It is somewhat difficult to pinpoint the “beginning” of feminism, and when exactly the application of gendered lenses became an instrumental tool for the advancement of women’s rights around the world. The literature commonly refers to the modern feminist movement as occurring in three main waves, with some scholars suggesting that a fourth wave is currently in progress. Olympe de Gouges, Wollstonecraft, Jane Addams, de Beauvoir, Gloria Steinem, Frida Kahlo, Angela Davis, bell hooks, Judith Butler, Maya Angelou, Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie are just some of the hundreds of names famously associated with the diverse agendas and movements within feminist history. In any case, it is important to note that there are fundamental differences between these waves of feminism, and that these differences have been instrumental in shaping what we now understand as “Data Feminism”. 

The first feminist “wave”, which spanned from the 19th century to the beginning of the 20th century, focused primarily on advancing political rights and securing women’s right to vote. This  wave was mostly active in the Western world, and many terms have been used to distinguish this important, but controversial, movement. Authors such as Koa Beck have referred to it as “white feminism”, while other terms have been used to capture this wave’s primary focus, such as Western feminism, corporate feminism, bourgeois feminism, and girl-boss feminism. The controversy stems from it being viewed as an exclusionary movement which does not (necessarily) embrace or advocate for women’s rights from an intersectional perspective, but rather work towards the advancements of the rights of white, middle- to upper-class women within Western capitalist systems. It was not until the second wave of feminism that Black women began to have greater participation in and impact on the movement, an injustice that was influenced by institutional racism of the time period (Wilson, 1997).

The so-called “white feminism” essentially pursues equal rights for those women within the culturally dominant elite of Western societies. They often had access to the best universities, a secure (yet arbitrary) number of years of professional experience, and financial resources. What binds them together is this “aspiration to whiteness”, or to gain more full participation in societies where white men traditionally held most of the political, economic and social power. 

The importance of understanding the context of this first wave of feminism is that it opened the space for other voices to emerge, due to the (compounded) inequalities that other (non-white) groups of women face. Specifically, activists such as Kimberlé Crenshaw, Audre Lorde, and Angela Davis began advocating for more intersectional approaches to understand, reflect, and move forward with a more egalitarian idea of what feminism is and could be. The term “intersectionality” was coined by Crenshaw, and is rooted in the concept of “interlocking” systems of oppression —that is, “we are actually living at the intersections of overlapping systems of privilege and oppression” (Carty and Mohanty, 2019). Intersectionality does not see women as a homogeneous group, but rather as one that encompasses several characteristics that, when combined, can enhance (or diminish) the level of inequality and marginalization they face, such as race, class, religion, national origin, or disability, amongst others.

Intersectionality, therefore, is at the core of DPA’s Data Feminism Program. We seek to build knowledge and foster awareness on gender inequalities worldwide by questioning how the types of inequalities faced by women (and other gender diverse minorities) intersect in given contexts. To gain the fullest understanding of this issue, as with all our work, the role of quality data is a vital component.