File spoon-archives/marxism-thaxis.archive/marxism-thaxis_1998/marxism-thaxis.9804, message 111

Date: Wed, 1 Apr 98 20:29:54 EST
Subject: Re: M-TH: Porn and Sex Debates

		To whom...,

	The fact that people didn't use the term "heterosexual" before
some date is the biggest non-point I've ever read.  Clearly they were
engaging in heterosexual sex at a fairly prodigious rate.  Identity-fetish
cuts both ways.  Why should we believe that there was some vast queer
culture that the term "heterosexual" was meant to quash?  Maybe
homosexuality was less prevalent before people started to have to
"identify" themselves.  The Greek aristocracy was not exactly
representative of the common worker in attitude, power or practise
generally, so why do we take the culture of the Ancient Greek bourgeoisie
to be the "true" culture? 

	I was ignorong this thread but at some point the knee-jerk liberal
relativism has to stop.  We live in a world of alienation *and*
homosexuality which does not mean that there is only alienation from
homosexuality. The incidence of homosexuality and the fetishized
homosexual identity *could* (not "is" but "could") be the product of
alienation to some extent.  That by no means implies that homosexuality is
somehow invalid or unnatural.  It might imply that an age-old human
behavior is increased by social stress. 

	That may not be true, but the prejudice towards what I'll call
"norms of contradiction" is obvious in this discussion.  Not everyone who
challenges the notion that liberation inevitably leads or should lead to
more queer culture is anti-gay or spouting biological determinism. 
Gainsaying the anti-queer, patriarchal culture is not the same as creating
a compassionate and accepting socialism. 


     --- from list ---


Driftline Main Page


Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005