I like Butler's books, but it's really just Foucault repackaged & developed for the American market. And the way she's worshipped by the dimmer segments of the left is unhealthy. Don't even get me started on the Ronell case
Butler is a difficult writer, but worthwhile. Given the difficulty of her style, she's surprisingly engaging in person, by the way. Anyhow, it is noticeable that a great many people resolutely confound biological sex with gender expression. That's a dumb move if you're actually trying to understand anything about gender, of course, but as the article's author points out, "understanding" in the rational, deliberative sense just isn't these folks' bag. They want argument from authority, and only from the stupidest damn authority they can hitch their benighted wagons to. I'm with George Carlin: he said something like (paraphrase), "I don't want to talk to or convince these people; I want to crush them at the ballot-box." When you do that really insistently, they don't entirely go away, but at least they sit down and STFU for a decade or two. Maybe that's as good as it ever gets for us more or less sane people.
Contrary to general belief humans do not "learn" by applying logic to reality, at which we fail miserably; we learn by imitating others, at which we are world champs. In particular imitating social forms, at which we are so good we mostly don't even notice that we're doing it.
Yes, I think that's true, and you state it well. The basic point that we learn our earliest lessons by imitating goes all the way back to Aristotle's Poetics, and it seems to be well-grounded.
If you follow creationists, you’ll see that same authoritarian mindset. Creationist organizations go as far as requiring members to sign a “statement of faith” that declares the Bible as the ultimate authority and they had to reject any evidence that conflicts with their biblical worldview.
It’s also why they spend so much time attacking Darwin. They think biologists accept evolution not because of the evidence, but because Darwin is their authority. They really believe they can make evolution go away by discrediting Darwin’s character.
Ta, Crip Dyke. Trans people are such a tiny percentage of the population that singling them out for hatred, and hate-based legislation, is infuriating. I have known trans women (and a few trans men) since I was a teenager. Their existence never threatened mine. Then again, I'm not Dominionist trash.
Well said. Of course, that they are a tiny percentage is exactly what makes them so easy for these idiots to trash. They can't so easily do the same nowadays to gay and lesbian folks, but they can single out trans people, and get some traction.
Why, based on the same bigotry they based it on before: shifting the target of attack to a group that is less "known" allows the same bigoted people to express their bigotry as if they had been presented with some totally new threat.
This maps perfectly with some thoughts I've been having about authoritarian thinking.
1. Anyone who says you need to believe in God and Jesus for 'salvation' has a very superficial definition of 'belief'...The notion that one can CHOOSE to believe in something illustrates that...IOW, authoritarians make no distinction between ACTUAL belief and a DECLARATION of belief. It's more important to SAY you believe than it is TO believe
2. (this one's really creepy)...People who claim that morals come from god are unintentionally giving you a view into how they think. Only someone WITHOUT an instinctual deeply intuitive moral center would posit that morals come from OUTSIDE of themselves. This would be like thinking that the Easter Bunny controlled your left arm...For non authoritarian folks, this sounds insane...Its ALSO explains (like Crip Dyke did in this here article) why people without an instinctual moral center can be manipulated by any bad actor with enough superficial charm...Its the ONLY thing that explains the literally 180 degree inverted moral landscape of this Christian fascist movement...bad is LITERALLY good and vice versa.
3. too much to go into here, but it's interesting that they still feel the need to MAINTAIN the language of goodness instead of reorganizing their language more accurately around their inverted morals.
Kant's point in "What Is Enlightenment?" is entirely lost on these types. You know, all that stuff about taking responsibility for our own morality.... It's just so much easier, I suppose, to claim that God has spoken to us, so our stupidest and most bigoted, unexamined notions must be true. As you suggest, it's the "saying" part that matters to them -- saying creates a kind of community, and they're happy with that. Everyone else is to be excluded, often quite viciously.
It's why I just couldn't join in reciting the Nicene Creed when I was younger or the pledge of allegiance...There is just something DEEPLY creepy about public declarations of fealty...
"The very powerful and the very stupid have one thing in common. Instead of altering their views to fit the facts, they alter the facts to fit their views... which can be very uncomfortable if you happen to be one of the facts that needs altering." — Doctor Who (4th)
This article led me to an insight that probably the rest of you have understood forever but thank you Crip Dyke for getting me there...
The insight is that the whole panic over "groomers" and book banning in schools is based on the idea that a person cannot come to their own realization of who they are but must have had it imposed upon them by an outside authority. If the only way to know yourself is to have been told by someone in authority then it's completely logical to ban any exposure to ideas outside those you believe are "correct". After all, the key in this kind of worldview is presenting and reinforcing the right authority and blocking any other. Finally, the behavior of these people makes some kind of sense.
Anyhow, I'll be over here in remedial logicking corner, wishing I could hang out with the smart kids.
It’s funny (strange not haha) that it’s Evangelicals pushing this line of thinking because those are Protestants, but the line of thinking itself is very Catholic in nature.
Interesting point. Frankie isn't saying this kind of shit though, rather the opposite. It's the Opus Dei assholes who think this way. I think American Catholics are so used to being cafeteria Catholics that we're fairly independent anyway.
Goddamn this was a good read. I'm going to read it again later. Too bad comments are not allowed, for if they were, there would also be some of the best ones from the standpoint of comments in the place where comments would be after this article.
Again, trying to reason with them is like trying to change someone's religion and for very similar reasons -- the belief in an ultimate authority that is beyond puny human understanding of silly things like "individuality" and "autonomy" and such as.
You forgot engineers. Some of the worst offenders I have met are engineers. Apparently you can still design a functioning piece of equipment while believing some really stupid shit.
I like Butler's books, but it's really just Foucault repackaged & developed for the American market. And the way she's worshipped by the dimmer segments of the left is unhealthy. Don't even get me started on the Ronell case
Crip Dyke might be the best addition to the Wonkette stable ever.
Butler is a difficult writer, but worthwhile. Given the difficulty of her style, she's surprisingly engaging in person, by the way. Anyhow, it is noticeable that a great many people resolutely confound biological sex with gender expression. That's a dumb move if you're actually trying to understand anything about gender, of course, but as the article's author points out, "understanding" in the rational, deliberative sense just isn't these folks' bag. They want argument from authority, and only from the stupidest damn authority they can hitch their benighted wagons to. I'm with George Carlin: he said something like (paraphrase), "I don't want to talk to or convince these people; I want to crush them at the ballot-box." When you do that really insistently, they don't entirely go away, but at least they sit down and STFU for a decade or two. Maybe that's as good as it ever gets for us more or less sane people.
Contrary to general belief humans do not "learn" by applying logic to reality, at which we fail miserably; we learn by imitating others, at which we are world champs. In particular imitating social forms, at which we are so good we mostly don't even notice that we're doing it.
Yes, I think that's true, and you state it well. The basic point that we learn our earliest lessons by imitating goes all the way back to Aristotle's Poetics, and it seems to be well-grounded.
If you follow creationists, you’ll see that same authoritarian mindset. Creationist organizations go as far as requiring members to sign a “statement of faith” that declares the Bible as the ultimate authority and they had to reject any evidence that conflicts with their biblical worldview.
It’s also why they spend so much time attacking Darwin. They think biologists accept evolution not because of the evidence, but because Darwin is their authority. They really believe they can make evolution go away by discrediting Darwin’s character.
Project 2025 goes as far as to declare the mere mention of transgender to be pornography (or "transgenderism" , an offensive term in my view)
There is no bottom to this- a new low is always achieved.
"The anti-gender movement opposes thought itself as a danger to society….”
Pretty much the core of all religious and/or conservative "thought" for thousands of years.
Ta, Crip Dyke. Trans people are such a tiny percentage of the population that singling them out for hatred, and hate-based legislation, is infuriating. I have known trans women (and a few trans men) since I was a teenager. Their existence never threatened mine. Then again, I'm not Dominionist trash.
Well said. Of course, that they are a tiny percentage is exactly what makes them so easy for these idiots to trash. They can't so easily do the same nowadays to gay and lesbian folks, but they can single out trans people, and get some traction.
Based on WHAT do they get traction? And if they're going to start throwing around Leviticus, they should drown in their shrimp cocktail sauce.
Why, based on the same bigotry they based it on before: shifting the target of attack to a group that is less "known" allows the same bigoted people to express their bigotry as if they had been presented with some totally new threat.
And that's exactly why: trans people are easy targets.
Too true.
Wait, there’s something wrong with Bluetooth assgadgets? Well there goes MY Friday night plans…
This maps perfectly with some thoughts I've been having about authoritarian thinking.
1. Anyone who says you need to believe in God and Jesus for 'salvation' has a very superficial definition of 'belief'...The notion that one can CHOOSE to believe in something illustrates that...IOW, authoritarians make no distinction between ACTUAL belief and a DECLARATION of belief. It's more important to SAY you believe than it is TO believe
2. (this one's really creepy)...People who claim that morals come from god are unintentionally giving you a view into how they think. Only someone WITHOUT an instinctual deeply intuitive moral center would posit that morals come from OUTSIDE of themselves. This would be like thinking that the Easter Bunny controlled your left arm...For non authoritarian folks, this sounds insane...Its ALSO explains (like Crip Dyke did in this here article) why people without an instinctual moral center can be manipulated by any bad actor with enough superficial charm...Its the ONLY thing that explains the literally 180 degree inverted moral landscape of this Christian fascist movement...bad is LITERALLY good and vice versa.
3. too much to go into here, but it's interesting that they still feel the need to MAINTAIN the language of goodness instead of reorganizing their language more accurately around their inverted morals.
Kant's point in "What Is Enlightenment?" is entirely lost on these types. You know, all that stuff about taking responsibility for our own morality.... It's just so much easier, I suppose, to claim that God has spoken to us, so our stupidest and most bigoted, unexamined notions must be true. As you suggest, it's the "saying" part that matters to them -- saying creates a kind of community, and they're happy with that. Everyone else is to be excluded, often quite viciously.
"saying creates a kind of community"
spot on...
It's why I just couldn't join in reciting the Nicene Creed when I was younger or the pledge of allegiance...There is just something DEEPLY creepy about public declarations of fealty...
"The very powerful and the very stupid have one thing in common. Instead of altering their views to fit the facts, they alter the facts to fit their views... which can be very uncomfortable if you happen to be one of the facts that needs altering." — Doctor Who (4th)
This explains so much, especially how tRump makes people feel so good about being uninformed. PAB take the wheel!
This article led me to an insight that probably the rest of you have understood forever but thank you Crip Dyke for getting me there...
The insight is that the whole panic over "groomers" and book banning in schools is based on the idea that a person cannot come to their own realization of who they are but must have had it imposed upon them by an outside authority. If the only way to know yourself is to have been told by someone in authority then it's completely logical to ban any exposure to ideas outside those you believe are "correct". After all, the key in this kind of worldview is presenting and reinforcing the right authority and blocking any other. Finally, the behavior of these people makes some kind of sense.
Anyhow, I'll be over here in remedial logicking corner, wishing I could hang out with the smart kids.
It’s funny (strange not haha) that it’s Evangelicals pushing this line of thinking because those are Protestants, but the line of thinking itself is very Catholic in nature.
Interesting point. Frankie isn't saying this kind of shit though, rather the opposite. It's the Opus Dei assholes who think this way. I think American Catholics are so used to being cafeteria Catholics that we're fairly independent anyway.
(Catholic, retired)
He just came out a week or two ago calling gender theory a scourge. -100 cool Pope points. But he hasn’t yet moved to groomers, that’s true.
Also a recovering Catholic.
good catch!
I didn't even make that connection! nicely done
Thanks but CD deserves the credit.
(:
I agree. I did not make that connection at all, but it makes a lot of sense.
Goddamn this was a good read. I'm going to read it again later. Too bad comments are not allowed, for if they were, there would also be some of the best ones from the standpoint of comments in the place where comments would be after this article.
If they were allowed. Which their not. Which makes replying a very surrealistic endeavor.
Personally I'm GLAD comments aren't allowed..things could have REALLY gone off the rails if they were!
Epistemic ambivalence must render these goobers catatonic
Again, trying to reason with them is like trying to change someone's religion and for very similar reasons -- the belief in an ultimate authority that is beyond puny human understanding of silly things like "individuality" and "autonomy" and such as.
You forgot engineers. Some of the worst offenders I have met are engineers. Apparently you can still design a functioning piece of equipment while believing some really stupid shit.
don't get me started on engineers
As an engineer, all I can say is, "Amen to that!".