The doctrine of intersectionality is a dud

The almost complete absence of anything remotely resembling an intersection in the progressive doctrine of intersectionality poses a problem for those on the left who adhere to its idiotic credo. Put crassly, intersectionality implies that anyone who is not straight, white and male shares an equal burden of oppression and should thus put aside footling differences of opinion and unite against the ghastly and brutal hegemony.

There are no greater agents of oppression than imperialism and colonialism and indeed these twin behemoths of wickedness are solely responsible for the misery inflicted upon the gay, non-white groups of today. That this is patently untrue and is revealed to be so every day forces those who believe in intersectionality to metaphorically put their hands over their ears, stamp their little feet, and lie through their teeth.

The eminent, and in many ways admirable, gay rights campaigner Peter Tatchell was up to this lying business on the radio last week. He had been invited on to Radio Four’s Today programme on Monday to comment on the latest antics of Matty Healy, a thick-as-mince gob on a stick who is the lead singer of the mystifyingly successful band the 1975. Playing a festival in Malaysia, Healy ranted about the country’s stringent anti-gay laws, kissed another male member of his awful band in protest against them and was immediately told by the authorities that the whole festival was cancelled. It was a typical bit of witless grandstanding from Healy which quickly drew criticism from Malaysia’s LGBT community for quite possibly making their situation worse. No intersection for Matty, then.

But it was Tatchell’s comments which interested me more. He did not mention that Malaysia was an Islamic country. He said, instead, that Malaysia’s laws prohibiting homosexual relationships were a consequence of Britain’s colonisation of the country and its time as part of the British Empire.