I’m very sorry to inform you that it befell on me to defend political writing. I know it’s a shock, but since my fellow writer Andrew has decided to call out all the « political bullshit » in the asexual community, everyone has to do his bit. Oh my !
Because I confess it, I’m guilty. I love this « political bullshit ». I may not be the best suited writer for writing it, but I love to read a good bit of political bullshit writing, especially about gender and sexualities.
To me, political writing is underrated. Political writings gave us so much. It gave us the idea of gender. No less. It gave us the idea of heterosexism, it gave us the idea of cissexism, of disability as a situation created by society and not as individuals’ property. And much much more.
Andrew may say what he wants : political writings are incredibly liberating. Political writings help us to remember than even when we’re told the contrary, the way we’re supposed to act and feel is not ordained by human nature.
What if not political writings can empower us up to the point where we’re able to choose our own name, and not the name society chooses for us ? What if not political writings can enable us to tell our own story, to define ourselves in our own terms ?
With political writings, we have the chance to discuss about what we need, about what we want and what we don’t want. We have the possibility to bring change.
So I’ll just say this : I love political writings in the asexual community. Keep at it, I will keep to read it. Continue to be incredibly free. Continue to invent new words and drop them when you don’t need them anymore. Continue to invent new ways of relating to each other. Continue to define what you think is wrong. You clearly deserve it.
And as much as I respect Andrew’s work, I strongly disagree with him on something else. If you read his text, you’ll be under the impression that political writings and truthful writings are two different things. That you can’t speak the truth if you talk politics. That there is science on the one hand and politics on the other.
That is not true. If Andrew has something to say about rhetoric in humanities, or rhetoric in social movements, that’s one thing. If he believes that feminist writers or queer theorists should write differently, that’s one thing. As for me, I think he’s dead wrong. But please, let’s not confuse everything here. It’s not because somebody does not write in the style that one likes, that this person is mistaken. To have a certain political stance is not the same thing as being wrong.
Feminism is political. Gay and lesbian studies are political. Disability studies are political. And that’s also science. Or is this also « political bullshit » ?
Anyway, in a few days, “The asexual agenda” will release a short text on « social construction ». Through this text, it will be easier to further the discussion between me and Andrew about what he calls « straw men » and « oppressive social order », but mainly about what is « real » and what is « socially constructed » and why it does matter. I look forward to it.