In My Tribe

Share this post
Intersectional Privilege, 2/12
arnoldkling.substack.com

Intersectional Privilege, 2/12

Arnold Kling
Feb 12
8
17
Share this post
Intersectional Privilege, 2/12
arnoldkling.substack.com

Richard Hanania writes,

I think we have a few options for how we treat public discourse. The first two are

  1. Expect everyone who participates in the marketplace of ideas to abide by male standards, meaning you accept some level of abrasiveness and hurt feelings as the price of entry.

  2. Expect everyone to abide by female standards, meaning we care less about truth and prioritize the emotional and mental well-being of participants in debates.

Instead of either of these options, I think we’ve stumbled upon a hybrid system, where

  1. We accept gender double standards, and tolerate more aggression towards men than we do towards women. We also tolerate more hyper-emotionalism from women than men.

Call this “female privilege.” But I don’t believe that it protects women in positions of power. I think that men can get away with aggressive talk against female political figures, for example. And I’d bet that it’s pretty rare for a female corporate officer to cry that something said at a meeting was “hurtful.”

Freddie deBoer writes,

There is, of course, no such thing as “online violence,” because the online world is disembodied and violence can only occur to bodies. Was there ever any chance whatsoever that these three ideologues doing this research would fail to find the effect they were looking for? How much do you want to bet that a vast portion of what they’re defining as violence is in fact perfectly fair criticism?

In fact, Glenn Reynolds points out that the left will say that violence is speech when that violence takes place, say, at a “mostly peaceful” BLM riot. But the left will say that speech is violence when a conservative says something offensive to progressives.

Call this double standard about what constitutes violence “progressive privilege.”

Finally, if a black public figure (other than an outspoken conservative) receives criticism, the probability that the critic will be branded a racist approaches 100 percent. Call this “black privilege.”

Intersectionality would imply that when you are in a room and a progressive black woman makes a comment, you had better think twice about disagreeing out loud.

Share

Comment
Share
Share this post
Intersectional Privilege, 2/12
arnoldkling.substack.com

Create your profile

0 subscriptions will be displayed on your profile (edit)

Skip for now

Only paid subscribers can comment on this post

Already a paid subscriber? Sign in

Check your email

For your security, we need to re-authenticate you.

Click the link we sent to , or click here to sign in.

Default Friend
Writes Default Wisdom ·Feb 12

The intersectionality people talk about isn’t truly intersectional. An ugly woman, for example, is hardly living life on easy mode, whereas a rich black man navigates the world differently than a poor white man. I think a lot of these things are real, but not correctly weighted. We don’t take seriously the implications of class and beauty, either, both are dismissed completely out of hand.

Expand full comment
ReplyGive gift
3 replies
[redacted]
Feb 12

“Silence is violence”

My favorite slogan from the racial reckoning of 2020.

Expand full comment
Reply
15 more comments…
TopNewCommunity

No posts

Ready for more?

© 2022 Arnold Kling
Privacy ∙ Terms ∙ Collection notice
Publish on Substack Get the app
Substack is the home for great writing