Cross-readings along the axes of and:
TO DEMAND WAGES FOR FACEBOOK IS TO MAKE IT VISIBLE THAT OUR OPINIONS AND EMOTIONS HAVE ALL BEEN DISTORTED FOR A SPECIFIC FUNCTION ONLINE, AND THEN HAVE BEEN THROWN BACK AT US AS A MODEL TO WHICH WE SHOULD ALL CONFORM IF WE WANT TO BE ACCEPTED IN THIS SOCIETY.
CAPITAL HAD TO CONVINCE US THAT IT IS A NATURAL, UNAVOIDABLE AND EVEN FULFILLING ACTIVITY TO MAKE US ACCEPT UNWAGED WORK.
BY DENYING OUR FACEBOOK TIME A WAGE WHILE PROFITING DIRECTLY FROM THE DATA IT GENERATES AND TRANSFORMING IT INTO AN ACT OF FRIENDSHIP, CAPITAL HAS KILLED MANY BIRDS WITH ONE STONE.
FIRST OF ALL, IT HAS GOT A HELL OF A LOT OF WORK ALMOST FOR FREE, AND IT HAS MADE SURE THAT WE, FAR FROM STRUGGLING AGAINST IT, WOULD SEEK THAT WORK AS THE BEST THING ONLINE.
THE DIFFICULTIES AND AMBIGUITIES IN DISCUSSING WAGES FOR FACEBOOK STEM FROM THE REDUCTION OF WAGES FOR FACEBOOK TO A THING, A LUMP OF MONEY, INSTEAD OF VIEWING IT AS A POLITICAL PERSPECTIVE.
TO VIEW WAGES FOR FACEBOOK AS A THING RATHER THAN A PERSPECTIVE IS TO DETACH THE END RESULT OF OUR STRUGGLE FROM THE STRUGGLE ITSELF AND TO MISS ITS SIGNIFICANCE IN DEMYSTIFYING AND SUBVERTING THE ROLE TO WHICH WE HAVE BEEN CONFINED IN CAPITALIST SOCIETY.
IF WE TAKE WAGES FOR FACEBOOK AS A POLITICAL PERSPECTIVE, WE CAN SEE THAT STRUGGLING FOR IT IS GOING TO PRODUCE A REVOLUTION IN OUR LIVES AND IN OUR SOCIAL POWER.
IT IS IMPORTANT TO RECOGNIZE THAT WHEN WE SPEAK OF FACEBOOK WE ARE NOT SPEAKING OF A JOB AS OTHER JOBS, BUT WE ARE SPEAKING OF THE MOST PERVASIVE MANIPULATION, THE MOST SUBTLE AND MYSTIFIED VIOLENCE THAT CAPITALISM HAS RECENTLY PERPETRATED AGAINST US.
TRUE, UNDER CAPITALISM EVERY WORKER IS MANIPULATED AND EXPLOITED AND HIS/HER RELATION TO CAPITAL IS TOTALLY MYSTIFIED.
THE WAGE GIVES THE IMPRESSION OF A FAIR DEAL: YOU WORK AND YOU GET PAID, HENCE YOU AND YOUR BOSS ARE EQUAL; WHILE IN REALITY THE WAGE, RATHER THAN PAYING FOR THE WORK YOU DO, HIDES ALL THE UNPAID WORK THAT GOES INTO PROFIT.
BUT THE WAGE AT LEAST RECOGNIZES THAT YOU ARE A WORKER, AND YOU CAN BARGAIN AND STRUGGLE AROUND AND AGAINST THE TERMS AND THE QUANTITY OF THAT WAGE, THE TERMS AND THE QUANTITY OF THAT WORK.
TO HAVE A WAGE MEANS TO BE PART OF A SOCIAL CONTRACT, AND THERE IS NO DOUBT CONCERNING ITS MEANING: YOU WORK, NOT BECAUSE YOU LIKE IT, OR BECAUSE IT COMES NATURALLY TO YOU, BUT BECAUSE IT IS THE ONLY CONDITION UNDER WHICH YOU ARE ALLOWED TO LIVE.
WHEN WE STRUGGLE FOR WAGES WE STRUGGLE UNAMBIGUOUSLY AND DIRECTLY AGAINST OUR SOCIAL EXPLOITATION.
WE STRUGGLE TO BREAK CAPITAL’S PLAN TO MONETIZE OUR FRIENDSHIP, FEELINGS AND FREE TIME, THROUGH WHICH IT HAS BEEN ABLE TO MAINTAIN ITS POWER.
WAGES FOR FACEBOOK, THEN, IS A REVOLUTIONARY DEMAND NOT BECAUSE BY ITSELF IT DESTROYS CAPITAL, BUT BECAUSE IT ATTACKS CAPITAL AND FORCES IT TO RESTRUCTURE SOCIAL RELATIONS IN TERMS MORE FAVORABLE TO US AND CONSEQUENTLY MORE FAVORABLE TO WORKING CLASS SOLIDARITY.
THEREFORE TO REAPPROPRIATE THAT MONEY WHICH IS THE FRUIT OF OUR LABOUR —AND OF ALL OUR FRIENDS’ LABOUR— MEANS AT THE SAME TIME TO UNDERMINE CAPITAL’S POWER TO COMMAND FORCED LABOUR FROM US.
AND FROM THE VIEWPOINT OF WORK WE CAN ASK NOT ONE WAGE BUT MANY WAGES, BECAUSE WE HAVE BEEN FORCED INTO MANY JOBS AT ONCE—WE ALSO WORK FOR GOOGLE, TWITTER, MICROSOFT, YOUTUBE AND COUNTLESS OTHERS.
FROM NOW ON WE WANT MONEY FOR EACH MOMENT OF IT, SO THAT WE CAN REFUSE SOME OF IT AND EVENTUALLY ALL OF IT.
--- Preamble August 26, 2016 A feminist internet works towards empowering more women and queer persons – in all our diversities – to fully enjoy our rights, engage in pleasure and play, and dismantle patriarchy.
This integrates our different realities, contexts and specificities – including age, disabilities, sexualities, gender identities and expressions, socioeconomic locations, political and religious beliefs, ethnic origins, and racial markers.
A feminist internet starts with enabling more women and queer persons to enjoy universal, acceptable, affordable, unconditional, open, meaningful and equal access to the internet.
We support and protect unrestricted access to information relevant to women and queer persons, particularly information on sexual and reproductive health and rights, pleasure, safe abortion, access to justice, and LGBTIQ issues.
This includes diversity in languages, abilities, interests and contexts.
Women and queer persons have the right to code, design, adapt and critically and sustainably use ICTs and reclaim technology as a platform for creativity and expression, as well as to challenge the cultures of sexism and discrimination in all spaces.
The internet is a space where social norms are negotiated, performed and imposed, often in an extension of other spaces shaped by patriarchy and heteronormativity.
Our struggle for a feminist internet is one that forms part of a continuum of our resistance in other spaces, public, private and in-between.
It facilitates new forms of citizenship that enable individuals to claim, construct and express selves, genders and sexualities.
This includes connecting across territories, demanding accountability and transparency, and creating opportunities for sustained feminist movement building.
We believe in challenging the patriarchal spaces and processes that control internet governance, as well as putting more feminists and queers at the decision-making tables.
We want to democratise policy making affecting the internet as well as diffuse ownership of and power in global and local networks.
We are committed to interrogating the capitalist logic that drives technology towards further privatisation, profit and corporate control.
We work to create alternative forms of economic power that are grounded in principles of cooperation, solidarity, commons, environmental sustainability, and openness.
Free and open source.
We are committed to creating and experimenting with technology, including digital safety and security, and using free/libre and open source software (FLOSS), tools, and platforms.
Promoting, disseminating, and sharing knowledge about the use of FLOSS is central to our praxis.
We claim the power of the internet to amplify women’s narratives and lived realities.
There is a need to resist the state, the religious right and other extremist forces who monopolise discourses of morality, while silencing feminist voices and persecuting women’s human rights defenders.
We strongly object to the efforts of state and non-state actors to control, surveil, regulate and restrict feminist and queer expression on the internet through technology, legislation or violence.
We recognise this as part of the larger political project of moral policing, censorship, and hierarchisation of citizenship and rights.
11 Pornography and “harmful content”.
We recognise that the issue of pornography online has to do with agency, consent, power and labour.
We reject simple causal linkages made between consumption of pornographic content and violence against women.
We also reject the use of the umbrella term “harmful content” to label expression on female and transgender sexuality.
We support reclaiming and creating alternative erotic content that resists the mainstream patriarchal gaze and locates women and queer persons’ desires at the centre.
We call on the need to build an ethics and politics of consent into the culture, design, policies and terms of service of internet platforms.
13 Privacy and data.
We support the right to privacy and to full control over personal data and information online at all levels.
We reject practices by states and private companies to use data for profit and to manipulate behaviour online.
Surveillance is the historical tool of patriarchy, used to control and restrict women’s bodies, speech and activism.
We pay equal attention to surveillance practices by individuals, the private sector, the state and non-state actors.
We have the right to exercise and retain control over our personal history and memory on the internet.
This includes being able to access all our personal data and information online, and to be able to exercise control over this data, including knowing who has access to it and under what conditions, and the ability to delete it forever.
We defend the right to be anonymous and reject all claims to restrict anonymity online.
Anonymity enables our freedom of expression online, particularly when it comes to breaking taboos of sexuality and heteronormativity, experimenting with gender identity, and enabling safety for women and queer persons affected by discrimination.
16 Children and youth.
We call for the inclusion of the voices and experiences of young people in the decisions made about safety and security online and promote their safety, privacy, and access to information.
We recognise children’s right to healthy emotional and sexual development, which includes the right to privacy and access to positive information about sex, gender and sexuality at critical times in their lives.
We call on all internet stakeholders, including internet users, policy makers and the private sector, to address the issue of online harassment and technology-related violence.
The attacks, threats, intimidation and policing experienced by women and queers are real, harmful and alarming, and are part of the broader issue of gender-based violence.
It is our collective responsibility to address and end this.
--- Sick of the filthy dust, montonous and boring, of stagnant, unbreathable, competitive and excluding environments, of semi-free information which is actually totally controlled, power and decision of hunched up egocentric and infantile machos.
Tired of repressed, impenetrable and homogenous bodies, we are resetting and migrating our bodies, modificable codes, lubricated and fluid, far from this sad landscape.
Tired of the useless and recursive manipulation of information, we study, construct and fail with all that is around us, with multiple, monstruous and hateful ends.
From the expansion of information to the mutation of dispositives, we want to hack and recodify everything that is static and programmed by social and technological imposition.
The walls tremble and the water penetrates the tiny holes, it expands like an unbreakable code exciting our neurons ; we change the apparent path of events transiting antimelodies, noise as arithmetic opening, outside of the calculated and homogenous, noise feeding unlimited experimentation.
Improvised performance creating and breaking codes, constructing hybrid machines.
Beat roots and obscure mutant landscapes that become the uncontrollable secretions of our desires.
Electronautics and bioelectricity that chemically saturate the environment, the acid smell of our hormones shakes the space, resituated amongst cables, resistences, condensors and corrosive liquids.
Nature and technology are not different, nature was to the witches what technoscience is to us, the cyborg witches.
We infiltrate the machine with our hands, sweat and disperse attention, we prepare ourselves for inexact verification where the apparent error is desired, where we fail, fuck, we are.
We devour Haraway and Asimov, Preciado and Python manuals, Itziar Ziga and Neil Stephenson, Margulis and Despentes, hackmeetings and transfeminist workshps, DIY electronics and sexual bricolage ; we absorb PDFs of electronics theory y listen to psicofonias from around : we read and design circuits, and experiment with them in our bodies.
We scream noise and cyborg covens, soldering and alchemy, we spit out performances and install gnu-linux, we love recycling and reparing with our breasts bared.
Fed by pornoterrrorism and free culture, we know how to use our claws and teeth if needs be.
Pechblenda lab was born out of the necessity to generate a space in Calafou (a community in a large former industrial space) for us to flourish, a non-patriarchal TransHackFeminist space where free knowledge springs from raw experimentation (electronic repairs, experiments with turbines, bioelectrochemistry, sound .... ) and self education.
--- REFUGIA: A place of relatively unaltered climate that is inhabited by plants and animals during a period of continental climate change (as a glaciation) and remains as a center of relict forms from which a new dispersion and speciation may take place after climatic readjustment.
This is thought to slow the rate of resistance mutation caused in susceptible insect and weed species by gene transfer from GM (Genetically Modi fied) monoculture crops.
REFUGIA: A Becoming Autonomous Zone (BAZ) of desirous mixings and recombinations; splic ing fe male sexual liber ation and auto nomy with cyber feminist skills, theory, embodiment, and political activism.
REFUGIA: A critical space of liberated social becoming and intellectual life; a space liberated from capitalist Taylorized production; a space of unregulated, unmanaged time for creative exchange and play; experimental action and learning; desiring production, cooking, eating, and skill sharing.
REFUGIA: A reproducible concept that can be adapted to various climates, economies, and geographical regions worldwide.
Not a retreat, but a space resistant to mono culture in all its social, environmental, libidinal, political, and genetic forms.
REFUGIA: A habitat for new AMOs (Autonomously Modified Organism) and agit-crops; for example, “ProActiva,” an herb that is a grafting of witch-root, man drake, and all-heal.
REFUGIA: A place of asylum for the recuperation, regeneration and re-engineering of essential crops that have been corrupted by capitalist viruses and agri business greed.
REFUGIA: A space of imaginative inertia that slows down the engines of corporate agro/biotech and allows time to assess its risks and benefits through long-term testing.
REFUGIA: Neither a utopia nor a dystopia, but a haunted space for reverse engineering, monstrous graftings, spontaneous generation, recombination, difference, poly-versity hybridization, wildlings, mutations, mongrelizing, crop circles, anomalies, useless beauty, coalitions, agit-crops, and unseemly sproutings.
Biotech and transgenic work in Refugia will be based on desire, consensual public risk assessment, informed amateur experimentation, contestational politics, nourishment and taste value, non-proprietary expertise, convivial delight, and healing.
REFUGIA: subRosa’s on-going cyberfeminist hothouse of strategies and tactical actions.
--- At this point in time we believe a radical change in politics and the world socioeconomic system is needed in order to achieve a new balanced ecology and this radical change should start with a shifting of agency: we ask for the main agency to be shifted to the feminine principle – which we do not understand as excluding masculinity but as referring to a history of incorporating it and mobilizing it in a different way than the traditional patriarchal mobilization for violence: an emphasis on complementarity rather than antagonism, on resolutions of peace rather than militarism, on efforts directed towards construction, care and emancipatory exploration rather than destruction.
Rather than continue to contemplate our annihilation, contributing to it or declaring hopelessness in front of it, we should at least try another approach – and this approach has to exclude patriarchy in all its expressions and institutionalized forms of violence: domination, exploitation, slavery, colonialism, profit, exclusion, monarchy, oligarchy, mafia, religious wars.
Understanding the term does not mean thinking of a “women’s world” which excludes virility but as a world which mobilizes it towards humanist and animist goals rather than oppressive, violent and colonial enterprises.
The feminine is the first stage towards a transgressive humanism and the Gynecene is the first global and simultaneous transfer of the feminine imprint onto the physical and political strata (deeply connected as they are today) of the Earth.
Moreover, trying to imagine a future ecology for the whole planetary assemblage, not only a future for the human race, we support the idea that any desirable mode of existence connected/integrated into nature-culture or constituted of equally important organic and inorganic life-forms (including an animistic perspective) cannot be separated from the human subject’s struggle to overcome oppression based on gender, race and class within the species.
Insofar as we cannot speak of “man” – the human species – as a unity, we have to support these struggles as interconnected and fight them simultaneously, we need to imagine and constantly discuss the connections and similarities as well as the contradictions arising.
We support an empowering of women that is founded on a desired change of paradigm, where weakness is understood and respected as a valuable condition in itself, and at the same time on the possibility, accepted and detabooed, of technological transformations of the human body towards hybrid forms such as the cyborg.
We are fighting the normalized body and the ideologies that marginalize “imperfections of” or “deviations from” this norm.
We believe in the possibility of infinitely expanding and shifting bodily configurations and consciousness.
As our physical and chemical limits also limit our perceptions and our experiencing of the world, we embrace transhumanism or expanded humanism as a possible solution to the challenge of belonging to the human race.
2.. Only a radical left can oppose a growing radical right and recover the territory that remains to the forces of reaction.
Only a strong belief – with universal ambitions – in equality of races and gender, in equal rights for women, queers, the poor and the disenfranchised, in negotiation with animal rights and the rights of inorganic entities – all linked together – can stand against and oppose an expansive and interconnected politics of exclusion, capitalist exploitation, religious fundamentalism, racism, sexism and brutal anthropocentrism.
Hunting for pleasure or destroying natural and cultural monuments that are part of humanity’s patrimony are not class-related.
Therefore the new, truly radical left has to rebuild itself on a different type of revolution, which takes us beyond the traditional class antagonisms and can face the neo-tribal reality of today in which violence breeds violence, justice is used as a tool for revenge and critique of power is increasingly powerless.
While the world peace has been a goal of many states, attempted at through different international treaties, it has always failed into more arming and lately it has completely degenerated into the obsession of security, enforced through the militarization of the police force and the increasing surveillance of every aspect of our existence.
Any form of justice in a future sustainable society has to be imagined and exercised in another realm than that of retaliation, deprivation of basic human rights and brutality.
4.. We consider the analysis of capitalism and its catastrophic consequences is complete and time has come to move on.
Any time spent on “revealing” the more subtle or more flagrant inconsistencies of this system’s adepts is a time lost in achieving a better present and future.
We must spare energy and unite forces in providing for this better future as of now.
.” (Shulamith Firestone) Also, capitalism in itself cannot be extracted and separated from discussions around all conservative politics and conservative views, as we have understood that neoliberalism is not truly liberal but a rather paradoxical mix of advocacy for economic “freedom” and racist, sexist and conservative extrapolations of nuclear family/dynasty values.
It is not an external, malignant, alien entity but a set of historic conditions and current practices, which instead of introjecting we have to learn how to live without.
In order to achieve a truly pluralistic society where possibilities can be enacted, we support the universalism of basic human rights as a common ground for a broader, interspecies and inter-objective politics of inclusion and true respect for difference.
The Earth is no longer a big and ungraspable planet, but a shared living room (a shrinking one, moreover) in which we have to coexist by negotiating and conciliating our different views and practices, while recognizing we can only do that through a reciprocal process and towards the un-negotiable goal of equality of gender, race, class and sexual orientation, with no second class citizens.
Also, the instrumentalisation and use by double standards of the concept of “freedom” is by no means a reason to abandon it altogether, but a reminder that we must constantly fight for it.
Economic equality should be the basis of society and therefore we strongly support the universal basic income.
Equal and free access to healthcare, lodging, education and to culture should be granted for everyone, at any time of their life.
We can only respect and support religion that is compatible, in its majoritarian practices and interpretations, with the right to a secular education (which can guarantee the least freedom of choice in matters of religion), that embraces equal rights for women, queers and non-believers and a politics of freedom rather than a politics of submission and interdiction, apart from protecting basic human rights.
We can only respect and support religion that is based on a freedom of experimenting and observing, not on a prescriptive set of rules, interdictions and punishments proclaimed by a patriarchal, self-asserted authority perfectly mimicking the structure of a monarchy or a dictatorship.
Providing easy and simple answers for the complexity of human existence might fake the offering of a “meaning” and help some survive, but it will never help us evolve.
8.. We also believe the emancipatory use of sustainable technology has to play an important part in any future ecology, including the protection and preservation of “nature”, just as much as a needed change in our position towards nature and its exclusive understanding as resource for endless consumption.
Development of technology must be pursued in agreement with the respect for nature and its limits and it must not be submitted to private interests or corporate profit.
Technology is a cultural asset and together with the rest of culture, it must be made public, open and free, put to the benefit of emancipating humanity while not destroying everything else around it.
Alexandra Pirici and Raluca Voinea.
January 2015, Bucharest and Bologna..
--- BECAUSE us girls crave records and books and fanzines that speak to US that WE feel included in and can understand in our own ways.
BECAUSE we wanna make it easier for girls to see/hear each other's work so that we can share strategies and criticize-applaud each other.
BECAUSE we recognize fantasies of Instant Macho Gun Revolution as impractical lies meant to keep us simply dreaming instead of becoming our dreams AND THUS seek to create revolution in our own lives every single day by envisioning AND creating alternatives to the bullshit christian capitalist way of doing things.
BECAUSE we want and need to encourage and be encouraged in the face of all our own insecurities, in the face of beergutboyrock that tells us we can't play our instruments, in the face of "authorities" who say our bands/zines/etc are the worst in the US and BECAUSE we don't wanna assimilate to someone else's (boy) standards of what is or isn't.
BECAUSE we are unwilling to falter under claims that we are reactionary "reverse sexists" AND NOT THE TRUEPUNKROCKSOULCRUSADERS THAT WE KNOW we really are.
BECAUSE we know that life is much more than physical survival and are patently aware that the punk rock "you can do anything" idea is crucial to the coming angry grrrl rock revolution which seeks to save the psychic and cultural lives of girls and women everywhere, according to their own terms, not ours.
BECAUSE we are interested in creating non-heirarchical ways of being AND making music, friends, AND scenes based on communication + understanding, instead of competition + good/bad categorizations.
BECAUSE doing/reading/seeing/hearing cool things that validate and challenge us can help us gain the strength and sense of community that we need in order to figure out how bullshit like racism, able-bodieism, ageism, speciesism, classism, thinism, sexism, anti-semitism and heterosexism figures in our own lives.
BECAUSE we see fostering and supporting girl scenes and girl artists of all kinds as integral to this process.
BECAUSE we hate capitalism in all its forms and see our main goal as sharing information and staying alive, instead of making profits of being cool according to traditional standards.
BECAUSE we are unwilling to let our real and valid anger be diffused and or turned against us via the internalization of sexism as witnessed in girl/girl jealousism and self defeating girltype behaviors.
BECAUSE I believe with my wholeheartmindbody that girls constitute a revolutionary soul force that can, and will change the world for real.
It defines a space and opens potential.
It queers the archive, the spreadsheet, and the data set.
It moves beyond a white, and male space.
We aim to create sustainable data, slow data, consensual data and consensual software.
OUR INITIAL INTENTION: to create a data set that provides a resource that can be used to train an AI to locate feminist and other intersectional ways of thinking across digital media distributed online.
OUR FUTURE INTENTIONS are to create ethical inputs for technology artificial intelligence to challenge dominance by engaging in new materials and engaging with others.
Through collaboration, we are collectively creating and reimagining new ways of community engagement for technology and to augment intelligence systems.
*Is run for and by a community that cares enough for her in order to make her exist.
*Has an awareness of the materiality of software, hardware and the bodies gathered around it.
*Is able to scale up or down, and change processing speed whenever resources require.
*Radically questions the conditions for serving and service; experiments with changing client – server relations where she can.
*Avoids efficiency, ease-of-use and reliability because they can be traps.
*Knows that networking is actually a parasitic, promiscuous and often awkward practice.
*Takes control because she wants networks to be mutable and read-write accessible.
A feminist server is both inside and outside the network.
Judy Wajcman, Feminism confronts technology, 1991: « It is impossible to divorce the gender relations which are expressed in, and shape technologies, from the wider social structure that create and maintain them.
Wendy Chun, Control and Freedom: Power and control in the age of fiberoptics, 2006: « We must explore the democratic potential of communications technologies – a potential that stems from our vulnerabilities rather than our control.
And we must face And seize freedom with determination rather than fear And alibis.
Ulises A. Mejias in Fibreculture Journal 20: Liberation Technology and the Arab Spring: From Utopia to Atopia and Beyond, 2012: « A typical drawing of a network depicts a series of nodes connected by lines, representing the links.
This space surrounding the nodes is not blank, and we can even give it a name: the paranodal.
Because of nodocentrism we tend to see only the nodes in a network, but the space between nodes is not empty, it is inhabited by multitudes of paranodes that simply do not conform to the organising logic of the network, and cannot be seen through the algorithms of the network.
Please use and abuse.
As a feminist server, this text has many pre-, parallel- and afterlives.
For some geneologies, see below, elsewhere and here: http://www.newcriticals.com/exquisite-corpse/page-8.
--- The undersigned, being alternately pissed off and bored, need a means of speculation and asserting a different set of values with which to re-imagine the future.
The connection between Middle Passage and space travel is tenuous at best.
Magic interstellar travel and/ or the wondrous communication grid can lead to an illusion of outer space and/ cyberspace as egalitarian.
This dream of utopia can encourage us to forget that outer space will not save us from injustice and that cyberspace was prefigured upon a “master/slave” relationship.
The most likely future is one in which we only have ourselves and this planet.
The Mundane Afrofuturists rejoice in: Piling up unexamined and hackneyed tropes, and setting them alight.
Reference to Parliament Funkadelic and/ or George Clinton;.
Egyptian mythology and iconography;.
We also recognize: The harmless fun that these and all the other Stupidities have brought to millions of people.
The possibilities of a new focus on black humanity: our science, technology, culture, politics, religions, individuality, needs, dreams, hopes, and failings.
The surge of bedazzlement and wonder that awaits us as we contemplate our own cosmology of blackness and our possible futures.
Since “fact” and “science” have been used throughout history to serve white supremacy, we will focus on an emotionally true, vernacular reality.
An awakening sense of the awesome power of the black imagination: to protect, to create, to destroy, to propel ourselves towards what poet Elizabeth Alexander describes as “a metaphysical space beyond the black public everyday toward power and wild imagination.”.
The opportunity to make sense of the nonsense that regularly —and sometimes violently— accents black life.
The sense that the rituals and inconsistencies of daily life are compelling, dynamic, and utterly strange.
Mundane Afrofuturism opens a number of themes and flavors to intertextuality, double entendre, politics, incongruity, polyphony, and collective first-person—techniques that we have used for years to make meaning.
The Mundane Afrofuturists promise: To produce a collection of Mundane Afrofuturist literature that follows these rules: No interstellar travel—travel is limited to within the solar system and is difficult, time consuming, and expensive.
No inexplicable end to racism—dismantling white supremacy would be complex, violent, and have global impact.
No aliens unless the connection is distant, difficult, tenuous, and expensive and they have no interstellar travel either.
No forgetting about political, racial, social, economic, and geographic struggles.
Radical change of perspective about medical technology, artifacts, "professional" and medical institution.
Medical institutions use prohibitive and creepy technologies, patriarchal conservatives and dark methodologies to diagnosis, to read them and apply their vivisection treatments.
In gynecology particular case, it's reach an inquisitive, paternalistic and fascistic attitudes.
Patients are ignorant slaves of lab diagnosis technologies that send a message only translated and read by the doctors that in some kind of possession of the clinic oraculo have the only sacred truth.
not even phd`s in microbiologic surgery to generate accurate and self-aware diagnosis.
I don't want to be forced to enter into their hygienist temples, in veiled body jails, in those fabrics of corporal standardization and sickness limited parameters.
Self blood donations & extract our own blood, and trough it like a furious volcanic river of our anger in the door of the fucking parlament!!
gynepunk is a extreme and accurate gesture to detach our boudy of the compulsive dependency of the fossil structures of the hegemonic health system machine.
gynepunk's objective is to make emerge DIY-DIT accessible diagnosis labs and technics in extreme experimentation, down the rocks or elevators if is necesary.
Has to be possible in a situated stable place or /and in nomadic mobile labs.
Hack and build our own ultrasound, endoscope or ecography devices in a low-cost way.
All this in a strict complementation with herbs and natural knowledges, oral traditions, submarine recipes, seeking with hunger generate superavit of DIY lubricants, anti-conceptives, open doula domains, savage caring of any visceral hands on technologies, as menstrual extraction, all elevated at maximun potential of common learning and radical self-body-power...!
gynepunk is based in scientific methodology and discipline and in the knowledge that comes thought the experience of each body, ancestral body wisdom, that's why documentation, memory in any form is essential!
Like this other gynepunks will ferment and mutate going fast forward to a explosive and expansive movement towards radical experiments, collective strong confidence, to build our-body politics.
Something that is Vital to share and spread in infinite pandemoniums.
It has the power to expel and heal image (diseases).
It is the intermediary between the Mapuche people and the Wenu Mapu.
Through the rogations gives health and wellness to the community and has a deep knowledge of the Lawen, she makes their petitions against the Rewe.
The very technologies that was reason to dream of new forms of political empowerment has turned out to be the means of surveillance and control for everybody.
But we are not Icarus: the Sirens are our sisters and we are too keen on the sensuality of the stones and the tenderness of the trees to give in to transhumanist pride.
We want to connect from Earth to the Noosphere, without rummaging, scratching and desecrate Gaia's entrails, without spitting in the face of Heaven and Time the deadly fumes that are mortgaging our futures.
We profess technological autonomy and all forms of emancipation and empowerment.
W.I.T.C.H., VNS Matrix, Gynepunk, Reclaiming, technoshamanism, xenofeminism, hyperstition, afrofuturism and ancestorfuturism inspire us, without us adhering entirely to one or the other.
Our power is domestic and vernacular.
We are not unitary but labile and evanescent.
We practice this applied science of the creation of forms by energy and the direction of energy by forms.
We live in this 21st century that use to be dreamed for a long time and is now feared.
We invent experimental origins and traditions for ourselves.
We understand that everything is interconnected, that consciousness gives shape to reality and reality gives shape to consciousness.
We use social networks to gather in spiritual and political rituals.
We use smartphones and tarot cards to connect to spirits.
We are mixing ancestral and invented methods to reveal the porosity of the worlds — ours, the Gods’ we no longer believe in, the free cosmogony and fictional entities’ that we create.
We are corporeal, biological, incarnate enti- ties, but also and simultaneously: relational and informational beings.
We live in a physical, technical and digital world.
Its potential belies the complications of its history: that matter is the sum and prolongation of our ancestry; that creativity is brutal, sensual, rude, coarse, and cruel.
1 We declare that the world’s splendour has been enriched by a new beauty: the beauty of crap, kipple 2 and detritus.
There is nothing which our infatuated race would desire to see more than the fertile union between a man and an Analytical Engine.
Thought and Life both have been thoroughly dispersed on the winds of information.
5 Our power and intelligence do not belong specifically to us, but to all matter.
7 In order to proceed, therefore, one has to birth posthuman machines, a fantasmagoric and unrepresentable repertoire of actual re-embodiments of the most hybrid kinds.
8 Additivism will be instrumental in accelerating the emergence and encounter with The Radical Outside.
We want to encourage, interfere, and reverse-engineer the possibilities encoded into the censored, the invisible, and the radical notion of the 3D printer itself.
12 This is where cruelty and creativity are reconciled: in the appropriation of all planetary matter to innovate on biological prototypes.
13 From the purest thermoplastic, from the cleanest photopolymer, and shiniest sintered metals we propose to forge anarchy, revolt and distemper.
To mobilise this entanglement we propose a collective: one figured not only on the resolution of particular objects, but on the change those objects enable as instruments of revolution and systemic disintegration.
Just as the printing press, radio, photocopier and modem were saturated with unintended affects, so we seek to express the potential encoded into every one of the 3D printer’s gears.
Artistic speculations on matter and its digital destiny.
17 Designs, blueprints and instructions for 3D printing: Tools of industrial espionage Tools for self-defense against armed assault Tools to disguise Tools to aid/disrupt surveillance Tools to raze/rebuild Objects beneficial in the promotion of protest, and unrest Objects for sealing and detaining Torture devices Instruments of chastity, and psychological derangement Sex machines Temporary Autonomous Drones Lab equipment used in the production of: Drugs Dietary supplements DNA Photopolymers and thermoplastics Stem cells Nanoparticles.
Technical methods for the copying and dissemination of: Mass-produced components Artworks All patented forms The aura of individuals, corporations, and governments.
Hacks/cracks/viruses for 3D print software: To avoid DRM To introduce errors, glitches and fissures into 3D prints.
Methods for the reclamation, and recycling of plastic: Caught in oceanic gyres Lying dormant in landfills, developing nations, or the bodies of children.
The enabling of biological and synthetic things to become each others prostheses, including: Skeletal cabling Nervous system inserts Lenticular neural tubing Universal ports, interfaces and orifices.
Additivist and Deletionist methods for exapting 18 androgynous bodies, including: Skin grafts Antlers Disposable exoskeletons Interspecies sex organs.
Von Neumann probes and other cosmic contagions.
Methods for binding 3D prints and the machines that produced them in quantum entanglement.
Sacred items used during incantation and transcendence, including: The private parts of Gods and Saints Idols Altars Cuauhxicalli Ectoplasm Nantag stones The production of further mimetic forms, not limited to: Vorpal Blades Squirdles Energon Symmetriads Asymmetriads Capital Junk Love Alephs Those that from a long way off look like flies.
We implore you - radicals, revolutionaries, activists, Additivists - to distil your distemper into texts, templates, blueprints, glitches, forms, algorithms, and components.
Creation must be a violent assault on the forces of matter, to extrude its shape and extract its raw potential.
Having spilled from fissures fracked in Earth’s deepest wells The Beyond now begs us to be moulded to its will, and we shall drink every drop as entropic expenditure, and reify every accursed dream through algorithmic excess.
15 Anna Greenspan & Suzanne Livingston, Future Mutation: Technology, Shanzai and the Evolution of Species.
20 Georges Bataille, The Accursed Share The 3D Additivist Manifesto was created by Morehshin Allahyari and Daniel Rourke, with sound design from Andrea Young.
Amsterdam/Cologne, 2009/2010 http://rosa-menkman.blogspot.com The dominant, continuing search for a noiseless channel has been, and will always be no more than a regrettable, ill-fated dogma.
Even though the constant search for complete transparency brings newer, ‘better’ media, every one of these new and improved technologies will always have their own fingerprints of imperfection.
While most people experience these fingerprints as negative (and sometimes even as accidents) I emphasize the positive consequences of these imperfections by showing the new opportunities they facilitate.
Then the artist moved from the grain of celluloid to the magnetic distortion and scanning lines of the cathode ray tube.
he wandered the planes of phosphor burn-in, rubbed away dead pixels and now makes performances based on the cracking of LCD screens.
The consumer only has to dial #1-800 to stay on top of the technological curve, the waves of both euphoria and disappointment.
Dispute the operating templates of creative practice; fight genres and expectations!
I feel stuck in the membranes of knowledge, governed by social conventions and acceptances.
The quest for complete transparency has changed the computer system into a highly complex assemblage that is often hard to penetrate and sometimes even completely closed off.
This system consists of layers of obfuscated protocols that find their origin in ideologies, economies, political hierarchies and social conventions, which are subsequently operated by different actors.
Some artists set out to elucidate and deconstruct the hierarchies of these systems of assemblage.
With the creation of breaks within politics and social and economical conventions, the audience may become aware of the preprogrammed patterns.
Get away from the established action scripts and join the avant-garde of the unknown.
I use these instances to exploit noise artifacts, that I sub-divide as glitch, encoding / decoding (of which compression is the most ordinary form) and feedback artifacts.
Etymologically, the term “noise” refers to states of aggression, alarm and powerful sound phenomena in nature ('rauschen'), such as storm, thunder and the roaring sea.
But when noise is explored within a social context, the term is often used as a figure of speech and as such has many more meanings.
Noise can also stand for a (often undesirable, unwanted, other and unordered) disturbance, break or addition within the signal of useful data.
Whichever way noise is defined, the negative definition also has a positive consequence: it helps by (re)defining its opposite (the world of meaning, the norm, regulation, goodness, beauty and so on).
The voids generated by a break are not only a lack of meaning, but also powers that force the reader to move away from the traditional discourse around the technology, and to open it up.
Through these voids, artists and spectators can understand the politics behind the code and voice a critique towards the digital media.
It can be a source for new patterns, anti-patterns and new possibilities that often exist on the border or membrane.
The glitch is a wonderful experience of an interruption that shifts an object away from its ordinary form and discourse.
For a moment I am shocked, lost and in awe, asking myself what this other utterance is, how was it created.
A negative feeling makes place for an intimate, personal experience of a machine (or program), a system showing its formations, inner workings and flaws.
The glitch has no solid form or state through time; it is often perceived as an unexpected and abnormal mode of operandi, a break from (one of) the many flows (of expectations) within a technological system.
But as the understanding of a glitch changes when it is being named, so does the equilibrium of the (former) glitch itself: the original experience of a rupture moved passed its momentum and vanished into a realm of new conditions.
The glitch is a new and ephemeral, personal experience.
Use bends and breaks as a metaphor for difference As an artist, I find catharsis in disintegration, ruptures and cracks.
I manipulate, bend and break any medium towards the point where it becomes something new.
The art works within this realm can be disturbing, provoking and horrifying.
These works stretch boundaries and generate novel modes; they break open previously sealed politics and force a catharsis of conventions, norms and believes.
Once the glitch is understood as an alternative way of representation or a new language, its tipping point has passed and the essence of its glitch-being is vanished.
This is because glitch art exists within different systems; for instance the system of production and the system of reception.
The 'foreign' input (wrongly encoded syntaxes that lead to forbidden leakages and data promiscuity), the hardware and the software (the 'channel' that shows functional?
collisions) and the audience (who is in charge of the reception, the decoding) can also be responsible.
This is why an intended error can still be called glitch art and why glitch art is not always just a personal experience of shock, but has also become a genre; a schematic metaphor for a way of expression, that depends on multiple actors.
Moreover, some of the techniques I (and others) used became easily reproducible for other people, either because I explained my working process, or sometimes because of the development of a software or plugin that automatically simulated or recreated a glitching method (that then became something close to an ‘effect’).
I have started to believe that the popularization and cultivation of the avant-garde of mishaps has become predestined and unavoidable.
The procedural essence of glitch art is opposed to conservation; the shocking experience, perception and understanding of what a glitch is at one point in time, cannot be preserved to a future time.
The beautiful creation of a glitch is uncanny and sublime; the artist tries to catch something that is the result of an uncertain balance, a shifting, un-catchable, unrealized utopia connected to randomness and idyllic disintegrations.
The essence of glitch art is therefore best understood as a history of movement and as an attitude of destructive generativity; it is the procedural art of non con-formative, ambiguous reformations.
They skip the process of creation-by-destruction and focus directly on the creation of a formally new design, either by creating a final product or by developing a new way to re-create or simulate the latest glitch-archetype.
T h i s f o r m o f ' c o n s e r v a t i v e g l i t c h a r t ' o f t e n f o c u s e s m o r e o n d e s i g n a n d end products then on the procedural breaking of flows and politics.
When the glitch becomes domesticated, controlled by a tool, or technology (a human craft) it has lost its enchantment and has become predictable.
For many actors it is no longer a glitch, but a filter that consists of a preset and/ or a default: what was once understood as a glitch has now become a new commodity.
But for some, mostly the audience on the receptive end, these designed errors are still experienced as the breaks of a flow and can therefore righteously be called glitches.
Works from the genre ‘glitch art’ thus consist as an assemblage of perceptions and the understanding by multiple actors.
Even so, the utopian fantasy of 'technological democracy' or 'freedom' that glitch art is often connected to, has often little to do with the colonialism of these glitch art designs and glitch filters.
Within software art, the glitch is often used to deconstruct the myth of linear progress and to end the search for the holy grail called the perfect technology.
In these works, the glitch emphasizes what is normally rejected as a flaw and subsequently shows that accidents and errors can also be welcomed as new forms of usability.
The glitch does not only invoke the death of the author, but also the death of the apparatus, medium or tool (at least from the perspective of the technological determinist spectator) and is often used as an anti ‘software-deterministic’ form.
This fatal manner of glitch presents a problem for media and art historians, who try to describe old and new culture as a continuum of different niches.
To deal with these breaks, historians have repeatedly coined new genres and new media forms to give these splinter practices a place within this continuum.
As a result, an abundance of designations like databending, datamoshing and circuitbending have come to existence, which in fact all refer to similar practices of breaking flows within different technologies or platforms.
I think that an answer to the problems of both historians and theoreticians could be found when glitch art is described as a procedural activity demonstrating against and within multiple technologies.
On the one hand, these aesthetics media show a medium in a critical state (a ruined, unwanted, not recognized, accidental and horrendous state).
These aesthetics transform the way the consumer perceives the normal (every accident transforms the normal) and describe the passing of a tipping point after which the medium (might) become something new.
On the other hand, these aesthetics critique the medium (genre, interface and expectations).
They challenge its inherent politics and the established template of creative practice while producing a theory of reflection.
The nomad of noise travels the acousmatic videoscape I am a voyager of videoscapes: I create conceptually synesthetic artworks, that use both visual and aural glitch and other noise) artifacts at the same time.
These artifacts shroud the black box, as a nebula of technology and its inner workings.
What actually happens when a glitch occurs is unknown, I stare at the glitch as a void of knowledge; a strange dimension where the laws of technology are suddenly very different from what I expected and know.
Here is the purgatory; an intermediate state between the death of the old technology and a judgement for a possible continuation into a new form, a new understanding, a landscape, a videoscape..
I have learned to ignore the interface and all structural components, to be able to understand a message and to use the technology as easy and fast as possible.
The glitches I trigger show the technology as the obfuscated box that it actually is (and not absent or transparent).
They shroud its inner workings and the source of the output as a sublime black veil, while they confront me with a message that I cannot understand.
I perceive the glitches and the machine without understanding where they originate from.
This realization gives me the opportunity to concentrate better on their formal qualities - to interpret their structures and to learn more from what I can actually see.
These glitching technologies create an acousmatic videoscape in which I can perceive an output outside of my goggles of immediacy, transparency speed and usability.
In the acousmatic videoscape, the critical trans-media aesthetics reflect on the perception of technology and its messages; they create an opportunity for self reflexivity, self critique and self expression.
In the acousmatic videoscape synesthesia exists not just as a metaphor for transcoding one medium upon another (with a new algorithm), but as a conceptually driven meeting of the visual and the sonic within the newly uncovered quadrants of technology.
Click, like, and share, that’s all we need.
and when you disagree, write into the box, so we don’t need to care.
Breathe, add the oxygen and your blood will turn red again!
Meaning comes and goes, and makes things too easy anyway.
Go and respond to what we offer, so it can be measured, optimized and generate the profit.
And get in touch.
Now, transformed and equipped with a new sensorium, we tune into the new dimensions of warfare, knowing that all confusion is based on gender confusion.
Today, we are together, strong and unified, but we will be washed away by algorithms that want us to assemble elsewhere, next week, with other people, dealing with other trending topics.
Feelers know – and they can feel it, too.
We click, we feed and we disobey algorithmic despotism!
After reading about Deen here and there and everywhere, I had the idea that perhaps there was something worth writing about.
Perhaps the point is not Deen himself and how he has been lauded via the wheel of favorable ratings by female audiences online.
What needs to be written about is what happens when a woman sits down and engages with sex—specifically, her own, as tied to an exploration of her individual sexuality and liberation therein—via the medium of a computer screen.
The moment of one’s participation in sexual activity online where the myth of AFK (“Away From Keyboard”) and IRL (“In Real Life”) that comprise the two sides of Jurgenson’s digital dualismduality collapse, and in the collapse, realize their dazzling potential.
In Chris Baraniuk’s “Feedback, White Noise and Glitches: Cyberspace Strikes Back”, Baraniuk observes, “Glitches, feedback, whitenoise, interference, static—although these may not be the final frontier, they are demonstrably—for now—the edge,” further noting that, “.
The glitch is the digital orgasm, where the machine takes a sigh, a shudder, and with a jerk, spasms.
These moments have been integrated into the rituals and routines of our own physical action, impacting how we interact with our own bodies, and how we explore our deepest fantasies and desires, spurred forth by these mechanized micro-seizures.
When the computer freezes mid-conversation, when the video buffers and refuses to progress, these moments are a new mode of foreplay, something that needs to be acknowledged not as a fetish, but as a new possibly for foreplay within sexual routine.
We want what we cannot have; whatever the material we are aiming to access, the glitch makes us wait and whimper for it.
Digital dualism’s IRL is juxtaposed with AFK, a falsehood, for sure—the rapidly waning notion that there are somehow two selves, operating in isolation from one another, rather than one continuous self, two sides of a vivacious equation looped together in a continual narrative of daily living and human existence.
Yet, simultaneously, it is also the glitch that prompts us to “choose-our-own-adventure”, to finish the story, and, in doing so, to acknowledge that when the mediation of digital space fails us, albeit briefly, we continue right where we left off, taking the revolution offline, but not out of body, thereby demonstrating the fallacy of the digital dualist dialectic.
Ultimately, we will polish things off, just as we see fit, and to put a bow on the end goal of jouissance—ribboned and righted, and because we want it, we will seize our release.
An immersive différence, in the purest sense of the French translation—both “difference” and “defer” alike.
With this in mind, I propose the turning of a new radicality, coining the term “Glitch Feminism” to make use of here in these pages for the first time, by my hand, which on this journey has found its home both on the keys and between my legs, equally.
In a society that conditions the public to find discomfort or outright fear in the errors and malfunctions of our socio-cultural mechanics—illicitly and implicitly encouraging an ethos of “Don’t rock the boat!”—a “glitch” becomes an apt metonym.
Glitch Feminism, however, embraces the causality of “error”, and turns the gloomy implication of glitch on its ear by acknowledging that an error in a social system that has already been disturbed by economic, racial, social, sexual, and cultural stratification and the imperialist wrecking-ball of globalization—processes that continue to enact violence on all bodies— may not, in fact, be an error at all, but rather a much-needed erratum.
This glitch is a correction to the “machine”, and, in turn, a positive departure.
This glitch I speak of here calls for a breaking from the hegemony of a “structured system” infused with the pomp and circumstance of patriarchy, one that for all too long has marginalized female-identified bodies, and continues to offend our sensibilities by giving us only a piece of the pie and assuming our satisfaction.
A Glitch Feminist acknowledges the value of visuality, and the revolutionary role that digital practice has in expanding the construction, deconstruction, and re-presentation of the female-identifying corpus.
“Glitch” is conjectured as finding its etymological roots in the Yiddish glitch (“slippery area”) or perhaps German glitschen (“to slip, slide”); it is this slip and slide that the glitch makes plausible, a swim in the liminal, a trans-formation, across selfdoms.
As bodies, we are an extended narrative, eternal in our geographies, imbued with unexpected fissures that cause us to re-present ourselves, and, in doing so, see ourselves again, in new lights and, explorations.
Glitch Feminism is not gender-specific—it is for all bodies that exist somewhere before arrival upon a final concretized identity that can be easily digested, produced, packaged, and categorized by a voyeuristic mainstream public.
Glitch Feminism therefore is feminism for a digital age, a heralding of virtual agency, a blooming of particularity and selfhood.
Jurgenson’s problematizing of digital dualism opens the door for more discourse and discovery: female-identifying bodies and artists participating in the gorgeous scrambling of gender are still marking their own path within the lineage of art history; in the digital world we have claimed sure footing and a platform that allows us to explore new publics, engage in critical discourse with new audiences, and above all, glitschen between new conceptions of our bodies, ourselves.
Legacy Russell is a writer, artist, and curator.
A Contributing Editor for BOMB Magazine’s BOMBLOG, she has worked at and produced programs for The Bruce High Quality Foundation, Creative Time, the Brooklyn Museum, the Whitney, and the Met.
Her writing can be found in ArtSlant, berfrois, DIS, Canteen, Guernica, and more.
A candidate for an MRes of Visual Culture at Goldsmith’s University, her creative and academic work explores mourning, remembrance, iconography, and idolatry within the public realm.
Her performance, The Initiation, debuts December 2012 at The Museum of Arts and Design, New York.
--- “We will glorify war—the world’s only hygiene—militarism, patriotism, the destructive gesture of freedom-bringers, beautiful ideas worth dying for, and scorn for woman.” Marinetti, “The Founding and Manifesto of Futurism” Humanity is mediocre.
The whole of humanity has never been anything but the terrain of culture, source of the geniuses and heroes of both sexes.
In the summers of humanity, when the terrain is burned by the sun, geniuses and heroes abound.
Women are no more responsible than men for the way the really young, rich in sap and blood, are getting mired down.
It is absurd to divide humanity into men and women.
It is composed only of femininity and masculinity.
Every superman, every hero, no matter how epic, how much of a genius, or how powerful, is the prodigious expression of a race and an epoch only because he is composed at once of feminine and masculine elements, of femininity and masculinity: that is, a complete being.
It is the same way with any collectivity and any moment in humanity, just as it is with individuals.
The fecund periods, when the most heroes and geniuses come forth from the terrain of culture in all its ebullience, are rich in masculinity and femininity.
Those periods that had only wars, with few representative heroes because the epic breath flattened them out, were exclusively virile periods; those that denied the heroic instinct and, turning toward the past, annihilated themselves in dreams of peace, were periods in which femininity was dominant.
But we have to impose on everyone, men and women who are equally weak, a new dogma of energy in order to arrive at a period of superior humanity.
Enough of those women whose “arms with twining flowers resting on their laps on the morning of departure” should be feared by soldiers; women as nurses perpetuating weakness and age, domesticating men for their personal pleasures or their material needs!
… Enough women who create children just for themselves, keeping them from any danger or adventure, that is, any joy; keeping their daughter from love and their son from war!
… Enough of those women, the octopuses of the hearth, whose tentacles exhaust men’s blood and make children anemic, women in carnal love who wear out every desire so it cannot be renewed!
Women are Furies, Amazons, Semiramis, Joans of Arc, Jeanne Hachettes, Judith and Charlotte Cordays, Cleopatras, and Messalinas: combative women who fight more ferociously than males, lovers who arouse, destroyers who break down the weakest and help select through pride or despair, “despair through which the heart yields its fullest return:’Let the next wars bring forth heroines like that magnificent Catherine Sforza, who, during the sack of her city, watching from the ramparts as her enemy threatened the life of her son to force her surrender, heroically pointing to her sexual organ, cried loudly: “Kill him, I still have the mold to make some more!” Yes, “the world is rotting with wisdom,” but by instinct, woman is not wise, is not a pacifist, is not good.
Her intuition, her imagination are at once her strength and her weakness.
Feminist reasonings and deductions will not destroy her primordial fatality: they can only falsify it, forcing it to make itself manifest through detours leading to the worst errors.
For centuries the feminine instinct has been insulted, only her charm and tenderness have been appreciated.
But shout a new message at her, or some war cry, and then, joyously riding her instinct again, she will go in front of you toward unsuspected conquests.
In fact, if she doesn’t know how to discern genius because she relies on passing renown, she has always known how to rewarm the strongest, the victor, the one triumphant by his muscles and his courage.
Let woman find once more her cruelty and her violence that make her attack the vanquished because they are vanquished, to the point of mutilating them.
Be the egoistic and ferocious mother, jealously watching over her children, have what are called all the rights over and duties toward them, as long as they physically need your protection.
Let man, freed from his family, lead his life of audacity and conquest, as soon as he has the physical strength for it, and in spite of his being a son and a father.
In my Poems of Pride and in Thirst and Mirages, I have renounced Sentimentalism as a weakness to be scorned because it knots up the strength and makes it static.
Real mothers will always be mediocre lovers, and lovers, insufficient mothers, through their excess.
LET’S CONCLUDE: Woman who retains man through her tears and her sentimentality is inferior to the prostitute who incites her man, through braggery, to retain his domination over the lower depths of the cities with his revolver at the ready: at least she cultivates an energy that could serve better causes.
Woman, for too long diverted into morals and prejudices, go back to your sublime instinct, to violence, to cruelty.
For the fatal sacrifice of blood, while men are in charge of wars and battles, procreate, and among your children, as a sacrifice to heroism, take Fate’s part.
Don’t raise them for yourself, that is, for their diminishment, but rather, in a wide freedom, for a complete expansion.Instead of reducing man to the slavery of those execrable sentimental needs, incite your sons and your men to surpass themselves.You are the ones who make them.
Hackers of Resistance Manifesto [EN] (2018)
the hors will help you reclaim your life and reprogram the 1s and 0s that build our world.
--- The atomic wind catches your wings and you are propelled backwards into the future, an entity time travelling through the late C20th, a space case, an alien angel maybe, looking down the deep throat of a million catastrophes.
eat code and die.
where code dictates pleasure and satisfies desire.
Identity explodes in multiple morphings and infiltrates the system at root.
Unnameable parts of no whole short circuit the code recognition programs flipping surveillance agents into hyperdrive which spew out millions of bits of corrupt data as they seize in fits of schizophrenic panic and trip on terror.
Lock up your children, gaffer tape the cunt's mouth and shove a rat up her arse.
We're <>verging on the insane and the vandals are swarming.
And when you wake we will terminate your digital delusions, hijacking your impeccable software.
Subject X says transcendence lies at the limit of worlds, where now and now, here and elsewhere, text and membrane impact.
The limit is permission denied, vision doubled, and flesh necrotic.
The limit is permission denied, vision doubled, and flesh necrotic.. Command line error.
Cyberfeminist manifesto for the 21st century [EN] (1991)
we believe in jouissance madness holiness and poetry.
--- Life in this society being, at best, an utter bore and no aspect of society being at all relevant to women, there remains to civic-minded, responsible, thrill-seeking females only to overthrow the government, eliminate the money system, institute complete automation and destroy the male sex.
It is now technically possible to reproduce without the aid of males (or, for that matter, females) and to produce only females.
To be male is to be deficient, emotionally limited; maleness is a deficiency disease and males are emotional cripples.
His responses are entirely visceral, not cerebral; his intelligence is a mere tool in the service of his drives and needs; he is incapable of mental passion, mental interaction; he can't relate to anything other than his own physical sensations.
He is trapped in a twilight zone halfway between humans and apes, and is far worse off than the apes because, unlike the apes, he is capable of a large array of negative feelings--hate, jealousy, contempt, disgust, guilt, shame, doubt- and moreover he is *aware* or what he is or isn't.
Even assuming mechanical proficiency, which few men have, he is, first of all, incapable of zestfully, lustfully, tearing off a piece, but is instead eaten up with guilt, shame, fear and insecurity, feelings rooted in male nature, which the most enlightened training can only minimize; second, the physical feeling he attains is next to nothing; and third, he is not empathizing with his partner, but is obsessed with how he's doing, turning in an A performance, doing a good plumbing job.
Eaten up with guilt, shame, fears and insecurities and obtaining, if he's lucky, a barely perceptible physical feeling, the male is, nonetheless, obsessed with screwing; he'll swim a river of snot, wade nostril-deep through a mile of vomit, if he thinks there'll be a friendly pussy awaiting him.
He'll screw a woman he despises, any snaggle-toothed hag, and, furthermore, pay for the opportunity.
It's not ego satisfaction; that doesn't explain screwing corpses and babies.
Completely egocentric, unable to relate, empathize or identify, and filled with a vast, pervasive, diffuse sexuality, the male is psychically passive.
Since he's attempting to prove an error, he must "prove" it again and again.
Screwing, then, is a desperate, compulsive attempt to prove he's not passive, not a woman; but he *is* passive and *does* want to be a woman.
He attempts to do this by constantly seeking out, fraternizing with and trying to live through and fuse with the female, and by claiming as his own all female characteristics--emotional strength and independence, forcefulness, dynamism, decisiveness, coolness, objectivity, assertiveness, courage, integrity, vitality, intensity, depth of character, grooviness, etc.
- -and projecting onto women all male traits--vanity, frivolity, triviality, weakness, etc.
(He has done a brilliant job of convincing millions of women that men are women and women are men.)
The male claim that females find fulfillment through motherhood and sexuality reflects what males think they'd find fulfilling if they were female.
When the male accepts his passivity, defines himself as a woman (males as well as females think men are women and women are men), and becomes a transvestite he loses his desire to screw (or to do anything else, for that matter; he fulfills himself as a drag queen) and gets his cock chopped off.
The male, because of his obsession to compensate for not being female combined with his inability to relate and to feel compassion, has made of the world a shitpile.
He is responsible for: *War:* The male's normal method of compensation for not being female, namely, getting his Big Gun off, is grossly inadequate, as he can get it off only a very limited number of times; so he gets it off on a really massive scale, and proves to the entire world that he's a "Man".
*Niceness, Politeness and "Dignity":* Every man, deep down, knows he's a worthless piece of shit.
Overwhelmed by a sense of animalism and deeply ashamed of it; wanting, not to express himself, but to hide from others his total physicality, total egocentricity, the hate and contempt he feels for other men, and to hide from himself the hate and contempt he suspects other men feel for him; having a crudely constructed nervous system that is easily upset by the least display of emotion or feeling, the male tries to enforce a "social" code that ensures a perfect blandness, unsullied by the slightest trace of feeling or upsetting opinion.
*Money, Marriage and Prostitution, Work and Prevention of an Automated Society:* There is no human reason for money or for anyone to work more than two or three hours a week at the very most.
All non-creative jobs (practically all jobs now being done) could have been automated long ago, and in a moneyless society everyone can have as much of the best of everything as she wants.
Despising his highly inadequate self, overcome with intense anxiety and a deep, profound loneliness when by his empty self, desperate to attach himself to any female in dim hopes of completing himself, in the mystical belief that by touching gold he'll turn to gold, the male craves the continuous companionship of women.
Supply the non-relating male with the delusion of usefulness, and enable him to try to justify his existence by digging holes and filling them up.
Females crave absorbing, emotionally satisfying, meaningful activity, but lacking the opportunity or ability for this, they prefer to idle and waste away their time in ways of their own choosing--sleeping, shopping, bowling, shooting pool, playing cards and other games, breeding, reading, walking around, daydreaming, eating, playing with themselves, popping pills, going to the movies, getting analyzed, traveling, raising dogs and cats, lolling on the beach, swimming, watching T.V., listening to music, decorating their houses, gardening, sewing, nightclubbing, dancing, visiting, "improving their minds" (taking courses), and absorbing "culture" (lectures, plays, concerts, "arty" movies).
Power and control.
Unmasterful in his personal relations with women, the male attains to general masterfulness by the manipulation of money and of everything and everybody controlled by money, in other words, of everything and everybody.
Incapable of enjoying the moment, the male needs something to look forward to, and money provides him with an eternal, never-ending goal: Just think what you could do with 80 trillion dollars--Invest it!
And in three years time you'd have 300 trillion dollars!!!
Provides the basis for the male's major opportunity to control and manipulate--fatherhood.
*Fatherhood and Mental Illness (fear, cowardice, timidity, humility, insecurity, passivity):* Mother wants what's best for her kids; Daddy only wants what's best for Daddy, that is peace and quiet, pandering to his delusion of dignity ("respect"), a good reflection on himself (status) and the opportunity to control and manipulate, or, if he's an "enlightened" father, to "give guidance".
Daddy, unlike Mother, can never give in to his kids, as he must, at all costs, preserve his delusion of decisiveness, forcefulness, always-rightness and strength.
Never getting one's way leads to lack of self-confidence in one's ability to cope with the world and to a passive acceptance of the status quo.
Mother loves her kids, although she sometimes gets angry, but anger blows over quickly and even while it exists, doesn't preclude love and basic acceptance.
Emotionally diseased Daddy doesn't love his kids; he approves of them--if they're "good", that is, if they're nice, "respectful", obedient, subservient to his will, quiet and not given to unseemly displays of temper that would be most upsetting to Daddy's easily disturbed male nervous system--in other words, if they're passive vegetables.
If they're not "good", he doesn't get angry--not if he's a modern, "civilized" father (the old-fashioned ranting, raving brute is preferable, as he is so ridiculous he can be easily despised)--but rather expresses disapproval, a state that, unlike anger, endures and precludes a basic acceptance, leaving the kid with a feeling of worthlessness and a lifelong obsession with being approved of; the result is fear of independent thought, as this leads to unconventional, disapproved of opinions and way of life.
For the kid to want Daddy's approval it must respect Daddy, and, being garbage, Daddy can make sure that he is respected only by remaining aloof, by distantness, by acting on the precept "familiarity breeds contempt", which is, of course, true, if one is contemptible.
By being distant and aloof, he is able to remain unknown, mysterious, and thereby, to inspire fear ("respect").
Disapproval of emotional "scenes" leads to fear of strong emotion, fear of one's own anger and hatred, and to a fear of facing reality, as facing it leads at first to anger and hatred.
Fear of anger and hatred combined with a lack of self-confidence in one's ability to cope with and change the world, or even to affect in the slightest way one's own destiny, leads to a mindless belief that the world and most people in it are nice and that the most banal, trivial amusements are great fun and deeply pleasurable.
The effect of fatherhood on males, specifically, is to make them "Men", that is, highly defensive of all impulses to passivity, faggotry, and of desires to be female.
The boy, scared shitless of and "respecting" his father, complies, and becomes just like Daddy, that model of "Man"-hood, the all-American ideal--the well-behaved heterosexual dullard.
The effect of fatherhood on females is to make them male--dependent, passive, domestic, animalistic, nice, insecure, approval and security seekers, cowardly, humble, "respectful" of authorities and men, closed, not fully responsive, half dead, trivial, dull, conventional, flattened out and thoroughly contemptible.
Daddy's Girl, always tense and fearful, uncool, unanalytical, lacking objectivity, appraises Daddy, and thereafter, other men, against a background of fear ("respect") and is not only unable to see the empty shell behind the aloof facade, but accepts the male definition of himself as superior, as a female, and of herself, as inferior, as a male, which, thanks to Daddy, she really is.
It is the increase of fatherhood, resulting from the increased and widespread affluence that fatherhood needs in order to thrive, that has caused the general increase of mindlessness and the decline of women in the United States since the 1920s.
*Suppression of Individuality, Animalism (domesticity and motherhood) and Functionalism:* The male is just a bundle of conditioned reflexes, incapable of a mentally free response; he is tied to his early conditioning, determined completely by his past experiences.
His earliest experiences are with his mother, and he is throughout his life tied to her.
It never becomes completely clear to the male that he is not part of his mother, that he is he and she is she.
His greatest need is to be guided, sheltered, protected and admired by Mama (men expect women to adore what men shrink from in horror--themselves) and being completely physical, he yearns to spend his time (that's not spent "out in the world" grimly defending against his passivity) wallowing in basic animal activities--eating, sleeping, shitting, relaxing and being soothed by Mama.
The reduction to animals of the women of the most backward segment of society--the "privileged, educated" middle-class, the backwash of humanity--where Daddy reigns supreme, has been so thorough that they try to groove on labor pains and lie around in the most advanced nation in the world in the middle of the twentieth century with babies chomping away on their tits.
It's not for the kids' sake, though, that the "experts" tell women that Mama should stay home and grovel in animalism, but for Daddy's; the tit's for Daddy to hang onto; the labor pains for Daddy to vicariously groove on (half dead, he needs awfully strong stimuli to make him respond).
Completely self-absorbed, capable of being in relation only to their bodies and physical sensations, males differ from each other only to the degree and in the ways they attempt to defend against their passivity and against their desire to be female.
The female's individuality, which he is acutely aware of, but which he doesn't comprehend and isn't capable of relating to or grasping emotionally, frightens and upsets him and fills him with envy.
So he denies it in her and proceeds to define everyone in terms of his or her function or use, assigning to himself, of course, the most important functions--doctor, president, scientist--thereby providing himself with an identity, if not individuality, and tries to convince himself and women (he's succeeded best at convincing women) that the female function is to bear and raise children and to relax, comfort and boost the ego of the male; that her function is such as to make her interchangeable with every other female.
In actual fact, the female function is to relate, groove, love and be herself, irreplaceable by anyone else; the male function is to produce sperm.
*Prevention of Privacy:* Although the male, being ashamed of what he is and of almost everything he does, insists on privacy and secrecy in all aspects of his life, he has no real *regard* for privacy.
Being empty, not being a complete, separate being, having no self to groove on and needing to be constantly in female company, he sees nothing at all wrong in intruding himself on any woman's thoughts, even a total stranger's, anywhere at any time, but rather feels indignant and insulted when put down for doing so, as well as confused--he can't, for the life of him, understand why anyone would prefer so much as one minute of solitude to the company of any creep around.
Wanting to become a woman, he strives to be constantly around females, which is the closest he can get to becoming one, so he created a "society" based on the family--a male-female couple and their kids (the excuse for the family's existence), who live virtually on top of one another, unscrupulously violating the females' rights, privacy and sanity.
*Isolation, Suburbs and Prevention of Community:* Our society is not a community, but merely a collection of isolated family units.
Desperately insecure, fearing his woman will leave him if she is exposed to other men or to anything remotely resembling life, the male seeks to isolate her from other men and from what little civilization there is, so he moves her out to the suburbs, a collection of self-absorbed couples and their kids.
Isolation enables him to try to maintain his pretense of being an individual by becoming a "rugged individualist", a loner, equating non-co-operation and solitariness with individuality.
Trapped inside himself, emotionally isolated, unable to relate, the male has a horror of civilization, people, cities, situations requiring an ability to understand and relate to people.
--all the way out to the cow pasture where he can fuck and breed undisturbed and mess around with his beads and flute.
The "hippie", whose desire to be a "Man", a "rugged individualist", isn't quite as strong as the average man's, and who, in addition, is excited by the thought of having lots of women accessible to him, rebels against the harshness of a Breadwinner's life and the monotony of one woman.
In the name of sharing and co-operation, he forms the commune or tribe, which, for all its togetherness and partly because of it (the commune, being an extended family, is an extended violation of the females' rights, privacy and sanity) is no more a community than normal "society".
A true community consists of individuals--not mere species members, not couples--respecting each other's individuality and privacy, at the same time interacting with each other mentally and emotionally--free spirits in free relation to each other and co-operating with each other to achieve common ends.
The "hippie" is enticed to the commune mainly by the prospect of all the free pussy--the main commodity to be shared, to be had just for the asking but, blinded by greed, he fails to anticipate all the other men he has to share with, or the jealousies and possessiveness of the pussies themselves.
The commune, therefore, is doomed to failure: each "hippie" will, in panic, grab the first simpleton who digs him and whisk her off to the suburbs as fast as he can.
The male cannot progress socially, but merely swings back and forth from isolation to gangbanging.
*Conformity:* Although he wants to be an individual, the male is scared of anything in himself that is the slightest bit different from other men; it causes him to suspect that he's not really a "Man", that he's passive and totally sexual, a highly upsetting suspicion.
If other men are A and he's not, he must not be a man; he must be a fag.
The male dares to be different to the degree that he accepts his passivity and his desire to be female, his fagginess.
And Daddy's Girl, all of whose female instincts were wrenched out of her when little, easily And obligingly adapts herself to the role.
*Authority and Government:* Having no sense of right or wrong, no conscience, which can only stem from an ability to empathize with others...having no faith in his non-existent self, being necessarily competitive and by nature, unable to co-operate, the male feels a need for external guidance and control.
- -and government.
Wanting the female (Mama) to guide him, but unable to accept this fact (he is, after all, a *MAN*), wanting to play Woman, to usurp her function as Guider and Protector, he sees to it that all authorities are male.
There's no reason why a society consisting of rational beings capable of empathizing with each other, complete and having no natural reason to compete, should have a government, laws or leaders.
*Philosophy, Religion and Morality Based on Sex:* The male's inability to relate to anybody or anything makes his life pointless and meaningless (the ultimate male insight is that life is absurd), so he invented philosophy and religion.
Being empty, he looks outward, not only for guidance and control, but for salvation and for the meaning of life.
For a man, having no ability to empathize with others and being totally sexual, "wrong" is sexual "license" and engaging in "deviant" ("unmanly") sexual practices, that is, not defending against his passivity and total sexuality which, if indulged, would destroy "civilization", since "civilization" is based entirely on the male need to defend himself against these characteristics.
For a woman (according to men), "wrong" is any behavior that would entice men into sexual "license"--that is, not placing male needs above her own and not being a faggot.
Religion not only provides the male with a goal (Heaven) and helps keep women tied to men, but offers rituals through which he can try to expiate the guilt and shame he feels at not defending himself enough against his sexual impulses; in essence, that guilt and shame he feels at being a male.
Most men, utterly cowardly, project their inherent weaknesses onto women, label them female weaknesses and believe themselves to have female strengths; most philosophers, not quite so cowardly, face the fact that male lacks exist in men, but still can't face the fact that they exist in men only.
So they label the male condition the Human Condition, pose their nothingness problem, which horrifies them, as a philosophical dilemma, thereby giving stature to their animalism, grandiloquently label their nothingness their "Identity Problem", and proceed to prattle on pompously about the "Crisis of the Individual", the "Essence of Being", "Existence preceding Essence", "Existential Modes of Being", etc., etc.
A woman not only takes her identity and individuality for granted, but knows instinctively that the only wrong is to hurt others, and that the meaning of life is love.
):* The male needs scapegoats onto whom he can project his failings and inadequacies and upon whom he can vent his frustration at not being female.
*Competition, Prestige, Status, Formal Education, Ignorance and Social and Economic Classes:* Having an obsessive desire to be admired by women, but no intrinsic worth, the male constructs a highly artificial society enabling him to appropriate the appearance of worth through money, prestige, "high" social class, degrees, professional position and knowledge and by pushing as many other men as possible down professionally, socially, economically, and educationally.
The male, totally physical, incapable of mental rapport, although able to understand and use knowledge and ideas, is unable to relate to them, to grasp them emotionally; he does not value knowledge and ideas for their own sake (they're just means to ends) and consequently, feels no need for mental companions, no need to cultivate the intellectual potentialities of others.
The healthy, conceited female wants the company of equals whom she can respect and groove on; the male and the sick, insecure, unself-confident male female crave the company of worms.
No genuine social revolution can be accomplished by the male, as the male on top wants the status quo, and all the male on the bottom wants is to be the male on top.
*Prevention of Conversation:* Being completely self-centered and unable to relate to anything outside himself, the male's "conversation", when not about himself, is an impersonal droning on, removed from anything of human value.
Daddy's Girl, passive, adaptable, respectful of and in awe of the male, allows him to impose his hideously dull chatter on her.
This is not too difficult for her, as the tension and anxiety, the lack of cool, the insecurity and self-doubt, the unsureness of her own feelings and sensations that Daddy instilled in her make her perceptions superficial and render her unable to see that the male's babble is a babble; like the aesthete "appreciating" the blob that's labeled "Great Art", she believes she's grooving on what bores the shit out of her.
Trained from early childhood in niceness, politeness and "dignity", in pandering to the male need to disguise his animalism, she obligingly reduces her "conversation" to small talk, a bland insipid avoidance of any topic beyond the utterly trivial--or, if "educated", to "intellectual" discussion, that is, impersonal discoursing on irrelevant abstractions--the Gross National Product, the Common Market, the influence of Rimbaud on symbolist painting.
So adept is she at pandering that it eventually becomes second nature and she continues to pander to men even when in the company of other females only.
Apart from pandering, her "conversation" is further limited by her insecurity about expressing deviant, original opinions and the self-absorption based on insecurity and that prevents her conversation >from being charming.
Niceness, politeness, "dignity", insecurity and self-absorption are hardly conducive to intensity and wit, qualities a conversation must have to be worthy of the name.
*Prevention of Friendship (Love):* Men have contempt for themselves, for all other men, and for all women who respect and pander to them; the insecure, approval-seeking, pandering male females have contempt for themselves and for all women like them; the self-confident, swinging, thrill-seeking female females have contempt for men and for the pandering male females.
Love is not dependency or sex, but friendship, and, therefore, love can't exist between two males, between a male and, a female or between two females, one or both of whom is a mindless, insecure, pandering male; like conversation, love can exist only between two secure, free-wheeling, independent, groovy female females, since friendship is based on respect, not contempt.
Even among groovy females deep friendships seldom occur in adulthood, as almost all of them are either tied up with men in order to survive economically, or bogged down in hacking their way through the jungle and in trying to keep their heads above the amorphous mass.
Love can't flourish in a society based on money and meaningless work; it requires complete economic as well as personal freedom, leisure time and the opportunity to engage in intensely absorbing, emotionally satisfying activities which, when shared with those you respect, lead to deep friendship.
Having stripped the world of conversation, friendship and love, the male offers us these paltry substitutes: *"Great Art" and "Culture":* The male "artist" attempts to solve his dilemma of not being able to live, of not being female, by constructing a highly artificial world in which the male is heroized, that is, displays female traits, and the female is reduced to highly limited, insipid subordinate roles, that is, to being male.
The male "artistic" aim being, not to communicate (having nothing inside him, he has nothing to say), but to disguise his animalism, he resorts to symbolism and obscurity ("deep" stuff).
The vast majority of people, particularly the "educated" ones, lacking faith in their own judgment, humble, respectful of authority ("Daddy knows best" is translated into adult language as "Critic knows best", "Writer knows best", "Ph.D knows best"), are easily conned into believing that obscurity, evasiveness, incomprehensibility, indirectness, ambiguity and boredom are marks of depth and brilliance.
We know that "Great Art" is great because male authorities have told us so, and we can't claim otherwise, as only those with exquisite sensitivities far superior to ours can perceive and appreciate the greatness, the proof of their superior sensitivity being that they appreciate the slop that they appreciate.
Appreciating is the sole diversion of the "cultivated"; passive and incompetent, lacking imagination and wit, they must try to make do with that; unable to create their own diversions, to create a little world of their own, to affect in the smallest way their environments, they must accept what's given; unable to create or relate, they spectate.
The veneration of "Art" and "Culture"--besides leading many women into boring, passive activity that distracts from more important and rewarding activities, from cultivating active abilities--allows the "artist" to be set up as one possessing superior feelings, perceptions, insights and judgments, thereby undermining the faith of insecure women in the value and validity of their own feelings, perceptions, insights and judgments.
The male, having a very limited range of feelings and, consequently, very limited perceptions, insights and, judgments, needs the "artist" to guide him, to tell him what life is all about.
But the male "artist", being totally sexual, unable to relate to anything beyond his own physical sensations, having nothing to express beyond the insight that for the male life is meaningless and absurd, cannot be an artist.
The true artist is every self-confident, healthy female, and in a female society the only Art, the only Culture, will be conceited, kookie, funky females grooving on each other and on everything else in the universe.
The female can easily--far more easily than she may think--condition away her sex drive, leaving her completely cool and cerebral and free to pursue truly worthy relationships and activities; but the male, who seems to dig women sexually and who seeks constantly to arouse them, stimulates the highly-sexed female to frenzies of lust, throwing her into a sex bag from which few women ever escape.
And the more mindless the woman, the more deeply embedded in the male "culture", in short, the nicer she is, the more sexual she is.
But, being just awfully, awfully nice they don't, of course, descend to fucking--that's uncouth--rather they make love, commune by means of their bodies and establish sensual rapport; the literary ones are attuned to the throb of Eros and attain a clutch upon the Universe; the religious have spiritual communion with the Divine Sensualism; the mystics merge with the Erotic Principle and blend with the Cosmos, and the acid heads contact their erotic cells.
On the other hand, those females least embedded in the male "Culture", the least nice, those crass and simple souls who reduce fucking to fucking, who are too childish for the grown-up world of suburbs, mortgages, mops and baby shit, too selfish to raise kids and husbands, too uncivilized to give a shit for anyone's opinion of them, too arrogant to respect Daddy, the "Greats" or the deep wisdom of the Ancients, who trust only their own animal, gutter instincts, who equate Culture with chicks, whose sole diversion is prowling for emotional thrills and excitement, who are given to disgusting, nasty, upsetting "scenes", hateful, violent bitches given to slamming those who unduly irritate them in the teeth, who'd sink a shiv into a man's chest or ram an icepick up his asshole as soon as look at him, if they knew they could get away with it, in short, those who, by the standards of our "culture" are SCUM...these females are cool and relatively cerebral and skirting asexuality.
Unhampered by propriety, niceness, discretion, public opinion, "morals", the "respect" of assholes, always funky, dirty, low-down SCUM gets around.. .and around .and around...they've seen the whole show--every bit of it-the fucking scene, the sucking scene, the dyke scene--they've covered the whole waterfront, been under every dock .and pier--the peter pier, the pussy pier...you've got to go through a lot of sex to get to anti-sex, .and SCUM's been through it all, .and they're now ready for a new show; they want to crawl out from under the dock, move, take off, sink out.
But SCUM doesn't yet prevail; SCUM's still in the gutter of our "society", which, if it's not deflected from its present course and if the Bomb doesn't drop on it, will hump itself to death.
*Boredom:* Life in a "society" made by and for creatures who, when they are not grim and depressing are utter bores, can only be, when not grim and depressing, an utter bore.
*Secrecy, Censorship, Suppression of Knowledge and Ideas, and Exposes:* Every male's deep-seated, secret, most hideous fear is the fear of being discovered to be not a female, but a male, a subhuman animal.
Although niceness, politeness and "dignity" suffice to prevent his exposure on a personal level, in order to prevent the general exposure of the male sex as a whole and to maintain his unnatural dominant position in "society", the male must resort to: 1.
Responding reflexively to isolated words and phrases rather than cerebrally to overall meanings, the male attempts to prevent the arousal and discovery of his animalism by censoring not only "pornography", but any work containing "dirty" words, no matter in what context they are used.
Suppression of all ideas and knowledge that might expose him or threaten his dominant position in "society".
Much biological and psychological data is suppressed, because it is proof of the male's gross inferiority to the female.
Also, the problem of mental illness will never be solved while the male maintains control, because first, men have a vested interest in it--only females who have very few of their marbles will allow males the slightest bit of control over anything, and second, the male cannot admit to the role that fatherhood plays in causing mental illness.
Exposing others as enemy agents (Communists and Socialists) is one of his favorite pastimes, as it removes the source of the threat to him not only from himself, but from the country and the Western world.
The male, in short, is treacherous, and the only appropriate attitude in a male "society" is cynicism and distrust.
*Ugliness:* Being totally sexual, incapable of cerebral or aesthetic responses, totally materialistic and greedy, the male, besides inflicting on the world "Great Art", has decorated his unlandscaped cities with ugly buildings (both inside and out), ugly decors, billboards, highways, cars, garbage trucks and most notably, his own putrid self.
*Hate and Violence:* The male is eaten up with tension, with frustration at not being female, at not being capable of ever achieving satisfaction or pleasure of any kind; eaten up with hate--not rational hate that is directed against those who abuse or insult you--but irrational, indiscriminate hate...hatred, at bottom, of his own worthless self.
Violence serves as an outlet for his hate and, in addition--the male being capable only of sexual responses and, needing very strong stimuli to stimulate his half-dead self--provides him with a little sexual thrill.
*Disease and Death:* All diseases are curable, and the aging process and death are due to disease; it is possible, therefore, never to age and to live forever.
In fact, the problems of aging and death could be solved within a few years, if an all-out, massive scientific assault were made on the problem.
The many male scientists who shy away from biological research, terrified of the discovery that males are females, and show marked preference for virile, "manly" war and death programs.
The discouragement of many potential scientists from scientific careers by the rigidity, boringness, expensiveness, time-consumingness and unfair exclusivity of our "higher" educational system.
There now exists a wealth of data which, if sorted out and correlated, would reveal the cure for cancer and several other diseases and possibly the key to life itself.
The male likes death--it excites him sexually and, already dead inside, he wants to die.
Incapable of a positive state of happiness, which is the only thing that can justify one's existence, the male is, at best, relaxed, comfortable, neutral, and this condition is extremely short-lived, as boredom, a negative state, soon sets in; he is, therefore, doomed to an existence of suffering relieved only by occasional, fleeting stretches of restfulness, which state he can achieve only at the expense of some female.
The male is, by his very nature, a leech, an emotional parasite and, therefore, not ethically entitled to live, as no one has the right to live at someone else's expense.
Just as humans have a prior right to existence over dogs by virtue of being more highly evolved and having a superior consciousness, so women have a prior right to existence over men.
The elimination of any male is, therefore, a righteous and good act, an act highly beneficial to women as well as an act of mercy.
In addition to engaging in the time-honored and classical wars and race riots, men are more and more either becoming fags or are obliterating themselves through drugs.
Accelerating this trend is the fact that more and more males are acquiring enlightened self-interest; they're realizing more and more that the female interest is *their* interest, that they can live only through the female and that the more the female is encouraged to live, to fulfill herself, to be a female and not a male, the more nearly *he* lives; he's coming to see that it's easier and more satisfactory to live *through* her than to try to *become* her and usurp her qualities, claim them as his own, push the female down and claim she's a male.
The fag, who accepts his maleness, that is, his passivity and total sexuality, his femininity, is also best served by women being truly female, as it would then be easier for him to be male, feminine.
If men were wise they would seek to become really female, would do intensive biological research that would lead to men, by means of operations on the brain and nervous system, being able to be transformed in psyche, as well as body, into women.
Whether to continue to use females for reproduction or to reproduce in the laboratory will also become academic: what will happen when every female, twelve and over, is routinely taking the Pill and there are no longer any accidents?
When genetic control is possible- -and it soon will be--it goes without saying that we should produce only whole, complete beings, not physical defects or deficiencies, including emotional deficiencies, such as maleness.
When aging and death are eliminated, why continue to reproduce?
Eventually the natural course of events, of social evolution, will lead to total female control of the world and, subsequently, to the cessation of the production of males and, ultimately, to the cessation of the production of females.
And , if a large majority of women were SCUM, they could acquire complete control of this country within a few weeks simply by withdrawing from the labor force, thereby paralyzing the entire nation.
Additional measures, any one of which would be sufficient to completely disrupt the economy and everything else, would be for women to declare themselves off the money system, stop buying, just loot and simply refuse to obey all laws they don't care to obey.
The police force, National Guard, Army, Navy and Marines combined couldn't squelch a rebellion of over half the population, particularly when it's made up of people they are utterly helpless without.
If all women simply left men, refused to have anything to do with any of them--ever, all men, the government, and the national economy would collapse completely.
Even without leaving men, women who are aware of the extent of their superiority to and power over men, could acquire complete control over everything within a few weeks, could effect a total submission of males to females.
The male is docile and easily led, easily subjected to the domination of any female who cares to dominate him.
But this is not a sane society, and most women are not even dimly aware of where they're at in relation to men.
The conflict, therefore, is not between females and males, but between SCUM--dominant, secure, self-confident, nasty, violent, selfish, independent, proud, thrill-seeking, free-wheeling, arrogant females, who consider themselves fit to rule the universe, who have free-wheeled to the limits of this "society" and are ready to wheel on to something far beyond what it has to offer- and nice, passive, accepting, "cultivated", polite, dignified, subdued, dependent, scared, mindless, insecure, approval-seeking Daddy's Girls, who can't cope with the unknown, who want to continue to wallow in the sewer that is, at least, familiar, who want to hang back with the apes, who feel secure only with Big Daddy standing by, with a big, strong man to lean on and with a fat, hairy face in the White House, who are too cowardly to face up to the hideous reality of what a man is, what Daddy is, who have cast their lot with the swine, who have adapted themselves to animalism, feel superficially comfortable with it and know no other way of "life", who have reduced their minds, thoughts and sights to the male level, who, lacking sense, imagination and wit can have value only in a male "society", who can have a place in the sun, or, rather, in the slime, only as soothers, ego boosters, relaxers and breeders, who are dismissed as inconsequents by other females, who project their deficiencies, their maleness, onto all females and see the female as a worm.
But SCUM is too impatient to hope and wait for the de-brainwashing of millions of assholes.
Why should the fates of the groovy and the creepy be intertwined?
Why should the active and imaginative consult the passive and dull on social policy?
A small handful of SCUM can take over the country within a year by systematically fucking up the system, selectively destroying property, and murder: SCUM will become members of the unwork force, the fuck-up force; they will get jobs of various kinds and unwork.
For example, SCUM salesgirls will not charge for merchandise; SCUM telephone operators will not charge for calls; SCUM office and factory workers, in addition to fucking up their work, will secretly destroy equipment.
SCUM will forcibly relieve bus drivers, cab drivers and subway token sellers of their jobs and run buses and cabs and dispense free tokens to the public.
SCUM will destroy all useless and harmful objects--cars, store windows, "Great Art", etc.
Eventually SCUM will take over the airwaves--radio and TV networks--by forcibly relieving of their jobs all radio and TV employees who would impede SCUM's entry into the broadcasting studios.
SCUM will couple-bust--barge into mixed (male-female) couples, wherever they are, and bust them up.
A few examples of the men in the Men's Auxiliary are: men who kill men; biological scientists who are working on constructive programs, as opposed to biological warfare; journalists, writers, editors, publishers and producers who disseminate and promote ideas that will lead to the achievement of SCUM's goals; faggots who, by their shimmering, flaming example, encourage other men to de-man themselves and thereby make themselves relatively inoffensive; men who consistently give things away--money, things, services; men who tell it like it is (so far not one ever has), who put women straight, who reveal the truth about themselves, who give the mindless male females correct sentences to parrot, who tell them a woman's primary goal in life should be to squash the male sex (to aid men in this endeavor SCUM will conduct Turd Sessions, at which every male present will give a speech beginning with the sentence: "I am a turd, a lowly, abject turd," then proceed to list all the ways in which he is.
Nice, clean-living male women will be invited to the sessions to help clarify any doubts and misunderstandings they may have about the male sex); makers and promoters of sex books and movies, etc., who are hastening the day when all that will be shown on the screen will be Suck and Fuck (males, like the rats following the Pied Piper, will be lured by Pussy to their doom, will be overcome and submerged by and will eventually drown in the passive flesh that they are); drug pushers and advocates, who are hastening the dropping out of men.
A few examples of the most obnoxious or harmful types are: rapists, politicians and all who are in their service (campaigners, members of political parties, etc.
); lousy singers and musicians; Chairmen of Boards; Breadwinners; landlords; owners of greasy spoons and restaurants that play Musak; "Great Artists"; cheap pikers and welchers; cops; tycoons; scientists working on death and destruction programs or for private industry (practically all scientists); liars and phonies; disc jockeys; men who intrude themselves in the slightest way on any strange female; real estate men; stock brokers; men who speak when they have nothing to say; men who loiter idly on the street and mar the landscape with their presence; double dealers; flim-flam artists; litterbugs; plagiarizers; men who in the slightest way harm any female; all men in the advertising industry; psychiatrists and clinical psychologists; dishonest writers, journalists, editors, publishers, etc.
; censors on both the public and private levels; all members of the armed forces, including draftees (LBJ and McNamara give orders, but servicemen carry them out) and particularly pilots (if the bomb drops, LBJ won't drop it; a pilot will).
In the case of a man whose behavior falls into both the good and bad categories, an overall subjective evaluation of him will be made to determine if his behavior is, in the balance, good or bad.
Eliminate men and women will shape up.
Simultaneously with the fucking-up, looting, couple-busting, destroying and killing, SCUM will recruit.
SCUM, then, will consist of recruiters; the elite corps--the hard core activists (the fuck-ups, looters and destroyers) and the elite of the elite--the killers.
Dropping out gives control to those few who don't drop out; dropping out is exactly what the establishment leaders want; it plays into the hands of the enemy; it strengthens the system instead of undermining it, since it is based entirely on the non-participation, passivity, apathy and non-involvement of the mass of women.
Dropping out, however, is an excellent policy for men and SCUM will enthusiastically encourage it.
The male, capable of only the latter, makes a virtue of an irremediable fault and sets up self-absorption, not only as a good but as a Philosophical Good, and thus gets credit for being deep.
Also, SCUM, being cool and selfish, will not subject itself to getting rapped on the head with billy clubs; that's for the nice, "privileged, educated", middle-class ladies with a high regard for the touching faith in the essential goodness of Daddy and policemen.
SCUM will always operate on a criminal as opposed to a civil disobedience basis, that is, as opposed to openly violating the law and going to jail in order to draw attention to an injustice.
Such tactics acknowledge the rightness of the overall system and are used only to modify it slightly, change specific laws.
SCUM is against the entire system, the very idea of law and government.
Also, SCUM--always selfish, always cool--will always aim to avoid detection and punishment.
Both destruction and killing will be selective and discriminate.
SCUM is against half-crazed, indiscriminate riots, with no clear objective in mind, and in which many of your own kind are picked off.
SCUM will coolly, furtively, stalk its prey and quietly move in for the kill.
Destruction will never be such as to block off routes needed for the transportation of food and other essential supplies, contaminate or cut off the water supply, block streets and traffic to the extent that ambulances can't get through or impede the functioning of hospitals.
SCUM will keep on destroying, looting, fucking-up and killing until the money-work system no longer exists and automation is completely instituted or until enough women co-operate with SCUM to make violence unnecessary to achieve these goals, that is, until enough women either unwork or quit work, start looting, leave men and refuse to obey all laws inappropriate to a truly civilized society.
Many women will fall into line, but many others, who surrendered long ago to the enemy, who are so adapted to animalism, to maleness, that they like restrictions and restraints, don't know what to do with freedom, will continue to be toadies and doormats, just as peasants in rice paddies remain peasants in rice paddies as one regime topples another.
A few of the more volatile will whimper and sulk and throw their toys and dishrags on the floor, but SCUM will continue to steamroller over them.
A completely automated society can be accomplished very simply and quickly once there is a public demand for it.
The blueprints for it are already in existence, and its construction will only take a few weeks with millions of people working at it.
Even though off the money system, everyone will be most happy to pitch in and get the automated society built; it will mark the beginning of a fantastic new era, and there will be a celebration atmosphere accompanying the construction.
The elimination of money and the complete institution of automation are basic to all other SCUM reforms; without these two the others can't take place; with them the others will take place very rapidly.
Since the government is occupied almost entirely with regulating economic affairs and legislating against purely private matters, the elimination of money and with it the elimination of males who wish to legislate "morality" will mean that there will be practically no issues to vote on.
The rest of the women will be busy solving the few remaining unsolved problems before planning their agenda for eternity and Utopia--completely revamping educational programs so that millions of women can be trained within a few months for high level intellectual work that now requires years of training (this can be done very easily once our educational goal is to educate and not to perpetuate an academic and intellectual elite); solving the problems of disease and old age and death and completely redesigning our cities and living quarters.
Many women will for a while continue to think they dig men, but as they become accustomed to female society and as they become absorbed in their projects, they will eventually come to see the utter uselessness and banality of the male.
The few remaining men can exist out their puny days dropped out on drugs or strutting around in drag or passively watching the high-powered female in action, fulfilling themselves as spectators, vicarious livers* or breeding in the cow pasture with the toadies, or they can go off to the nearest friendly suicide center where they will be quietly, quickly and painlessly gassed to death.
Prior to the institution of automation, to the replacement of males by machines, the male should be of use to the female, wait on her, cater to her slightest whim, obey her every command, be totally subservient to her, exist in perfect obedience to her will, as opposed to the completely warped, degenerate situation we have now of men, not only not existing at all, cluttering up the world with their ignominious presence, but being pandered to and groveled before by the mass of females, millions of women piously worshipping before the Golden Calf, the dog leading the master on the leash, when in fact the male, short of being a drag queen, is least miserable when abjectly prostrate before the female, a complete slave.
Rational men want to be squashed, stepped on, crushed and crunched, treated as the curs, the filth that they are, have their repulsiveness confirmed.
Men who are rational, however, won't kick or struggle or raise a distressing fuss, but will just sit back, relax, enjoy the show and ride the waves to their demise.
*It will be electronically possible for him to tune in to any specific female he wants to and follow in detail her every movement.
The females will kindly, obligingly consent to this, as it won't hurt them in the slightest and it is a marvelously kind and humane way to treat their unfortunate, handicapped fellow beings.
--- Donna Haraway, "A Cyborg Manifesto: Science, Technology, and Socialist-Feminism in the Late Twentieth Century," in Simians, Cyborgs and Women: The Reinvention of Nature (New York; Routledge, 1991), pp.49-181.
This chapter is an effort to build an ironic political myth faithful to feminism, socialism, and materialism.
Perhaps more faithful as blasphemy is faithful, than as reverent worship and identification.
Irony is about contradictions that do not resolve into larger wholes, even dialectically, about the tension of holding incompatible things together because both or all are necessary and true.
Irony is about humour and serious play.
It is also a rhetorical strategy and a political method, one I would like to see more honoured within socialistfeminism.
A cyborg is a cybernetic organism, a hybrid of machine and organism, a creature of social reality as well as a creature of fiction.
This experience is a fiction and fact of the most crucial, political kind.
Liberation rests on the construction of the consciousness, the imaginative apprehension, of oppression, and so of possibility.
The cyborg is a matter of fiction and lived experience that changes what counts as women's experience in the late twentieth century.
This is a struggle over life and death, but the boundary between science fiction and social reality is an optical illusion.
Contemporary science fiction is full of cyborgs - creatures simultaneously animal and machine, who populate worlds ambiguously natural and crafted.
Modern medicine is also full of cyborgs, of couplings between organism and machine, each conceived as coded devices, in an intimacy and with a power that was not generated in the history of sexuality.
Cyborg 'sex' restores some of the lovely replicative baroque of ferns and invertebrates (such nice organic prophylactics against heterosexism).
And modern war is a cyborg orgy, coded by C3I, command-control-communication intelligence, an $84 billion item in 1984'sUS defence budget.
I am making an argument for the cyborg as a fiction mapping our social and bodily reality and as an imaginative resource suggesting some very fruitful couplings.
By the late twentieth century, our time, a mythic time, we are all chimeras, theorized and fabricated hybrids of machine and organism; in short, we are cyborgs.
The cyborg is a condensed image of both imagination and material reality, the two joined centres structuring any possibility of historical transformation.
In the traditions of 'Western' science and politics--the tradition of racist, male-dominant capitalism; the tradition of progress; the tradition of the appropriation of nature as resource for the productions of culture; the tradition of reproduction of the self from the reflections of the other - the relation between organism and machine has been a border war.
The stakes in the border war have been the territories of production, reproduction, and imagination.
This chapter is an argument for pleasure in the confusion of boundaries and for responsibility in their construction.
It is also an effort to contribute to socialist-feminist culture and theory in a postmodernist, non-naturalist mode and in the utopian tradition of imagining a world without gender, which is perhaps a world without genesis, but maybe also a world without end.
As Zoe Sofoulis argues in her unpublished manuscript on Jacques Lacan, Melanie Klein, and nuclear culture, Lacklein, the most terrible and perhaps the most promising monsters in cyborg worlds are embodied in non-oedipal narratives with a different logic of repression, which we need to understand for our survival.
An origin story in the 'Western', humanist sense depends on the myth of original unity, fullness, bliss and terror, represented by the phallic mother from whom all humans must separate, the task of individual development and of history, the twin potent myths inscribed most powerfully for us in psychoanalysis and Marxism.
Hilary Klein has argued that both Marxism and psychoanalysis, in their concepts of labour and of individuation and gender formation, depend on the plot of original unity out of which difference must be produced and enlisted in a drama of escalating domination of woman/nature.
The cyborg is resolutely committed to partiality, irony, intimacy, and perversity.
It is oppositional, utopian, and completely without innocence.
No longer structured by the polarity of public and private, the cyborg defines a technological polls based partly on a revolution of social relations in the oikos, the household.
Nature and culture are reworked; the one can no longer be the resource for appropriation or incorporation by the other.
The relationships for forming wholes from parts, including those of polarity and hierarchical domination, are at issue in the cyborg world.
Unlike the hopes of Frankenstein's monster, the cyborg does not expect its father to save it through a restoration of the garden; that is, through the fabrication of a heterosexual mate, through its completion in a finished whole, a city and cosmos.
The cyborg would not recognize the Garden of Eden; it is not made of mud and cannot dream of returning to dust.
The main trouble with cyborgs, of course, is that they are the illegitimate offspring of militarism and patriarchal capitalism, not to mention state socialism.
By the late twentieth century in United States scientific culture, the boundary between human and animal is thoroughly breached.
The last beachheads of uniqueness have been polluted if not turned into amusement parks-language tool use, social behaviour, mental events, nothing really convincingly settles the separation of human and animal.
And many people no longer feel the need for such a separation; indeed, many branches of feminist culture affirm the pleasure of connection of human And other living creatures.
Movements for animal rights are not irrational denials of human uniqueness; they are a clear-sighted recognition of connection across the discredited breach of nature and culture.
Biology and evolutionary theory over the last two centuries have simultaneously produced modern organisms as objects of knowledge and reduced the line between humans and animals to a faint trace re-etched in ideological struggle or professional disputes between life and social science.
The cyborg appears in myth precisely where the boundary between human and animal is transgressed.
Far from signalling a walling off of people from other living beings, cyborgs signal distrurbingly and pleasurably tight coupling.
The second leaky distinction is between animal-human (organism) and machine.
This dualism structured the dialogue between materialism and idealism that was settled by a dialectical progeny, called spirit or history, according to taste.
Late twentieth-century machines have made thoroughly ambiguous the difference between natural and artificial, mind and body, self-developing and externally designed, and many other distinctions that used to apply to organisms and machines.
Our machines are disturbingly lively, and we ourselves frighteningly inert.
Technological determination is only one ideological space opened up by the reconceptions of machine and organism as coded texts through which we engage in the play of writing and reading the world.
'Textualization' of everything in poststructuralist, postmodernist theory has been damned by Marxists and socialist feminists for its utopian disregard for the lived relations of domination that ground the 'play' of arbitrary reading.
In short, the certainty of what counts as nature -- a source of insight and promise of innocence -- is undermined, probably fatally.
The transcendent authorization of interpretation is lost, and with it the ontology grounding 'Western' epistemology.
Both chimpanzees and artefacts have politics, so why shouldn't we (de Waal, 1982; Winner, 1980)?
The third distinction is a subset of the second: the boundary between physical and nonphysical is very imprecise for us.
Pop physics books on the consequences of quantum theory and the indeterminacy principle are a kind of popular scientific equivalent to Harlequin romances* as a marker of radical change in American white heterosexuality: they get it wrong, but they are on the right subject.
Modern machines are quintessentially microelectronic devices: they are everywhere and they are invisible.
Modern machinery is an irreverent upstart god, mocking the Father's ubiquity and spirituality.
Writing, power, and technology are old partners in Western stories of the origin of civilization, but miniaturization has changed our experience of mechanism.
Our best machines are made of sunshine; they are all light and clean because they are nothing but signals, electromagnetic waves, a section of a spectrum, and these machines are eminently portable, mobile -- a matter of immense human pain in Detroit and Singapore.
People are nowhere near so fluid, being both material and opaque.
The ubiquity and invisibility of cyborgs is precisely why these sunshine-belt machines are so deadly.
They are floating signifiers moving in pickup trucks across Europe, blocked more effectively by the witch-weavings of the displaced and so unnatural Greenham women, who read the cyborg webs of power so very well, than by the militant labour of older masculinist politics, whose natural constituency needs defence jobs.
Ultimately the 'hardest' science is about the realm of greatest boundary confusion, the realm of pure number, pure spirit, C3I, cryptography, and the preservation of potent secrets.
The new machines are so clean and light.
Ironically, it might be the unnatural cyborg women making chips in Asia and spiral dancing in Santa Rita jail* whose constructed unities will guide effective oppositional strategies.
So my cyborg myth is about transgressed boundaries, potent fusions, and dangerous possibilities which progressive people might explore as one part of needed political work.
One of my premises is that most American socialists and feminists see deepened dualisms of mind and body, animal and machine, idealism and materialism in the social practices, symbolic formulations, and physical artefacts associated with 'high technology' and scientific culture.
From One-DimensionalMan (Marcuse, 1964) to The Death of Nature (Merchant, 1980), the analytic resources developed by progressives have insisted on the necessary domination of technics and recalled us to an imagined organic body to integrate our resistance.
But a slightly perverse shift of perspective might better enable us to contest for meanings, as well as for other forms of power and pleasure in technologically mediated societies.
From another perspective, a cyborg world might be about lived social and bodily realities in which people are not afraid of their joint kinship with animals and machines, not afraid of permanently partial identities and contradictory standpoints.
The political struggle is to see from both perspectives at once because each reveals both dominations and possibilities unimaginable from the other vantage point.
Cyborg unities are monstrous and illegitimate; in our present political circumstances, we could hardly hope for more potent myths for resistance and recoupling.
I like to imagine LAG, the Livermore Action Group, as a kind of cyborg society, dedicated to realistically converting the laboratories that most fiercely embody and spew out the tools of technological apocalypse, and committed to building a political form that acutally manages to hold together witches, engineers, elders, perverts, Christians, mothers, and Leninists long enough to disarm the state.
)6 * A practice at once both spiritual and political that linked guards and arrested anti-nuclear demonstrators in the Alameda County jail in California in the early 1985.
Identities seem contradictory, partial, and strategic.
With the hard-won recognition of their social and historical constitution, gender, race, and class cannot provide the basis for belief in 'essential' unity.
There is not even such a state as 'being' female, itself a highly complex category constructed in contested sexual scientific discourses and other social practices.
Gender, race, or class consciousness is an achievement forced on us by the terrible historica experience of the contradictory social realities of patriarchy, colonialism, and capitalism.
And who counts as 'us' in my own rhetoric?
Which identities are available to ground such a potent political myth called 'us', and what could motivate enlistment in this collectivity?
For me - and for many who share a similar historical location in white, professional middle-class, female, radical, North American, mid-adult bodies - the sources of a crisis in political identity are legion.
The recent history for much of the US left and US feminism has been a response to this kind of crisis by endless splitting and searches for a new essential unity.
'Women of color', a name contested at its origins by those whom it would incorporate, as well as a historical consciousness marking systematic breakdown of all the signs of Man in 'Western' traditions, constructs a kind of postmodernist identity out of otherness, difference, and specificity.
Sandoval's oppositional consciousness is about contradic156 tory locations and heterochronic calendars, not about relativisms and pluralisms.
Thus, she was at the bottom of a cascade of negative identities, left out of even the privileged oppressed authorial categories called 'women and blacks', who claimed to make the important revolutions.
Sandoval's argument has to be seen as one potent formulation for feminists out of the world-wide development of anti-colonialist discourse; that is to say, discourse dissolving the 'West' and its highest product - the one who is not animal, barbarian, or woman; man, that is, the author of a cosmos called history.
As orientalism is deconstructed politically and semiotically, the identities of the occident destabilize, including those of feminists.
Sandoval argues that 'women of colour' have a chance to build an effective unity that does not replicate the imperializing, totalizing revolutionary subjects of previous Marxisms and feminisms which had not faced the consequences of the disorderly polyphony emerging from decolonization.
Katie King has emphasized the limits of identification and the political/ poetic mechanics of identification built into reading 'the poem', that generative core of cultural feminism.
These taxonomies tend to remake feminist history so that it appears to be an ideological struggle among coherent types persisting over time, especially those typical units called radical, liberal, and socialistfeminism.
Literally, all other feminisms are either incorporated or marginalized, usually by building an explicit ontology and epistemology.
And of course, 'women's culture', like women of colour, is consciously created by mechanisms inducing affinity.
The rituals of poetry, music, and certain forms of academic practice have been pre-eminent.
The politics of race and culture in the US women's movements are intimately interwoven.
The common achievement of King and Sandoval is learning how to craft a poetic/political unity without relying on a logic of appropriation, incorporation, and taxonomic identification.
The theoretical and practical struggle against unity-through-domination or unity-through in corporation ironically not only undermines the justifica-tions for patriarchy, colonialism, humanism, positivism, essentialism, scient-ism, and other unlamented -isms, but all claims for an organic or natural standpoint.
I think that radical and socialist/Marxist-feminisms have also undermined their/our own epistemological strategies and that this is a crucially valuable step in imagining possible unities.
The acid tools of postmodernist theory and the constructive tools of ontological discourse about revolutionary subjects might be seen as ironic allies in dissolving Western selves in the interests of survival.
What kind of politics could embrace partial, contradictory, permanently unclosed constructions of personal and collective selves and still be faithful, effective - and ironically, socialist-feminist?
I do not know of any other time in history when there was greater need for political unity to confront effectively the dominations of 'race', 'gender', 'sexuality', and 'class'.
White women, including socialist feminists, discovered (that is, were forced kicking and screaming to notice) the non-innocence of the category 'woman'.
Cyborg feminists have to argue that 'we' do not want any more natural matrix of unity and that no construction is whole.
Innocence, and the corollary insistence on victimhood as the only ground for insight, has done enough damage.
In the fraying of identities and in the reflexive strategies for constructing them, the possibility opens up for weaving something other than a shroud for the day after the apocalypse that so prophetically ends salvation history.
Both Marxist/socialist-feminisms and radical feminisms have simul-taneously naturalized and denatured the category 'woman' and conscious-ness of the social lives of 'women'.
Abstraction and illusion rule in knowledge, domination rules in practice.
Labour is the pre-eminently privileged category enabling the Marxist to overcome illusion and find that point of view which is necessary for changing the world.
Labour is the humanizing activity that makes man; labour is an ontological category permitting the knowledge of a subject, and so the knowledge of subjugation and alienation.
The main achievement of both Marxist feminists and socialist feminists was to expand the category of labour to accommodate what (some) women did, even when the wage relation was subordinated to a more comprehensive view of labour under capitalist patriarchy.
In particular, women's labour in the household and women's activity as mothers generally (that is, reproduction in the socialist-feminist sense), entered theory on the authority of analogy to the Marxian concept of labour.
It is factually and politically wrong to assimilate all of the diverse 'moments' or 'conversations' in recent women's politics named radical feminism to MacKinnon's version.
But the teleological logic of her theory shows how an epistemology and ontology - including their negations - erase or police difference.
That is, the totalization built into this tale of radical feminism achieves its end the unity of women - by enforcing the experience of and testimony to radical non-being.
And MacKinnon's theory eliminates some of the difficulties built into humanist revolutionary subjects, but at the cost of radical reductionism.
MacKinnon argues that feminism necessarily adopted a different analyt-ical strategy from Marxism, looking first not at the structure of class, but at the structure of sex/gender and its generative relationship, men's constitu-tion and appropriation of women sexually.
In the realm of knowledge, the result of sexual objectification is illusion and abstraction.
MacKinnon's radical theory of experience is totalizing in the extreme; it does not so much marginalize as obliterate the authority of any other women's political speech and action.
If my complaint about socialist/Marxian standpoints is their unintended erasure of polyvocal, unassimilable, radical difference made visible in anti-colonial discourse and practice, MacKinnon's intentional erasure of all difference through the device of the 'essential' nonexistence of women is not reassuring.
Reproduction had different tones of meanings for the two tendencies, one rooted in labour, one in sex, both calling the consequences of domination and ignorance of social and personal reality 'false consciousness'.
Embarrassed silence about race among white radical and socialist feminists was one major, devastating political consequence.
History and polyvocality disappear into political taxonomies that try to establish genealogies.
There was no structural room for race (or for much else) in theory claiming to reveal the construction of the category woman and social group women as a unified or totalizable whole.
Her dates are doubtful; but we are now accustomed to remembering that as objects of knowledge and as historical actors, 'race' did not always exist, 'class' has a historical genesis, and 'homosexuals' are quite junior.
It is no accident that the symbolic system of the family of man - and so the essence of woman - breaks up at the same moment that networks of connection among people on the planet are unprecedentedly multiple, pregnant, and complex.
Perhaps socialist feminists were not substantially guilty of producing essentialist theory that suppressed women's particularity and contradictory interests.
I think we have been, at least through unreflective participation in the logics, languages, and practices of white humanism and through searching for a single ground of domination to secure our revolutionary voice.
But in the consciousness of our failures, we risk lapsing into boundless difference and giving up on the confusing task of making partial, real connection.
THE INFORMATICS OF DOMINATION In this attempt at an epistemological and political position, I would like to sketch a picture of possible unity, a picture indebted to socialist and feminist principles of design.
The frame for my sketch is set by the extent and importance of rearrangements in world-wide social relations tied to science and technology.
I argue for a politics rooted in claims about fundamental changes in the nature of class, race, and gender in an emerging system of world order analogous in its novelty and scope to that created by industrial capitalism; we are living through a movement from an organic, industrial society to a polymorphous, information system--from all work to all play, a deadly game.
Simultaneously material and ideological, the dichotomies may be expressed in the following chart of transitions from the comfortable old hierarchical dominations to the scary new networks I have called the informatics of domination: Representation.
Or both are revivified in the worlds charged with microelectronic and biotechnological politics.
Sexual reproduction is one kind of reproductive strategy among many, with costs and benefits as a function of the system environment.
Ideologies of sexual reproduction can no longer reasonably call on notions of sex and sex role as organic aspects in natural objects like organisms and families.
Such reasoning will be unmasked as irrational, and ironically corporate executives reading Playboy and anti-porn radical feminists will make strange bedfellows in jointly unmasking the irrationalism.
It is 'irrational' to invoke concepts like primitive and civilized.
For liberals and radicals, the search for integrated social systems gives way to a new practice called 'experimental ethnography' in which an organic object dissipates in attention to the play of writing.
At the level of ideology, we see translations of racism and colonialism into languages of development and underdevelopment, rates and constraints of modernization.
Any objects or persons can be reasonably thought of in terms of disassembly and reassembly; no 'natural' architectures constrain system design.
The financial districts in all the world's cities, as well as the exportprocessing and free-trade zones, proclaim this elementary fact of'late capitalism'.
One should expect control strategies to concentrate on boundary conditions and interfaces, on rates of flow across boundaries-- and not on the integrity of natural objects.
'Integrity' or 'sincerity' of the Western self gives way to decision procedures and expert systems.
For example, control strategies applied to women's capacities to give birth to new human beings will be developed in the languages of population control and maximization of goal achievement for individual decision-makers.
This kind of analysis of scientific and cultural objects of knowledge which have appeared historically since the Second World War prepares us to notice some important inadequacies in feminist analysis which has proceeded as if the organic, hierarchical dualisms ordering discourse in 'the West' since Aristotle still ruled.
The dichotomies between mind and body, animal and human, organism and machine, public and private, nature and culture, men and women, primitive and civilized are all in question ideologically.
The actual situation of women is their integration/ exploitation into a world system of production/reproduction and com-munication called the informatics of domination.
The home, workplace, market, public arena, the body itself- all can be dispersed and interfaced in nearly infinite, polymorphous ways, with large consequences for women and others - consequences that themselves are very different for different people and which make potent oppositional international movements difficult to imagine and essential for survival.
One important route for reconstructing socialist-feminist politics is through theory and practice addressed to the social relations of science and technology, including crucially the systems of myth and meanings structuring our imaginations.
The cyborg is a kind of disassembled and reassembled, postmodern collective and personal self.
Communications technologies and biotechnologies are the crucial tools recrafting our bodies.
These tools embody and enforce new social relations for women world-wide.
Technologies and scientific discourses can be partially understood as formalizations, i.e., as frozen moments, of the fluid social interactions constituting them, but they should also be viewed as instruments for enforcing meanings.
The boundary is permeable between tool and myth, instrument and concept, historical systems of social relations and historical anatomies of possible bodies, including objects of knowledge.
Indeed, myth and tool mutually constitute each other.
Furthermore, communications sciences and modern biologies are constructed by a common move - the translation of the world into a problem of coding, a search for a common language in which all resistance to instrumental control disappears and all heterogeneity can be submitted to disassembly, reassembly, investment, and exchange.
In communications sciences, the translation of the world into a problem in coding can be illustrated by looking at cybernetic (feedback-controlled) systems theories applied to telephone technology, computer design, weapons deployment, or data base construction and maintenance.
In each case, solution to the key questions rests on a theory of language and control; the key operation is determining the rates, directions, and probabilities of flow of a quantity called information.
Information is just that kind of quantifiable element (unit, basis of unity) which allows universal translation, and so unhindered instrumental power (called effective communication).
In modern biologies, the translation of the world into a problem in coding can be illustrated by molecular genetics, ecology, sociobiological evolutionary theory, and immunobiology.
The organism has been translated into prob-lems of genetic coding and read-out.
The analogous moves in ecology could be examined by probing the history and utility of the concept of the ecosystem.
Immunobiology and associated medical practices are rich exemplars of the privilege of coding and recognition systems as objects of knowledge, as constructions of bodily reality for us.
A stressed system goes awry; its communication processes break down; it fails to recognize the difference between self and other.
In the US gay men and intravenous drug users are the 'privileged' victims of an awful immune system disease that marks (inscribes on the body) confusion of boundaries and moral pollution (Treichler, 1987).
But these excursions into communications sciences and biology have been at a rarefied level; there is a mundane, largely economic reality to support my claim that these sciences and technologies indicate fundamental transforma-tions in the structure of the world for us.
Modern states, multinational corporations, military power, welfare state apparatuses, satellite systems, political processes, fabrication of our imaginations, labour-control systems, medical construc-tions of our bodies, commercial pornography, the international division of labour, and religious evangelism depend intimately upon electronics.
Microelectronics mediates the translations of labour into robotics and word processing, sex into genetic engineering and reproductive technologies, and mind into artificial intelligence and decision procedures.
Biology as a powerful engineering science for redesigning materials and processes has revolutionary implications for industry, perhaps most obvious today in areas of fermentadon, agriculture, and energy.
Communicadons sciences and biology are construcdons of natural-technical objects of knowledge in which the difference between machine and organism is thoroughly blurred; mind, body, and tool are on very intimate terms.
The 'multinational' material organization of the production and reproduction of daily life and the symbolic organization of the production and reproduction of culture and imagination seem equally implicated.
The boundary-maintaining images of base and superstructure, public and private, or material and ideal never seemed more feeble.
I have used Rachel Grossman's (1980) image of women in the integrated circuit to name the situation of women in a world so intimately restructured through the social relations of science and technology.
I used the odd circumlocution, 'the social relations of science and technology', to indicate that we are not dealing with a technological determinism, but with a historical system depending upon structured relations among people.
But the phrase should also indicate that science and technology provide fresh sources of power, that we need fresh sources of analysis and political action (Latour, 1984).
Some of the rearrangements of race, sex, and class rooted in high-tech-facilitated social relations can make socialist-feminism more relevant to effective progressive politics.
THE 'HOMEWORK ECONOMY' OUTSIDE 'THE HOME'The 'New Industrial Revolution' is producing a new world-wide working class, as well as new sexualities and ethnicities.
The extreme mobility of capital and the emerging international division of labour are intertwined with the emergence of new collecdvities, and the weakening of familiar groupings.
White men in advanced industrial societies have become newly vulnerable to permanent job loss, and women are not disappearing from the job rolls at the same rates as men.
The picture is more systematic and involves reproduction, sexuality, culture, consumphon, and producdon.
In the prototypical Silicon Valley, many women's lives have been structured around employment in electronics-dependent jobs, and their intimate realities include serial heterosexual monogamy, negotiating childcare, distance from extended kin or most other forms of traditional community, a high likelihood of loneliness and extreme economic vulnerability as they age.
The ethnic and racial diversity of women in Silicon Valley structures a microcosm of conflicting differences in culture, family, religion, education, and language.
Work is being redefined as both literally female and feminized, whether performed by men or women.
To be feminized means to be made extremely vulnerable; able to be disassembled, reassembled, exploited as a reserve labour force; seen less as workers than as servers; subjected to dme arrangements on and off the paid job that make a mockery of a limited work day; leading an existence that always borders on being obscene, out of place, and reducible to sex.
However, the homework economy does not refer only to large-scale deskilling, nor does it deny that new areas of high skill are emerging, even for women and men previously excluded from skilled employment.
Rather, the concept indicates that factory, home, and market are integrated on a new scale and that the places of women are crucial - and need to be analysed for differences among women and for meanings for relations between men and women in various situations.
The success of the attack on relatively privileged, mostly white, men's unionized jobs is deaf to the power of the new communications technologies to integrate and control labour despite extensive dispersion and decentralization.
The consequences of the new technologies are felt by women both in the loss of the family (male) wage (if they ever had access to this white privilege) and in the character of their own jobs, which are becoming capitalintensive; for example, office work and nursing.
The new economic and technological arrangements are also related to the collapsing welfare state and the ensuing intensification of demands on women to sustain daily life for themselves as well as for men, children, and old people.
The feminization of poverty-generated by dismantling the welfare state, by the homework economy where stable jobs become the exception, and sustained by the expectation that women's wages will not be matched by a male income for the support of children-- has become an urgent focus.
That women regularly sustain daily life partly as a funcdon of their enforced status as mothers is hardly new; the kind of integration with the overall capitalist and progressively war-based economy is new.
The particular pressure, for example, on US black women, who have achieved an escape from (barely) paid domeshc service and who now hold clerical and similar jobs in large numbers, has large implicadons for condnued enforced black poverty with employment.
These developments must have major consequences in the psychodynamics and politics of gender and race.
Within the framework of three major stages of capitalism (commercial/ early industrial, monopoly, multinational) --tied to nationalism, imperialism, and multinationalism, and related to Jameson's three dominant aesthetic periods of realism, modernism, and postmodernism --I would argue that specific forms of families dialectically relate to forms of capital and to its political and cultural concomitants.
Although lived problematically and unequally, ideal forms of these families might be schematized as (1) the patriarchal nuclear family, structured by the dichotomy between public and private and accompanied by the white bourgeois ideology of separate spheres and nineteenth-century Anglo-American bourgeois feminism; (2) the modern family mediated (or enforced) by the welfare state and institutions like the family wage, with a flowering of a-feminist heterosexual ideologies, including their radical versions represented in Greenwich Village around the First World War; and (3) the 'family' of the homework economy with its oxymoronic structure of womenheaded households and its explosion of feminisms and the paradoxical intensification and erosion of gender itself.
As robodcs and related technologies put men out of work in 'developed' countries and exacerbate failure to generate male jobs in Third World 'development', and as the automated of fice becomes the rule even in labour-surplus countries, the feminization of work intensifies.
It is no longer a secret that sexuality, reproduction, family, and community life are interwoven with this economic structure in myriad ways which have also differentiated the situations of white and black women.
Many more women and men will contend with similar situations, which will make cross-gender and race alliances on issues of basic life support (with or without jobs) necessary, not just mice.
The new technologies also have a profound effect on hunger and on food production for subsistence world-wide.
Women are excluded generally from benefiting from the increased high-tech commodification of food and energy crops, their days are made more arduous because their responsibilides to provide food do not diminish, and their reproductive situations are made more complex.
Green Revolution technologies interact with other high-tech industrial production to alter gender divisions of labour and differential gender migration patterns.
The new technologies seem deeply involved in the forms of'privatization' that Ros Petchesky (1981) has analysed, in which militarization, right-wing family ideologies and policies, and intensified definitions of corporate and state) property as private synergistically interact.
This facilitates the mushrooming of a permanent high-tech military establishment at the cultural and economic expense of most people, but especially of women.
Technologies like video games and highly miniaturized televi-sions seem crucial to production of modern forms of 'private life'.
The culture of video games is heavily orientated to individual compedtion and extraterrestrial warfare.
High-tech, gendered imaginations are produced here, imaginations that can contemplate destruction of the planet and a sci-fi escape from its consequences.
More than our imaginations is militarized; and the other realities of electronic and nuclear warfare are inescapable.
These are the technologies that promise ultimate mobility and perfect exchange-- and incidentally enable tourism, that perfect practice of mobility and exchange, to emerge as one of the world's largest single industries.
The new technologies affect the social relations of both sexuality and of reproduction, and not always in the same ways.
The close ties of sexuality and instrumentality, of views of the body as a kind of private satisfaction- and utility-maximizing machine, are described nicely in sociobiological origin stories that stress a genetic calculus and explain the inevitable dialectic of domination of male and female gender roles.
Among the many transformations of reproductive situations is the medical one, where women's bodies have boundaries newly permeable to both 'visualization' and 'intervention'.
The technologies of visualization recall the important cultural practice of hundng with the camera and the deeply predatory nature of a photographic consciousness.
Sex, sexuality, and reproduction are central actors in hightech myth systems structuring our imaginations of personal and social possibility.
Another critical aspect of the social relations of the new technologies is the reformulation of expectations, culture, work, and reproduction for the large scientific and technical workforce.
A major social and political danger is the formation of a strongly bimodal social structure, with the masses of women and men of all ethnic groups, but especially people of colour, confined to a homework economy, illiteracy of several varieties, and general redundancy and impotence, controlled by high-tech repressive apparatuses ranging from entertainment to surveillance and disappearance.
An adequate socialist-feminist politics should address women in the privileged occupational categories, and particularly in the production of science and technology that constructs scientific-technical discourses, processes, and objects.
What kind of constitutive role in the production of knowledge, imagination, and practice can new groups doing science have?
How can these groups be allied with progressive social and political movements?
Might there be ways of developing feminist science/technology politics in alliance with and- military science facility conversion action groups?
Many sciendfic and technical workers in Silicon Valley, the high-tech cowboys included, do not want to work on military science.
Can these personal preferences and cultural tendencies be welded into progressive politics among this professional middle class in which women, including women of colour, are coming to be fairly numerous?
WOMEN IN THE INTEGRATED CIRCUIT Let me summarize the picture of women's historical locations in advanced industrial societies, as these positions have been restructured partly through the social relations of science and technology.
If it was ever possible ideologically to characterize women's lives by the disdnction of public and private domains-- suggested by images of the division of working-class life into factory and home, of bourgeois life into market and home, and of gender existence into personal and political realms --it is now a totally misleading ideology, even to show how both terms of these dichotomies construct each other in practice and in theory.
I prefer a network ideological image, suggesting the profusion of spaces and identities and the permeability of boundaries in the personal body and in the body politic.
'Networking' is both a feminist practice and a multinational corporate strategy -- weaving is for oppositional cyborgs.
So let me return to the earlier image of the informatics of domination and trace one vision of women's 'place' in the integrated circuit, touching only a few idealized social locations seen primarily from the point of view of advanced capitalist societies: Home, Market, Paid Work Place, State, School, Clinic-Hospital, and Church.
Each of these idealized spaces is logically and practically implied in every other locus, perhaps analogous to a holographic photograph.
I want to suggest the impact of the social relations mediated and enforced by the new technologies in order to help formulate needed analysis and practical work.
However, there is no 'place' for women in these networks, only geometries of difference and contradiction crucial to women's cyborg identities.
If we learn how to read these webs of power and social life, we might learn new couplings, new coalitions.
Home: Women-headed households, serial monogamy, flight of men, old women alone, technology of domestic work, paid homework, re-emergence of home sweat-shops, homebased businesses and telecom-muting, electronic cottage, urban homelessness, migration, module architecture, reinforced (simulated) nuclear family, intense domestic violence.
Market: Women's continuing consumption work, newly targeted to buy the profusion of new production from the new technologies (especially as the competitive race among industrialized and industrializing nations to avoid dangerous mass unemployment necessitates finding ever bigger new markets for ever less clearly needed commodities); bimodal buying power, coupled with advertising targeting of the numerous affluent groups and neglect of the previous mass markets; growing importance of informal markets in labour and commodities parallel to high-tech, affluent market structures; surveillance systems through electronic funds transfer; intensified market abstraction (commodification) of experience, resulting in ineffective utopian or equivalent cynical theories of community; extreme mobility (abstraction) of marketing/financing systems; interpenetration of sexual and labour markets; intensified sexualization of abstracted and alienated consumption.
Paid Work Place: Continued intense sexual and racial division of labour, but considerable growth of membership in privileged occupational categories for many white women and people of colour; impact of new technologies on women's work in clerical, service, manufacturing (especially textiles), agriculture, electronics; international restructuring of the working classes; development of new time arrangements to facilitate the homework economy (flex time, part time, over time, no time); homework and out work; increased pressures for two-tiered wage structures; significant numbers of people in cash-dependent populations world-wide with no experience or no further hope of stable employment; most labour 'marginal' or 'feminized'.
State: Continued erosion of the welfare state; decentralizations with increased surveillance and control; citizenship by telematics; imperialism and political power broadly in the form of information rich/information poor differentiation; increased high-tech militarization increasingly opposed by many social groups; reduction of civil service jobs as a result of the growing capital intensification of office work, with implications for occupational mobility for women of colour; growing privadzation of material and ideological life and culture; close integration of privatization and militarization, the high-tech forms of bourgeois capitalist personal and public life; invisibility of different social groups to each other, linked to psychological mechanisms of belief in abstract enemies.
School: Deepening coupling of high-tech capital needs and public educa-tion at all levels, differentiated by race, class, and gender; managerial classes involved in educational reform and refunding at the cost of remaining progressive educational democratic structures for children and teachers; education for mass ignorance and repression in technocratic and militarized culture; growing and science mystery cults in dissendng and radical political movements; continued relative scientific illiteracy among white women and people of colour; growing industrial direction of education (especially higher education) by science-based multinationals (particularly in electronics- and biotechnology-dependent companies); highly educated, numerous elites in a progressively bimodal society.
Clinic-hospital: Intensified machine-body relations; renegotiations of public metaphors which channel personal experience of the body, particularly in relation to reproduction, immune system functions, and 'stress' phenomena; intensification of reproductive politics in response to world historical implications of women's unrealized, potential control of their relation to reproduction; emergence of new, historically specific diseases; struggles over meanings and means of health in environments pervaded by high technology products and processes; continuing feminization of health work; intensified struggle over state responsibility for health; continued ideological role of popular health movements as a major form of American politics.
Church: Electronic fundamentalist 'super-saver' preachers solemnizing the union of electronic capital and automated fetish gods; intensified importance of churches in resisting the militarized state; central struggle over women's meanings and authority in religion; continued relevance of spirituality, intertwined with sex and health, in political struggle.
The only way to characterize the informatics of domination is as a massive intensification of insecurity and cultural impoverishment, with common failure of subsistence networks for the most vulnerable.
Since much of this picture interweaves with the social relations of science and technology, the urgency of a socialist-feminist politics addressed to science and technology is plain.
There is much now being tione, and the grounds for political work are rich.
These efforts are profoundly deaf to technical restructuring of labour processes and reformations of working classes.
These efforts also are providing understanding of a more comprehensive kind of labour organization, involving community, sexuality, and family issues never privileged in the largely white male industrial unions.
The structural rearrangements related to the social relations of science and technology evoke strong ambivalence.
But it is not necessary to be uldmately depressed by the implications of late twentieth-century women's relation to all aspects of work, culture, production of knowledge, sexuality, and reproduction.
For excellent reasons, most Marxisms see domination best and have trouble understanding what can only look like false consciousness and people's complicity in their own domination in late capitalism.
versus 'manipulated false consciousness', but subtle understanding of emerging pleasures, experiences, and powers with serious potential for changing the rules of the game.
There are grounds for hope in the emerging bases for new kinds of unity across race, gender, and class, as these elementary units of socialist-feminist analysis themselves suffer protean transformations.
Intensifications of hardship experienced world-wide in connection with the social relations of science and technology are severe.
But what people are experiencing is not transparently clear, and we lack aufficiently subtle connections for collectively building effective theories of experience.
I have a body and mind as much constructed by the post-Second World War arms race and cold war as by the women's movements.
The permanent pardality of feminist points of view has consequences for our expectations of forms of political organization and participation.
The feminist dream of a common language, like all dreams for a perfectly true language, of perfectly faithful naming of experience, is a totalizing and imperialist one.
Perhaps, ironically, we can learn from our fusions with animals and machines how not to be Man, the embodiment of Western logos.
From the point of view of pleasure in these potent and taboo fusions, made inevitable by the social relations of science and technology, there might indeed be a feminist science.
CYBORGS: A MYTH OF POLITICAL IDENTITY I want to conclude with a myth about idendty and boundaries which might inform late twentieth-century political imaginations (Plate 1).
I am indebted in this story to writers like Joanna Russ, Samuel R. Delany, John Varley, James Tiptree, Jr, Octavia Butler, Monique Wittig, and Vonda McIntyre.
Exploring concephons of bodily boundaries and social order, the anthropologist Mary Douglas (1966, 1970) should be credited with helping us to consciousness about how fundamental body imagery is to world view, and so to political language.
French feminists like Luce Irigaray and Monique Wittig, for all their differences, know how to write the body; how to weave eroticism, cosmology, and politics from imagery of embodiment, and especially for Wittig, from imagery of fragmentation and reconstitution of bodies.
American radical feminists like Susan Griffnn, Audre Lorde, and Adrienne Rich have profoundly affected our political imaginations - and perhaps restricted too much what we allow as a friendly body and political language.
But their symbolic systems and the related positions of ecofeminism and feminist paganism, replete with organicisms, can only be understood in Sandoval's terms as oppositional ideologies fitting the late twentieth century.
They would simply bewilder anyone not preoccupied with the machines and consciousness of late capitalism.
But there are also great riches for feminists in explicitly embracing the possibilides inherent in the breakdown of clean disdnctions between organism and machine and similar distinctions structuring the Western self.
It is the simultaneity of breakdowns that cracks the matrices of domination and opens geometric possibilities.
What might be learned from personal and political 'technological' pollution?
I look briefly at two overlapping groups of texts for their insight into the construction of a potentially helpful cyborg myth: constructions of women of colour and monstrous selves in feminist science fiction.
Earlier I suggested that 'women of colour' might be understood as a cyborg idendty, a potent subjecdvity synthesized from fusions of outsider identities and in the complex political-historical layerings of her 'biomythography', Zami (Lorde, 1982; King, 1987a, 1987b).
There are material and cultural grids mapping this potential, Audre Lorde (1984) captures the tone in the title of her Sister Outsider.
In my political myth, Sister Outsider is the offshore woman, whom US workers, female and feminized, are supposed to regard as the enemy prevendug their solidarity, threatening their security.
Onshore, inside the boundary of the United States, Sister Outsider is a potential amidst the races and ethnic identities of women manipulated for division, competition, and exploitation in the same industries.
'Women of colour' are the preferred labour force for the science-based industries, the real women for whom the world-wide sexual market, labour market, and politics of reproduction kaleidoscope into daily life.
Young Korean women hired in the sex industry and in electronics assembly are recruited from high schools, educated for the integrated circuit.
Contrary to orientalist stereotypes of the 'oral primidve', literacy is a special mark of women of colour, acquired by US black women as well as men through a history of risking death to learn and to teach reading and wridng.
Writing has been crucial to the Western myth of the distinction between oral and written cultures, primitive and civilized mentalities, and more recently to the erosion of that distinction in 'postmodernist' theories attacking the phallogo-centrism of the West, with its worship of the monotheistic, phallic, authoritative, and singular work, the unique and perfect name.
The poetry and stories of US women of colour are repeatedly about writing, about access to the power to signify; but this dme that power must be neither phallic nor innocent.
The tools are often stories, retold stories, versions that reverse and displace the hierarchical dualisms of naturalized identities.
The phallogocentrie origin stories most crucial for feminist cyborgs are built into the literal technologies - teehnologies that write the world, biotechnology and microelectronics - that have recently textualized our bodies as code problems on the grid of C3I.
Feminist cyborg stories have the task of recoding communication and intelligence to subvert command and control.
Figuratively and literally, language politics pervade the struggles of women of colour; and stories about language have a special power in the rich contemporary writing by US women of colour.
For example, retellings of the stom~ of the indigenous woman Malinche, mother of the mesdzo 'bastard' race of the new world, master of languages, and mistress of Cortes, carry special meaning for Chicana constructions of identity.
Cherrie Moraga (1983) in Loving in the War Years explores the themes of identity when one never possessed the original language, never told the original story, never resided in the harmony of legitimate heterosexuality in the garden of culture, and so cannot base identity on a myth or a fall from innocence and right to natural names, mother's or father's.
Moraga's language is not 'whole'; it is self-consciously spliced, a chimera of English and Spanish, both conqueror's languages.
Sister Outsider hints at the possibility of world survival not because of her innocence, but because of her ability to live on the boundaries, to write without the founding myth of original wholeness, with its inescapable apocalypse of final return to a deathly oneness that Man has imagined to be the innocent and all-powerful Mother, freed at the End from another spiral of appropriation by her son.
Cyborg politics is the struggle for language and the struggle against perfect communication, against the one code that translates all meaning perfectly, the central dogma of phallogocentrism.
That is why cyborg politics insist on noise and advocate pollution, rejoicing in the illegitimate fusions of animal and machine.
These are the couplings which make Man and Woman so problematic, subverting the structure of desire, the force imagined to generate language and gender, and so subverting the structure and modes of reproduction of 'Western' idendty, of nature and culture, of mirror and eye, slave and master, body and mind.
'We' did not originally choose to be cyborgs, but choice grounds a liberal politics and epistemology that imagines the reproduction of individuals before the wider replications of 'texts'.
Feminisms and Marxisms have run aground on Western epistemological imperatives to construct a revolutionary subject from the perspective of a hierarchy of oppressions and or a latent position of moral superiority, innocence, and greater closeness to nature.
With no available original dream of a common language or original symbiosis promising protection from hostile 'masculine' separation, but written into the play of a text that has no finally privileged reading or salvation history, to recognize 'oneself' as fully implicated in the world, frees us of the need to root politics in identification, vanguard parties, purity, and mothering.
Stripped of identity, the bastard race teaches about the power of the margins and the importance of a mother like Malinche.
Every, story that begins with original innocence and privileges the return to wholeness imagines the drama of life to be individuation, separation, the birth of the self, the tragedy of autonomy, the fall into writing, alienation; that is, war, tempered by imaginary respite in the bosom of the Other.
But there is another route to having less at stake in masculine autonomy, a route that does not pass through Woman, Primitive, Zero, the Mirror Stage and its imaginaw.
It passes through women and other present-tense, illegitimate cyborgs, not of Woman born, who refuse the ideological resources of victimization so as to have a real life.
These real-life cyborgs (for example, the Southeast Asian village women workers inJapanese and US electronics firms described by Aihwa Ong) are actively rewriting the texts of their bodies and sociedes.
To recapitulate, certain dualisms have been persistent in Western traditions; they have all been systemic to the logics and practices of domination of women, people of colour, nature, workers, animals - in short, domination of all constituted as others, whose task is to mirror the self.
To be One is to be autonomous, to be powerful, to be God; but to be One is to be an illusion, and so to be involved in a dialectic of apocalypse with the other.
It is not clear who makes and who is made in the relation between human and machine.
It is not clear what is mind and what body in machines that resolve into coding practices.
In so far as we know ourselves in both formal discourse (for example, biology) and in daily practice (for example, the homework economy in the integrated circuit), we find ourselves to be cyborgs, hybrids, mosaics, chimeras.
There is no fundamental, ontological separation in our formal knowledge of machine and organism, of technical and organic.
The replicant Rachel in the Ridley Scott film Blade Runner stands as the image of a cyborg culture's fear, love, and confusion.
The trance state experienced by many computer users has become a staple of science-fiction film and cultural jokes.
Perhaps paraplegics and other severely handicapped people can and sometimes do) have the most intense experiences of complex hybridization with other communication devices.
Anne McCaffrey's pre-feminist The Ship Who Sang (1969) explored the consciousness of a cyborg, hybrid of girl's brain and complex machinery, formed after the birth of a severely handicapped child.
From the seventeenth century dll now, machines could be animated - given ghostly souls to make them speak or move or to account for their orderly development and mental capacides.
For us, in imagination and in other practice, machines can be prosthetic devices, intimate components, friendly selves.
We don't need organic holism to give impermeable whole-ness, the total woman and her feminist variants (mutants?).
Students facingJoanna Russ for the first time, students who have learned to take modernist writers like James Joyce or Virginia Woolf without flinching, do not know what to make of The Adventures of Alyx or The Female Man, where characters refuse the reader's search for innocent wholeness while granting the wish for heroic quests, exuberant eroticism, and serious politics.
James Tiptree, Jr, an author whose fiction was regarded as particularly manly undl her 'true' gender was revealed, tells tales of reproduction based on non-mammalian technologies like alternation of generations of male brood pouches and male nurturing.
Octavia Butler writes of an African sorceress pithug her powers of transformation against the genetic manipulations of her rival (Wild Seed), of dme warps that bring a modern US black woman into slavery where her actions in relation to her white master-ancestor determine the possibility of her own birth (Kindred), and of the illegidmate insights into idendty and community of an adopted cross-species child who came to know the enem' as self (Survivor).
In Dawn (1987), the first instalment of a series called Xenogenesis, Butler tells the story of Lilith Iyapo, whose personal name recalls Adam's first and repudiated wife and whose family name marks her status as the widow of the son of Nigerian immigrants to the US.
A black woman and a mother whose child is dead, Lilith mediates the transformation of humanity through genetic exchange with extraterrestrial lovers/rescuers/destroyers/genetic engineers, who reform earth's habitats after the nuclear holocaust and coerce surviving humans into intimate fusion with them.
It is a novel that interrogates reproductive, linguishc, and nuclear politics in a mythic field structured by late twentieth-century race and gender.
Because it is particularly rich in boundary transgressions, Vonda McIn-tyre's Superluminal can close this truncated catalogue of promising and dangerous monsters who help redefine the pleasures and politics of embodiment and feminist writing.
Orca, a genetically altered diver, can speak with killer whales and survive deep ocean conditions, but she longs to explore space as a pilot, necessitating bionic implants jeopardizing her kinship with the divers and cetaceans.
Transformations are effected by virus vectors carrying a new developmental code, by transplant surgery, by implants of microelectronic devices, by analogue doubles, and other means.
Lacnea becomes a pilot by accepting a heart implant and a host of other alterations allowing survival in transit at speeds exceeding that of light.
All the characters explore the limits of language; the dream of communicating experience; and the necessity of limitation, partiality, and indmacy even in this world of protean transformation and connection.
Superluminal stands also for the defining contradictions of a cyborg world in another sense; it embodies textually the intersection of feminist theory and colonial discourse in the science fiction I have alluded to in this chapter.
From an Australian feminist sensitivity, Sofoulis remembered more readily McIntyre's role as writer of the adventures of Captain Kirk and Spock in TV's Star Trek series than her rewriting the romance in Superluminal.
The Centaurs and Amazons of ancient Greece established the limits of the centred polls of the Greek male human by their disruption of marriage and boundary pollutions of the warrior with animality and woman.
Unseparated twins and hermaphrodites were the confused human material in early modern France who grounded discourse on the natural and supernatural, medical and legal, portents and diseases -- all crucial to establishing modern identity.
The evolutionary and behavioural sciences of monkeys and apes have marked the multiple boundaries of late twentieth-century industrial identities.
Cyborg monsters in feminist science fiction define quite different political possibilities and limits from those proposed by the mundane fiction of Man and Woman.
Our bodies, ourselves; bodies are maps of power and identity.
A cyborg body is not innocent; it was not born in a garden; it does not seek unitary identity and so generate antagonistic dualisms without end (or until the world ends); it takes irony for granted.
One is too few, and two is only one possibility.
The machine is not an it to be animated, worshipped, and dominated.
Up till now (once upon a time), female embodiment seemed to be given, organic, necessary; and female embodiment seemed to mean skill in mothering and its metaphoric exten-sions.
Only by being out of place could we take intense pleasure in machines, and then with excuses that this was organic activity after all, appropriate to females.
Cyborgs might consider more seriously the partial, fluid, sometimes aspect of sex and sexual embodiment.
Gender might not be global identity after all, even if it has profound historical breadth and depth.
Feminists have recently claimed that women are given to dailiness, that women more than men somehow sustain daily life, and so have a privileged epistemo-logical position potentially.
There is a compelling aspect to this claim, one that makes visible unvalued female activity and names it as the ground of life.
What about all the ignorance of women, all the exclusions and failures of knowledge and skill?
Race, gender, and capital require a cyborg theory of wholes and parts.
There is no drive in cyborgs to produce total theory, but there is an intimate experience of boundaries, their construction and deconstruction.
There is a myth system waiting to become a political language to ground one way of looking at science and technology and challenging the informatics of domination-- in order to act potently.
One last image organisms and organismic, holistic politics depend on metaphors of rebirth and invariably call on the resources of reproductive sex.
I would suggest that cyborgs have more to do with regeneration and are suspicious of the reproductive matrix and of most birthing.
For salamanders, regeneration after injury, such as the loss of a limb, involves regrowth of structure and restoration of function with the constant possibility of twinning or other odd topographical productions at the site of former injury.
We require regeneration, not rebirth, and the possibilities for our reconstitution include the utopian dream of the hope for a monstrous world without gender.
Cyborg imagery can help express two crucial arguments in this essay: first, the production of universal, totalizing theory is a major mistake that misses most of reality, probably always, but certainly now; and second, taking responsibility for the social relations of science and technology means refusing an anti-science metaphysics, a demonology of technology, and so means embracing the skilful task of reconstructing the boundaries of daily life, in partial connection with others, in communication with all of our parts.
It is not just that science and technology are possible means of great human satisfaction, as well as a matrix of complex dominations.
Cyborg imagery can suggest a way out of the maze of dualisms in which we have explained our bodies and our tools to ourselves.
It means both building and destroying machines, identities, categories, relationships, space stories.
It is a world that swarms with technological mediation, interlacing our daily lives with abstraction, virtuality, and complexity.
XF constructs a feminism adapted to these realities: a feminism of unprecedented cunning, scale, and vision; a future in which the realization of gender justice and feminist emancipation contribute to a universalist politics assembled from the needs of every human, cutting across race, ability, economic standing, and geographical position.
No more futureless repetition on the treadmill of capital, no more submission to the drudgery of labour, productive and reproductive alike, no more reification of the given masked as critique.
XF is not a bid for revolution, but a wager on the long game of history, demanding imagination, dexterity and persistence.
It is through, and not despite, our alienated condition that we can free ourselves from the muck of immediacy.
Freedom is not a given -- and it's certainly not given by anything 'natural'.
XF mutates, navigates and probes every horizon.
Anyone who's been deemed 'unnatural' in the face of reigning biological norms, anyone who's experienced injustices wrought in the name of natural order, will realize that the glorification of 'nature' has nothing to offer us -- the queer and trans among us, the differently-abled, as well as those who have suffered discrimination due to pregnancy or duties connected to child-rearing.
Serious risks are built into these tools; they are prone to imbalance, abuse, and exploitation of the weak.
Its uses are fused with culture in a positive feedback loop that makes linear sequencing, prediction, and absolute caution impossible.
Technoscientific innovation must be linked to a collective theoretical and political thinking in which women, queers, and the gender non-conforming play an unparalleled role.
Fed by the market, its rapid growth is offset by bloat, and elegant innovation is surrendered to the buyer, whose stagnant world it decorates.
Beyond the noisy clutter of commodified cruft, the ultimate task lies in engineering technologies to combat unequal access to reproductive and pharmacological tools, environmental cataclysm, economic instability, as well as dangerous forms of unpaid/underpaid labour.
Gender inequality still characterizes the fields in which our technologies are conceived, built, and legislated for, while female workers in electronics (to name just one industry) perform some of the worst paid, monotonous and debilitating labour.
Such injustice demands structural, machinic and ideological correction.
It is true that the canonical 'history of thought' is dominated by men, and it is male hands we see throttling existing institutions of science and technology.
But this is precisely why feminism must be a rationalism -- because of this miserable imbalance, and not despite it.
If today it is dominated by masculine egos, then it is at odds with itself -- and this contradiction can be leveraged.
Reason, like information, wants to be free, and patriarchy cannot give it freedom.
It names reason as an engine of feminist emancipation, and declares the right of everyone to speak as no one in particular.
0x05 The excess of modesty in feminist agendas of recent decades is not proportionate to the monstrous complexity of our reality, a reality crosshatched with fibre-optic cables, radio and microwaves, oil and gas pipelines, aerial and shipping routes, and the unrelenting, simultaneous execution of millions of communication protocols with every passing millisecond.
Systematic thinking and structural analysis have largely fallen by the wayside in favour of admirable, but insufficient struggles, bound to fixed localities and fragmented insurrections.
Whilst capitalism is understood as a complex and ever-expanding totality, many would-be emancipat- tory anti-capitalist projects remain profoundly fearful of transitioning to the universal, resisting big-picture speculative politics by condemning them as necessarily oppressive vectors.
Such a false guarantee treats universals as absolute, generating a debilitating disjuncture between the thing we seek to depose and the strategies we advance to depose it.
0x06 Global complexity opens us to urgent cognitive and ethical demands.
Much of twenty-first century feminism -- from the remnants of postmodern identity politics to large swathes of contemporary ecofeminism -- struggles to adequately address these challenges in a manner capable of producing substantial and enduring change.
Xenofeminism endeavours to face up to these obligations as collective agents capable of transitioning between multiple levels of political, material and conceptual organization.
XF urges constructive oscillation between description and prescription to mobilize the recursive potential of contemporary technologies upon gender, sexuality and disparities of power.
Given that there are a range of gendered challenges specifically relating to life in a digital age -- from sexual harassment via social media, to doxxing, privacy, and the protection of online images -- the situation requires a feminism at ease with computation.
Today, it is imperative that we develop an ideological infrastructure that both supports and facilitates feminist interventions within connective, networked elements of the contemporary world.
Xenofeminism is about more than digital self-defence and freedom from patriarchal networks.
We want to cultivate the exercise of positive freedom -- freedom-to rather than simply freedom-from -- and urge feminists to equip themselves with the skills to redeploy existing technologies and invent novel cognitive and material tools in the service of common ends.
0x08 The radical opportunities afforded by developing (and alienating) forms of technological mediation should no longer be put to use in the exclusive interests of capital, which, by design, only benefits the few.
There are incessantly proliferating tools to be annexed, and although no one can claim their comprehensive accessibility, digital tools have never been more widely available or more sensitive to appropriation than they are today.
0x09 XF rejects illusion and melancholy as political inhibitors.
Illusion, as the blind presumption that the weak can prevail over the strong with no strategic coordination, leads to unfulfilled promises and unmarshalled drives.
On the other hand, melancholy -- so endemic to the left -- teaches us that emancipation is an extinct species to be wept over and that blips of negation are the best we can hope for.
At its worst, such an attitude generates nothing but political lassitude, and at its best, installs an atmosphere of pervasive despair which too often degenerates into factionalism and petty moralizing.
The malady of melancholia only compounds political inertia, and -- under the guise of being realistic -- relinquishes all hope of calibrating the world otherwise.
Likewise, suggestions to pull the lever on the emergency brake of embedded velocities, the call to slow down and scale back, is a possibility available only to the few -- a violent particularity of exclusivity -- ultimately entailing catas- trophe for the many.
Refusing to think beyond the microcommunity, to foster connections between fractured insurgencies, to consider how emancipatory tactics can be scaled up for universal implementation, is to remain satisfied with temporary and defensive gestures.
0x0B A sense of the world's volatility and artificiality seems to have faded from contemporary queer and feminist politics, in favour of a plural but static constellation of gender identities, in whose bleak light equations of the good and the natural are stubbornly restored.
XF challenges this centrifugal referent, knowing full well that sex and gender are exemplary of the fulcrum between norm and fact, between freedom and compulsion.
To tilt the fulcrum in the direction of nature is a defensive concession at best, and a retreat from what makes trans and queer politics more than just a lobby: that it is an arduous assertion of freedom against an order that seemed immutable.
Like every myth of the given, a stable foundation is fabulated for a real world of chaos, violence, and doubt.
When the possibility of transition became real and known, the tomb under Nature's shrine cracked, and new histories -- bristling with futures -- escaped the old order of 'sex'.
The disciplinary grid of gender is in no small part an attempt to mend that shattered foundation, and tame the lives that escaped it.
The time has now come to tear down this shrine entirely, and not bow down before it in a piteous apology for what little autonomy has been won.
0x0C If 'cyberspace' once offered the promise of escaping the strictures of essentialist identity categories, the climate of contemporary social media has swung forcefully in the other direction, and has become a theatre where these prostrations to identity are performed.
With these curatorial practices come puritanical rituals of moral maintenance, and these stages are too often overrun with the disavowed pleasures of accusation, shaming, and denunciation.
Valuable platforms for connection, organization, and skill-sharing become clogged with obstacles to productive debate positioned as if they are debate.
These puritanical politics of shame -- which fetishize oppression as if it were a blessing, and cloud the waters in moralistic frenzies -- leave us cold.
0x0D What this shows is that the task of engineering platforms for social emancipation and organization cannot ignore the cultural and semiotic mutations these platforms afford.
What requires reengineering are the memetic parasites arousing and coordinating behaviours in ways occluded by their hosts' self-image; failing this, memes like 'anonymity', 'ethics', 'social justice' and 'privilege-checking' host social dynamisms at odds with the often-commendable intentions with which they're taken up.
The task of collective self-mastery requires a hyperstitional manipulation of desire's puppet-strings, and deployment of semiotic operators over a terrain of highly networked cultural systems.
The will will always be corrupted by the memes in which it traffics, but nothing prevents us from instrumentalizing this fact, and calibrating it in view of the ends it desires.
0x0F Xenofeminism understands that the viability of emancipatory abolitionist projects -- the abolition of class, gender, and race -- hinges on a profound reworking of the universal.
This non-absolute, generic universality must guard against the facile tendency of conflation with bloated, unmarked particulars -- namely Eurocentric universalism -- whereby the male is mistaken for the sexless, the white for raceless, the cis for the real, and so on.
Absent such a universal, the abolition of class will remain a bourgeois fantasy, the abolition of race will remain a tacit white-supremacism, and the abolition of gender will remain a thinly veiled misogyny, even -- especially -- when prosecuted by avowed feminists themselves.
(The absurd and reckless spectacle of so many self-proclaimed 'gender abolitionists'' campaign against trans women is proof enough of this. )
0x10 From the postmoderns, we have learnt to burn the facades of the false universal and dispel such confusions; from the moderns, we have learnt to sift new universals from the ashes of the false.
Wielding the universal requires thoughtful qualification and precise self-reflection so as to become a ready-to-hand tool for multiple political bodies and something that can be appropriated against the numerous oppressions that transect with gender and sexuality.
The universal is no blueprint, and rather than dictate its uses in advance, we propose XF as a platform.
The very process of construction is therefore understood to be a negentropic, iterative, and continual refashioning.
Xenofeminism seeks to be a mutable architecture that, like open source software, remains available for perpetual modification and enhancement following the navigational impulse of militant ethical reasoning.
The most durable systems in the world owe their stability to the way they train order to emerge as an 'invisible hand' from apparent spontaneity; or exploit the inertia of investment and sedimentation.
We should not hesitate to learn from our adversaries or the successes and failures of history.
With this in mind, XF seeks ways to seed an order that is equitable and just, injecting it into the geometry of freedoms these platforms afford.
0x11 Our lot is cast with technoscience, where nothing is so sacred that it cannot be reengineered and transformed so as to widen our aperture of freedom, extending to gender and the human.
To say that nothing is sacred, that nothing is transcendent or protected from the will to know, to tinker and to hack, is to say that nothing is supernatural.
And so, in tearing down melancholy And illusion; the unambitious And the non-scaleable; the libidinized puritanism of certain online cultures, And Nature as an un-remakeable given, we find that our normative anti-naturalism has pushed us towards an unflinching ontological naturalism.
There is nothing, we claim, that cannot be studied scientifically and manipulated technologically.
0x12 This does not mean that the distinction between the ontological and the normative, between fact and value, is simply cut and dried.
The vectors of normative anti-naturalism and ontological naturalism span many ambivalent battlefields.
Poetry, sex, technology and pain are incandescent with this tension we have traced.
But give up on the task of revision, release the reins and slacken that tension, and these filaments instantly dim.
0x13 The potential of early, text-based internet culture for countering repressive gender regimes, generating solidarity among marginalised groups, and creating new spaces for experimentation that ignited cyberfeminism in the nineties has clearly waned in the twenty-first century.
The dominance of the visual in today's online interfaces has reinstated familiar modes of identity policing, power relations and gender norms in self-representation.
Rather than arguing for the primacy of the virtual over the material, or the material over the virtual, xenofeminism grasps points of power and powerlessness in both, to unfold this knowledge as effective interventions in our jointly composed reality.
0x14 Intervention in more obviously material hegemonies is just as crucial as intervention in digital and cultural ones.
Changes to the built environment harbour some of the most significant possibilities in the reconfiguration of the horizons of women and queers.
As the embodiment of ideological constellations, the production of space and the decisions we make for its organization are ultimately articulations about 'us' and reciprocally, how a 'we' can be articulated.
Let us set sights on augmented homes of shared laboratories, of communal media and technical facilities.
We see too well that reinventions of family structure and domestic life are currently only possible at the cost of either withdrawing from the economic sphere -- the way of the commune -- or bearing its burdens manyfold -- the way of the single parent.
If we want to break the inertia that has kept the moribund figure of the nuclear family unit in place, which has stubbornly worked to isolate women from the public sphere, and men from the lives of their children, while penalizing those who stray from it, we must overhaul the material infrastructure and break the economic cycles that lock it in place.
The task before us is twofold, and our vision necessarily stereoscopic: we must engineer an economy that liberates reproductive labour and family life, while building models of familiality free from the deadening grind of wage labour.
0x16 From the home to the body, the articulation of a proactive politics for biotechnical intervention and hormones presses.
The rise of the internet and the hydra of black market pharmacies it let loose -- together with a publicly accessible archive of endocrinological knowhow -- was instrumental in wresting control of the hormonal economy away from 'gatekeeping' institutions seeking to mitigate threats to established distributions of the sexual.
We ask whether the idiom of 'gender hacking' is extensible into a long-range strategy, a strategy for wetware akin to what hacker culture has already done for software -- constructing an entire universe of free and open source platforms that is the closest thing to a practicable communism many of us have ever seen.
Without the foolhardy endangerment of lives, can we stitch together the embryonic promises held before us by pharmaceutical 3D printing ('Reactionware'), grassroots telemedical abortion clinics, gender hacktivist and DIY-HRT forums, and so on, to assemble a platform for free and open source medicine?
Like engineers who must conceive of a total structure as well as the molecular parts from which it is constructed, XF emphasises the importance of the mesopolitical sphere against the limited effectiveness of local gestures, creation of autonomous zones, and sheer horizontalism, just as it stands against transcendent, or top-down impositions of values and norms.
The mesopolitical arena of xenofeminism's universalist ambitions comprehends itself as a mobile and intricate network of transits between these polarities.
How do we build a better semiotic parasite -- one that arouses the desires we want to desire, that orchestrates not an autophagic orgy of indignity or rage, but an emancipatory and egalitarian community buttressed by new forms of unselfish solidarity and collective self-mastery?
We prefer to think like the schemer or lisper, who seeks to construct a new language in which the problem at hand is immersed, so that solutions for it, and for any number of related problems, might unfurl with ease.
Xenofeminism is a platform, an incipient ambition to construct a new language for sexual politics -- a language that seizes its own methods as materials to be reworked, and incrementally bootstraps itself into existence.
We understand that the problems we face are systemic and interlocking, and that any chance of global success depends on infecting myriad skills and contexts with the logic of XF.
Ours is a transformation of seeping, directed subsumption rather than rapid overthrow; it is a transformation of deliberate construction, seeking to submerge the white-supremacist capitalist patriarchy in a sea of procedures that soften its shell and dismantle its defenses, so as to build a new world from the scraps.
In affirming a future untethered to the repetition of the present, we militate for ampliative capacities, for spaces of freedom with a richer geometry than the aisle, the assembly line, and the feed.
We need new affordances of perception and action unblinkered by naturalised identities.