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

[queer dewd formerly known as ( )]

At 07:27 AM 1/9/2007, James Heartfield wrote:
>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.

I didn't read the whole thread. Who said that their personal pleasure is a 
form of politics. I must have missed it.

As Carol Hanisch said lo so many years ago: to recognize that the personal 
is political is to discover that what are often called "personal problems" 
are really the result of the inequitable organization of society. Thus, 
when looking at women's condition in 1968, she concluded, "there are no 
*personal* solutions at this time." (You weren't going to fix inequities at 
home in the household division of labor solely by duking it out with your 
husband. You weren't going to fix sex harassment on the job by confronting 
your boss). You need political organization and collective struggle to fix 
those problems.

Queer Dewd: where feminists can suck my delicate, feminine cock!

http://blog.pulpculture.org