> start thinking of thier efforts as political, rather than as an attempt
> to expalin sex as a matter of scientific fact. I do acknowledge that if
> one finds thier physical explanation of sex totally unbeleivable, then
> thier political projects appear to exist without an adequate foundation in
> reality. Such is the realm of politics.
I am puzzled. If this is so then such work as Butler & Foucault's is
polemics, and if it is polemical why do people mistake it for
scholarship? Are you suggesting that F used the discourse of philosophy
as a cloak to conceal what was no more than a desire to make political
space for his own sexuality? You find no insight, no linkage to extant
practices or experience, only the application of rhetorical force?
William Dolphin
San Francisco
dolphin@xxxxxxxx