“For transsexuals and intersexuals, transhumanism is a real, visceral, day-to-day lived philosophy. Yet the technology, while liberating in that it allows better transitions every year and provides better medical support for those who have transitioned and those born in-between, has not changed the social norms that entrap and restrict trans and intersex individuals. Because of that failure, we need a philosophy of social change, one that is built upon the discourse of dissolving cultural norms, of countering social standards and undermining hegemonic power. Transhumanism can articulate the technologies, the potential selves, the unlimited beings we can be, but it needs cyberfeminism to prepare the way, to alter the politics and deconstruct the norms of culture and society that would bind technoscience to mindsets of the past. Transhumanism and cyberfeminism are complimentary philosophies that, when united, are capable of driving the technological development, political change, and societal progress necessary for both to be successful.”
— Written by: Kyle Munkittrick (full article HERE)
I wrote a comment last night, but I think I deeletd it (hopefully, I did and not doing 2 comments). I guess I just wanted to say 2 things, really. 1. Historically jewelry is the form in which women could personally carry wealth. Legally, women couldn’t hold a bank account without a male signature until quite recently and women often couldn’t legally earn or inherit money (for a variety of reasons), so it makes sense that jewelry is a traditional way for women to display wealth or importance (men have other equally frivolous ways to do this). Contemporary, educated women like Sascha have other ways to do this now, too. Liking shiny objects isn’t in women’s physical make up, that’s nuts 2. I don’t know if David was being a devil’s advocate, or stating his own opinions (either way, I’m not personally fussed what he thinks of women, but most of what he asked I was raising at least one eyebrow like, what? ), but I think that was the premise and I just don’t really enjoy listening to devil’s advocate arguments about feminism for this reason: discussions about feminism almost always boil down to a question of whether women haven’t historically achieved as much as men because they are held back by society, or they are actually inferior to men. It’s a defensive position for women. The standards of achievement are male (not, say, historically who’s held the most hands of sick children in the middle of the night, or who made the comfy-iest quilt by hand, etc.) since we don’t value what women have traditionally done and still don’t. Just ask someone what a housewife/homemaker does and watch them roll their eyes. It’s personal to me in a way that it’s not personal to men, since we tend to assume men as fully human and not wannabees, trying to be as strong and powerful as some other group. So when men play the devil’s advocate, I always feel like they take advantage of that distance between themselves and the argument to be cool while I have to stop myself from getting a bit red in the face. I would never play devil’s advocate about a racial issue or gay rights issue because I’m white and straight, so even when I feel very indignant on behalf of some other group, I get that it doesn’t have the power over me that it has over them, and it would not be cool to pose hypothetical questions to any minority about being inferior, fairly stereotyped or other stuff that I have more social (emotional?) protection from. I don’t know if that makes sense, but it’s something I’ve always wanted to say to devil’s advocates (who in my experience have always been male and caucasian, but maybe that’s just a coincidence and I’ve got it all wrong). However, I couldn’t tell, and maybe these opinions are his opinions, in which case, fair enough, and we’ll agree to disagree sort of thing. I’d always rather hear people contributing their real questions rather than hypotheticals.If you ever re-discuss feminism, please invite Kathleen Hanna. That would be fun! Sascha was great, but I’d love to hear a tough lady in the room. I’m gonna go find some Le Tigre love to everyone in the hatch. xx
Katiane, I’m not sure what this has to do with cyborg feminism? Maybe you left the comment in the wrong post? 🙂 Sounds like that may be the case given your references to “David” / another commenter…?