> is therefore concerned with destabilising binaries. However this is done
> strategically and in my case, the strategy is directed at challenging the
> inequality of oppressed groups not at increasing inequality by promoting
> the always already powerful."
> I'm not sure if capitalization helps an argument, but it seems here you
> reiterate the idea that you will choose, strategically I suppose, what is
> critical and what is not. I still don't see a proof or logic in what you
> claim. Why could I, for example, not claim (without capitalization) that
> it is critical for disability studies and the disability movement that we
> not focus on a binary disabled/non-disabled but on a continuum which
> emphasizes how different the concept of disability is from other very
> binary-oriented identities like male/female, black/white, gay/straight.
> (Parenthetically, those binaries themselves are crumbling in the face of
> transgender and deconlonization theory and activism.)
There is a double negative in this passage that may be confusing me. I
think I hear you saying that a continuum is different to a 'binary'. I see a
continuum as being a line (rational) between two polar opposites along
which lie positions which are relative to both poles. Thus any two
positions along a continuum are necessarily binary (specially when
looking at two positions). If this analysis of the notion of continuum is
reasonable, then I ask, "is there another word which symbolises an array
of possibilities or contingencies?" Does the word 'spectrum' do it for
anyone? Is it an 'Isomorph'?
I recall a lecture on Foucault where the speaker talked about language
and meaning and epistemes. He gave an example (from Foucault) of how
in ancient China, people categorised dogs; not as we do these days in
western cultures by breed and size and colour etc but by concepts such
as "those that are painted by a fine camel hair brush" and "those that from
a distance, look like flies" and similar bizarre interpretations.
Now I've forgotten why I mentioned that in the first place. C'est la vie.
School of Occupation and Leisure Sciences
Faculty of Health Sciences
University of Sydney
P.O. Box 170
Lidcombe NSW 2141
Phone: (62 1) 9351 9509
Fax: (62 1) 9351 9166
e-mail: [log in to unmask]
Please visit the School's interim web site at
Not one shred of evidence supports the notion that life is serious