Let's start with Judith Butler. A shining light of academia.

"Butler argued in her defense that radical ideas are often best expressed in writing that challenges conventional standards of lucidity, grammar, and common sense."

The distinction between gender & sex is necessary to draw. From this base, the idea of sex can be degraded. And here, she does it. Read as much, or as little, as your sanity can bear. I strongly suggest avoiding her direct work. In any other era, she would be classed as insane. Not today though.

Which begs the obvious question - why attack sex? Something we have easily co-existed with. I'll let someone else explain this too

If conventional politics is a battle between state & family - machinery of the state (in this case education) is an ideal form of artillery. Family is the realm in which one grows up. Then branches out into the wider world. If this is impeded, universities have an 'adult child' to work with. To mould in the correct manner. Replacing the family role. Witness the amount of unmitigated junk that flows. An 'adult child' whines for its 'parents' to provide for it.

Sex is (obviously) necessary for a family. It is not necessary for a state. In fact, a sexless state is a form of utopia. A Brave New World.
Why a sexless state? Well, its simple in origin. We cant be equal with sex. It has too many messy outcomes. Of course, we still need children. But they can come from anywhere. Society can mould them into the ideal form - a dependent, useless parasite. The state can keep growing to accomodate this. Family is the obstacle.

Donate your now worthless crypto to Igroki

ETH 0x31e0da9a8f3083ecbcba7d941d0a6e394ccf657b

LTC M85Q9RxzRZcDjYk8U72rnqhHyCVG3yZVdz

XRP rPvKH3CoiKnne5wAYphhsWgqAEMf1tRAE7?dt=5407

Big Deal