Make sure that you give special attention to:

Introduction
Beside Oneself
Gender Regulations
The Question of Social Transformation

The topic for next week is: Resisting Norms, Resisting and Resituating Ethics.

(How) does Butler do this?
Do you see a shift in her thinking from "Ethical Ambivalence" to Undoing Gender?
From Gender Trouble to Undoing Gender?
What are the ethical possibilities in Butler's work?
For Butler, what is the ethical?

In addition to talking about that essay, I thought you all could discuss your own projects and how you are interested in using troublemaking in your final papers/projects. It could be a useful way to get feedback from each other.

Please email me a (roughly) 200 word description of the topic for your final project by next week.

My assessment of the way in which some academics contrive to turn serial irresponsibility into a form of heroism under the banner of academic freedom has now been at once confirmed and challenged by events at the University of Ottawa, where the administration announced on Feb. 6 that it has “recommended to the Board of Governors the dismissal with cause of Professor Denis Rancourt from his faculty position.” Earlier, Rancourt, a tenured professor of physics, had been suspended from teaching and banned from campus. When he defied the ban he was taken away in handcuffs and charged with trespassing.

Dr. Johannes Dillinger, Oxford Brookes University, England "Treason.
Arson. Poison: Traitors and Terrorists in the Early Modern Period"
Tuesday, March 24, 12:00-1:20 PM
1210 Heller Hall (History Dept. conference center)
(light refreshments)

http://events.tc.umn.edu/event.xml?occurrence=418307

Details:
Is terrorism a 20th-century phenomenon? People in the early modern
period recognized a variety of political crimes: "crimen laesae
majestatis," "perduellio," "breach of the Empire's peace" or simply
"treason." The legal definition of these crimes helped to outline the
ideal of the well-ordered state. On a more concrete level, the
emerging states of the early modern period had to face crimes that
resembled latter-day terrorism in many ways. The authorities as well
as the populace feared organized gangs of criminals in the pay of
rival political or religious leaders. These gangs were said to attack
the civilian population using arson and mass poisoning in order to
destabilize whole states. The fear of the terrorist "state destroyer"
was part and parcel of state building from its very beginning.

DR. JOHANNES DILLINGER is Senior Lecturer in Early Modern History at
Oxford Brookes University, England. He received a Ph.D. from the
University of Trier. His dissertation, a comparative study of 1300
witch-trials in two German principalities, won the Friedrich Spee
Award for outstanding contributions to the historiography of
witchcraft. He also won a prestigious Emmy Noether Grant of the
German Research Association.

That’s Revolting: Queer Strategies for Resisting Assimilation

Being Outside
Some of the writing is reminiscent of Homi Bhabha’s notion that all changes come from the borders or margins of society. But, is this the same as an outside? What constitutes a border region? Butler theorizes inside/ outside as constantly shifting notions that are mutually constitutive. The various authors in That’s Revolting offer different notions of inside/outside that are complex and different. For instance, in the “Legalize Sodomy” essay, whether one is inside or outside prison is shifted by the legalization of certain sexual practices. However, the barrier is merely shifted, as other sexual practices are still criminalized. This is true both of the inside/ outside the law barrier and the power/pleasure/ “outsider” status border that is operative in such situations.

The Academy
The academy is another inside/ outside construct developed by various authors in the collection. It is restricted and codified discursive space. How does this relate to Butler’s notion of internal critique? She offers a critique from within feminism not to tear it down but to productively push its boundaries from within. Is this a useful construction of how to be a “freak” or “troublemaker” without the traditional trappings, such as being an “outside” voice? In this way, does this book valorize the “outsider” position? Does it do so uncritically? Furthermore, it is possible to look at some visions of outsider identity as necessitating a utopian impulse or organizing vision. Is there a way to insist on negation without these future-oriented ideas?

Troublemaking through (And the Trouble with) Affinity Politics
The question of social movement is central to That’s Revolting. When does organizing break down? Why? When do these movements start replicating the same hierarchical structures of dominant society? How did ACT-UP, never wanting to be an “insider” group, still end up as an institution? Can a real-deal, trouble-making queer really be part of an organization or group? (p.256). Assumed similarities/ goals need to be analyzed to organize without identity as central. Can it be a queer project and still be inclusive? This type of coalition politics are supposed to be hard, provisional (Bernice Reagan Johnson). However, we always organize with friends and people we already know. Are shared values a stumbling block for critique? Is there an element of anti-intellectualism in organizing that doesn’t allow constant, fracturing, internal critique? The focus on action in some groups can be seen to exile thinking in some instances.

Power
Is “resisting assimilation” about how you position yourself in relation to a dominant? Can such a framework be considered a purely “negative” politics? If assimilation is conceived of as some form of conformity with dominant structures, then resisting it outright may be a way to consistently negate dominant identity. However, this notion of the outside as place constituted by those on the margins as a place of minority identity. Is taking part in such an identification a “positive” project that rearticulates dominant notions of identity and social organization?

Pride, Creating Public and Personal (Bodily?) Space, and Not Being a Victim
Does being a parent require a certain level of assimilation? Can you remain a queer when others constantly assume you are a normal, heterosexual parent with a child? p. 104. The discussion of these issue in That’s Revolting do not resolve the issue of whether assimilation is conferred by others or about self-definition. Do you have to resist the way others may simple identify you as a normal? Performativity is key here. How do you perform resistance? Who polices these performances of oppositional identity? These issues have been considered in the study of subcultures by British Cultural Studies theorists (Dick Hebdige Subculture: The Meaning of Style). Is it an issue of intent?

The Pregnant Man/T he Octomom: Monstrous troubling names:

-Who are really the troublemakers?
-How does the heteronormative institution of motherhood cast judgment?
-Why are his sexual parts troubling to others?
-What is the media’s role in troubling these circumstances?
Is this gender trouble at its finest?

Nadya vs “Jon & Kate + 8” and the Duggers (18 kids):
-What is she troubling and they aren’t?
- Why are fertility and science in trouble?

1. Go to U Think.
2. Click on Login to UThink
3. Put in your user id (ex: puot0002) and password
4. You are now on the moveable type page. You should find a link to our class. Click on GWSS 8190 (not the URL but the other link). If you do not have a link to our class, please email me and I will add you as an author.
5. Click on “new entry” (it is on the top right hand side under posting).
6. Type in your entry. Scroll down to the bottom and hit save. You're done!

It is all over the web. I found it on an interesting blog called Angry White Kid. I haven't looked at it that closely, but I think this blog offers another perspective on troublemaking...

I would like to add one more chapter from Gender Trouble for next week's class. Please read the first chapter (Subjects of Sex/Gender/Desire, 1-47).

Thanks and see you next week!