Re: [-empyre-] [empyre] producers and consumers
I did mention in a previous post that the problem with the word "cunt"
and with women identifying themselves with it is that it plays directly
into the segmentation of the body and the idea of a woman as an
extension of her sexual organs. Anyone who sees "cunt" as an "object of
worship" is trying too hard or simply missing the point, that to see
people as full and complete human beings, we cannot refer to people as
isolated, specific body parts [which happens constantly in the media- a
woman is a face, a set of breasts, a washboard stomach, a set of legs,
etc etc etc- neverminding that she could be a senator, a songwriter, an
actress, an artist, a poet, which is what men can be.] 19th century
morality has little to nothing do with it.
Even in referencing men as pricks can't have the same effects because
the culture is not one that actively participates in the reduction of
men to body parts [and in a sense some men crave it- but reducing
everyone in that way is not liberation, either.] It strikes me as a
profoundly absurd practice for a woman to refer to herself as a "cunt"
as a source of pride. Even removing the negative connotations of
reducing oneself to a sexual organ, consider the absurdity of referring
to yourself as an earlobe- how does this address who you are, what ideas
you have, what your soul is made of? Even positive stereotypes are
stereotypes, which serve to reduce a person to a role, which is the
precise opposite process of liberation. The idea of turning "cunt" into
a "positive" term is kind of valueless. If African Americans has turned
the word "nigger" into a compliment it wouldn't change race relations,
and, in fact, would only serve to further enforce its negative
connotations into the role playing of any African American individual
who chose to identify themselves with that term.
What strikes me about the value of the net is the possibility of
becoming completely androgynous. I think net.androgyny would be the key
liberating factor- look at entities like NN, who, in her initial
incarnation, was completely genderless, and may, still, be a man or
woman. Or both. Or neither :) Any attempts at dismissing its ideas based
on gender backfire. If you want to argue you have to dismiss the ideas,
and in order to do that credibly you have to understand them and
Damien Everett wrote:
Hmmm, Cristiano... perhaps people like you are one of the main reasons
for the need for CyberFeminism? Perhaps if you actually listened to
and understood what was being said you would realise that:
women on the internet feel oppressed by rude and intolerent men
such as yourself... that they want a space to express themselves and
ideologies without being dismissed as stupid / irrelevant / a waste of
Can you appreciate that women are trying to address (heal) the gender
issues that still exists in our culture... the internet is a great way
to continue this quest on a global scale... why do you feel the need
to seek to discredit / discount this? Does your male ego feel
threatened by this? If you were ever oppressed by the issues woman
have faced I'm sure you would feel differently...
| Cunt comes from 'priestess', symbol of power that of
course the male society transformed in a sybol of hate
for exactly that reason, restricting its meaning to
the body part. This is history.
Art has a tendency of seeking to shock, sometimes by taking words /
ideas and turning them upside down / recontextualising them. Words
don't mean the same thing to different people. Cunt is not a symbol of
hate, for some it is an object of worship, for others a symbol of
crude desire, and for others it might be the womb / matrix of all
existence and experience... it depends where you are coming from.
Perhaps you are still caught up in 19th century repressive morality?
Art is easy to misinterpret if you don't have an open mind.
your friendly prick / cock / dick...
This archive was generated by a fusion of
Pipermail 0.09 (Mailman edition) and