Walkers, bikers and busers

First I wanted to start with a series of photos that show my state in which I am while writing my last blog. I am pretty sure this is what I look like every time I write. I remember someone saying we should take a picture of us blogging. So here are mine and it only seems fitting to reveal my 'identity' from behind the curtain of internet anonymity.
2009-12-10.jpg

On to the blog...
We have talked about intersectionality in the last couple of weeks and I have to admit I was surprised that it was a new concept to some of us. Mainly, because I believe we were talking about it the whole time. I would say that queer in its very existence is laced with intersectionality. For me, intersectionality has always been discussed in my black feminist classes. In particular look at Patricia Hill Collins and her use of it which states that identities do not exist separate from one another but instead are linked and woven together and collide in singular bodies.... this is a very simplified and incomplete definition.

In this class and in particular readings it was the first time I had wrestled with the terms literal meaning. Highway_Intersection_-_Connected.224132102_std.JPG
That it is the actual street intersection, where separate roads collide and in that collision bodies might get hit or blow up. In Punk'd Theory Tavia Nyong'o ends the essay with another look at the literal idea of intersectionality. But instead of just focusing on the road itself, Tavia is asking an important question of the bodies (walkers) on the streets and their right-a-way or lack there of and their relationship with the vehicles on the road. Tavia argues that one needs to defend their right-a-way, even thought they 'have it' because those with mobility (privilege) really have the right-a-way.

But Tavia, where are the bikers and the busers?Thumbnail image for Thumbnail image for cork.gif What do they signify in the analogy of intersectionality? Especially since they allow for more mobility than walkers. Then there are busers, pedestrians placed on a mobile vehicles. What does that signify? Or is it even worth placing them with in the analogy. I think it can be interesting to use these other two forms of pedestrians to talk about power and how it operates. How is power operating within intersectionality when pedestrians are forced onto a mobile vehicle to gain access to things they need...like food, health care, common goods, etc...?