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 -  (32 children)

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

[–]Innisfree 9 insightful - 4 fun9 insightful - 3 fun10 insightful - 4 fun -  (31 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]  (30 children)

[deleted]

    [–]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!