Previous research has established that people tend to respond negatively to discrimination claims made by people of color and women, even when sufficient evidence to support the discrimination claim is provided. However, past research was limited to single identity axes. Studying race and gender independently of each other limits a study’s applicability to real world social experiences because in vivo those two social identities are experienced simultaneously. This study aimed to expand the literature by incorporating identity intersections in order to better understand the influence of demographic matching and discrimination claim type on appraisals of discrimination claimants. Participants were randomly assigned to a race, gender, race-gender, or no match condition. Participants were then asked to evaluate the target on a positive evaluations measure. It was hypothesized that women of color will be rated more negatively when they claim discrimination compared to when they do not, but that this effect will be more pronounced as the number of matched identities with the target decreases. Interestingly, non-Hispanic women evaluated the target as more of a troublemaker when she claimed race-based discrimination than when she claimed intersectional discrimination. Hispanic men evaluated the target as more of a troublemaker when she claimed intersectional discrimination than when she claimed race-based discrimination, and Hispanic men evaluated the target as more of a troublemaker when she claimed intersectional discrimination than when she did not claim discrimination. These unexpected findings highlight the need for more intersectional work studying how discrimination claimants are evaluated.