Hearing Judith Butler speak on the phantasm of contemporary right wing anti-gender discourse last night was so illuminating. I loved the idea of the phantasm: an assemblage of contradictory beliefs and impulses that nevertheless cohere in the mind of the believer, and thereby motivate political action (e.g., is "gender ideology" total reckless freedom or is it totalitarianism that seeks to dictate your relationships and identities? Is it a contagion or a colonial imposition? Etc., etc.).
This is what always bugs me about smug liberal discourse about the right. So many are content to merely point out a logical fallacy or inconsistency, or take a perverse delight in pouncing on instances of hypocrisy. But contradiction is not just accepted in these discourses: it is the point. Right wing discourse is not seductive because it makes sense, it is seductive because it relieves the adherent of the need to make sense. It …
Hearing Judith Butler speak on the phantasm of contemporary right wing anti-gender discourse last night was so illuminating. I loved the idea of the phantasm: an assemblage of contradictory beliefs and impulses that nevertheless cohere in the mind of the believer, and thereby motivate political action (e.g., is "gender ideology" total reckless freedom or is it totalitarianism that seeks to dictate your relationships and identities? Is it a contagion or a colonial imposition? Etc., etc.).
This is what always bugs me about smug liberal discourse about the right. So many are content to merely point out a logical fallacy or inconsistency, or take a perverse delight in pouncing on instances of hypocrisy. But contradiction is not just accepted in these discourses: it is the point. Right wing discourse is not seductive because it makes sense, it is seductive because it relieves the adherent of the need to make sense. It provides convenient scapegoats to externalize complex insecurities.
Butler responded to a provocative TERFy audience question not by deflating the questioner's ego or pointing out some superficial contradiction in their framing (which certainly Butler is more than sharp enough to do). Despite the fact that these sorts of disingenuous questions have absolutely hounded Butler for decades, they instead patiently but efficiently identified the fears that were motivating the question, and suggested a reframing of the problem. This is how you talk about the fallacies of right wing discourse.
The other strong point that I took away from the talk is that any Left discourse that treats gender as a secondary concern is ill-equipped to confront contemporary fascism, as anti-gender ideology is actually quite central to the discourse of these movements, and is one of their most effective rallying cries. It needs to be understood and taken seriously by anyone who considers themself anti-fascist.
Anyway, their new book is "Who's Afraid of Gender?," and it is targeted at a general audience. I look forward to checking it out.
![[Image description: a tweet by The R in LGBTQIA stands for Raccoon (@OzmaRacc) that says “Are you a boy or a girl?” “Nope” “Okay but what were you assigned at birth?” “A lifetime of debt and menial labor in service of the capitalist oligarchy”]](/images/status/597eabc3-6c79-47b0-907f-b533b56e151e.png "[Image description: a tweet by The R in LGBTQIA stands for Raccoon (@OzmaRacc) that says “Are you a boy or a girl?” “Nope” “Okay but what were you assigned at birth?” “A lifetime of debt and menial labor in service of the capitalist oligarchy”]")
