Comments on: Quick Cut http://www.feministe.us/blog/archives/2006/03/31/quick-cut/ In defense of the sanctimonious women's studies set. Fri, 10 Feb 2012 05:34:11 +0000 hourly 1 By: Alas, a blog » Blog Archive » Link Farm and Open Thread #18 http://www.feministe.us/blog/archives/2006/03/31/quick-cut/#comment-39016 Alas, a blog » Blog Archive » Link Farm and Open Thread #18 Wed, 05 Apr 2006 23:44:33 +0000 http://www.feministe.us/blog/archives/2006/03/31/quick-cut/#comment-39016 [...] mprehend how anyone, even a Republican, could think this is good policy. Curtsy: F-Words. Feministe: Feminism, Trans, and Boundaries Piny uses some of his and Spit's exchange [...] [...] mprehend how anyone, even a Republican, could think this is good policy. Curtsy: F-Words. Feministe: Feminism, Trans, and Boundaries Piny uses some of his and Spit’s exchange [...]

]]> By: az http://www.feministe.us/blog/archives/2006/03/31/quick-cut/#comment-38540 az Sun, 02 Apr 2006 04:53:49 +0000 http://www.feministe.us/blog/archives/2006/03/31/quick-cut/#comment-38540 I'm hungover and don't have much coherent to add, except to say that the conversation between you and spit rocked. It's a pleasure to read such considered, intelligent writing and transness and feminism. I’m hungover and don’t have much coherent to add, except to say that the conversation between you and spit rocked. It’s a pleasure to read such considered, intelligent writing and transness and feminism.

]]> By: IndyLib http://www.feministe.us/blog/archives/2006/03/31/quick-cut/#comment-38478 IndyLib Sat, 01 Apr 2006 00:27:39 +0000 http://www.feministe.us/blog/archives/2006/03/31/quick-cut/#comment-38478 <blockquote>It’s as counterproductive to ignore the dichotomy as it is to uncritically accept it. </blockquote> I don't think you're suggesting these are the only two choices we have, but I wanted to mention another strategy all the same. A lot of the queer & feminist theories I play with (in my own head, although a good deal of the pomo stuff does this too) seeks to critically destabilize the dichotomy by engaging it as it is and then pulling it all apart and seeing how many functionally different ways we can fit the various pieces together. Which definitely creates some chaos. But to my mind the potential advantages are well worth it. This sort of critical destabilization is already starting to allow all kinds of bodies, regardless of identification, to explore less-traveled/new territory in gender configurations, performances, and identities.

It’s as counterproductive to ignore the dichotomy as it is to uncritically accept it.

I don’t think you’re suggesting these are the only two choices we have, but I wanted to mention another strategy all the same.

A lot of the queer & feminist theories I play with (in my own head, although a good deal of the pomo stuff does this too) seeks to critically destabilize the dichotomy by engaging it as it is and then pulling it all apart and seeing how many functionally different ways we can fit the various pieces together. Which definitely creates some chaos. But to my mind the potential advantages are well worth it. This sort of critical destabilization is already starting to allow all kinds of bodies, regardless of identification, to explore less-traveled/new territory in gender configurations, performances, and identities.

]]> By: A http://www.feministe.us/blog/archives/2006/03/31/quick-cut/#comment-38474 A Fri, 31 Mar 2006 22:21:26 +0000 http://www.feministe.us/blog/archives/2006/03/31/quick-cut/#comment-38474 It's a very complicated and messy question, that of at what point affinity is generative, and at what point it becomes restrictive. Obviously, it's never static, but the conventional wisdom seems to be that affiliation <strong>is</strong>fixed and immutable. Identities that don't fall comfortably into binaries always blur things, often to the point that those invested in the either/or construction interpret them as an overt threat, when all too often that's not the case. It’s a very complicated and messy question, that of at what point affinity is generative, and at what point it becomes restrictive. Obviously, it’s never static, but the conventional wisdom seems to be that affiliation isfixed and immutable. Identities that don’t fall comfortably into binaries always blur things, often to the point that those invested in the either/or construction interpret them as an overt threat, when all too often that’s not the case.

]]>