Integration, Intersex, and Firestone’s Dialectic

Firestonian Futures and Trans‐Affirming Presents

“…Moreover, it should be noted that Merck's focus includes applying an intersectional analysis to selected cases using Firestone's Dialectic as foundation. Although a full examination of Firestone's view of racial identity and experience is beyond the scope of my work here, suffice it to say that I agree with Merck and many others that Firestone's chapter on race is highly “problematic” (Merck , 173). Race, class, ability status, and other factors are all relevant to one's experiences in the world, and having white privilege (as well as other privileges) affects one's life as a trans person and/or as a person with DSD.…”

“…Far from revealing Firestone as “haplessly heterosexist” (Merck , 168), I believe the above passage merely shows that Firestone acknowledges that her wished‐for revolution may involve consequences that are difficult to imagine from her own standpoint. She recognizes that if sexuality were truly free of the social controls that existed in 1970 and persist today, if, as Firestone remarks, “homosexual sex taboos would disappear” (Firestone /1972, 223), then sex itself may be experienced much differently than she could predict.…”

“…Given that Firestone's references to transsexuality are few and not well developed, exactly what she meant when using the term is debatable. For instance, Mandy Merck, co‐editor of the recent volume Further Adventures of The Dialectic of Sex: Critical Essays on Shulamith Firestone , in her own essay in the collection, “Integration, Intersex, and Firestone's Dialectic,” argues against taking Firestone's references to transsexuality at face value (Merck ). Instead, she believes that Firestone's references to “transsexuality” are to be read as “pansexuality.” Furthermore, she would regard Firestone's references to “pansexuality” to be undermined by her statements that Merck takes to be heterosexist in nature.…”

“…Second is the substantive question of what Firestone meant by her use of the term transsexuality . Merck does not supply the specifics of her reasoning, but only states that “transsexuality” is “indicatively used as a synonym of ‘pansexualty’” (Merck , 168). Although I think that it is usually best to take any author at her word, I acknowledge that some might legitimately second‐guess Firestone's word choice in this way.…”

“…Merck writes,

The opening prediction that “an unobstructed pansexuality… would probably supersede heter/homo/bi‐sexuality” (Firestone, 19) is later revised to propose that “people might still prefer those of the opposite sex simply because it is physically more convenient” (Firestone, 62) “for sheer physical fit” (Firestone, 223). (Merck , 168)

…”