On my new blog, I’m resolving to be more unapologetic about talking about my various pet issues. In the past, I’ve often moderated my views in light of who I think my audience is. I know lots of readers are not ace, and therefore I tend to save the inside ace baseball for The Asexual Agenda. I know some of my readers are religious, or otherwise unsympathetic to the atheist movement, so I try not to be terribly unfair on religion.
Well it’s my blog and I will talk about the topics I want.
But I wonder. If I’m being more unapologetic, does that mean talking about intersectionality more, or less?
Intersectionality between different identities can be both important and fascinating, often in ways that are difficult to describe. Everything I see occurring in social justice activism gets interpreted through the lens of my experience in the atheist movement, and vice versa. Just to give an example, when social justice activists demand apologies from their opponents, I find that weird because if I demanded apologies from Christians I would be seen as another asshole atheist. Why is that? Is there something wrong with our attitude towards social justice, towards atheism, neither, or both?
These tiny intersections constantly intrude upon my thoughts. But they can also be rather intractable to talk about. They feel very personal, and peculiar to my own way of viewing both the asexual and atheist movements. If I’m worried about boring people with too much inside baseball, these private intersections are even more inside baseball than that. But with my new resolution, perhaps I’ll try to write about it more often.
On the other hand, talking about intersectionality is often a form of marketing. I organized a panel about asexuality and atheism in FTBCon primarily because I just want to raise awareness about asexuality in that particular audience. We discussed many acephobic tropes commonly used by atheists, but to some extent this discussion functions as a hook. We argue that asexuality is relevant to the atheist community, but the intended point is that asexuality is relevant period.
Marketing isn’t a bad thing. I feel that I often struggle with caring about issues that I know intellectually are important. Global inequality is really important. I don’t really read much about it though. If someone could get me invested in the subject, perhaps by explaining how it is relevant to one of my personal interests, that is a force for good.
But marketing has its limitations. For instance, if you want to market the issue of global inequality to atheists, the obvious route is to talk about how third world countries are ravaged by Islamic regimes, and led wrong by Christian missionaries. I seriously doubt that this provides a clear perspective on world issues.