Introduction
This essay explores the concept of intersectionality within criminology, with a specific emphasis on the dynamic interplay between structure and agency. Intersectionality, a framework initially developed by Kimberlé Crenshaw (1989), highlights how overlapping social identities—such as race, gender, and class—shape experiences of oppression and privilege. In criminology, this lens reveals how systemic inequalities influence criminal justice outcomes and individual behaviours. The theme of structure and agency, which examines the balance between societal constraints and personal choice, provides a critical perspective for understanding how intersecting identities impact engagement with crime and justice systems. This essay will first outline intersectionality’s relevance to criminology, then analyse how structural factors and individual agency interact within this context, and finally, discuss the implications for policy and research.
Intersectionality in Criminology
Intersectionality offers a robust framework for understanding the multifaceted nature of crime and victimisation. Traditional criminological theories often focus on singular factors like economic deprivation or individual pathology. However, intersectionality argues that experiences of crime are shaped by multiple, intersecting axes of identity. For instance, Black women may face unique forms of discrimination in the criminal justice system, distinct from those experienced by Black men or White women, due to the combined effects of racism and sexism (Crenshaw, 1991). Research by Potter (2015) further illustrates how intersectional identities influence not only victimisation—such as higher rates of domestic violence among minority women—but also interactions with law enforcement, where biases compound vulnerability. This approach challenges criminology to move beyond one-dimensional analyses, highlighting the need for nuanced understandings of how power structures shape criminal justice outcomes. While this perspective enriches the field, it is limited by a lack of comprehensive data on intersecting identities, often restricting empirical validation.
Structure and Agency through an Intersectional Lens
The tension between structure and agency is central to criminological inquiry, and intersectionality provides a lens to explore this relationship. Structural factors, such as poverty, systemic racism, and gendered norms, often constrain individual choices, disproportionately impacting marginalised groups. For example, studies show that economic inequality—a structural issue—disproportionately affects ethnic minorities, increasing their likelihood of involvement in crime as a survival mechanism (Webster, 2015). Conversely, agency reflects individuals’ capacity to resist or navigate these constraints. Young (1999) argues that while structural oppression limits opportunities, some individuals exercise agency by engaging in subcultural resistance, which may manifest as criminal behaviour. However, intersectionality reveals that agency is not equally accessible; a working-class woman of colour, for instance, may face more barriers to exercising choice than a middle-class White man due to intersecting oppressions. This interplay suggests that neither structure nor agency operates in isolation—rather, they are shaped by overlapping identities. Indeed, this complexity makes policy interventions challenging, as solutions must address systemic issues while empowering individual autonomy.
Implications for Criminology
Understanding intersectionality’s impact on structure and agency has significant implications for criminological research and practice. Firstly, it calls for policies that address structural inequalities, such as reforming biased policing practices that disproportionately target minority groups. Secondly, it highlights the need for intersectional data collection to better capture diverse experiences within the justice system. Without such data, as Potter (2015) notes, interventions risk perpetuating existing inequalities. Furthermore, this perspective encourages criminologists to adopt a critical approach, questioning how power dynamics influence both crime and responses to it. Generally, while intersectionality enriches our understanding, its application remains limited by resistance to systemic change within criminal justice institutions.
Conclusion
In conclusion, intersectionality offers a vital framework for examining the interplay of structure and agency in criminology. It reveals how overlapping identities shape experiences of crime, victimisation, and justice, challenging simplistic explanations of criminal behaviour. Structural constraints like racism and poverty often limit agency, though individuals may still resist through personal choices, albeit within unequal conditions. The implications are clear: criminology must prioritise intersectional research and advocate for systemic reforms to address these disparities. Ultimately, this approach not only deepens academic understanding but also informs more equitable criminal justice practices, ensuring that the field remains relevant to diverse societal realities.
References
- Crenshaw, K. (1989) Demarginalizing the Intersection of Race and Sex: A Black Feminist Critique of Antidiscrimination Doctrine, Feminist Theory and Antiracist Politics. University of Chicago Legal Forum, 1989(1), 139-167.
- Crenshaw, K. (1991) Mapping the Margins: Intersectionality, Identity Politics, and Violence against Women of Color. Stanford Law Review, 43(6), 1241-1299.
- Potter, H. (2015) Intersectionality and Criminology: Disrupting and Revolutionizing Studies of Crime. Routledge.
- Webster, C. (2015) Race, Crime and Criminal Justice: International Perspectives. Palgrave Macmillan.
- Young, J. (1999) The Exclusive Society: Social Exclusion, Crime and Difference in Late Modernity. SAGE Publications.
