Re: Foucault and Queer-bashing (Was Foucault and Sex)

on 2/1/01 12:06 AM, Bryan C at kirk728@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:

>
> The same for gendered universals. What is wrong with sexism, racism,
> genocide for that matter under a pure Foucauldian world? Without a
> right and wrong distinction, which you are assuming, there can be
> nothing wrong with any type of domination. You said yourself:
> "Domination is not evil until you apply normative standards" in your
> last post.

Foucault does not say norms do not exist. The point is that they are
products of power/knowledge structures. Foucault is not normative, but he
does allow for normative structures -- there is a tremendous difference.

> As for "everyone does not believe the same thing," this is not an
> indictment. The transendental principle is a priori. It exists
> external to human consciousness, what people believe can be wrong.

I'm with Chris on this one (prolly on all the others, too, I'm guessing).
What's with the Kant shit with no relation to Foucault?

I'm probably getting on people's nerves already so I'm gonna end with this
one for a bit - at least until a new thread.

---

Asher Haig ahaig@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Dartmouth 2004



Partial thread listing: