{"id":2169,"date":"2026-03-10T15:01:00","date_gmt":"2026-03-10T15:01:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/sites.exeter.ac.uk\/humanrightsanddemocracyforumblog\/?p=2169"},"modified":"2026-03-10T15:01:03","modified_gmt":"2026-03-10T15:01:03","slug":"two-courts-discover-intersectionality-in-the-same-year-revealing-everything-about-democratic-difference-by-bernardo-carvalho-de-mello","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/sites.exeter.ac.uk\/humanrightsanddemocracyforumblog\/2026\/03\/10\/two-courts-discover-intersectionality-in-the-same-year-revealing-everything-about-democratic-difference-by-bernardo-carvalho-de-mello\/","title":{"rendered":"Two Courts Discover Intersectionality in the Same Year: Revealing Everything About Democratic Difference, by Bernardo Carvalho de Mello"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<p>In 2024, intersectionality\u2019s long journey through international human rights jurisprudence reached two milestones \u2014 almost simultaneously, yet worlds apart. On 10 December 2024, the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) <em>explicitly<\/em> recognised intersectional discrimination for the first time, in <a href=\"https:\/\/hudoc.echr.coe.int\/ukr#{%22itemid%22:[%22001-238319%22]}\"><em>FM and Others v Russia<\/em><\/a>, a ruling in which five trafficked women were found to have been targeted specifically due to the intersection of their gender, ethnicity and irregular migration status. Across the Atlantic, in early 2025, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACtHR) delivered its judgment in <a href=\"https:\/\/www.corteidh.or.cr\/docs\/casos\/articulos\/seriec_539_esp.pdf\"><em>Santos Nascimento and Ferreira Gomes v Brazil<\/em><\/a>, condemning Brazil for the intersectional race-and-gender discrimination suffered by two Black women denied employment. Both rulings invoke the concept of intersectionality coined by Kimberl\u00e9 Crenshaw in 1989.<a href=\"#_ftn1\" id=\"_ftnref1\">[1]<\/a> Yet the stark differences between the two judgments reveal how the quality of democracy \u2014 and the willingness of its institutions to perceive intersectional harm \u2014 shapes the very meaning of equality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">A Long-Awaited Arrival in Strasbourg<\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p><em>FM and Others v Russia<\/em> concerned five women from Uzbekistan and Kazakhstan trafficked to Moscow, who were held in appalling conditions, subjected to forced labour and sexual violence. Despite years of complaints, Russian authorities repeatedly failed to investigate. The Court found violations of Article 4 (prohibition of forced labour) and, crucially, of Article 14 (prohibition of discrimination), holding that state inaction constituted intersectional discrimination against the applicants \u201cas women who were foreign workers with an irregular immigration status\u201d [para. 346]. Notably, the Court used the term \u201cintersectional discrimination\u201d explicitly, rather than merely identifying the concept implicitly through its reasoning.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>The significance of this development cannot be overstated. For decades, Strasbourg had resisted naming intersectional discrimination despite academic calls to do so. In <a href=\"https:\/\/hudoc.echr.coe.int\/eng#{%22itemid%22:[%22001-112459%22]}\"><em>BS v Spain<\/em> (2012)<\/a>, involving a Black sex worker subjected to police violence, the Court found a violation of Article 14 but refused to engage with the intersectional nature of the harm \u2014 treating race and gender as parallel rather than compounded grounds. Sandra Fredman and other scholars had long criticised the European system\u2019s \u201csingle-axis\u201d approach, which forces claimants to fit their experience into isolated categories of discrimination. With <em>FM v Russia<\/em>, the Court finally adopted the language and logic of intersectionality, recognising that the women\u2019s vulnerability arose from the specific combination of gender, ethnicity and social position \u2014 not from each factor alone.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">A Decade of Intersectional Practice in San Jos\u00e9<\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p>The IACtHR, by contrast, reached this point a decade earlier. In <a href=\"https:\/\/www.corteidh.or.cr\/docs\/casos\/articulos\/seriec_298_ing.pdf\"><em>Gonzales Lluy and Others v Ecuador<\/em> (2015)<\/a>, Judge Ferrer Mac-Gregor Poisot identified how \u201cnumerous factors of vulnerability and risk of discrimination intersected\u201d [para. 290] in relation to a young woman, living with HIV, and in poverty. Since then, the Inter-American Court has built a jurisprudence in which intersectionality is not an occasional analytical tool but a structuring framework for understanding discrimination.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><em>Santos Nascimento and Ferreira Gomes<\/em> extends this trajectory into binding remedial orders. In 1998, Neusa dos Santos Nascimento and Gisele Ana Ferreira Gomes (both Black women) applied for positions at a medical insurance company in S\u00e3o Paulo. They were immediately turned away; a white woman who applied the same day was hired immediately. After twenty-six years of domestic impunity, the IACtHR condemned Brazil for failing to provide an effective judicial response to racial discrimination. Crucially, the Court ordered Brazil to adopt an investigation protocol incorporating an intersectional perspective on race and gender. Following the earlier <a href=\"https:\/\/www.corteidh.or.cr\/docs\/casos\/articulos\/seriec_407_ing.pdf\"><em>Fireworks Factory<\/em> ruling<\/a>, the judgment also required corporate human rights due diligence measures, linking intersectional discrimination directly to structural obligations of the state and private actors.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">What the Divergence Reveals About Democracy and Human Dignity<\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p>The comparison between these two judgments exposes a fundamental asymmetry in how democratic legal traditions conceive of equality. The European system\u2019s belated adoption of intersectionality reflects what Atrey has called a persistent \u201cformalist\u201d approach\u2014one that compartmentalises identity and treats discrimination as deviation from a neutral norm rather than as a structurally embedded phenomenon.<a href=\"#_ftn2\" id=\"_ftnref2\">[2]<\/a> The Inter-American system, forged in response to the colonial legacies that <a href=\"https:\/\/www.jstor.org\/stable\/4640051\">Mar\u00eda Lugones<\/a> identified as constitutive of modern gender hierarchies, has been structurally more receptive to seeing discrimination as produced at the intersection of multiple systems of oppression. This is not incidental. The <a href=\"https:\/\/www.corteidh.or.cr\/docs\/opiniones\/seriea_32_en.pdf\">IACtHR\u2019s 2025 Climate Advisory Opinion<\/a> went so far as to declare intersectionality \u201cnot an optional lens but a binding normative requirement\u201d [para. 617]. Human dignity provides a further thread connecting these two systems. In <em>FM v Russia<\/em>, the European Court\u2019s analysis under Article 4 ECHR, a provision the foundations of which rest on the inviolability of human dignity, may have predisposed it towards a more holistic reading of the harm, compelling it to treat the applicants\u2019 compound vulnerability as a distinctive dignitary injury rather than as isolated protected characteristics. The IACtHR has been more explicit still: <a href=\"https:\/\/www.oas.org\/dil\/treaties_b-32_american_convention_on_human_rights.pdf\">Article 11 of the American Convention enshrines human dignity as a freestanding right<\/a>, and since <em>Gonzales Lluy<\/em> the Inter-American Court has consistently treated it as a normative anchor for intersectional analysis, on the understanding that compound discrimination produces a dignitary harm irreducible to any single axis of oppression.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>This matters profoundly for how we understand the promise of the 2026 IWD theme \u2014 \u201cRights. Justice. Action. For ALL Women and Girls.\u201d The word \u201call\u201d demands intersectional attention. Neusa and Gisele were not discriminated against merely as women, nor merely as Black people, but as <em>Black women<\/em> \u2014 a specific form of structural violence, in <a href=\"https:\/\/www.jstor.org\/stable\/422690\">Johan Galtung<\/a>\u2019s terms, that cannot be captured through single-ground analysis. The five women in <em>FM v Russia<\/em> were targeted not simply as women or as migrants, but at the precise intersection of gender, ethnicity and precarious status. If democratic legal systems cannot recognise these intersections, they cannot fulfil the dignity promise that <a href=\"https:\/\/www.un.org\/en\/about-us\/universal-declaration-of-human-rights\">Article 1 of the Universal Declaration<\/a> makes to all human beings.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">An Unfinished Project<\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p>Both rulings are milestones, but neither is sufficient. <em>FM v Russia<\/em> identified intersectional discrimination in a case against a state that has now left the Council of Europe, raising questions about whether Strasbourg will develop the concept in future cases. <em>Santos Nascimento<\/em> ordered structural remedies, yet Brazil\u2019s twenty-six-year failure to punish the original discrimination reveals the gap between normative ambition and lived reality. What <a href=\"https:\/\/academic.oup.com\/icon\/article\/14\/3\/712\/2404476\">Sandra Fredman<\/a>\u2019s substantive equality framework identifies as the need for <em>structural transformation<\/em>, not merely individual redress, remains the central challenge.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>For women and girls in democracies, the lesson is uncomfortable: whether the legal system can <em>see<\/em> you depends on which democracy you inhabit, and how willing its courts are to recognise that discrimination rarely operates along a single axis. This <a href=\"https:\/\/www.internationalwomensday.com\/Theme\">IWD<\/a>, the demand for \u201crights, justice and action for ALL women\u201d must begin with an insistence that democratic institutions develop the conceptual tools to make \u201call\u201d genuinely inclusive \u2014 intersectional in theory, structural in remedy, and universal in ambition.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong><em>Bernardo Carvalho de Mello is a doctoral researcher at Newcastle University Law School, where his thesis develops a novel taxonomy of discrimination in international human rights law. His research combines Johan Galtung\u2019s violence theory with conceptual engineering and intersectionality, with a comparative focus on the European and Inter-American human rights systems.<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<hr class=\"wp-block-separator has-alpha-channel-opacity\" \/>\n\n\n\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref1\" id=\"_ftn1\">[1]<\/a>Kimberl\u00e9 Crenshaw, &#8216;Demarginalizing the Intersection of Race and Sex: A Black Feminist Critique of Antidiscrimination Doctrine, Feminist Theory and Antiracist Politics&#8217; (1989) <em>University of Chicago Legal Forum<\/em> 139.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><a id=\"_ftn2\" href=\"#_ftnref2\">[2]<\/a>Shreya Atrey, <em>Intersectional Discrimination<\/em> (OUP 2019) chapter 2.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>In 2024, intersectionality\u2019s long journey through international human rights jurisprudence reached two milestones \u2014 almost simultaneously, yet worlds apart. On 10 December 2024, the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) explicitly recognised intersectional discrimination for the first time, in FM and Others v Russia, a ruling in which five trafficked women were found to have [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":973,"featured_media":2089,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v23.0 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/wordpress\/plugins\/seo\/ -->\n<title>Two Courts Discover Intersectionality in the Same Year: Revealing Everything About Democratic Difference, by Bernardo Carvalho de Mello - Dignity &amp; Democracy<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/sites.exeter.ac.uk\/humanrightsanddemocracyforumblog\/2026\/03\/10\/two-courts-discover-intersectionality-in-the-same-year-revealing-everything-about-democratic-difference-by-bernardo-carvalho-de-mello\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Two Courts Discover Intersectionality in the Same Year: Revealing Everything About Democratic Difference, by Bernardo Carvalho de Mello - Dignity &amp; Democracy\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"In 2024, intersectionality\u2019s long journey through international human rights jurisprudence reached two milestones \u2014 almost simultaneously, yet worlds apart. On 10 December 2024, the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) explicitly recognised intersectional discrimination for the first time, in FM and Others v Russia, a ruling in which five trafficked women were found to have [&hellip;]\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/sites.exeter.ac.uk\/humanrightsanddemocracyforumblog\/2026\/03\/10\/two-courts-discover-intersectionality-in-the-same-year-revealing-everything-about-democratic-difference-by-bernardo-carvalho-de-mello\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Dignity &amp; Democracy\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2026-03-10T15:01:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2026-03-10T15:01:03+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/sites.exeter.ac.uk\/humanrightsanddemocracyforumblog\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/197\/2026\/02\/Picture-4-IWD-2026.png\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"2068\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"1679\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/png\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"ccld201\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"ccld201\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"6 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/sites.exeter.ac.uk\/humanrightsanddemocracyforumblog\/2026\/03\/10\/two-courts-discover-intersectionality-in-the-same-year-revealing-everything-about-democratic-difference-by-bernardo-carvalho-de-mello\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/sites.exeter.ac.uk\/humanrightsanddemocracyforumblog\/2026\/03\/10\/two-courts-discover-intersectionality-in-the-same-year-revealing-everything-about-democratic-difference-by-bernardo-carvalho-de-mello\/\",\"name\":\"Two Courts Discover Intersectionality in the Same Year: Revealing Everything About Democratic Difference, by Bernardo Carvalho de Mello - Dignity &amp; Democracy\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/sites.exeter.ac.uk\/humanrightsanddemocracyforumblog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/sites.exeter.ac.uk\/humanrightsanddemocracyforumblog\/2026\/03\/10\/two-courts-discover-intersectionality-in-the-same-year-revealing-everything-about-democratic-difference-by-bernardo-carvalho-de-mello\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/sites.exeter.ac.uk\/humanrightsanddemocracyforumblog\/2026\/03\/10\/two-courts-discover-intersectionality-in-the-same-year-revealing-everything-about-democratic-difference-by-bernardo-carvalho-de-mello\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/sites.exeter.ac.uk\/humanrightsanddemocracyforumblog\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/197\/2026\/02\/Picture-4-IWD-2026.png\",\"datePublished\":\"2026-03-10T15:01:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2026-03-10T15:01:03+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/sites.exeter.ac.uk\/humanrightsanddemocracyforumblog\/#\/schema\/person\/858d8c98ff31d036d3e30b2393ae98ab\"},\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/sites.exeter.ac.uk\/humanrightsanddemocracyforumblog\/2026\/03\/10\/two-courts-discover-intersectionality-in-the-same-year-revealing-everything-about-democratic-difference-by-bernardo-carvalho-de-mello\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/sites.exeter.ac.uk\/humanrightsanddemocracyforumblog\/2026\/03\/10\/two-courts-discover-intersectionality-in-the-same-year-revealing-everything-about-democratic-difference-by-bernardo-carvalho-de-mello\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/sites.exeter.ac.uk\/humanrightsanddemocracyforumblog\/2026\/03\/10\/two-courts-discover-intersectionality-in-the-same-year-revealing-everything-about-democratic-difference-by-bernardo-carvalho-de-mello\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/sites.exeter.ac.uk\/humanrightsanddemocracyforumblog\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/197\/2026\/02\/Picture-4-IWD-2026.png\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/sites.exeter.ac.uk\/humanrightsanddemocracyforumblog\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/197\/2026\/02\/Picture-4-IWD-2026.png\",\"width\":2068,\"height\":1679},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/sites.exeter.ac.uk\/humanrightsanddemocracyforumblog\/2026\/03\/10\/two-courts-discover-intersectionality-in-the-same-year-revealing-everything-about-democratic-difference-by-bernardo-carvalho-de-mello\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/sites.exeter.ac.uk\/humanrightsanddemocracyforumblog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Two Courts Discover Intersectionality in the Same Year: Revealing Everything About Democratic Difference, by Bernardo Carvalho de Mello\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/sites.exeter.ac.uk\/humanrightsanddemocracyforumblog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/sites.exeter.ac.uk\/humanrightsanddemocracyforumblog\/\",\"name\":\"Dignity &amp; Democracy\",\"description\":\"A HRDF Blog\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/sites.exeter.ac.uk\/humanrightsanddemocracyforumblog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":\"required name=search_term_string\"}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/sites.exeter.ac.uk\/humanrightsanddemocracyforumblog\/#\/schema\/person\/858d8c98ff31d036d3e30b2393ae98ab\",\"name\":\"ccld201\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/sites.exeter.ac.uk\/humanrightsanddemocracyforumblog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/068ca04bb7c545e926b963b535a5293f?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/068ca04bb7c545e926b963b535a5293f?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"ccld201\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/sites.exeter.ac.uk\/humanrightsanddemocracyforumblog\/author\/ccld201\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Two Courts Discover Intersectionality in the Same Year: Revealing Everything About Democratic Difference, by Bernardo Carvalho de Mello - Dignity &amp; Democracy","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/sites.exeter.ac.uk\/humanrightsanddemocracyforumblog\/2026\/03\/10\/two-courts-discover-intersectionality-in-the-same-year-revealing-everything-about-democratic-difference-by-bernardo-carvalho-de-mello\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Two Courts Discover Intersectionality in the Same Year: Revealing Everything About Democratic Difference, by Bernardo Carvalho de Mello - Dignity &amp; Democracy","og_description":"In 2024, intersectionality\u2019s long journey through international human rights jurisprudence reached two milestones \u2014 almost simultaneously, yet worlds apart. On 10 December 2024, the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) explicitly recognised intersectional discrimination for the first time, in FM and Others v Russia, a ruling in which five trafficked women were found to have [&hellip;]","og_url":"https:\/\/sites.exeter.ac.uk\/humanrightsanddemocracyforumblog\/2026\/03\/10\/two-courts-discover-intersectionality-in-the-same-year-revealing-everything-about-democratic-difference-by-bernardo-carvalho-de-mello\/","og_site_name":"Dignity &amp; Democracy","article_published_time":"2026-03-10T15:01:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2026-03-10T15:01:03+00:00","og_image":[{"width":2068,"height":1679,"url":"https:\/\/sites.exeter.ac.uk\/humanrightsanddemocracyforumblog\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/197\/2026\/02\/Picture-4-IWD-2026.png","type":"image\/png"}],"author":"ccld201","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"ccld201","Est. reading time":"6 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/sites.exeter.ac.uk\/humanrightsanddemocracyforumblog\/2026\/03\/10\/two-courts-discover-intersectionality-in-the-same-year-revealing-everything-about-democratic-difference-by-bernardo-carvalho-de-mello\/","url":"https:\/\/sites.exeter.ac.uk\/humanrightsanddemocracyforumblog\/2026\/03\/10\/two-courts-discover-intersectionality-in-the-same-year-revealing-everything-about-democratic-difference-by-bernardo-carvalho-de-mello\/","name":"Two Courts Discover Intersectionality in the Same Year: Revealing Everything About Democratic Difference, by Bernardo Carvalho de Mello - Dignity &amp; Democracy","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/sites.exeter.ac.uk\/humanrightsanddemocracyforumblog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/sites.exeter.ac.uk\/humanrightsanddemocracyforumblog\/2026\/03\/10\/two-courts-discover-intersectionality-in-the-same-year-revealing-everything-about-democratic-difference-by-bernardo-carvalho-de-mello\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/sites.exeter.ac.uk\/humanrightsanddemocracyforumblog\/2026\/03\/10\/two-courts-discover-intersectionality-in-the-same-year-revealing-everything-about-democratic-difference-by-bernardo-carvalho-de-mello\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/sites.exeter.ac.uk\/humanrightsanddemocracyforumblog\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/197\/2026\/02\/Picture-4-IWD-2026.png","datePublished":"2026-03-10T15:01:00+00:00","dateModified":"2026-03-10T15:01:03+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/sites.exeter.ac.uk\/humanrightsanddemocracyforumblog\/#\/schema\/person\/858d8c98ff31d036d3e30b2393ae98ab"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/sites.exeter.ac.uk\/humanrightsanddemocracyforumblog\/2026\/03\/10\/two-courts-discover-intersectionality-in-the-same-year-revealing-everything-about-democratic-difference-by-bernardo-carvalho-de-mello\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/sites.exeter.ac.uk\/humanrightsanddemocracyforumblog\/2026\/03\/10\/two-courts-discover-intersectionality-in-the-same-year-revealing-everything-about-democratic-difference-by-bernardo-carvalho-de-mello\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/sites.exeter.ac.uk\/humanrightsanddemocracyforumblog\/2026\/03\/10\/two-courts-discover-intersectionality-in-the-same-year-revealing-everything-about-democratic-difference-by-bernardo-carvalho-de-mello\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/sites.exeter.ac.uk\/humanrightsanddemocracyforumblog\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/197\/2026\/02\/Picture-4-IWD-2026.png","contentUrl":"https:\/\/sites.exeter.ac.uk\/humanrightsanddemocracyforumblog\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/197\/2026\/02\/Picture-4-IWD-2026.png","width":2068,"height":1679},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/sites.exeter.ac.uk\/humanrightsanddemocracyforumblog\/2026\/03\/10\/two-courts-discover-intersectionality-in-the-same-year-revealing-everything-about-democratic-difference-by-bernardo-carvalho-de-mello\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/sites.exeter.ac.uk\/humanrightsanddemocracyforumblog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Two Courts Discover Intersectionality in the Same Year: Revealing Everything About Democratic Difference, by Bernardo Carvalho de Mello"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/sites.exeter.ac.uk\/humanrightsanddemocracyforumblog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/sites.exeter.ac.uk\/humanrightsanddemocracyforumblog\/","name":"Dignity &amp; Democracy","description":"A HRDF Blog","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/sites.exeter.ac.uk\/humanrightsanddemocracyforumblog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":"required name=search_term_string"}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/sites.exeter.ac.uk\/humanrightsanddemocracyforumblog\/#\/schema\/person\/858d8c98ff31d036d3e30b2393ae98ab","name":"ccld201","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/sites.exeter.ac.uk\/humanrightsanddemocracyforumblog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/068ca04bb7c545e926b963b535a5293f?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/068ca04bb7c545e926b963b535a5293f?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"ccld201"},"url":"https:\/\/sites.exeter.ac.uk\/humanrightsanddemocracyforumblog\/author\/ccld201\/"}]}},"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/sites.exeter.ac.uk\/humanrightsanddemocracyforumblog\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/197\/2026\/02\/Picture-4-IWD-2026.png","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/sites.exeter.ac.uk\/humanrightsanddemocracyforumblog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2169"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/sites.exeter.ac.uk\/humanrightsanddemocracyforumblog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/sites.exeter.ac.uk\/humanrightsanddemocracyforumblog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sites.exeter.ac.uk\/humanrightsanddemocracyforumblog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/973"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sites.exeter.ac.uk\/humanrightsanddemocracyforumblog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2169"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/sites.exeter.ac.uk\/humanrightsanddemocracyforumblog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2169\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":2175,"href":"https:\/\/sites.exeter.ac.uk\/humanrightsanddemocracyforumblog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2169\/revisions\/2175"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sites.exeter.ac.uk\/humanrightsanddemocracyforumblog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/2089"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/sites.exeter.ac.uk\/humanrightsanddemocracyforumblog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2169"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sites.exeter.ac.uk\/humanrightsanddemocracyforumblog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2169"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sites.exeter.ac.uk\/humanrightsanddemocracyforumblog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2169"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}