breaking through the patriarchix;

[nachtebuch]

(Originally posted by johnny9fingers at Because I thought this little run of Sinfest should have a bigger audience.)

Comments

[coldthermistor]

On the contrary, I think it is essential to consider that it is a problem of interpretation, because then you must study the sociology of the interpretation itself. Going up the layers, so as to speak. I want to argue that instead, it is essential because this is exactly what everyone else is ignoring in their eagerness to follow approved discourse: that if you truly wish an inquiry into the phenomenology of being, you must direct it at the paradigm itself, and start questioning if you should even accept such terms in the first place.

Which, ironically, you are very much doing by shifting the focus onto men. Congratulations.

[nachtebuch]

I'm not actually arguing anything about men. I'm bringing men into the picture to show that the paradigm cannot be torn down if you focus only on women: the paradigm applies to both genders, and that the paradigm is inherent to neither concept.

[coldthermistor]

Right. That in itself isn't an argument? :P

[nachtebuch]

... hey, you have to look at what it means to accept a term before you reject it, right?