Intersectionality: An Explanation and Critique
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 27 фев 2019
- My website: www.jordanbcooper.com
Patreon: / justandsinner
This video is an explanation of intersectionality as developed by Kimberle Crenshaw. I discuss the ideological foundations of this movement, and then give criticisms, explaining the reasons why I find intersectionality to be flawed.
I think Crenshaw’s reason for developing the concept of intersectionality is not meant to
judge or exclude people who are privileged. I think you have missed the point of her work which is that it is meant to shed light on the people who are effectively erased because they fall at an intersection of identities such as race and gender. It is rather meant to identify them, their vulnerability, the structural inequalities they are subject to and therefore address it. This does not mean excluding others and it is not about finding how many different identities there are and trying to class people according to that. I think you would enjoy Crenshaw’s TED talk and her talk at the Southbank centre. Unfortunately the popularity of the concept has resulted in its distortion by different groups over the last 30 years.
ruclips.net/video/KPRhJeFNico/видео.html
Theory in this domain isn't similar to the Theory of Gravity, for example. Hence the scientific postulates of "germ theory' are fully cognizant in the world of today; look about you during the Coronavirus, currently. Intersectionality is another "theory' whence articulated within society creates absolutely NO impact when the reality of biological truth intervenes; nothing, whatsoever. Viruses don't care about your feelings, nor do they discriminate according to sex, ethnicity, religion, creed, sexual preference or whether you like cats. This is where the falsehood of so-called intersectionality collapses; it's not rooted in reality. Just another whacky theory that attempts to demonstrate that there are differences between people, except when that reality is tested unto death. And hasn't humanity been subjected to enough Leftist theories that led to the deaths of AT least 100 million victims in the last hundred years? Apparently not. Here we go again! Marxists can't see that their ideas don't work; unless you include North Korea; Vietnam; China (excluding Taiwan); Ethiopia; Laos; Cambodia; El Salvador, etc, etc...
I'm awaiting the latest obfuscations regarding Intersectional reifications involving nuclear physics, and say elective surgery. Go figure.
ruclips.net/video/jkQ-lcJQ-j0/видео.html
Keith Eldershaw Keith Eldershaw I’m not sure how your reply has anything to do with what I’ve said. I don’t identify as Marxist, and neither does Crenshaw as far as I know, and intersectionality has nothing to do with viruses. Viruses do not discriminate but I don’t think people act like viruses. Your example is a very random deviation. If you can’t identify, for example, that laws and policies have different effects on people (as a result of differences in sex and/or race and/or class etc.) then you have missed the crux of her argument entirely. If you watch the videos I suggested in the original comment you will see the exact contexts that prompted Crenshaw‘s concept of intersectionality. It had to do with how anti- discrimination laws in the US had actually discriminated against black women because the legal system basically refused to acknowledge that black women could be subjected to both racial and sexual discrimination at the same time. Sometimes it’s important to read and try to make sense of things properly before labeling them as a “falsehood”. You don’t have to agree with every theory or perspective and but at least try to come up with a proper critique. If you read, you will actually find that many Marxists actually offer a constructive criticism of intersectionality.
@@mariang1692 Thank you for your reply. As evidenced you say "I don't identify..." and that is my point; Who/whom; Who cares and whom do you refer to? People actually DO act like viruses and that is why viruses are so successful; look at the Spanish Flu epidemic. Viruses don't require epistemological antecedents as it works at a microbial level that has the ability to change their DNA to replicate the attacks upon it. Ideas such as Intersectionality are similar to a virus which Richard Dawkins elaborated in his The Selfish Gene and through his development of biological antecedents to human cognition, viz the meme.
I am reading one of the foundation documents regarding the destruction of the Black family in the USA, Daniel Moynahan's The Negro Family: The case for national action, and I am awaiting my copy of Amity Shlaes book on the Great Society which demonstrates that failure. See ruclips.net/video/BhtWsFmT50E/видео.html
My point is that the road to perdition is replete with 'good intentions', especially when the basis of the theory cements people into a cohort defined as victims. Intersectionality is meaningless outside the academic grievance class, and THAT is one of the assaults from the Marxists. See, Grand hotel abyss: The lives of the frankfurt school- Stuart Jeffries. Most of the Intersectionality thesis is reliant upon a distillation from Neo-Marxism and fragments of French postmodernism, (Althusser, Foucault, Derrida) with some nods towards Gramsci. Its all been said before, this is just the latest instantiation.
So the essential question is this: When does it end; when does humanity KNOW ( Metaphysically/ epistemologically/ ontologically) that Intersectionality has finished: that its goal has been achieved? No-one knows because the Utopian fantasy that supports this can never axiomatically provide proof. See The utopian mind and other papers--Aurel Kolnai. How many innocent people have to suffer until the Utopian vision is installed INTO THE MINDS of ordinary people? And that is where its authoritarian and anti-human side of Intersectionality is revealed; a reversal of Foucault's concept ( which he stole from Bentham's model) of the Panopticon, whereby, "we" have to constantly subject ourselves internally, and externally to constant surveillance to make sure there is no TRANSGRESSION: the sine qua non of the police state.
Good luck with that!!
@@mariang1692ruclips.net/video/EmNUbf1OHes/видео.html
I think you are missing a huge point which is that these categories aren't arbitrary, they are politically and historically important. Disability is not the core of my identity, but it is part of my identity and it affects every area of my life every day. When disabled people come together it's not like gathering up all the blue-eyed people or all the athletic people - it's politically and personally relevant. It also isn't an attempt to just cluster people with similarities together. Disabled people know that we are all different and the obstacles faced by a blind person vs a mentally ill person vs an amputee are all different. But we are all marginalized in similar ways and face overlapping burdens and discrimination. We need legal protections and how can I advocate for that if I'm just thinking of 'M's own unique experience'?
So what you are saying is, that women are disabled?
Your disability is not a social or a political issue. It's a physiological issue. You aren't oppressed by culture, you're "oppressed" by reality.
Hm. "Intersectionality is not primarily about identity. It's about how structures make certain identities the...vehicle for vulnerability." - Kimberlé Crenshaw
It's possible that this is commonly misunderstood.
Where is the data and studies evidencing that? Why do quantitative sociologists seem to think it's a joke and never use the theory, do papers on it, etc?
@@24tommyst Evidencing that people can "fall through the cracks"? Not sure I understand the question. My point was that intersectionality is not about identity as such, therefore it is not supposed to be used to justify an "oppression olympics". It's not about how many boxes you tick - it's primarily about the specific intersections where people tend to fall through the cracks. In my country, South Africa, for example (just thinking of one specific example off the top of my head here), poor people are assisted with grants but refugees and asylum seekers don't qualify. So this intersection, poor and a refugee, would be one of these intersections deserving of attention.
@@Graanvlok Ya, you agree with me then. Why are you quoting crenshaw? She uses "identities" which are STUPID to use as they limit what you can look at. Quantitative sociology is what you're talking about. Is bipolar disorder, which I have, an "identity"? Is being ugly an "identity"? Is having only one parent an "identity"? Nope. And yet mental illness and single parent households in the US are some of the best predictors of suffering. My point is simple: quantitative sociology is the GROWN UP version of this intersectionality stuff and that all who seek to be GROWN UPS should move from the latter to the former.
@@24tommyst I don't personally have a problem calling it an "identity" if the "identity" (bipolar, one parent etc.) is relevant to the problem. But it's just a word. We can call it whatever. The word "identity" is a bit fraught these days. Politically loaded. But yeah, quantitative sociology. I guess that means looking at actual data to back up the argument about some societal issue? Yup, I like that. Science! :--)
Still makes no sense.
Great talk! Subscribed :) I have a question pls: are there any articles or books that you can recommend which substantively critique intersectionality?
I should add here that multivariate statistical analysis took all this into account 75 years back.
Frankly, I think white men are able to be more "individual" in a sense because minority often impedes on how someone's humanity is viewed. My identities are often seen before I am, regardless of how unique of a person I am. I find the language of intersectionality useful in some regards because I DO share life experiences with other people in my "identity group" and those life experiences do inform the person I am today. My personality cannot be fully separated from my life experiences, and therefore cannot be fully separated from the systemic oppression I've faced.
I do agree that within intersectionality based social circles some people absolutely will weaponise their identity to manipulate others, discredit genuine criticism and excuse nasty and/or abusive behaviour.
Intersectionality is a great framework when used as a guideline, not a hard and fast rule of who is Oppressed and Good, and who is an Oppressor and Bad.
I think your critique is fair. The best way to think of intersectionality is like salt for cooking in this case the meal is diversity and inclusion.
Adding just enough increases your enjoyment of the meal. Adding too much salt i.e. turning it into a numbers game and losing the essence of the individual ruins the meal
Thank you for the overview of "Intersectionality". It seems like it is yet another way of studying the differences between Human Beings. Some of the differences seem to be changeable, some partially changeable and some unchangeable. Differences should be better understood in order to build ways of tolerance (Live and Let Live), as opposed to excuses for conflict (You are less, therefore I am entitled to oppress you and take from you).
Thank you for this helpful introduction to this interesting and topical subject . I for one would value and look out for your more detailed analysis of this very current system of thinking
Individualism answers and resolves the problems perceived within intersectionality, there's really no general advantages not general disadvantages for about 70% of the categories
And it is only collectivistic thinkers that impose these problems onto themselves or other perceived groupings/demographics
Oh brother! What else can people come up with to justify their feeling of being oppressed or being victimized?
very balanced, careful dealing with the topic. well done.
0:59 thank you for the word of caution
You communicated that wonderfully.
Once these ideas took root in the online eating disorder recovery community that's when I realized I would have to take the next step in my lifelong journey alone. The loud voices of that part of the community shouted down the quiet voices. Why do we as humans fall into that so easily?
If you have time and would like to: Please explain what the eating disorder recovery community has to do with intersectionality. Also have a nice day!
It seems to me that the logical conclusion of intersectionality is a sort of individualism, which means that the solution to the problems they try to solve is individual justice.
In a certain way, it is. INtersectionality is basically a kind of technocratic approximation of individuality. In a certain way, its like "getting to know the individual without having the need to ask him."
In a certain way, intersectionality reminds reminds me on a search engine of an art- or porn site. You do not exactly remember the name of what you are looking for. And instead, you write down certain groups of traits like "dark hair" , "long hair", "glasses" and so on, to narrow down the possible set of pictures until you have the specific pic you search for or stuff which is at least pretty similar to what you are looking for.
Yes, please do talk more about intersectionality. That would be interesting.
Absolutely poignant and very well thought through. Thank you
This video presents an amazing opportunity for my dissertation in regard to Elementary Dance Education in Chicago Public Schools. Thanks
You should be arrested for child abuse.
Marxist ideology has a strong means of memetic transmission. If you're a member of a social species, empathy for those who are bullied is a strong, natural reaction (at least as long as they are a member of the in-group).
There's a lot of currency in being oppressed. It means you're, to whatever degree, immune from accountability - and thus criticism - not to mention that you're most certainly due some form of compensation.
It has evolved to the new environment, just enough that it sometimes flies under the radar of the immune response. Rather than a simple bourgeois versus proletariat model, it uses "intersecting" axes. Unimpressive, uninspiring.
Main problems are basically everything that it ignores.
Oppressor/oppressed relation prioritized. Why?
People most accurately viewed as demographic collective. Why?
Equal outcome assumed to be:
1) necessarily symptomatic of oppression, never natural causes, individual choice etc... Why?
2) a good moral goal despite the fact that implementing it would necessitate systemic prejudice of immutable characteristics.
It's trash. Unfortunately it looks like it might be quite popular the next few generations. Hopefully kids outgrow it sooner rather than later.
Thanks! if you are free can you make a video of intersectionality and how it applies to the women in prison research?
What happens when intersectionalities are not regulated? What happens when there is no regulated exchange or correct management of each of these intersectionalities? I believe that the consequences are various, from falling into demagogic discourses, losing the memory of collective experiences, polarisation and isolation towards other groups or in stronger cases, terror and violence.
chaos happens
Before all of this was a thing, let’s say early 80’s and from the most right leaning junior high school teacher I ever had. “Disadvantage” was explained to me as an additive math problem. Class, plus gender plus, plus race, plus all the other things that you might be differentiated by. And what those prejudices might be applied. Long before “intersectionality” was a thing…
Not long after that “white privilege” was described to me as a teenager living on the street outside of Harvard University in the exact same way it was being described in a lecture hall just inside that university by its author - but it was described to me a a white supremacy recruiting tool by a skinhead… “How much white privilege have you had today?!?” Going on about the invisible backpack I supposedly had. And how ignored I should be feeling about that. And he too went in about the math problem I had heard before people were saying that the factor of class is being ignored. That somehow he and I were supposed to be considered the same as the people the people attending Harvard while we froze in the snow.
I’ve heard that same argument from other ‘white supremacists” and that same criticism of white privilege often coupled up with “replacement” and other bullshit….
I say this because the ideas of intersectionality and the competition to differentiate oneself- are weapons against the ideas that are supposed to be used to seek attention to inequality. Because they leave out the fact that you might be in a different part of the boat due to the additive math of disadvantages. Misses the fact that most of us are in the same sinking lower middle class boat. And some of us are in a completely different class boat. Some of us are not even in a boat. And that has little to do with what the color of your skin is, or what your gender is, or who you choose to sleep with. It’s a distraction from the fact that some are on a boat that is sinking, and that some are floating alone in the ocean. And that there are billionaires yachts floating away with all the money…
Thank you. This is by far the most helpful video on youtube that explains intersectionality and its problems clearly. I recently went to the British Library exhibition of women's rights and was startled by how it promoted the intersectionality idea. It was promoted like it was what Feminism should be about without explaining what it exactly was, and its pros and cons. It was the first time I learned about this concept and I really didn't appreciate the way British Library basically tried to tell me how I should think (what idea I should agree with) instead of giving me the knowledge and let me form my own opinion. Your video is great. Please do more videos or podcasts about feminism and intersectional feminism!
I have asked PHDs who push the "theory" for the papers showing how it's a really important thing for us to know, and they never present them. It's almost like a religion: lots of feelings, little in the way of evidence.
Thanks for a very clear explanation, but I can't understand why the concept of intersectionality has been embraced so enthusiastically. It seems to me no more than common sense. Yes, some people suffer more forms of oppression than others but what is supposed to follow from that statement of the blindingly obvious?
Geoff Short that’s why it is so often referred to as a religion.
Thank you. And greetings from the UK.
It is quite important to distiguish Interersectional Feminism, Intersectional Marxism and Intersectionality itself but Intersectionality itself is not the same as Intersectional Feminism and Intersectional is just the adjective for what type of feminism but Intersectionality exist independently without feminism
Thanks
Wow...awesome explanation
Intersectionality is a new morality contrary to sola scriptura and the gospel.
How about INTER-PERSONALITY?
Some of the theology/ethics of Miroslav Volf, or other Liberationist theologians, might be a useful Christian response.
4:36 bookmark
Thank you for the video, pictures diagrams would be more helpful.
One way to understand intersectionality is that it is essentially victim hustling.
After all whites/europeans did build up privileges themselves.. Everyone has the right to build his own privilege, but it's not okay if that happens at the cost of others!
From a naturalist perspective, privilege is fundamentally going to operate at the expense of others, that’s why it’s privilege.
The centuries of Catholic European culture that birthed the western world came at great expense to the Europeans living in it, particularly the many labouring class and that's sort of the whole point, ie. the discipline, modesty and restraint taught in Catholicism and Europe largely shaped our modern world reality.
But people like to think it fell out of the sky, fully-formed and the degree of order we enjoy in the world is purely by accident. LOL! People have no clue what they have today, it's utterly astounding to appreciate it.
Just an fyi a Planned Parenthood ad played for me during this video
Intersectionality = another way to promote CRT, sexual indictrination, and racism to kids.
Hi there, friendly neighborhood critical theory Marxist who is critical of intersectionality as well and wanted to offer a counter perspective. I recently made a video that criticizes intersectionality from a disabled-marxist analysis. Don't worry I don't bite. I was curious to see if our critiques were similar.
One thing before i go too deep, not sure what you mean by the neo/cultural-Marxist, I've always found this term kind of ambiguous. I think it's more accurate to say that these second wave feminist movements you're alluding to were actually more concerned with understanding how oppression as a subject is constructed. Where does patriarchy come from? And of course there were a variety of perspectives, that took on marxism differently. Compare social model of disability with something like Anti-Oedipus. The former is inspired more in the idea of socialization, while the latter is a radical Marxist-freudian analysis of production and reproduction. In fact the former is largely criticized these days, so these different interpretations have different value.
But what is interesting is that we actually agree on the core problem with intersectionality! The production of these groups is a major issue for disability for example because every body is physically medically uniquely impacted by circumstance. Diagnoses function more as a means to access treatment rather than describe these problems, so diagnoses are inherently alienating by the group of disabled people. You can really see for example with "black disabled woman", with "disability" this tells us nothing about her struggle - is she blind? Unable to walk? Rare autoimmune disorder? And of course ignores how disability and race inform each other.
My main criticism of your presentation though is that you're not critical of what produces the circumstances surrounding success. This is both unnecessary and a weakness - success is largely contextualized around capitalist interactions of exploitation, which suggests an unanalyzed Marxist component. Think about for example how success in the USSR must have been totally different than in the west.
You are also completely right to point out the alienation inevitably produced by intersectionality. This alienation is, as you rightly point out, a result of these categories of oppression becoming more and more dense. With disability, this reflects the alienation a disabled person already has - think about how unique every case presents itself in medicine. In fact a common problem in disabled communities is consolidating issues based on these produced categories.
Your criticism of intersectionality producing reverse hierarchy i don't think is fully represented in the literature, but I do think reflects itself in practice. This however I think is a consequence of the alienation produced by intersectionality. In order to have issues heard in an alienated perspective like this, we need to pack more detail into our description. However, this isn't just a problem within intersectional movements. Think about how in order to be properly recognised in any group we need to add more and more detail to our descriptions to identify us - and this too produces the same alienation.
I know a lot of intersectionals disagree with me but I don't think Foucault is largely compatible with intersectionality - think about his criticisms of medicine and how they conflict with what i said above. Also, a lot of those guys were gay or were involved in the radical civil movements of the late 60's. Frustratingly, many amateur intersectional enthusiasts erase or tokenize their homosexuality or participation in civil movements as you describe.
This is why i gravitate personally towards Félix Guattari, who can be very difficult to read (serious warning) but offers an interesting solution - these issues are a product of machine-like movements, and we contextualize them in a language that's constantly changing because it's produced by these movements. He would argue that the context is produced by this constantly changing interaction, but also criticize the groups as sorting categories like you do. Instead of sorting them into categories, he would say it's a narrative that constantly changes, because you learn new things about yourself, and forget others. And that's how most of us experience our own individual differences i think!
This model in its more detailed form has been powerful for helping me describe disability as an interaction with labor, medicine and language, and also has influenced black, queer and feminist writers as well. I like to explore disability because i believe everyone is impacted by it in an easy to understand way - through healthcare. I'm certain you've dealt with it at least once even if youre healthy, but its also possible you dont realize you have some medical issue and this silently contributes to many issues. It really opens discussion from many backgrounds.
Ultimately I think where the best value is with these intersectional pieces is analyzing the lived experience expressed through them. However we should be critical of the theory as a whole.
Here is my video by the way: ruclips.net/video/r6w9mcbqPL4/видео.html
I might make a video also explaining my points here to help better explain these ideas outside of a RUclips comment. I think having a more in depth criticism that helps people all over the political spectrum better think about these problems is ultimately what everyone, including intersectionalists, could benefit from.
Dr. Cooper, you disappoint me. You failed to extrapolate your opponents logic and you've given easily defeated argument at 8:00. Of course! Of course those additional categories you mentioned are important to intersectionality, and they are increasingly considered. Attractiveness, physicality, and social ability are so obvious to include as intersectional criteria that I feel you've made yourself look like a fool. You make valid points about additional categories, then jump to the conclusion the theory will be overwhelmed with a quantity of categories! But what of your own philosophies? Are they so overwhelmed by the complexity of life that you cannot use them?
The problem with intersectionality is that it assumes victimhood. It does not take into account the positive factors that those same people may possess. For example beauty, talent, the status of family and friends, wealth, education, profession, etc. Beyonce' is a black woman. According to intersectional rules, she is a victim. But she is a beautiful, talented, rich, celebrity. Does anyone think that her life suffers from negative intersectional bias? In fact, I would say that as of 2020 no beautiful, rich, or talented woman does.
I can understand the statement about victimhood, and I often ponder about this. However, I'm sure we can understand and agree that wounds have been created for entire groups of people. These are not the kinds of wounds that heal themselves. They need a doctor, and we are the doctor(s).
Intersectionality just came up in the last few years..?
It's been in discussion for 30 years. It's been on blogs for 15+ years.
Ohhhh cultural Marxism Frankfurt School Conspiracy Theory. Gotcha.
And oppression/oppressor dichotomy. And "complexity" described as if it's an objective mapping of the phrenology of experience.
Just the slightest subtle exasperation with each mention of a dimension of human experience.
He did say in the video that it was created in the late 80s.
Yikes! What a misinformed conception of intersectionality. Love how you use anecdotes to make your critiques, super insightful.
As somebody who cares deeply for progressive inclusivity, you laughing during your 'critique' felt patronizing. Because you have certain areas of privilege, you might have to do a lot of personal work on undoing the lens with which you see the world through, and on seeing it through the lens of those oppressed groups you mentioned. While I like your explanation, it is tainted by your unchecked ignorance.
Your video leaves me with the impression that you're trying to make yourself relevant in an area you don't really need to be... while simultaneously discounting the work of applied intersectionality. Also, you really went out of your way to elevate white scholarship without presenting your awareness of the socioeconomic functions that prohibited other voices during that time.
This isn't to say that your critique is bad or wrong, or that you don't have the right to continue your work on intersectionality. But um, it could be more emotionally-informed (by acknowledging your privilege in practice, not just in regurgitating the merits of the act), and less self-interested.
As a philosopher, I dare you to read what you've written here in your head backwards. This is just drivel; a blancmange of rhetorical gibberish undigested without any critical acuity, as if found in the bottom of a dustbin of propaganda dusted off during one of the many purges in the near distant past to kill thought.
You would be better of reading Milan Kundera's novel The Joke, wherein pseudo-intellectuals like this preside over the death of humour, love and humanity without any language of their own. This tosh reminds me of what George Orwell wrote: If you want to see the future of humanity ( as evinced in this gobbledygook) imagine a feminist's boot stamping on a human face, forever.
Mariah Macwilliam - or your misapprehension is great, as there's no 'group' that sees all through the same 'lens.' Collectivism ignorantly assumes the unimportance of the individual in just the way you have.
I mean you've gone beyond the words he's actually saying to (by your apparent powers of magic) reading his mind and assuming his intentions and world views, not to say you've made essentially racist / classist assumptions about his whole life and that of all 'white' scholarship.
I have magical powers too, I can see the future. Your whole life will consist of weasel-wording and bullying. Intersectionality is such a lie to this end. And for some people that's enough.
ruclips.net/video/tCD0FVodIT4/видео.html
How is viewing the world through an “intersectionality view” anything but racism?
White kid who grows up with no father and a meth head mom compared to the millions of healthy 2 parent black households is explained how with your warped view?
How does the success of Nigerian immigrants which is far higher than white Americans and white immigrants? How does your racist reality explain the drastic difference in Nigerians flourishing in America while Somali immigrants fail miserably?
One can find a far greater correlation between hand outs and no drive to prosper than your judgement of people based on the color of skin etc.
This kind of pathetic logic is a cancer that literally kills people. Telling an obese person they need to lose weight isn’t some retarded concept like fat shaming or fat phobia. Only a dumbass fool ignores how obese people lose almost a decade of life to embrace a fairytale.
@@keitheldershaw9428 hmmm?
You have missed the main point of the categories. They are all oppressed. No one is oppressing attractive people or unattractive people. The intersection of multiple membership in oppressed groups is greater than the sum of each. And we as white male able bodied heterosexual appearing need to listen to those in the intersection of their oppression. And meet them in their world.
Finally to be critical of the genius’s of their ideas because they began with a white guy demonstrates your ignorance. People of color have not had the privilege of Foucault, which further supports Dr Crenshaw’s work.
Pathetic. People who think this way will only dig themselves deeper into an "oppressed" state that isn't actually there at all.
Ughh! You didn’t read anything!
One of the ironies of history is that feminism and intersectionality came from white Western European thinkers
And the second irony is childishly attacking western civilization is not very possible without the amenities and support of western civilization.
Like sawing off the tree branch you are yelling from, because dammit that there branch holding you up is structural inequality.
@@j_freed Childishly attacking western civilisation? The irony is black people not choosing to leave their lands through slavery and indigenous people not choosing western civilisation to colonise them. How about we go back in time, remove slavery and colonisation and see how much we need western civilisation? How about we do some research and see how much the west depend on countries that are not "developed" per say to run western civilisation (I say this sarcastically because what even is developed?). PATHETIC. Also Martin Reid, take that cap off and show me some references if you're dropping a bold statement that goes again "Dr Coopers" researched statement that Kimberle Crenshaw created that term. (This video does nothing but encourage White Straight Men to cry out because they're the "bad guys" and god forbid, your life is so much harder).
I hate that watching videos like this appears to populate my recommendations with anti-vaccine content, and the occasional Qanon crap as well.
Well, for whats it's worth, I'm not anti-vax or QAnon.
RUclips didn't start assuming I must be a die-hard MAGA hat wearer until I started looking into some of the people Dr. Cooper has debated. The worst part is they no longer correctly assume that I like punny unfunny jokes!
So it's oppression Bingo?
I think you oversimplified the discussion about privilege and oppression and made it sound like the list could be infinite as to who are the folks with privilege and who are the folks who are oppressed. The Visions model looks at oppression from that place of historicity, reinforced by laws, and limited access to resources. As for intersectionality you seem to have missed the point but not surprising since as you shared yourself you come from a place of privilege.
so, what’s the point then?
Giggles here and there 😅
Doc, your conclusion is a bit disinegenous.
"Cultural Marxism"
If you're here, you're either a leftist who wants to learn more about the cult you follow or you're a conservative and you want to know more about how the left thinks.
Either way you're wasting your time.
Go study math ->
In summary:
Judge not least you be judged yourself.
For the meek shall inherit the Earth. 🌎
As I started watching this video I expected a well grounded, academic critique. But it turned out as superficial as most of the videos on the topic. Intersectionality has its flaws, of course, but the commentator seems to be mocking this approsch. Anyway, he looked like a little boy with superficial arguments.
What makes it not well grounded, not academic?
Ad hominem attack. Nice. 😂
Considering the junk this Dr.Cooper uploaded in his video "Cultural Marxism Explained"... I won't even take the time to watch this one. He needs to get with some homework and then when he wants to present a case, do so honestly.
And, he just got his PhD... What does that tell ya?
@RamaRendezvoo So you're commenting and passing judgement on a video that by your own admission you did not watch?
RamaRendezvoo - maybe these 'intellectual products' are for him not that hard to point out as fraudulent, and of course they tell a little truth with every lie.
@@andre0baskin No. I passed my opinion on the one i 'did' watch and indicated it persuaded me not to watch more of his content on the subject until i'm given good reason to do so.