The Intersectionals: a Secular Religion

Here’s a good article that touches on some of the religious dimensions of today’s secular social justice ideologues:

It was always foolish to believe that a less Christian America would be a less religious America.

The demise of religion among American youth is greatly exaggerated. It turns out that America isn’t raising a new generation of unbelievers. Instead, rising in the heart of deep-blue America are the zealots of a new religious faith. They’re the intersectionals, they’re fully woke, and the heretics don’t stand a chance.

The New Atheist talking point about getting rid of religion (Christianity, that is) and replacing it with a cultural love of science and reason was always nothing more than wishful thinking propped up by faith.

This entry was posted in Religion, Social Justice, social justice atheism, Society, Uncategorized and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

13 Responses to The Intersectionals: a Secular Religion

  1. stcordova says:

    Some random thoughts.

    Of all people, Peter Boghossian is claiming intersectionality is a new religion!

    Boghossian is now arguing intersectionality is a virus (like faith). Boghossian was actually praising Christians for their willingness to dialogue, compared to the intersectionals that won’t.

    Here is a video of the intersectional rituals:


    Jordan Peterson, Christina, Yaaron Brooks and Sargon of Akkad

    The best part was the audience getting fed up with Antifa and then beating them up, and Yaaron Brooks stepping on the Antifa flag Sargon of Akkad capturing it and the crowd cheers. 🙂 One thing the Christian movements had, they were less likely to make themselves odious to society like the SJW do-nothing nutters.

  2. TFBW says:

    The self-destruction of atheism is nothing, PZ. Wait until you discover that the A+ puritans you’re aligning yourself with include people who claim with a straight face that science shows there are no differences between men and women. That’s the part I’m really looking forward to: the clash of the Evolutionary Biologists with the Social Constructionists. PZ is still too busy scowling outward at the awful sexist atheists to notice that he’s embedded with scientific heretics.

    What a lovely train wreck.

  3. nsr says:

    Was New Atheism really ever anything to do with science?

  4. stcordova says:

    Jordan Peterson points out the project called “New Real Peer Review” which highlights abstracts from postmoderns and intersectional that the authors didn’t want advertised since their journals were just meant to make money by libraries buying their journals (and supposedly to get them points for publishing), but which they didn’t want anyone to read because it was so awful!

    The twitter website Peterson referred to is horribly organized, but Peterson was reading it to find reprehensible abstracts:

    The website includes the “heteronormative evolution” discussion, but there were some other “gems” highlighted by the website:

    “A good feminist theory should consist of nonsensical buzzwords according to feminist scholar”:

    “Intersectionality as buzzword
    A sociology of science perspective on what makes a feminist theory successful

    Since its inception, the concept of `intersectionality’ — the interaction of multiple identities and experiences of exclusion and subordination — has been heralded as one of the most important contributions to feminist scholarship. Despite its popularity, there has been considerable confusion concerning what the concept actually means and how it can or should be applied in feminist inquiry. In this article, I look at the phenomenon of intersectionality’s spectacular success within contemporary feminist scholarship, as well as the uncertainties and confusion which it has generated. Drawing upon insights from the sociology of science, I shall show how and why intersectionality could become a feminist success story. I shall argue that, paradoxically, it is precisely the concept’s alleged weaknesses — its ambiguity and open-endedness — that were the secrets to its success and, more generally, make it a good feminist theory.


    “Queer black marxist feminist political economy in a white-supremacist heterosexist-homophobic capitalist patriarchy: Rhonda M. Williams on method, history, theory, and policy

    SPRINGER is publishing this crap? EESH!


    “Diaries, dicks, and desire: how the leaky traveler troubles dominant discourse in the eroticized Caribbean

    This article employs ‘unconventional linguistic self-designation’ in an attempt to move beyond the abstract signifying logics commonly used to theorize First-World/Third-World sex tourism in a language of knowledge, power, and resistance. I look specifically at the sexual liaisons between Western tourists, including myself, and men from the Dominican Republic. In my efforts to move away from representational logics, I mobilize an apparatus utilizing feminist and queer affect theory, notions of embodiment, and a phenomenological language of ‘orientation’. I analyze the journal accounts of my own erotic encounters with Dominican men to stimulate a certain type of layered thinking capable of accessing affective dispositions and challenging the notion of an oriented, stable, composed subject. Neither tourist nor local Dominican men fit this unitary description. Instead, I rely on metaphors of disorientation, rupture, and leakage to arrive at indeterminate, fleeting, fugitive experiences, defying common touristic tropes. I conclude that although Western white men (and women) are bound by authoritative modes of knowing – individually exempt, perhaps, but structurally bound – possibility exists to ‘write back’ or successfully transgress boundaries in the (non)representation of self and the other in a process of mutual recognition.”

    This sounds like mindless religious babble of Eastern/Hindu religions. It attempts to sound profound, but it’s just babble.

    AND from the BLAZE:

  5. Dhay says:

    stcordova > AND from the BLAZE: [Link]

    It seems that the author doesn’t actually create a new, intersectional feminist theory of quantum physics:

    It should be noted that Stark doesn’t appear to detail how exactly the actual study of physics might change as a result of her criticism.

    It seems to be all about Heisenberg’s Sexual Uncertainty Principle.

  6. stcordova says:

    Dhay> “It seems to be all about Heisenberg’s Sexual Uncertainty Principle.”


    Unfortunately, and I’m no expert on this, cults have the characteristic of having sacred literature that is total babble that no one understands. It makes the sheep easier to manipulate. Thus they need a lot of ritual to perpetuate their cult-ure rather than thoughtful investigation and discourse. Peterson, and even (gag) Boghossian, pointed out these people are not into dialogue.

    What feeds them is the shutting down of their rational faculties, and going into mindless mantras and rituals. They only have to pretend to themselves they are rational with intersectional babble that Peterson highlighted.

  7. stcordova says:

    From the International Feminist Journal of Politics:
    “Drone Disorientations

    Killing with drones produces queer moments of disorientation. Drawing on queer phenomenology, I show how militarized masculinities function as spatiotemporal landmarks that give killing in war its “orientation” and make it morally intelligible. These bearings no longer make sense for drone warfare, which radically deviates from two of its main axes: the home–combat and distance–intimacy binaries. Through a narrative methodology, I show how descriptions of drone warfare are rife with symptoms of an unresolved disorientation, often expressed as gender anxiety over the failure of the distance–intimacy and home–combat axes to orient killing with drones. The resulting vertigo sparks a frenzy of reorientation attempts, but disorientation can lead in multiple and sometimes surprising directions – including, but not exclusively, more violent ones. With drones, the point is that none have yet been reliably secured, and I conclude by arguing that, in the midst of this confusion, it is important not to lose sight of the possibility of new paths, and the “hope of new directions.”

    HT: New Real Peer Review

  8. stcordova says:

    Another gem from New Real Peer Review. This was about a guy who views himself as a TransAnimal (the next step beyond a Transgender). He says he’s a Hippo. Am I an intolerant bigot for thinking this guy has some issues?

    Publishished in the Journal of Theoretical Humanities.
    Journal of Theoretical Humanities
    Volume 22, 2017 – Issue 2: tranimacies: intimate links between animal and trans* studies

    the subject as metaphor

    Florentin Félix Morin


    This article explores the formation of a tranimal, hippopotamus alter-ego. Confronting transgender with transpecies, the author claims that his hippopotamus “identity” allowed him to (verbally) escape, all at once, several sets of categorization that govern human bodies (“gender,” “sexuality,” age). He starts with an account of how his metaphorical hippo-self is collectively produced and performed, distinguishing the subjective, the intersubjective and the social. The article then investigates the politics of equating transgender and transpecies, critically examining the question of the inclusion of “xenogenders” in the trans political movement. Finally, the author returns to the magical power of metaphors, arguing that metaphors do materialize insofar as the flesh does not remain unchanged by them. Analogizing his hippo-self to a “cut” as theorized by Eva Hayward – a regeneration of the boundaries of the self – he offers a final crossing to the world of fiction by showing how the His Dark Materials trilogy outlines an aesthetics of porosity, which suggests that the self is, as much as a novel, a work of fiction.

  9. stcordova says:

    “The Cult of Intersectionality on Campus
    Some blame the new campus intolerance on hypersensitive, over-trophied millennials. But the students who signed that letter don’t appear to be fragile. Nor do those who recently shut down lectures at Berkeley, Middlebury, DePaul, and Cal State LA. What they are is impassioned. And their passion is driven by a theory known as intersectionality.

    Intersectionality is the source of the new preoccupation with microaggressions, cultural appropriation, and privilege-checking. It’s the reason more than 200 colleges and universities have set up Bias Response Teams. Students who overhear potentially “otherizing” comments or jokes are encouraged to make anonymous reports to their campus BRTs. A growing number of professors and administrators have built their careers around intersectionality. What is it exactly?

    Intersectionality is a neo-Marxist doctrine that views racism, sexism, ableism, heterosexism, and all forms of “oppression” as interconnected and mutually reinforcing. Together these “isms” form a complex arrangement of advantages and burdens. A white woman is disadvantaged by her gender but advantaged by her race. A Latino is burdened by his ethnicity but privileged by his gender. According to intersectionality, American society is a “matrix of domination,” with affluent white males in control. Not only do they enjoy most of the advantages, they also determine what counts as “truth” and “knowledge.”

    But marginalized identities are not without resources. According to one of intersectionality’s leading theorists, Patricia Collins (former president of the American Sociology Association), disadvantaged groups have access to deeper, more liberating truths. To find their voice, and to enlighten others to the true nature of reality, they require a safe space—free of microaggressive put-downs and imperious cultural appropriations. Here they may speak openly about their “lived experience.” Lived experience, according to intersectional theory, is a better guide to the truth than self-serving Western and masculine styles of thinking. So don’t try to refute intersectionality with logic or evidence: That only proves that you are part of the problem it seeks to overcome.

  10. Pennywit says:

    I’m fine with logrolling, forming an ad-hoc political alliance, or even being part of a long-term political coalition, but I generally see those in purely transactional terms. ‘I’ll support you on XYZ issues if you support me on ABC issues.” I don’t see a need to agree 100 percent with other people in the coalition, and I bridle at ANYBODY, left or right, who wants to enforce an orthodoxy.

    Which is a long way of saying “screw intersectionalism.”

  11. Dhay says:

    I was interested in Hemant Mehta’s 20 July 2018 post entitled “Young Black People Aren’t Abandoning Religion as Quickly as Other Millennials” which quotes a Pew analysis of their 2014 Religious Landscape Study which concludes that young Blacks are far, far more religious than young ‘nonblacks’.

    And of course, ‘older blacks’ are far more religious again.

    It occurs to me that discrimination against Black people intersects quite majorly with discrimination against Christians — do one, do the other.

    And that discrimination against Christians intersects quite majorly with discrimination against Black people — do one, do the other.

    Do militantly anti-Christian New Atheists realise how racist they are.

  12. Dhay says:

    And I guess Pew reinforces, with figures, my impression — try counting the non-white and non-female faces in Reason Rally crowd pictures — that atheists are predominantly young White males.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.