How would you respond to someone of high intersectionality who claims to be systematically oppressed by straight white cis-gendered (not transmen) Christian men? For example, "Are there some benefits of being LGBTQX, not-white, transpersoned, non-Christian, or female?". As you may know, intersectionality is the ranking system of identity politics where groups of people see the world as a battle between the "privileged" and the "oppressors" based mostly on immutable factors. It is also a movement to combine varied non-straight-cis-white-Christian-male groups against a common "enemy". Here's a calculator where you can get a "score" of your intersectionality: [intersectionalityscore.com]
7
Be part of the movement!
Welcome to the community for those who value free speech, evidence and civil discourse.Create your free account
33 comments
Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.Frankly the whole paragraph is incoherent. To many PC buzz words in there. The truth is we are all oppressed by someone everyday. The question is not are you oppressed. Its what are you going to do about it? Lay down and be walked over or stand up and push back. Raise yourself up and prosper inspite of others.
Lila1958
Level 2
Dec 23, 2019
0
Just as the categories of intersectionality are nearly infinite, the category of the oppressive class can be constructed to be whatever the aggrieved party needs it to be.
Like "Climate Change," Intersectionality is another god that Voltaire knew we would have to create, although, I think even he would have been amazed to see gods outnumbering their worshipers.
Terence57
Level 7
Nov 13, 2019
0
Ask open-ended questions. Be an "Active Listener". Nobody wants to be talked at. Everyone wants to be heard.
LiterallyYourMom
Level 2
Oct 24, 2019
0
Aa long as silence isn't confused for acceptance ...
I think you first have to understand what discrimination is. If you are discriminated against due to your being a white Christian male, straight person, you would have to have a real life example where those qualities effected your socio-economic and political status as a result of discrimination or in this case, racism. Not just where you were insulted or where you were denied a certain thing that you wanted.
As I see it, in America every stratification of class offers white Christian straight males, the strongest tail winds for success.
As a white Christian straight male you may think you aren't racist, but you really are.
Why?
Because racism exists in law, in cultural, in business, in politics and without any doubt white Christian straight males have not been the victims, as a race, ever.
So you start with your cultural identity, then you say "it must happen", but it didn't. Not in America.
YET.
Robbankstoday
Level 3
July 6, 2019
0
I would respond by stating homosexuality is immoral as is heterosexual promiscuity. God condemns both both. They are, by far, not the only, or chief sins (there is no scale 1 to 10 on sin severity) all sin is disobedience. "Intersectionality" is newspeak.
The fact is, Black, White, Purple is meaningless as we are all spirit beings in an earth suit. "Trans" is mental dysfunction. The homosexual agenda, beside brainwashing children (our most valuable and vulnerable asset), is to eradicate Christianity because the two cannot coexist. Nutshell: homosexuality is sin, transexaulity is mental disorder, not conditions people are born with. What we are born with is a hatred for God and His Truth.
AlladinSane
Level 4
June 24, 2019
0
If homosexuality is sin and there is no scale 1 to 10 on sin severity, how can Christianity and homosexuality not coexist? According to the Bible, everyone has sinned. Christianity seemingly exists because we are all sinners. Worse, we'll be sinners tomorrow and 10 years from now. Seems like a contradiction. You seem to elevate homosexuality into some kind of sin hierarchy.
@chuckpo
They cannot coexist because the homosexual agenda includes FORCING compliance. All you have to do is look at the Christian bakers and florist. Where Christians recognize everyones right to their own form of self destruction, deviants recognize only complete acceptance.
@AlladinSane, before this stuff--before the legalization of gay marriage, I stated that homosexuals weren't looking for legal rights to be homosexuals. They already had them. What they were looking for was to force the church into validating and normalize their behavior. REALLY fascinating dynamic. I'd be really curious to see what you think about that.
So, you're arguing that homosexuality won't allow Christianity to exist? I have to reread your first assertion. OKAY, I can see that. I misread your intention. That's really interesting. I can think of a few conservative homosexuals of late talking on the topic--a small bridge between the groups, but they don't go into a lot of detail on how this 'merger' works or even how it works for them. It's an extremely complicated topic, and I realize critics won't listen to the Christian perspective, let alone understand. Tough position.
@chuckpo I feel the same about homosexual 'right's as I do about woman's 'rights'. They already have them. We all have human 'right's endowed by our Creator. What homosexual s want is to elevate themselves above 'normalmy sexed' people, especially Christians (Christ, demanding adherence to God's laws, is in direct opposition to their lifestyle of choice). Besides, basing your identity on a sexual preference is counter productive to Spiritual growth.
I remember telling a joke when someone mentioned they watched The Handmaids Tale which went something like this: Of course when Trump won we at the patriarchy meetings where going to implement the sexual slavery of women however when we saw you marching down the streets in pussy we though better of it. I mean at any moment these women could have reported us for sexual harassment while we were raping them.
The point was to show the paradox in the idea they can appeal to the powers of society while claiming that same society is oppressing them. If that were true not only would the institutions not care about their complaints they would further victimise them.
acthenpens
Level 6
June 24, 2019
1
Being the question asks how I would respond I'll answer it as such. Mind you, this is not answering what is the "proper and fitting" way to respond. But hey, if I'm asked then I'm giving my answer. Here it is...
(After laughing my ass off...in an incredulous tone): GTFO of here with your whiny ass complaints about being oppressed from leveling up on your freakish and deviant style. You wanna know what real oppression is? Wear my WHITE MIDDLE AGED CHRISTIAN DIVORCED MAN SHOES for a year and see what real government oppression via an anesthesia-free colonoscopy in search of your wallet twice a month feels like!!! It's called "divorce rape." That along with gynocentric government rules handing my beloved children to a hypergamist and biological liar (aka woman/women) I have basically danced on the edge of the cliff of suicide like a million or so men have been, are, or will shortly be doing. You'll call me a "deadbeat dad" (a slur in my mind) and I'll knock your teeth out...with enthusiasm. Then I'll make you attempt to say "BEAT DEAD DAD, I'm sorry" as the blood and saliva drool down your chin. .... Because here's how I see you, ya punk. You're the corrupt and oppressive county level government trafficking children and subjugating honorable men. My fist is my dignity and your face is every individual aggrandizing themselves in the family court system. And because your little "intersectional" group sucked up all the legal oxygen in our society, families have been left to rot. So...no sympathy for you!! And here's your teeth back."
That's what "I" would say...for myself, a million men (many who have taken their lives), and for all the people in society at least trying to be normal and live meaningfully. Spare me the freak parades.
Arrrrggghhhh!!! That felt good to rant! 
DanielEvans
Level 7
June 24, 2019
3
Good for you having your say! Refreshing.
@chuckpo Thanks! I wasn't even drunk.
I don't think everyone who's "highly intersectional" is solely out to get white men. A lot of thinkers on the left actually acknowledge that patriarchy is bad for not only men, but society as a whole, and this is why they want to see patriarchal structures dismantled (https://juniaproject.com/three-ways-patriarchy-bad-men/). In a similar way, Marx didn't really make moral statements about capitalists. He more thought of them as members of a an economic class, and such they were obligated to act in their own class interests or lose their position in that class. More about Marx's thoughts on morality here: [isreview.org]
In conclusion, I think a lot of people on the left aren't interested in attacking individuals with different politics so much as the institutions that perpetuate trends they see as harmful (for example, the policy of single family zoning is really hot in the news right now bc of the housing crisis). The line can get a bit blurry in the case of a person that represents an institution or a brand, like in the case of Jeff Bezos, Ben Shapiro, or Steven Crowder. Basiclaly in my opinion, the majority of the left isn't out to kill every single white Christian man in the world simply for their identity.
xXShadowThornxX
Level 4
June 23, 2019
2
As an observer, I'd certainly disagree, though I see some truth hidden in the emotive extremes. The blind attacks on 'institutions' (nicer way to say groups the left doesn't like) are lazy. Eradicate Christianity because it upset somebody, destroy the group 'men' because it upset somebody, obliterate heterosexuality because it upset somebody. Dismantle the family because some people did family poorly.
Okay, intersectionality isn't designed to get white men. That would actually require a deeper level of thought. The left's intersectionality is a desperate self-obsessed fight for power over all, and the only thing saving the left from each other is the mutual hatred for the non-left. Me, me, me, me, me, me, me, me, me, me, me, me, me, me, me, me, me, me, me, me, me, me, me, me, me, me, me, me, me, me, me...
I agree there are some bad ideas within each of the groups the radical left hates and has set its sights on. I strongly disagree that the models of those groups are bad. In fact, I'd argue the models of those groups are truly great and extraordinarily positive--even necessary--unless you can define another model that is at least as functional. That's the other part of the left's laziness. All they do is tear stuff up. They don't bother to propose another model at a level that's more complex than 'socialism is better than capitalism (fantasy, btw).
The non-left wants from the left SOME actual work showing another way. The left is like a Miss America contestant with 30 seconds to respond to the topic. 'I want world peace'. Great, dumbass. What does world peace look like, and how are we going to achieve that? Well, LEFT, what does family-less society look like, and how do we achieve it? What does a world without religion look like? How will you achieve it? What is the system that replaces it? How do you force people to abandon their beliefs in favor of yours, because ONLY violence on a massive scale will even pretend to meet your goal.
This fly by the seat of your pants remaking of 'the patriarchy' (an absurd notion), what does it actually look like? What's better? Oh, I know, 'we like just want world peace through the subjugation of men, you know?'
We know what the left wants. We've heard all of the pageant talking points. The non-left simply rejects your premises and ill-considered, half-baked, problem-creating interference. Let's pretend this is the adult table and we're talking about real stuff and that real stuff needs real serious solutions. Until then, you're a bunch of angry teenagers bitching because you don't want to take out the garbage.
BTW, the left's solutions turn into oppression. That's BECAUSE they're half-baked.
@chuckpo no one is trying to get rid of Christianity or men, they're simply trying to get people to understand the historical trends that have led to the problematic aspects of these groups. And it's not like people on the left think that all Muslims or all Buddhists are perfect either.
@xXShadowThornxX, there is no problem with those groups that aren't the problems of every other groups containing human beings. It's a fallacy, and it's bigoted.
Islam is an interesting contradiction for the left. The left uses Muslims as a weapon against Christians, yet ignores that Muslims promote most of the same things the left hates about Christians--often worse. The funny thing is if y'all succeed you're going to bring in hoards of a group that will set up stricter moral judgments and laws than you have with Christians, and they'll take you over and drag you all the fuck right. Can you not see that?
@chuckpo who is saying the American government needs to have more muslims? No one is saying fundamentalist muslims are better than fundamentalist Christians. Look at how much hate the left has against Saudi Arabia.
@xXShadowThornxX, I think its not debatable that the left has embraced Islam. Are you disputing it?
Wait, so you're saying moderate Christians are okay? Wow.
@chuckpo ummm, yes? Depends on what you mean by embraced. Can you define that?
@xXShadowThornxX actually I have had several leftist friends say they are more fearful of conservative Christians than radical Islamists.
@ronhark that doesn’t mean they’ve embraced them. That’s like saying I’m less afraid of dying by strangulation than fire.
@xXShadowThornxX they most certainly have, although it is more for political reasons than anything else. "The enemy of my enemy is my friend." These are the same folks who will not denounce radical Islamic terrorists, but instead lament the rampant "Islamophobia" that may come from such attacks. When you can show me where these folks mock Islam in the same brutal ways they mock Christianity, then I might reconsider.
@chuckpo They can't see that. Muslims are part of the protected groups. I try to get my SJW relatives to read the Koran - but they won't even do that! So I started calling all my Roosters "Muhammed". After all, they have multiple wives and a chip on their shoulder. I am up to Muhammed 16.
You speak of Marx as if he was noble! Utopia is only a dream. Men at our core are evil not good. Thus men never create utopia.we only create pain and murder. All power begets hunger for more power. Power always corrupts.
@xXShadowThornxX If you think the left doesnt want to destroy Christianity I have to wonder what planet you live on. I fear the day we put another Democrat in the white house. They will come after us with guns blazing. Only ones left wil be those who hide in dark closets. You see I can't call a male she and her at work or anywhere else. Im sorry they don't know their own biology but I won't lie to appease them. That will get me locked up soon enough. We haven't left our foundation.America has left us!
I think I might get down to basics and ask them where they think rights come from first. If they say from God, we have a basis to talk; if they say anything similar to government, state, or mention an evolutionary process we have no basis to talk. If they aren't gifted inalienable rights from Creator God they have no rights, just permission until permission is taken away by government, state, or someone stronger. Those people they assume they are being oppressed by, the ones who uphold certain inalienable rights for all, may be all that is standing between them and becoming a serf. Under genuine oppression as it has happened in the past, they wouldn't be complaining out loud; not for long.
Quakergrey
Level 2
June 23, 2019
2
Everybody in our society is privileged. We are all, by historical standards, extravagantly wealthy.
If you were the emperor of Rome, your medical treatment would be given to you by the functional equivalent of witch doctors. There were perhaps a million books in the entire empire, and only one library with more than 100,000 volumes. If you wanted entertainment, unless you were truely wealthy, there was the Hippodrome a few times a year. The rest of the time was pure drudgery, which you shared with a population that was 50% slave. And that was the glory of Rome, one of the better epochs of history.
timon_phocas
Level 9
June 23, 2019
4
@admin, you clever little devil you. Gotta love this. Thanks! Some observations:
- The “calculator “ you cited is so close to the border between serious and satire that I did a full digital double-take.
- In the unlikely event that the calculator is serious, God help us all.
- I’m in agreement with Stephen Hicks when he compares this SJW approach to a “reverse Thrasymachus,” meaning that all justice belongs to the weak.
Thanks!
GaryWitt
Level 8
June 23, 2019
4
Thrasymachus' "Might makes Right" still holds true for SJWs as it's all a quest for the power so they can change the system to match their ideology. It's hard to argue that a group that includes 90% of liberal college professors is weak. 2 cents.
@Admin "It's hard to argue that a group that includes 90% of liberal college professors is weak." Care to further characterize and substantiate this bloc of professors?
@GaryWitt Assuming that the professor's methodology was sound (the Mooney newspaper is suspect), what does that say about their ideology and political goals? Might it say more about the state of the GOP?
Nihilism sucks ass, but it's seemingly an impervious reality. I'm sorry this is an unhelpful contribution to the conversation, but it all seems exhausting at every turn when searching for answers concerning human and societal affairs at large. For every argument or viewpoint addressed(or apparently overcome), another opposing obstacle and new argument arises...In short closing, there is obviously a current & deliberate social massive ideological war being waged against white conservative heterosexual males in the U.S......Is it happening globally- idk?
Biosphere
Level 7
June 23, 2019
4
My aim is to foster the conversation. It can be argued that the Left requires an injustice to rally against and is running out of specific examples of oppression to attack - i.e., for the most part, previous injustices have been addressed with changes in societal norms and legislation. The level of outrage by the Left has also seemed constant over the last 40 years despite gains against discrimination of all types. Since now we are left with much fewer obvious and direct threats to the equality of opportunity, the Left must champion the "racist ghosts in the machine" theory that creates inequality of outcome and resist meritocracy, individualism and capitalism. A big concern is that the Left can self-justify beating up their accused oppressors until they are satisfied with the leveling of outcomes. They will therefore be empowered to promote increasing level of government intervention.
@Admin You articulate on paper extremely well. There is NO doubt about that. It's borderline intimidating to someone like me. You're comments deserve breathing room, and an overnight break to humbly absorb. I will remain cautious in my response tomorrow. In the meantime, try imagining stumbling across an island, or isolated place with some dogs that had been previously caged up in harsh conditions not too long before you arrived.The initial captors are now long gone forever. You feel empathy for the oppressed and caged dogs, and have the capability to free them. So, you do so!....
Then the dogs you just freed (with the best of intentions), are attacking you!....
IDK about you, but I would instantly lock them back up until I could figure out what the hell to do. This is a VERY POOR analogy in the attempt to make the comparison to women's right's oppression and slavery (yet
arguably fitting), and the massive social assault being made on white males who just arrived to the island and saw a problem, and tried to do "the right thing".. Niether you, nor I was alive when the early settlers of modern society began oppressing women and slaves/people of color...I will stop there...I can already see how many will disagree with me....disclosure: Before I go to bed I want to cover my ass a bit..I know what I said comes across as barbaric and brash. And it's like drowning and describing the water- which is pointless!!...you are looking to foster conversation to find solutions. I did nothing. I'm sorry
@Biosphere Rest assured, as adults, we understand that your angry dogs metaphor is simply that and does not equate dogs with any humans. There are several questions that arise... are the dogs justified in their anger towards the newcomers? what if the newcomers continue to treat the dogs in the same manner of the previous group or the dogs are still skittish of any people. Yeah, best to review after sleep, ha!
"Farm Attacks in South Africa"
I'm sure you are familiar with this, if not it will answer your question of the global trend. Now, consider that the EU is replacing their white citizens outright with foreign migrants who are raping and murdering their hosts.
@Admin the hell they will! Their arguements are weak and brittle. You need only have a few facts and the strength of your convictions to break down their BS into echoes of past sins and false constructs built around laughable suppositions. In reality the process can be fun!
@Admin That was well stated! I appreciate your leniency towards me after my interjection of a crude proposition..I guess where I'm coming from is, that as a white middle aged male that would like to see the entire world expunged of racism; I am still experiencing an obvious prejudice against me in my personal everyday & common life experiences living here in the south (North Carolina). This happens to me most everywhere around here, from going to the corner store market, going to work, and beyond. I don't have a problem understanding that people who hate me just because I'm white, are just plain flat out "racist."
My beef is primarily with the mainstream media and our current culture for purposely, tactfully and sneakingly painting me with a broad brush as the bad guy who is a living oppressor from the past. Anyway, I'm drinking again and I should have waited until I sobered up..I'll try another better attempt again soon
@Admin The answer for the left, and anyone else unhappily living in a prosperous nation (i know there is poverty, but our poor are rich compared to world levels) that was born from Christian values, is to GTFO. But of course they would prefer to subjugate the other 97%.
@Facci
Ah, yes. The racial genocide in S.Africa. If we don't acknowledge it, does it even exist? A tree falling in the forest.
Bigot.
jwhitten
Level 7
June 22, 2019
2
Could you elaborate?
@Admin Sure. Bigotry lies along each axis of those intersections. The fact that someone would even sit down and try to come up with some bullshit "system of oppression" based on people possessing some specific set of different ideologies and / or immutable characteristics is, on its face-- *according to the actual denotative definition-- bigotry.
In fact, you might even go so far as to call them a "Bigot's Bigot". As they are putting in the work to create an entire panoply of divisiveness-- essentially making them the "transcendental bigot".
Where others toil to seek enlightenment and ultimate truth, they simply toil to divide and rend asunder, sort of like the definitive temper tantrum from the consummate toddler (no offense meant to any actual toddlers).
Why would someone even waste their time with that kind of nonsense is beyond me? Maybe they just need a hug.
(Or a reach-around 
)
big·ot·ry
/ˈbiɡətrē/
noun: bigotry; plural noun: bigotries
intolerance toward those who hold different opinions from oneself.
"the difficulties of combating prejudice and bigotry"
synonyms: prejudice, bias, partiality, partisanship, sectarianism, discrimination, unfairness, injustice; intolerance, narrow-mindedness, fanaticism, dogmatism; racism, racialism, sexism, heterosexism, homophobia, chauvinism, anti-Semitism, jingoism; Jim Crowism
antonyms: tolerance
big·ot
/ˈbiɡət/
noun
a person who is intolerant toward those holding different opinions.
"don't let a few small-minded bigots destroy the good image of the city"
synonyms: dogmatist, partisan, sectarian, prejudiced person; racist, racialist, sexist, homophobe, chauvinist, jingoist, anti-Semite; informalmale chauvinist pig, MCP
I would tell them that if they choose to place themselves into this tiny box inside a false construct that they have surrendered their individuality and are disconnected from the diverse opportunities provided by the most fluid, abundant and accepting culture in all human history. Then walk away quickly. This entire overlapping BS can be done with any type of of set that has a majority element. It is voodoo graphing. The farther you are from the majority element the more unusual you are.....nothing else!
10thGeneration
Level 7
June 22, 2019
3
I am not highly educated, but as I understand it, most civilizations that go down this multi gender/homosexual path usually end up in the garbage heap of history.
Then there is the Islamic religion and we know how they deal with this issue.
Maybe these confused groups need to start paying attention the number of countries the muslims are getting control over, usually by doing things like having 4 wifes and having 3 or 4 kids per wife.
Didn't one of our congress women marry their brother?
The gender issue is a distraction from real problems. If you don't like who you are, keep it to yourself!
PAY ATTENTION, or ALL IS LOST!!!!!!
Serg97
Level 8
June 22, 2019
11
@FaithJones My point exactly! I do not remember if I read Grubb's book or another covering the same subject, but I'm at a point in life that I don't remember a lot of things.
First, I would ask what is the form of your perceived "opression?" Next, I would want to know if the person was complaining about private people or businesses, or the government exhibiting the defined oppression. Private parties cannot oppress anyone without the imprimatur of government. If whatever the oppression amounts to is government derived or sponsored, they have a point. If it is private, or in reality, they merely want others to condone their behavior, they are on their own, and likely have no idea what oppression means.
BEARSHRUGGED
Level 5
June 22, 2019
1
I'm not sure I agree with that entirely unless your sentence hangs entirely on the meaning of 'imprimatur of government' being somewhat mutable... I think oppression is entirely possible between private parties, and in my view is likely to be the more widely-spread and probably the commonest form. Though whether one could / would whittle it further to simply 'domination' for whatever personal reasons... would be a moot point.
Intersectionality, assigning implicit moral equivalency (oppressor vs victim) based on stereotypical asumtions surrounding immutable characteristics, is the purest definition of bigotry in existence.
Cheetolini
Level 6
June 22, 2019
4
Yes it is. At that point you've pretty much reached the summit and anything said after that by definition must be in a more rational direction...
@jwhitten
The problem with intersectionality is that those proposing it as a “science” haven’t followed their own theory out to its natural conclusion. If you continue to define new categories you eventually end up at the individual.
There are over 7 billion categories of humans as the “snowflake” theory holds. Not one of us is the same.
Why not just bypass all that crap, and treat people as individuals without hyphens.
@Cheetolini Works for me.
there is absolutely no advantage to suffering with mental illness and in this case we are talking about a mental illness known as "gender diaspora". Homosexual people are grossly misunderstood when they are referred to as being "gay". There is hardly a more miserable group of people than those who suffer with homosexuality. This fact is clearly revealed in statistics on suicide relative to "gender and other self identity" issues.
iThink
Level 9
June 22, 2019
3
Correct. I would add that Homosexuality and the other associated sexual dysphoria are learned conditions, not the result of birth, therefor, not immutable.
Recent Visitors 158
Photos 127 More
Posted by Admin Does teaching "white guilt" also cultivate a "white pride" backlash?
Posted by Admin Is it time to take a knee on the Superbowl?
Posted by Admin Why not equality right now?
Posted by Admin How's Biden doing?
Posted by Admin How many good friends do you have from other political tribes?
Posted by Admin What did Trump do, if anything, to incite violence?
Posted by Admin Is free speech dead?
Posted by Admin Is free speech dead?
Posted by Admin Is free speech dead?
Posted by Admin Under what time and circumstance is the use of violence warranted?
Posted by Admin Now what?
Posted by Admin What do you expect to be achieved by this week's pro-Trump DC rally?
Posted by Admin What did you learn in 2020?
Posted by Admin Should pedophiles be allowed to have "child" sex robots?
Posted by Admin Do you have a "line in the sand" regarding political or social change?
Posted by Admin Should big tech firms hire more Blacks and Hispanics?