Hi Sanil
What about these two words "stud" & "gigolo"
c

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "sanil v" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, June 10, 2007 6:57 PM
Subject: {greenyouth} Re: protest against moderation



As someone who moderates postings by students - boys
and girls - I do not think that Rajeender's public
mails merit moderation. If this guy has been sending
abusive personal emails, then he should be reported to
the police. I denounce him. None of us should invite
him home either.  Some wife-beaters and perverts may
have interesting things to say about Kerala, computers
or even gender. Why shouldn't we listen to those? If
this is liberalism, so be it!

The prevailing consensus on the sexist and oppressive
nature of certain words seems to be based on
simplified and popular interpretations of the logic of
binaries and stereotypes.  Contemporary logic and
philosophy of language have proposed a nuanced
critique of binary logic and stereotypes.  What is
wrong with binaries? Some developments in logic show
that binaries work through a law of composition which
is not that of opposition or contradiction. Serious
political criticism should shift its focus away from
these binaries. They are nothing more than the dust
collected in the wake of power. However, populist
interpretations propagate exactly the opposite notion.
They are still unearthing binaries behind every
utterance and showing us that one of them is
privileged over the other. They do this as if they are
saying something significant about power or hegemony!
They still fantasize about cleansing language and
thinking of binaries! Such revenge against natural
language, even if it manages to produce monotonic
utterances, would not save us from hegemony.

Now stereotypes! Psychoanalysis and theories of
language have developed a sophisticated account of
them. There is one insight most of them share.
Stereotypes are not ideological constructs saturated
with prejudices and ideological meanings. In fact,
stereotypes are poor in meaning.  They plug-in the
gaps in the symbolic domain and give it consistency.
Hence, their impenetrability to ideology critique. Our
populist theoreticians pervert this insight and draw
silly consequences.  They still think that they can
criticize stereotypes by revealing the prejudices
condensed in them! That they harbor dangerous meaning
is their lure. The stereotypical activist is their
victim not critic.  In the hands of some, this popular
anti-stereophony/binarism has become a tool to ensure
easy victory in all arguments.

This is not to say that all stereotypes are harmless.
Interpretation or censorship is not the best way to
counter them. Some might wish to take a leaf out of
the Sardarjis' book of dealing with Sardar jokes -
mostly by laughing, sometimes with the sword and some
other times by withdrawing into their thick beard of
confidence.

Using the word "whore" in a communicative context
merits punishment.  But, using a half-baked theory of
stereotype to censor the use of the word "whore" in
all discursive contexts is alarming.


sanil



____________________________________________________________________________________
We won't tell. Get more on shows you hate to love
(and love to hate): Yahoo! TV's Guilty Pleasures list.
http://tv.yahoo.com/collections/265




--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
greenyouth mailinglist is the activist support mailinglist for kerala 
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to