/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.21595518]

>In 1976, philosopher and historianMichel Foucaultargued inThe History of Sexualitythat homosexuality as an identity did not exist in the eighteenth century; that people instead spoke of "sodomy," which referred to sexual acts. Sodomy was a crime that was often ignored, but sometimes punished severely undersodomy laws. He wrote, "'Sexuality' is an invention of the modern state, the industrial revolution, and capitalism."

What do we think of this?

[Anonymous No.21595523]

What, that's correct isn't it?

[Anonymous No.21595533]

Based. Constructing gayness as an identity allows you to argue it's an inherent part of the self, and decouples the matter of choice from your actions

[Anonymous No.21595535]

>>21595523
>What, that's correct isn't it?
Yes and it refutes all of the lgbt agenda of "coming out as what you truly are". Once you realize that you are not born gay/straight, you have choice over your sexuality and fight your lust. Meanwhile those who believe that sexual orientation is biological will take advantage of your sissy porn addiction and will make you believe that you were always gay or a woman but just didn't discover it before.

[Anonymous No.21595540]

He's right but the label is useful because some people are just fundamentally depraved faggots who should be burned at the stake. Say, for example, a French intellectual who raped underage boys in Tunisia.

[Anonymous No.21595542]

>>21595535
The more I read Foucault, the less I understand why he's presented as one of the Woke's poster children. He was clearly anti-identitarian.

[Anonymous No.21595545]

>>21595540
>He's right but the label is useful because some people are just fundamentally depraved faggots who should be burned at the stake. Say, for example, a French intellectual who raped underage boys in Tunisia.
Yeah, the label is useful so those faggots will remain faggots instead of correcting their behaviour. Chuds like you are the reason why these insane people are seeen as the good guys, you don't care about saving people from this filth, you only want to shill your obsessive anger.

[Anonymous No.21595546]

>>21595542
because wokesters abuse his concept of biopower for their own nefarious ends. muh black and queer bodies. he would hate this if he was alive, of course.

[Anonymous No.21595548]

>>21595545
i dont really want to execute anybody im just shitposting on 4channel ;)

[Anonymous No.21595558]

>because it wasn't defined by the progeny of cavemen it's not a "real" category
He didn't think this deep enough, he didn't go far back enough. Unless he's making a passing frivolous comment on a microbiome film of development on matter from the far away eons-as-years perspective of a god. In the grand scheme of things, it doesn't even matter.

[Anonymous No.21595565]

>>21595542
Existentialists/Phenomenologists and Marxists have always been anti-identitarian, believe it or not, and the Postmodernists who followed them went further still. They all reject the idea of human essence, gender essence, race essence, etc. Identity politics at most is allowed for strategic subversive purposes. It's called "strategid essentialism." Normally, the French/German 19th-20th century continental philosophers agree almost unanimously that essentialism is false and bad. But some post-colonialists say you can use pretend-essentialism for good purposes and that's the most they allow. This is lost on the "woke" masses who don't actually read philosophy and just read Twitter/Tumblr digests of other Twitter/Tumblr digests of other ... and so on several times, til you finally arrive at tertiary sources at BEST (like Wikipedia/YouTube). Very few of these people read primary sources (the original philosophers) or secondary sources (books on those philosophers). But that's not a "woke" problem, it's a people problem. For example, /lit/ is exactly the same, and the whole world. Very few people fucking read original works. So this sort of crap happens a lot, regardless of politics.

[Anonymous No.21595579]

>>21595518
>>21595535
>>21595540
Homosexuality is clearly not an innate evil. Even Plato, who found the act of sodomy repellent, regarded homosexual eros as spiritually superior to its heterosexual counterpart. He would have forbidden sex between men and women as well were it not necessary for the generation of the race. The present day 'gay community' might have nothing to recommend it, but history furnishes us with plentiful examples of heroic and virtuous men of this sort... One would be hard-pressed to find any modern heterosexual man equal to an Epaminondas, an Aristides, a Lysander. The saddest thing is that boys of this inclination are not taught from youth about the highest examples of their type, but instructed to imitate drag queens and pimps.

[Anonymous No.21595581]

>>21595565
That's expected, considering how boring philosophy can be. I suppose that after the Greeks, even well written philosophy books (unlike Kant's) would be a boring experience.
They just want the thrill of politics without the boring aspects.

[Anonymous No.21595584]

>>21595579
Yeah, in the past you could be a fag without being fag. Nowadays all fags are also fags.

[Anonymous No.21595586]

>>21595546
He was a careerist, you never know.

[Anonymous No.21595590]

>>21595565
>Identity politics at most is allowed for strategic subversive purposes. It's called "strategid essentialism."
Unfortunately for them it seems that these strategic subversive purposes have become they ideology itself. The unwillingness of marxist-leninists to recognize that they had an elite is probably why things have turned up this way. There is no longer any leadership but simply the masses of plebs who don't have any direction, all of these marxist twitter influencers are just "one of the people" but in the literal and actual sense, none of them resemble Trotskyor some old marxist mastermind.

[Anonymous No.21595592]

>>21595565
>Identity politics at most is allowed for strategic subversive purposes. It's called "strategid essentialism."
Good luck taking it all back.

[Anonymous No.21595627]

>>21595579
I think that the first and most important thing to do is to argue against the obvious absurdity of sexual identities and the indoctrination and subversiveness which comes with it. After dealing with this we can argue if there are reasonable forms of "homosexuality". I don't deny that there can be but "homosexuality" always comes with a few problems, like for example anal/oral sex which goes against the dignity of the submissive male, the high levels of lust provoked by "homosexuality" being another problem. Also, I've observed that some people want to justify a healthy version of "homosexuality" by turning to these pre-modern models while being motivated by lust, I won't accuse you of doing this but you should question yourself if you are making these considerations based on reason alone or if you are knowingly or unknowingly doing them by being motivated by lust.

[Anonymous No.21595642]

>>21595565
Me again. Let me try addressing some of that.

>Marxists ... rejected the idea of human essence
"The criticism of religion ends with the teaching that man is the highest essence for man" - Marx, Paris manuscripts

Now correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't Marx state human essence is only emancipation? Or further, "[Atheism and communism] are but the first real emergence, the actual realisation for man of man’s essence and of his essence as something real. So I'm not sure if Marx (Younghegelians) rejects human essence, or if he positis essence is objectified in labor.

[Anonymous No.21595644]

>>21595627
I think there are more motivations than just "reason alone" (which implies a disinterested intellect) and lust (which implies someone trying to obtain license for sexual escapades), since there is also sentimentality. A person with deeply embedded memories of love for a person of the same sex might want somehow to demonstrate that his experiences are as beautiful and profound as heterosexual relationships.

[Anonymous No.21595659]

>>21595642
The 1844 manuscripts are essentialist in language but already proto-existentialist (which is anti-essentialist), 1845 Marx already rejected essentialism if you read the German Ideology.

[Anonymous No.21595726]

>>21595659
Ah, so you'd rather not count those as canonical for Marxism?

[Anonymous No.21595775]

>>21595644
>A person with deeply embedded memories of love for a person of the same sex might want somehow to demonstrate that his experiences are as beautiful and profound as heterosexual relationships.
Well, I don't agree with most of the things "heterosexual" people do so "homosexuals" doing the same things is not a justification for me. Sentimentality without reason is a bad idea for it can bring regrets in the future when your sentiments vanish and reason kicks in. I guess that subjectivity also plays a role here, in my case for example even though I am physically attracted by young people of the same sex, I don't feel the urge to maintain sexual relations with them, maybe that is also because I am attracted by their youthful look and I see sex in this regard as a grotesque corruption of their purity.

[Anonymous No.21595790]

>>21595775
You sound like a modern day Socrates.

[Anonymous No.21595814]

>>21595542
Y'know how Neo-Cons are Trotskyists? There's your answer. His critiques of the Enlightenment are just that: critiques of the Enlightenment. That applies to both Communism and Liberalism.

Remember "under Liberalism everything is power relations" is a statement about LIFE UNDER LIBERALISM, not life in general.

[Anonymous No.21595838]

>>21595535
What a dumb post. "All identity is manufactured, but you should accept this heterosexual normie identity that I have manufactured here."

Right-wingers are a lot more postmodern than they think they are. Protip: The logical conclusion to saying identities are manufactured by the society you live in is identity nihilism, it isn't "My manufactured identity is correct!"

[Anonymous No.21595847]

>>21595838
I've noticed conservatives, who speak all the time of objective moral goods, behave very nihilistically, whereas liberals, who are theoretically relativists, are haunted by so many absolutes!

[Anonymous No.21595849]

>>21595838
The whole point is that there are no biological identities and you should choose based on reason what is better for you. Also I am not a right-winger.

[Anonymous No.21595852]

>>21595849
No the point is that you are trying to use Foucauldian logic to enforce the sexual and gender binary because those are the things you yourself believe in, even though these things are just as manufactured by society and capitalism as any other identity.

[Anonymous No.21595855]

>>21595849
>choose based on reason
>sexuality
you're posting on the same website that gave us timeless classics like tilefucker or that furry bedroom entirely decorated with porn drawings of some cartoon gorilla, no one is in control of what tickles their fancy

[Anonymous No.21595858]

>>21595847
Yes. Anything that serves my purpose can be considered an objective truth which should be the basis of our society, anything contrary to my purpose is a meaningless social construct we can abandon

[Anonymous No.21595864]

>>21595858
At least you're honest.

[Anonymous No.21595869]

>>21595858

Thats because you are liberal at heart not a conservative. This is the basis of liberalism man against all under a social contract. You are a hypocrite basically like all conservatives.

[Anonymous No.21595874]

>>21595869
Who said I was a conservative?

[Anonymous No.21595883]

>>21595852
>to enforce the sexual and gender binary because those are the things you yourself believe in
Where have I claimed this?

[Anonymous No.21595890]

>>21595883
You're literally whining over men's supposed "sissy porn addiction". Everyone already knows what you believe.

[Anonymous No.21595905]

>>21595890
>Everyone already knows what you believe.
oh, so you're a passive-aggressive bitch who can't get beyond 4chan stereotypes

[Anonymous No.21595910]

>>21595905
Maybe don't write posts full of the worst rightoid talking points ever if you want to be taken seriously retard.

[Anonymous No.21595917]

>>21595910
What I said is correct and 4chan is full of such cases. This is not a rightoid talking point, is literally the truth. You may be embarrassed by this topic but ignoring it doesn't make it disappear.

[Anonymous No.21595926]

>>21595917
>What I said is correct

It doesn't matter if it's correct or not, what matters is that your "solution" to this perceived problem is reactionary retardism that is never going to happen.

[Anonymous No.21595937]

>>21595926
>what matters is that your "solution" to this perceived problem is reactionary retardism that is never going to happen
How is this "reactionary retardism"? You have no arguments, everything you say is discrediting labels. If you have nothing better to say then stop replying.

[Anonymous No.21595940]

>>21595542
>he's presented as one of the Woke's poster children
when and where did that happen
is that just something you imagined maybe?

[Anonymous No.21595948]

>>21595937
>How is this "reactionary retardism"?

How is "Your gay identity is fake, time for you to stop being a degenerate and start being a normie heterosexual" not reactionary?

[Anonymous No.21595954]

>>21595535
just because you reject the modern essentialist view of sexuality doesn't mean you suddenly have god mode control over what you are or aren't attracted to. you arent born gay or straight but you might still only ever have turned out one way or the other

[Anonymous No.21595969]

>>21595948
> "Your gay identity is fake, time for you to stop being a degenerate and start being a normie heterosexual"
I never claimed this, you just identified me with a stereotype. What I said is that there are no biological sexual identities and that obviously includes heterosexuality, I didn't even made an attack on "homosexuality" as a whole but only on a certain phenomenon pushed by lgbt and their supporters with the help of sexual identities. Again, you are in fighting on 4chan, not in having a healthy conversation.

[Anonymous No.21595972]

So tired of weakly veiled extreme right wing /pol/ threads.

Go get a fucking life.

[Anonymous No.21595980]

>>21595972
triggered tranny

[Anonymous No.21595990]

>>21595969
>I never claimed this,

Yes you did. That is what this post >>21595535 says.

[Anonymous No.21595993]

>>21595972
You definitely don't have anger-issues...

[Anonymous No.21595997]

>>21595990
>Once you realize that you are not born gay/STRAIGHT
are you illiterate or something lmfao

[Anonymous No.21595998]

>>21595540
>a French intellectual who raped underage boys in Tunisia.
never happened. the only "witness" suddenly "remembered" it years after the fact and was never in tunisia at the same time as foucault. rightoids will pride themselves on seeing through propaganda only to become perfectly credulous towards the same glowie lies when they find them advantageous. an intellectually bankrupt mindset

[Anonymous No.21596004]

>>21595997
Cope.

[Anonymous No.21596012]

Dumb thread. Please delete.

Can /pol/ please fuck off. I'm so tired.of these shitters shitting up the board.

[Anonymous No.21596016]

>>21595972
>>21596012
pol and their iconic foucault discussion threads

[Anonymous No.21596028]

>>21596012
nah this thread is an artwork. ITT we have the perfect example of right wing schizophrenia:
>somebody says identities aren't real
>rightoid: i agree BUT ALSO MY CHOSEN IDENTITY *IS* REAL AND I CAN PROVE IT WITH FACTS AND LOGIC

[Anonymous No.21596031]

>>21595518
I agree. I wrote a dialogue and unfinished essay on this. There is no such thing as "sexual orientation." Sexuality is normal desire for the opposite sex akin to hunger for food, and deviations are akin to Pica (desire to consume non-food items like bricks). Un the same way boys can be groomed or conditioned into "homosexuality", they can also be groomed culturally into "hungering" for non-foods.

[Anonymous No.21596056]

>>21596028
lies and stereotypes, read >>21595997

[Anonymous No.21596068]

>>21595518
>/lit/'s starting to realize that french pomo's weren't all about degeneracy and purple prose
Now read Deleuze and find how much he despised labelism

[Anonymous No.21596081]

>>21595726
Not a Marxist, but yes.
Look up Marx's "epistemological break" and the young-old Marx distinction

[Anonymous No.21596085]

>>21595972
>extreme
Hysteric, please.

[Anonymous No.21596110]

I don't get it. There has to be some biological component to sexuality. I have heard of transsexuals who took estrogen which they say "changed" their sexuality from whatever sexuality they had before they took E. Since there are cartoons, there have been furries and other fetishists, especially since the 80s. I dunno why but Hunter Schafer is really fucking hot to me.

[Anonymous No.21596125]

>>21595518
i always thought this independently. Good to know I'm as smart as fococo

[Anonymous No.21596135]

>>21595579
>One would be hard-pressed to find any modern heterosexual man equal to an Epaminondas, an Aristides, a Lysander.
that was hard

[Anonymous No.21596144]

>>21596110
>In 1996, psychologists Ray Blanchard and Anthony Bogaert found evidence that gay men have a greater number of older brothers than do heterosexual men. This "fraternal birth order" (FBO) effect has been replicated numerous times, including in non-Western samples.
How did Blanchard manage to know everything about both fags and trannies?

[Anonymous No.21596155]

I think the difficult part of this discussion comes from the fact that straight people are naturally disgusting by homosexuals. The fact that kids would find two men kissing much more gross than a straight couple kissing doesn't come from "straight indoctrination".

[sage No.21596161]

>>21596155
>disgusted

[Anonymous No.21596164]

[Anonymous No.21596175]

>>21596144

[Anonymous No.21596187]

>>21596110
>biological component
Foucault, Illich and Agamben all ignore biology and that's why two of them were taken out, Agamben was lucky covid was just a flu.

[Anonymous No.21596347]

>>21595940
Honestly? Really?

You don't think Foucault's presented as a grandfather of contemporary woke movements?

[Anonymous No.21596352]

>>21596110
Reminder that you will never look this good IRL, Anna.

[Anonymous No.21596353]

>>21596081
Note taken, thanks.

[Anonymous No.21596361]

>>21595726
I personally think you can restate the existentialist-sounding aspects in anti-essentialist language, and thus preserve the moral of 1844 in a later Marxist framework.

[Anonymous No.21596495]

>>21596016
lmfao