[-empyre-] Re: [-empire-] following

Of course not, women are not alone in the world and environmental culture is
at work. But really, I do not know that a man would have never produced the
theory of liberation of women but women to women... Th beginning of this
claim was political : on the citizenship (EN: Sufragettes) the question of
the right of vote, more on intellectual capacity it was the work "The second
sex"  which ruled once for all.. It was the book which meade the success of
Simone de Beauvoir in the USA (where she met Nelson Algreen  and falling in
love - the book "a walk in the wild side" - which title inspîred Lou
Reed'song -is dedicated to Simone de Beauvoir)

What I explain is not my opinion, it is information. Because I am not
feminist in the sense I write ; I have left the femnist group in Paris at
the moment they pushed out the men. Hetero were in conquest of power, and
homo were suffering. The question was not not equality. (in this moment)
Imagine: I was married since several years more I had a son, then more sons!
Imagine that I could not get out men of my life !

If there are feminists among us who knows the story and this claiming, they
know perfectly well this situation. And Christina has quoted other women as

Deleuze has nothing to see with French feminism reborning in the seventies
just he agreed ; if someone helped more it is Guattari (equally from
outside) from outside.

But in progressive militantism the tradition is that never successful revolt
can come from who is not directly concerned. Can be war of liberation (Viet
Nam, Algeria whatever the help of FR communists) can be social evolution,
can be proletariat, and so on. It was exactly the question of establishment
of intellectuals in industrial factories or agriculture in the cultural

For example: see how it would be very suspect that men walk with female
prostitute for their rights: may be their procurers?
 and so on.. 

Women has always claimed the intellectual advantage in the theory from their
own part.

On 12/03/07 11:57, "Nicholas Ruiz III" <editor@intertheory.org> probably

> I doubt that women alone can claim feminism as their
> own exclusionary project.  Under what pretense? The
> chance possession of XX chromosomes, rather than XY?
> Such a feminism, could only ever be a
> 'femdamentalism,' no?
> --- Aliette <aliette@criticalsecret.org> wrote:
>> Personally I can't understand that women take stool
>> from theory written by
>> men at the moment these women pretend to manifest
>> their radical social
>> otherness.
>> If you quote feminism so please quote women. I have
>> quote Sontag because at
>> my view as well Beauvoir better than Roudinesco or
>> Badinter (for the French)
>> they counted as feminists from the political side.
>> If feminism is a communitarism it does not interest
>> me because I largely
>> prefer teh company of the men;-) But if feminism is
>> Once more marxism counts in post modern feminism,
>> because being founded by
>> Simone de Beauvoir's concepts from an application of
>> the theory of master
>> and slave to the sex more the theory marxist of
>> relationship of production
>> turning women into statement of exploited class (as
>> second sex) what showed
>> the means of liberation in the side of struggle of
>> class... At the moment
>> the heterosexuality is the dialectic object to be
>> solved by the equal rights
>> and practices there does not create communities but
>> clubs.
>> But at the moment it becomes a pure question of
>> discriminate (naturalist)
>> sex as social otherness, it means exclusion of the
>> males, instead of rebuild
>> the relationship between women and men. At this
>> point instead having the
>> objective of re conquest their respective rights it
>> creates communities of
>> the same sex as social organisation having its
>> proper claim of class as
>> communities whatever the other problem stays
>> unsolved, and so on.
>> what is the new objective is not more
>> heterosexuality to have the best
>> respects and rights but homosexuality to have the
>> same respect and rights
>> than hetero.
>> At the moment the sexual communitarism develops
>> itself whatever the unsolved
>> relationship between hetero women and hetero men
>> their inside relationship
>> as late women made them unconsidered at their proper
>> eyes as interesting
>> women by feminist activism what leave them without
>> protection facing men who
>> from their part have win an increasing
>> representation of virility by missing
>> narcissism from these struggles and turn into
>> violence at home.
>> At this moment the best hetero woman at home is free
>> slave more free
>> prostitute.
>> It is the very reason why after having seen the
>> progress of feminist rights
>> not only collective but more private we see now a
>> recession of the practices
>> of respect and equality and increasing violence
>> against hetero women at
>> home: because they are without self-protection
>> (narcissism) depending their
>> absence of feeling of be a part of common of the
>> homo community. So they are
>> alone and victim.
>> It is because Susan Sontag, both famous intellectual
>> and famous feminist
>> whatever she was homosexual wanted never request her
>> homosexuality as
>> feminist woman in struggle.
>>> From which the way of leave the servitude -more the
>> sex servitude -for women
>> is coming from an application of the theory of
>> class. From the same
>> rationalism of production a revendication of free
>> professional prostitution
>> has come.
>> In politics of emancipation we have learnt that
>> nobody can have a struggle
>> for you at your place because it would be unuseful
>> to your proper progress.
>> I do not understand where you can imagine that men
>> would have given the idea
>> of emancipation to the woman but being very
>> misogynist yourself:) The
>> theorician of feminism are great and proper women
>> but from the beginning of
>> post modernity coming from marxism view of the
>> system of production.
>> This inauguration by Beauvoir had following
>> application: Fanon to the social
>> relationship in the colonialist society, Jean Genet
>> on the racial
>> segregation in the occidental society and so on (on
>> this way you meet the
>> Black Panther Party).
>> At Baudrillard as hetero the question of women it is
>> something other which
>> refers to the individuation from Simondon as well in
>> sciences as well in
>> arts as well the techical objects, and so on, since
>> Le système des objets
>> (he had work on Simondon through Roland Barthes'
>> "systeme de la mode" who
>> was member of his jury of thesis and whose
>> conferences he had followded at
>> the Practical School of High studies)... In Physics,
>> Singularity appears
>> when the space is submitted to a constrain (? Je
>> veux dire contrainte) (René
>> Thom) and so on... Such as seduction from a part of
>> his concept, may be...
>> On 12/03/07 3:28, "Danny Butt" <db@dannybutt.net>
>> probably wrote:
>>> To maybe approach the question differently now
>> that "Baudrillard in
>>> relation to his peers" has come up:
>>> The three "names" Ken mentions, as well as
>> slipping easily into
>>> "unquestioned academic practices", have also been
>> useful for self-
>>> consciously feminist work (though Deleuze less so,
>> empirically).
>>> Something makes me think this is more than mere
>> coincidence, and that
>>> there might be more than militancy or academicism
>> that differentiates
>>> Baudrillard's work from the others - after all,
>> feminism has a
>>> history of both militancy and exclusion from the
>> academy.
>>> Aliette, this enquiry has no relation to your
>> question about Sontag's
>>> sexuality. I'm asking the question of the texts
>> and the methodology,
>>> rather than the person behind them.
>>> On 11/03/2007, at 3:17 PM, McKenzie Wark wrote:
>>>> There was a politics to one's choice of theorist
>> in the 80s in the
>>>> Anglophone world, and perhaps still. What i
>> admired about Lyotard and
>>>> Baudrillard is that they were ex militants. This
>> is not true of
>>>> Foucault, Derrida or Deleuze. Its no accident
>> that the attempt to keep
>>>> a traditional scholarly practice at arms length
>> collapses in the cases
>>>> of Foucault, Derrida and Deleuze, who all now
>> slip easily into
>>>> unquestioned academic practices.
>>> --
>>> http://www.dannybutt.net
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> empyre forum
>>> empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
>>> http://www.subtle.net/empyre
>> _______________________________________________
>> empyre forum
>> empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
>> http://www.subtle.net/empyre
> Dr. Nicholas Ruiz III
> Editor, Kritikos
> http://intertheory.org
> _______________________________________________
> empyre forum
> empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
> http://www.subtle.net/empyre

This archive was generated by a fusion of Pipermail 0.09 (Mailman edition) and MHonArc 2.6.8.