Dr Em The Trojan Unicorn, Queer Theory and Paedophilia

Fermats I'm so glad you brought up and explained anti-carceral feminism.

• its a crock of ** isn't it? (I don't know how to academically word my feelings on that one).

It's telling that for all it's male sexual anarchy claptrap, Queer Theory is so unapologetically anti-lesbian. Unless those 'lesbians' are either heterosexual males or heterosexual females putting on a show for heterosexual males. It's amazing that it's taken so long for the true agenda to start to register.

I remember sitting in a meeting a couple of years ago while a 'woke' male colleague waxed lyrical on the virtues of Sexual Entertainment Venues. Apparently allowing men a 'sexual release' stops them from 'doing worse things' and 'actually makes an area safer'. Looking back, I can't quite believe I sat through his little speech in silence. In hindsight it couldn't have been more transparent that he was actually talking about his own lack of self control and his own desire to be lap danced or whatever it was. You don't have to work very hard to read between the lines once you wake up to it.

My late mother was an academic. She used to refer to "Fucking Foucault". Having read these articles, I can see why!

AlwaysComingHome

Completely agree, I had no idea and assumed as you said that it's was about gay rights.
From reading Dr Ems papers I can see the paraelles between this and P. I. E.
If someone was to do a course in queer theory would they actually be learning about the people and their ideas that Dr. Em talks about?

"Queer Theory" is a label given to the male desire for a sexually anarchic world .. no boundaries of any kind, at any time, in any place.

That is a very useful bite-sized description, JackyH:

There's a second part:
Acceptance without exception
a mantra that forbids "kink shaming".
a mantra that doesn't allow for a discussion on whether the Q belongs in the private sphere rather than at Pride, in schools, or in the policies of the NSPCC

Ha, no need to be dry. The post office things was bizarre, for sure.

As far as teens, I would not assume, as a reader, that someone who says children in some places and teens in another only means those who are under age, as I have encountered people before who use the term "children" very broadly. Some of the queer theorists were talking about teens as well, particularly around the idea of gay male teens, and I found myself unsure whether everyone was talking about the same age group or not.

Maybe it's a control thing? In that it provides some illusionary feeling of the world being on your terms because you shaped it so.

I made myself read the article on the prostasia website on age related play (or something like that). This woman was saying how much she liked playing a small girl because it gave her release from the responsibilities of everyday life. I think some women find having to take responsibility for themselves quite challenging in a society where previously they have not necessarily had to do that. Legitimising alternative realities (particularly when sex is involved too) maybe gives an escape route.

It seems to me that "Queer Theory" is a label given to the male desire for a sexually anarchic world .. no boundaries of any kind, at any time, in any place.

Sorry Goosefoot there is only so much I can take before sarcasm and when Califia is claiming that the post office was in a giant homophobic conspiracy I felt I dealt with hose arguments with the respect and gravity they deserved - a.k.a sarcasm. From now on I will endeavour to be as dry and boring as possible and crush my spirit.

There is indeed a difference between 13 year olds and 19 year olds. As the authors consistently mention they are talking about children. The paedophile apologists themselves did try to move the goal posts and talk about older teens but they keep coming back to justifying raping children. I was not lumping them in together.

Maybe it's a control thing? In that it provides some illusionary feeling of the world being on your terms because you shaped it so.

I think, consciously or subconsciously, some women decide to take the route to give up on "beating" men/patriarchy and instead look to a route to power/influence by limiting the exertion of it to other women. Risk/reward strategy?

The trojan unicorn is such a brilliant way to describe this phenomenon.

Maybe it's a control thing? In that it provides some illusionary feeling of the world being on your terms because you shaped it so.

It might be. Some of them seem to really like the idea of being able to do what they want sexually. All seem to really have a very undeveloped idea of what it means to be "free".

I know men who think similarly but they don't tend to theorise about it, they just do it.

Or they don't know what it means at all. I mentioned it in passing to my sister recently, and she was shocked, thinking it was a slur.

I think most people are thrown by the term Queer Theory. Because ‘queer’ was a term thrown at gay people, and because gay people adopted the label to ‘take it back’, I think most of us just thought Queer Theory was about gay rights.

I think most of the people I know who really embrace queer theory are women. There really does seem to be something about it that appeals to them.

Maybe it's a control thing? In that it provides some illusionary feeling of the world being on your terms because you shaped it so.

I haven't thought that argument through - just musing out loud.

I think most of the people I know who really embrace queer theory are women. There really does seem to be something about it that appeals to them.

I found the articles really useful, though I though the third section was a little weaker, it felt like the author couldn't resist making sarcastic comments any more, and while I generally agreed they distracted me from the main text. I alway found myself thinking that there needs to be some discussion generally around the idea of teens as children with regard to their participation in sex and ability to consent. There are such profound differences between someone of 13 and 19, I don't know if its useful to lump them together. Perhaps the author was only thinking of teens under the age of consent but it was unclear to me if I should be reading it that way or not.

I was really surprised how recently some of the people discussed had been writing.

i dunno really. it seems so obviously a men's sexual rights movement. why would women put themselves out for that? we've had some women posting here who are passionate advocates of QT

but then I guess there are always women who will conspire with patriarchy. it's just another level of self delusion, because the advocates that post here always think they're so progressive

the astonishing thing is the women that subscribe to queer theory. it's baffling

Why is it astonishing? And why is it baffling? To put the questions right back at you.

Well, QT reifies existing power relations while pretending it doesn't. Clearly that's going to wash better in upper middle class academia than it is among the lessers.

the astonishing thing is the women that subscribe to queer theory. it's baffling

Thank you!

An unintended consequence of women's liberation from ownership patriarchy. I suppose we should have seen it coming really. Sigh.

Agreed. Loved your recent safeguarding work Lang.

I think the reason QT has triumphed in academia and institutions is it is always hard to go up against men's sexual entitlement. As feminists did, queer theory emerged as a backlash.

I agree with this. If men no longer own individual women via patriarchy, they just try to own them all.

In my opinion, the academy created an image that once women were admitted and allowed to be awarded degrees and take academic positions that sexism in HE was solved. This has hidden the fact that those higher up have been male and set the terms of correct thinking, the external funders have also been male and set the terms of research and what questions shall be asked. For example, as soon as feminist thought got a foot hold and was being listened to (women's studies) it was kneecapped and replaced with 'gender studies'.

There is nothing to argue with here, imo. ^

Desperate to save these somewhere. Can't seem to download on the links?