Can aporetic disjunctives of inter-contextual post-feminist dilemmas and trilemmas be deconstructed ?

Please consider how Derridean or Baudrillardean methodologies could help to achieve the goal.Can aporetic disjunctives of inter-contextual post-feminist dilemmas and trilemmas be deconstructed ?It is amusing that you pose this particular conundrum, as it bears a striking resemblance to one of my recent crepuscular cerebral ruminations.



I personally would find the proposition of further deconstruction of post-feminist dilemmas to be dubious one at best. After all, what is post-feminism itself other than a desconstructivist reaction and questioning of the validity of Baudrillardean hyperreal portrayals of femininity within feminism itself? We can see this in subsets of the post-feminism whole which question genetic determinism in sexuality and identity. In that sense, further deconstruction is only concievable if post-feminism has failed in this objective as a whole.



Perhaps some effort might yet be expended on peripheral systems, such as the name 'feminism' itself, with its very non-relative implications. Still, I'm not inclined to suggest that such less-material - if not immateral - concerns weaken the post-feminist meme significantly.Can aporetic disjunctives of inter-contextual post-feminist dilemmas and trilemmas be deconstructed ?
I did that once, but no one cared! Now , could you ask question us lay people can respond to?Can aporetic disjunctives of inter-contextual post-feminist dilemmas and trilemmas be deconstructed ?You do and you clean it up.
Do you have any idea what you asked? Neither does anyone else.Can aporetic disjunctives of inter-contextual post-feminist dilemmas and trilemmas be deconstructed ?I'm not understanding your question... "disjunctive" is an ADJECTIVE and you are using it as a noun... perhaps you mean "disjunction" or "disjuncture"???... both of which are OBVIOUSLY nouns and would help your question make much more sense...

Go back to school and ask your question at a later date when you fell more confident...



Hope this helped and Good Luck!!!...Can aporetic disjunctives of inter-contextual post-feminist dilemmas and trilemmas be deconstructed ?
The question is; should they?
The Aporetic conundrum you propose is dependant on the afore mentioned dilemma or trilemma.

My question for you would be is if it would be advantageous to build on the post femimist dilemma instead of deconstruction.

Can the post - feminist be used as a learning tool to improve the future feminism?Can aporetic disjunctives of inter-contextual post-feminist dilemmas and trilemmas be deconstructed ?
Well i think it can done. But why try iy? I read feminist dilemmas inspired by communist ideas, and that is enough bad for me. That are things i do not want to think about.
Only through the least invasive and subversive means by connecting the hypothetical deciduous conducive to conglamerous ideas. or maybe i didn't quite get your question. sounded something like supercalifragilisticexpialidocious.
Yes, but very carefully.
Sure they can. But why would you want to?
Anything can be deconstructed...............















blah blah blah......
Two points to consider here:



1.) Is a question worth asking if it cannot be asked utilizing the common vernacular?

2.) That which can be constructed, by it's very nature, can be deconstructed.
The question is (as you know) largely nonsense.



An Aporia is not necessarily disjunctive, and aporias cannot be deconstructed-- it is this impassibility (and impossibility) of the "peras" that deconstruction finds as a "limit".



"Inter-contextual" is meaningless-- context is always "inter-", especially according to Derrida.



"Post-feminist" is too vague an appelation to be useful.



Dilemmas and Trilemmas aren't deconstructed, and certainly not via "aporetic dusjunctives".



Finally, Derrida does not have a "methodology" (or a "method", for that matter), as he has stated on numerous occasions, and I seriously doubt that Baudrillard's work could be shoehorned into a methodology either (although, I must admit, I haven't read any of his work more recent than the late '70s).



So, to summarize: nice attempt, but you'll have to do a better job if you really want to hang out with the cool kids.