What happens when feminism is treated as universal — despite emerging from very unequal histories and contexts?

In this episode of Intersectional Psychology, I compare Anglo-American feminism and African feminisms, asking what gets lost when Western feminist frameworks are exported as the default lens for understanding gender, power, and justice.

Drawing on African feminist scholarship and decolonial theory, this episode explores how feminism looks different when it is shaped by colonial histories, economic inequality, community-based survival, and collective responsibility — rather than liberal individualism.

🎁 Support the podcast and get exclusive bonus content at Patreon.com/IntersectionalPsychology.

🌈 If this episode resonates, please share it, rate the show, and send us your thoughts.

📄 Download a transcript of this episode on IntersectionalPsychology.com.

00:00:00 Pre-credit teaser 00:01:22 Land acknowledgement 00:01:50 Title credits 00:02:17 Introduction to African vs Anglo-American feminism 00:04:18 Anglo-American feminism: Who is it really for? 00:07:42 The problem with universal womanhood 00:09:46 African feminism: Context is not optional 00:13:15 Why Anglo-American feminism still falls short 00:16:18 Intersectionality: Why this is personal 00:17:55 South Africa, apartheid, and compounded oppression 00:22:28 Why African feminism matters 00:26:32 End credits

🔗 Subscribe wherever you get your podcasts 📮 Got feedback or questions? Reach out at @IntersectionalPsychology or IntersectionalPsychologyPod[@]gmail.com

You can contribute to the Palestine Children's Relief Fund at https://www.pcrf.net/

See Privacy Policy at https://intersectionalpsychology.com/privacy-policy/