Revisiting the EoZ Intersectionality Victimhood Calculator

My Intersectionality Victimhood Calculator is coming up to its third anniversary, and I have been amazed at how accurate it is.

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 attributes 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, which holds up amazingly well, was:

Attribute	Victimhood score
Trans	8
Black	8
Native American or other First People	7
Woman	6
Gay	6
Muslim	5
Arab, 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
Identifies proudly as Zionist	-8
Trump supporter	-8
White nationalist/neo Nazi	-18

The only change I made since 2018 was that would be that if the person identifies as a proud Zionist, any of his or her positive victimhood scores should be inverted to negative. That is the Jason Hill/Hen Mazzig rule - a person who is supposedly in a victimhood group of being, say,  gay or a person of color or an immigrant who is still a Zionist is a traitor to the woke and the lowest of the low, according to the calculator.

Let's look at some recent examples.

I wondered on Twitter about the difference in reactions to Dave Chappelle's transphobic and antisemitic jokes, where the anti-LGBT jokes were criticized much more harshly. The answer is that Chappelle, as a black man, has a higher victimhood score than Jews but a roughly equivalent score to transsexuals.

The May Gaza war is obvious - Israel is always wrong - but the people who hate Israel and who subscribe to this victimhood ideology went out of their way to emphasize the women and children who were killed and de-emphasize the roughly half who were terrorists, to increase the differential score.

Hamas, being a +10 of Muslim and Arab, can literally do anything it wants to Israeli Jews and still be the victim.  Supporting terror does not lower your score at all. 

Ben and Jerry might be white-passing Jews (-3-1=-4) but they are positioning themselves as being anti-Jewish Zionist settler (-3+-6+-8=-17) so they win.

David Miller, as a white non-Jewish male, has a score of -1, but he claims that he was attacked by Zionist Jews, who are at least a -11. When one has claims, the side with the higher victimhood score is the only one whose claims may be taken seriously.  (I suppose being a member of Israel's government or the Mossad would subtract a few more points.)

Bahrain allows Israel to open up an embassy - its Arab score gets inverted to -5, and its perceived as being Zionist so Bahrain (and the UAE) are now firmly oppressors with a solid -13. As such, since they started warming up to Israel, Human Rights Watch has become far more critical of them.

Iraq puts out arrest warrants to citizens who want peace with Israel. Iraq's score is +10, those traitor Arab Zionists are at least a -5. So that's why human rights groups aren't interested in a pure human rights story.

Padding the score is very important to the players. A person who becomes an As-a-Jew immediately adds four points. Revealing that one is gay, or an immigrant, or a person of color can swing more sympathy one's way. Successfully framing your opponent as a Nazi is the equivalent of capturing the Golden Snitch in Quidditch - if you do that, the game is over. (This seems to be Eli Valley's full time job.)

The only possible counterexample to these rules I can think of is the May antisemitic attack against Los Angeles diners, which is mostly being ignored by the woke and has been covered in the media. The lawyer for the attackers is trying to make them into victims, and given that one of them is Hispanic, he might yet succeed.

It is almost scary how accurate this calculator is. And most of the mainstream media slavishly follows this formula.

---

---