|REMINDER -- If you start to read a paper and find it interesting, but don't have time to finish it online (or find it difficult to read from a computer screen), there are downloadable copies available that can be opened (and printed) from your favorite word processor!||WHAT'S NEW: 10/1/03 -- I've added the Straight Dope Message Board posts, a set of short arguments posted to a public message board and presenting my views on psychiatric oppression and the mental health system.|
Feminism and/or Academia
Sexual Identity / Sexual Politics
Feminism-convergent / Feminism-inspired Radical Theology
Sociology of Deviance, Psychiatric Oppression, and the Psychiatric Inmates' Liberation Movement
* Radical Schizzy Lib: the Rights to Behavioral Self-Determination of the Allegedly "Differently Minded"
Feminism-inspired Future Visions, New Social Order, Etc.
Potpourri / Men in Feminism, Various Small Articles (mainly shooting my mouth off in online posting areas)
* Abortion Rights, in the Age of the Partical-birth Abortion Bill (from an "Abortion, Pro/Con" posting area)
When I was being called "sissy", I was also being called "faggot" and "queer" as I was being physically and verbally assaulted. To be a sissy is to be on the inside of Homophobia, surrounded by it, experiencing it constantly. You don't even have to be physically attracted to males to get in. CONTINUE
Clea and Allan: A Kitchen Dialog (with flashbacks) <--Theory in the form of FICTION!
The editor of an online periodical liked the opening section of my Visual Sexuality paper and asked if I could write a short fiction piece in that style, about how men and women see things differently. I have not often thought of myself as much of a fiction writer but I decided to give it a shot. The results eventually became this unusual fiction-theory piece, which is about positive reinforcement for girls and negative reinforcement for boys (i.e., that girls are taught to be approval-junkies while boys are kept in line by fear of punitive consequences), and the psychosexual consequences for all of us, which I think is more centrally important than most other theorists seem to. CONTINUE
My sociology teacher wrote:
Poststructuralist feminist theory contains tools for attacking the academy's excuses for keeping feminist theory out--in fact, this is the real reason for the popularity of poststructuralist feminism in the academy. However, I discovered a set of theoretical tools derived from or articulated within radical feminist theory, which address the same problem. This should not be too surprising, since the two strands of feminist theory have certain commonalities. But in this paper I will explain why I think poststructuralist feminism is fatally, dangerously flawed, and why I think radical feminist theory is the better tool for the job.
This paper rustled some cows that were sacred to the Women's Studies program coordinator; writing it did not singlehandedly end my university career, but my participation in the seminar in which it was written pretty much killed any possibility of me getting the WS graduate certificate, and by that time the sociology PhD was on the skids, so this paper marks the beginning of the end.
The witch sees in Orthodoxy -- any Orthodoxy -- the only possible sacrilege. Orthodoxy is the religion of and blueprint for rigid social control, power of people over other people, and punishment for disobedience. The two social forms are no more able to coexist than are their respective religions. To the patriarchy, then, the practice of witchcraft is a threat to the established Holy Order of Things.
We need new values, morals for a new social order, definitely. But they will not come from an old book and they will not come from a new book either; to return to the rigidity of Orthodoxy would accomplish nothing but our own demise, regardless of whether the content of that Orthodoxy were new or the same set that we have been wriggling loose from for the last couple centuries.
The ideology that says our problems and their emotional (and cognitive) manifestations are all due to wiring problems in our brains is used to shift the focus off of how we feel, because if our feelings are just symptoms, presumably compassion and empathy and a gently supportive and respectful environment wouldn't solve anything. I still fail to understand how they justify deciding that such things would not help (even if my brain is not in perfect working order and some of what I feel and think has nothing to do with my social and physical environment, surely some of it does). Many of us in the movement believe that's all it is--an ideology that justifies the miserable experience they subject us to on behalf of the society they are protecting from our disturbing presence. CONTINUE
Radical Schizzy Lib: the Rights to Behavioral Self-Determination of the Allegedly "Differently Minded"
Just for the sake of argument, suppose there really is a biological difference in our brains setting us apart from other people. What are the implications for the psychiatric inmates' liberation movement and the things that we have said about psychiatric oppression if in fact those of us diagnosed with such labels as schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, clinical depression, etc., really *do* have biochemical, bioelectrical, or neurostructural differences in our heads CONTINUE
We spent the night sitting up on cushions and pillows, telling tales of our incarcerations and sharing information about psychiatry and psychiatric drugs and the legal rights and ramifications of being psychiatrically labeled or having a psychiatric history. Yes, we are organized, with group names and meetings and public rallies and speakouts, even political candidates and judicial activists and user-run alternatives to the psychiatric system. Yes, there really *is* a psychiatric inmates' liberation movement! CONTINUE
If "anarchy" means "no one rules" and is associated with chaos, and all other "-archies" mean people have power over other people and, despite the rhetoric of our rulers, are also experienced by many of us as suffering from a lot of chaos, what is the right term for a system in which we all rule, where no one is in a position of having power over others, and where the result is adequately orderly? Allarchy. The rule of all.
(To quote Isaac Asimov, the science fiction and science tutorial writer who once proposed an award called the "Isaac", named after Isaac Newton--"What other reason could I possibly have for proposing such a name?")
It's a subject I'm resistant to writing a long, thought-out expository paper on, and yet people keep asking me what I think of the idea. Come to think of it, that's probably why I'm so resistant to writing a long, thought-out expository paper on the subject!
|Abortion rights, in the age of the "partial-birth abortion" bill||Culprit Theories of Oppression are Stupid|
|The Complexities of Oppression, using Children's Oppression as Example||(not in use yet)|