Fallout from intersectionality criticism continues

Recently I've offered what I see to be mild criticism of excesses in the application of intersectionality in the animal rights movement. For this, people have made various negative insinuations about my character, dug into my writing — dating back to college — in search of problematic material, and had my writing removed from publications where it was scheduled to appear. Most recently, I had a column bumped from the Earth First! Journal.

Here's a little background. On August 23, an article of mine was posted on the North American Animal Liberation Press Office website. In the text, I used the backlash against anti-speciesist writer Will Potter, who offered tepid critique of a particular Black Lives Matter action, as an example of intersectionality run amok. Following reports of protestors at the Ferguson anniversary protests carrying a pig's head, Potter tweeted, "Violent cops aren’t ‘pigs.’ Pigs are intelligent and compassionate. Not props for media stunts.” Another relatively high-profile anti-speciesist immediately took Potter to task for this, suggesting Potter was 'tone policing' the Black Lives Matter movement and racist for doing so. After recounting this chain of events, which are all too common on social media, I compared the calling out of Potter to the "you're-either-with-us-or-against-us" logic that leftists justifiably lampooned when it was invoked by the likes of George W. Bush. I pointed out one could support a struggle while offering criticism, which shouldn't have to be said but apparently does.

Flash forward to September 6, the day I am writing this. I get an email from the collective behind the Earth First! Journal. They found my August 23 article and are displeased with me for criticizing the holy shibboleth of intersectionality. As a result, my writing will not appear in an upcoming issue as had been agreed. "We had discussed the Will Potter pig/cop comment as a collective previous to reading your article, and felt that he was being counterproductive to the fight against oppression with his comments," the collective member wrote. "Though we absolutely agree that the celebration of the killing of an animal and equating police with farm animals is disgusting and cruel, it doesn't seem an appropriate thing for an animal activist to say when trying to show solidarity with a group fighting oppression. Especially publicly, when very little public support had been given previously." Bear in mind, this is coming from a collective whose publication's very name, the Earth First! Journal, suggests prioritizing non-human issues.

I can only reiterate what I've said previously. I support intersectionality. So far as anyone knows me in the animal-rights movement, it's for my articles seeking dialogue with the socialist left. But for a certain segment of intersectional animalists, it seems intersectionality only goes one way, with anti-speciesist writers and activists gaining recognition primarily based on the degree to which they minimize animal issues in the face of human ones, and criticize others for doing so inadequately. This doesn't help animals. And if we truly believe the premise of intersectionality, that all oppression and exploitation is connected, it doesn't help humans. It's posturing. Let's do our part as anti-speciesists and make sure animals get a place on the leftist agenda. Because no one else will but us.