this post was submitted on 30 Dec 2025
25 points (93.1% liked)
PhilosophyMemes
358 readers
191 users here now
Memes must be related to phil.
The Memiverse:
!90s_memes@quokk.au
!y2k_memes@quokk.au
!sigh_fi@quokk.au
founded 4 months ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I "resort[ed] to vaguery" because I was writing a comment on a website not an essay for gender studies.
But sure, I have the day off so I'll do the exegesis you avoided.
material process - This tells us that the process affects the physical world and/or has real importance or great consequences
power - legal or official authority, capacity, or right, physical might. This is both legitimized violence by the state, actions by doctors, parents, community leaders etc.
Applied to the body carries both of the relevant definitions of material. It has real importance and great consequences on your life depending on which gender is applied to your body. Some of those consequences are physical ones, such as what medical care you are allowed to receive or refuse. Two examples of this are involuntary genital surgeries on intersex infants and bans on abortion for people who can get pregnant.
Your allegations: "It’s not trying to say anything" "It’s trying to appear to say something profound so that the paycheques keep arriving."
I demonstrated that the quote is saying something. Saying that sex is not a pre-existing foundation for culturally constructed gender but rather is imposed on the body by power is an incredibly profound and necessary thing to say. Gender studies and feminist literature is commonly used as an example of a "worthless" degree. You've not provided any proof for this assertion and I can't find any with some basic research so I conclude that you made that up. But enough of me, I'll let Judith explain their position in their own words:
From “There Is a Person Here”: An Interview with Judith Butler
I never asserted that Gender Studies or Feminism were worthless, they certainly aren't. I do however have little patience for writers who delight in unnecessarily padding out their language with redundant flourishes to the detriment of their message.
My original comment was facetious, but it's telling from Judith's quote that she hadn't considered (or at least anticipated) her audience when writing. Her other comments about wanting to challenge readers as a form of self-betterment are frankly insulting, not to mention completely at odds with her other comment about the obligation to speak to people where they are (with which I entirely agree).