Subject: Re: AUT: AGAINST OPEN SEXUALITY--FOR COMMUNISM
From: chris wright <cwright.21stcentury-AT-rcn.com>
Date: 03 Apr 2003 23:07:51 -0600


Well, well.  It seems you have decided that puritanism is not a mental
illness.  I refuse to post a defense of my activism on this issue to
hypocrites who organize actions in defense of people that they patronize
and see as violent oppressors and deviates, especially since this is the
kind of 'real militant' self-denial at the base of your puritanism
anyway, and therefore not worth discussing in the way you pose it.

You obviously feel the need to defend the entirely unhealthy, insane,
mentally deranging standards of bourgeois puritan sexuality: of a
codified, binary, fixed heterosexuality.  

More importantly, you also obviously feel the need to place it with
child molestation, rape, racist violence, etc.  Don't try and weasel out
of the fact that you put sexual orientation in the category of
oppressive, violent, inhuman behaviour brought on by class society.

You did not simply pose a position of opposition to homosexuality as an
illness, you criminalized it and ranked it with white supremacy and
patriarchy and the abuse of children.  And you did it in a flyer that
went into public circulation.

Chris

ps - you would most certainly have gotten a bit of hail and fire if you
had derided the punk or DIY subculture, as that was at one point a
ferocious topic of debate here.  Personally, I do not see any subculture
'scene' as necessarily more than the life-spring that replenishes the
otherwise wholly dead and buried mainstream bourgeois culture by
providing new novelties and spectacles, but the 'necessarily' has to be
taken into account, as the drive behind counterculture is itself not one
of integration into bourgeois values.  Without being ticky-tacky, the
question is whether or not we are talking about a subculture or a
counterculture, not a new avante garde, but a hatred of all
acculturation to bourgeois life.  On this, i have yet to see anything
going beyond the SI, and certainly not your curmudgeny puritanism.

pps - Isn't this taking Marx's critique of 'fetishism' a little to
literally?

ppps - Thomas, Too Much Information, man.  Too Much Information.

On Thu, 2003-04-03 at 22:13, Floyce White wrote:
> Well, well.  I seem to have hit a sore point here.
> 
> I'll make myself absolutely clear.  In my opinion,
> homosexuality is a form of mental illness, a
> behavioral disorder similar to alcoholism or
> exhibitionism.  I oppose any form of persecution or
> scapegoating of the mentally ill just as I oppose any
> persecution of people with physical illnesses--and
> unlike armchair revolutionaries, I've helped build
> demonstrations and speak-outs against it.  There
> always have been and always will be mental illnesses. 
> It is the responsibility of each of us to help all
> others.  The only way to achieve a society where
> mutual support and understanding is possible is by
> overthrowing class society and all of its
> institutions--and that means ending marriage and the
> family.
> 
> This point of view is neither uncommon nor
> controversial.  The question of the nature and origin
> of homosexuality is also a subject of mass discussion,
> so the subject matter is well known to activists.  If
> I had written an article that only pointed out that
> the "punk subculture" and any other counterculture is
> actually part of ordinary capitalist culture, and
> presents a dead-end, phony course of inaction, it
> wouldn't have raised an eyebrow.  The pretense of
> shock and offense is stale old political correctness
> and impresses me only with the lack of honesty of its users.
> 
> __________________________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Tax Center - File online, calculators, forms, and more
> http://tax.yahoo.com
> 
> 
>      --- from list aut-op-sy-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---




     --- from list aut-op-sy-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---