
So, you know how every class ever talks about patriarchy and "the system" or "the man."
Normative this and subversive that, all that la-de-da.
Well, we were all going on about how by challenging the norm--the conventional categorisations of man-woman, queer-straight, etc-- one upholds it. In order to talk about femininity one needs masculinity, and in order to talk about feminism one has to make mention of patriarchy and such.
So, by challenging the norm, you are upholding it, merely by fact of mentioning it.
But doesn't that mean by upholding a norm (patriarchy's constant reaffirmation of its prowess) it challenges itself. As in, if a norm was so right or so secure then it could ignore the subversive, that which is against it.
You have to speak "the enemy's" language in order to pick a fight.
But you wouldn't pick a fight unless you felt there was something to defend.
I mention this in reference to films that seem to condemn non-conventional sex and sexuality as opposed to those that portray them positively.
These are just my ramblings at the moment, not sure how they fit in with anything. I did just watch Harold and Maude, though, gooooood movie. That doesn't fit in with anything either, but thought I'd share. Cheers!

No comments:
Post a Comment