GeniesLoki

here's a thing that's been bothering me re: intersectionality (which i have complex feels about) when people* talk about it, it's pretty much always race / gender and sure those are important but what about, say if someone is neurotypical? *americans 1/x

Don't worry intersectionality will catch up on neurodivergence now that we're increasingly recognising that women can be autistic too.

I know someone who was bullied for being clumsy. In adulthood they find brain abnormalities in his cerebellum. Jordan Peterson's take is that if you take into account all the axis of privilege, some undiscovered, you end up on the scale of the individual. Which I agree with.

You may have to then acknowledge that the only objective measure of privilege is subjective happiness. I am in favour of intersectionality if it is taken to this logical endpoint, but it's proponents *by design* do not want to use it to the extent it obviously calls for.

For most its proponents it is not a sincere conviction, but a hammer to hit enemies in the head with. Incels are pretty clearly going to be a group that are high on lack of privilege if full fair intersectional standards are used. That will be fun to see.

I kinda agree with this but I think it misses the point of the privilege and intersectionality frameworks. It's true that every individual has a unique set of privileges and marginalisations to them, but measuring degree of privilege is sortof not what the framework is for.

(I agree that that's often how it's treated in its weaponised form) It's not really a tool of analysis where you're supposed to be able to say how much someone is privileged or marginalised, it's for looking at the specific ways in which privilege and marginalisation occur.