Tag Archives: accelerationism

On Gender Acceleration and Its Critics

Halloween 2018 has been especially interesting for those of us embedded, either willingly or unwillingly, in the weird-theory milieu of Twitter. Land officially began the release of his book Crypto-Current: Bitcoin and Philosophy,1)For those interested in the project, I suggest reading Part 2 of “Ideology, Intelligence, and Capital: An Interview with Nick Land” on Vast Abrupt. and n1x finally dropped the long awaited Gender Accelerationism (G/Acc) Blackpaper on Vast Abrupt. Following the release of “Gender Acceleration,” some so-called “spicy” shots have been fired claiming n1x’s essay is less-than savory. Thus, in this post, I want to lay out my take on G/Acc and an interpretation of n1x’s argument and, in doing so, hopefully answer some of the criticisms leveled against it.

The first thing any reader should obviously do is go and read “Gender Acceleration: A Blackpaper.” After that, hit the jump and dive into the aphotic abyss!

Continue reading →

References

References
↑1 For those interested in the project, I suggest reading Part 2 of “Ideology, Intelligence, and Capital: An Interview with Nick Land” on Vast Abrupt.

Genderhacking an Alien Future: On Helen Hester’s ‘Xenofeminism’

Hester, Helen. Xenofeminism. Polity Press, 2018.

In 2015, the Laboria Cuboniks collective proclaimed “If nature is unjust, change nature!” at the end of their much celebrated Xenofeminist Manifesto: A Politics for Alienation. After countless discussions in the years that followed, the second canonical xenofeminist text was written by one of Laboria Cuboniks’ founding members, Helen Hester (Associate Professor of Media and Communication at the University of West London). Hester’s new polemic, Xenofeminism, published by Polity in their Theory Redux series, expands upon the groundbreaking work of the initial manifesto by bringing us a fresh look at xenofeminism from a specific perspective. As Hester notes, “[e]ach of the six members of Laboria Cuboniks […] would likely emphasize different aspects of the manifesto” and thus Xenofeminism is not so much “the book on xenofeminism [..,] but rather a book on xenofeminism.” As such, one ought to read Xenofeminism not as a book explaining an already established set of ideas, but, rather, as a growing nodule on the xenofeminist root: Hester’s nodule.

Read the rest