Intersectionality Improperly Defined
Your description of the theory of intersectionality (“The Myth of Intersectionality,” Nov. 2) is wholly inaccurate. Worse yet is your alienating, anti-progressive invective.
First, it’s not a newfound theory, unless you consider a 34-year-old theory new. The term intersectionality was coined by Professor Kimberle Crenshaw in her 1989 academic article that bemoaned the failure of intellectuals to appreciate that the woman’s experience of discrimination and the Black person’s experience of discrimination are not mutually exclusive. “Because the intersectional experience is greater than the sum of racism and sexism,” she argued, “any analysis that does not take intersectionality into account cannot sufficiently address the particular manner in which Black women are subordinated.” The term has since been expanded beyond race and gender discrimination and describes a framework in which all forms of inequality can compound themselves and create obstacles not understood among conventional ways of thinking.
Second, your uninformed and narrow-minded summary of intersectionality is simply inaccurate and offensive. Conservatives and those on the far-right use this false definition to fear-monger and to support their position that the far left is just a bunch of crybabies trying to play the victim at the hands of the white man. Again, this is so far afield from both the original definition of intersectionality as well as its modern theoretical applications.
Many of us on the left who support critical race theory and try to understand the diverse experiences of others through the intersectionality lens do not see Israel as the oppressor and the Palestinians as the oppressed. We are sensitive to the injustices that many different ethnic groups feel and we are sympathetic to Israel and support the Jewish people’s right to self-determination.
At a time when all Jews must come together to support Israel, it may be wise to not paint us on the left with such a sloppy, broad brush.
Dara Lovitz Van Naarden, Bala Cynwyd
The calls for a pause in the Israel-Hamas war should not happen “(Biden’s Call for a Ceasefire Is Pro-Hamas and Anti-Israel,” Nov. 9). Giving Hamas a chance to continue its barbarism would be tantamount to national suicide for Israel.
Hamas only wants an extermination of all Jews, starting with Israel. Also, in spite of the constant deafening global sirens for a cease-fire, Israel needs to ignore all those who want appeasement at any cost.
What is beyond comprehension is why the world won’t accept Israel’s position on this issue of no cease-fire until all the hostages are released. This is a reasonable viewpoint unless you’re one of Iran’s hate-filled proxies like Hamas or one of the world’s spaghetti-spined rulers afraid to stand up to the Palestinian protesters disrupting their country or even the college presidents who look the other way when their students are screaming vitriolic antisemitic statements that Hitler himself would gleefully approve.
The IDF needs to complete the job it started and put the Hamas demons where they belong.
Marcia Brunelli, Glenolden