In this article, I examine Wilkinson's (2000) injunction that practitioners "omit entirely the 'minority' concept" (pp. 124-25). I maintain that Wilkinson's argument disempowers groups-such as gays and the disabledwho have used a "minority" identity effectively, and speciously indicates that African-Americans would benefit from such retrenchment, thereby implying that social justice is a zero-sum game. Rather, "minority" coalitions are effectively pursuing justice for all. Moreover, Wilkinson's deconstruction of "minority" conflates conceptual breadth with conceptual vagueness, and conveniently ignores (or denies) the socially constructed character of "race" and "ethnicity." I suggest that practitioners learn more about the historical development of all of these concepts and honor clients who self-identify as "minority" group members, lest they become alienated from them.