promiscuity of the theoretical variety

The video posted here [http://t.co/N5lcxQR] got a bad rap in my doctoral seminar today. To contextualize the class scrutiny, we are five young feminist scholars from various intellectual backgrounds: (I over-simplify:) literature, philosophy, political science, women's studies and sociology (though I consider my academic experiences to be some blend of them all + social work). We are studying pop culture, transgender theory, citizenship, indigenous relations and education respectively. Our discussions are critical, abstract, concrete, thoughtful, respectful, heavy and lighthearted. We read academic essays, we read fiction, we view films and images, we laugh, we drink tea, we meet once per week.


The video posted above was seen by the other seminar members as a "comedic routine" that is incoherent, disrespectful and, ultimately, unscholarly. It was seen as contributing, even, to the poor reputation of interdisciplinary (read: women/gender and cultural) studies, particularly with regard to (lack of) academic rigour. I take these points, though I cynically offered "what's wrong with being entertained?" in so many words...


While Judith Jack Halberstam's presentation is indeed disrespectful of conference parameters (timelines, style, language, etc.) and her colleagues (not to mention, the targets of her defamation were likely audience members) aaaand well-developed and longstanding theoretical paradigms / entire intellectual traditions (god forbid!), I found myself piqued by her stuttering, slippery (hypersexualized!) (Lady)Gaga (and Beyonce) Pheminism. I gulped her every spoken-way-too-quickly-for-an-academic-forum word. She sang right into my scatterbrained ideas and (dare I say?) perhaps composed a melody for/of my generation -- that is, a generation of feminists that must jive with the multiple rhythms of the global condition in a way our moms did not. We're out there in geographic and cyber space flaunting some aspects of our sexuality while concealing others, claiming new gender order while willingly complying with subordinate roles in our personal and professional lives, calling for world peace while committing colonial violence in our everyday consumer habits...  We're fighting -isms with -isms.


All of this to say, we can't climb onto our mothers' soapboxes because our (rightful) fears of committing the violence of slogan-itus require that we speak with too much nuance for the loudspeaker. What would I put on a t-shirt? "Stop violence! But don't stop it with other violence. And let's try to find out where it's coming from, who is being killed, and who is doing the killing. It all boils down to class. I mean gender. I mean race. Colonialism. Religion. Capitalism. Fuck."


WE'RE CONFUSED, OKAY? I say don't throw Halberstam out with the bath water. Her jittery, albeit selfish, performance is a depiction of the future of pheminism. Theoretical promiscuity to the max! The more thoughts the better. The less "get to the point", the more realistic. The world is incoherent, so should our theories be.

"I don' wanna think anymore, I lef' my heart and my head on the dance floor!" - Lady Gaga