Greetings

ghostdaddotcx: Self reblogging to add a thing I...

Tue, 18 Jun 2013 04:40:21 -0400

Self reblogging to add a thing I found:

http://overland.org.au/previous-issues/issue-208/feature-malcolm-harris/

The account @Anti_Racism_Dog didn’t last long. Twitter suspended it quickly, a fate reserved only for the most aggressive, abusive and hateful users. What could a dog – an anti-racist one, at that – do to deserve it? @Anti_Racism_Dog had one real function: to bark at racist speech on Twitter. The account responded to tweets it deemed racist with the simple response ‘bark bark bark!’ Sometimes it would send wags to supporters but that was pretty much it.

For the short time it lasted, it was amazing to watch how people reacted to @Anti_Racism_Dog. The account would respond mostly to what the sociologist Eduardo Bonilla-Silva would call ‘colour-blind racism’, that is, racisms that are generally right-libertarian in orientation and justified through appeals to supposedly objective discourses like science and statistics. It’s a notoriously insidious white-supremacist ideology, a virulent strain evolved specifically to resist anti-racist language. Colour-blind racism defends itself by appeals to neutrality and meritocracy, accusing its adversaries of being ‘the real racists’. Although its moves are predictable, they’re hard to combat rhetorically since they’re able to ingest the conventional opposition scripts. Colour-blind racists feed on good-faith debate, and engaging with them, especially online, is almost always futile. But when they’re barked at by a dog, one whose only quality is anti-racism, they flip the fuck out. They demand to be engaged in debate (‘Tell me how what I said was racist!’) or appeal to objective definitions (‘The dictionary says racist means X, therefore nothing I said was racist’), but @Anti_Racism_Dog just barks.

@Anti_Racism_Dog inverted the usual balance of energy in online dialogs about race. Precisely because the dominant global discourse is white-supremacist, it is rhetorically easier to make a racist argument than an anti-racist one. Look at almost any comment thread or discussion board about race and you can see anti-racists working laboriously to be convincing and to play on their opponents’ ‘logical’ turf, and racists repeating the same simple lines they were taught (‘I didn’t own slaves’, ‘I’m just stating the facts’, ‘The Irish were persecuted too’, etc.) ‘Trolling’ as a certain kind of internet harassment is tied to time: the successful troll expends much less time and energy on the interaction than their targets do. It’s the most micro of micro-politics, an interpersonal tug of war for the only thing that matters. But have you ever played tug of war with a dog?

A true troll doesn’t have a position to protect because to establish one would leave it vulnerable to attack, and playing defence takes time. @Anti_Racism_Dog, by fully assuming the persona of an animal, was invulnerable to counter-attack. You can’t explain yourself to a dog and you look like an idiot trying. The only way to win is not to play but this is the colour-blind racist’s Achilles Heel: they’re compelled to defend themselves against accusations of racism. It’s the anti-racist argument that gives them content; theirs is an ideology that’s in large part a list of counter-arguments. After all, white-supremacists are already winning – their task now is to keep the same racist structures in place while making plausibly colour-blind arguments against dismantling them. @Anti_Racism_Dog was empty of anything other than accusation and so left its targets sputtering.

The account served a second purpose: as a sort of anti-racist hunting dog. @Anti_Racism_Dog quickly attracted a lot of like-minded followers who understood the dynamics at play. Whenever it would start barking at another user, this was a cue to the dog’s followers to troll the offender as well. There’s only so much one dog can do alone. Colour-blind racism is particularly dangerous because it isn’t immediately visible as such. It provokes good-faith discussion from liberals about what counts as racism, muddying the water. But @Anti_Racism_Dog’s strategy draws new lines about what constitutes acceptable discourse on race, placing colour-blind racists on the other side by speaking to them like an animal. What would be taken as totally insane in flesh space can be infuriatingly clever online.

Bloody brilliant

racialicious: Presented without comment.::holler-laughs from...

Sun, 16 Jun 2013 05:23:52 -0400

racialicious:

Presented without comment.

::holler-laughs from back of the room::

tyrabanksonabudget: butterflies are just moths with colour on them they’re not pretty they’re like...

Wed, 12 Jun 2013 17:29:22 -0400

tyrabanksonabudget:

butterflies are just moths with colour on them they’re not pretty they’re like if you take david cameron and put him in fishnets and stilettos. still looks like a dickhead

"You might remember that earlier I mentioned I clicked the link provided by Azealia Banks of her..."

Mon, 03 Jun 2013 16:26:34 -0400

“

You might remember that earlier I mentioned I clicked the link provided by Azealia Banks of her remix, only to find it had been taken down. Banks posted the remix on soundcloud, but Baauer and his labelmate Diplo demanded it be taken down because it was an un-authorized remix. Aside from the obvious rejoinder that the majority of soundcloud is unauthorized remixes, this episode reveals the difference of power that negotiates the “open” space of the internet. We have a white producer, who is accused of appropriating Harlem culture, attacking a black female rapper born in Harlem of improperly using his “intellectual property.” Black claims to propriety are met with crickets, while a white man’s claim is heard and acted upon to the detriment of Banks. Diplo took to twitter to begin the anti-Banks commentary, while Banks refused to back down. She made a music video and posted it to youtube, ensuring that her fans would still have access to the song. The spat continued on twitter though, with Banks inadvertently calling Baauer the “F-word.” This re-ignited a sleeping giant in Azealia Banks’ burgeoning career, which is her intramural relations with the LGBT civil rights apparatus, as well as gay male media figures, that simultaneously support and police her. This conversation is deep and necessary (for a much better handling of this topic, click here), yet for the purposes of this essay it is important to mention this because much of the coverage of this “twitter beef” was to categorize this as “yet another Azealia Banks beef.” There is an almost universal consensus that Banks starts and maintains beefs with producers, a storyline Baauer and Diplo cited and perpetuated to deflect attention away from their own fault. Baauer and Diplo’s story is that Banks recorded a remix and they asked her to not post it because they decided to go into a different direction. The different direction was to get Juicy J to record a remix and release that as the official remix. What this mystifies is what Banks brought up: the fact that they came to Banks asking her to remix it initially and then, at the last second, after she had worked, mixed, prepared a marketing strategy, aligned it with her own schedule, and shot a video, they decided they did not want her to go forward with it. So, Baauer and Diplo decided that Banks’ life and career should take a backseat because they wanted another, more famous, black artist to remix their song.

What is happening here is a politics of obliteration. That Banks is thought to be replaceable by Juicy J is emblematic of what so many black people in popular culture have attested to: the systemic belief in the interchangeability of black entertainers. The thought here is that a black female rapper from Harlem can be replaced by a black male rapper from Memphis, Tennessee. Baauer attempts to say that he thought Azealia Banks’ lyrics were only so-so and believed Juicy J could do better. If this is not an example of a white man talking out of his ass, I am not sure what is. I do not need to get into the technical aspects of rapping to say Azealia Banks could destroy any rapper who’s idea of a great song is, “Bands ‘a make her dance.” But this is not about Juicy J, this is about Baauer and the meaning of blackness to his ability to produce music. For him, black culture is not an other’s thing made in specific contexts, but instead are loose, unowned resources of “cool” to be stretched, interpolated, and sequenced into a dramatic product to produce his own name. Thus, the being of black culture (its claims to place and time) are obliterated so that he may write himself into existence over the cleared field. Saidiya Hartman writes, “The elasticity of blackness and its capacious affects enabled such flights and becomings… The fungibility of the commodity, specifically its abstractness and immateriality, enabled the black body to serve as the vehicle of self-exploration, renunciation, and enjoyment” (Hartman, 25). Thus, Baauer is not simply emblematic of an internet-age, post-genre music culture, but is instead an example par excellance of the white imagination using the black body as a vehicle for its own purposes. In other words, Baauer is not (only) a thief, he is a master.

”

- Looking for Azealia’s Harlem Shake, Or How We Mistake the Politics of Obliteration for Appropriation (via so-treu)

1st comment:

Damn this is good. I wish I wrote it :/

Thus, Baauer is not simply emblematic of an internet-age, post-genre music culture, but is instead an example par excellance of the white imagination using the black body as a vehicle for its own purposes. In other words, Baauer is not (only) a thief, he is a master.

======================

2nd comment:

#Speechless.

(via newmodelminority)

Diplo is the scum of the fucking earth. I hope his eardrums rupture so he can never steal music and culture again.

(via blackfoxx)

check out the other work on that blog (outofnowhere.blogspot.com). Both (I think right now it’s still only two) of those thinkers are PHENOMENAL. Murillo & Brady’s work can also be found on thefeministwire.com.

(via fenice-argento)

wow. these are the kinds of conversations and writing i like. *goes to read more*

(via strugglingtobeheard)

I hate like fuck that R. Kelly is still so celebrated

Sun, 26 May 2013 12:14:50 -0400

I hate like fuck that R. Kelly is still so celebrated:

dannyareyouokay:

the90sfreak:

sourcedumal:

karnythia:

native-detroiter:

tashabilities:

native-detroiter:

searchingforknowledge:

tashabilities:

But then again, he only victimized BLACK girls.

They don’t have innocence worth protecting from grown ass men, no.

This nigga should be under a jail, but the fact that he still gets to have a career says SO MUCH about how little Black people and society in general value Black female personhood.

I do not understand why that dude is not shunned to the depths of loathing

one time I was shopping with my grandma and her best friend and the bfs daughter. we were in the daughter’s car and Michael Jackson’s pyt came on the radio. she was like oh this takes on a whole new level (this was a couple years after the second trial). and I was like well I guess you’ll stop listening step in the name of love then? but of course his victims were black girls so you don’t care.

And I don’t get how there are Black people who helped white folks vilify Michael Jackson, right?

Negroes BELIEVED that my hero was molesting children, when the FBI had a file on him FOR YEARS and found NOTHING!

All them cases were motherfuckers trying to extort The Kang,

But these n-words KNOW that R. Kelly was messing with underage girls, and they still bump his shit!

i read that Robert used to cruise around chicago high schools looking to pick up girls

It was so bad that most of us knew what places to avoid when he was in town. The McDonald’s in Hyde Park, the Rock & Roll McDonald’s downtown, a couple of burger spots on the West Side…like this list is so long because he would post up after school at a place where teens hung out and try to pick up girls. And if you were around long enough you could usually spot the recycled game. Everyone was so pretty they could be in a video, so smart they had no business hanging out with kids, & so grown he knew they were ready to spend time with a real man. How do I know? He hit on me & my friends twice. Mind you, he was only interest when we were clearly underage.

Yep.

Same here.

But everybody is so thirsty to defend his ass, when he’s nothing but a predator.

why isn’t this shit common knowlege

He had the gall to call himself the fucking Pied Piper and people still defend his predatory ass.

There’s a psychological study that shows that the more ‘afro-centric’ a person’s features the more likely people would give them the death penalty - but only if the victim was white.

iamonebeing: Angela Davis on the “Racialization” of Terrorism,...

Sun, 26 May 2013 06:45:16 -0400

iamonebeing:

Angela Davis on the “Racialization” of Terrorism, From Assata Shakur to Boston Marathon Bombings

Published on May 3, 2013

Watch the full interview with Angela Davis on Democracy Now! at http://owl.li/kGdcY. The legendary activist and scholar Angela Davis tells Democracy Now! that the FBI’s adding of former Black Panther Assata Shakur to its Most Wanted Terrorists List exemplifies a longstanding “racialization” of terrorism in the United States, and an effort to deter the young activists Shakur has inspired today. “When the grandchildren of those who were active in the late ’60s and early ’70s are becoming involved in similar movements today, there is this effort to again terrorize young people by representing such an important figure as Assata Shakur as a terrorist,” Davis says. “Before the Tsarnev brothers were discovered to be the alleged perpetrators [of the Boston Marathon bombings], there was an attempt to present the person who planted the bomb as either a black man or a dark skinned man with a hoodie. This racialization of what is represented as terrorism is an attempt to bring the old-style racism into the conversation with modes of repression in the 21st century.”

In 1998, Democracy Now! aired the audio of Assata Shakur reading her open letter she wrote to Pope John Paul II during his trip to Cuba in 1998 after the FBI asked him to urge her extradition. Listen at https://soundcloud.com/democracynow/a…

whatmakespistachionuts: The male type is characterised by a detached, if not outright...

Fri, 24 May 2013 12:41:15 -0400

whatmakespistachionuts:

The male type is characterised by a detached, if not outright dysfunctional, sensibility: retreat from a perplexing and frustrating emotional world into an intellectual domain in which their precocious facility with words and images affords them a degree of mastery and skewed self-understanding. “Girls” are then somewhat unfortunately positioned as gateways into the abandoned realm of sensual and emotional connection, and alternately idealised as muses/sex-goddesses and denigrated as (variously) narcissists, seducers, trivial beings, neurotic leeches, etc. (Dworkin’s inventory of misogynist stereotypes remains one of the most comprehensive and deeply-felt). Duncan Thaw’s alternating attraction towards and contempt for Kate Caldwell is exemplary here, as is his delirious observation that “men are pies that bake and eat themselves, and the recipe is hate”.

Young female intellectuals (again, I’m talking about the characters one encounters in books, such as the memoirs mentioned above) seem to have problems not so much with “boys” as with themselves: boys are a nuisance insofar as they behave unfeelingly and unpleasantly, rather than because they represent an unattainable connection with some inaccessible reality. It is a matter of reconciling, or finding ways of living with not being able to reconcile, one’s full and contradictory humanity with the simplified and diminished humanity encoded as “femininity”; resisting (rather than transcending) confinement, the “women’s room” of narrowed scope and lowered expectations. The problem is then one of knowing what to do with oneself, where to put all that stuff for which there appears to be neither place nor name.

—Dominic Fox

priceofliberty: nightbringer24: priceofliberty: So I guess...

Tue, 21 May 2013 03:21:38 -0400

priceofliberty:

nightbringer24:

priceofliberty:

So I guess Sweden is on fire?

Any link to the news this is supposed to be from?

Sorry, here you are!

Riots in Stockholm suburb over police shooting

Gangs of youth apparently angered by the police shooting death of an elderly man have hurled rocks at police and set cars and buildings on fire in a Stockholm suburb, forcing the evacuation of an apartment block.
Police spokesman Lars Bystrom says around 50 youths were involved in the riots early Monday in the suburb of Husby, west of Stockholm.

He says three officers were injured by rocks and several cars and buildings were damaged. No arrests were made.

Bystrom says the youths also set light to a parking garage, compelling police to evacuate residents from an adjacent apartment block. They could return home after a couple of hours.

Husby resident Ali Muzelef told Swedish radio protesters felt they had not been heard after the shooting earlier this month.

heteroglossia: Sexual Violence and Neoliberalism Historical...

Wed, 15 May 2013 17:15:12 -0400

heteroglossia:

Sexual Violence and Neoliberalism

Historical Materialism NY 2013

April 26, 2013

With Tithi Bhattacharya , Jennifer Roesch and Silvia Federici

Sponsored by Historical Materialism Conference 2013 - New York

SPEAKERS:

Tithi Bhattacharya, Jennifer Roesch, and Silvia Federici

"Art will not create social change, but it can provoke thought and prepare us for change. Art can..."

Mon, 13 May 2013 15:54:00 -0400

“Art will not create social change, but it can provoke thought and prepare us for change. Art can tell us what we do not see, sometimes what we do not want to see, what we do not realize about life, about sensitivity and crassness. What is ordinary may be seen as spectacular. What seems ugly may appear quite beautiful and vice versa. What seems trivial may become important depending upon how it is presented by the artist.”

- Elizabeth Catlett (via blaublueblah)

lickypickystickyme: If grandmothers around the world had a...

Sun, 12 May 2013 03:47:30 -0400

lickypickystickyme:

If grandmothers around the world had a rallying cry, it would probably sound something like “You need to eat!”

Photographer Gabriele Galimberti’s grandmother said something similar to him before one of his many globetrotting work trips. To ensure he had at least one good meal, she prepared for him a dish of ravioli before he departed on one of his adventures.

“In that occasion I said to my grandma ‘You know, Grandma, there are many other grandmas around the world and most of them are really good cooks,” Galimberti wrote via email. “I’m going to meet them and ask them to cook for me so I can show you that you don’t have to be worried for me and the food that I will eat!’ This is the way my project was born!”

The project, “Delicatessen With Love”, took Galimberti to 58 countries where he photographed grandmothers with both the ingredients and finished signature dishes.

He acted as photographer and stylist during each shoot with the grandmothers, taking a portrait of both the women and the food they made for him.

From top to bottom:

Inara Runtule, 68, Kekava, Latvia. Silke (herring with potatoes and cottage cheese).

Grace Estibero, 82, Mumbai, India. Chicken vindaloo.

Susann Soresen, 81, Homer, Alaska. Moose steak.

Serette Charles, 63, Saint-Jean du Sud, Haiti. Lambi in creole sauce.

The photographer’s grandmother Marisa Batini, 80, Castiglion Fiorentino, Italy. Swiss chard and ricotta Ravioli with meat sauce.

Normita Sambu Arap, 65, Oltepessi (Masaai Mara), Kenya. Mboga and orgali (white corn polenta with vegetables and goat).

Julia Enaigua, 71, La Paz, Bolivia. Queso Humacha (vegetables and fresh cheese soup).

Fifi Makhmer, 62, Cairo, Egypt. Kuoshry (pasta, rice and legumes pie).

Isolina Perez De Vargas, 83, Mendoza, Argentina. Asado criollo (mixed meats barbecue).

Bisrat Melake, 60, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. Enjera with curry and vegetables.

"I had an auto-repair man once, who, on these intelligence tests, could not possibly have scored more..."

Tue, 07 May 2013 17:09:53 -0400

“I had an auto-repair man once, who, on these intelligence tests, could not possibly have scored more than 80, by my estimate. I always took it for granted that I was far more intelligent than he was. Yet, when anything went wrong with my car I hastened to him with it, watched him anxiously as he explored its vitals, and listened to his pronouncements as though they were divine oracles - and he always fixed my car.
Well, then, suppose my auto-repair man devised questions for an intelligence test. Or suppose a carpenter did, or a farmer, or, indeed, almost anyone but an academician. By every one of those tests, I’d prove myself a moron, and I’d be a moron, too. In a world where I could not use my academic training and my verbal talents but had to do something intricate or hard, working with my hands, I would do poorly. My intelligence, then, is not absolute but is a function of the society I live in and of the fact that a small subsection of that society has managed to foist itself on the rest as an arbiter of such matters.
Consider my auto-repair man, again. He had a habit of telling me jokes whenever he saw me. One time he raised his head from under the automobile hood to say: “Doc, a deaf-and-mute guy went into a hardware store to ask for some nails. He put two fingers together on the counter and made hammering motions with the other hand. The clerk brought him a hammer. He shook his head and pointed to the two fingers he was hammering. The clerk brought him nails. He picked out the sizes he wanted, and left. Well, doc, the next guy who came in was a blind man. He wanted scissors. How do you suppose he asked for them?”
Indulgently, I lifted my right hand and made scissoring motions with my first two fingers. Whereupon my auto-repair man laughed raucously and said, “Why, you dumb jerk, He used his voice and asked for them.” Then he said smugly, “I’ve been trying that on all my customers today.” “Did you catch many?” I asked. “Quite a few,” he said, “but I knew for sure I’d catch you.” “Why is that?” I asked. “Because you’re so goddamned educated, doc, I knew you couldn’t be very smart.””

- Isaac Asimov (via skinnybaras)

I keep seeing this post around!!! I’v e been going, sure, yeah good point if you’ve never come across any critiques of IQ tests and stuff, fair enough, but it bothered me.

I couldn’t put my finger on what bothered me til now: it’s that he thinks all the skills he doesn’t have are the kind that you learn so you have A Job. He’s got one job, why’d he need any of the rest of this knowledge. But… guess what Asimov, working in a garage or in any of those industries is still a job with a wage that’s recognised as socially valuable, and that’s not the only kind of work there is. You know what isn’t A Job? Housekeeping, cooking, gardening, working as a carer. This idea that in a world where if he couldn’t earn a living as an academic he’d have to learn manual labour skills, but that luckily he can so he’ll never have to? That’s some bullshit right there.

Y’know what Asimov? Loads of us started learning some of those oh-so-complicated manual dexterity skills as pre-teens because it makes sense for everyone in a family to cook dinner sometimes, or maybe just ‘cause we were girls and we ought to know how to cook. Taking care of the place you live is work and a skill-set and you can choose to learn it if you want to take care of your home. You and everyone fucking else can learn it.

(via kwerey)

"Jacques Lacan reminds us, that in sex, each individual is to a large extent on their own, if I can..."

Sun, 05 May 2013 13:09:33 -0400

“Jacques Lacan reminds us, that in sex, each individual is to a large extent on their own, if I can put it that way. Naturally, the other’s body has to be mediated, but at the end of the day, the pleasure will be always your pleasure. Sex separates, doesn’t unite. The fact you are naked and pressing against the other is an image, an imaginary representation. What is real is that pleasure takes you a long way away, very far from the other. What is real is narcissistic, what binds is imaginary. So there is no such thing as a sexual relationship, concludes Lacan. His proposition shocked people since at the time everybody was talking about nothing else but “sexual relationships”. If there is no sexual relationship in sexuality, love is what fills the absence of a sexual relationship. 

Lacan doesn’t say that love is a disguise for sexual relationships; he says that sexual relationships don’t exist, that love is what comes to replace that non-relationship. That’s much more interesting. This idea leads him to say that in love the other tries to approach “the being of the other”. In love the individual goes beyond himself, beyond the narcissistic. In sex, you are really in a relationship with yourself via the mediation of the other. The other helps you to discover the reality of pleasure. In love, on the contrary the mediation of the other is enough in itself. Such is the nature of the amorous encounter: you go to take on the other, to make him or her exist with you, as he or she is. It is a much more profound conception of love than the entirely banal view that love is no more than an imaginary canvas painted over the reality of sex.”

- Alain Badiou, In Praise of Love (via heteroglossia)

"You cannot live when you are untouchable. Life is vulnerability."

Sun, 05 May 2013 07:31:11 -0400

“You cannot live when you are untouchable. Life is vulnerability.”

- Édouard Boubat, Notebooks, 1958
From Édouard Boubat: A Gentle Eye (via liquidnight)

nsrnicek: immolator: atheists argue with zizek_ebooks “But...

Sat, 04 May 2013 08:26:25 -0400

nsrnicek:

immolator:

atheists argue with zizek_ebooks

“But he’s a scientist!”

"When I ask such persons what makes [Tim] Wise’s commentaries so unique or revolutionary, they become..."

Sat, 27 Apr 2013 14:05:04 -0400

“When I ask such persons what makes [Tim] Wise’s commentaries so unique or revolutionary, they become quiet. For in truth, there is nothing new in Wise’s analysis. If anything, it is an analysis born of the blood struggle for Black liberation and racial justice throughout American history. Our ancestors may not have used terms like “white privilege.” Instead, they just called it what it was and is: white supremacy. (Imagine a white anti-racist saying, “I’m going to use my white supremacy to help people of color.”) Nonetheless, white privilege has become the watch-word of the movement. Yet, for the most part, it has been used as a means for white anti-racists to point the finger at “those” whites or navel gaze and wallow in a guilt that doesn’t produce results. Overall, it has the tendency to takes us away from addressing the real issue head on – whiteness itself and the ideology of white supremacy that gives whiteness whatever power and meaning it currently holds.”

- Word to the Wise: Unpacking the White Privilege of Tim Wise (via brashblacknonbeliever)

Tim Wise wouldn’t exist but for the blood of Afrikans standing up for themselves for generations.

(via whitedenial-ontrial)

oh the fucking irony

(via hewasalittledognamedsnuggles)

"Love doesn’t just sit there like a stone; it has to be made, like bread, remade all the time, made..."

Fri, 26 Apr 2013 12:45:26 -0400

“Love doesn’t just sit there like a stone; it has to be made, like bread, remade all the time, made new.”

- Ursula K. Le Guin, The Lathe of Heaven (via herefornow)

“The revolution starts in the ATOS smoking area” - on welfare, addiction, and dependency

Fri, 26 Apr 2013 07:28:04 -0400

“The revolution starts in the ATOS smoking area” - on welfare, addiction, and dependency:

novaramedia:

Originally posted at Libcom.org by ‘Ramona’ in April 2013

some thoughts on ecofeminism, radical feminism, essentialism and transfeminist thought

Fri, 26 Apr 2013 07:26:24 -0400

radtransfem:

I find it interesting and sad that radical feminism and ecofeminism are so commonly described as essentialist, given that to my knowledge they are the two feminist tendencies with the most explicit critiques of “essences”. Radical feminists challenge the existence of a female “gender essence”, which encodes women’s oppressed condition, and argue instead that women’s situation is created through social structures and women’s own resistance to those structures. And ecofeminists challenges the existence of a special “human essence” that inheres most strongly in white men and is linked to rationality, transcendence and control over the nature realm (understood as the realm not possessing that essence).

Read More

?

Wed, 24 Apr 2013 11:17:48 -0400

anneboyer:

do you think men will sit together in groups of themselves talking only to themselves? do you think that when women talk men will interrupt women? do you think men will explain to women what the women already know? do you think men will act as if the women said nothing at all? do you think that women will sit quietly and say nothing unless asked directly? do you think women will dismiss argument and abstraction out of self-protection or exasperation at the way they are excluded, ignored, and punished? do you think there will be women who insult themselves or pretend to be stupid? do you think there will be women who will just sit there and watch? do you think that women who do not sit there and watch will be understood to be crazy or shrill or angry or foolish or unserious? do you think that there will be women who will be brilliant, original, and vital, whose brilliance and originality will be understood to be mad? do you think men who are not briliant, original, and vital, will be understood to be so? do you think that women who do not sit quietly but have effectively watched the men and taken notes and made extensive preparations to behave in ways to please them will please them and then be used to excoriate the other women? do you think you think there are women who will worry under these social conditions that to be respected is a nightmare like being mocked? do you think that women will know the boundaries which circumscribe their behavior and know full well the social consequences of exceeding these boundaries? do you think women will not be divided about how to be in the boundaries? do you think there will be a fumbling struggle for solidarity? do you think there are women who will worry about their clothes, their bodies, how to obscure these bodies, how to neutralize? do you think there are men who have never once worried about how to present themselves neutrally? do you think there will be many aggressions, minor and major, of ommissions and attentions, of arrangements of bodies, of voices which speak or are silent, of ideas not said or said, of judgments made or not made, of occlusions and dominent visions, of sexual aggressions, minor and major?