Comments on: Judith Butler

By: kelliem

kelliem — Mon, 02 Apr 2007 20:06:07 +0000

Yeah, I agree with Cara and Elizabeth. I got pissed when I read the part about homosexuals polluting the world with AIDS. I have a feeling that Butler was pissed about it too. What about other ways to contract AIDS? Needles, anyone? I was watching an outdated clip the other day that ran along the same lines. Don’t have sex until you’re married, or else you’ll get AIDS. Oy. Anyway, you’re right, it did get a little tangled once she introduced drag into the picture. I read drag not so much as an illusion, but a taste of reality. For some people, drag is a release that they aren’t allowed in everyday societal life. You don’t go to work in drag; you’d be out of a job. But say someone is anatomically a man but more comfortably associates with the feminine “gender” (in quotations because, according to Butler, gender does not exist). He can then show what’s on the inside, what he’s been hiding. Or rather, what’s on the outside, since that’s where the soul is.

By: elizabeth0509

elizabeth0509 — Mon, 02 Apr 2007 01:48:50 +0000

hey Joei,
I’m glad I stopped by your page to read your blog because, like Cara said, I feel like I have a better understanding of a few things now, thank you! I was also a little confused where Butler talks about the body. To me, it also seemed that she was saying a man and a woman are distinguished only by their body parts…well thats what I gathered from it haha. Hopefully we will bring this up in class so it makes a little more sense. It was really good that you related the idea of the soul to Saussure because honestly, I couldn’t really relate this section to any of the theorists, I thought this was one of the hardest pieces to read so far. Its really good that you talked about the signified and signifying parts popping up a lot, I think I missed that. I was too concerned with understanding even one section of this piece haha. I’m really happy I read your blog because after reading Butler, I was convinced that there weren’t really any theorists that relate to this piece, now I know that there are! Thank you

By: carawhalen

carawhalen — Sun, 01 Apr 2007 23:40:14 +0000

After reading your blog I was better able to understand some of the points that I was a little iffy on. I actually also discussed a lot of the points that you covered, which I thought was great too because you touched on different aspects of what I commented on. In particular, I thought your comments regarding AIDS, and how Butler discussed how another theorist indicated that a person with aids is a “polluting person”. I too thought that the quote that followed in this paragraph that you commented on regarding homosexuality was completely off base. Yet, it made me wonder if I was misreading the material, because I personally couldn’t understand how someone could view this and naming him/her as a “polluting person”. I also thought that your discussion about the soul was interesting. I didn’t understand this as much as I would of liked, it seems that we both have some questions for tomarrow’s class. I actually spent a long time looking at that quote that you posted, because I couldn’t piece together exactly what was being said…but your comments def. helped! Great blog!!