As I understand it, “intersectionality” is identity politics *within* identity politics, further dividing groups into finer and finer gradations of hatred. Such as: you can’t be just a feminist… you have to divide that up by your race, your body type, your sexuality, height, socioeconomic status, whether or not you’re blind, what your hair color is, etc. And this isn’t simply for the purposes of accounting, but to apportion virtue. A black feminist is better than a white one, a lesbian feminist better than a straight one, one with mental illness is better than a sane one, etc. And the more of these nuggets you can pile up, the higher you are in the intersectional food chain.
For those of us in the rational world, this sort of thing is at best amusing. Villains are bad, of course, but if the villains start to fall upon each other for slight perceived differences in ideology (Trotsky wasn’t killed by Stalin because Trotsky wasn’t a commie, but because he wasn’t the *right* kind of commie), why that’s just plain entertainin.’ So, for your enjoyment, here’s this:
A whole lot of this reads like gibberish to me, I suspect because I’m not fluent in Intersectionalism. But it *seems* that this art exhibit was set up by male-to-female transgendered people (could be the other way, I can’t fargin’ tell) who are ticked off at regular feminists because those feminists won’t do the horizontal mambo with transgendered males or something. And as a result, the art exhibit includes nonsense like bats and axes meant to attack feminists who display wrongthink.
Ladies in gentlemen: I present to you not only todays politics, but what passes for “art” these days. Give me old-school art instead.
