Posts and replies

@woozle
@nex3

Maybe this is where I can get some help with how exclusive and isolating "intersectionality" presents to me?

Do you have questions, @deejoe ? I'm no expert in intersectionality, but I *think* I understand the basic idea.

cc: @nex3

@woozle @nex3

more like a math-based beef: when working with sets, each application of the intersection operator whittles the scope of the resulting set. it is, in essence, a limiting, divisive function.

The union operator, on the other hand, supports broadened perspectives and inclusion.

The math-informed discussion above makes me think I could find some appreciation for the dissonance these usages present me.

@deejoe

Ahh, yes, I see your point.

Staying more or less within mathematics, I'd say "intersectionality" derives more from network theory than from set theory in that an intersection (technically "vortex") is a place where lines ("edges") converge.

More practically, I think it's intended to evoke a navigational metaphor -- an "intersection" of multiple roads.

In a sense, tho, it *is* intentionally restrictive in that something is only intersectional if it has more than one path.

cc: @nex3

@woozle

Ah right, thanks. That read has occurred to me but isn't as "sticky". Maybe I get stuck at the traffic light ;-)

@nex3