To the Editor:
Reading Christine Rosen’s article made me think that when some advocates of intersectionality insist that all men are rapists, it is because to admit otherwise would disprove their ideology. If individuals make choices that have consequences, rather than behaving in accordance with their identity groups, the claim that other groups are oppressed simply because of group identity is called into question.
One consequence of intersectionality is that it encourages thinking along racial, gender, and other identity lines, thus encouraging the behavior it claims to oppose. Is it a coincidence that racism and other prejudices have had a resurgence even as intersectionality has become the doctrine of choice on the left?
Putting feelings over facts is a return to the magical thinking that has always resulted in great horrors.
Intersectionality gives individuals who lack power a rationalization for their failure to attain it. It then allows them to claim it as an entitlement. This removes the need to consider possible or necessary changes to their own behavior.
To the Editor:
I’d only add to Christine Rosen’s argument by noting that radical feminists tend to reject objective truth and see the world as a place of conflict with no hope for cooperative compromises (“Kavanaugh and the Assault on Men,” November). They see the world only through subjective reasoning and based purely on their limited experiences. Since they view themselves perpetually in conflict with others, they seek to beat into submission those with differing views. In this way, they hope to bring on the society they want.
Richard R. Allen
Colorado Springs, Colorado
Christine Rosen writes:
Richard R. Allen is correct to point out the highly subjective nature of the feminist project. Personal experience—and the idea that follows it, that the “personal is political”—has been the lodestar of the modern feminist movement since the first consciousness-raising session in the 1960s. The idea has metastasized to give us the current demand, “Believe All Women,” and, as we saw during the Kavanaugh confirmation hearings, it brings with it contempt for due process and for the presumption of innocence.
Yale Zussman makes an insightful point when he notes the connection between the embrace of “intersectionality” and the abandonment of personal responsibility. The reassurance of belonging to a supposedly oppressed group offers a kind of protection from having to face everyday disappointments. Once one has gone down the intersectional rabbit hole, failure, rude people, or mediocrity become discrimination, microaggressors, or the exercise of incorrect privilege. As both correspondents note, whatever existential reassurance such magical thinking offers its adherents is far outweighed by the damage it does to facts and to people’s lives.