To recap, the calculator is meant to determine who is the "winner" in any conflict in this new woke world.
The actual facts in any conflict are utterly irrelevant - only the victimhood score, which is the sum of all victimhood or oppressor values a person has.
One with a negative victimhood score is perceived as an oppressor, a positive score means that one is oppressed.
My scoring system is:
Intersectionality Calculator 1.1
Attribute
| Victimhood Score |
|---|---|
| Trans | 8 |
| Black | 8 |
| Native American or other First People | 7 |
| Woman | 6 |
| Gay | 6 |
| Muslim | 5 |
| Arab or other Middle Eastern | 5 |
| Hispanic | 4 |
| Disabled, pregnant | 4 |
| Anti-Zionist Jew | 4 |
| Wears hijab | 2 |
| Palestinian | 2 |
| Asian American | 1 |
| White | -1 |
| Republican or conservative | -3 |
| Christian (white only) | -3 |
| Jew | -3 |
| Visibly religious Jew | -3 |
| Jewish settler | -6 |
| Trump Supporter | -8 |
| White nationalist/Neo Nazi | -18 |
| Zionist | -8 |
Total score: 0
People with a positive victimhood score who are also Zionist are considered traitors to their intersectionality rankings, and therefore have their scores multiplied by -1 to flip to negative.
The system has held up amazingly well.
In the context of the current Gaza war, after the initial October 7 shock, things normalized to usual: Gazans, even those who cheered the massacre, even those who participated in the massacre, have victimhood scores of at least 12 if they are Muslim, while Israelis generally have scores ranging from -2 to -17. An Israeli Jewish woman who was raped and murdered is still an oppressor and her rapist is a victim.
The only change I might need to make is to modify the "Jewish settler" category to just "Israeli citizen," as the woke crowd no longer even pretends to distinguish which side of the Green Line Israeli Jews live. They are all "settlers."
But there is a new application for the calculator: it also informs us of how the media will report on the war.
Let's take an example from this weekend:
Israeli forces shot at a United Nations convoy of armored vehicles in central Gaza on Thursday evening as it was returning from delivering aid in the northern part of the territory, U.N. officials said.“Israeli soldiers fired at an aid convoy as it returned from northern Gaza along a route designated by the Israeli Army,” Thomas White, the Gaza director for UNRWA, the U.N. relief agency for Palestinian refugees, wrote on social media. He said that one vehicle in the convoy had been damaged, adding: “Aid workers should never be a target.”The Israeli military did not immediately comment when asked about the episode.The convoy, whose vehicles were marked with U.N. insignia, was returning from delivering aid, including flour. It was south of Gaza City when it came under fire, Juliette Touma, spokeswoman for UNRWA, said in an interview. Before setting out to deliver the aid, the convoy had coordinated its plans with the Israeli military and notified it of the routes it would take, she added.Ms. Touma said that the Israeli military had told the convoy to take a different route, which it did. “They rerouted and then the shooting happened,” she said.
In this case, the accusers are UNRWA employees who might be white, but they weren't on the ground during the alleged incident - they are quoting "witnesses" who are Gaza Palestinians with scores of at least 12. This is why they reflexively blame Israel for the shooting (if there was a shooting) and not Gaza militants - it is what the calculator tells them to do. Even though the accusation makes zero sense, the amount of proof required by the New York Times for the accusation is essentially zero.
It is up to the IDF to figure out what happened if anything before issuing a denial. This will take several days. By then, no one will follow up with a new story.
If the media treated both sides equally, it would at least ask for some proof, some witnesses, some verification from UNRWA, and find out if there are any other factors in play - like historic antipathy towards Israel - that might make them shade the truth a little bit.
The Al Ahli hospital attack was reported the same way: the accusations against Israel by "victims," with no evidence that it was an Israeli airstrike, is what created the narrative.
The Gaza casualty figures is another place where the victimhood calculator writes the story more than the reporters themselves. The BBC story on the Gaza death toll not only believes Hamas figures of the total number killed, but also their breakdown of how many are women and children. It quotes officials who have no actual evidence as verifying Hamas' figures - because they have their own internal victimhood calculator that trusts those with higher victimhood scores. But when it comes to Israeli estimates of roughly 7.000-8,000 Hamas terrorists killed, the skepticism goes way up, both from the BBC and their quoted "experts:"
The BBC has not been able to establish a clear method of verifying the number of fighters killed.Prof Michael Spagat, said he would "not be at all surprised" if around 80% of those killed were civilians.The IDF's numbers for combatants killed "have been all over the place, devoid of details and without explanations", he added.
But Hamas figures are believed! Because even terrorists always have a higher victimhood score than Israeli officials, so therefore their statements are believed far more readily than Israeli statements.
An honest reporter would ask how Hamas could have such detailed and specific data when they don't have reliable communication channels, and when all experts at actually counting victims in war zones say how it takes a great deal of time to get accurate numbers. If you look at estimates of the number of victims of other wars in Wikipedia, you will find huge variances from different sources - but Hamas figures being so specific doesn't raise any red flags.
Any wild accusation by Gazans is taken seriously by the media, any detailed denial by Israel is not believed . While antisemitism is part of this - it is baked into the calculator - a lot of the reason is also because perceived victims are considered more trustworthy than perceived oppressors.
And being slaughtered, raped, kidnapped and burned is not enough to make you a victim when your victimhood scores are below zero.
|
Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424. Read all about it here! |
|
