The Combahee River Collective describes the nature of Black feminism with the following quote: “We might use our position at the bottom to make a clear leap into revolutionary action. If black women were free, it would mean that everyone else would have to be free since our freedom would necessitate the destruction of all the systems of oppression.” The first part of it implies their position being on the very bottom, meaning that they were put in the lowest caste of society because of the inferiority of their gender, race, and consequently, social class, which all acted against them simultaneously. The second part of the quote claims that because Black women historically have been subjects to all kinds of such oppressions, they need to fight them all at once to gain freedom. Because of this, the goal of Black feminists becomes very challenging to achieve: the psychological toll and lack of power and resources to rely upon makes it hard to organize a strong movement, leaving Black women with an option to rely on themselves. The Collective defines such an approach as “identity politics,” which evolve from focusing on their own oppression. As they explain, “The most profound and potentially most radical politics come directly out of our own identity, as opposed to working to end somebody else’s oppression.” This belief seems very logical to me — we seek to improve our lives more than someone else’s because it is in our survival nature. No one would fix an issue better than us if it affects us because we know first-hand what it’s like to suffer from it.

This topic is unfolding in Paris is Burning, when we are shown characters with very different individualities and different dreams. Although they are part of one big community that shares the same values, the characters put their interests first a lot of the time to come closer to their dream or to manifest the vision of their life. At the same time, they share the same burden of oppression and through fighting it they become one, employing identity politics as a whole.

Gender and race oppression are directly connected with mechanisms of capitalism, which at its nature imply the existence of privilege and division of people into classes. Hypothetically, capitalism would not exist in a society where everyone is equal, because it thrives on competition. It is a system in which one individual benefits from the work (read: slow suffering) of others, similarly to what stands behind systems of oppression. Based on the experience of my female relatives, who were born in the USSR, it is true. My grandmother worked as an elevator technician, and it was absolutely normal. From their stories I can tell that there was much less apparent sexism in the work environment. We now know, of course, that there were larger, hidden issues in their society, and that oppression certainly existed at all times of USSR’s history. On that note, the relationship between capitalism and sexism/racism isn’t reciprocal. The Collective states: “We are not convinced, however, that a socialist revolution that is not also a feminist and anti-racist revolution will guarantee our liberation.” Capitalism cannot exist without oppression; oppression, on the other hand, can exist without capitalism.