"Gender Trouble" and Griceanisms

-- by JLS
----- for the GC

I have NOT yet totally transcribed the youtube J. Kennedy was referring to:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DLnv322X4tY

-- which prompted my description of "Butler, a well known lesbian" mimicking a gay. So here sort of goes. Note that I don't use 'gay' myself, but I'm slightly lazy to editorialise right now. And I know I should use the hyphen between well and known above ('well-known'). In any case, these are some of the words I transcribed from my hearing (right 2 minutes ago) that (can't think of the word, but I mean something like 'sad') talk by Butler: She says (literally) things like -- plus she uses gestural marks, like the 'double quote' lovely gesture with her hands. I should be able to show that in the transcript.

TRANSCRIPT OF BUTLER'S TALK at:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DLnv322X4tY

THE STORY:

"There's a 'story' that came out around, I don't know, eight years ago?, of a young man, who lived in Maine, and he walked down the street of his small town where he had lived his entire life."

"And he walks with what we call a swish, a kind of, his hips moved back and forth. You know? 'feminine way' [*]."

"And as he grew older -- fourteen, fifteen, sixteen -- that swish, that walk, became more pronounced, o-kay."

"And it was more dramatically 'feminine'."

"And he started to be harrassed by the boys in the town. And soon, two or three boys, er, stopped his walk. And they fought with him, and they ended up throwing him over a BRIDGE [**] and they [just] killed him [***].

-------

THE QUESTION: ('philosopher''s)



So then we have to ask:

Why would someone be killed for the way they walk?

Or:

Why would that walk be so upsetting, to those other boys, that they would feel that they must NEGATE this person, they expunge the trace of this person -- they must stop the walk -- no matter what. They must, er, they must, er, er, -- erradicate the possibility of that person ever walking again? [pause].


-----


THE ANSWER:


---

"Er, it seems to me, err, that, err, we are talking about, err, an extremely deep panic? or fear? -- an anxiety? that pertains to gender norms.

And:

if someone says

'You must comply with the norm of masculinity,
othewise, er, you will die'

--

Or:


'I'll you know,

because

you do NOT comply'

Then, er, we have to, er, start to question what the relation is
between,er, complying with gender and coercion."


* She does the 'quote' gesture with hands][She keeps smiling -- in the way academics from Berkeley smile: a pleasant smile that covers very horrid stories behind it.

** she changes intonation and is very emphatic about the lexeme, 'bridge' and its denotatum, we expect.

*** she raises the intonation over 'killed' as she had made the opposite effect under 'bridge'. The way she looks at the camera is also very telling.


In my original commentary, what I meant to emphaise is the 'gestural' display of 'gender' or 'sex'.

--- The way Butler emphasises the word 'feminine' TWICE in the speech: 'feminine way'. "O-kay" she adds, as to have that GRANTED by her recipient. The second time, 'more 'dramtically feminine'. I.e. she is leading the recipient, rightly, into seeing that this is all a 'drama' in MORE than one way.

----

She will at a later stage of the speech -- it's an interview possibly for French television, as it is dubbed, but I'll be damned if I miss her gestures by seeing what is French for 'swish' --, speak of 'masculinity'.

To contrast with femininity.

So here we have

+/- MALE

say.

So Butler (a -MALE) is talking of a boy (+MALE) who is displaying (-MALE). Because the walk is seen as 'feminine way', 'dramatically feminine'.

But Butler's point is of course than merely asking to jail those 'boys', we have to understand where that _fear_ originates, and why the hypocritical ('politically-correct') view of 'complying with gender norms' is more of a case of COERCION which ends up involving those who have internalised that fear into criminals.

The fact that it is a -MALE (a female if you want) mimicking a +MALE (the Maine boy) displaying a -MALE behaviour (as perceived by these 'two or three boys' in Maine).

I was noting that Butler's point, qua author of Gender Trouble, is engaged in the sexual-orientation, or gender orientation, and so I thought that mentioning that she is telling the story as a sexual dissident (as it were, a lesbian) makes the telling all the more 'telling'. For we CAN digest all that irony coming from her as an open lesbian. Why?

Well, just imagine the same story as told by Barrack Obama or worse by Michelle Obama:

FROM THE KENNYBUNKER REPORTER, Maine. Reuter. It was pleasant to welcome Michelle Obama in Maine. She has a story to tell.

MICHELLE OBAMA. "Well, yes. There's this story, a piece of news really, that came out around, I don't know, eight years ago? It as a very young man, about 17 -- wasn't it. Well, he lived in Maine. Beautiful state, Maine. I always come when I can.
Well, Jonathan Peirce Smithson-Murray, his name was. And he walked down the street of Kennybunker -- right there (she points to house) -- where he had lived his entire life, if you can imagine that.

REPORTER. Why wouldn't you imagine that?

MICHELE. I was kidding, kid. And Kevin...

REPORTER. I thought you said his name was Jonathan Peirce Smithson-Murray.

MICHELE. Yes, but he went by "Kevin". He walked with what we (Barrack and I) call a swish, a kind of, -- let me dow it."

"At this point Michelle up and did the walk to us -- who remained marvellous at how much sexual understanding has progressed in this beloved country of us."

MICHELE (laughing) goes on "His hips moved back and forth. You know? 'feminine way. But, as he grew older -- fourteen, fifteen, sixteen, was it? -- that swish, that walk, became more pronounced, o-kay. And it was more dramatically feminine. And he started to be harrassed by the boys in the town. And soon enough, two -- or three, witness differ -- boys, er, just stopped his effeminate walk. And they fought with him. To cut a long story short, they threw him over a BRIDGE, and he drowned.

JOURNALIST. Wow.

MICHELE. Indeed. Now, the question we need to ask is -- why would someone be killed for the way they walk?"

JOURNALIST: Hear! Hear!

MICHELE: Why would a walk be so upsetting that a white straight boy from Maine would feel that he must literally 'get away WIHOUT it'? What values have, you Maine folk, instilled on that boy, Christain Zachary Powell-Robertson, expunge the trace of 'Kevin'. Why would Zach feel entitled to erradicate the possibility Kevin walking?

JOURNALIST: Well, are you suggesting that there are ways of erradicating the walk without erradicating the walker?

MICHELE. You insult me. What you Maine people have done in Zach, who is now free on bail, of course -- is, but I won't say 'poor Zach', instill on Zach an extremely deep panic -- fear -- anxiety, and this pertains to nothing so serious. It pertains to mere gender norms.

JOURNALIST: "Mere"? We's talking murder here, lady.

MICHELE. You are rude and ignorant. You don't follow the modus-ponens I'm proposing [she pronounces modus-ponens to rhyme with Cacharel]. If someone says 'You must comply with the norm of masculinity, othewise, you'ill die'. Or: 'I'll you know -- because you do NOT comply', then we have to, or at least you provincial Mainers have to -- start to question what the relation is between complying with gender and coercion."

JOURNALIST: PoMo!

----