Returning to nature: It’s not what you think.

February 17, 2012 at 5:35 pm | #24
bloggerclarissa :
“I would have not trouble with a feminist identification with nature if they were only to take that project seriously — go and live out in the Amazonian rain forest for a few weeks; make like Bear Grylls. Actually, there is a lot that can be learned from various kinds of association with nature.”
– One of the scholars I’m talking about (a woman) arrived at a conclusion that it is easier for female political prisoners to withstand torture because they are closer to the animal world and don’t experience torture as acutely as men do. And she didn’t notice how this line of reasoning could be used for political terror. This is a person from Argentina, where there is a history of this kind of terror. If that’s where essentialist gender thinking takes one, who needs it?
Indeed — but obviously I was also being at least partially ironic. What I’m getting at is there is no harm in individuals, like your Argentinian, going back to Argentina and offering herself up to the prisons there for experimentation. This is one way to test the veracity of one’s ideology and find out how useful it is.
This is what I am suggesting about nature being a very useful learning tool. It’s not going to teach you anything like you imagine, but that’s not the fault of nature.
I’m sorry. Everything I say is ironic. You will find nothing on my blog that isn’t at least partially ironic. This is the Nietzschean and Bataille school of philosophy, where nothing is really what it seems and you always have to watch out where you step.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s