Marxism vs Queer Theory
Вставка
- Опубліковано 13 сер 2023
- With Michael Dance
Marxism 2023 is a festival of socialist ideas taking place from Thursday 29 June to Sunday 2 July at SOAS University, London. It brings together meetings, speakers, debates, live music, a culture tent, film screenings, and more
Great meeting,thanks
Children are not sexual beings, adults are, so when there is a subset of society aiming to sexualise children by way of introduction to queerness or propagation of identity politics, or any demonstrably sexually aligned concept, they should expect backlash.
Violence is unacceptable but discourse is essential and calling anyone who disagrees with you or challenges you a nazi or any other smear, you do a disservice to your entire argument by literally not even making one.
children are sexual beings from birth. that does not mean they should have sex. 🤣
having a sexual education and queer studies is a must for young adults and students.
i knew i was bisexual at 6 years old. i found out without the assistance of an adult, without the internet, but myself and a friend my age. i found out myself, and what i wish i had at the time was someone to help guide me through what i was feeling. bc if there was i would not have blocked those feelings out after many years of projection and lack of self worth. im not saying that kids should be having sex whenever wherever with whoever, but not being able to describe how i felt to my parents or my siblings because i felt ashamed by the environment that was built around me, thats what was really damaging and is damaging to other kids that went through what i did. what im saying is that if kids are curious enough, theyll find out. whether its through the internet or a neighborhood friend. the point is not expose them to these things, but to make them feel accepted no matter what because thats what parents should be doing.
@@aramkitkhemoambe9801 1 true statement wrapped in 2 false ones
Children are not sexual, but they have sexualisation and gender foisted on them intensely by forces that are nearly all outside of this discourse (e.g. indiviualist-based capitalism). Subverting the gender aspects of that isn't alarming to me. As for the purported sexualising carried out by drag queens, it's more than curious that no one ever lost their marbles over generations of pantomime.
@@stevendurrant1724 you must not have children
Yeah, the problem lies in this: marxism comes from enlightment and queer theory comes from postmodernism which critizes the fundamental tenets of enlighment and what "reality" or "truth" or "science" means. Queer theorists and some decolonialists don't believe in universalism, which is fundamental in marxism. And I mean... for a materialist it's quite ironic to want so vehemently to defend an ideology based on an idealist belief, fundamentally. Thinking that a statement or a sentiment changes your sex and that therefore you need to be treated by the law and others as the sex you want is quite contradictory to any materialistic theory. But the worst of all this is, as was often said, the enormous lack of feminism in this movement which opens the door to the most raw misogyny (and sexism), like transgenderism. In other words, you are struggling with "fragmentation" because you aren't intersectional to begin with. And of course queerness or drag is not revolutionary... it's regressive under the cover of "play" and "rebellion".
I'm not sure how many people really do think a sentiment changes sex. It all seems part of the stupid and highly common trap of conflating sex with gender. I find the notion of gender abolition very appealing.
@@stevendurrant1724 Some really do think that in the way you probably wrote your answer. Some think trans identified male = female brain = sex changed. Or that they have been female since birth. But yes, they use "gender" as an abstract concept, but it's always related to sex. If sex didn't exist, they couldn't talk about gender in those terms or at all. "Gender" in their view is actually a statement about how do you feel about your sex.
tell me you’ve confused “materialism” with a crude physicalism without telling me you’ve confused “materialism” for a crude physicalism.
It's not crude physicalism. It's about relations in society that are essential for its existence. The control over sexuality and reproduction has been present since early societies and is the base of sex based oppression. Talking about gender without touching that point is reducing gender to an aesthetic view and marginalising women who suffer from sex based oppression.
@@italokarav What you are describing as “sex-based oppression” is literally just one aspect of the gender system. The category of sex is a social construct. It is an extension of gender, it is inherently oppressive, and it is naturalised (hilariously, under the guise of “materialism”) so as to uphold said oppression.
Trans people, more than any other group of people, undermine this system merely by being trans (rejecting the fundamental rule laid down by gender). To say that “transgenderism” is a product of “raw misogyny” is not only wrong, it is obscene in that it posits victims of misogyny as responsible for misogyny.
Who is “reducing gender” to an “aesthetic”? It’s not queer theorists, as anyone with even a passing familiarity with it would know. Queer theorists touch on these points ALL THE TIME.