Noodling on intersectionality (more on the 1%, the 20%, and the 80%)
Still trying to learn to sketch. However, my handwriting, bad with pen and paper, is horrific with an iPad and a stylus, so herewith a digital version of the initial assumption:
Class, in other words, is "vertical"; the others are "horizontal." This is a restatement of the 80/20/1 framework discussed here. I'll try a sketch that has fewer words:
Triangle #1 is our familiar 80/20/1 structure; it's all out of proportion ("not to scale") because that's the best I can do! In Triangle #2, we add a "horizontal" dimension to the vertical, in this case gender: pink (female) and male (blue). Given that the division of male/female in our society is approximately 50/50, we'd expect, if we drew a dotted line vertically from the apex to the base, to have all the pink on one side, and all the blue on the other. However, everybody knows that's not true; in Triangle #3 we see the red arrow of discrimination pushing the red dotted line out of plumb. However, at this point, I'm concerned that the triangle concept is "chart junk" that distorts the data.
What the triangles do well:
1) Communicate that there are fewer women (smaller blue area) in the 1%. This is clear to all: There a lot more Jamie Dimons than there are Carly Fiorina;
2) Communicate the vertical/horizontal distinction/combination: It's clear that there are both men and women at all levels of the 80/20/1 hierarchy; it's also clear that although their sub-triangles have different proportions, they are still triangles; gender, that is, does not make class go away;
3) Communicate the fundamental unfairness of discrimination; why isn't the red dotted line plumb?
4) Communicates the limits of analytical approaches that focus only on discrimination. A subtriangle is still a triangle, with its own 1%.
What the triangles do not do well:
1) Communicate the actual numbers (and proportions) at each level. For example, the male/female proportion in the 80% is very distorted (hence, "chart junk"). I think that could possibly be remedied by using separate dotted lines at each level, instead of the single dotted line, hanging from the apex.
There's a lot more to this topic, obviously, but since I promised I'd write something every day on the 12 Point Platform....
 I'm playing in my mind with a distinction between "classification" and "discrimination."
NOTE These come from a YouTube titled "Neoliberalism as a Water Balloon", I think by Tim McCaskeill, which I'm not including directly because IMNSHO the water balloon metaphor doesn't actually work.