>Am I the only one completely unsurprised? No. I noticed the same thing hearing the drum of intersectionality beaten so often. Crenshaw's foundational piece[1

>Am I the only one completely unsurprised? No. I noticed the same thing hearing the drum of intersectionality beaten so often. Crenshaw's foundational piece[1] on intersectionality lacks any meaningful analysis of class (except for the class who is party to a lawsuit)! The part about entry into the country club is revealing: it's not about equality in society, it's about equality in the professional-managerial class. Adolph Reed, Jr (despite maybe going too far in wholly rejecting identity politics) really gets the point across[2]: >...the burden of that ideal of social justice is that the society would be fair if 1% of the population controlled 90% of the resources so long as the dominant 1% were 13% black, 17% Latino, 50% female, 4% or whatever LGBTQ, etc. Re: >The only bizarre or disagreeable bit is how it ever got passed off as somehow altruistic or progressive. My take is that the left holds similar liberal viewpoints, so there is just enough overlap to wear the progressive (and therefore altruistic) cloak. [1]: https://chicagounbound.uchicago.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1052&context=uclf https://chicagounbound.uchicago.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?arti... [2]: http://nonsite.org/editorial/how-racial-disparity-does-not-help-make-sense-of-patterns-of-police-violence http://nonsite.org/editorial/how-racial-disparity-does-not-h...