Re: Camille Paglia: Junk Bonds and Corporate Raiders

Harrison Brace wrote:

>How, and why would anyone respond to her (Paglia's)
>"critical" statements such as "only women have vaginas" from that essay,
>hum-drum remarks that she imagines to be witherning?

I'm not spoiling for a fight here, but isn't the point she's trying to make
about the very _hum-drumness_ of sexual differentiation? (And if anything's
going to get withered, it's penises, not vaginas. :-) )

Paglia is a polemicist, so her points are sloppy, but isn't there a
difficulty here for gender-definitions that begin and end in discourse

Not that I believe that what Foucault says is as simple as all that.



Partial thread listing: