Among archives of time, the contribution of Black women often stands overlooked and overshadowed. Their pivotal role in molding historic moments, such as passing the Fifteenth and Nineteenth Amendments, remains undeniable; Yet they spent another half a century fighting towards inclusion and equality Between the ratification of the Fifteenth and Nineteenth Amendments, women’s organizations were divided on the issue of including Black women in the fight for suffrage in the United States.
In 1869, suffragists formed two rival organizations, the National Woman Suffrage Association (NWSA), led by Susan B. Anthony and Elizabeth Cady Stanton, and the American Woman Suffrage Association (AWSA), led by Lucy Stone. While both organizations had a small number of Black women in their membership, the NWSA allowed local chapters to reject Black women from participation. According to The Nation, Stanton went as far as to argue that “[…] native-born white women deserved the vote more than nonwhites and immigrants.” In 1890, Anthony and Alice Stone Blackwell successfully negotiated a reunification of the two organizations, forming the National American Woman Suffrage Association (NAWSA), though ethnic and racial discrimination in the suffrage movement continued, according to the National Women’s History Museum.
In 1989, just short of a century later, Kimberlé Crenshaw, an American Civil Rights Advocate and Critical Race Theory Scholar, coined the term intersectionality, or how individual characteristics of one’s identity intersect or overlap concurrently, constructing unique lived experiences or encounters with oppression and marginalization. Amidst early resistance, intersectionality has been accepted into feminist thinking and women’s studies scholarship. It is widely understood, as reported by UN Women, “[…] an intersectional feminist approach to the crises of today helps us seize the opportunity to build back better, stronger, resilient, and equal societies.” But, have historical women’s organizations embraced intersectionality, evolving to be more inclusive of all women?
Veris Media Group investigated the National Organization for Women (NOW), the largest feminist organization in the United States, founded in 1966 and consisting of “[…] hundreds of chapters and hundreds of thousands of members and activists in all 50 states and the District of Columbia.” According to the National Chapter, the mission of NOW is to seek constitutional equality for all women through the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA), “[…] championing abortion rights, reproductive freedom and other women’s health issues; opposing racism; fighting bigotry against the LGBTQIA community; and ending violence against women.”
NOW presents strong statements on its website acknowledging women have individualized aspects to their identity that require proportional representation in the push for women’s equality. However, Dr. Pramila Venkateswaran, President of Suffolk County, Long Island Chapter of NOW, argues that “[…] it is only in the last decade or even less that NOW even conceived […] including the term intersectional within’ its mission.” Dr. Venkateswaran described a controversial and contentious history, spanning from the 1980s through today; “[NOW] was focused on white middle-class issues,” she explained, “[…] a lot of people of color felt that it was not inclusive, and so there was this great divide between Blacks and whites.”
The LGBTQIA+ community has yet to fare well in terms of inclusion in NOW. An LGBTQIA Inclusion Resolution had to be made at the 2019 National NOW Conference, recognizing that despite being one of the six core issues of NOW, the LGBTQIA+ community faced obstacles when seeking inclusion in NOW agendas. Concurrently, NOW leaders acknowledged that the transgender community was facing eradication by our federal government, but no attempts were made to address the issue. Congresswoman Carolyn B. Maloney, President of the New York State Chapter of NOW, informed Veris Media Group that she wasn’t aware of the national chapter’s position on issues facing the transgender community; “[Christian F. Nunes] has never discussed it publicly,” she said, “[but] only she, with the approval of her board, can make any decision or endorsement on the national level.”
Congresswoman Maloney went on to clarify, “[…] on the state level […] everyone can do their own thing.” However, this state-level authority to construct action plans has never materialized. Programming limits focus to celebrations during Pride Month and events like Trans Day of Remembrance, but nothing associated with grassroots feminist activism. Dr. Venkateswaran contends that the reason reflects a fear of policing, “[…] safety and security make them avoid taking risks, then what happens is they lose out on being radical […] it’s a fear of stepping out and doing something that can be considered radical.”
This “fear of policing” begs the question: How are other marginalized aspects of one’s identity represented and included in NOW agendas? The NOW website has a page dedicated to National Action Campaigns, which intend to center policy-making and advocacy around all women, through “[…] concrete actions our local chapters, state organizations, members, and activists can take.” This contradicts Congresswoman Maloney’s statement about local and state chapters’ flexibility in addressing issues. Contrastingly, NOW states that action plans must be approved and distributed by the national chapter. While a collective voice at the national level sounds ideal, failures by the national chapter to address socioeconomic and political issues impacting marginalized groups of women continue to emphasize white middle-class issues.
Could the continued failures of the national chapter be tied to concerns about the effectiveness of feminist activist organizations that engage in political lobbying and the endorsement of political candidates? Dr. Venkateswaran has noticed this, “[…] NOW is going to play to the people […] that they are supporting. That’s another reason it will not take a different position.” In a political environment where we observe targeted legislation and reversals of court precedent, are NOW leaders following endorsed politicians? According to Dr. Venkateswaran, “No matter how much you are passionate, and feel [NOW] has to take a political position […] I don’t think it will.”
It has been 35 years since Kimberlé Crenshaw coined the term intersectionality; Despite its widespread incorporation into feminist thinking and women’s studies scholarship, feminist activist groups continue to demonstrate signs of resistance. The mission of NOW is to “[…] lead societal change, eliminate discrimination, and achieve and protect the equal rights of all women and girls.” But, as Emma Lazarus famously said, “Until we are all free, we are none of us free.”