Following hot on the heels of Foucault Explained with Hipsters, here’s JB’s Gender Trouble explained in Socratic dialogue style. With cats.
All page references from Butler, J. (1990 [2008: 1999]). Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity. New York; London: Routledge.
Got any more ideas for philosophy/sociology/gender theory you’d like to see explained in comic form? Let me know in the comments below.
Pingback: Episode #30 – What Shannon wants pattern companies to know about their fat, queer customers – Clothes Making Mavens
Pingback: 87. Wat kan ik Ignacio geven als Secret Santa? – Factotum
Thank you for this explanation! I am a german student of the English language and need Butler’s theory for my masters thesis. However, it helped me a lot, now I understand what is going on and it is not actually that complicated as I thought it would be. Thanks!!
Pingback: Syllabus | Gender and Sexuality in the Bible
Pingback: Judith Butler: Understanding queer theory | Lesbian News
Pingback: Give Drag a Chance | BINARYTHIS
Pingback: 5 things that have made me (a little bit) saner – Walking on the dark side
Pingback: Brooke Candy and the Question of Queer Femininity | BINARYTHIS
Thank you for this! Makes me feel much less dumb. 🙂 After three failed attempts to finish Gender Trouble, I think I’ll just imagine myself as the cat next time. Hope it’ll work, claws crossed.
Pingback: Butler – Gender Trouble – The Body Disciplined
Pingback: Literal Gender Performativity | Mediated Culture
Pingback: The Queer World of Stranger Things | BINARYTHIS
Pingback: Academic Blogging has a 30% chance of setting you on fire, new study claims – The Short Story
Pingback: ‘Queer – a graphic history’ and an excellent read. | That Katherine's Blog
Pingback: Fluffy | Be Less Amazing
Pingback: Epic Feminist Faceoff: Joan Scott vs. Judith Butler – The New Emma Jones Society
Pingback: Prince and Judith Butler Cakes – Thesis Cakes
Pingback: 10 Ways Your Social Justice Work Might Be Inaccessible and Elitist (And Why That's a Problem) — Everyday Feminism
You are an absolute lifesaver! I have an exam on this tomorrow. Thank you so much 🙂
Pingback: Quiz : Quel féminisme es-tu? | Revue Boulette
Pingback: Judith Butler explained with cats | History 710 - Digital History
Pingback: Queering and Queening Femininity | BINARYTHIS
Pingback: Fashion Theory: Judith Butler - Rarely Wears Lipstick
Pingback: Congratulations (+cats) | mit2200group9
Pingback: Meryl Streep Chooses 'Humanist' Over 'Feminist': Are We Doing Feminism All Wrong?
Pingback: Judith Butler explained with cats | Gendersaurus Rex
Reblogged this on psychosputnik.
Pingback: Stop calling me a feminist | annemariwrites
Reblogged this on Some loser with a blog and commented:
Part of me hates Butler, but the other part of me adores her for fucking things up
Pingback: Actively being saved, the resurrection and putting in the hard yards | shecallsme
lines of flight?
lines of flight in comic form would be a godsend
Pingback: Judith Butler Explained with Cats | Doing Things with Words
Reblogged this on Dead Wild Roses and commented:
Well, it makes it a little more clear…
Reblogged this on London is Fem.
Oh I love this. I keep coming back here. I keep sharing this with people. I keep reading it and loving it. I mean I love Butler. I love cats. (actually I dont think I had evenread judith butler before I accidentally stumbled upon this but now I have!!!
Pingback: Who’s Afraid of Gender Theory? | Mary McGill
Pingback: Beautiful Fighting Girl and Otaku Sexuality | Fantastic Memes
This is literally the only thing getting me through this essay right now. You are a godly being.
Pingback: Women & Rodeo | Rodeo Masculinities
Pingback: You got a friend in me | Breaking Grad (School)
Reblogged this on December and commented:
Thank you for making “reading Butler” cute! Awww cats, I love cats ❤
Pingback: On Femininities, and Femmes, and Fierceness: Part 1 | Violent Femmes 2015
Reblogged this on shakespearescholarinprogress and commented:
Judith Butler: ace.
Judith Butler with cats? Even better!
Pingback: judith butler explained with cats | orgtheory.net
Reblogged this on Vegan -Health and Hope.
Pingback: Auf Empfehlung des Hauses
Pingback: Gender: “Is this my body?” and “What is my body?” | Things Fall Apart
Pingback: Maman, ça a commencé! | Marion // En développement
Pingback: Judith Butler Explained with Cats | LGBT
Pingback: The ‘G’ Word | Feminist Doing Gender
Reblogged this on Less is more and commented:
Hat zwar nix mit Konsum zu tun, ist aber trotzdem lustig.
Pingback: Judith Butler Explained with Cats | TG Punk Poet
Pingback: Judith Butler explained with cats | Borrowing Money From Friends
Pingback: Welcome to Monday ~ 26 May 2014 | feminaust ~ for australian feminism
Any chance you could explain Lacan’s theory of Sexuation this way? It’s killing me. Thanks for the JB explanation by the way, I’m using her in my dissertation, but reading it is HARD. It’s nice to check whether I’m actually getting it or not. With Cats.
Pingback: self-imposed leisure reading | Indirect Libre
Pingback: Judith Butler Explained with Cats | otherwomenswords
Reblogged this on Living Ethnography and commented:
Firestone’s “Dialectic of Sex” explained with doge.
Ha that would be amazing, but perhaps a disservice to Shulamith? Doge in conversation with Shulie?
Pingback: Queer Music Review – Fun Machine’s ‘Bodies On’ | BINARYTHIS
Pingback: Blog Post 4: Performativity and Identity Politics in Online Worlds | Megan Devlin
Pingback: What I’ve Been Reading, May ’13 | Catherine Elms
“Butler”, like “gender”, DOESNT EXIST , Subjects are a cultural construct . So I dont see the point in talking about anything
First, this is fantastic. I have been recently doing research on Butler’s theory of performativity, and this illustration nails it. Secondly, I agree that Deluze and/or Gramsci would be a wonderful follow-up.
Reblogged this on Mi vida en Brasil.
Gramsci (hegemony, organic intellectuals, etc.)! Bourdieu (habitus and the structuring structures…)!
Pingback: LCM – Judith Butler and Cats | MaconHolt - Music and Cultural Theory
Pingback: J.B. and cats | Petervonzahnd's Blog
Reblogged this on Feminist Nonfiction and commented:
This is a must-read for anyone struggling with Judith Butler. It is super helpful!
Pingback: My Struggle With Feminism | BINARYTHIS
Pingback: Making friends with Butler. | Under De-construction
What about Discursive Formation? It sure gave me a hard time during my first year of English and American Studies so it would probably be useful for many of your readers!
History of Sexuality!!
And then Habermas!!
Heya i’m for the first time here. I found this board and I find It truly useful & it helped me out a lot.
I hope to give something back and help others like you helped me.
Pingback: Judith Butler Explained with Cats | GENDER & SEXUALITY IN WORLD CIVILIZATIONS
Reblogged this on GENDER & SEXUALITY IN WORLD CIVILIZATIONS and commented:
Here’s something to prime you for Thursday’s reading.
Pingback: postadrianism | Some blog crushes of mine
Reblogged this on sinceritypop.
Reblogged this on Laura Linker and commented:
Derrida on Deconstruction! What an awesome project you have created! Well done…I’m so happy I ran into this.
Where is the one about Derrida on Deconstruction? I really, really want to read that.
It was actually my suggestion to the author of the blog. I don’t think there is one yet.
Pingback: What I’ve Been Reading, May ’13 | Here. In My Head.
Pingback: Judith à Montréal | jesuisféministe.com
This oen was so fun that I’d like you to explain ANYTHING in comic!
These cartoons are great! How about Wittgenstein’s Language Games?
Pingback: Being Productive | Feminist Music Geek
Pingback: Captain Planet returns | Honeybees&Helium
Reblogged this on Dispirited and commented:
A bit off topic – but hard to resist..
Love how you zeroed in on the toughest concepts! Mostly it’s the wording that throws my students. Can you do West and Zimmerman’s essay “Doing Gender”?
Badiou’s subtractive ontology vis à vis (post-)Cantorian set theory
I find this really hard to understand. Can you add side notes explaining the jargon? I haven’t read Judith Butler, so I can assure you that this isn’t very readable to someone who doesn’t have a background in reading her theories.
For example, what does it mean that gender is “styles of the flesh” that “congeal over time”? That means nothing to me.
All credit here has to go to Butler, whose complex ideas cannot be reduced to a 2-page cat comic. You can access Gender Trouble here though: http://autof.files.wordpress.com/2010/02/butler-judith-gender-trouble-feminism-and-the-subversion-of-identity-1990.pdf
Aren’t we doing Butler out of her royalties if we get the book from here?
Yes, buy the book people!
Ranciere’s Dissensus: On Politics and Aesthetics, in Pugs
This is very cool 🙂
Oh, please—can you explain logical paradox theory for those of us who aren’t mathematicians?
Pingback: Internet Cat Privilege Checklist | BINARYTHIS
You make a fellow linguist proud
See…even the cats can get it!
Reblogged this on CrazyQueerClassicist and commented:
Since unabridged Judith Butler hurts people’s brains…have some philosophical cats.
Reblogged this on The Femmetastic Feminist.
Maria here. I also try to collect, use and promote what’s relevant to educators, so I’ll take the opportunity to share the links…about pedagogy and curriculum, school leadership and management, education policy and practices, specialised programs for girls and boys, critical literacy and media, bullying and violence, self esteem and assertiveness, body image and eating disorders, sexuality and relationships, domestic and caring responsibilities, subject choice and career paths.
There’s the Association of Women Educators website http://www.awe.asn.au and Facebook page http://www.facebook.com/pages/Association-of-Women-Educators/205030579508722?ref=hl
I also put together the AWE’s exciting, accessible, and colourful journal, REDRESS, as a labour of love, and would appreciate any and all kinds of ideas and contributions. View info, join and subscribe here http://www.awe.asn.au/drupal/content/redress Some of your site visitors might be interested in joining our register of speakers and consultants http://www.awe.asn.au/drupal/content/speakers-and-consultants
I’m a worker and activist in a few other arenas, and a PhD student researching feminist policy activism and agency with/in the Australian education bureaucracy. See http://www.teachjustice.com.au I’ve just recently created this site to host a private forum for my research group, as one of my formal research methods, so decided to open a community forum as well, and provide lists of resources too. Feel free to join the community forum and respond to some items and general questions I’ve posted there, or post your own burning issue or inspiration : )
Looking forward to some great new connections. Please browse and share anything from our/my sites.
Thanks again for providing this
Cheers, Maria Delaney
Visit the forum – Love and Justice http://teachjustice.com.au/forums/topic/love-and-justice-2/
In the forum:
..reflecting on this lovely definition of feminism, by bell hooks, and listening to one of my new favourite songs. Please post your own favourite inspirations in response. Enjoy.
“… we have allowed patriarchal mass media to represent the entire movement (feminism) based on hatred rather than in love. Visionary feminism is a wise and loving politic. The soul of our politics is the commitment to end domination. Love can never take root in a relationship based on domination and coercion. … When we accept that true love is rooted in recognition and acceptance, that love combines acknowledgment, care, responsibility, commitment and knowledge, we understand there can be no love without justice. With that awareness comes the understanding that love has the power to transform us, giving us the strength to oppose domination. To choose feminist politics, then, is to choose love”
(Bell Hooks, Feminism is for Everybody, Passionate Politics, South End Press, Cambridge, MA, 2003).
Check this out – Love And Justice Women’s Anthem http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6HpCmdLRuF8
Here’s more from bell http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zQUuHFKP-9s and http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OQ-XVTzBMvQ
Cats would never ask such stupid questions and this still fails to make Judith Butler intelligible to cats. In the first place cats would ask: why do humans expect us to perform this category called gender when most of us have been neutered? We have more important things to worry about, like food…
You are my new hero. ❤
Wonderful! How about ecofeminism explained by/to wolves or some other sexy megafauna. Val Plumwood’s Feminism and the Mastery of Nature is a great base text. You have till fall when I teach again 🙂 Seriously, it would be fantastic to have!
This is just an essay with random pictures scattered around it. You could have used pictures of giraffes, or tea kettles, and it would have the same effect.
This is actually harder to read than if you had just used paragraphs.
I agree with the ginger cat in the last frame: Awesome! I would love to see Derrida’s concept of the reader as co-creator with the author explained with cats, too.
Deleuze with birds and Freud with wolves, please.
Mouffe+hegemony with… guinea pigs? Cool hats?
Heideggerian terminology (like being-in-the-world)!
Value-Form and communization theory explained with corgis.
Pingback: Judith Butler Explained with Cats | Latest Updates About Internet | Celebrity News | Holidays packages | Internet marketing | Google News
I never comment, but, this is the best the
internet has to offer.
Pingback: Judith Butler Explained with Cats | Femina Invicta
Actually the quote “sex is always already gender” is taken out of context as it is meant as a reply not to biological theorists but to absolutist or non-relational/non-positional theories of self and society which feminist anthropologists at the time claimed were sexist (See some of the authors she cites, e.g. Chodorow, Strathern or Haraway). In fact, Butler (1993) finds the notion of ‘constructivism’ a banal truism (p. 8) and not revolutionary enough to counter the nature:female and culture:male bias of socio-cultural anthropology, where the male as culture inscribes gender onto the muted female body as sex (See p. 5 for Butler’s critique of attempts to reduce sex to gender). Butler is pro-sex; she does not deny the materiality of sexed bodies nor the existence of a pre-discursive subject before the performative “I” (Note that she clearly distinguishes between sex and “sex” and I and “I”)… so I’m not sure if I’ll agree with the statement that ‘there is no do-er behind the deed’… even though Butler does seem to get carried away with this line of thought at times. Lastly, which I think this comic got right, Butler does not claim that gender cannot be a “choice” (albeit a rather limited one) or that ‘sex’ or ‘gender’ is always deterministic as she does leave some room for agency within its structural bounds.
Great effort! I hope the visitors to this blog will be inspired to do a close reading of the actual texts though.
wait…you just called Strathern nonrelational? what?
Hmm… I think Strathern considers herself a ‘feminist anthropologist’, doesn’t she…
i guess i am confused by how you are using the word ‘relation.’ Strathern has published numerous articles on relationality, including a small book called “the relation.” she is widely cited as a founder of ‘relational anthropology.’
i’m looking at the strathern references in gender trouble and the haraway references in bodies that matter…and i’m really not finding anything disagreeable (or anything about relational/nonrelational) being said about either author. if there’s a different point of reference, i’d be interested in finding it.
Actually what I meant was that feminist anthropologists in the early 1990s were saying that socio-cultural anthropology at that time was absolutist or non-relational and that Butler was just responding to that criticism in her discussion of the nature/culture distinction, not that she was criticizing either Haraway or Strathern.
Oh shucks. The last message I typed vanished. Anyway I was saying that Strathern published a piece in 1987 about how feminism and anthropology stood in oppositional relation to one another and how feminism back was an oppositional stance rather than a substantive theory. I guess that has changed now. I think there was this huge backlash within American Anthropology at the time to the ‘Writing Culture’ anthology (Marcus and Clifford, 1986) and the project of ‘experimental ethnography’ in general. Apparently a group of anthropologists who called themselves ‘feminist ethnographers’ (e.g. Lila Abu-Lughod, Ruth Behar, Kirin Narayan, Kamala Visweswaran) were miffed that ‘Writing Culture’ lacked contributions by women and citations to ethnographies written by women. In the introduction to ‘Gendered Fields’ (Bell and Caplan, 1993), it was suggested that anthropology at the time, as reflective of a universal ‘male’ standpoint, had an absolutist, non-relational standpoint as opposed to the relational standpoint of women. I guess Butler disagreed with feminist theory at the time, which posited a natural inclination towards relationality for women but not men. So Butler might have intended a critique of these particular feminist theories in addition to the nature/culture=sex/gender bias attributed to male-authored socio-cultural anthropology by feminist theorists themselves.
Thanks Memesis, I hope this encourages people to read more Butler too. I created this comic for my second-year gender studies students last year, to help them through Gender Trouble. For more on Butler you can check out my post: https://binarythis.wordpress.com/2013/01/29/convoluted-schmonvoluted-the-value-of-complex-ideas/
Pierre Bourdieu, Distinction, explained with welsh corgis!
Max Stirner for cats
awesome indeed! theoretical catphilia at its best!
PS: that was totally awesome,
Yes, Derrida, please!
Reblogged this on (IN)VISIBLE ISSUES.
This is fantastic! Great job. 🙂
amazing, thnx! how about affect theory? or “becoming” in Deleuze?
especially becoming animal
maybe with ponies?
> Got any more ideas for philosophy/sociology/gender theory you’d like to see explained in comic form?
Yes: the dependent origination of the self in buddhism. Closely related to the concepts explained in this page, as you may know (but 2500 years old).
Bahaha! This is brilliant. Next: Epistemology of the Closet pls!
Foucault on madness in comic form would be good! Trying to understand it at the moment!
Marxism/Socialism Explained by Cats!
Please do terrorist assemblages!
Oh yes, please! I’ve read it twice and it makes my head spin.
That’s right, because the book says the same thing over and over again, no wonder your head spins over and over again.
I should totally do this! I love Puar 🙂
If you could I’d really like the difference between the paralogical and logical uses of the three syntheses explained… especially in regard to the conjunctive synthesis. I never really got how that related to the “So that’s what I wanted!”
Or — WTF is a plateau?
An explanation of the third synthesis would be nice — in both its paralogical and legitimate uses.
Or the socius.
Or, WTF is a plateau?