I read a post in here that had ALL THE RIGHT WORDS pertaining to anti black male dog whistling and misandry, aka "intersectional black feminism".
Fam, all feminism is white.
It has a racist origin (white sufragettes using the spectre of black rapist bogeymen to mobilize their constituents; they didn't want black men to get the vote first...said we'd rape every woman and somehow seize power
) and should be thoroughly "unpacked" and then "cancelled".
When the going gets tough, you see what they do as a unit, look at the polls.
All of that female solidarity for naught.
Wait, let's look closer at that black bogeyman...Shall we?
We see the same exact spectre being raised again in Michele Wallace's "Black Macho and the Myth of the Super Woman" or Kimberle Crenshaw's "critical race theory/intersectionality".
There are 2 issues people tend to ignore:
Michele Wallace was published by (CIA attache) Gloria Steinem's Ms. Magazine at a critical time.
Scathing portrayal of black men, widely published in mainstream media.
Raised by 2 well to do black parents in a well to do area.
Not "oppressed".
Next, we have Kimberle Crenshaw, who coined the term "intersectionality", and put together the widely accepted "critical race theory".
A woman from a 2 parent, middle class household in a small ohio city somehow gets a stimulus package and gets accepted into Cornell, where she becomes a member of the primarily white make secret society, QUILL AND DAGGER, brother fraternity to the SKULL AND BONES.
Why is critical race theory so one-sided?
It was designed to be.
The subject of this thread is irrelevant and my post is related.
I see a lot of misandrist terminology being inserted into the lexicon, straight men using homosexual slang and feminist buzzwords, adopting strange new cultural identifiers to seem progressive.