>From: Joanna Sheldon <cjs10 at cornell.edu>
>Reply-To: lbo-talk at lists.panix.com
>To: lbo-talk at lists.panix.com
>Subject: Re: Rob Schaap on Foucault
>Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2001 06:18:02 +1000
>
>Charles,
>
>>CB: Does male homosexuality inherently participate in the interpersonal
>>subordination of women in that women are , by definition, undesirable
>>interpersonal partners for homosexual men ? In other words, doesn't sexual
>>preference for men subordinate women interpersonally by definition ?
>
>No. It makes us uninteresting. To each other.
>
>CB quoting KW:
>>--cross cultural, historical research shows that there is no normal or
>>natural sexuality
>
>Just shows you what hogwash cross-cultural, historical research can
>produce, when it falls in love with its own still image and stops observing
>Mamma Natura in action.
>
>"Natural" and "normal" need to be distinguished, here, however impolitic it
>may be to do so. The fact that homosexual behaviour exists among all
>animals tells us that it is animal behaviour. So let's call it natural
>behaviour. That doesn't alter the fact that the survival of any species
>depends on most members being attracted to members of the opposite
>sex. Normal behaviour, meaning "behaviour practiced by most members most
>of the time", has no option but to be heterosexual. (Though of course if
>IV fertilisation gets to be popular that'll no longer be the case amongst
>us chatterers.)
>
>Hatred and fear of, as well as distaste for homosexuality seems to be a
>strictly human phenomenon (experienced to a greater or lesser degree in
>human cultures across the globe and over time), so it's another
>manifestation of what we do so well: turn idiosyncratic (let's call it so
>as not to say abnormal) behaviour into something to feel guilty about. The
>human animal seems to be obsessed with drawing lines around stuff, even
>when they do more harm than good. Thus we devise categories for boys who
>like boys, girls who like boys, girls who like girls, etc, etc., and some
>of those categories are ruled In and some of them are ruled Out. When in
>fact there's no reason for categories at all, in this case: sexuality is on
>a continuum, as the members of all other species would patiently point out,
>if we could trouble them to think about it: some days a bull might want to
>mount a cow, some days he might feel like mounting another bull; some days
>a girl rabbit might pretend she's a boy rabbit and jump her sister. That
>doesn't conflict with the fact that, for most critters most of the time,
>sexual attraction is necessarily between two members that can produce
>offspring.
>
>CB quoting KW:
>>--biological capacities are transformed & mediated culturally, producing
>>sexuality as a social need and relation
>
>Dunno about transformed (depends on how it's meant); biological capacities
>are culturally mediated, willy nilly, I suppose. But how do we get from
>there to a need for sexuality? Sexuality is a construct, a concept, a
>cousin once removed from the business at hand (or rather, not at hand, we
>hope), which is sex. Right? So who needs sexuality? What kind of a need
>would that be? And how does sexuality get to be a "relation"? Sex -- now,
>there's a need for you. But, since both social and non-social animals
>experience and act on the need, evidently it doesn't require social
>mediation.
>
>But I should have started with the caveat that I don't have to make a
>living from this subject, so I'm allowed the luxury of trusting my own eyes
>and ears, hah hah.
>
>>(((((((((
>>
>>CB: This is an overstatement of the cultural transformation and mediation
>>of sexuality across cultures. Most non-Western kin systems have
>>heterosexual underlying presumptions. I have not seen one ethnography in
>>which homosexual relationships have the same significance as heterosexual
>>relationships in kinship structure.
>
>They wouldn't last long if they did.
>
>cheers,
>Joanna S.
>
>
>-----
>my site www.overlookhouse.com
>news from down under www.smh.com.au
>
_________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com