Faadism (See Also, Facadism)– (Tiqqun, 25) This is one of the issues I found was important. Even though we are urged from these readings to consider paradigm shifts (E.g., transgressing past Tiqqunian days of yore) (particularly within the critical discourse we are currently grappling with, within the context of this class), I find that what Tiqqun speaks to referring to this particular term, is quite important. I consider this notion of facadism to be the undercurrent of our neoliberal framework, and I find Tiqquin to be describing the allure specifically amazingly. Regardless to whether or not the subject/object related to the discourse is (fe)male is ancillary to the point. This is the allure to the prestige of the white supremacist heteronormative patriarchal neoliberal frame. EVERYONE can/will buy into it, even though there’s nothing really there behind the exterior masks placed on us through this system of power that regulates identity. So, whatever is the MOST commodifiable characteristics/attributes are the ones to be actively pursued. Tiqqun seemed to be harping on specifically feminized characteristics/attributes even though those very characteristics were not necessarily to be directly contributed to those identifying as “female”.
I also find the discourse Weigel & Mal Ahern provide, to be working directly with Tiqqun, in that it provides the “Made-Easy” definition of the masculinzed/commodified patriarchal version of EVERYTHING Tiqqun discusses at length. My question here is about THE POINT of all this. Do we throw out the baby with the bathwater, so-to-speak? We are urged to consider the paradigm in suggestive and challenging ways, but what actually are we called to “DO” with this information? I know at the conclusion of the Weigel & Mal Ahern piece, we were urged to engage in an imaginative spaces as far as future generations are concerned, but what does this REALLY mean? In relation to last week, what are the real stakes here in the drive to engage imaginative spaces (especially with this week focusing primarily on the generations developing)?
Sexuality As A Separation Device- (Tiqqun, 28) For those who know me, you all know that I am particularly interested in [Female] sexuality. So, when Tiqqun discusses it in the sense of a separation device, it makes COMPLETE sense in the commodified version of the term. But I wonder if I could complicate this a bit and presumptuously throw it into an imaginative space…
A. How do “masculine” Young-Girls utilize their sexuality as a separation device? It ain’t just “girls,” we ALL know that by now (those of us who have read all of what I am referring)?
B. I want to talk more about the shift that was proposed where feminist’s have moved into spaces where they are in play with the “man-child” of yore… How can we relate this to Black Feminism?
C. What do you think ALL of this has to to with CRITICAL DISCOURSE, et al?! I just watched this amazing video that I somehow connected to these readings in very interesting ways. If you have some extra time, I would MOST CERTAINLY suggest peeping this, and see all the places your head goes…
I am interested in thinking about this MUCH further/deeper, and CANNOT WAIT for our class discussion.
Until Next Time, Comrades,