[lbo-talk] The personal is not political (was Nepalese Maoists, privilege etc)

James Heartfield Heartfield at blueyonder.co.uk
Tue Jan 9 04:27:37 PST 2007


Wise words from Joanna, who strikes me as no prude in saying:

"I have no problem with whatever happens between consenting adults. The only thing I have taken issue with is the idea that fetishes are a sign of sexual freedom; they are, to me, the very opposite. Freedom is not scripted."

It really is narcissistic for the self-appointed kinksters to pretend outrage at other people's outrage. After all, the appeal of crossing boundaries is precisely that you are breaking conventions. That is where the inner shiver of delight comes from. Are the powers that be really challenged by the re-enactment of oppression as play in the bedroom? I suspect not. Should it be legal, of course it should.

The personal is not political, I say.

PS to Yoshie, I don't think that living in the wealthy USA is a privilege (nor indeed in wealthy Europe). Americans and Europeans work very hard to generate the wealth that underscores their relatively liberal societies. But you are definitely right that ragging the Nepalese for their gender orientation policies is just Orientalist condecension, dressed up as concern - and haven't we seen that a thousand times before?



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list