Discussion » Nonsense » man/wo-man

  • joe
    joe wrote:
    <p><img src="http://img.dl.e.weliveinchina.com/_outimages/98617B60A1C9077E2C1D2F46170B5F06/536/WMDEditor/2/2012/10/15/536_100020121015054849465121-2.jpg" alt="alt text" /></p>
  • Saint - Spartacus
  • Sonja Lund
  • Saint - Spartacus

    @Joepie , your generalization and stereotype makes you an total idiot . and what you've showed just release your weakness... ...

    i have to list some names to give contrary examples and make the point clear: 1. Judith Butler : Butler said, performed 'an unwitting regulation and reification of gender relations' -- reinforcing a binary view of gender relations in which human beings are divided into two clear-cut groups, women and men. Rather than opening up possibilities for a person to form and choose their own individual identity, therefore, feminism had closed the options down.

    Butler notes that feminists rejected the idea that biology is destiny, but then developed an account of patriarchal culture which assumed that masculine and feminine genders would inevitably be built, by culture, upon 'male' and 'female' bodies, making the same destiny just as inescapable. That argument allows no room for choice, difference or resistance.

    Butler prefers 'those historical and anthropological positions that understand gender as a relation among socially constituted subjects in specifiable contexts'. In other words, rather than being a fixed attribute in a person, gender should be seen as a fluid variable which shifts and changes in different contexts and at different times.

    Butler's approach -- inspired in part by Foucault -- is basically to smash the supposed links between these, so that gender and desire are flexible, free-floating and not 'caused' by other stable factors.

    Butler says: 'There is no gender identity behind the expressions of gender; ... identity is performatively constituted by the very "expressions" that are said to be its results.' (Gender Trouble, p. 25). In other words, gender is a performance; it's what you do at particular times, rather than a universal who you are.

    2 . beatriz preciado : “Je ne suis ni homme, ni femme, ni hétérosexuelle, ni homosexuelle, ni transsexuelle” déclare cette brillante philosophe et essayiste, qui en avril 2002 a été finaliste d´un Prix Anagrama de Ensayo en sa XXXVIII édition, avec l´œuvre “Porno-utopie,

    Sex, Hormones and Porn as Biopolitical Machines “I don’t think there are cells which are male or female, because male and female are yet themselves biopolitical concepts in some way.

    (Beatriz Preciado is a philosopher and teacher of gender theory. She critizices the division between male and female which the heterosexual tradition establishes. She proposes a new sexuality that she analyzes in her book “El manifiesto contrasexual”.)

    Biology is a techno-alive system, so to say, in which there are yet involved cultural interpretation and production processes, and also that science works producing performative metaphores, that means, that it produces that which it tries to describe, in some way.

    When we are born, the sexual identification process is not carried out making a chromosomic analysis, a genetic analysis. Do you know your chromosomic chart? No, me neither, however you have an absolut certainty that your gender is female, that mine is female, for instance, well, I haven’t got of course any certainty, but well, there are those who still have it without knowing his/her chromosomic chart. That’s to say in some way that the asignation to male and female during birth is realized according merely to visual criteria, it has to do with an esthetic, an esthetic of the body, an esthetic of sexuality and sex.

    First of all, what we have to accept is that there is a multiplicity. The body is multiple, the body is plastic and it has a multiplicity of expressions that can not be reduced to male or female ones, and the gender cathegory is invented precisely to reduce this multiplicity to masculinity and to feminity.

    Any man, bio-man, can nowadays get to a farmacy to buy some pills and to start a feminization process. Meanwhile, testosterone can not be found in a free market state, so to say, testosterone is still regulated, its access is regulated, by a set of state political systems, and it’s necessary to pass a series of criteria which has to do with transexual psychiatry to gain access to testosterone.

    Pornography as a biotechnological industy, as one of the tentacles of the bio-power, operates precisely naturalizing and normalizing the use of the organs, the relation among bodies, the timing and spacing of the relation among the bodies and… I tell you an example, for instance, a porno movie, really, what does propose to us are pedagogics of sexuality. In some way, it’s not there, the porno movie does not represent the reality of sex but in some way it operates as a performative machine that works producing models of sexuality. So to say, it tells us exactly how we must use the organs, in which situations we have to use them, aven who we have to use them, in which places, so to speak, it establishes a whole series of distinctions among public and private spaces, sexual and non-sexual organs.

    The blowjob, let’s say the fellatio, appears as an specifically sexual technique which also requires a whole arrange of learnings, and for that for instance the film “Deep throath” is going to teach american women, and later in some way like a global pornographic pedagogy, its going to teach women all around the world how to make correctly a fellatio.

    Some scientists have profited of these fear that there was in some way in feminism during the 80′s to confront with the body, with corporality, because it seemed to carry us directly to a naturalistic determinism, an anatomical determinism, in which it seemed that we could no longer speak but about men and women, penis and vaginas. I think that the challenge of contemporary feminism is to re-think precisely corporality, to re-think the cells, I would speak of biomicropolitics of the cells if you want.”

    3 . laurie anderson Laurie Anderson is without question the high-tech priestess of the late 20th Century. She became widely known outside the art world in 1981 when her single "O Superman" reached number two on the UK pop charts

    4 , Céline Sciamma French screenwriter and filmmaker Céline Sciamma was behind the 2007 Water Lilies, a film following a pair of teenage girls who explored their sexualities after meeting in the swimming pool locker room. And now with her new movie Tomboy, Sciamma delves again into the idea of gender and sexuality from the point of view of someone too young to know who they are and how that aligns with who everyone else wants them to be. In the case, the character in question has an idea that what they are feeling is not quite "right" and that they could be in trouble for the way they are acting, despite it being the most natural to them. alt text

    alt text

    alt text

    alt text

    women ( a name for certain gender) are as complicated as ''men'' in the name of biological part , they are one part of human beings.

  • Saint - Spartacus

    He must be awfully bored ... ha , but i am not a male ... ... pictures of confused people? you can't deny the science which out of your filed ...
    then you just 装逼不成就变傻逼了咯。有木有 ?

    Hey Men , your excited angry look should be the most sexy ever ! ; p

    alt text

Please login to post a reply to this thread.


WeLiveInBeijing.com is a social community for people living in or traveling to Beijing.

Powered by: Bloc