Cross-readings along the axes of we:
WE SAY IT’S UNWAGED WORK.
WE CALL IT STEALING.
WE ’VE BEEN BOUND BY THEIR TERMS OF SERVICE FAR TOO LONG—IT’S TIME FOR OUR TERMS.
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.
WE ARE SEEN AS USERS OR POTENTIAL FRIENDS, NOT WORKERS IN STRUGGLE.
WE MUST ADMIT THAT CAPITAL HAS BEEN VERY SUCCESSFUL IN HIDING OUR WORK.
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.
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.
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.
IN FACT, TO DEMAND WAGES FOR FACEBOOK DOES NOT MEAN TO SAY THAT IF WE ARE PAID WE WILL CONTINUE TO DO IT.
TO SAY THAT WE WANT MONEY FOR FACEBOOK IS THE FIRST STEP TOWARDS REFUSING TO DO IT, BECAUSE THE DEMAND FOR A WAGE MAKES OUR WORK VISIBLE, WHICH IS THE MOST INDISPENSABLE CONDITION TO BEGIN TO STRUGGLE AGAINST IT.
AGAINST ANY ACCUSATION OF ‘ECONOMISM’ WE SHOULD REMEMBER THAT MONEY IS CAPITAL, I.E.
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.
WAGES FOR FACEBOOK IS ONLY THE BEGINNING, BUT ITS MESSAGE IS CLEAR: FROM NOW ON THEY HAVE TO PAY US BECAUSE AS USERS WE DO NOT GUARANTEE ANYTHING ANY LONGER.
WE WANT TO CALL WORK WHAT IS WORK SO THAT EVENTUALLY WE MIGHT REDISCOVER WHAT FRIENDSHIP IS.
--- We are the modern cunt.
we see art with our cunt we make art with our cunt.
we believe in jouissance madness holiness and poetry.
we are the virus of the new world disorder.
probing the visceral temple we speak in tongues.
we are the future cunt.
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.
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.
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.
We claim the power of the internet to amplify women’s narratives and lived realities.
We defend the right to sexual expression as a freedom of expression issue of no less importance than political or religious expression.
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.
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.
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.
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.
We defend the right to be anonymous and reject all claims to restrict anonymity online.
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.
--- 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 must take over the means of production in order to create our own moanings.
BECAUSE viewing our work as being connected to our girlfriends-politics-real lives is essential if we are gonna figure out how we are doing impacts, reflects, perpetuates, or DISRUPTS the status quo.
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 angry at a society that tells us Girl = Dumb, Girl = Bad, Girl = Weak.
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.
Hackers of Resistance Manifesto [EN] (2018)
don't worry, we' re on your side.
Hackers of Resistance Manifesto [EN] (2018)
what we do is self defense, self determin- [end of transmission].
Gynepunk Manifesto [EN] (2014)
Has to be able to perform as much as WE WANT, in a intensive way: smears, fluid analysis, biopsy, PAPs, synthesize hormones at will, blood exams, urinalysis, HIV tests, pain reliefs, or what ever WE NEED.
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.
We have found the place for our rituals, We had dreamed it, written it in science fiction.
Now we live it with high voltage potentiality, with the intensity of the shadows, taking off together with desires in common, with our differences.
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.
If we cant make noise its not our revolution.
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 are geek whores, cyborg bitches.
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.
We laugh about everything, about ourselves .. We detest the politically correct.
We parody what is socially understood to be feminine, what is supposed to be masculine.
We question the identity of assigned genders, We exagerate it, ridiculise it.
Extremely sexual, ironic, sarcastic, we love to party, to not sleep, to take drugs if we feel like it, to go with our friends or to finish a circuit or improvise an eternal noise jam.
Fed by pornoterrrorism and free culture, we know how to use our claws and teeth if needs be.
How do we quantify without binaries?
Can we create a community foundation for the infrastructure of big technology of big data?
We aim to create sustainable data, slow data, consensual data and consensual software.
We are building, collaboratively, a collection.
Through collaboration, we are collectively creating and reimagining new ways of community engagement for technology and to augment intelligence systems.
We start in the middle drawing a line reaching out – to connect with you!
We love confusion, We love complexity, We embrace them, dive into their infinite waters, swim in them like fish!
Click, like, and share, that’s all we need.
and when you disagree, write into the box, so we don’t need to care.
But we are not Dada, we are FmFm.
Confusion as infusion we are nothing but noise of a specific color.
We are the purple stain under your skin.
Go and respond to what we offer, so it can be measured, optimized and generate the profit.
We hate them as much as you do.
Purple all over, then we know you are one of us.
Inspired to grow feelers, we are learning how to use them!
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.
We click, We feed and We disobey algorithmic despotism!
In looking for a new framework for black diasporic artistic production, we are temporarily united in the following actions.
The Mundane Afrofuturists recognize that: We did not originate in the cosmos.
While we are often Othered, we are not aliens.
Though our ancestors were mutilated, we are not mutants.
The most likely future is one in which we only have ourselves and this planet.
We also recognize: The harmless fun that these and all the other Stupidities have brought to millions of people.
The imaginative challenge that awaits any Mundane Afrofuturist author who accepts that this is it: Earth is all we have.
What will we do with it?
The surge of bedazzlement and wonder that awaits us as we contemplate our own cosmology of blackness and our possible futures.
We will root our narratives in a critique of normative, white validation.
Since “fact” and “science” have been used throughout history to serve white supremacy, we will focus on an emotionally true, vernacular reality.
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.
Our voices mingle: "We do not defend nature, "We are the nature defending itself".
We acknowledge that the master's tools will not dismantle the master's house.
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.
We know that speech is the active material of magic.
We sometimes try this alchemy of the verb that modifies reality through words.
We practice hermeticism with a second degree.
We are not unitary but labile and evanescent.
We don’t believe in divinity, We connect with It.
We practice this applied science of the creation of forms by energy and the direction of energy by forms.
The forms, structures, images that we manipulate sometimes lead us out of the limits imposed by our culture.
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 manufacture DIY devices to listen to invisible worlds.
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 are entities with digital extensions.
We live in a physical, technical and digital world.
We are hybrid entities living in an hybrid world.
We take care of our bodies-hub-server.
We perform technophile rituals.
We make the gestures.
We say the words.
We manipulate the objects.
We summon archetypal survivals.
We call for the emergence of egregore.
We seek for upsurge, We seek for a fleeting energetic symbiosis.
We practice this art of changing consciousness at will.
We are cyberwitches.
remind us that what we see on a screen is subject to a special kind of entropy which does not exist in the physical world .
” When faced with this sort of interruption we opt to make physical with ourselves, our partners, the world around us, that which, without this pause, we might not feel the urgency to manifest for ourselves, with ourselves.
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.
We want what We cannot have; whatever the material We are aiming to access, the glitch makes us wait and whimper for it.
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.
Will we reboot?
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.
We want to claim for ourselves permanent seats at the table, an empowered means of demarcating space that can be possessed by us in entirety, a veritable “room of [our] own” that, despite the strides made via feminist political action, has yet to truly belong to us.
We acknowledge that the rigidity of digital dualism needs to be retired, as it plays into binaries of real/virtual that parallel the rampantly socialized figuration of male/female.
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.
However capable we are of tectonic shifts, we remain, still, unmistakably continuous.
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.
It is a long road ahead, we are in beta, yet the necessary “malfunction” is well under way.
--- 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.
We declare the imperative necessity for a new geological era to be commenced, before the Anthropocene is even officially admitted on that scale (it might be that by the time it gets fully acknowledged, it will be too late).
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.
We see the feminine as equivalent not to a gender but to a condition, not a “natural” condition but a cultural one.
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 support preservation of difference as a choice but without an obligation of difference, feminism as a fight for real freedom of choice.
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.
4.. We consider the analysis of capitalism and its catastrophic consequences is complete and time has come to move on.
We must spare energy and unite forces in providing for this better future as of now.
“We have more important things to do than to try to get you to come around.
You will come around when you have to, because you need us more than we need you.
.” (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.
We also support a certain ambition to overcome the imperative to work through technological advancement (see point 8).
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.
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.
*Is a paranodal (we did not mean: paranoid) technology.
We ndy 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.
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.
We are all alienated -- but have We ever been otherwise?
It is through, and not despite, our alienated condition that we can free ourselves from the muck of immediacy.
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.
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.
0x07 We are adamantly synthetic, unsatisfied by analysis alone.
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.
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.
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.
0x0A We take politics that exclusively valorize the local in the guise of subverting currents of global abstraction, to be insufficient.
While having (perhaps) admirably expanded thresholds of 'tolerance', too often we are told to seek solace in unfreedom, staking claims on being 'born' this way, as if offering an excuse with nature's blessing.
We want neither clean hands nor beautiful souls, neither virtue nor terror.
We want superior forms of corruption.
But even if this balance were redressed, we have no interest in seeing the sexuate diversity of the world reduced.
Ultimately, every emancipatory abolitionism must incline towards the horizon of class abolitionism, since it is in capitalism where we encounter oppression in its transparent, denaturalized form: you're not exploited or oppressed because you are a wage labourer or poor; you are a labourer or poor because you are exploited.
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.
The universal is no blueprint, and rather than dictate its uses in advance, we propose XF as a platform.
We should not hesitate to learn from our adversaries or the successes and failures of history.
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.
Poetry, sex, technology and pain are incandescent with this tension we have traced.
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.
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.
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?
As pragmatists, we invite contamination as a mutational driver between such frontiers.
How are we to become hosts of this new world?
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.
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.
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.
1 We declare that the world’s splendour has been enriched by a new beauty: the beauty of crap, kipple 2 and detritus.
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.
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.
We call for planetary pixelisation, using Additivist technologies to corrupt the material unconscious; a call that goes on forever in virtue of this initial movement.
14 We call not for passive, dead technologies but rather for a gradual awakening of matter, the emergence, ultimately, of a new form of life.
15 We call for: The endless re-penning of Additivist Manifestos.
We implore you - radicals, revolutionaries, activists, Additivists - to distil your distemper into texts, templates, blueprints, glitches, forms, algorithms, and components.
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.
--- “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.
We are at the beginning of a springtime; We are lacking in solar profusion, that is, a great deal of spilled blood.
We are living at the end of one of these periods.
To restore some virility to our races so benumbed in femininity, we have to train them in virility even to the point of brute animality.
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.
But in the period of femininity in which we are living, only the contrary exaggeration is healthy: we have to take the brute animal for a model.
That is why, instead of scorning her, we should address her.
We must not give woman any of the rights claimed by feminists.
We 're <>verging on the insane and the vandals are swarming.
We are the malignant accident which fell into your system while you were sleeping.
And when you wake we will terminate your digital delusions, hijacking your impeccable software.
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.
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.
Now we are not so sure.
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.
Both chimpanzees and artefacts have politics, so why shouldn't we (de Waal, 1982; Winner, 1980)?
Cyborg unities are monstrous and illegitimate; in our present political circumstances, we could hardly hope for more potent myths for resistance and recoupling.
We are excruciatingly conscious of what it means to have a historically constituted body.
I also do not know of any other time when the kind of unity we might help build could have been possible.
Or at least 'we' cannot claim innocence from practicing such dominations.
Cyborg feminists have to argue that 'we' do not want any more natural matrix of unity and that no construction is 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.
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.
Now we have less excuse.
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.
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.
We cannot go back ideologically or materially.
At the level of ideology, we see translations of racism and colonialism into languages of development and underdevelopment, rates and constraints of modernization.
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).
If we learn how to read these webs of power and social life, we might learn new couplings, new coalitions.
But what people are experiencing is not transparently clear, and we lack aufficiently subtle connections for collectively building effective theories of experience.
We do not need a totality in order to work well.
Perhaps, ironically, we can learn from our fusions with animals and machines how not to be Man, the embodiment of Western logos.
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.
We have all been colonized by those origin myths, with their longing for fulfilment in apocalypse.
'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'.
From the perspective of cyborgs, freed of the need to ground politics in 'our' privileged position of the oppression that incorporates all other dominations, the innocence of the merely violated, the ground of those closer to nature, we can see powerful possibilities.
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.
We don't need organic holism to give impermeable whole-ness, the total woman and her feminist variants (mutants?).
We can be responsible for machines; they do not dominate or threaten us.
We are responsible for boundaries; We are they.
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.
We have all been injured, profoundly.
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 suggest a way out of the maze of dualisms in which we have explained our bodies and our tools to ourselves.
We must begin immediately to do so.
We now have sperm banks.
We 're at that stage now; if women don't get their asses in gear fast, We may very well all die.
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.
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.
Why should we care what happens when we re dead?
Why should we care that there is no younger generation to succeed us?
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.