you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]carrotcake 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (49 children)

Ask her! Now I'm curious for you too.

[–]Innisfree 9 insightful - 4 fun9 insightful - 3 fun10 insightful - 4 fun -  (48 children)

I think ultimately her answer will not be that interesting because it's her life and I don't want to dig into it. What is interesting is how we got into this mess in the first place - the history of thought (logical fallacy, more like). I'm reading Monique Wittig's "The Straight Thought" now. The Monique Wittig who said "lesbians are not women" and who wanted to abolish the categories of sex (not even gender) . She is also the one who inspired Judith Butler's "Gender Trouble" - the great troubler of normativity :).

So far I can say that it's like talking to a PhD student who's taken mushrooms for the first time and chased them down with a few tequila shots. There's some good stuff there, but it's swimming under a sea of barf as Strictly would say. I might come back with a post on it if my small brain will be able to gauge the greatness of her thoughts.

PS: this post is mainly in the hope that better minds than mine can start a thread on the history of queer theory and the role of lesbians in it, because it seems lesbians have started this effing mess.

[–][deleted] 8 insightful - 3 fun8 insightful - 2 fun9 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

I probably loathe non-binaries more than actual transes; non-binary straight-up betrays women.

At least trans identified males like women enough to want to BE us, no matter how misguided and unwell transes can be, or behave.

When a woman calls herself a non-binary lesbian I literally want to grab her by the bowtie and slap her. Not kidding. I never would, because that’s insane, but the urge is there. That’s how disgusted I am with people who are privileged enough to words-their-way out of womanhood, while women all over the world suffer and have no escape. If any of those non-binary cowards still call themselves feminists I hope they at least feel some shame.

They are not smashing any binaries, they are creating a new one. It’s pathetic. Woman up, cowards.

[–][deleted]  (44 children)

[deleted]

    [–][deleted] 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (10 children)

    People don’t realise how pedo queer theory is

    Edit: and i think it’s illogical to break all boundaries. Why anyone would imagine that as a good thing is mystifying to me. It’s like the child who keeps doing something wrong because you told them not to. Very immature basis for theory

    Editx2: they created new, queer norms, but did nothing to better society, in the end.

    [–][deleted]  (9 children)

    [deleted]

      [–][deleted] 7 insightful - 3 fun7 insightful - 2 fun8 insightful - 3 fun -  (5 children)

      It seriously seems like something rich eccentrics came up with at the turn of the last century. You have to have power to play with it, meanwhile, many in the world don’t even have food or medicines to treat curable disease. It’s the “let them eat cake” of theory

      EDIT: if they want to play with power they should just join some bdsm club. Lol

      [–]Innisfree 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

      Oh they sure did. Incidentally, the queer theory proponents your Foucaults and Wittigs come from very Conservative Catholic families. I wonder if theres' a link / s :D

      [–][deleted] 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

      Yeah and also a link between trans and conservative catholic families. Lots of kids from backgrounds like that end up needing to repair their own brains for years to come

      [–]Innisfree 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

      Shall we start an NGO for the poor things? BrainRepair.org We'll show them David Attenborough docs, for a small fee of course that will go towards reissuing The Lavender Menice manifesto lol

      [–][deleted] 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

      That’s a good start! Lol

      [–][deleted] 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

      Also: the whole “happy hooker” thing is a perfect example of who gets fucked over from things like queer theory. WOMEN

      [–][deleted]  (1 child)

      [deleted]

        [–][deleted] 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

        Yeah. I have known hookers, that happy hooker shit is straight up cam girl nonsense. I bet you’re happy when no one is touching you, dumbass. Even then it would be disgusting, but i honestly doubt there are many women working the street or escorting that are “happy hookers.”

        [–]Innisfree 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (29 children)

        Really appreciate your insightful reply!

        Particularly because my angry order of some books by Foucault will take time to arrive. I think Helen Pluckrose also mentioned Foucault's influences in her tracing of the history of queer theory and gives a summary in her talk here .

        I'm dying to know who was it Butler was so miffed with - probably radfems glorifying the female goddesses Lol

        So far I found Butler's ideas, specifically on abolishing the categories of sex, clearly articulated in Wittig's writing. This article explains the connection and summarises Wittig's writings. It also makes fun of Butler misunderstanding and misusing her sources. For that alone a great read, for those who have time for a bit of schadenfreude.

        Ps: I'm sure you're well informed on the whole schtick, I just included the links for those who might be entertained by digging around a bit.

        [–][deleted]  (28 children)

        [deleted]

          [–]Innisfree 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

          Brilliant you are!

          because women are individuals who have different experiences (across stuff like race and class), it is therefore impossible for women to have ANYTHING in common EVER,

          Butler - the queen of false premises and overgeneralizations.

          Loooool about the bow ties. Spot on!

          [–][deleted] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (25 children)

          Well, at least we will be served our dinner more quickly at the banquet if more women are servers. Lol. Don’t think it will destroy the whole womanhood thing, but you never know.

          [–][deleted]  (24 children)

          [deleted]

            [–][deleted] 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (23 children)

            Judith Butler should have found a million pairs of legs to bury her head between instead of writing a bunch of dumb dumb stuff and being the spokesperson for this ridiculous time we have found ourselves in. I’m sure she could have found some commonalities between women by becoming an expert at head. Maybe I’ll pitch this idea to her

            [–][deleted]  (22 children)

            [deleted]

              [–][deleted] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (21 children)

              She would go for it, I think. I am very persuasive!

              [–]carrotcake 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

              It saddens me that so many people in academia are ok with this Foucault idea that individual resistance is the way to go.

              [–][deleted]  (1 child)

              [deleted]

                [–]carrotcake 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

                Exactly

                [–]carrotcake 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

                You're right. I got curious but it's better to leave it as it is. She'll either answer something that doesn't answer it or be offended. What we really want to know is what is moving people to do this and how it all started, like you said.

                And ahhhh I wish I had the knowledge to start this thread and I hope someone does that. I confess that I should have read a part of Gender Trouble for university but I was busy with other stuff and didn't do it. I still want to at some point but I also wanted to read someone that is acclaimed and criticizes her work. Unfortunately one of the only professors I have that worries with LGBT and gender history is super into queer stuff. We could do a monthly/weekly thread for reading critically works like this. If I have people to push me maybe I'd do it. I always end up reading other stuff and never go back to Butler. And yes, it's crazy that she's a lesbian!

                [–]Innisfree 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

                No worries. I feel a lot like you about wanting to know how we got here. But so far, what i read of queer theory just feels like it's not adding in any way to a clearer vision of the world. So much of their writing is wild conjecture, they assert a premise, never explain how they got to it (this is the most maddening) and rarely bother supporting it with sound arguments. I would also start with reading some credible critique (but which one is that?) and not give Butler the time of day, unless you are really committed to understanding the schtick or you need it for uni.

                Hannah Arendt has a brilliant quote about this dilemma: "Sometimes people mistake the need to think, with the desire to understand". Often when i go too deep into some "queerology" i go back to this quote and wonder am i mistaking the need to think (that is develop my own sound arguments) with a desire - an idle curiosity. Anywho, this might just be me though :)