Politics of Polymorphism

lips-651339_128019th century Europe saw the ideological invention and subsequent social construction of imaginary “normative bodies” for many different physionomistic categories, most of which were invented and created during the modern era. This is not to ignore that anatomical idealization existed long before in artistic expression, yet most “normative bodies” for human physionomistic categories were not idealized at all as part of the taxonomic physionomistic project as the production and social construction of imaginary “normative bodies” were rather mostly historico-structural expressions of physionomistic abjection indeed.

The physionomistic invention of “normative bodies” and the subsequent ideological hegemony surrounding those imaginary “normative bodies” have led to physionomistic mass crimes of literally gargantuan dimensions, obviously including but very far from limited to the Holocaust. Indeed, the perception of “normative bodies” was absolutely central to the official Nazi ideology, yet the physionomistic mythology of “normative bodies” still very much pervades modern society and its hegemonically physionomistic epistemologies of taxonomizing biopolitics.

Physionomistic epistemology is in the context of the Western history of ideas rooted in the ancient pseudo-science of physiognomy. Of course, it is undeniable that we can draw conclusions from observing the appearance and speech patterns of a fellow individual person. The problem however as indeed with the pseudo-scientific behaviors of psychiatrists is whether and to what degree such physionomistic “observation” is reliable as opposed to rather fully open to physionomistic misunderstanding? Indeed, psychiatry is the syncretic continuation of both secularized medieval exorcism in demonology as well as the ancient pseudo-science of physiognomy as in fact already existing in ancient Greece.

While plants and animals were mostly idealized by means of the invention and subsequent social construction of taxonomic “normative bodies” as beginning in the 18th century were most human imaginary “normative bodies” severely physionomistic indeed in constituting discursive abjection; textual, drawn and photographic. While normative bodies of ideal White women, ideal White men, ideal White youth and ideal White children were invented as well in drawing upon long-standing artistic traditions in Europe as spanning back to Greco-Roman Antiquity, were these nevertheless systematically posed against the backdrop of a vast diversity, indeed panoply of discursively abjected “normative bodies”, a discursive and state-certified “freak show” indeed.

Today are images of fashion models systematically “improved” by means of now widely publicly used digital aesthetic enhancement technologies. While clothes were originally a means of warming the body and then became a means of disguising sexual desire have clothes now among fashion-aware females become a means of re-idealizing structurally abjected bodies.

This is so as most female teenageers and young/youthful women in Western society now find it emotionally challenging to watch their own images as naked in the bedroom mirror in thus engaging in cultural behaviors of structural abjection of their own mirror images. This is due to younger females comparing their own bodies with idealizing, yet digitally manipulated pictures of female models of fashion, advertisement and pornography alike.

Western culture have thus increasingly become a culture of stuctural individual self-abjection where heterocultural females are increasingly fearful that males will not approve of their bodies once undressed and in particular so with respect to the aesthetic interpretation of individual female genitalia.

The structure of Western physionomism is thus based on a dialectics of idealized neo-classical bodies as juxtaposed against a vast diversity of alternative “normative bodies” as produced by means of taxonomic abjection. Feminist genius and Queer theorist Judith Butler already in her famous seminal 1990 book “Gender Trouble; Feminism and the Subversion of Identity” suggested that many more forms of beauty become recognized as beauty, something which indeed inspired the global beauty industry into inventing/recognizing more and more “beauty types” in thus facilitating the increasingly extensive use by females of cosmetics as the growing diversity of beauty types made it much easier to become perceived as physically beautiful by means of cosmetic enhancement indeed.

The challenge thus is to shift aesthetic paradigm and move beyond the demeaning dialects of the structurally idealized body & the structurally abjected body, whether abjected by oneself, by others or simply structurally so.

This cannot be limited to recognizing more and more bodies and aesthetic styles as “beautiful” which is surely an important and essential task indeed, but rather needs become strategically extended to subversively disrupting the very structural performance of abjection of bodies. Thus, even if we do not find a particular body beautiful need we certainly avoid performing practices of abjection. This opens the question as to whether it is even possible to fully end psychological abjection altogether and the answer is probably no, yet we can at least become trained in avoiding performance of culturally structural abjection and individualized abjection can also certainly become minimized with appropriate SBT (Social Behavioral Training).

There are two sides however to the interactive performance of interpersonal abjection. There is the person performing abjection and the person becoming abjected. Younger heterocultural females are typically profoundly fearful of abjection on the part of males (sexual abjection) and on the part females (peer abjection) and so tend to very substantially invest in aesthetic enhancement whether permanent (plastic surgery), semi-permanent (physical exercise, healthy eating, fashion and cutting hair) and temporary (daily hairstyle, makeup and perfume).

It is thus very much possible to succeed in largely avoiding becoming subjected to individualized/structural abjection and precisely so by means of deploying aesthetic enhancement. Now is that a good thing to do considering that females who currently do not largely become the subject of female peer abjection and male sexual abjection alike? While radical feminists rightly oppose the compulsory cosmetic social regime should we nevertheless ask ourselves whether the heterocultural male normative relative inattention to primping themselves is really preferable to heterocultural female primping?

Feminism is the only modern political movement that is committed to promoting noble behaviors although many radical feminists in contrast see it as their task to promote “feminist” masculinism by encouraging females to behave as lowly as do typically heterocultural males.

While undoing the social terror of binary genders is no doubt essential needs this crucially also become attained by means of teaching males in the skills of primping. Primping is the practice of looking good to others in reinforcing your good behaviors towards those others. Just as we irrespective of gender ought behave pleasantly towards others one another ought we also otherwise appear pleasant to others and entirely irrespective of assigned anatomical/social shibboleths of discrimination such as age, class, gender etc.

Primping in the sense as paying careful attention to one’s appearance is thus an essential part of good behavior for humans generally. Yet this should not be misconstrued as implying compulsion in e.g. use of makeup, elaborate hairstyles or compulsory standard social roles but rather that we need to make the effort to appear pleasant to others as part of and parcel of pleasant behavior for persons of all genders in accordance with an evolving and inclusively feminist etiquette indeed.

Once heterocultural males understand that primping will make them far more individually sexually attractive will they indeed become increasingly incentivized into adopting and adapting beauty skills. The feminist social revolution thus subversively requires transformatively supplanting the male norm of non-primping with the female norm of primping for persons of all genders. Would it just not be more fun to live in a world where everyone is hot and where experiencing abjection whether being abjected or abjecting would be very rare indeed?

In embracing elective sociofluidity (including elective genderfluidity) of flexibly self-designing one’s social roles and appearance in aesthetically expressing oneself can we all help transform public space in turning it into the new globa Versailles where primping was indeed universally practiced irrespective of individual ages, individual genders and individual sexualities. Pride Parades are indeed a very good beginning in this regard as we need transform society into one large slutty Pride Parade all-year around. The feminist social revolution thus requires transforming society into a synthesis between Pride Parades and the functionally panamorous (pansexual) Versailles.

Primping is hence the subversive practice of preventing and disrupting abjection and that needs to be complemented with SBT in teaching human persons generally how to avoid performance of abjection, whether against others or against oneself. Salutogenic plastic surgery furthermore needs become part of universal health care coverage as this is indeed an important means towards minimizing intra-human abjection whether structural abjection or individualized abjection.

The trajectory of feminism has undergone a number of important historical stages. First wave feminism (Emancipation) sought legal emancipation for women, yet not for girls. Second Wave feminism (Equality) sought economic, social and sexual parity for women with men. Third Wave feminism (Mainstreaming) hybridized with virtually every conceivable masculinist ideology in thus engaging in Gramscian-style infiltration of patriarchy and transformative subversion of oppressive ideological hegemony. Fourth Wave feminism (intersectionality) unites political currents opposing structural oppression in thus turning feminism into an increasingly inclusive movement against structural oppression generally.

In accelerating the global feminist revolution need we now also expeditiously imagine, design and carefully devise Fifth Wave feminism (Polymorphism) which needs to be about embracing subversively transformative polymorphism of diversity in animated bodies in putting an end to the physionomistic regime of imaginary “standard bodies”. What we hence need to do is to subversively transform current physionomistic biopolitics by means of discrediting socially hegemonic physionomistic epistemologies as regulating hermeneutic practices in physiognomy, namely structural misinterpretation of persons by means of stereotypical interpretations of the respective appearances of their bodies.

How then go about implementing Fifth Wave feminism? Beauty-aware persons of all genders need engage in extensive social activism in teaching males (boyfriends, father, brothers, sons, male friends etc.) how to primp as well as sharing with them various common “tricks” for otherwise turning someone on. It is essential that this is done scientifically in sharing the essential insight that becoming attractive is about aesthetic self-expression while love is about appreciating aesthetic self-expression in others. Attractiveness has no gender, age, race/species, functionality or any other arbitrary categorical bodily distinction of imaginary “standard bodies”.

Radically aesthetically individualized polymorphism as the fifth stage in the trajectory of feminism needs thus become physically individually visible not only in physical public space but also in the national political arena as well. This means that polymorphism needs become the new keyword in moving the increasingly unified and increasingly inclusive current Fourth Wave feminism (i.e. Intersectionality) into subversive politics of actually effective social transformation of radical aesthetic individualization in order so as to effectively ridicule and discredit the physionomistic perception and interpretation of imaginare “normative bodies”. The strategic challenge ahead in this is therefore to make the essential leap from Intersectionality to Polymorphism indeed.

The Intelligence Entrapment Methods documentation project.


The Eurolect – Politics of the Para-Christian documentation project

Screenshot 2017-12-01 at 23.30.32