there is a great deal of a chance that i don't get any of this... but where
does the notion of ambivalence fit into this?

to simple and possible stupid questions:
1: for example it is taboo to express jubilation over the fall of the towers
of evil , - and everytime anyone utters anything about sept. 11 they make
sure not to forget to emphasise that 'they do think it was terribly unlawful
atrocities committed. There seems to be a universal denial of not only
ambivalence but the very existence of personal emotions...

2: i think it is great to have men and women - would it not be great if we
could just live with the fact that 'we' are different.. how can a
complementary union come about if not of separate elements?


----- Original Message -----
From: "Erminia Passannanti" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2001 7:37 PM
Subject: Re: Is this real. . .


Antinomies often arise in the frame of mind of dogmatic people who prefer
keeping systematically separate opposites with strict definitions, beyond
any real dialectic use they might have in concrete terms.
People of this kind normally oppose the kind of (feminist) statement
according to which one day male and female roles will be so shared that
there will be no need for such gender partitions as who is to be the man
and who is to be the woman. To hope for a transsexual society (in terms of
roles and functions) does not mean that there wont' be any sentimental or
sexual exchanges between and among individuals of different sexes. The
going beyond these definitions can indeed create a better ground for
interrelations among human beings (believe it or not). It means to go
beyond the language itself that created partitions.
In the order of ideas that I am criticizing, people will be inclined to
believe that being different is better, more special and more desirable
than being similar.

This proves the being in action of a dicotomical mind not of a dialectical
one.

To prefer, as suggested, the condition of transindividuality means to
attribute to the contradictory nature of things and causes the pretext and
ground for moving beyond. It is a form of transcendentalism in the sense
that it wishes to reconcile the antinomy of causes and results in a space
outside the conflict. If one employs this terminology not only to
understand experiences and roles, but to venture beyond these established
boundaries, one will see that each person in himself/herself is, in fact,
what one is but also what is opposite to one's own nature, one will see
that opposite natures melt and assimilate one to the other and are in fact
only illusionary different. Transindividuality attempts to reconcile
opposites, permitting, in this way, the overcoming of conflicts between
men and women.