☆☆☆ "Appropriate & subvert the patriarchal semiotic hegemony of the hetero-normative dyad!" ☆☆☆

Sunday, January 17, 2016

Transmogrification of Agenda

 Cut/paste from CrossDream Forums -- today

Deborah Kate wrote:


I don't think many people here share your political agenda.

Do you wish to affirm crossdreaming, or condemn it as politically unsound?

 Michel Foucault in History of Sexuality asserts that sexuality is diverse and infinitely variable, infininitely expressed/presented.

For the record, I'm picking up on threads relating to "cis priviledge" from Julia Serano, Vitale, Dr. Becky . . . and co-mingling with radical feminism, a great deal of Husserl, Foucault, post structuralist gender theory by way of radical feminist authors. Indeed there is a dissonance in the LGBT community about idealogical schisms between trans gender and gay radical feminists.

Janice Raymond, Transsexual Empire (1979) -- We've read, blogged on this monograph. Raymond makes some strong arguments. Critics of Raymond make strong arguments. Those who would resist reading Raymond would ignore issues that need to be addressed.

I've been aware of Blanchard since 1989, when he first published. I've read broadly on both sides of this argument. From a post structuralist POV, I would deconstruct, appropriate, subvert the term "fetish" -- Phenomenology does this neatly. Post-modernist would problematize the valorization of the term. Fetish is a phenomenological object. As humans we focus sex drives on objects, a phenomenological ontology. It's oppressive to put value judgements on those objects. This oppression comes directly out of the patriarchal hegemony of the hetero-normative dyad.

AND -- this is precisely the line of reason radical feminists put on "cross dressing" as being a patriarchal objectification, and "femme" is a patriarchal objectification. Radical feminists put negative value on these objectifications. Interestingly, Blanchard pretty much does the same, only instead of "politically incorrect," Blanchard labels it pathological.

"Politically unsound?" -- Thanks for asking . . .

Serano introduced me to a new acronym: TERF "trans exclusive radical feminist." I've been aware of the political position. I wasn't aware of the acronym. Seemingly from reading the blogs associated here (blogspot.com) there appears several "camps" in CrossDream. Historically for me, I have spent more than a few nights in each and every one of these camps. I'm still looking for places to pitch my gender identity tent.

Judith Butler notes that Simone de Beauvoir views "gender presentation" as historical and accordingly fluid, dynamic, phenomenologically convoluted.

My current state of gender presentation is undergoing a great fluid review -- We're specifically hoping to "Appropriate and subvert the hegemonic patriarchal semiotics of the hetero-normative dyad." That's my blog header. It's from Judith Butler, and an enclave of theorists who call into question the semes of gender presentation, and the phenomenological ontology of sex/gender identity. This sentiment is derived from radical feminism. I'm male and a radical feminist.

Radical feminism hopes to free all of us from the oppression of genderism. Rad fem addresses the oppression of feminine stereotypes, but little considers the oppression of masculine stereotypes. Masculine stereotypes are oppressive, are oppressive . . . too. Radical fem suggests that the female paradigm is subordinate to the male paradigm. Let me suggest that both ends of the paradigm are oppressive and I hope to find resolution in "gender liberation." I'm a radical feminist gender liberationist.

These CrossDream forums present a great diversity of trans-gender attitudes, behavior, political agendas . . . But I'm not seeing the agendas being much directly addressed and considered.

That's my agenda: Figure out gender so I can be less dysphoric, more grounded in my ontological perspectives. Liberate humanity from the constraints of gender oppression.

No comments:

Post a Comment