I mean just look at this article
Well, paint me orange and call me a vulgarian.
Loooool
Well you evil heterosexual adult human skinny tall American-born high-self esteem neurotypical powerful smart active married happy able-bodied healthy Christian hard-working rich cis college-educated white male, your opinions are full of crap and more people in your group need to check their priviledge
Did I do this right?
Lol, I pressed the reply button by accident
How do you delete a post lol?
You don’t. We consider that a feature around here.
That’s a parody of the Vulgar version, sure. It’s quite self-defeating to mention the existence of this version around people who know about the Academic one.
Has anyone read the article I posted?
Sorry, no.
My Readers Digest came yesterday and is taking up all my reading time.
Right. So when I ask my college-aged son, who is majoring in Criminal Justice & Law, about it and he’s like “Eh…” then it’ll be because “Well, not THOSE young people steeped in academia but the OTHER people…”
Gotcha
That’s an impressive sample size.
It’s more or less the same as saying that since none of your friends voted for Trump, you can’t understand how he got elected.
I know, right? I mean it’s almost as scientific as “Uh HUH is so true and if you don’t see it then you’re just missing it because it’s totally 100% true I said so!” 
How old are you and how much time do you spend on the red pill? You aren’t making a good case for anything.
What I said is true. The left supports social egalitarianism, the right supports social hierarchies.
For the right (in the US) they obsess over valued in-groups over less valued out-groups.
Men (over women)
Whites (over non-whites)
Christians (over other faiths)*
Native born (over immigrants)
Heterosexual (over LGBTQ)
Republican (over democrat)
The right support these hierarchies and believe the in groups deserve special powers, privileges and opportunities denied to the out-groups. Liberals believe both in-groups and out-groups deserve equal treatment in the social, legal and political system.
So conservatives thing they deserve to get married, gay people don’t. They think they deserve to vote, but democrats do not. They think men should make their own medical decisions, but women should not. They think Muslim bans are fair, but christian bans are unjust. etc
*I say ‘christians’, but it used to be you had to be the right kind of christian. A certain type of protestant, and catholics, mormons, etc. were all out-groups. Nowadays pretty much any christian will do.
The left also support tearing down existing power structures in their own cultures.
Anyway, you don’t seem to have any real quality debate or discussion skills.
I suspect it will be highly corrolated with major. It’s very possible that many students, by choosing specific majors and distribution requirements will never hear about it in a true academic setting but the same vulgar way that many of us have.
The term “intersectionality” is not well known among liberals. It’s hard to find articles before 2014 that discuss it. The term was created in 1989, but only recently has it begun to even come to the notice of most liberals. Here’s a collection of articles and quotations from those articles showing that it’s not well known, where the link is given first and then the quotation, so at very least the idea that the left is obsessed with it is ridiculous:
As BME Women’s Rep on the Women’s Campaign, I’m often called upon to talk about intersectionality. I don’t consider myself an authority on the issue by any means, but I find it interesting how many people who identify as feminists have not even heard of the term, let alone apply it to their activism.
Most know that feminism is the movement set on achieving gender equality. But not as many know what intersectional feminism is.
Even though the concept of intersectionality in feminism has been around for decades, it only seems to have made it into mainstream debate in the past year or so. And yet still so many people are confused by what it means, or what it stands for.
You don’t have to condescendingly tell me my feminism needs to be intersectional. I already know that because yesterday I googled the meaning of ‘intersectionality.’ Prior to my search-engine enlightenment, I thought, Feminism located at intersections?
Nobody knows what intersectionality means. I certainly don’t, and the more I read about it the more confused I become.
Well, for the record, my reading typically consists of the Washington Post, The Atlantic, the Guardian, BBC, and Vox, as well as watching MSNBC regularly. Nope, sorry, I truly had never heard the term before this thread.
I now understand the concept behind it, having read this thread.
That’s because like I said, i am starting to instigate in politics and social issues more than ever.
Also, I just started hearing the term like 4 months ago too[at least in that definition, I heard of intersectionality in math back in 8th grade and will probably hear it again while I’m in Geometry]
I’m honestly not sure what you’re going on about, but with respect it appears to me to be generalized whining. But maybe I am mistaken. Anyway, I’ll give it a shot.
Ah. Oppression olympics.
In the US, complaining is protected speech. Whether anyone listens is another matter. Whether anyone should listen depends upon the validity of the underlying claims.
Seriously, it depends. Fox News and 4chan are obsessed with SJWs.
On the left, Talking Points Memo and 538 are less concerned with identity politics than Vox.com. All three offer up solid, empirically grounded articles.
So I’d say that conservatives are more obsessed with this stuff than most of the left, with a minority of the left being more obsessed than conservatives.
Who cares? The point of intersectionality is to consider the aspects of people separately and together. It’s not really a ranking thing, outside of conservative circles.
Take out female animals and re-read Spice Weasel’s posts.
Your link does not mention intersectionality.
With respect, you have a sample size of zero.
Saying this is a dominant paradigm in academia seems silly and paranoid to me. (Fairly repressed discussion of this in STEM or biz admin I say, much more in lit class.) Saying that there’s a free speech crisis on college campuses smacks of hysteria. As an example the UC Berkeley administration bent over backwards to accommodate internet troll Milo Milo Yiannopoulos who makes great pronouncements for months, but can’t be bothered to book rooms, assemble a guest list that actually agrees to show up, or put together a coherent written argument.
(I’m not sure, but perhaps you mean investigate.
Investigate: to examine, study, or inquire into systematically; search or examine into the particulars of; examine in detail.
Instigate: 1. to cause by incitement; foment: to instigate a quarrel.
2. to urge, provoke, or incite to some action or course: to instigate the people to revolt. )