What Are the Oppression Olympics, and Why Should You Stop Playing?

I remember sitting in a discussion group with some UN folk, listening as colleagues debated who had it worse: women facing sexism, people of color facing racism, or disabled people facing ableism. Each person made their case, citing statistics and personal experiences, trying to prove that their oppression was the most severe. Instead of solidarity, the discussion felt like a contest. This was my first real experience with the term "Oppression Olympics."

“Oppression Olympics” describes a discussion in which people rank forms of marginalization to decide whose suffering counts most. Elizabeth “Betita” Martínez used the phrase in a documented 1993 discussion with Angela Davis about building coalitions across communities. She argued against a competition of hierarchies. The transcript establishes that use of the phrase; it does not establish its first-ever use.

The trouble starts when a comparison becomes a reason to dismiss someone else's account or deny them support. Comparing the effects of policies can be necessary: a ramp, a safer workplace and protection from racial bias solve different problems. The point is to see those needs clearly, including the needs of people who live at several intersections, without demanding a winner in a suffering contest.

1. Scarce attention or resources. When support is limited, people may fear that recognizing another group's needs will push their own aside. That fear can be real even when the resulting contest is unhelpful.

2. A need to be believed. People whose experiences have been minimized may feel pressed to prove how much harm they have faced.

3. Overly simple categories. Talking as though “disabled people,” “women” and “people of color” are separate groups overlooks people who belong to more than one.

• A workplace conversation: Someone raises the lack of accessible meeting rooms. Another person replies that other employees face “real discrimination,” so accessibility can wait. The response ranks claims instead of addressing the barrier.

• A campaign planning meeting: A group discusses racial bias in healthcare. A participant insists that disability cannot be part of the plan because one type of discrimination must take priority in every case. That overlooks disabled people who also experience racism.

• A conversation about pain: A person with an invisible disability describes being doubted. They are told that other disabled people have it worse, so they should not ask for help. The fact that needs differ does not make theirs unreal.

These are illustrative scenarios, not reports of a particular organization or movement. Stephanie Berntsen's account of living with an invisible disability shows what it feels like when people compare pain instead of listening.

A ranking game can silence people whose experiences do not fit a single category. It can replace a practical question about which barrier needs removing with a fight over whose claim deserves to be heard. Disabled people can disappear from a diversity conversation altogether, or be treated as though disability cancels out their experiences of racism, sexism or poverty.

Kimberlé Crenshaw's work on intersectionality offers a useful way to ask whose experience a single-issue approach misses. Recognizing overlapping barriers does not require pretending every barrier is identical. It means paying attention to the people a neat hierarchy would leave behind.

1. Ask what is happening. Which policy, attitude or physical barrier is causing harm? Name the problem before debating who has it worst.

2. Listen across differences. Acknowledge needs you do not share, and let people describe their own experience.

3. Plan with the people affected. An inclusive response can address distinct needs without making communities compete for basic recognition.

We can take different injustices seriously without awarding medals for suffering. When disability belongs in the conversation from the start, the better question is practical: who is missing, what barrier are they facing, and what would change it?