What Haraway presents as a view is interesting and the problems she points to important, but I feel that it needs to be thought in many ways, by different people, leaving aside the sword of morality (feminist or otherwise) for later on. For many years now epics of moral cleanliness have been a substitute for religious fervor. Moreover I think that the elephant in the room (the large masses of people with non modern or semi modern existential/religious approaches) needs to be considered (and respected?) and not, supposedly, taken care of through reference to Amazonean tribes who can be made to "talk" in the language that suits the current fashions in anthropology or the biographical choices of a few individuals.
It is interesting that she searches (as I feel it ) for measure. Also the participants show a quite pleasurable mood. That's heartening. "Materialist" seems to be a holy word since it pepers the talk at different places. Also I do not see why a more falic approach cannot coexist with a more feminist approach. Depending on the context would it not be possible to turn towards the one or the other or even turn towards a differen axis (than the contrast falic - feminist)?
There is a sense of tragic here. As the participants appear in the multiple windows of you tube, I have a sense like seeing the metope sculptures in Parthenon but in a moving form. These modern academic heroes can exist in this form due to a great support system provided by the capitalism of the high moderns. And yet they revolt, they feel suffocating by the consequences of this system at the same time that it animates them to exist in this form.
What Haraway presents as a view is interesting and the problems she points to important, but I feel that it needs to be thought in many ways, by different people, leaving aside the sword of morality (feminist or otherwise) for later on. For many years now epics of moral cleanliness have been a substitute for religious fervor. Moreover I think that the elephant in the room (the large masses of people with non modern or semi modern existential/religious approaches) needs to be considered (and respected?) and not, supposedly, taken care of through reference to Amazonean tribes who can be made to "talk" in the language that suits the current fashions in anthropology or the biographical choices of a few individuals.
I have to correct. Around 40:00 very interesting connection about damages in Navaho nation lands and other lands (more mainstream)
It is interesting that she searches (as I feel it ) for measure. Also the participants show a quite pleasurable mood. That's heartening. "Materialist" seems to be a holy word since it pepers the talk at different places. Also I do not see why a more falic approach cannot coexist with a more feminist approach. Depending on the context would it not be possible to turn towards the one or the other or even turn towards a differen axis (than the contrast falic - feminist)?
There is a sense of tragic here. As the participants appear in the multiple windows of you tube, I have a sense like seeing the metope sculptures in Parthenon but in a moving form. These modern academic heroes can exist in this form due to a great support system provided by the capitalism of the high moderns. And yet they revolt, they feel suffocating by the consequences of this system at the same time that it animates them to exist in this form.