Talk:Intersectionality

I am open to having a conversation about the inclusion of "Omnicause" as an alternate definition, but there are countless (left-leaning and right-leaning) sources out there that are "due." Even left-of-center sources like this one acknowledge its existence. This isn't just some fiction of mine... Doctorstrange617 (talk) 19:34, 14 January 2026 (UTC)

The term appears to be a reactionary dogwhistle against progressive political coalitions in general, and specifically, the "paradox" of queer opposition to the Gaza genocide. The Bella Caledonia op-ed calls it a favourite phrase of the far-right. Anyway, it doesn't seem closely related to the actual concept of intersectionality.

Five opinion columns do not make a reliable secondary source (congressional testimony is particularly suspect; please review WP:PRIMARY). It's not at all clear that the term is notable or due here. –RoxySaunders 🏳️‍⚧️ (talk • stalk) 20:07, 14 January 2026 (UTC)

Once again, beyond the countless opinion columns (many written by editors, not columnists), the Free Press source comes from a deputy editor of theirs who is an actual journalist. Why does that not qualify as "due"?

This other source, written by a "journalist, syndicated columnist, and senior member of the Chicago Tribune editorial board," clearly connects intersectionality and the Omnicause as concepts for this page.

All of this is quite the double standard when the very same "Other forms" section introduces a concept known as "strategic intersectionality" that is traced back to just one individual from 2007, as the advisory tag notes, and yet that is not a "random factoid"? It is allowed by you all to stand as viable content while this Omnicause concept that is referenced repeatedly by various sources stands no chance? Why is the bar suddenly so much higher for a "random" named Marie-Claire Belleau as opposed to numerous perspectives who are established editors?

("Editor" in the journalistic sense, which is above a "reporter") Doctorstrange617 (talk) 20:52, 14 January 2026 (UTC)

The "deputy editor" is merely responsible for the introduction to an op-ed by Lucy Biggers, described as "head of social media" at The Free Press. In other words, not a real journalist.

"Countless opinion columns" do not amount to a reliable source. That goes for editorial boards as well as syndicated columnists.

See also WP:RS/P#The Free Press. —Sangdeboeuf (talk) 21:07, 14 January 2026 (UTC)

Due and undue weight is determined by whether something represents the predominant view among reliable, independent sources, not whether a source is right- or left-leaning. No one is saying the term "omnicause" is a fiction, but not every random factoid belongs in an encyclopedia.

"Bolster(ing) the description" with a Du Bois Review article from more than ten years ago that doesn't even use the term^[1] also looks like improper synthesis. —Sangdeboeuf (talk) 20:42, 14 January 2026 (UTC)

Sorry, I meant this: "Why is the bar suddenly so much higher for numerous perspectives who are established editors as opposed to a "random" named Marie-Claire Belleau? She seems much more niche than a Free Press editor, syndicated Wall Street Journal columnist, and the list goes on. Doctorstrange617 (talk) 20:54, 14 January 2026 (UTC)

See WP:OTHERCONTENT. The existence of one fringe opinion in the article does not justify adding more. See below. —Sangdeboeuf (talk) 20:56, 14 January 2026 (UTC) edited 21:25, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

False equivalence. One academic opinion from 2007 is not on par with countless headlines and actual reporting that clearly demonstrate the notability of this "Omnicause" term. It's also weird to run into so much opposition and source nitpicking when I'm just quickly introducing an alternate definition for intersectionality, not a whole new page. But, in any case, here are four other non-opinion sources, including three examples of reporting (the other is from a research fellow):

Reporting: https://www.wsj.com/us-news/education/gen-z-israel-gaza-college-protests-conversation-cf699896

Reporting: https://nymag.com/intelligencer/article/socialism-vs-abundance-bernie-sanders-aoc-mamdani-democrats-future.html

Reporting: https://www.deseret.com/environment/2025/11/11/sierra-club-social-justice-members-leaving/

Research fellow: https://www.city-journal.org/article/a-slush-fund-for-radical-protesters

What is the issue with these sources now, or did I clear the bar for some sort of inclusion? Doctorstrange617 (talk) 21:26, 14 January 2026 (UTC)

Also, not trying to be hostile at all. I welcome these opinions and they are informative. Thanks to everyone Doctorstrange617 (talk) 21:27, 14 January 2026 (UTC)

None of these sources use the term intersectionality or intersectional, so citing them for an alternate definition for intersectionality (which is really a label, not a definition) is at best improper synthesis.

James B. Meigs is not a researcher, but a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute, a politically conservative think tank. City Journal is where they disseminate political propaganda to the media and wider public.

Most of the other sources have some conditions on their reliability at WP:RS/P. Not that it matters, because none of them are specifically about the supposed "omnicause", only using the term in passing. Several put "omnicause" in quotation marks, suggesting it's an unfamiliar neologism.

Most of the sources cited for the main points of the article are peer-reviewed scholarship, so brief mentions in news reports (let alone op-eds and political propaganda pieces) are unduly weighted here. —Sangdeboeuf (talk) 12:09, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

See, now we're really nitpicking. On the hand, WP:RSP is cited as gospel, but then the justification to omit the City Journal source is purely opinion-based. There is no mention of the Manhattan Institute or City Journal there, so "disseminate political propaganda to the media and wider public" is just your personal feeling about the group while sentences like the one below are readily accepted with no mention of the fact that these are then also "political propaganda" groups:

"Additional organizations such as the National Black Women's Reproductive Justice Agenda, the Black Mamas Matter Alliance, and the Disability Justice Collective also work to center intersectionality in health justice advocacy, public policy, and community-driven research efforts."

How is this not a clear double standard when RSP can't justify the City Journal's exclusion? And again, that is just one example of a source. I shared reported stories (and there are more out there), and the Deseret News has a green light per WP:DESERET. The Intelligencer is "generally reliable" too, and yet the insinuation here is that we should all just pretend that the word "Omnicause" doesn't exist under any circumstance.

Here's a potential solution: Why don't we introduce "Omnicause" with one or two sentences as a "label" as opposed to a "definition," caveating that it is primarily referenced in right-of-center commentary? Like a preface for readers to know? Happy to work with you on a short paragraph that might work Doctorstrange617 (talk) 14:26, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

Yes, my opinion (which you earlier said was welcome and informative) is that City Journal lacks a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy, based on the obvious fact that it is published by a political think tank. Calling that nitpicking is merely your opinion. If you disagree, then present your reasoning and try to gain consensus. That's how this works.

WP:DESERET is listed as generally reliable for local news, with no mention of broader political coverage. WP:INTELLIGENCER says There is no consensus on whether it is generally reliable for contentious statements.

Once again, none of these sources specifically mention the topic of intersectionality. Citing their description of the "omnicause" in this article would be a violation of WP:SYNTH & WP:UNDUE. —Sangdeboeuf (talk) 15:21, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

Marie-Claire Belleau is a law professor and member of the Royal Society of Canada who has made significant contributions to the fields of the history of legal thought, the practice of dissent and participatory justice. I don't know if the statements attributed to her represent majority scholarly opinion or not, but at first blush Belleau has a much better claim of authority than some scandal-mongering journalists. —Sangdeboeuf (talk) 19:25, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

To be honest, I don't really want to get into the opinion game. I just want to volunteer a wide range of reliable sources that demonstrate the Omnicause's notability for Wikipedia, and that has already been done. Whatever we think personally, it shouldn't have a bearing here, so why get into insinuations like "scandal-mongering journalists"? Like, let's just try to be constructive?

Just curious: What do you think about creating a new, separate page for the Omnicause then? As opposed to linking it to intersectionality? That might not be a bad idea as an alternative, but open to your thoughts. Cheers Doctorstrange617 (talk) 21:17, 2 February 2026 (UTC)

hi, the Rigoberta Menchú Biography "I, Rigoberta Menchu: An Indian Woman in Guatemala" could be an insightful add to intersectionality as her account gives light to the treatment of different indigenous groups in Guatamala as well as counters the false notion that her account as a woman must encompass all those within her culture, especially when compared to a man's account which is typically viewed as a singular testimony. Ybutcher (talk) 19:36, 18 February 2026 (UTC)

Interesting. Based on the reliable sourcing below (and other RS), that seems to be WP:DUE. Maybe not a whole paragraph, but at least a sentence or two...

•https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/09589236.2025.2496391

•https://vc.bridgew.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2464&context=jiws Doctorstrange617 (talk) 18:06, 20 February 2026 (UTC)

This article is currently the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 27 January 2026 and 15 May 2026. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Little mermaid52623 (article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by Msn1023 (talk) 20:13, 27 February 2026 (UTC)