More than 20 years ago, Black feminist scholars and others built a case for working for peace and justice from the intersections of people's multiple identities. A body of scholarship focused on intersectionality thinking has subsequently arisen. Working for social justice from identity intersections is thought by some scholars and activists to have broader appeal and to be more efficacious. However, to what degree today's social movements actually use intersectional discourses has heretofore remained an open question. Quantitative and qualitative analyses of data from a longitudinal study of peace movement organizations, reveals surprisingly low levels of actual use in public materials. A subset of data from the Women's International League for Peace and Freedom, a PMO thought to be highly likely to use intersectional discourses due to its international heritage, its early shared membership with the NAACP, activism in Haiti and Liberia in the early 20th century and current mission statement, was used to further explore the disconnect between public statements and organizational sensibility. Findings show that while historically WILPF public statements did not infuse intersectionality, their intersectional discourses did significantly increase in their recent civil society consultation process regarding women and security issues. The findings suggest that an ideological commitment to inclusion alone was not sufficient to produce intersectional discourses; a combination of an external mediated political opportunity and an internal demographic threat to the movement's longevity were necessary before discursive change occurred. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]