The Anti-Peterson

[Anonymous No.11881276]

>Feminism between Fish and Future AI: A Geotraumatic Critique of Posture

>For a long time in the West, the horizontal has been championed by feminist critics of philosophical rationality as the exemplary mode of non-patriarchal, discursive and sensory styles of counter-subjectivation. This critique often takes the form of an indictment of the auto-reflexive, solipsistic, and self-sufficient ‘neo-liberal subjectivity’ (to borrow a term from Adriana Cavarero’s Inclinations) inherent to the vertical construction of what has been posited as a properly ‘human’ way of founding autonomy. But has it also fallen into a set of traps that see its committed horizontalism recapitulating the very form of the arguments it nominally understands itself to be fighting against?

>Part performance, part theory, this talk seeks to complicate this basic, biaxial political geometry in two ways. First, by interrogating the distinctions it implicitly makes between the vertical and the horizontal in order to show how traditional forms of biopolitical and social critique threaten to repress a more complex, feminist understanding of biological and material thought. And secondly, via a theory-fictional performance work that combines contemporary digital art practice and additive manufacturing technology to communicate with a deeper substrate of simultaneously archaic and futuristic artificial intelligence.

Why aren't you reading her, /lit/?

[Anonymous No.11881284]

Poetry analysis here:
https://www.urbanomic.com/document/poememenon/

[Anonymous No.11881289]

>>11881276
Because she's being marketed to me as comparable to Peterson, a retarded entertainer. She must be a retarded entertainer too.

[Anonymous No.11881327]

>claims to be feminist
>looks like an eshay lad
It is like the feds are not even trying

[Anonymous No.11881338]

>>11881327
Bitch looks exactly like Dylann Roof

[Anonymous No.11881408]

>>11881289
That's just for here. There's no direct link or any sort of conflict, but her philosophy and poetry are basically the opposite of the Petersons and other meme writers.

[Anonymous No.11881424]

Are there actual feminists on this board? Or are they just larping as /leftypol/?

[Anonymous No.11881429]

Too much jargon.

[Anonymous No.11881431]

>>11881424
Anyone that matters is feminist.

[Anonymous No.11881435]

>>11881429
pseud

[Anonymous No.11881447]

>>11881435
I make no claims of being an intellectual. As soon as these people start invoking directional or geometrical metaphors, I know they have nothing good to say.

[Anonymous No.11881452]

Ok, I'll be the one to say it: I want to fuck that dykeboy

[Anonymous No.11881461]

>>11881447
If you don't get math you can't get the new poetics.

[Anonymous No.11881487]

>>11881461
Math is fine on its own, but it’s obnoxious when “theorists “ try to appropriate it.

[Anonymous No.11881503]

>>11881461
It's not math though. It's appropriating the language of math in order to feign some of the credibility that math has

[Anonymous No.11881613]

>Read-Only Memory, or ROM, is designed to protect temporality from the feminized feedback of the woman-demon-machine continuum. But the fragility of the structural relation between the profiteers of the specular economy and its appropriated outside only manifests long after its power has been functioning in reverse.

[Anonymous No.11881633]

>>11881424
I think there are. I spoke to someone on here once who claimed to be one at least.

There’s nothing inherently wrong with feminism, anyway. It’s just that retarded schools of feminist thought are dominant in academia at the moment.

[Anonymous No.11881645]

>>11881633
This. The movement needs to be reinvigorated by reading the classics.
http://www.wbur.org/onpoint/2017/02/21/feminist-womens-march-protest

[Anonymous No.11882366]

>>11881276

How do you think she comes?

[Anonymous No.11882396]

>>11882366
begrudgingly

[Anonymous No.11882402]

>>11882366
By transcending the vast spongocoelean horroremenon of the gendered capital poetics abyss.

[Anonymous No.11882487]

>>11881276
the fuck

[Anonymous No.11882497]

>>11881487
>>11881503
These. Fuck off from muh STEM, you vampiric charlatans. I've seen people abuse philosophy in this manner too, the most abundant is saying something is 'metaphysical' when it clearly fucking isn't.

I don't understand how these people don't kill themselves out of shame and self-disgust, they have absolutely nothing in them, no thought or skill or knowledge or originality. It's exactly the same as """innovative""" entrepreneurs nonsensically spouting engineering and economics buzzwords/terms, both are deceivers and devoid of anything in themselves. They may as well be shadows. They're like a formless blob operating along a directive, assuming anything and everything in a vaguely structured manner. They're literally the simplistic AI we have today, they have no thought or understanding, just emulatory use of bits of info they've inferred are somehow 'key'. Truly the best example of an NPC if they were ever one.

[Anonymous No.11882516]

>>11882497
>SAVE THE SCIENTISM!
No, sweetie, your science is binary and genderoppressive. Prepare to be liberated with poetic injections.

[Anonymous No.11882561]

>>11881276
Possibly the most pseud post if all time top kek. Wow, she made a reference to the Cartesian coordinate system to construct a dichotomy she hasn't yet proven and used unnecessarily verbose language to express very basic concepts.

Well done. You're sure going to change some minds with this one.

[Anonymous No.11882570]

>>11882497
Also, this has been happening for a while. I think Deleuze made it trendy. These people -- including Deleuze -- cannot be considered intellectuals of any sort, arguably they're anti-intellectual. If you want to be generous, they're a kind of artist, if not, then they're just death-of-thought promoting charlatans, the worst of them, really, as they've promoted and cultivated a culture of charlatanry within academia itself and within the notion of intellectualism.

It can be surmised as: nonsensically/incoherently/uncontextually/wrongly using terms from everywhere, but generally the intellectually prestigious or relevant, is a valid substitute for actual thought. Throwing about nonsense basic terms in mathematics/physics and getting a rise out of their contemporaries (and 'internet intellectual' retards, usually students) only shows the ignorance of the whole lot, if such words invoke notions of prestige and weightiness.

[Anonymous No.11882574]

>>11882561
Deconstruct it if you think she's a pseud. She is one of the most important up and coming thinkers.

[Anonymous No.11882598]

>>11881289
>t. makes conclusions about authors based on the subject line of one thread on a Malaysian fish breeding website

[Anonymous No.11882631]

>>11882574

[Anonymous No.11882660]

>>11881338
Hot.

[Anonymous No.11882694]

"Horizontality" is a fashionable meme concept among jurists, sociologists et caterva here in Brazil who think releasing our prison population on the streets would be a heroically humanitarian gesture, and not the completely retarded and disastrous gesture it plainly is.

In order to do so, they use the same kind of embarrassing abstract, latinate words OP's greentexted quote is infested with, because to defend it in plain language would be impossible. And everything that can not be defended in plain language is not worth defending.

Whatever the hell she is talking about it is fucking pap and you know it. "Horizontality" is a fashionable meme, it's the kind of shit a pseud can write an entire verbose, quote-heavy thesis about and get applauded for.

Seriously, read this again:

>For a long time in the West, the horizontal has been championed by feminist critics of philosophical rationality as the exemplary mode of non-patriarchal, discursive and sensory styles of counter-subjectivation. This critique often takes the form of an indictment of the auto-reflexive, solipsistic, and self-sufficient ‘neo-liberal subjectivity’ (to borrow a term from Adriana Cavarero’s Inclinations) inherent to the vertical construction of what has been posited as a properly ‘human’ way of founding autonomy. But has it also fallen into a set of traps that see its committed horizontalism recapitulating the very form of the arguments it nominally understands itself to be fighting against?

There is no thinking going on here. She's playing with Lego bricks. Fancy Lego bricks: "Non-patriarchal, discursive and sensory sytles of counter-subjectivation." That's a fine load of smartypants words right here, and coordinated in an impeccable syntactitcal arrangement. Each piece is in the right place. What a smart girl. "An indictment of the auto-reflexive, solipsistic, and self-sufficient ‘neo-liberal subjectivity’", "inherent to the vertical construction of what has been posited as a properly ‘human’ way of founding autonomy." Again, what a mistifying stream of hundred-dollar words. And you gotta love the "human" between quotation marks there, human is precisely what this kind of writing is not.

But what do I know, I'm just a country bumpkin. I'm sure there is some dizzyingly penetrating shit being said here that I'm failing to grasp.

[Anonymous No.11882712]

>>11882574
>She is one of the most important up and coming thinkers.
This better be b8. That introduction is the most bourgeois thing I've possibly ever read.

[Anonymous No.11882745]

I actually parsed that highfalutin nonsense, and she sounds like a reactionary. One Camille Paglia is one too many.

2/10

[Anonymous No.11882752]

>>11882745
>2/10
Same as this b8

[Anonymous No.11882756]

>>11882570
Deleuze? Bitch, Lacan made it cool, to be obscure and edgy as you can be, back in the day.
even though he is as charlatan as any of these modern day trippers.

[Anonymous No.11882772]

>>11882745
It's NRx CyberFeminism.

[Anonymous No.11882830]

>>11882694
I reread the thing and she seems to be criticizing "horizontality" and the heretofore orthodox pinko feminist ideas as a whole, so I take it back. She could use more human-like prose, though. Her very face in the picture seems to be reacting in horror the jargon in the text.

I still can't make sense of the second paragraph, and I won't bother to read it again, but the idea "communicating with a deeper substrate of simultaneously archaic and futuristic artificial intelligence" sounds like she wants to summon ancestral chtnonic forces into some super-computer.

[Anonymous No.11882859]

>>11882830
>right winger backpedals after friendly firing like a brainlet: episode 9001

[Anonymous No.11882929]

>>11882859
>backpedaling
>misunderstanding
2 different things. Understandable on his part concerning the paragraphs in question. Dont pretend like you understood it on the first go round. I doubt you even understand it now pseud

[Anonymous No.11882950]

>>11882929
Aww, did I hurt your little snowflake feelings?
You would probably still be shitposting how awful she is even though she's writing things you 100% agree with just because she's a woman if I hadn't spoonfed you.

[Anonymous No.11883013]

>>11882859
Suck my dick. I didn't backpedal on shit. I stand behind everything I said. The girl is not as misguided as I thought. She employs shitty Theory jargon in order to criticize Theory, which is... weird.

I'm not a "right-winger". A right-winder votes for a Bush and reveres Bill O'Reilly. A right-winger listens to Nickelback and reads Aurini. I get it. That's not me. My last.fm profile and book stacks are probably gayer than yours. But I believe in natural law, not positivism. I believe in tradition, not progressism. I believe in plain ideas stated in plain language. I believe that ushering in a new collectivist utopia is not worth it if genocide is the price to pay, nevermind the fact that these utopias invariably reveal themselves to be totalitarian nightmares. And is that not what you lovelies are working on night and day?

But yeah man you're all smart boys and I'm surely not the brightest bulb in here, but it's fucking funny how seriously you guys take Deleuze, Althusser, Lyotard, Jacobin mag, Verso books, all this tacky pinko stuff. Although some of you are actually paid to do this, which makes it more forgivable.

[Anonymous No.11883021]

>>11882950
Lmao. Which post above is yours then? You haven't spoonfed shit cuz you dont actually know what she's saying. Leftypol intellectuals lmao

[Anonymous No.11883110]

>>11882950
Great job assuring everyone that he’s the angry one and that random accusation of sexism at the end. I’m sure your post really served to improve the quality of the board.
A tiny flaw in your brave defense of womxn all around the world is that you were replying to a different person this time.
No worries though, we all know 4chan can be confusing sometimes, especially for someone so used to Twitter handles.

[Anonymous No.11883115]

>>11882830
>sounds like she wants to summon ancestral chtnonic forces into some super-computer
you unironically got it by accident

[Anonymous No.11883169]

Too bad she stole her idea from a schizophrenic guy on reddit and now she is all out of memes.

[Anonymous No.11883191]

Is feminism just slapping the word "feminist" in front of something that is well established? Shit like
>feminist understanding of biological and material thought.

This sounds like complete charlatanism

[Anonymous No.11883304]

>>11883169
They're partners in crime.

[Anonymous No.11883313]

>>11883191
Feminism beyond the second wave was a mistake.

[Anonymous No.11883321]

I can't take a board who believe in feminist problems seriously. "Patriarchal" "neoliberal"argh

[Anonymous No.11883329]

>>11883321
>the left understands me-

[Anonymous No.11883330]

>>11881276
>reverse image search
Heh

[Anonymous No.11883347]

>>11883013
>>11883021
>>11883110
Look how mad you are

[Anonymous No.11883350]

>>11882574
Ooh a thinker? Don't see many of those nowadays.

[Anonymous No.11883412]

>>11881276
She looks like she would be the drummer for a heavily derivative and mediocre indie prog rock band

[Anonymous No.11883623]

>>11883013
in other words, you're a conservative
this is exactly why it's important to begin recognizing that conservative-liberal is a separate spectrum from left-right and authoritarian-libertarian

[Anonymous No.11883643]

>>11881424
My gf's cousin's gf posts on here. Never met her but she looks and acts like the dictionary definition of a feminist. Worships Zizek.

[Anonymous No.11883649]

>/lit/ defending scientism
In all my years...

[Anonymous No.11883651]

>>11883643
>acts like the dictionary definition of a feminist
>Worships Zizek.
you may want to get the new edition of that dictionary

[Anonymous No.11883660]

>>11883651
Tbf, certain schools of Feminism crossover with Socialism to a large extent.

[Anonymous No.11883666]

>>11883660
i'm aware, but they still won't like zizek of all leftists, not an stereotypical femimist, at least

[Anonymous No.11883697]

>>11883643
She was posting earlier.

[Anonymous No.11883708]

>>11883649
it's not scientism, and if you can't make distinctions at that level of subtlety you're lying to yourself about being "a Thinker" (spew), which is all all of this stuff amounts to: a novelty seeking pseud ponzi scheme.

[Anonymous No.11883719]

>>11882497
Absolutely based anon. Philosophers need to stop pretending that they are doing math. It leads to autistic debates about non issues and lets intellectual conmen seem smart without using their fucking brains as opposed to their intro logic textbook.

[Anonymous No.11883729]

>>11883708
No, this is true science. And incels are just mad that women are overtaking them.

[Anonymous No.11883734]

>>11883666
What's a stereotypical feminist, Satan?

[Anonymous No.11883737]

>>11883734
some liberal, i'd say

[Anonymous No.11883742]

>>11883697
based af

[Anonymous No.11883749]

>>11883729
lmao

[Anonymous No.11883772]

>>11882574
Different anon,
the whole first section is just "we live in a society" combined with a pretty undeveloped critique of liberal/kantian individualism. All of this could have been more clearly stated in terms of social relations and the effects of culture on the individual, but these points are obscured by the autistic geometry analogy.
>biaxial political geometry
Anon please tell me in good faith that this is anything other than posturing.
The second part appears to be saying that the paradigm outlined above is an oversimplification. So she's basically just saying that individuals and the social totality are in complex bidirectional relationships. Wow, mind = blown. The insight of a high school sophmore's english paper combined with the language of structural engineering.

[Anonymous No.11883774]

>>11881503
This is an idiotic critique that doesn’t pan out when you actually examine the texts themselves. When philosophers invoke quantum mechanics, that is them boosting their credibility with references to science, but when it’s mathematics more often then not it’s clearly being used metaphorically. Or in the case of Badiou literally but completely accurately.

[Anonymous No.11883777]

>>11883729
That image doesn't make sense to me. By focusing on survivors they automatically only include those that are victims, so of course they won't lie that they're victims. It doesn't talk at all about those that aren't victims, but instead claim to be.
If they talked about women in the first part instead of survivors, perhaps it would have more validity as a scientifically-testable statement, but as it stands it is just a feedback loop of terminology.

[Anonymous No.11883794]

>>11883719
these people aren't really philosophers much more than they're mathematicians. they're more cynical self-marketers who craft an "intellectual" brand image out of pure jargon and vague moral idealism to appeal to dumb undergrads who have no idea how the world works and generally will just try mimic what they presume to be a superior intellect.

[Anonymous No.11883817]

>>11883774
Badiou is a peculiar exception in that he went to the lengths to actually learn the math properly to go on to use it to still say almost nothing at all, except, of course, "look how much smarter I am than my nearest competitors :^)".

[Anonymous No.11883822]

>>11882574
Her set up is clear enough; feminists characterize bad stuff as all belonging to the category of ‘the vertical’ and oppose that with stuff they consider ‘horizontal’, but in this effort they have come to repeat a lot of the stuff they ostensibly stand against because that dichotomy is insufficient to capture the problems at hand.

What I don’t understand is how it’s possible that an artistic performance can do anything like give us new understanding which solves that problem. I had a gf who’s was telling me for weeks that she was working on some question relating to trauma and knowledge but when she showed me the finished work it was an abstract video art piece and I can’t say it gave me any new insight into trauma. I don’t get this approach to the humanities. Maybe it’s my “logocentrism” or some other thing like that but for better or worse I’m trapped in a mode where political ideas need to be conveyed with words, not abstract art, for me to understand them. If somebody could help me on this I’d be forever grateful.

[Anonymous No.11883850]

>>11883822
I don't get performance pieces either. It sounds like psychoanalytical BS to me. I swear that gender studies and the humanities in general would be better off if they weren't so afraid of empiricism.

[Anonymous No.11883903]

>>11881276

do you need brain cancer to do pomo or does it happen afterwards

[Anonymous No.11883994]

>>11883777
>>11883729
The study that people cite that claims that only 4% of rape accusations are false actually claimed that only 4% of rape charges ended up being false. That distinction matters because many prosecutors used to only press charges in cases where the evidence was overwhelming, so the process already selects for instances where the rape most likely occurred. This entire argument is based on misinterpreted data.

[Anonymous No.11884340]

>>11881461
dude quantum euler sigmoid hermeneutics lmao

[Anonymous No.11884731]

The fuck does that shit mean

[Anonymous No.11884778]

>>11882497
>These. Fuck off from muh STEM, you vampiric charlatans. I've seen people abuse philosophy in this manner too, the most abundant is saying something is 'metaphysical' when it clearly fucking isn't.

This. Gender studies and the like has developed a form of automimicry to avoid getting the ax from their academic peers. They think by dressing their language in the jargon of harder subjects, they can make themselves seem more credible.

[Anonymous No.11884812]

>>11884778
shh. don't destroy their mystical socialmedia safe space bubble

[Anonymous No.11884813]

>>11883850
empiricism is still spooked - the problem is that Capital has infiltrated the discourse and defanged it by making it completely self-referential and impossible to inderstand for the lay-person. Once this class distinction has been effected, everything proceeds as business as usual.

[Anonymous No.11884830]

>>11884813
I honestly can’t think of a better way to make sure that philosophical ideas are misunderstood than by feeding Foucault to horny drug-addled undergraduates who have never held a job for longer than 3 months at a time.

Wage-cucking is a fundamental human experience that needs to be obtained to write any philosophy of relevance.

[Anonymous No.11885161]

I have a vague suspicion that these people will cease to exist as blips on our meme radar once the AI winter hits

[Anonymous No.11885777]

Is it over for Peterson?

[Anonymous No.11885781]

>>11882745
>sounds like a reactionary
lmaoing @ yer life

[Anonymous No.11885782]

>>11881431
W-Who matters?

[Anonymous No.11885842]

>>11881276
Is this supposed to be satire? Because it made me laugh.

[Anonymous No.11885850]

>>11885777
Amy Ireland btfo of Peterson during their last debate; honestly I doubt there is any coming back from it.

[Anonymous No.11885874]

>>11881276
>posited
This meme word has gotten too much use lately. How do we kill it?

[Anonymous No.11885909]

>>11881431
What if women want to be themselves and not part of some cult they have to sacrifice their youth, beauty and voice to?

[Anonymous No.11885914]

>>11881431
uhhmmm sweetie that sounds authoritiarian, exclusionary, and essentialist. self crit or ban.

[Anonymous No.11886056]

>>11885850
I've seen /lit/ claim that everytime he doesn't do 100% perfect so I doubt it desu. I haven't seen the debate tho.

[Anonymous No.11886068]

>>11885909
Feminism is a movement that ultimately aims for the creation of a society were women can “be themselves” via the uprooting of of the current society. It’s revolutionary, but not necessarily cultish.

The vocal “feminists” you see in Academia and on Tumblr are faux feminists that support the very system that oppresses them.

[Anonymous No.11886223]

>>11885850
Link?

[Anonymous No.11886477]

do not strawman Jung by attacking peterson you cheap mongoloids

[Anonymous No.11886519]

>>11883729
I FUCKING LOVE SCIENCE

[Anonymous No.11886544]

>>11883729
>there are people honestly responding to a facebook screenshot

[Anonymous No.11886659]

>>11883729

This is retarded. How would they know if the survivors in question are actually telling the truth if they don't report anything or don't present any evidence and are disbelieved? Dumb animals.

[Anonymous No.11886712]

>>11882497
Philosophy has always been associated with math, insofar is it trained when to think without reference to the senses. This is why one was not allowed to study at Plato's academy without a thorough understanding of mathematics. But I don't claim to be apologizing for "theorists" like the above-posted post-hysterectomied bull dyke.