Sexual topologies in the Aristotelian cosmos: revisiting Irigaray's physics of sexual difference [Book Review]
Continental Philosophy Review 43 (3):373-389 (2010)
|Abstract||Irigaray’s engagement with Aristotelian physics provides a specific diagnosis of women’s ontological and ethical situation under Western metaphysics: Women provide place and containership to men, but have no place of their own, rendering them uncontained and abyssal. She calls for a reconfiguration of this topological imaginary as a precondition for an ethics of sexual difference. This paper returns to Aristotelian cosmological texts to further investigate the topologies of sexual difference suggested there. In an analysis both psychoanalytic and phenomenological, the paper rigorously traces a teleological and oedipal narrative implicit in the structure of the Aristotelian cosmos, in which desire for the mother is superseded by love for the father. Further, the paper argues that this narrative is complicated by certain other elements in the Aristotelian text—aporias involving the notion of boundary and the relationship between space and time, the fallenness of the feminine, and the ineliminably aleatory qualities of matter. The paper concludes that such elements may provide material for disrupting this teleology of gender, opening onto not merely an ethics of sexual difference, but providing space and place for a proliferation of non-normative, queer, transgender and intersex modes of sexed and gendered subjectivity.|
|Keywords||Aristotle Irigaray Place Physics Gender Psychoanalysis|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Anne Leeuwen (2013). An Examination of Irigaray's Commitment to Transcendental Phenomenology in The Forgetting of Air and The Way of Love. Hypatia 28 (3):452-468.
Anne van Leeuwen (2010). Sexuate Difference, Ontological Difference: Between Irigaray and Heidegger. [REVIEW] Continental Philosophy Review 43 (1):111-126.
Alison Stone (2006). Luce Irigaray and the Philosophy of Sexual Difference. Cambridge University Press.
Diane Perpich (2003). Subjectivity and Sexual Difference: New Figures of the Feminine in Irigaray and Cavarero. [REVIEW] Continental Philosophy Review 36 (4):391-413.
Penelope Deutscher (2002). A Politics of Impossible Difference: The Later Work of Luce Irigaray. Cornell University Press.
Krzysztof Ziarek (2000). Proximities: Irigaray and Heidegger on Difference. [REVIEW] Continental Philosophy Review 33 (2):133-158.
William Robert (2010). Antigone's Nature. Hypatia 25 (2):412 - 436.
Helen Fielding (2003). Questioning Nature: Irigaray, Heidegger and the Potentiality of Matter. [REVIEW] Continental Philosophy Review 36 (1):1-26.
Lisa Guenther (2011). Merleau-Ponty and the Sense of Sexual Difference. Angelaki 16 (2):19 - 33.
Evelien Geerts, Forcefully Subverting or Reinforcing Dichotomies? Elizabeth Grosz‟s Feminist Rereading of Charles Darwin, Via the Perspectives of Jacques Derrida and Luce Irigaray.
M. F. Simone Roberts (2010). A Poetics of Being-Two: Irigaray's Ethics and Post-Symbolist Poetry. Lexington Books.
Anne Caldwell (2002). Transforming Sacrifice: Irigaray and the Politics of Sexual Difference. Hypatia 17 (4):16-39.
E. A. Grosz (2011). Becoming Undone: Darwinian Reflections on Life, Politics, and Art. Duke University Press.
Added to index2010-11-27
Total downloads28 ( #49,832 of 722,853 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #60,917 of 722,853 )
How can I increase my downloads?