It's so refreshing to see intellectuals like Zizek not only being accepting but justifying his support through philsophy as he does all he decisions, rather than it being a mere peer pressure thing. Love how genuine he is.
Zizek's paradox about love and determinism also holds true in art. On the face of it, art is the ultimate expression of freedom. However, you cannot simply choose to create great art. Artists often have a very innate sense of determinism, both in whether they create art and in the shape of that art. This is true for all people who have a "calling" in life, art is just an example.
I like the "+" in LGBT+, it basically a stand-in symbol that includes everybody else. In a way, it's a self defeating designation, as it should be in a truly equal society.
So to attempt to interpret and rephrase (as this guy is notoriously obtuse at times) he wishes to emphasise that the lgbtq+ cause is about a kind of freedom that must not be mistaken for the superficial freedom to choose, but the far more violent fredom to be, to love, to feel, etc. which is experienced not as a unpressured free choice, but as a viceral necessity.
If people are bisexual, they might have latitude in directing their sexual attentions, but human experiences are far from all the same. There are people who are exclusively gay, all their lives, without influence of any other examples, who could no more change their orientations than to retrain their brains to see the color "red" where they now see "green" (meaning the actual sense-impression, not merely the word applied).
I totally agree with that concept. We are told that ultimate freedom is the ability to do or chose whatever you want. But that's just superficial hedonism. I think that true freedom is commitment.
What he's not understanding is the difference between a choice and the "inner-self" - obviously transitioning is a choice. But is being trans a choice? Of course, being in a gay relationship is a choice (so is being in a straight relationship, also), but is the attraction towards the other/same gender or lack thereof a choice? The transitioning and being a in a relationship are active choices, but these choices don't happen in a vacuum - you can be straight and in a gay relationship (maybe you lost a bet, or whatever, I dunno), which is an active choice, but the lack of attraction towards other men will still make you straight - in another words, the attraction won't change, whether you are in a straight or queer relationship. Nor will the identity change, whether you choose to transition or choose to live in the closet.
If you want to get Zizek's 'I WOULD PREFER NOT TO' t-shirt you can do so here:
It's so refreshing to see intellectuals like Zizek not only being accepting but justifying his support through philsophy as he does all he decisions, rather than it being a mere peer pressure thing. Love how genuine he is.
You can get killed in some countries for being a homosexual. If you’re willing to risk your life for it, it’s probably not simply a choice
Zizek's paradox about love and determinism also holds true in art. On the face of it, art is the ultimate expression of freedom. However, you cannot simply choose to create great art. Artists often have a very innate sense of determinism, both in whether they create art and in the shape of that art. This is true for all people who have a "calling" in life, art is just an example.
This is such a nuanced topic that neither the left or right wings of the United States are ready for.
Zizek would be called a right winger to most leftists at my university😂.
do not listen to people who are not biologists on this topic - Dr. Julia Serano or Dr. Robert Sapolsky know better
I like the "+" in LGBT+, it basically a stand-in symbol that includes everybody else. In a way, it's a self defeating designation, as it should be in a truly equal society.
I like how he says LGBT and so on and so on🤣Typical slavoj
Man needs to speak to at least one LGBT person. This is such a stupid take.
why his speaking like spit
"if you want me to be your analyst you are really crazy" lmao
"They are the most free among us, and they pay the price for it." <3
And so on and so on
So to attempt to interpret and rephrase (as this guy is notoriously obtuse at times) he wishes to emphasise that the lgbtq+ cause is about a kind of freedom that must not be mistaken for the superficial freedom to choose, but the far more violent fredom to be, to love, to feel, etc. which is experienced not as a unpressured free choice, but as a viceral necessity.
If people are bisexual, they might have latitude in directing their sexual attentions, but human experiences are far from all the same. There are people who are exclusively gay, all their lives, without influence of any other examples, who could no more change their orientations than to retrain their brains to see the color "red" where they now see "green" (meaning the actual sense-impression, not merely the word applied).
I totally agree with that concept. We are told that ultimate freedom is the ability to do or chose whatever you want. But that's just superficial hedonism. I think that true freedom is commitment.
Everyone should read Baudrillards The Transparency of Evil
What he's not understanding is the difference between a choice and the "inner-self" - obviously transitioning is a choice. But is being trans a choice? Of course, being in a gay relationship is a choice (so is being in a straight relationship, also), but is the attraction towards the other/same gender or lack thereof a choice? The transitioning and being a in a relationship are active choices, but these choices don't happen in a vacuum - you can be straight and in a gay relationship (maybe you lost a bet, or whatever, I dunno), which is an active choice, but the lack of attraction towards other men will still make you straight - in another words, the attraction won't change, whether you are in a straight or queer relationship. Nor will the identity change, whether you choose to transition or choose to live in the closet.
Simply, if you're everything you're nothing.