C'est un message de format MIME en plusieurs parties.
------=_NextPart_000_0177_01C08CC2.9AA320E0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Bryan,=20
Ok, here's an argument: Juan says he "hates homosexuals". What is he =
actually saying? He hates (dislikes, is repelled by, despises) all =
individuals within a category he labels "homosexuals". There are two =
major problems here.=20
1. The category: Who is a homosexual? Somebody who has sexual relations =
with people from the same sex? or the same gender? what is a sexual =
relation? are we talking about attraction or does the individual need to =
have sexual intercourse in order to be a member of Juan's category? if =
so, what kind of sexual intercourse and to what extent? My point is that =
we are all constituted and constitute ourselves within a sexual field =
(forgive the spacial analogy) which is not bipolar and even if it were =
bipolar, who would decide on the cutoff point. But Juan feels authorised =
- or rather authorises himself - to unilaterally equalise the =
irreductible difference and singularity to a point where he feels =
confident to create the category of "homosexuals". This is a fairly =
violent operation by which he reduces difference to sameness. Juan =
creates a subjectivity which is based on a sexual behaviour, even worse, =
Juan's own hallucination of the sexual behaviour of the people he =
objectifies.
2. Hatred: Juan "hates". Juan's hatred denies every member of his =
category his respect for their choice (or constitution). He negates =
their subjectivity which he himself created. Declaring himself to be the =
universal judge on categories, he denies every member of his category =
the very subjectivity he performatively sollicits for himself. But =
hatred is more than that, it stems from an aggression Juan harbours =
against that which is different from himself, which is different and he =
turns into radical otherness.
Now of course, you're going to say that I haven't provided you with an =
argument of why it is WRONG. Well, there is simply no theoretically =
sound deduction that would sustain the wrongness of Juan's aggression. =
Of course one could call on norms and argue that Juan is not behaving in =
correspondance with our contemporary social norms, but then you would =
rightly ask whether in this case it would have been "right" to be a Nazi =
in Germany between 1933 and 1945. The question here, again, is not about =
RIGHT or WRONG in an absolute sense, nor of some kind of validity, but =
one of a personal ethics. The only thing we can do is showing the =
intolerance and absurdity in Juan's judgement and this is exactly the =
function of critique.
Yves
----- Original Message -----=20
From: Bryan C=20
To: foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx=20
Sent: Friday, February 02, 2001 12:44 AM
Subject: Re: Is Juan Cruz a Homosexual himself?
>I AM NOT HOMOSEXUAL, I HATE HOMOSEXUALS. I AM ON A DIET, THAT'S WHY I =
AM SO
>BORED TODAY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>
>Juan Carlo
Before anyone yells at Juan, have an argument. Don't just label him a
homophobe or a facist. How do you know that homophobia and facism
aren't valid? To exclude an opinion from deliberation is to do
yourself a terrible injustice.
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
------=_NextPart_000_0177_01C08CC2.9AA320E0
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.50.4134.600" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Bryan, </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Ok, here's an argument: Juan says he =
"hates=20
homosexuals". What is he actually saying? He hates (dislikes, is =
repelled by,=20
despises) all individuals within a category he labels "homosexuals". =
There are=20
two major problems here. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>1. The category: Who is a homosexual? =
Somebody who=20
has sexual relations with people from the same sex? or the same gender? =
what is=20
a sexual relation? are we talking about attraction or does the =
individual need=20
to have sexual intercourse in order to be a member of Juan's category? =
if so,=20
what kind of sexual intercourse and to what extent? My point is that we =
are all=20
constituted and constitute ourselves within a sexual field (forgive the =
spacial=20
analogy) which is not bipolar and even if it were bipolar, who would =
decide on=20
the cutoff point. But Juan feels authorised - or rather authorises =
himself - to=20
unilaterally equalise the irreductible difference and singularity to a =
point=20
where he feels confident to create the category of "homosexuals". This =
is a=20
fairly violent operation by which he reduces difference to sameness. =
Juan=20
creates a subjectivity which is based on a sexual behaviour, even worse, =
Juan's=20
own hallucination of the sexual behaviour of the people he=20
objectifies.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>2. Hatred: Juan "hates". Juan's hatred =
denies every=20
member of his category his respect for their choice (or constitution). =
He=20
negates their subjectivity which he himself created. Declaring himself =
to be the=20
universal judge on categories, he denies every member of his category =
the very=20
subjectivity he performatively sollicits for himself. But hatred is more =
than=20
that, it stems from an aggression Juan harbours against that which is =
different=20
from himself, which is different and he turns into radical=20
otherness.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Now of course, you're going to say that =
I haven't=20
provided you with an argument of why it is WRONG. Well, there is simply =
no=20
theoretically sound deduction that would sustain the wrongness of Juan's =
aggression. Of course one could call on norms and argue that Juan is not =
behaving in correspondance with our contemporary social norms, but then =
you=20
would rightly ask whether in this case it would have been "right" to be =
a Nazi=20
in Germany between 1933 and 1945. The question here, again, is not about =
RIGHT=20
or WRONG in an absolute sense, nor of some kind of validity, but one of =
a=20
personal ethics. The only thing we can do is showing the intolerance and =
absurdity in Juan's judgement and this is exactly the function of=20
critique.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Yves</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE=20
style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV=20
style=3D"BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: =
black"><B>From:</B>=20
<A title=3Dkirk728@xxxxxxxxxxx =
href=3D"mailto:kirk728@xxxxxxxxxxx";>Bryan C</A>=20
</DIV>
<DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A=20
title=3Dfoucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx=20
=
href=3D"mailto:foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx";>foucault@lists.villag=
e.virginia.edu</A>=20
</DIV>
<DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Friday, February 02, 2001 =
12:44=20
AM</DIV>
<DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: Is Juan Cruz a =
Homosexual=20
himself?</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>>I AM NOT HOMOSEXUAL, I HATE HOMOSEXUALS. I AM ON A =
DIET,=20
THAT'S WHY I AM SO<BR>>BORED=20
TODAY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!<BR>><BR>>Juan Carlo<BR><BR>Before =
anyone=20
yells at Juan, have an argument. Don't just label him =
a<BR>homophobe or=20
a facist. How do you know that homophobia and facism<BR>aren't=20
valid? To exclude an opinion from deliberation is to =
do<BR>yourself a=20
terrible=20
=
injustice.<BR>___________________________________________________________=
______<BR>Get=20
your FREE download of MSN Explorer at <A=20
=
href=3D"http://explorer.msn.com";>http://explorer.msn.com</A><BR></BLOCKQU=
OTE></BODY></HTML>
------=_NextPart_000_0177_01C08CC2.9AA320E0--
------=_NextPart_000_0177_01C08CC2.9AA320E0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Bryan,=20
Ok, here's an argument: Juan says he "hates homosexuals". What is he =
actually saying? He hates (dislikes, is repelled by, despises) all =
individuals within a category he labels "homosexuals". There are two =
major problems here.=20
1. The category: Who is a homosexual? Somebody who has sexual relations =
with people from the same sex? or the same gender? what is a sexual =
relation? are we talking about attraction or does the individual need to =
have sexual intercourse in order to be a member of Juan's category? if =
so, what kind of sexual intercourse and to what extent? My point is that =
we are all constituted and constitute ourselves within a sexual field =
(forgive the spacial analogy) which is not bipolar and even if it were =
bipolar, who would decide on the cutoff point. But Juan feels authorised =
- or rather authorises himself - to unilaterally equalise the =
irreductible difference and singularity to a point where he feels =
confident to create the category of "homosexuals". This is a fairly =
violent operation by which he reduces difference to sameness. Juan =
creates a subjectivity which is based on a sexual behaviour, even worse, =
Juan's own hallucination of the sexual behaviour of the people he =
objectifies.
2. Hatred: Juan "hates". Juan's hatred denies every member of his =
category his respect for their choice (or constitution). He negates =
their subjectivity which he himself created. Declaring himself to be the =
universal judge on categories, he denies every member of his category =
the very subjectivity he performatively sollicits for himself. But =
hatred is more than that, it stems from an aggression Juan harbours =
against that which is different from himself, which is different and he =
turns into radical otherness.
Now of course, you're going to say that I haven't provided you with an =
argument of why it is WRONG. Well, there is simply no theoretically =
sound deduction that would sustain the wrongness of Juan's aggression. =
Of course one could call on norms and argue that Juan is not behaving in =
correspondance with our contemporary social norms, but then you would =
rightly ask whether in this case it would have been "right" to be a Nazi =
in Germany between 1933 and 1945. The question here, again, is not about =
RIGHT or WRONG in an absolute sense, nor of some kind of validity, but =
one of a personal ethics. The only thing we can do is showing the =
intolerance and absurdity in Juan's judgement and this is exactly the =
function of critique.
Yves
----- Original Message -----=20
From: Bryan C=20
To: foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx=20
Sent: Friday, February 02, 2001 12:44 AM
Subject: Re: Is Juan Cruz a Homosexual himself?
>I AM NOT HOMOSEXUAL, I HATE HOMOSEXUALS. I AM ON A DIET, THAT'S WHY I =
AM SO
>BORED TODAY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>
>Juan Carlo
Before anyone yells at Juan, have an argument. Don't just label him a
homophobe or a facist. How do you know that homophobia and facism
aren't valid? To exclude an opinion from deliberation is to do
yourself a terrible injustice.
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
------=_NextPart_000_0177_01C08CC2.9AA320E0
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.50.4134.600" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Bryan, </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Ok, here's an argument: Juan says he =
"hates=20
homosexuals". What is he actually saying? He hates (dislikes, is =
repelled by,=20
despises) all individuals within a category he labels "homosexuals". =
There are=20
two major problems here. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>1. The category: Who is a homosexual? =
Somebody who=20
has sexual relations with people from the same sex? or the same gender? =
what is=20
a sexual relation? are we talking about attraction or does the =
individual need=20
to have sexual intercourse in order to be a member of Juan's category? =
if so,=20
what kind of sexual intercourse and to what extent? My point is that we =
are all=20
constituted and constitute ourselves within a sexual field (forgive the =
spacial=20
analogy) which is not bipolar and even if it were bipolar, who would =
decide on=20
the cutoff point. But Juan feels authorised - or rather authorises =
himself - to=20
unilaterally equalise the irreductible difference and singularity to a =
point=20
where he feels confident to create the category of "homosexuals". This =
is a=20
fairly violent operation by which he reduces difference to sameness. =
Juan=20
creates a subjectivity which is based on a sexual behaviour, even worse, =
Juan's=20
own hallucination of the sexual behaviour of the people he=20
objectifies.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>2. Hatred: Juan "hates". Juan's hatred =
denies every=20
member of his category his respect for their choice (or constitution). =
He=20
negates their subjectivity which he himself created. Declaring himself =
to be the=20
universal judge on categories, he denies every member of his category =
the very=20
subjectivity he performatively sollicits for himself. But hatred is more =
than=20
that, it stems from an aggression Juan harbours against that which is =
different=20
from himself, which is different and he turns into radical=20
otherness.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Now of course, you're going to say that =
I haven't=20
provided you with an argument of why it is WRONG. Well, there is simply =
no=20
theoretically sound deduction that would sustain the wrongness of Juan's =
aggression. Of course one could call on norms and argue that Juan is not =
behaving in correspondance with our contemporary social norms, but then =
you=20
would rightly ask whether in this case it would have been "right" to be =
a Nazi=20
in Germany between 1933 and 1945. The question here, again, is not about =
RIGHT=20
or WRONG in an absolute sense, nor of some kind of validity, but one of =
a=20
personal ethics. The only thing we can do is showing the intolerance and =
absurdity in Juan's judgement and this is exactly the function of=20
critique.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Yves</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE=20
style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV=20
style=3D"BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: =
black"><B>From:</B>=20
<A title=3Dkirk728@xxxxxxxxxxx =
href=3D"mailto:kirk728@xxxxxxxxxxx";>Bryan C</A>=20
</DIV>
<DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A=20
title=3Dfoucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx=20
=
href=3D"mailto:foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx";>foucault@lists.villag=
e.virginia.edu</A>=20
</DIV>
<DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Friday, February 02, 2001 =
12:44=20
AM</DIV>
<DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: Is Juan Cruz a =
Homosexual=20
himself?</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>>I AM NOT HOMOSEXUAL, I HATE HOMOSEXUALS. I AM ON A =
DIET,=20
THAT'S WHY I AM SO<BR>>BORED=20
TODAY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!<BR>><BR>>Juan Carlo<BR><BR>Before =
anyone=20
yells at Juan, have an argument. Don't just label him =
a<BR>homophobe or=20
a facist. How do you know that homophobia and facism<BR>aren't=20
valid? To exclude an opinion from deliberation is to =
do<BR>yourself a=20
terrible=20
=
injustice.<BR>___________________________________________________________=
______<BR>Get=20
your FREE download of MSN Explorer at <A=20
=
href=3D"http://explorer.msn.com";>http://explorer.msn.com</A><BR></BLOCKQU=
OTE></BODY></HTML>
------=_NextPart_000_0177_01C08CC2.9AA320E0--