I Think That Every Sexual Position Is

We're Trying To Divide Groups Or Decide That Some Of Them Are Truly Victims And Some Of Them Are Truly Aggressors.

Perhaps The Promise Of Phallus Is Always Dissatisfying In Some Way.

Maybe We Need To Start With The Rethinking Of What Is "west" And What Is "non-west." It Seems To Me That There Are Any Number Of Populations Who Already Cross That Divide, And We Could Probably Point To Several Existing States That Belong Exclusively Neither To One Category Nor To The Other. Do We Use These Terms To Designate Geographical Realities, Geopolitical Ones, Or Perhaps Sites Of Power, Exploitation, Orientalism That Move Through Space And Time In Ways That Have To Be Tracked Historically.

In The Us The Problem Has Been, For Instance, That Nazis Have Rights Of Free Expression, Right? But Other Kinds Of Racist Speech Is Not Protected. And You Have To Link The Speech To Conduct Or To A Certain Kind Of Threat Against Minority Population. I Know That In Europe, This Kind Of Framework Doesn't Exist In The Same Way So It's Very Difficult To Make The Analogy.

What Is Most Important Is To Cease Legislating For All Lives What Is Liveable Only For Some, And Similarly, To Refrain From Proscribing For All Lives What Is Unlivable For Some.