Judith Butler, why are you doing this to me?

Yeah... too much work to be done in a week. I guess i will just drown on my own hatred and dance to her rythm...

Once you become a teacher you it'll be up to people like you to set the next generation straight and unfuck their minds. Hold that as a source of motivation if nothing else.

Dear blog,

Today my teacher told us to read evil person. I do not want to read evil person >=-(
I only read what i think agree with.
×××Akademia is sicku sicku placey ××××

That's another battle I am not going to know how to deal with it. Things are really going south here in Spain. The other day in a school, they wanted to make all the males of a PRIMARY school to be punished with 10 less minutes of a break so they can understand what the male privilege is. i would not know how to handle that if that happens to me when I become a teacher.

You have a moral duty to use the knowledge you have learned from Blank Slate to undermine this bullshit. Be careful with your methods- the subtler the better. Use Socratic questioning. Feign ignorance. Drop tiny red capsules made from facts and stats around your class, not nuclear red pills. Remember the parable of the sower. But don't stay silent. All this relativism and perspectivism nonsense isn't just wrong it is damaging to society. Do your bit to push back. Godspeed op.

Found the reddit angry mob. geez wiz, y'all crackers o'ght t'learn wu iz man

you are retreating into the safe space of monologue. this is because you don't actually have a good enough argument to critique these theories

when will you learn that we're all just channers? no one came here from stormfront, no one came from reddit. is it too much for you to acknowledge informed dissent?

If you're studying to be a teacher you should be more open minded so you can pass that onto the kids you teach. As it stands, you are nothing more than a reactionary pleb who can't face ideas you don't agree with.
Butler is a respected academic whether you agree with her or not. I'd venture to say that you haven't even opened a book by her though.

I'm not an expert on feminist theory, but I have tried to critique leftist ideas in academia, and got punished as a result. My critique wasn't punished because it was poorly written, in fact I spent more time on it than I usually do. All you need to do is look around academia and see how many people are actively critiquing feminism. They are very few and far between, and almost none of them achieve prominence unless you're someone like Jordan Peterson, who can hardly be said to be well versed with regards to critiquing the left. People like him are just memes basically.

lemme see some of your critiques. time spent and quality of writing by themselves don't determine the success of an argument. other things matter: logical validity, examination of assumptions, the support of verified evidence, and acknowledgement of counter-arguments

>channers
yep that's reddit

kind of retreating into the safe space of passing. My main critiques are as follows:

>Lack of consilience
An analysis of human nature must be a consilience of different subjects. Assuming that meaningful truth can be obtained only by pseudo-freudian theories is irresponsible to say the least.

> Disregard for scientific evidence. Her ontology is based purely in ideology as she proudly states.

If you are interested in a thorough answer, i suggest you read pages 348.351 from The Blank Slate, but i would like to quote from page 341, considering Butler's ideas as Gender feminist: Gender feminism is an empirical doctrine commited to three clamis about human nature. The first is that the differences between men and women have nothing to do with biology but are socially constructed in their entirety. The second is that humans possess a single social motive-power-and that social life can be understoon only interms of how it is exercised. The third is that life human interactions arise not from the motives of people dealing wih each other as individuals but from motives of "groups" dealing with other groups- in this case, the male gender dominating the female gender.

You really expect me to post an entire critique just for you? The quality of the critique isn't what matters here. Have you never been in a class that has a bias towards the left way of thinking? OP is saying it happens. I'm saying it happens. It isn't a matter of the quality, it's a matter of the ideas in the paper, which happen to be ideas that the establishment detests.

I'm open minded enough to take a whole history of feminism in a masters oriented to TEACH English. I have read some of what she had to offer, but i will be honest with you, it is just a bunch of mumbo jumbo and academic jargon that goes from nowhere to anywhere. I am open-minded, I do not mind discussing Kristeva or essentialist ecofeminists. Let this be clear. I DO NOT FUCKING CARE if she is a respected academic. Respect means nothing to me. Content of the ideas does. Honesty in the words does. Clarity of expression does. Respect for other branchs of knowledge does. The assumption you make about my narrow-mindness is just that - an assumption.

What do you think ideas are made of? Do you think they just exist in vacuo? Take, for example, pro-life. This idea is founded on the assumption that life begins at conception. That assumption is supported by a biological definition of life which includes homeostasis, cell division, and growth. But what if your definition of life includes self-sustenance, the ability to survive outside another organism, and the ability to adapt to change? Embryos cannot survive outside their mothers--should they be considered life under this definition? This is why you debate--to clarify your line of thought and all your assumptions and evidence. Of course I've been in classes with left-bias. That doesn't mean I dismiss them out of hand. Refusing to participate in thoughtful debate is ultimately a form of intellectual cowardice.

>Intellectual cowardice
Luckily here we can all be brave, amirite bois?

>“The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) went out to the musalla (prayer place) on the day of Eid al-Adha or Eid al-Fitr. He passed by the women and said, ‘O women! Give charity, for I have seen that you form the majority of the people of Hell.’ They asked, ‘Why is that, O Messenger of Allah?’ He replied, ‘You curse frequently and are ungrateful to your husbands. I have not seen anyone more deficient in intelligence and religious commitment than you. A cautious sensible man could be led astray by some of you.’ The women asked, ‘O Messenger of Allah, what is deficient in our intelligence and religious commitment?’ He said, ‘Is not the testimony of two women equal to the testimony of one man?’ They said, ‘Yes.’ He said, ‘This is the deficiency in her intelligence. Is it not true that a woman can neither pray nor fast during her menses?’ The women said, ‘Yes.’ He said, ‘This is the deficiency in her religious commitment.’”

actually, your narrowmindedness was pretty apparent in your OP
>bullshit lies
>swallow the bluepill
>hard not to go apeshit mode
you sound like /pol/

This. It's easy to argue points when your future career isn't on the line. If I told you that you would be fired if you argued a certain point of view, I doubt you would argue it. And if you did it would be basically pointless. the way this gets solved is by attacking academia from the outside, not inside their sphere of influence.

www.reddit.com

ironic shitposting is still shitposting

ironic shitposting is still shitposting.

I don't know why you're trying to become a teacher if you can't deal with dissenting views in your own critical papers, let alone those of students. The reason you're in that class is to learn how to read and think and challenge ideas, without resorting to name-calling and dismissal.

I'm not OP, but regardless, I think OP shouldn't argue his points now, he should wait until he can work at his own discretion without fear of reprisal. And yes, classes ultimately should be about challenging ideas and forming coherent opinions with evidence, but universities are quickly changing, and such things aren't valued anymore by academic elites.

your naivety is heartwarming. I hope you can find those ideal situations where you can discuss and challenge ideas. And i hope reality does not strike you hard the day you learn you can't. What I critize is that exact lack of open-mindness in my teacher. And trust me, experiencing that only persuades me to be even more tolerant with my students' views.

hey buddy, fuck you. Just because you succumbed to cowardice and the golden lure of comfort and career, doesn't mean everyone in the world has also done so. I have faced real institutional bullshit of a very different kind, and I have not and will not back down. I'm not going to silence myself to preserve the respect of people I despise. I'm going to keep shouting and making trouble and burning bridges, as I have already done. At the end of this I will find a community that recognizes me. And even if I don't, I know I will have maintained my dignity to the last. I am not afraid of sacrificing whatever career or employment awaits the neutered version of myself that the system desires. Prestige is a capitalist invention. I am not afraid of working the rest of my life at minimum wage or less, as long as I continue to do the intellectual work I do.

Well, I have no hard feelings for you. Good luck being a moral bastion. That surely ends well.

I suggest to you what suggested to me. Good luck with your quarrels.

I get it user, I dare say that I'm in a similar situation. (as the other user mentioned, I will expand a little):

- Do not overthink this, you will only get into paranoia and people will notice this, that is, they might think that because you hate the ideology that you are a right-wing supremacist or that you hate group X, do not overthink but be very careful! (or worse, you yourself might get into so much paranoia that you will doubt yourself, trust yourself).

- Be extremely chill about it. Don't try to be provocative, even IF they deserve it. Show genuine curiosity, or play it till it's genuine curiosity (nobody who knows the truth and flaws of an ideology has it easy and wants to play this part of genuine interest, but you have to do it here, it's borderline psychopathic, but you have to take into account with who you are dealing with).

- Ask real questions and stick to your field, do not mention biology or natural science (or talk of it as such because they might, for some absurd reason) think, again, that you are some kind of supremacist; instead use quotes and talk about facts: "What would she say to the argument that...", "The Harvard professor S.Pinker writes that, how does this correlate?"

- Stick with the classics. This cannot be stressed enough. These people love Mill, Locke, Rousseau, Freud and Kant, even though they use them to drive their own ideology. Show them that you have read these works, and beat them at their own game. Then ask them questions they don't know. For instance, if they give you some Kant, ask them then or say: "Didn't Hegel explain this better or refute this?" or with Freud or Lacan: "Does not modern neuroscience disprove this?" And read Marx's "Kapital", because, chances are they haven't read it or have skimmed through it. Some Max Weber and classical sociology like Giambattista Vico, that they haven't read, will help. You haven't read ALL the classics, BUT present your arguments in such a way that you have properly understood them, and that they cannot refute your argument.

- Give them arguments they don't expect.
Try to bring up classical metaphysical works/arguments along the lines of Neoplatonism, Plato, Buddhism, Taoism into the game, because chances are they don't know or are not interested in this, they only care and know about "social constructive materalism", so give them something they don't expect -- they are not interested in universal metaphysical things. They will end up confused.

- Use texts from classical feminist literature or some kind of classical socialist working class left, works you actually agree with (trust me, these do exist, you just have to find them). Some suggestions: the goddess Camille Paglia (Sexual Personae) , Simone de Beauvoir, Iris Murdoch, Simone Weil, Rosa Luxemburg.

++ Martha Nussbaum wrote a harsh essay against Butler. faculty.georgetown.edu/irvinem/theory/Nussbaum-Butler-Critique-NR-2-99.pdf

Wow, what an answer. Thank you so much to you and all that provided me useful feedback. I will surely give Vico a check, and it would not be a bad idea to hone my classics' knowlege. Hegel is specially difficult to understand, i will start there.
I've been looking forward to buy some good essays by Paglia, I do not fully agree with everything she says, but would not mind give her a read. Will also check Rosa Luxemburg, do not even know who she is.
I will not overthink it, but I will read that article ASAP so i can get some relief. I guess i'm gonna have a walk or sth so my brains do not burst out.

Again, thanks for that insightful answer. I truly appreciate it, user.

do you have to use gender neutral spanish?

Based Nussbaum

>Subservient to the oracular voice of Butler's text and dazzled by its patina of high concept abstractness
Holy shit, this describes perfectly the hordes of "theory" pseuds

>I swear no trap has ever trapped me
You don't understand what a trap is, that's why she smirked. Go ask Yea Forums what a trap is and then reconsider whether nature might have a wide spread on the dimorphism, and one which favours youth above all else.

Not really. Masculine has always been used as gender neutral. Nosotros (we) can be used to any group as long as it holds one male in it. Nowadays this is changing, and it's becoming a motherfucking madness. One of the most famous political parties, Unidos podemos (together we can) has changed it to Unidas podemos. The masculine they used before were ment to reffer to everybody regadless of sex. Now, using Unidas only reffers to women, since feminism has been a great deal this past elections and they are using that tactic to just get more votes from women. Gender usage in Spain is quite a problem nowadays. It is better to be overpolite and use both in most situations so they do not jump to your back and immediately brand you alt-right racist scum

I am sorry, i do not understand your question. And yeah, it is truth, i do not understand traps. I respect them though, it is none of my bussiness what do they do with their lives. Would not mind that you could recommend me some good literature on the topic. I will gladly read it.

Is Spain as out of control as Argentina in terms of leftist politics?

I don't get you. You're dealing with language not sociobiology, that is what's more phenomenological not the testicles of chimpanzees. Pinker isn't really concerned with the concept or expression of the self... if gene X makes you biologically retarded or not is irrelevant to the actual lived experience of a ghetto black lesbian and its communication in words. You got to get used to the fact you can say things and communicate pure nonsense. It's all a game really. Also ya, the history of feminism is filled with all kinds of problematic aspects you can have fun with.
historyoffeminism.com/summary-of-the-social-purity-movement/

Being extremely pedantic won't help if you're just talking different languages about totally different subjects. Socialism/liberalism and oriental metaphysics may not be the issue. I mean if your issue with Butler is she isn't concerned enough with making more laws to put on the books to protect women from the "real" dangers of the world you're better off doing something else. Real pomo is beyond all that.

Attached: 3.jpg (600x600, 21K)

Argentina is far worse. Also, the allegedly leftist politics we are implementing here have little to do with real leftist politics. They are more concerned with implementing random flashy politics to appeal acritical feminists rather than caring from the working class, which is as fucked as always or even more. They have made a law that only if a woman explicitly says yes you can have sex with her. If not it will be considered a sexual agression. Of course there is no way to prove if she consented or not, so if she decides to fuck your life saying she did not consent, you immediately are going to jail for 48h max, you ruin your rep. since now everyone thinks you are a rapist and you will face serious legal consecuences. Meanwhile, people cannot afford a house, and we have lawyers and engineers being bartenders and clerks. We have serious issues with child poverty or education, yet we better make sure that hiring women in top positions in companies will result in a tax deduction. This is no left. They are motherfucking clowns. Sadly, the right is no option either. They are a bunch of mafia-esque nepotists that need help to wipe their own arses and steal form us.

Will check your info. Seems interesting. The problem is that i'm not dealing with language. I'm dealing with history of feminism for some unknown reason. I only want to teach kids to be kind to each other and themselves, and try to cram some English language on their brain along the way.
May I ask you what are the bases of what you reffer of Real pomo? Genuine curiosity.

Just finished reading the essay. Did Butler ever respond?

I just mean post-modernism, if taken seriously, must take you beyond leftism

youtube.com/watch?v=EVZhE8zN6aU

>Being extremely pedantic won't help if you're just talking different languages
Yes, language and words are social-constructed if you will, everyone who is into linguistics knows this since de Saussure. This is no secret. And yes, we are languages apart, but this is exactly the point. It is not about "destroying the enemy" here.These people are smart and yet stupid in a sense, that they will not change their opinion even if there are flaws in their arguments.

This is about being pedantic, because they are ready to figuratively and literary hang you for saying certain things or saying things not in their way. It's about not playing their (language) game and about not agreeing with them, letting them know that they have not persuaded you to use this kind of language, showing true tolerance and resistance.

Butler did respond to critics who have accused her of her unclear writing style. See here: archive.nytimes.com/query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage-950CE5D61531F933A15750C0A96F958260.html

However, the only response on the internet that says that Butler responded was is from Shmoop.com (shmoop.com/judith-butler/comrades-rivals.html) The other things feature a source, but the alleged response (since there is not source and I can't find it anywhere else), if Butler ever really said that seems rather weak.

However, as far as I know, it is true that Nussbaum is much more respected and sells more books than Butler. Which, again, I fail to see why, or how is this not an irrelevant Ad hominem? I mean Shakespeare and Dosto sell a lot of books, this does not mean that they are wrong because of it.

So many Nazis and Incels in this thread, but what can I expect from Yea Forums? A bunch of retarded and inept young men who think they're a bunch of intellectuals, but can't even muster up the intellectual curiosity and moral integrity to recognize and admit that THEY have been behind 90+% of the wars, massacres, epidemics, famines, and conquests in history. Its people like the entitled little retards and autists of Yea Forums that are respnsible for homophobia, transphobia, slavery, global warming, WW2, the holocaust, starvation and disease throughout the third world, etc. Its hilarious that you guys genuinely think you have anything worthwhile to contribute to the world, when you guys are the type of people to fail a FRESHMAN sociology class because ypu want to got into class everyday and argue with the teacher, without ever opening your mind to beyond just what you've been conditioned to believe by patriarchal, western , capitalist, WHITE, MALE society. There is more to the world then imperialistic Western socio-epistemic categories like "truth", "knowledge", "evidence", "justice", "freedom", "logic", etc. Maybe it is time we give up the Eurocentric concepts, and embrace a more inclusive and holistic understanding of the relationship between nature, society, and oppression, but given that literal Incel and Facist organizations and website like Yea Forums still have so much cultural influence, we still have a long way to go.

Pretty bad response from Butler, desu.

>"Throwing ad hominem around will surely change their minds."

Attached: 1538602924452.jpg (466x492, 36K)

based and redpilled

>since the existence of performative roles derived from our sexual dimorphism come from natural roles
the "natural" roles can be changed and subversed, that's the point of performativity

Butler's point is that gender is normally performed. It's how traps work (they aren't usually hoping to become the girl but convince a man). Looks can convince people not only of your gender but also whether you are pregnant, white, upper class or a degenerate. That's what the problem is with gender: most of the time nature allows for imitation (from benign bugs copying the colours of poisonous ones to fool the birds to women faking their ovulation signals with blush) and so no appeal to the natural order stops the performance from being believable if all its signs are credible.
This is also why Butler is often hated by feminists. It means not only do traps either pass or fail based on how good their performance is, but people born with vaginas can look like tubby loners with too many sex toys to take care of children. It means that women who are ugly are performing beauty poorly. It means you can say to people born with vaginas "you look like a dude in a dress" when they do, just like you can say that to a poorly performing trap who does not pass. Butler argues we're all just passing and there is no penis inspection day because she's always passed penis inspection day.