intersectional | Campus Safe Words

TERM: intersectional
RISK LEVEL: extreme

Definition

“Intersectional” refers to a framework that examines how overlapping social identities—such as race, gender, class, and sexuality—interact to produce unique experiences of discrimination or privilege. In higher education, the term often appears in diversity training, academic research, curriculum development, and public statements on equity and inclusion.

Why It’s Risky

“Intersectional” is directly associated with critical race theory and related academic movements, which have become flashpoints in states passing legislation to limit perceived ideological indoctrination, such as Florida’s Stop W.O.K.E. Act and Texas Senate Bill 17. Critics argue that intersectionality promotes a worldview centered on identity politics, collective victimhood, and systemic grievance narratives. When used in official communications, program descriptions, or training materials, “intersectional” may signal institutional endorsement of contentious social theories. This framing can trigger accusations of political bias, mission drift, or compelled speech. In politically regulated environments, use of the term may prompt legislative inquiries, audits, donor withdrawal, or public controversy, especially when it appears in hiring materials, strategic plans, or required coursework.

Common Critiques

Opponents argue that “intersectional” thinking promotes division by categorizing people primarily by their group identities rather than individual character, achievement, or merit. Critics claim it encourages a victim-oppressor worldview that undermines national unity, personal responsibility, and traditional civil rights ideals. In higher education, intersectionality is often seen by conservative policymakers as a tool for politicizing curricula, administrative practices, and student services. Lawmakers have cited the term in efforts to ban mandatory diversity trainings and identity-based hiring programs, arguing that it embeds progressive ideology into institutional operations. Furthermore, intersectionality’s complex and often subjective framework has been criticized for its lack of empirical grounding outside of specific academic contexts, making it vulnerable to claims of intellectual bias and mission misalignment. In politically sensitive states, documentation or public statements referencing intersectionality can lead to institutional penalties or reputational harm.

Suggested Substitutes

Recognition of diverse experiences and backgrounds (in program materials);
Understanding how different factors impact student success (in training guides);
Focus on individual student needs and strengths (in support services);
Commitment to fairness and opportunity for all (in strategic plans);
Support for inclusive academic inquiry (in course descriptions)

These alternatives encourage awareness and support without ideological framing or political risk.

When It May Still Be Appropriate

“Intersectional” may be appropriate in academic research, particularly in sociology, gender studies, or legal studies where the term is methodologically relevant and critically examined. It may also appear in elective coursework where participation is voluntary and the concept is presented with balanced perspectives. In official policy documents, hiring materials, or strategic communications, avoid using the term to maintain neutrality and compliance.

NOTES: Avoid the term “intersectional” in general institutional documents unless clearly required for academic or grant purposes. Focus instead on individual support, educational opportunity, and respect for all backgrounds to minimize political and legal risks.