תגובה אחת

1. משתפת כאן את הערותיי בעקבות הראיון השלישי של לוראן דיפון עם פטריק לנדמן ב-LacanWebTV עם שינויים קלים:

   The signifier “trans” is much broader than its application to gender might suggest.

   To begin with, it is a signifier of a position inseparable from biomedical technique. It is difficult to conceive what its mode of existence would be without the solutions that such a position seeks in the existing technique. If there were other possible techniques offering solutions to still unformulated problems, for example, flights to the moon, what could prevent me from arguing that I feel-consider- estimate-define myself as native of the moon and demand the corresponding space transportation to my natural ecosystem? Or if genetic engineering (crispr or any other) allowed trans-species modifications, who could argue against my assertion that I am a primate other than homo sapiens, let’s say a nice chimpanzee, and demand the readaptation of my production line?

   As proof of concept, transableism or transability should be enough. This rather novel significant “means” the subjective position whereby some of the members of the human body – legs or arms or part of them-, are in excess, such that my corporal completeness requires the amputation of whichever of them that I choose.

   Secondly, every possible means of producing change in this area is under the aegis of medicine. It turns out that if in woke culture no form of “trans” should be considered a medical disorder, at the same time the only possibilities of operating on the body in this non-medical non-disordered situation are in the hands of doctors. Health insurance and all health care agencies, by definition, operate on diseases or disorders that fall within a medical definition. And nobody is talking aesthetic medicine here! God forbid. According to financial logic, the insurer requires a justification to “trans”fer your funds and finance your new “facility” to use the term proposed by Hanif Kureishi in his novella “The Body”. Roadblock!
   It does not seem fair that the trans, in the name of their autonomy and the understandable refusal of the medicalization of their constellation, should saw off the branch on which they are sitting on. Yet another roadblock.
   To freshen up see:
   https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/cns-spectrums/article/elective-amputation-of-a-healthy-limb/81FB8C7DB1E7C75778A9E146D87A96F8

   https://journalofethics.ama-assn.org/article / difficult-appendage / 2001-09

   https://www.jstor.org/stable/41698212?seq=1

   http://www.medanthrotheory.org/article/view/4631/6325

   https: //daily.jstor. org / the-complicated-issue-of-transableism /

   הגב