The main focus of this bachelor thesis concerns the discourses presented in texts on critical classification about marginalized groups. The text explores some of the difficulties that can stem from the idea that there is a possibility of objectivity within classification and cataloguing, as they are not a neutral occurrence but controlled by constructs such as ideological thinking and bias. Based on Hope A. Olson’s suggestions that feminist knowledge organization should be based on flexibility, connectedness and inclusivity, our empirical material explores these questions regarding change in normative and oppressive structures. Apart from Olson, much inspiration is taken from Birger Hjørland, and his domain analysis, in the field that our analysis originates in. This study is based on a discourse analysis regarding four academic articles on the subject, authored by academic researchers and librarians. The aim of this bachelor thesis is to account for discourses that writers in the field of Library and Information Science formulate through the problems they present. The examined discourse show that existing universal systems such as Dewey Decimal Classification and Library of Congress Subject Headings tend to create and uphold marginalization of several social groups that could be included in alternative classification systems. The empirical evidence our discourse analysis uncovers solutions based on implementing nonhierarchical structures within classification. The authors have used gender theoretical concepts such as queer and intersectionality. The outcome of our work reveals dividing lines between a narrow perception of limitations of classification, and a broader approach towards possibilities.