Jan. 10th, 2005

well this is part of why i don't generally participate in class. written by a classmate. posted to our class mailing list. fuck beans.

i didn't mean to attack the parents; i meant to attack a form of psychoanalytic discourse that conceives of interpersonal sexual relations as always involving six people (participants and their parents), because this arborizing process structures the form any referendum of sexuality might take. indeed, it structures the way one experiences sexuality in general, such that what comes to be a 'problem' for some people - the fact of being closeted, a fetishist; in short, abnormal/aberrant - necessitates a referendum at all. more simply put, and though this might be a (by now) banal claim, these types of discourse necessitate the taking of a referendum and, more importantly, the mode of taking a referendum - one under and according to their terms. this is part of why i look forward to reading non-traditional (i.e. conceptually limited) psychoanalytic essays, those that incorporate referendum into the equation while still retaining the logic of the unconscious. presently i'm still tied to foucault's criticism of the psychoanalytic theory of sexuality, which is from where my not-so-seriously formulated criticism stemmed.

the radio guy and psychoanalysts proliferate these discourses, discourses which arborize and structure the individual in potentially destructive ways - even in the ways one becomes skeptical of their categories. i think that's the motivation of our criticism.

um, "our" criticism? whatchu talkin about, willis?

tomorrow i'm going to raise my hand and be like, "teacher? what does arborize mean?"
(i'm guessing something to do with hippies and making trees. huhhhuh "trees" huhhuhuh "wood". i hear sex often involves "wood" huhhhuuh)

fuck. i am so not matoor enough for gradsk00l.


jpeter: (Default)

March 2016

202122 232425 26

Page Summary

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Sep. 23rd, 2017 07:34 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios