• idiomaddict@feddit.de
    31·
    8 months ago

    Caveat: I didn’t go around the paywall.

    Generally, Judith Butler is the mother Theresa of feminism/gender theory. They think the only real solution is to fetishize hierarchical structures, and because we do fetishize them, we shouldn’t try to dismantle the hierarchies that currently oppress people.

    And yet, they’re seen as a representative of and righteous fighter for the people they’re harming.

      • idiomaddict@feddit.de
        21·
        8 months ago

        Gender necessary, because how hot is a schoolgirl scene? We’d never get that if we weren’t constantly hemmed in by gender. Anyway, the best way to deal with the inherent oppression within the system is to parody gender and play with it while you fetishize it.

        Mother Theresa thought pain ennobled the spirit, so she didn’t allow traditional pain medication doses even for palliative cancer patients. All the people in her hospitals suffered completely needlessly

        • barsoap@lemm.ee
          1·
          8 months ago

          I’m sorry how has gender anything to do with hierarchy, inherently. Why would you create or reinforce that kind of spook. It’s the -archy that’s the problem, always has been.

          • idiomaddict@feddit.de
            1·
            8 months ago

            Judith Butler argues (ish, they’re more one for implications) that gender exists to serve a hierarchy, from which it can never break free, and that it’s completely arbitrary. However, they also suggest that any rejection of gender will not work, as it will destroy our libidos and reform from nothing anew (though the genders could be completely different). Their proposal for dealing with it is to subvert gender from within it and fetishize it.

            I say that’s harmfully pessimistic, bordering on FUD.

            • barsoap@lemm.ee
              2·
              8 months ago

              that gender exists to serve a hierarchy, from which it can never break free

              Yeah that’s the kind of stuff that happens when you talk to your Animus more often than actual men I’d say. “UUUUh men are big and scary” – so are roller-coasters. Just make sure it’s well-maintained before getting on. Some may be so fucked up they collapse on you while walking by but that’s not an inherent property of roller-coasters.

              Of course, that could be what she means, wrt. subverting gender to redefine it, hidden beyond layers of philosophical jargon meaning things just ever so subtly different than what you expect it to mean – honestly haven’t read her. But there’s nothing to define, really, once you do the good ole anarchism and replace hierarchy with horizontalism (that kind, not the tehe one) you’ll see that it’s always been there. Thinking that there’s nothing wholesome in the biotruths is rather anti-materialist as our inherent notion of wholesome co-evolved with our sexual dimorphism. Also, pushes you back into 2nd wave political lesbianism eugenics, “we need to change the species itself”. I think Andrea Dworkin was reincarnated as a duck.