> I really do not get this way of reading Adorno. <
it certainly isn't reading adorno, as dennis noted. it's a way of shoring up identity politics by engaging in overwrought list polemic is what it is. what better way to avoid a critique of identity politics (embraced as pragmatic necessity) than by rendering one if its best exponents as homophobic? that might be comforting, but it's (consciously or not) dishonest.
a citation from Minima Moralia: "In his relation to the subject Hegel does not respect the demand that he otherwise passionately upholds: to be in the matter and not 'always beyond it.' to 'penetrate into the immanent content of the matter.' If today the subject is vanishing, aphorisms take upon themselves the duty 'to consider the evanescent itself as essential.' They insist, in opposition to Hegel's practice and yet in accordance with his thought, on negativity: 'The life of the mind only attains truth when discovering itself in absolute desolation. The mind is not this power as a positive which turns away from the negative, as when we say of something that it is null, or false, so much for that and now for something else; it is this power only when looking the negative in the face, dwelling upon it."
parasitism? yes. what else is there? pretending that in our minds we have taken flight from the world by locating it on the path of a positive dialectics a la hegel's _philosophy of right_? those claiming the latter would no doubt obliterate the negative at first chance they get. and hardly without precedent.
Angela _________