Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2003 14:15:36 -0400
From: "steve.devos-AT-krokodile.co.uk" <steve.devos-AT-krokodile.co.uk>
Subject: love and difference


All

Following on from the research on silence and after some discussion with 
a number of colleagues relating to 'love and difference' the following 
issue was raised which might be of interest:

Related initially to Judith Butler and a text called 'Bodies that 
Matter' - " According to female theorists (meaning N.American feminists 
I presume) who set a specific tone for gender discourse, "...both sex 
and gender are determined entirely by culture, devoid of natural nature 
and thus alterable, transitory, and capable of being subverted..." 
Whereas Irigarary as a representative of the 'nature/essentialist 
approach' occupies a position which is constructed on an acceptance of 
and perhaps even necessary biological difference.

Whilst the nature-culture argument may not be the most useful structure 
from which to discuss this issue it may be essential given that the 
denial of difference may be a problem in itself. The point of the 
argument might perhaps be framed in terms of whether any such difference 
are structurally founded on culture equalling - "...that which cannot be 
challenged..." or/and nature equalling - "..humans cannot effect this 
because we evolved along these lines" - where this looks like it will be 
acceptable through genetic manipulation or other technologies to be 
changeable. So where in this debate do people stand and think. 
Culture/Nature - where does the presumed difference exist ?

Finally then following on from this - "love" as a western expierence, by 
this I mean that modern-love was invented probably around the end of the 
19th C as a we might be said to understand it, which is about the same 
time as psychoanalysis was invented. By this I mean that the free 
exchange of bodies and subjecthoods began to be possible - prior to this 
- isn't it the case that what was and is defined as "love" was more 
simply related to power relations. For example and indirectly related to 
this - in the European legal systems there is a growing and expanding 
new invention which will be used to enable a social difference to be 
understood between "arranged marriages" and "forced marriages" within 
some of the minorities cultures.  

Two questions then:   culture/nature?  Love in 21st C post-modern 
society is it possible to apply modern and pre-modern definitions to the 
term ?

regards
steve