusion and diversity requires recognizing and carefully negotiating differences among group members. This will necessitate engaging in good-faith dialogues and meeting others where they are—especially those with whom one disagrees. With these negotiations, groups develop a more dynamic identity that respects the unique individual traits of their members while also seeking similarities that can be accepted and appreciated. It not only adds to the community identity but also polishes a way of respect and coexistence.

Emotional Investment^[35]: This is about forging emotional ties to the collective identity and its goals, a prerequisite for continuity of group cohesion. If people feel an emotional connection to their community, they are more likely to actively participate and put a lot of necessary energy into achieving its aims. Such an emotional attachment raises individual loyalty and aggregates the collective identity with more strength and life.

Cross-movement Organizing^[38]: This involves different social movements joining forces to work on problems that are connected.

Breaking Free from Issue-based Silos^[38]: This approach emphasizes the connectedness of social problems and recognizes that they cannot be solved in a vacuum. But instead of crystallizing into independent professional prisons, advocates can address issues more holistically by recognizing the inclusiveness that social injustices forced upon them.

Disruption of Power Relationships^[38]: Supporters of cross-movement collaborations view these alliances as essential in forging solutions to structural social, political, and economic power inequities that ensure inequality in environmental reproductive health (ERH) and other health and social inequity areas. These collaborations are godsent for nurturing systemic change.

Intersectionality as a Tool for Unity^[38]: Instead of claims that intersectionality separates one group from another, an analysis where our identities intersect can result in solidarity and unity between disparate groups. This ideology does not negate the common experience of the oppressed but respects individual experiences.

Real Coalitions^[38]: Based on our understanding of intersectionality at the movement-building level, we can identify real points of common interest among groups and hopefully build real coalitions. Such coalitions are essential to promote common policy goals and achieve mutual aspirations effectively.

Community Support^[39]: Experiences from the LGBTQIA+ community in the UK and Brazil, a shared effort to build a response during the COVID-19 pandemic, illustrated how much the presence of every local-led initiative positively impacted individuals facing difficulties.

Meeting Diverse Needs^[40]: Mutual aid responses recognize that marginalized communities are not monolithic, and efforts focused on mutual aid reflect this.

Collectivized care^[41]: This framework suggests that individuals' power to provide for themselves is highly limited and emphasizes a collective approach; we must promote mobilization about providing care on a mass scale.

Freedom Dreaming^[42]: This approach nurtures the hope and inspiration needed to pursue long-range projects dedicated to social change.

Black-Palestinian Solidarity Movement^[43]

Black Feminist Activism for Global Social Justice^[44]

Black and White Men Together (BWMT) and Antiracist Feminist Lesbians of Color^[45]

Occupy, Gezi Park, and the Women's March^[46]

Indigenous Social Movements in North America: American Indian Movement (AIM) and Idle No More (INM)^[47]

Postsecondary Labour Activism - CUPE Local 1281^[48]

These include achieving balance and the voice of all groups in a movement. When everyone represents a group to be included, it becomes easier for other groups to overshadow decision-making or put their own perspectives in the spotlight while marginalizing others^[49]. Another thing is that the interweaving of identities can add layers of hierarchy to movements^[50]. For those with more than one marginalized identity, ensuring their voice is heard or their needs are met can be even more challenging.

External pressures and opposition against intersectional solidarity movements heighten internal tensions and threaten their effectiveness. Intersectional movements are met with efforts by dominant groups to conserve their power and privilege. Such opposition may manifest itself in political, social, cultural, and economic resistance. Pressure from outside groups can sometimes solidify walls between marginalized populations, but it can also heighten tensions^[51].

Intersectional movements are often confronted with the difficult task of balancing many varied needs and then allocating scarce resources. This is, in part, because coalition groups often have competing interests or visions for change^[52]. Additionally, resource constraints might expose cracks between movements or other groups. Scarcity resources spurring competition undermine solidarity building and pit similar groups with similar missions and values against one another. This can cause friction within the groups orienting towards different horizons of time or levels of radicalization^[53]. So, to make implementing truly intersectional approaches possible, one needs to continue to reflect and amend. The matrix of oppression and privilege is an elaborate set of dynamics that movements might never be able to ascertain and navigate in totality.