What's your opinon on this?
>“Black Anality” argues that “black” and “anal” are rendered ideologically, discursively, and representationally synonymous, and that black female flesh becomes the material space on which this convergence occurs. Drawing on an archive of online, widely accessible black pornographies, I develop the term black anality to describe how black pleasures are represented as peculiarly and particularly oriented toward the anus, and thus as peculiarly and particularly attached to anal ideologies. In doing so, I depart from black feminist scholarship, which has long examined the buttocks as an imagined locus of racial-sexual difference and which has developed a set of analytics that now predominate in the study of black female sexualities: spectacularity, excess, grotesquerie, and display. “Black Anality” offers a new set of analytics for black feminist work on sexuality: spatiality, waste, toxicity, and filth. These analytics, I argue, allow black feminists to consider how black female sexuality is imagined to be rooted in (and perhaps generative of) certain kinds of filthy spaces, particularly the ghetto; how black sexuality is constructed as literally and metaphorically dirty; how black sexuality is posited as toxic, non-productive, and nonreproductive; and how black sexuality is imagined as wasteful. In turning attention to this understudied and overdetermining space — the black anus — “Black Anality” considers the racial meanings produced in pornographic texts that insistently return to the black female anus as a critical site of pleasure, peril, and curiosity.
This has to be a troll.
Kc tier but also kind of hot, I'd love to make some black anality to a ghetto girl
critical theory was a mistake
It has nothing to do with critical theory burgerlord
not the other burger,
but this is crit theory, whether useful or not useful.
It aims to 'unravel' a representation of space and an ideological opinion.
as far as my opinion of it - meh
Kinda interesting, but I think it misses the point on black sexuality and anal pornography.
Either way, feminist discourse is cancer and annoying. They miss the point that females are not special in anyway.
Continentals now talk about the link between black feminism and anuses, while analytics produce shit like pic related.
Marx was right when he noted philosophy is like jerking off.
Op's article is not philosophy but "gender & ethnic studies". It's own special form of cancer and circlejerk.
it still can make use of critical theory
Author fingers xir butthole 24/7
It's still a bastard child of continental philosophy, fuggen frogs.
above all, the have zero self reflection.
tldr: niggers are psychologically children
I would argue that it's a misreading of continental philosophy produced by anglos. Julia Kristeva isn't exactly fond of some of those arguments and the treatment of her work, for instance. So the frogs made something and then the murrikans misread and made it into something else entirely.
Also much of critical theory is a literal cia psyop(proof: http://thephilosophicalsalon.com/the-cia-reads-french-theory-on-the-intellectual-labor-of-dismantling-the-cultural-left/).
Is it about buttfucking negresses?
Now that's something I can get "behind" he he he.