malelesbian
Femboyism IS feminism.
I'm an anti-essentialist universalist. Butler's view involves many metaphysically realistic elements and assertion about universal truths. We just view universals as alterable and revisable.
The Feminine Perspective against the Manosphere
- Thread starter malelesbian
- Start date
-
- Tags
- a bunch of trolls trolling each other aesthetic jihad chicks dig guys with money cia lesbian david lesbian do you tongue punch the dirt star? dolezal1977 eating pussy without asking everyone on this board is a troll extraterrestrial bisexual feminist travis bickle justified ancients of noncing lesbian separatism luka's crop top malelesbian: english rp boy toy malethespian mansplaining feminism mr tea confirmed pegging freak mrs tea eaten out 24/7 prevent prevent! sarlacc pit taking the filth the art of trolling the feminonce massive the perils of self-publishing the viper of cunnilingus undisciplined lockerroom pussy eating unimaginable anguish version's throbbing penis
malelesbian
Femboyism IS feminism.
Mothers are phallic, Lacan even says so.
mixed_biscuits
_________________________
Ann Widdecombe
mixed_biscuits
_________________________
In the same way the universe's physical constants are alterable you mean?
mixed_biscuits
_________________________
Lacan is the most evidence-free source anyone could possibly pick.
malelesbian
Femboyism IS feminism.
I'm not sure what you mean, could you go into detail? An example of a universal category changing is when, in recent times the definition of women expanded to include transwomen. Up until a certain point in history, the category of women only included ciswomen.
Yes but Lacan literally started the discourse about the phallus in his paper "Signification of the Phallus," so he's also the most canonical and widely cited author I can pick on the topic.
mixed_biscuits
_________________________
That's not universal, that pertains to a sub-culture within a fraction of global society.
malelesbian
Femboyism IS feminism.
All transwomen are women. That is a universal claim, even if not everyone accepts or believes it.
mixed_biscuits
_________________________
You are being essentialist again
sus
Moderator
It's the opposite of Andrea Long Chus thesis
malelesbian
Femboyism IS feminism.
I'm being a realist and universalist. Versions of anti-essentialism that reject universal claims about social reality are overly weak.
And don't forget, the potential to act non-phallic is in all of us, man, woman, or anyone else. I am the non-phallic male, the male lesbian.
But there are even phallic female lesbians too!
malelesbian
Femboyism IS feminism.
Now you're engaging in reductionism. The phallus is distinct from symbolic capital. The phallus is an oppressive system of signifiers, images that monopolizes meaning. It is a totalistic enterprise. Misogyny is phallic. Misogynists try to say the feminine is bad, they proscribe feminine culture. Phallic culture refuses to understand feminine culture. So the issue isn't saying that there's something unfeminine about possessing symbolic capital. It's not that men endure a particular state and women or feminine people don't. The issue is that phallic culture is a system of meanings that obscure a real part of the human experience. The phallus only provides us the conceptual resources needed to understand the world in male terms. We need a second system of representation to understand the meaning of the feminine experience. This second system I call the feminine imaginary. So I'm not making the negative claim that something good is unfeminine. I'm making a positive claim that a unique feminine perspective on the world exists. This system is just as good as the phallus but in different ways. It's not as bad as the phallus because it doesn't try to block out the phallus, but the phallus tries to repress femininity
mixed_biscuits
_________________________
You are the opposite of a realist and I don't see how you can justify the universal validity of anything you've said on this thread with the tools you've given yourself.
ghost
Well-known member
nobody can monopolize meaning on your behalf. that's on you, no?
yeah this is a skill issue, i would simply pay attention to the full human experience
malelesbian
Femboyism IS feminism.
Gendered behaviors have a social reality. Their reality depends on a group consensus. As a matter of fact, behaviors define genders. At the heart of every gender identity is a material, bodily performance. Communities decide on which particular behaviors define a specific identity. This is a fact. How do you even define gender without appeal to behavior? The only alternative I know is to define gender in terms of biological characteristics, which conflates sex and gender and is biological essentialism. And how are you going to deny that gender identity depends on the recognition of others? No gender exists in a vacuum. People have to accept you as a member of your gender in order for you to be understood as a member of your gender. There's no getting around that.
What justifies the validity of Butler's universal claims is that they are the best available account of the relevant phenomenon. When you look at the empirical facts about gender, Butler's theory is most accurate. If we had a description of what gender is that was better than Butler's, then that would be a different story. If you can give a better alternative account of gender, give one. But you can't just reduce gender to sex.
What justifies the validity of Butler's universal claims is that they are the best available account of the relevant phenomenon. When you look at the empirical facts about gender, Butler's theory is most accurate. If we had a description of what gender is that was better than Butler's, then that would be a different story. If you can give a better alternative account of gender, give one. But you can't just reduce gender to sex.
malelesbian
Femboyism IS feminism.
Who said it was happening on my behalf? The phallus is a system bigger than individuals. It is the narrative that runs through so much mainstream culture that says everything is about the individual's self love. The majority of society assumes the male perspective. They don't do that on my behalf.
It's not a skill issue, it's an issue of representation. We all have access to phallic representations. But since the phallus blocks out non-phallic representations, feminine cultural representations are hidden from us. So the matter is assymmetrical. As a matter of empirical fact, too much of our culture ignores feminine experience. To achieve consciousness of the full human experience, we must first awaken the femininity that lies dormant in our society. It's more important to represent non-phallic femininity because feminine culture is underrepresented in our society.
mixed_biscuits
_________________________
You just relocate your essentialism in behaviour and keep contradicting yourself on whether communities get to define identity or individuals or both.
'Gender' can't be defined without reference to biological sex; try it.
ghost
Well-known member
Once again, is the phallus "male"? The semantics here are tiresome.
But again—they engage of their own free will. There is all the material in the world online, and people get to understand how they constitute their own sense of meaning.
Please, go on pinterest, go on Tumblr. There may not be exact, 1:1 balance, but the idea that culture entirely occludes feminine experience is straight out of the 1950s. It wasn't true in 1968, it's so much less true today, the battle for access to minds is over.
It's clear that access to a narrative that supports an antipathy to our so-called Phallus—ie, having symbolic capital and agency and participating in the construction of society—is available to people if they simply look.
This is the creed of every ideologue—"my ideas are hidden, nobody can access them, this harms society." Have you considered that they're right there on Wikipedia, and people see them, and find them unappealing and unworthy of engagement?
Or, more directly: people like the "Phallus." It gives them meaning. Why fight that?