Date: Wed, 1 Apr 98 20:29:54 EST From: boddhisatva <kbevans-AT-panix.com> 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. peace --- from list marxism-thaxis-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---
Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005