#intersextionality

WEEK #8 

Understanding and embracing what Tobin Siebers is trying to suggest about people’s preference to view the future with an imperative to triumph over death has been a steep and bumpy uphill battle. He writes, 

“Science Fiction fantasizes about aliens who have left behind their mortal sheath; they are superior to us, but we are evolving in their direction. Cybernetics treats human intelligence as software that can be moved from machine to machine.”  

He seems to have lumped this pattern into what he calls the ideology of ability. While I see that the ideology of ability is the compulsive tendency to set exclusive and discriminatory standards of humanness based on measure of ability, or capability, I just do not see how questioning or pushing the boundaries of ‘embodiment’ reinforces ableism.

As I ended my previous blog, (week#7) Another sci-fi theory explored in Ghost in the Shell is the theory that AI will be the next step in human evolution. With Major being an augmented-cybernetic human with "full-body prosthesis" I can see how the character runs the risk of representing and reinforcing Ableism.

An important concept within AI/evolution theory is the process of merging two sets of data AI & DNA , the DNA containing one’s “essences” or internal code for “awareness” in order to create an infinite amount of embodiment possibilities. AI, is in some capacity, self-aware. So it has its own consciousness or “ghost” which as discussed in my prior blog, is what makes one “human” according to the philosophy presented in Ghost in the Shell. This merger of two operating "ghosts" into one mind is specifically different from birth while being simultaneously analogous to it – this does not create a standard for humanness but rather questions what it means to be human. I would argue that these fictitious depictions are meta-representations of the writers’ own philosophical inquiries regarding humanness and/or embodiment.

It is more obvious to me in their creation of the Tachikomas which are artificially intelligent tank-like robots with extremely flexible, adaptable AIs that programed safeguards that enables them to behave unpredictably and flexibly. In the anime, Tachikoma often ask questions that most people who are not concerned with trying to understand our world would not think of. There are Tachikoma short clips that involve them discussing complex philosophical issues and how they relate to existence. The Tachikomas are also used to approach the question of whether or not one's individuality can withstand a parallelization of information from a different perspective, or even have the capability to simultaneously parallel multiple perspectives at once. These short clips are amazing complicated layering of Intersextionality and the variability and infinite possibility of human existence or being.

It is still difficult to fully determine I feel as though this story franchise depicts a person ideology of ability, more or less, then it questions if any limits or standards can realistically be placed on embodiment or existence.  The show tends to blur the lines between all different theoretical lenses I have attempted to apply. Making it harder to answer my initial questions in my Week#7 post. 

would wanting to force a fictional character that can fit into any and all embodiments, or even exist as multiple embodiments at once, into one single race, gender, and cultural representation be a form of imposed ideal? 

would agreeing with the critics make me in some way, an ableist?

My search for answer only led me to more questions....

but perhaps ill revisit this later.

Xanthe Lee Vinson

@jasonsfarr