View Single Post
Old 05-04-2010, 01:03 PM   #36 (permalink)
roachboy
 
roachboy's Avatar
 
Super Moderator
Location: essex ma
i don't have much time at the moment, but it seems to me that at one level the thread is jammed up around a kind of equation between what is socially constructed (this is not precise...it's more complicated not like an erector set) and what's "real" or "exists" as if there are things that somehow just "are" that are "real" and other things that social formations name for themselves which aren't. i have no idea what these things that simply "are" would look like. and i doubt that you or anyone else could refer to those things, given that the medium that allows you to communicate is a primary medium for the social construction/positing that you're getting at.

from this viewpoint, any classification, any system of classification is not "real" because any system of classification leans on a previous history (or plural) of systems of classification/ways of thinking about classification, etc. and it's also pretty obvious that in binary thinking x implies not-x, presupposes it, is defined with reference to it.

so yeah.

recognition of constructedness, or historical contingency *can be* a way for people socialized into a particular social form to relativize what shapes their perceptions (again, this is too fast and it sounds loopier than i want it to) but relativizing these frames doesn't mean that the frames somehow cease to function.

so it's not like one fine morning anyone wakes up and thinks:

my god the way i think feel and everything else follows from the historical situation in which i live

and then gets to step outside that situation in the way that you can take off a hat and be out from under that hat.

so i'm a bit confused by the conceptual underpinning of all this.
that's what i think keeps tangling up the points that nm seems to want to make about sexual orientation and/or gender.

as for hetero/homo sexualities being functions of binary thinking...that's really close to tautological in its self-evidence, ain't it?
does it follow then that hetero/homo sexualities don't exist? not outside the peculiar assumption that pits "the constructed" over against some (imaginary) always-already there....

gotta go.
__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear

it make you sick.

-kamau brathwaite
roachboy is offline  
 

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360