(from Butler, Gender Trouble and translated version)
Within philosophical discourse itself, the notion of "the person" has received analytic elaboration on the assumption that whatever social context the person is "in" remains somehow externally related to the definitional structure of personhood, be that consciousness, the capacity for language, or moral deliberation. (22)
철학적 담론 자체로 '사람' 이란, 그 사람이 '처한' 모든 사회적 맥락이 어쨋든 사람됨을 정의하는 구조와 외적으로 연관되어 있다는 전제에 입각한 분석적 연구를 수용해왔다. (115)
"Intelligible" genders are those which in some sense institute and maintain relations of coherence and continuity among sex, gender, sexual practice, and desire. In other words, the spectres of discontinuity and incoherence, themselves thinkable only in relation to existing norms of continuity and coherence, are constantly prohibited and produces by the very laws that seek establish causal or expressive lines of connection among biological sex, culturally constituted genders, and the "expression" or "effect" of both in the manifestation of sexual desire through sexual practice. (23)
'인식 가능한' 젠더는 어떤 의미에서는 섹스, 젠더, 성 습관, 그리고 욕망 간에 일관성과 연속성의 관계를 설정하고 유지한다. 다시 말해 불연속성이나 비일관성이라는 유령들, 기존의 연속성이나 일관성의 규범과 관련해서만 존재할 법한 그 유령들은 다름 아닌 법 때문에 계속 금지되고, 또 그 법 때문에 생산된다. 이 법은 생물학적 섹스, 문화적으로 구성된 젠더, 그리고 성 습관을 통해 표명되는 섹스와 젠더의 '표현물' 이나 '결과물' 가운데 어떤 인과론적이거나 표현론적인 관계망을 설정하고자 한다. (116)
Gender is the repeated stylisation of the body, a set of repeated acts within a highly rigid regulatory frame that congeal over time to produce the appearance of substance, of a natural sort of being. (45)
젠더는 본질의 외관, 자연스러운 듯한 존재를 생산하기 위해 오랫동안 응결되어온 매우 단단한 규제의 틀 안에서 반복된 몸의 양식화이자 반복된 일단의 행위이다. (147)
The replication of heterosexual constructs in non-heterosexual frames brings into relief the utterly constructed status of the so-called heterosexual original.
비이성애적 틀 안에서 이성애의 구성물을 반복하는 것은, 이른바 이성애적 원본이라는 것이 순전히 만들어진 위상임을 분명하게 드러낸다. (144)
i was thinking of the tourism poster that i mentioned in previous post, and seeing these women in traditional coustume made me think how this image produces meaning and gender. if i have to relate 'performative gender' to this image, i would have to borrow from Butler that, gender is a set of repeated acts within a highly rigid regulatory frame that congeal over time to produce the appearance of substance, of a natural sort of being (45). thus, the image of women in Hanbok carefully preparing food is highly sexed gender as 'female' with (socially recognised or socially accepted) female characteristics, female roles and heterosexuality (who serves king). this reinforces coherent gender. so no good. i mean i wouldn't be this annoyed if there wasn't two women in hanbok and such text. it could've been better if there was both male and female, or two women smiling at camera (so they don't look very submissive), or no person, no text. it could've been better to appeal foreign tourists with only food images. don't put women in traditional coustume with no face or feast like a king kinda stuff.
최근 댓글 목록