男同性恋者的女权主义议程(或:凯瑟琳·麦金农和基于性别的希望的发明)

Shannon Gilreath
{"title":"男同性恋者的女权主义议程(或:凯瑟琳·麦金农和基于性别的希望的发明)","authors":"Shannon Gilreath","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.2997593","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In this Article, I concentrate on two main themes: (1) I use the work of Professor MacKinnon and her colleague Andrea Dworkin to critique the destructive role of pornography in gay men’s lives, and (2) I use this theory to expose the dangerousness of the poststructuralist theoretical project generally named “queer theory” when it is offered as an explanation of our lives and as a tool for “liberation.” I aim to show just exactly what its engagement with reality on a contingency basis only (making it an antithesis of feminism) costs. Of course, queer theory and queer legal theory are not monoliths. Not all work identifying with queer theory or as queer aligns itself with heterosexual male supremacy in the ways I critique in this essay. However, much of, if not most of, queer theory and queer legal theory shares the characteristics I critique below. \nEngaging both pornography and queer theory simultaneously as I do here makes sense, since queer theory emerged, as Professor Janet Halley has said, principally as a line of defense against Professor MacKinnon’s recognition of pornography as a violation of civil and human rights.4 Professor Halley’s supposition about the nexus of queer theory and pornography in legal theory echoes, as do many of her primary points, the work of Judith Butler. Butler claimed, as Halley would go on to do, that feminist critique of pornography is itself an act of sex discrimination — a practice of sexual subordination — problematically entrenching gender norms. In this upside-down postmodern thinking, pornography is a/the solution to the problem of gender, not a primary engine of the gender binarism that enslaves us. The gay liberation alternative to queer theory’s madness is Professor MacKinnon’s feminism — which is to say: sex equality feminism: FEMINISM UNMODIFIED. It is, in my view, essential that the gay agenda be a feminist agenda. Professor MacKinnon’s feminism made it possible for survivors of pornography to be heard. Her work made it possible for pornography’s potent male supremacy to be challenged, even by gay men. It made it possible for me to say what it is necessary to say in this context as a gay man for gay men.","PeriodicalId":102688,"journal":{"name":"Law and Inequality","volume":"28 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-07-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Feminist Agenda for Gay Men (Or: Catharine MacKinnon and the Invention of a Sex-Based Hope)\",\"authors\":\"Shannon Gilreath\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/SSRN.2997593\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In this Article, I concentrate on two main themes: (1) I use the work of Professor MacKinnon and her colleague Andrea Dworkin to critique the destructive role of pornography in gay men’s lives, and (2) I use this theory to expose the dangerousness of the poststructuralist theoretical project generally named “queer theory” when it is offered as an explanation of our lives and as a tool for “liberation.” I aim to show just exactly what its engagement with reality on a contingency basis only (making it an antithesis of feminism) costs. Of course, queer theory and queer legal theory are not monoliths. Not all work identifying with queer theory or as queer aligns itself with heterosexual male supremacy in the ways I critique in this essay. However, much of, if not most of, queer theory and queer legal theory shares the characteristics I critique below. \\nEngaging both pornography and queer theory simultaneously as I do here makes sense, since queer theory emerged, as Professor Janet Halley has said, principally as a line of defense against Professor MacKinnon’s recognition of pornography as a violation of civil and human rights.4 Professor Halley’s supposition about the nexus of queer theory and pornography in legal theory echoes, as do many of her primary points, the work of Judith Butler. Butler claimed, as Halley would go on to do, that feminist critique of pornography is itself an act of sex discrimination — a practice of sexual subordination — problematically entrenching gender norms. In this upside-down postmodern thinking, pornography is a/the solution to the problem of gender, not a primary engine of the gender binarism that enslaves us. The gay liberation alternative to queer theory’s madness is Professor MacKinnon’s feminism — which is to say: sex equality feminism: FEMINISM UNMODIFIED. It is, in my view, essential that the gay agenda be a feminist agenda. Professor MacKinnon’s feminism made it possible for survivors of pornography to be heard. Her work made it possible for pornography’s potent male supremacy to be challenged, even by gay men. It made it possible for me to say what it is necessary to say in this context as a gay man for gay men.\",\"PeriodicalId\":102688,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Law and Inequality\",\"volume\":\"28 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2017-07-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Law and Inequality\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2997593\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Law and Inequality","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2997593","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在这篇文章中,我主要关注两个主题:(1)我利用麦金农教授和她的同事安德里亚·德沃金(Andrea Dworkin)的作品来批判色情在男同性恋者生活中的破坏性作用,(2)我利用这一理论来揭露后结构主义理论项目的危险性,通常被称为“酷儿理论”,当它被用来解释我们的生活和作为“解放”的工具时。我的目的是展示它与现实的接触仅仅是在偶然的基础上(使其成为女权主义的对立面)所付出的代价。当然,酷儿理论和酷儿法律理论并不是一成不变的。并非所有认同酷儿理论或作为酷儿的作品都像我在这篇文章中批评的那样,与异性恋男性至上主义保持一致。然而,酷儿理论和酷儿法律理论中的大部分(如果不是大多数的话)都具有我在下面批评的特征。像我这样把色情和酷儿理论同时结合在一起是有道理的,因为正如珍妮特·哈雷教授所说,酷儿理论的出现主要是为了抵御麦金农教授认为色情侵犯了公民权利和人权的观点哈雷教授关于酷儿理论和色情在法律理论中的联系的假设,和她的许多主要观点一样,与朱迪思·巴特勒(Judith Butler)的工作相呼应。巴特勒声称,就像哈雷后来所说的那样,女权主义者对色情作品的批评本身就是一种性别歧视行为——一种性从属的实践——有问题地巩固了性别规范。在这种颠倒的后现代思想中,色情是性别问题的解决方案,而不是奴役我们的性别二元主义的主要引擎。同性恋解放替代酷儿理论的疯狂是麦金农教授的女权主义——也就是说:性别平等的女权主义:未经修改的女权主义。在我看来,同性恋议程必须成为女权主义议程。麦金农教授的女权主义使色情幸存者的声音被听到成为可能。她的作品使得色情作品中强大的男性至上主义受到挑战,甚至是同性恋者。这让我有可能在这个背景下,作为一个同性恋者,为同性恋者说些有必要说的话。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A Feminist Agenda for Gay Men (Or: Catharine MacKinnon and the Invention of a Sex-Based Hope)
In this Article, I concentrate on two main themes: (1) I use the work of Professor MacKinnon and her colleague Andrea Dworkin to critique the destructive role of pornography in gay men’s lives, and (2) I use this theory to expose the dangerousness of the poststructuralist theoretical project generally named “queer theory” when it is offered as an explanation of our lives and as a tool for “liberation.” I aim to show just exactly what its engagement with reality on a contingency basis only (making it an antithesis of feminism) costs. Of course, queer theory and queer legal theory are not monoliths. Not all work identifying with queer theory or as queer aligns itself with heterosexual male supremacy in the ways I critique in this essay. However, much of, if not most of, queer theory and queer legal theory shares the characteristics I critique below. Engaging both pornography and queer theory simultaneously as I do here makes sense, since queer theory emerged, as Professor Janet Halley has said, principally as a line of defense against Professor MacKinnon’s recognition of pornography as a violation of civil and human rights.4 Professor Halley’s supposition about the nexus of queer theory and pornography in legal theory echoes, as do many of her primary points, the work of Judith Butler. Butler claimed, as Halley would go on to do, that feminist critique of pornography is itself an act of sex discrimination — a practice of sexual subordination — problematically entrenching gender norms. In this upside-down postmodern thinking, pornography is a/the solution to the problem of gender, not a primary engine of the gender binarism that enslaves us. The gay liberation alternative to queer theory’s madness is Professor MacKinnon’s feminism — which is to say: sex equality feminism: FEMINISM UNMODIFIED. It is, in my view, essential that the gay agenda be a feminist agenda. Professor MacKinnon’s feminism made it possible for survivors of pornography to be heard. Her work made it possible for pornography’s potent male supremacy to be challenged, even by gay men. It made it possible for me to say what it is necessary to say in this context as a gay man for gay men.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信