― mark s (mark s), Monday, 11 April 2005 20:22 (nineteen years ago) link
― o. nate (onate), Monday, 11 April 2005 20:24 (nineteen years ago) link
most of what yr describin just IS protestantism!! (i'm too tired to look it up but tom paulin says somewhere that autobiography is the exemplary form of the protestant political text)
― mark s (mark s), Monday, 11 April 2005 20:35 (nineteen years ago) link
― mark s (mark s), Monday, 11 April 2005 20:37 (nineteen years ago) link
I"m just using "post-protestant" to mean "has now or ever been protestant". But you're right, the US is not very post its protestantism. My use follows Geert Hofstede's in his cultural dimensions studies, but actually he restricts the term to places like Germany and Sweden, which are culturally protestant without being very religiously so these days.
Whitman and Twain are seen as the essence of America, but they lack that protestant extremism we see in Dworkin, the Mayflower, Salem, etc. Whitman's sensuality, in particular, seems particularly un-American, don't you think?
― Momus (Momus), Monday, 11 April 2005 20:47 (nineteen years ago) link
"inherent biological inequalities in heterosexual vaginal sex "
there is no inherent "inequality" here - the perception of inequality comes later with the development of a specific point of view. matriarchal societies still managed to exist and reinforce themselves and still "relied" (as much as any political system relies on perpetuation of the species) on ye olde in-n-out. the sexual act can certainly have political connotations, has been used to reinforce power structures, etc., but the sexual act developed as it did for practical biological reasons that are quite separate from any ideology (ie, it is the most efficient way for the human organism to transfer DNA).
― Shakey Mo Collier, Monday, 11 April 2005 20:50 (nineteen years ago) link
― mark s (mark s), Monday, 11 April 2005 20:51 (nineteen years ago) link
if i have time tomorrow (= mum's illness and work nightmares permitting) and if this thread has not gone all ghastly, i shall and say it more clearly
― mark s (mark s), Monday, 11 April 2005 20:55 (nineteen years ago) link
x-post
― Shakey Mo Collier, Monday, 11 April 2005 20:55 (nineteen years ago) link
― m coleman (lovebug starski), Monday, 11 April 2005 20:55 (nineteen years ago) link
Do you see Dworkin as an American writer?
― Momus (Momus), Monday, 11 April 2005 20:56 (nineteen years ago) link
― M. White (Miguelito), Monday, 11 April 2005 20:56 (nineteen years ago) link
― mark s (mark s), Monday, 11 April 2005 20:57 (nineteen years ago) link
― mark s (mark s), Monday, 11 April 2005 21:01 (nineteen years ago) link
xpost
― M. White (Miguelito), Monday, 11 April 2005 21:01 (nineteen years ago) link
As American as violence and apple pie. And I think you're absolutely right about the Janus face of American culture: Whitman greeting the dawn naked and Ashcroft covering up nude statues in the capitol.
― m coleman (lovebug starski), Monday, 11 April 2005 21:04 (nineteen years ago) link
― Momus (Momus), Monday, 11 April 2005 21:05 (nineteen years ago) link
― mark s (mark s), Monday, 11 April 2005 21:06 (nineteen years ago) link
― scott seward (scott seward), Monday, 11 April 2005 21:07 (nineteen years ago) link
Protestant is an awfully lazy term here, but there is something very pre-industrial and Jeffersonian in their desire for connection to the land, manageable local democracy, and for homespun simplicity which has always made me think that part of the hippy impulse is rather nostalgic and reactionary.
see i think the specific cultural expression of the 60s in anti-atomised forms (eg rock bands, rock audiences, rock culture)
This desire for community at the cost of individuality has always scared me at concerts. There is oftimes the echo there of fascist rallies or mobs.
― M. White (Miguelito), Monday, 11 April 2005 21:11 (nineteen years ago) link
I think the first impulse won out more often in the 60s convulsions, despite mucho lip service paid to the latter.
― m coleman (lovebug starski), Monday, 11 April 2005 21:15 (nineteen years ago) link
ie it is anti-hierarchical, and expressive rather than submissive
― mark s (mark s), Monday, 11 April 2005 21:27 (nineteen years ago) link
― M. White (Miguelito), Monday, 11 April 2005 21:30 (nineteen years ago) link
― mark s (mark s), Monday, 11 April 2005 21:37 (nineteen years ago) link
― M. White (Miguelito), Monday, 11 April 2005 21:38 (nineteen years ago) link
(ps i didn't mean sad in the "loser" sense, which i hate: i mean genuinely struck-to-its-depth w.something sorrowful - that everything shared is tainted amd corrupting)
rock culture's dream of itself wz that this wz a vast joyful unity taken on as an active choice: rockbands as little marriages, band-and-audience as a two-way lovematch etc etc
― mark s (mark s), Monday, 11 April 2005 21:42 (nineteen years ago) link
― M. White (Miguelito), Monday, 11 April 2005 21:49 (nineteen years ago) link
Meat eating = objectification = pornography and women = cattle
It's as if she's saying "It's much worse than you think. Women are even more abject than anybody imagined. Cattle. Offal. Hamburgers." I mean, who does that analysis help? Where does that metaphor lead? It makes the image of a leggy hamburger on her book jacket look positively chivalric in comparison.
― Momus (Momus), Monday, 11 April 2005 21:50 (nineteen years ago) link
but the bondage scenario above is queer sex--or at least sex informed by knowledge of power dialectics.
― anthony, Monday, 11 April 2005 22:05 (nineteen years ago) link
― Shakey Mo Collier, Monday, 11 April 2005 22:09 (nineteen years ago) link
WTMFF?
― M. White (Miguelito), Monday, 11 April 2005 22:12 (nineteen years ago) link
― m coleman (lovebug starski), Monday, 11 April 2005 22:18 (nineteen years ago) link
― Shakey Mo Collier, Monday, 11 April 2005 22:21 (nineteen years ago) link
― Shakey Mo Collier, Monday, 11 April 2005 22:24 (nineteen years ago) link
but i realize i cant be seduced.
― anthony, Monday, 11 April 2005 22:25 (nineteen years ago) link
Dworkin just never got any. That was her problem - who would go down on THAT?
― NamC, Monday, 11 April 2005 22:25 (nineteen years ago) link
― anthony, Monday, 11 April 2005 22:29 (nineteen years ago) link
― g e o f f (gcannon), Monday, 11 April 2005 22:30 (nineteen years ago) link
― lolita corpus (lolitacorpus), Monday, 11 April 2005 22:32 (nineteen years ago) link
― Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Monday, 11 April 2005 22:33 (nineteen years ago) link
― Shakey Mo Collier, Monday, 11 April 2005 22:34 (nineteen years ago) link
Blah blah blah 'hatred of women' blah blah blah. Never met a woman who hated me as a person funnily enough and have plenty of them as friends and, shockingly, was brought up by them too. Blah blah blah - this is nonsense. Dworkin was a pig ugly obese nutcase and if someone only laid her back and gave her some fine oral she'd probably have revised her views a long time ago. As it is she was no worse than a KKK member telling us all blacks are the spawn of satan - only her enemy had a penis.
― NamC, Monday, 11 April 2005 22:35 (nineteen years ago) link
― M. White (Miguelito), Monday, 11 April 2005 22:37 (nineteen years ago) link
― Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Monday, 11 April 2005 22:39 (nineteen years ago) link
― Shakey Mo Collier, Monday, 11 April 2005 22:41 (nineteen years ago) link
What makes SF great is just how sexually liberated it is. The Castro district is - like - now one of my fave places ever.
― NamC, Monday, 11 April 2005 22:42 (nineteen years ago) link
― M. White (Miguelito), Monday, 11 April 2005 22:43 (nineteen years ago) link
oddly, I still find yr sub-literate masturbatory fantasies really really REALLY boring.
― Shakey Mo Collier, Monday, 11 April 2005 22:44 (nineteen years ago) link