In Response to Nancy Pelosi
"The difference between the sexes is not whether one does or does not have a penis, it is whether or not one is an integral part of a phallic masculine economy."
- Antoinette Fouque
From bell hooks' Feminist Theory: From Margin to Center
- Antoinette Fouque
From bell hooks' Feminist Theory: From Margin to Center
posted by Assonance Not Apathy at 12:24 PM
4 Comments:
What is the Phallic Masculine economy?
An economy of domination and control, maintained by physical power and/or the threat of physical power, mixed with a complacency towards a self-serving status quo.
Fucking people.
Just my reading of it.
"...it is whether or not one is an integral part of a phallic masculine economy."
'an integral part'
this to me doesn't ascribe any positive function to the individual in question. One can be part of the economy and not neccesarily produce it in a virulent form. I also believe that the part will be there - the question is what does that part look like, and to what degree does it become violent.
'economy'
circulation, exchange, returns, inter-change... an economy of symbols...
Economies are symbolic processes. Exchange assumes a certain level of equivilence between different objects, and the passing of those objects into lots of different places. I think having Pelosi's face on the unit of exchange changes its function. See: Albright as Sec. State, which forced a continual re-inscription of the masculine norms of the military in order to legitimate itself. If having Pelosi as chair forces some people to call our congress as a boys club (which would help explain its role in the phallic masculine economy), I'm down.
Duncan
If as a government official, your role is to indeed shelter and produce at least the economy in a virulent form, then that is the function you will perform. (An example of producing in a virulent form being, at least to me, support of free trade.)
"I also believe that the part will be there - the question is what does that part look like, and to what degree does it become violent."
Indeed the part will be there. What the individual looks like doesn't so much matter to me, (do you like your cog purple or green?).
It is already violent. Unless this violence is turned around and focused on fragging members of congress, I wont be happy.
Economies have real effects, see hunger, prisons, deforestation, mining, Manifest Destiny, Private ownership. Pelosi's face on that unit doesnt change it. If it were just people playing video games I wouldnt care.
Youre playing with semantics, maybe?
The focus on symbols, distracts from what I see as shit that is very real.
What does the Madeline Albright example mean? I cant figure out what youre trying to say.
As far as the last sentence, I don't care if the congress were ALL women, if they were still executing the same things.
Post a Comment
<< Home