From: "odessa steps" <italia-AT-gryphon33.fsnet.co.uk>
Subject: Re: AUT: AGAINST CONSERVATISM--FOR COMMUNISM
Date: Sun, 6 Apr 2003 10:41:03 +0100


But this denies us choice, which is surely the whole point of
anarchism/autonomism - are we not free to be what we want to be (as well as
what we can be) and if that means serially heterosexual, monogamous,
polygamous, homosexual, bisexual or whatever, then let us be that person -
don't try to impose biological ideologies on rational beings with the
capacity to choose.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Ilan Shalif" <gshalif-AT-netvision.net.il>
To: <aut-op-sy-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu>
Sent: Saturday, April 05, 2003 9:27 PM
Subject: Re: AUT: AGAINST CONSERVATISM--FOR COMMUNISM


> I wonder If people speak
> the same language as me.
>
> I claim that humans are bi-sexual and those who are
> "heterosexuals" or "homosexuals" are deprived of some
> of the potential for joy love and pleasure due to
> harsh capitalist upbringing.
>
> I do not regard my heterosexuality as less deviant than the
> homosexuality and other limitations.
>
> Tom Messmer wrote:
> >
> > Yeah, this whole thing is beyond the pale as far as I'm concerned. I
> > could only resort to silliness, but I'm appalled at both Floyce and
> > Ilan's take on homo stuff. I have a formal education in clinical mental
> > health from a pretty conservative university, and even the crustiest of
> > the crusty there wouldn't have spouted this reactionary blather.
> >
> What is reactionary in tracing the horible effects of capitalist
> upbringing on deprivation of people from inborn options we all have?
> >
> > Hello?
> > Even liberals pay lip service to the concept of individual liberty,
> > even the value of transgression...This seems almost like some
> > antinomian freakout or something, I don't get it.
> >
> > What sexuality has to do with autonomism is I think both personal and
> > profoundly subversive, it involves the intersection of the individual's
> > body and mind on one hand and the hold society does or does not have on
> > them. Now, is "gay culture" automatically and at all times
> > transgressive? Hell no, not one whit more than any other subculture,
> > but the existence of this subculture most definitely exposes and
> > undermines the hold capitalism has on people's minds and bodies(to an
> > extent now, I'm not getting carried away). For starters, what is the
> > implications for "reproduction", etc, etc. Of course, like every
> > subculture it has been co-opted, but from an autonomist perspective,
> > capitalism was FORCED to co-opt it, once again having to folow The
> > majority of gay/les/bi/trans et al who are after all, working people,
> > end of story.
> >
> > As far as biology vs. upbringing, who cares? It would actually make me
> > happier if it was a choice rather than some preprogrammed neurons
> > firing but whatever, like everything else its prolly some from column A
> > and some from column B.
> >
> > And as a tatooed punk rock bisexual freaker I don't care a fiddlers
> > fart about nature vs. nurture, I can do whatever and whoever I please,
> > nyah!
> > ;)
> >
> As one who was not deprived of his bisexual potentials you
> You could do better than defame or not caring.
> Ilan
>
> > On Sat,  5 Apr 2003 19:11:39 +1000, topp8564-AT-mail.usyd.edu.au wrote:
> > > On 4/4/2003 4:19 PM, "Ilan Shalif" <gshalif-AT-netvision.net.il> wrote:
> > >
> > >>  Homosexuality and other deviations in the sexual domain
> > >>  are a deviation that is of entirely different domain.
> > >>
> > >>  It is of the same processes of "mental imprinting" like
> > >>  these that cause the new born duckling to follow any thing
> > >>  of the correct size and speed encountered in few hours
> > >>  after it get out of the eeg.
> > >>
> > >>  The same process (though a bit milder) that cause people to
> > >>  look for intimate partners who resemble the parent of the
> > >>  opposite sex.
> > >>
> > >>  Even the reactionary establishment of mental health re-labled
> > >>  the homosexuality as personality disturbance and no more
> > >>  as illness.
> > >
> > >
> > > *GASP*
> > >
> > > You cannot be serious - homosexuality isn't listed as a 'disturbance'
> > > even in
> > > the DSM, which IS orthodoxy. None of the anthropologists and
> > > psychologists
> > > that I know  believes this mental imprinting story - the hard core
> > > positivist
> > > explanation these days is that homosexuality, at last male
> > > homosexuality, is
> > > due to brain physiology. The case for that is looking stronger and
stronger
> > > every day, though I used to be highly sceptical of it. The other
> > > theory, that
> > > certain events in your childhood would make you into a queen has been
> > > essentially booted out of the psychology establishment, or at least
the
> > > reputable part of it. I guess some people who have an axe to grind
push the
> > > idea that child abuse or overbearing mothers makes you gay, though
> > > these ideas
> > > have either not been tested credibly - what's an overbearing mother? -
> > >  or have
> > > been statistically mauled.
> > >
> > > I am surprised to hear these terms "dysfunction" and "disturbance" in
this
> > > context, specially in the present forum. Homosexuality is about as
> > > dysfunctional as blond hair and light skin, and as disturbed as
> > > liking peaches
> > > rather than plums.
> > >
> > > At any rate, I'd like to know what this has to do with autonomism.
> > >
> > > Thiago
> > >
> > >
> > > -------------------------------------------------
> > > This mail sent through IMP: www-mail.usyd.edu.au
> > >
> > >
> > >      --- from list aut-op-sy-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---
> > >
> >
> >      --- from list aut-op-sy-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---
>
>
>      --- from list aut-op-sy-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---
>



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