Intersectionality is Bad: Here’s Why…
What are your thoughts on the concept of intersectionality?
Does it actually work beyond theory?
Does intersectionality enhance or diminish the quality of our society?
Check out my video response on why intersectionality is bad :
More Old Simo YouTube videos here
I dislike it when people use certain new wave words and terms in arguments. Certain words and phrases erode intellectual capital. CIS gendered and Islamophobia are at the top of the list. So is intersectionality. Intersectionality is bad and problematic when it goes beyond a mere academic theory.
Intersectionality should never have left the confines of academia. Unfortunately it has leaked into mainstream society. It is a sibling to gender and identity politics. All three combined have excelled white western guilt culture, created victimhood fetish and furthered irrational minority fundamentalism.
Intersectionality was invented by American civil rights activist Kimberle Williams Cremshaw. She devised it as a theory to explain how different social identities over lap and form connection. It’s the process of multiple social identities that intersect and infuse. They create a hybrid of “minority” or disadvantageous elements.
Williams wanted to illustrate how black women can face double doses of discrimination by virtue of race and gender in the US. This gives white or non black women a level of privilege not afforded to black women. Sounds simple and accurate? This one example is simple. It reflects a truth. However, the belief that all aspects of an individual’s identity should be taken into account is where it become complicated.
The theory also suggests that forms of discrimination and prejudice are all shaped by one another. The list of identities includes and is not limited to: social class, ethnicity, gender, skin color, sexuality, nationality, age, mental disability, religion, physical illness, and mental illness.
What happens when the black woman is also gay, lower socioeconomic and has a physical impairment? She’s no longer viewed as an individual. She is a hybrid of disadvantageous groups. This is used to define and categorize her. It doesn’t go beyond that. It is an aesthetical and superficial driven method.
Intersectionality is bad beyond a mere theory because:
Intersectionality is too ambiguous. It has no specific parameters. The options to increase the intersectional hybrid are endless. Where does it stop?
Intersectionality has become a favourite among far leftists and minority fundamentalists (like CIS gendered and Islamophobia). Once its taken out of the hands of Ms Cremshaw and placed into society it becomes an empty slogan. It’s just a buzz word. We don’t understand it because we don’t understand the complexities of religion, ethnicity, gender, and sexuality. Especially groups that we don’t belong to.
We can’t practice it because its impractical. Most of us are too concerned with ourselves to be interested in intersectionality. It just sounds good and makes people feel better about themselves.
Intersectionality forms an unholy marriage with gender and identity politics. When they intersect with intersectionality they create two narrow prisms: villainy and victimhood. This is where the concept of privilege also comes into play. People are graded on the spectrum of villainy and victimhood based on social identities.
For example, a white heterosexual Christian man is as bad as it gets (villain category). A brown, Islamic, gay woman is as good as it gets (Victimhood category). They are graded on what they are. The analysis is not on who they are.
This creates a feverish and irrational form of victimhood Olympics. It all becomes about suffering. The more disadvantageous categories you belong to, the more credibility you have. Sounds quite masochistic.
Not all forms of social oppression are linked. This is what intersectional theory campaigners like to believe. These artificial collaborations between groups share little in common apart from a hatred of another group. Furthermore, a myopic western scope clouded by white western guilt also comes into play.
This is evident when examining the area of religion. Because of western perceptions (that don’t extent further than the West) Christianity and Judaism are power majority religions. There is much truth in this, but because of this they automatically (with utmost delight) go into the villainy category. Anyone with a Christian or Judaic identity must check their privilege. Islam is a minority, therefore it’s a consummate victim. By virtue of this identity, the individual is placed (with utmost delight) in the victim-hood category.
These prisms don’t take into account the fact that Islam often is a power oppressor in the East. Christians and Jews in that context become persecuted minorities. These facts ruin the agenda. The persecution of Jewish people in the West is also ignored.
Intersectional advocates identify Jews with Israel. They are against Israel because they see it as a colonial state persecuting Muslims. Yet there is no outcry over the colonial Islamic state of Pakistan and the heinous damage that caused.
Since Christianity and Judaism is in the villainy prism, third wave feminists and gays align themselves with Islam (due to its perceived victimhood status). They have no real understanding of the complexities and factors of the religion. its victimhood status is enough.
The disturbing part of this alliance is that third wave feminists and gays have aligned themselves to a religion that not only condemns them but prescribes punishments for them. Reformed modern Christianity and Judaism do not do this.
Examples of Identity Politics and Social Identities taking Precedence:
Barack Obama: Obama received less scrutiny and criticism from the public due to two reasons :
- His intelligence, articulation and friendly media personality.
- His skin color.
Intersectional theory and activists allocate Obama into victimhood category due to skin color. Therefore, he can do no wrong.
He was not significantly criticized for deporting more illegal immigrants than any other US president. His involvement in Iraq, Libya, Syria and Yemen was largely not criticized. If he was George Bush or Donald Trump it would be a different matter.
Hillary Clinton– Third wave feminists often gave her support and votes due to her gender. Gay men wet their pants over seeing a bossy woman in a power position. Her minority category of gender (woman) cemented her favour. This identity automatically placed her in the victimhood prism. You could argue that anyone would be better than Trump, but her gender as opposed to her character and policies was a major factor of support.
Waleed Aly– Aly is an Australian academic and social commentator. He has tried to minimized the realistic power of ISIS. He’s dismissed Boko Haram as “mere vigilantes”. Aly refuses to engage in honest and analytical discussion regarding Islam. He avoids it like the plague. None of this matters to intersectional theory and activists. He is Muslim, therefore he gets a free pass.
Example of Identity Politics Infusing Intersectionality
Linda Sarsour and Yassmin Abdel Magied– Sarsour is a lying fanatical Sharia advocate and Islamist. She claims to be a feminist and human rights advocate. She is an anti-Semite. Sarsour has called for female genital mutilation of her opponents.
Magied has lied about the realities of Sharia law and has tried to rewrite history. In her book, she blamed Western colonialism for the setbacks of women in the Islamic world. Facts are that unreformed Islamic doctrines and extremism have been persecuting women since their inception.
But all that doesn’t matter to intersectional theory activists. They are women. Both women are Muslim. Sarsour is Arab. Magied is Sudanese. Three points of victimhood ! Score! Support!
Intersectionality is bad. My simple combat advice: Observe and judge people on who they are and what they say and do. Do not categorize, sympathize, and judge based on what they are! Also remember, you are not racist, sexist, or bigoted for calling out the reasonable argument that intersectionality is bad.