Last International Women's Day, we wrote an article surrounding Kimberle Crenshaw's ideas of intersectionality and the importance of intersectional feminism as a progressive way forward. You can access the article via this link:
International Women's Day is a time to celebrate women in all their diversity and to recognize that no nation has yet achieved true gender equality. While it’s a day for celebration, it's also a reminder of the persistent violations of women's rights, gender discrimination, and the lack of representation of women in positions of power. Today, women must unite to fight for their fundamental rights—equality and freedom—and to challenge the systems that maintain patriarchal control. It’s also a day to support those without equal representation and to acknowledge the structural challenges that women still face globally.
Feminism’s goal is not to transfer power from men to women but to dismantle the very structures that perpetuate unequal power dynamics. As Mary Shelley once said, "Women should not have power over men, but over themselves."
In my recent studies of human rights and through various discussions, I've become increasingly uncomfortable with the concept of "empowerment."
Commonly defined as "the authority or power given to someone to do something," this term creates a divide, suggesting an "us" and "them" dynamic. Such a framing can hinder the fight for equality by reinforcing hierarchical structures, rather than breaking them down.
One quote that resonates with me on this issue comes from G.D. Anderson, who said: "Feminism is not about making women stronger; women are already strong. It's about changing the way the world perceives that strength."
The desire to "empower" can, paradoxically, embody the very forces that oppress people by implying that they lack self-determination or the ability to represent themselves. This misinterpretation of empowerment often allows existing power imbalances to persist, with one group retaining control over others.
This issue extends beyond women’s rights and applies to all marginalized groups who are underrepresented globally. The notion of empowerment assumes that those in a position to "empower" hold inherent authority or superiority. To suggest that a person needs empowering implies that they lack the ability or worth on their own. Such thinking perpetuates existing inequalities and hierarchical structures.
Empowerment, in this sense, implies a "giving" from a position of control, reinforcing the idea that the "giver" holds inherent value over others. This assumption often manifests in colonial values, where privileged groups—particularly white, straight, able-bodied, cisgender women—are viewed as inherently empowered, while others are not. This only deepens societal divisions and reflects the lingering effects of colonialism in our language and actions, even in the context of fighting for equality.
Assuming that underrepresented groups are inherently unempowered has broader societal consequences. It maintains the narrative that minorities are of lesser worth and supports a system of oppression that benefits the dominant patriarchal structure. The idea that some women have more value or power because they "empower" others perpetuates a harmful elitism, akin to the "white savior" complex.
Furthermore, the concept of giving empowerment assumes that individuals lack something from the outset. This devalues the inherent capabilities of women and other marginalized groups, denying them their legitimacy and self-determination. The popular phrase "empowered women empower women" suggests that not all women are empowered, undermining their capabilities and shifting the focus away from the patriarchal systems that are the real source of inequality.
By focusing on the concept of empowerment, we risk losing sight of the structures that continue to harm women and marginalized groups. Women are not disempowered by nature, but rather by a system that benefits men and has been built to do so. It is these colonial and patriarchal systems—not women themselves—that have hindered progress toward equality.
While the term "empowerment" is often well-intentioned, especially in the context of women's rights, it still carries underlying values that undermine others and reinforce the dominance of male-centered and colonial ideals. This is where Kimberlé Crenshaw’s concept of intersectionality becomes critical. As noted in last year's International Women's Day article:
"The feminist movement is at risk of losing progress if it fails to recognize that not every woman is straight, white, cisgender, able-bodied, or middle-class. Now, more than ever, the movement must acknowledge the multiple forms of prejudice that intensify gender-based discrimination."
It’s crucial for those with privilege—both men and women, particularly from dominant societal groups—to recognize the impact of their voices in the fight for equality. Acknowledging this privilege is essential, as it can minimize the struggles of others in their pursuit of recognition and legitimacy. The power that the dominant group holds is not earned but gained through the exploitation of others, and the concept of empowerment, when misused, can become a tool for reinforcing this power dynamic.
What we need is not empowerment, but the opportunity for self-representation. Women and marginalized groups do not need others to "empower" them; they need a seat at the table and the opportunity to determine their own path, free from the constraints of patriarchal and colonial systems. It’s time to shift the rhetoric from empowerment to self-determination, valuing the power within autonomy.
As Sallie Krawcheck aptly puts it: "It can't be about 'empowerment' any longer. To make real progress, it has to be about power—using and growing the power we women already have."
Comments