Throughout chapter two, Hancock focuses on the concept of violence and how by using intersectional activism and ‘intersectional-like thinking,’ the movement to end violence against women can continue to prevail. The collision of these two concepts are ever more necessary when trying to make people aware of the epidemic that is occurring throughout the world, it must become visible. However, it is crucial to realize that when bringing forth the violence put against women, and specifically women of color, it should not come off that these women are powerless. As bell hooks once stated in her passage of Changing Perspectives on Power, “sexism has never rendered women powerless. It has either suppressed their strength or exploited it” (hooks 95). This thought is also prevalent when Hancock states that by making the struggle with violence against women of color visible, it does not imply that these women are powerless. Intersectionality would focus on the fact that these women’s issues need to become personalized, that their race sets them apart from the white women who report being beaten. Action must be taken to demonstrate how by making this violence visible, it cannot just be brushed aside. Hancock argues that intersectional activists have a duty of recognizing three main components. The three main components Hancock mentions …show more content…
Women of color in particular even had to fight against other women to have their voices heard. In the movie, She’s Beautiful When She’s Angry, it demonstrates how there were all these different type of movements taking place under the one large umbrella that was the liberation. Whether these women were lesbians, Black, or Latinas, these women fought to have their voices heard. Groups such as Witches, Black Women, or Women Now, all produced change within the women’s liberation. They were creating a deeper meaning to the liberation by allowing it to have an intersectional-like