intersectionality was conceptualized as all policies being in everyone's universal interest rather than being targeted to particular groups, "pan equality" was concern for issues that affected most marginalised groups but not people as a whole. "Multi-strand intersectionality" attempted to consider different groups when making a decision, but rarely viewed the interests of the groups as competing or focusing on issues for a particular group. "Diversity within" considered one main form of identity, such as gender, as most important while occasionally considering other aspects of identity, with these different forms of identity sometimes seen as detracting from the main identity. "Intersections of equality strands" considered separate distinct identities but no form of identity (e.g., women) was seen as more relevant. In this approach is was sometimes felt that if one dealt with the most marginalised identity the system would tend to work for all people. Christoffersen referred to some of these forms of inequality as "additive" where combined inequalities can be sees as a combined set of features something unique. Criticism Methods and ideology Generating testable predictions from intersectionality theory can be complex; postintersectional critics of intersectional theory fault its proponents for inadequately explained causal methodology and say they have made incorrect predictions about the status of some minority groups. For example, despite antisemitism rising across the globe, Jews are often excluded from intersectionality movements on the grounds that they are not sufficiently oppressed. According to David Schraub's White Jews: An Intersectional Approach: "Vigorous theoretical accounts of how antisemitism currently manifests in Western societies lag behind the excellent work focused on other oppressions. And though in theory intersectionality has much to offer Jews as an analytical tool for untangling some of these questions, in practice intersectional theorists have largely ignored the Jewish case. While intersectional approaches to Jewish difference are not unheard of, they are exceedingly rare." Kathy Davis asserts that intersectionality is ambiguous and open-ended, and that its "lack of clear-cut definition or even specific parameters has enabled it to be drawn upon in nearly any context of inquiry". Rekia Jibrin and Sara Salem argue that intersectional theory creates a unified idea of anti-oppression politics that requires a lot out of its adherents, often more than can reasonably be expected, creating difficulties achieving praxis. They also say that intersectional philosophy encourages a focus on the issues inside the group instead of on society at large, and that intersectionality is "a