icarusupinthestars-blog

[icarusupinthestars-blog]

happy pride month, if you buy into and promote the idea that homophobes are actually repressed queers i fear you are actually espousing a line of homophobic thinking yourself. yeah, i get that there are cases where people are homophobic and project their feelings of self hatred onto others, but that is not the root cause of homophobia itself. if anything, to reduce most displays of homophobic behavior to the repression hypothesis 1) places the cause of homophobia as originating with queer people themselves (when there are plenty of cishet ppl that plainly do not like or are disgusted by queer people), 2) overlooks the material conditions that make homophobia systemic (it has to do with capitalist patriarchy, oppositional sexism, and maintaining gender norms for the exploitation of domestic labor and reproduction), and 3) psychically allows you to avoid confronting your own complicity in homophobia by making it a matter of "closet cases" on the right when realistically we are all socialized to be homophobic within the current economic system because it's materially useful for the ruling class !!!

i find c.j. pascoe's study of the use of the word f** to be especially revealing about the gendered subtext of most instances of homophobia because pascoe's subjects largely used that word for displays of behavior they considered to be gender non-conforming rather than non-cishet desire which suggests that a lot of men's homophobia is rooted in a fear of subverted gender roles rather than being closeted. And those gender roles are useful for capitalist production because it allows the ruling class to get a whole lot of free labor from women (both cis and trans), which is why many feminists now use the term cisheteropatriarchy to refer to the inherently intertwined aspects of homophobia, transphobia, and misogyny.

more than anything else, we cannot know what someone's sexuality is until they themselves enunciate what they identify as, so i find the whole "closet case" theory to be not useful in that way either. sometimes it kinda feels like you all are using "gay" as an insult to belittle homophobes on the basis of insecurity (which is also seen as an "unmasculine trait") the same way homophobes use gay to belittle us, when we should be critiquing the action itself and its material impacts because their effect on the social world will still be the same if they are actually closeted or just violently homophobic.

[icarusupinthestars-blog]

All of you here on Tumblr, don’t ignore this before you do something. How long will you remain silent? ✊🏽 While we die before your eyes? Have you experienced losing your health? Have you experienced losing your feet? Have you experienced losing your family? Have you experienced your children dying of hunger and thirst? Have you experienced losing your friends? Think carefully, move your hearts. This is enough—our hearts are crying. No to silence. (Engage here, click on the heart) Donate here 🍁 I depend on your donations to live, me and my family.

Please don't let us die alone here. Donate, share

[icarusupinthestars-blog]

this article from new york magazine about how college students are now all cheating using ai is really chilling, but one of the major sociological points that i think we need to address (that the article alludes to) is how the capitalist world has conditioned us to think of education solely as a "checkpoint"/a means to an end for career progression and family life. that guy, chungin (roy) lee, had this quote where he basically said that he cheated to get into an ivy league school not because he wanted to learn anything but because he thinks that somewhere like columbia is where you're most likely to find your future co-founder and your wife.

it reminds me of this exercise that i once had to do for a class in undergrad where the professor asked us to draw a timeline of what we imagined our lives were going to look like in 5, 10, and 15 years. when we all talked about our individual timelines as a class, the professor really insightfully pointed out that the majority of our timelines were largely oriented around the type of work we wanted to do and what we thought our future families were going to look like. i was kinda shocked at this revelation because i hadn't even thought about quotidian things like what types of hobbies i wanted to pick up or what i'd want to do outside of work and family life. my future identity, as it was, was literally what i thought my labor would amount to.

i think this is part of what karl marx was talking about when he said that one of the major effects of capitalism on human beings is an alienation from the self/our species-being. I use species-being - and marx does this too - because he points out that most human beings have an inherent drive to create just because we're human. literally any attention to internet fandom shows that we are incredibly complex, creative creatures that will make things just for our satisfaction and pleasure. but what capitalism does is harness this creativity - and therefore our ability to imagine the future - and redirects it so that all of our life energies are dedicated solely to the creation of profit for the bourgeoisie/capitalist class.

public education is particularly complicit, and i think teachers need to think more critically about this when forming their pedagogical practice. think about how many career days/career oriented activities that we would be expected to do throughout middle and high school. so many career simulations, etc. that all condition us to be workers. hell, even think about how one of the most common questions we ask children in elementary school is "what do you want to be when you grow up?" a.k.a. what type of profession do you want to do as an adult. i think kids are a bit more fantastical with their answers generally - lest we forget about the superheroes, princesses, etc. that lots of kids want to be - but they understand that that particular social script is oriented around the jobs that we wish to have in the future. i remember when i was in kindergarten, at my little graduation ceremony we were all expected to come up to the mike and announce to our parents what we wanted to be (or do, really) when we grow up. even the language of "being" a profession (our species-being) shows how we cannot imagine ourselves and our identities outside of the labor that we can provide for the bourgeois class. i'm sure many people have similar experiences to this.

also not to mention how career days will implicitly devalue domestic labor as an actual form of labor, based on the way that stay at home moms are largely excluded from career days even though cleaning, cooking, and childcare are all forms of labor that would be considered as such if it didn't take place in the context of the family.

we live in hell.

[icarusupinthestars-blog]

No safety. No food. No aid. No water. No healthcare. No education. Is this what it means to live? Is this what world accept as life?

If a group of animals were trapped, starved, and cut off from the world like this, people would be outraged.

But because it's us—human beings—somehow, the world looks away.

These are unbearable days. Everything feels heavy. Each hour presses on my chest like I’m being suffocated.

My family needs urgent help.

Basic survival has become nearly impossible. Bread—just bread—now costs over $25 a day to make.

We are not asking for luxury. We are begging for life.

Please, if you’re reading this: help. Reblog this post. Talk about us. Donate if you can. Even a small act can mean everything right now.

#crisis #humanrights #emergency #donate #pleasehelp #tumblrcommunity #survivestories #reblogtohelp #signalboost

[icarusupinthestars-blog]

there's this term in right-wing zionist human rights discourse going around which elaborates what they consider to be a new form of a "crime against humanity" that they have termed "kinocide," which they use to suggest that palestinian militants committed a particular form of "brutality" through specific attacks on families on october 7th.

the definition of family here is, of course, not one that is applied to the mass extermination of entire palestinian bloodlines but specifically related to violations against the Israeli nuclear family.

that "kinocide" can gain conceptual currency in the way that it has tells us that human rights, as a global liberal democratic ideal, have largely been formed by capitalist patriarchal technologies of labor exploitation which simultaneously prevent the oppressed peoples of the world from claiming justice while perpetuating genocidal violence against them in the next breath.

[icarusupinthestars-blog]

i think what we're at theoretical odds about is whether or not capitalist patriarchy constitutes a unitary system (including colonialism/racism, queerphobia, transphobia, disability, etc.) or whether we should interpret them as analytically separate but connected systems (forgive me if i'm wrong in this regard, but we're rehashing the vogel/italian marxist feminist vs. hartmann/mackinnon debate from the 70s and 80s here again). my perspective - as a marxist feminist - is that they constitute a fluid, contradictory totality (to quote cinzia arruzza) that almost might be better read as what ashley bohrer calls a "tapestry," or what some decolonial feminists have referred to as the "imbrication"/"braiding" of systems.

i would refer you to both cinzia arruzza's essay "remarks on gender" (2014) as well as david mcnally's essay "intersections and dialectics" from bhattacharya's social reproduction theory for a more comprehensive overview of my own personal political beliefs, but i think the issue with the dual systems approach is that it ultimately devolves into a debate about which system came first when, as arruzza points out, capitalism and patriarchy have become so embedded with each other that trying to separate them as autonomous social forms is a moot point. while i agree that patriarchy likely does predate capitalism (i should be more specific with my use of that term, perhaps it'd be better to take the position of anuradha ghandy and refer to it as "class society" more generally, although i think i was using it properly in my original post) trying to separate them is, as himani bannerji puts it, trying to unmix coffee, milk, and sugar after they have been stirred together - it's largely an ungenerative endeavor when at this point in time they clearly act as a unanimous form of oppression. (you might refer to the difference between unitary vs. dual systems theory as what patricia hill collins and bonnie hill thornton refer to as the divide between "strong" vs. "weak intersectionality," although i find that term to be unnecessarily uncharitable in its phrasing)

i also think ghandy's third world anti-caste marxist feminist approach is useful to invoke here because one of her major criticisms of dual systems theory is that because it does not fully free itself from the radical feminist posturing that positions women as a class oppressed by men as a class, the logical recourse can only be separatism or the abolition of men. while they might be possible in small scale projects, ghandy specifically has gripes with this point because she doesn't believe it can lead to a full transformation of society - maybe the solution is to make everyone socially a woman, like andrea long chu suggests - but i tend to agree with ghandy that dual systems doesn't leave any targetting of patriarchy at its roots, which is fundamentally class society. you're free to disagree with me in any of these regards/points, but i just wanted to engage in some friendly critique as someone who wants the same thing as you (liberation of all people from oppression) and clarify my position as such! have a lovely day!!

from a social reproduction/marxist feminist perspective, the cultural focus on biology as a determining factor of "womanhood" in broader currents of transphobic violence should make all women everywhere alarmed because it is a hegemonic tool that is being used to reinforce the nuclear family and the capitalist patriarchal exploitation of women's domestic/reproductive labor.

silvia federici has written incredibly eloquently on this in both wages against housework and caliban and the witch, but biology has historically been used as a method to create a seemingly insurmountable division between "men" and "women" that capitalists will use to justify things like cleaning, cooking, and childcare as "naturally" in the realm of the "feminine." the renaissance investment in re-envisioning human bodies as biological machines that could be exploited for work - beginning with the anatomical studies of vesalius - also spent an inordinate amount of time trying to discover the "bodily differences" between cis men and cis women to enclose women into the realm of the "domestic"/the "home" so that the emerging capitalist class during the 15th/16th centuries would not have to invest resources into making their workers survive just enough for further exploitation.

i find it incredibly troubling - especially in places like britain - that there has been a turn towards reading "womanhood" as a biological phenomena without consideration of how biology - literally the study of life, which implies human projection on the object of interest - is a cultural construct that becomes tethered, as most cultural objects do, to larger systems of capitalist patriarchy.

when terfs + "left-wingers" shit on trans people, what they're actually doing is lending their energy to reentrenching women's oppression as gendered workers, and it should be summarily rejected in all instances as reactionary and patriarchal.

[icarusupinthestars-blog]

from a social reproduction/marxist feminist perspective, the cultural focus on biology as a determining factor of "womanhood" in broader currents of transphobic violence should make all women everywhere alarmed because it is a hegemonic tool that is being used to reinforce the nuclear family and the capitalist patriarchal exploitation of women's domestic/reproductive labor.

silvia federici has written incredibly eloquently on this in both wages against housework and caliban and the witch, but biology has historically been used as a method to create a seemingly insurmountable division between "men" and "women" that capitalists will use to justify things like cleaning, cooking, and childcare as "naturally" in the realm of the "feminine." the renaissance investment in re-envisioning human bodies as biological machines that could be exploited for work - beginning with the anatomical studies of vesalius - also spent an inordinate amount of time trying to discover the "bodily differences" between cis men and cis women to enclose women into the realm of the "domestic"/the "home" so that the emerging capitalist class during the 15th/16th centuries would not have to invest resources into making their workers survive just enough for further exploitation.

i find it incredibly troubling - especially in places like britain - that there has been a turn towards reading "womanhood" as a biological phenomena without consideration of how biology - literally the study of life, which implies human projection on the object of interest - is a cultural construct that becomes tethered, as most cultural objects do, to larger systems of capitalist patriarchy.

when terfs + "left-wingers" shit on trans people, what they're actually doing is lending their energy to reentrenching women's oppression as gendered workers, and it should be summarily rejected in all instances as reactionary and patriarchal.

[icarusupinthestars-blog]

This is my daughter, Salma, only three months old, born into this "cruel war that has been killing innocent people for two years and is still ongoing." Since her birth, she has felt nothing but fear and hunger, deprived of her most basic rights. She needs food, safety, and a dignified life that every child deserves. Therefore, I appeal to you from the bottom of my heart to support her and extend a helping hand to save her. Your donation today could make a difference in saving her from certain death. Donate here

🌟 Our campaign is vetted by gazavetters list at (#21) sami alkhlili Donate here

[icarusupinthestars-blog]

the issue with condemning all forms of nationalism is that it conflates revolutionary and reactionary forms of nationalism with each other (re: fanon) which is a critical error that many left-wingers in the imperial core fall into in their political beliefs.

i think it's useful to use yen le espiritu's concept of involuntary and voluntary ethnicity/nationality to outline the differences between the two. namely, espiritu points out that not all ethnic identifications originate from the same source, and distinguishes between the two on the basis of whether or not ethnic/national identification originates from within or outside the group (the innenwelt vs. umwelt in freudian terms).

voluntary ethnicity relies on a conception of stabilized unity on the basis of shared foundational/primordial characteristics between members of a national group. involuntary ethnicity, on the other hand, is one where the source of identification is external to the self/group and exists as an interpellative/"calling" force that doesn't emerge from within (this is what fanon described as the shock of the gap between his perception of himself as human and an external perception of himself as Black when a white child tells his mother "Look, an n-word"). what césaire and fanon reveal to us is that the two are different in the way that the former inevitably becomes a reactionary mode through the desire for a mythical past through an inability to cope with the present (benjamin describes this when he talks about the relation between fascism and nostalgia) while the latter is revolutionary because its emergence is typically conditioned by systemic oppression (the inability to "self-determine," so to speak) and thus sets its sights towards a future outside the boundary formation imposed upon it. this is a very rudimentary schema and there are also many instances where the latter transforms into the former (as fanon writes of in the pitfalls of national consciousness), but they also possess a relative degree of autonomy to the point that conflating the two is constitutive of a category error.

when people critique nationalism as a form of violence, what i think they're doing is assuming that voluntary ethnicity is the only form of nationalism that can exist because their idea of nationalism has largely been inscribed by the cultural imaginary of white/european voluntary ethnic nationalisms, which have almost inevitably been reactionary because they were used as a way to colonize and expand empire through the creation of racial hierarchies. yet not all nationalisms have been formed on the basis of voluntary identification but sometimes become a method of resistance as a response to oppression, which endows it with a revolutionary character (revolutionary Black and Palestinian nationalisms fall into this, for example). the trick is to develop a keen eye to spot the differences between the two and adjust the latter so it doesn't transform into the former, with the ultimate goal of expanding the anti-oppressive impulse present in revolutionary nationalisms to counter all forms of oppression. this is why fanon said a major mistake of decolonization movements was that the nationalist impulse that developed to resist colonial power ultimately did not move towards a socialist revolution as a way to break apart the idea of ethnic identification entirely and expose it as a fantasy rooted in material forms of exploitation and accumulation.

[icarusupinthestars-blog]

reading through keynes' general theory is really interesting because you can get a sense of what raymond williams (citing rosa luxemburg) was speaking about in the country and the city when he criticized a tendency for a romanticization of a "socialism of consumption" rather than a socialism of production, to use marxist terms.

[icarusupinthestars-blog]

i really want to romanticize my life going to a nice pretty campus and everything but i end up just rotting in my bed with an unopened book that i need to read for my work but just. don't.

it's literally not old cups of tea and old books and shit it's old takeout containers and feeling like garbage while u scream about not understanding whatever the fuck ur meant to study <3