Because one of the distinguishing marks of CRT was that its assertions were based not on evidence, as it might previously have been understood, but essentially on interpretations and attitudes. This marked a significant shift in the manner in which people were expected to prove assertions. While rarely announcing the fact, the rules of CRT had no need for normal standards of evidence. If a person’s “lived experience” could be attested to, then the question of “evidence” or “data” had to find a place further back in the queue, if at all. The intersectionalists who grew up at the same time
...more
