Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Judith Butler interview

414 replies

MotherofPearl · 07/09/2021 12:27

https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2021/sep/07/judith-butler-interview-gender?CMP=ShareiOSAppOther

Apologies if this has already been posted. I found this troubling to read. Am I misreading this or is Butler saying that GC feminism is fascist?

OP posts:
Ereshkigalangcleg · 07/09/2021 18:12

Is there any scope for starting a thread on this forum where we can read, pick apart and discuss notable books by the opposition?

I would definitely be up for this, but I fear Genderist Book Group would be deleted either because it would be inevitably trolled and derailed into a bunfight by bad actors, or our "picking apart" of their texts, low hanging fruit that it is, would be targeted and deleted as "not in the spirit".

nauticant · 07/09/2021 18:07

It seems that some within feminist movements are becoming sympathetic to these far-right campaigns. This year’s furore around Wi Spa in Los Angeles saw an online outrage by transphobes followed by bloody protests organised by the Proud Boys. Can we expect this alliance to continue?

This kind of thinking, if the far right are interested in a cause we have to back away from it, led those with responsibility in Rochdale and other places to see that a scandal would attract the far right and as a result inaction and continuing to let children get gang raped was the best course.

RoyalCorgi · 07/09/2021 18:03

@donquixotedelamancha

I GENUINELY don't get if there's a definite boundary between Butler and Chopra and, if so, where!

One of them is a callous grifter motivated only by their own fame and fortune who uses big words to hide the self-conflicting vacuousness of their ideas and doesn't care about how their bullshit harms the vulnerable as long as they keep making money.

The other is Deepak Chopra.

Grin

It's funny because it's true.

IvyTwines2 · 07/09/2021 17:51

Judith Chauffeur.

ElliottSmithsfingers · 07/09/2021 17:44

I tried to read but it was too convoluted to even try engaging with. Just a load of "blah blah blah" bullshit. Academic my arse, these people would not last a day in the real world.

CircularReasoning · 07/09/2021 17:41

@NoWireHangersEver

I've been thinking about this for a little while anyway, but thought I might take it here - after seeing what Butler had to say about us 'never reading any gender studies'.

We should all start systematically reading gender studies, and start 'listening to trans women'! See exactly what the best and brightest of them have to say, so we can refute it exactly as it's written and argue on their level. We need to know the enemy! Every GC feminist should start getting very familiar with the foundational arguments and literature of contemporary trans ideology.

I'm going through Serano's Whipping Girl right now (very important book, whose arguments are constantly reused online) and seeing so much that's just ridiculously easy to refute. Also reading Andrea Long Chu's Females with a friend. Is there any scope for starting a thread on this forum where we can read, pick apart and discuss notable books by the opposition?

This is why we'll probably win tbh - they don't read books we write, but we read books that they write. Even though their ideology falls apart in a long-form book format.

I have read quite a lot of gender studies and queer theory and listened to Trans Activists. That's why I'm GC.

I read some JB in the 90's and it put me off feminism for 2 decades. I thought, if that's the standard of modern feminist thought, I think it might have peaked and got on with my career grateful to 2nd wave feminists for enabling it.

I haven't self described as a feminist until the last few years and that is mainly down to disagreeing on every conceivabl level with her mind vomit. So I guess she did eventually inspire me into feminism.

CircularReasoning · 07/09/2021 17:31

Will she be writing the screen play?

SoManyQuestionsHere · 07/09/2021 17:29

CircularReasoning, to be perfectly fair, there's a novel take on the classical Fantasy Epic in there somewhere: "Chosen One - but their fatal flaw is: nobody gets it!"

Commercial potential arguably contingent on the author steering well clear of too much dialogue.

CircularReasoning · 07/09/2021 17:03

"
At the end she says that the reason everyone doesn’t agree with her is because she isn’t able to express her position in language of sufficient clarity. Considering she’s had 30+ years to try and nail it I’d suggest it ain’t going to be happening any time soon."

Only she has THE TRUTH. She doesn't have the words to describe her own profundity. It flows through her like a modern day Messiah.

She is the chosen one!

CircularReasoning · 07/09/2021 16:51

@FloralBunting

When I wrote Gender Trouble, there was no category for “nonbinary” – but now I don’t see how I cannot be in that category.

When I dribbled impenetrable cobblers into book form before, I missed a fucking trick by not coining 'non-binary' didn't it? Never mind, I am still the grateful recipient of adulatory hagiographies from all these pricks, and since 'non-binary' seems to be top of the apex right now, I think I will be having some of that, thenkyewverymuch.

Fluent in Butler Bullshit!

HOW did this person acheive academic success? I'd be suprised if she could tie her own shoelaces.

SoManyQuestionsHere · 07/09/2021 16:43

@donquixotedelamancha, I think I love you!

donquixotedelamancha · 07/09/2021 16:40

I GENUINELY don't get if there's a definite boundary between Butler and Chopra and, if so, where!

One of them is a callous grifter motivated only by their own fame and fortune who uses big words to hide the self-conflicting vacuousness of their ideas and doesn't care about how their bullshit harms the vulnerable as long as they keep making money.

The other is Deepak Chopra.

SoManyQuestionsHere · 07/09/2021 16:36

She says that changing sex is also possible because naming your sex makes it so. This is the realm of pure theory and thought games which is all well and good until you apply it to real life.

Nah!

I mean, yes, that's exactly what she says (IMO, again, it's Butler, so ... who the fuck knows?). But also:

This is PRECISELY where it leaves the territory of "scientific" or even "philosophy" and wanders off into the space of "unfalsifiable woowoo".

Someone, anyone, pray, do tell me (genuinely interested here!), where precisely to draw the line between a philosophical take on "reality happens because you think it" and New Age bullshit like the "Law of Attraction", which, basically makes the same claims.

Except, of course, it all gets messed up and inhumane and positively awful when you take the whole situation from the abstract into the concrete.

And, no, I GENUINELY don't get if there's a definite boundary between Butler and Chopra and, if so, where!

donquixotedelamancha · 07/09/2021 16:35

At the end she says that the reason everyone doesn’t agree with her is because she isn’t able to express her position in language of sufficient clarity.

She doesn't answer questions when asked to clarify her positions either.

I recall a very neutral but actually probing interview with the new statesman in which she just called them transphobes for asking questions and ranted about how GC feminist cause all the world's ills.

FlyingOink · 07/09/2021 16:32

Can you explain what this was? Thanks

The Reimer case, John Money took a boy who had lost his penis in a botched circumcision and made him into a "girl" and got his twin brother to simulate fucking him. They both committed suicide.

donquixotedelamancha · 07/09/2021 16:30

I thought JB was one of the people who firmly believed gender is a construct. But here she seems to be saying it's sacrosanct?

i thought she was GC.

Nooooo. JB is the architect of Genderism- she's the one they base all this 'no such thing as biological sex stuff on'.

She does think Gender is a social construct but she thinks the construct is reality and any attempt to recognise material reality or to apply reason is far-right, colonialist, capitalist naughtyness.

FloralBunting · 07/09/2021 16:29

@NoWireHangersEver

I've been thinking about this for a little while anyway, but thought I might take it here - after seeing what Butler had to say about us 'never reading any gender studies'.

We should all start systematically reading gender studies, and start 'listening to trans women'! See exactly what the best and brightest of them have to say, so we can refute it exactly as it's written and argue on their level. We need to know the enemy! Every GC feminist should start getting very familiar with the foundational arguments and literature of contemporary trans ideology.

I'm going through Serano's Whipping Girl right now (very important book, whose arguments are constantly reused online) and seeing so much that's just ridiculously easy to refute. Also reading Andrea Long Chu's Females with a friend. Is there any scope for starting a thread on this forum where we can read, pick apart and discuss notable books by the opposition?

This is why we'll probably win tbh - they don't read books we write, but we read books that they write. Even though their ideology falls apart in a long-form book format.

FWIW, I agree with you, and my method has long been, as I suspect it has been for many here, to read genderist arguments to try and make sense of them. That's what being open minded is all about, that's why genderists get asked the same questions when they plop here - most of us are interested in how someone comes to be convinced of these ideas.

It's a basic debate technique - not in a tricksy gotcha way, but in the sense that there is no point arguing against a position your opponent does not hold (the 'straw man'), so you must learn their argument so well you could convince a neutral person with it if asked. Because then you can see the actual flaws in the argument and produce a genuine counterpoint.

To be perfectly honest, this is how actual progress and consensus works as well. If you've got any sense at all, you know that the way you strengthen your case, so that you can persuade others to share your views on things you think matter, is to subject it to argument with those who disagree with you. Only then do you see if your logic and conclusions make sense.

Only talking to people who agree with you won't do this, which is why, as much as the 'echo chamber' accusation gets flung at us here, it's nonsense, because most of the perspectives here have been refined by interacting with Genderists directly, or through their writing.

So yes, read it, challenge it with questions. Engage.

And if you're a genderist reading this, then post, discuss, ask us questions and be prepared to answer ours. So, so many of us were broadly in agreement with some of your views until we interrogated those views and found our questions unanswered or deemed heretical.

Cactu · 07/09/2021 16:25

I took from it that gender is a construction but it’s one we can create and recreate for ourselves. So changing our gender is something people will do. She says that changing sex is also possible because naming your sex makes it so. This is the realm of pure theory and thought games which is all well and good until you apply it to real life. Then you get women being raped in prisons and all the other awful consequences.

At the end she says that the reason everyone doesn’t agree with her is because she isn’t able to express her position in language of sufficient clarity. Considering she’s had 30+ years to try and nail it I’d suggest it ain’t going to be happening any time soon.

NoYOUbekind · 07/09/2021 16:21

More than a little bit disingenous to publish this today with JB's account of the Wi Spa incidents and a link to the Guardian's account of the Wi Spa incidents when we now know what we know about the Wi Spa.

In fact, I'd go as far as to say that is fake news...

StrangeLookingParasite · 07/09/2021 16:15

She's an ambulant sack of every cliché about the social 'sciences'.

morningtoncrescent62 · 07/09/2021 16:14

I love that she thinks we should all read gender studies, but she doesn't appear to have clapped eyes on anything GC feminists have written. If she did, maybe she'd understand that we're not all a bunch of religious right-wingers who think that women should go back into the kitchen and stay there.

CaptSkippy · 07/09/2021 16:13

We are assigned a sex at birth and then a slew of expectations follow which continue to “assign” gender to us.

For crying out loud, nobody is "assigned" a sex at birth. Sex is determined way before birth and simply observed at birth. She can't even get this right. Seems to me like another has drunk the Coolaid.

Anyways, that's about all I needed to know. I wonder if she just does this because she hopes she won;t be canceled.

MondayYogurt · 07/09/2021 16:07

just made the mistake of googling the fawning fan interviewer. Much fond of own voice droning youtube videos + marxism.

CaptSkippy · 07/09/2021 16:06

@dyslek

Mehgan Murphy gave the definative verdict on JB interviews;

'American academic re-emerges to remind the world she is a fraud.'

That's rich coming from Meghan Murphy. She is now slagging off radical feminism and sucking up to the likes of Benjamin Boyce and Joe Rogan.
KimikosNightmare · 07/09/2021 15:57

When it slowly emerged that the John/Jane Doe psychological experiment was not only unethical, but falsified and actually abusive JB did a u-turn

Can you explain what this was? Thanks

Swipe left for the next trending thread