International Christian University Repository / 国際基督教大学リポジトリ
Not a member yet
5325 research outputs found
Sort by
初級日本語クラスにおける TBLT(Task based language teaching)に即した評価法 : 2022 年度夏期日本語教育 C3 コース実践報告
Get PDFdepartmental bulletin pape
Relational formations of “sexualized-gendered subject” : the experiences of gender dysphoria in romantic/sexual relationships
Get PDFThe conceptualization of gender and sexuality and their relationship have been argued in feminism and queer studies. Empirical sociological research has also explored how gender works through sexuality, and sexuality works through gender, and how the two shape identities and relationships with others. In transgender studies, researchers have focused on the aspect of “embodiment” and showed the indivisible relationship between gender identity and sexual orientation. Based on the above point, this paper focuses on the manifestation of gender dysphoria in the romantic/sexual relationships of four people who identified as X-jendā, and seeks how gender, sexuality, and the body have been structurally interrelated. “X-jendā” is a term denoting or relating to a person who does not subscribe to conventional gender distinctions but identifies with neither, both, or a combination of male and female genders. It is a uniquely Japanese term that came into use at the end of the 1990s. In depicting these experiences, this paper focuses on the concept of “sexualized gendered subject,” which refers to one person being gendered through the sexual “gaze” of the self and others in romantic/sexual relationships. The case analyses of the four X-jendā participants reveal how “gazing/being gazed at” and “not gazing” are related to being sexualized-gendered subjects. Their experiences of non-polarized or non-binary sexuality illustrate how the structural relation between gender, sexuality, and the body is entangled in various practices that are in contact with, but not contained by, the gender binary system.departmental bulletin pape
Bersani’s violent care/saeborg’s sliding bodies
Get PDFThis essay aims to extend Leo Bersani’s thought over the ethics of care by analyzing a series of works by a Japanese installation and performance artist Saeborg. Through outlining a juxtaposition of the artist and theorist, I will demonstrate how both seek a nonviolent relationality with others, contrary to the general assumption of Bersani as a thinker of solipsistic and masochistic self-shattering.In the first section, I deal with the violent representations of Saeborg from the vantage point of Marxist feminism and also of biopolitics, with particular attention to the animal figure. In her performance of slaughter, it is with rubber suits that female performers disguise themselves, before rendering visible the brew of violence of capitalism/patriarchy/biopolitics befallen on women equated with livestock. It is, nonetheless, impossible to go unmarked that from the very latex suits, Saeborg draws out the affirmative implication of a self determined body as well. This ostensible incongruity should define the theoretical limit of violent representation, which calls upon the eroticism that rubber arouses.In order to settle the aforementioned contradiction, in the second section I turn my eyes to a shift in Leo Bersani’s thought towards what is called sameness: a concept Bersani develops from his self-shattering with which a subject experiences violence with masochistic jouissance. While Bersanian sameness radically demolishes socially constructed self-other boundaries, his consistent emphasis on individuality appears not to obliterate them altogether; on the one hand, the Bersanian subject is masochistically assimilated into the world, and yet, on the other hand, he insists on a thoroughgoing enclosure of the individual. Regarding the movement between these scatteredhomogeneities as “sliding,” this paper connects the Bersanian concept of sameness to Saeborg’s fungible bodies of rubber suits, which bring about the masochistic eroticism of unbecoming human and submerging under anonymity whilst shutting out the performers to evacuate them from the fascist-like ontological wholeness that sameness at times leads to. In the third section, I detail the latent complicity between the ethics of care and biopolitics to sketch another form of care Bersani and Saeborg both deliver, by referring to a prerequisite of the ethics of care: subjectification. Bersani’s view on Jean Laplanche’s concept of the enigmatic signifier demonstrates that subjectification prepares the self-other difference, from which, according to Bersanian and Saeborg, violence derives. This paper, then, sets Saeborg against the “sliding,” which designates a perpetual oscillation between two formations of Bersanian masochism: violent self-shattering and non-violent sameness, with Bersani and Saeborg suggesting the latter one as an alternative form of care through the image of “envelopment.” By relinquishing the attributed identity, an essential dispositif for biopolitics, to achieve sameness where each singularity cares for themselves that is no more distinct than the other singularity, I conclude that Saeborg, in union with Bersani, dreams of an exit out of the complex of capitalism, patriarchy and biopolitics, though this care does not defy the necessary link to pleasurable violence.departmental bulletin pape
Revisiting David Hume’s Review of the Rev. Robert Henry’s History of Great Britain: Illuminating Hume on Religion, Politics, and Modernity
Get PDFIt has been more than eighty years since E.C. Mossner first brought to the attention of modern scholars the pre-publication proof sheets of David Hume’s review of Volume Two of the Rev. Robert Henry’s The History of Great Britain, from the Invasion of it by the Romans under Julius Caesar. Written on a New Plan (1774). Intended for the Edinburgh Magazine and Review, Hume’s review was supressed by the journal’s editors. Why? Mossner speculated Hume’s critique was more favourable than the editors wanted. His account of Hume’s supposedly “kindly intended review” has been influential, being quietly absorbed as the unchallenged record. It’s time to revisit Hume’s review and to read it more closely than Mossner and those who have followed him did. Hume always expected diligent readers; in his review of Henry he provides them with an elaborate assessment. Unpacking Hume’s intricacies, we find him ironically playful and less praising than has been thought. When Hume’s review of Henry is
read closely—in the contexts of Henry’s History as a whole, Hume’s own History of England, and Hume’s telling final revisions to his History—we see he was quite critical of the core of Henry’s antiquarian account of England’s ancient times. And, all of this helps to illuminate Hume as the philosophical historian of the History of England, especially when it comes to the intertangled topics of religion, politics, and modernity. The essay concludes by fleshing out additional context offered by another anonymous Humean review, one which the author submits might usefully be seen as a companion piece to Hume’s review of Henry.departmental bulletin pape