Resubmitting the Zan ddl, in the Senate with very little chance of passage -when other solutions, such as the Scalfarotto bill, would have ensured a law against homobitransfobia-. PD Secretary Letta has repeatedly emphasised that the issue of rights is decisive for his party.
Rights theme that is nevertheless always placed as a complementary, side of issues considered far more important: the war, of course, economic issues, but also simply electoral law.
In truth, most of the political game today is played on what are called 'rights'.
True, the womb for rent or the hormonisation of children or free gender identity are issues that would seem to concern only a minority of the population. But today, 33 years after the end of the Cold War, it is precisely these issues that delineate the horizon in the direction of which one moves - or differently, which one resists.
These themes outline what we call post-human or transhuman horizon, who thinks of natural humanity as archaic and surmountable. What technologies allow one to do becomes immediately licit and desirable. The human no longer constitutes a model for machines; on the contrary, it is machines that are models for human corporeality, right from the moment of reproduction.
The same progressive political camp that advocates the preservation of nature and the environment thus promotes the disempowerment of the mother and the denaturing of the human.
The transhuman horizon is presented as inescapable destiny, but this is not the case.
Ivan Illichfather of contemporary ecologism, in Gender. For a historical critique of equality- prophesied that things might end up this way, explaining that the disappearance of sex in the direction of the neutral "is the decisive condition for the rise of capitalism and a way of life that depends on industrially produced goods'. e "degrades women (...) even more than men'. why 'the common language of the industrial age is simultaneously neutral and sexist', and concluded by stating that "negative growth is necessary to reduce sexism'.
Struggle against unregulated capitalism and fight for women's freedom, resistance to neutralisation and opposition to mercatism thus shape a single goal that could be called 'survival of the human world'. Because, Illich further explains, "the fight against sexism coincides with efforts to reduce the destruction of the environment and attempts to challenge the radical monopoly of goods and services over needs'..
Claiming that the body exists, let it think and speak, is an inescapable preliminary step against the encroachment of patriarchy.
Resisting being women is the first move in this non-violent struggle.
The alternative to the transhuman model is female-rooted civilisation no longer based on the individual and his rights, but keeps the relationship at the centre understood as an indivisible social atom. In this key, for example, it would be important to think of a right whose subject is the relationship, and no longer the individual: a huge and revolutionary task.
This is the direction in which we want to move, understanding these issues - which cannot be avoided, as is often the case, because they are considered 'divisive' - as ultra-political: most of the game is played there.
The transhuman model presents itself as unique, inescapable and invincible: it is not.
It may be bitter to realise, many of us coming from a left-wing background, that the transhuman model is pursued and propagated by the very progressives and liberals throughout the democratic West. But there are too many things to be bitter about.