Among the many things we've learned from the Lindsay Clancy trial and its ignominious end, he most entertaining -- and illuminating -- is what happens when intersectionality collides with itself.
Lindsay Clancy fan discovering that the lone juror is black might be the greatest video in history pic.twitter.com/jIAjIvMcU5
— End Wokeness (@EndWokeness) September 11, 2026
Before it was revealed that the holdout juror was a Black man, progressives were all up in arms against him.
They assumed he was white and therefore an oppressor -- and thus a bad person. He was a bad person for not being sufficiently empathetic to Lindsay's plight. After all, in this framework, a woman who claims to have been suffering from mental illness when she killed her kids means she's the real victim and deserves empathy. He was even more bad for going against the "wisdom" of the female jurors, who were being noble and empathetic and trying to make this about something more than just the acts Lindsay Clancy committed and her mental state at the time.
Once the progressive pundits found out the juror was a Black man, they needed to recalculate their oppressor-victim equation and promptly divided by zero. a
After all, by their standards, who is the greater victim and who wins the Victim-Oppressor Olympics now that it is known the holdout was Black?
Is it the lone Black male being nagged, hectored, and lectured incessantly by white women who claim to know better and are thus whitesplaining the issues to him?
Or is it a white woman alleged to be suffering from postpartum psychosis who killed her three children?
How do they decide who wins when empathy and intersectionality is all you have to go on?
It is entertaining to watch them struggle. But beneath the humor is a rather sad commentary: this kind of intersectional “analysis”—in which people are assigned points on a hierarchy of group victimhood and empathy is elevated above objectivity and facts—has become a mainstream way of determining who is right.
When intersectionality becomes the primary lens through which a situation is judged, the facts become secondary to the identities of the people involved.
And when two supposedly competing categories of victim and oppressor collide, the resulting calculation gets very complicated.
Especially when someone forgets to account for the possibility of a Black man being the holdout on the jury.
No comments:
Post a Comment