Derroteros: Sexo y poder, con Santiago Alba Rico (CARNE CRUDA EXTRA)

0:00It's Toyota Truck Muff, time for a truck that works as hard as you, Tacoma, Tundra, built for the job, and ready for the trail. Available with four-wheel drive and connected tech, all backed by legendary Toyota Reliability. Visit your local Toyota dealer for great financing and lease options available to qualify customers. Or visit biatoiota.com to find your Truck Muff deal today. That's biatoiota.com Toyota, let's go places. Bye, bye. I'm going to the top. Just like the top. I'm going to the top. The direction is right. I'm going to the top. With a set of data, I'm going to the top. We're going to the top. The direction that is written for the top. I'm going to the top. The book contains a hotel. It's a line marked in the map of Marias to guide the drivers. Or rumo.

1:00The road. The road. The road. The road. The road. The road. The road. The road. The road. The road. The road. The road. Hello, San Tiquetal. How are you? How are you? How are you, Javier? I'm very happy to be here. Well, you know that I too. Because at least we have a certain peace of mind in these passes. Although sometimes we are taking us to dark places, even terrors. I don't know where we are going to take today. Well, one is also very terrified. It's true that we are a bit in planning these new routes. So, no matter the current and current, it only produces jumps and tragedies. Well, I wanted to propose that we talk about something that has produced a great scandal and indignation in the last week, in the last days.

2:02Not to occupy us completely from that case, you know that I always like to use the mold of the current for a little bit more there and plant more general topics. In this case, I obviously refer to Julia Iglesias and the relationship, let's say, between power and sex. Well, we are very well because we are starting the week, dedicating the program to the specific case and if we finish it, taking the philosophical derivatives of the question. Well, look at that. We can try that. I already told you that I am not interested in that specific case that is terrible and repugnant, but if I am interested in the measure that they can also take conclusions, generally, close to that relationship, between power and sex, because the question is a bit strange. In fact, Julia Iglesias cited the bodies

3:04of the women who submitted to that infamy or what they were interested in, and it was the power that exercised on them. And the most general question is this. It is the power, let's say, the case of the story of power, those who have used their power, precisely to access without limits to the bodies of the others, and above all, the others. But I say, it is the power of a way to access without limits to sexuality or to the contrary, sexual violence is an expression more of power in general and of the gender violence in general. That is the question that I would like to make. And what is the answer that you think is this? Because to me, it makes me wonder this case and what your plan was to make the question, sometimes you make the question of how a man can travel

4:04to a woman who does not wish that relationship. How can he excite the man and have an erection? What is the purpose of the erection? The body of the woman? Or rather, as well, you pointed out, perhaps, the power of that matter. That is what I say. It seems to me that it is very related to the way the case is used. It seems to me that it is a woman who does not wish why? Why do I do it? It is because of you that those who defend the atrocities of Julio Iglesias, of Julio Iglesias, of the prestige of Spanish in the world, because they always get the courage to say that, that all Julio Iglesias is a rich guy and a handsome guy who could have already had all the most beautiful women on his side, when he wanted to say, why did Julio Iglesias need to recur to the violence? And I think that is what is more or less similar

5:06to the testimonies of the victims. It is that they are showing something fundamental. It is that it is precisely that, it is that, and Julio Iglesias did not want to get married with those women, he wanted to humiliate them, to crush them, to nourish their will, to have them to their Mercedes. Javier, that is the impression I have. That is what he put, what he puts, Julio Iglesias will do. Not a beautiful body that wants to approach and with which he wants to have a occasional relationship with how many fans have now had an occasional sexual relationship and now we talk about this, of the fans, of the desiguality of power if you want. And that relationship has the desire, but it is obvious that in this case it was not interested in the body of the women. Yes, indeed. Yes, indeed. Santiago asks this regarding why, for the selection of the character, if he sought in young people and especially beautiful,

6:06and in fact, he asked photography of the women. Well, obviously, because some relationship with the sexual desire and power is that there is what we have to explore. But I want to say that here, now we see what is the desire, what is my desire, what is my desire, and what is the relationship with the power. But I think here, I live there. I wanted women, young women and wapas. Because if we have an sexual desire but what really was really important was to convert that desire that desire that desire in power. That is, the desire is desire of power and not desire of sexuality, because sexuality could be accessed by other lives, by other lives, we say concerned, and more or less friendly. So, here, the question, perhaps, is this, that if if it is the sexual violence, the maximum expression of the gender violence because I have the impression that the gender violence is not always

7:06sexual violence, and that is precisely that is why Javier is so important the difference between sex and gender. Why can try against the condition of gender of the other without necessarily commit the other to a sexual abuse or a sexual violence. Is it thinking, for example, Javier, that you have seen in the series wanting from from from from from from from from from from from from from from from from from from from from from from from from from from

8:06of is 1 11 the way that advances is moving the attention of the viewer and of the own children, that denouncing something that finally results much more serious. In fact, this woman inflicts her in the forms of violence, which goes much further beyond the sexual aspect. And the sexual aspect is the biggest manifestation of all the violence that she has during her life. Exactly, one more. And it is not perhaps the cheapest for this woman. There is the apartment of her family, for example, as the island of the rest.

9:12The apartment was humiliated in public until the point of this man who is more well planned for the director and for the journalists, because while the woman, a woman, likes to not fall in love with the man, all the contrary, who has opened her face, charismatic, generous, and, of course, at the same time, she manages to transmit the director to the viewer a permanent feeling of threats and physical threats. Absolutely. A physical violence that the husband does not need to never consume or exercise, because, precisely, she is completely dominated, she is completely immersed, which also occurs with the victims of Julio Elesias, she is completely immersed in this exercise of power. And if the exercise can be absolutely, she does not need to reach the violence of the physical violence.

10:19But there is power. There is power that needs, in some way, to fly in the body, in the body of the victim. And that is why the question is to be, to be able to, I wish, or to be able to, because you know that from Nietzsche, in the occidental translation we have always associated with the ability to fly. In fact, Nietzsche speaks of flying, of power. And, in fact, at the same time, you know, that in the measure in which the philosophy of Nietzsche, in part of the Nazism, the equality, the will and power, has a very large political meaning in the Nazism, under the Nazism. And, however, I think that, in a relationship with the power of the same, the will is on the side of the victims. The will of resistance, the will of the negative, to leave clear the negative of the rebellion.

11:20There is the will of the side of the resistance and of the rebellion. In short, it would say that power is fundamentally desire. And, as it is desire, well, there is sexuality, it plays a role, a role, a important role, a decisive role. But what is fundamentally desire, the power is desire, there is a conjunction between power and desire that does precisely, that when power needs to be submitted to the other, the co-operality of the other, well, one of the central aspects, it is not sustainable, from then on, it is sexual aspect. Of course, I understand, for what you are saying, that power is desire to impose your will over the other, on the victim, it is to say that in the relationship of power of the same, the will of the side of the victims, the victim who tries to maintain his will, despite the desire that there is the most powerful, to crush it.

12:22That is why, and you have said that it is desire to impose his will. I would say that it is the desire to plan the will of the other, to annul the will of the other. To return to the other, from one side to the other, and from the other side and return. And in that battle, when the desire has accompanied many, many, many power, of absolute power, his desire is the desire. Okay, to fill the whole of the will. I will ask you to clarify, for those who do not listen, the difference between desire and return, for if someone does not have, of course, what you are referring to. There is this one, it is really, it is a complicated and delicate situation, which has the very long centuries of philosophical debates. No, no, no, no, no. You also know that you have already said, I know that when I talk about these things, I always try to get along with my friend Clara Serra,

13:23who will end up with an amazing thesis, specifically about this theme, which I hope is soon to be on a, In a book, from the discussion, if you want to talk a little bit about the discussion between Cazarin Machino and Judith Butler, and well, Deceo and Voluntad, it is a fiction, we are, let's say, a convention in virtue of which we can say that the Deceo has to do with the pulsions, with the impulses, with the most visceral, with that which in some way illuminates the world, but it also becomes an object of codity, of absence, of acucia. And we have the truth. The truth is that it is a complete fiction, but a juridical fiction that I think it is very necessary to respect. Therefore, when we talk about consent, it is clear that it is not insistent on what the only thing that can guarantee the

14:27The minimum clarity, although it is not a libidinal clarity, but it is a juridical clarity, which is the voluntatio of the Seas, that is to say no, the voluntat is expressed through a note that is not always possible, as we know, and there is a certain reason, it has here when the need to contextualize the consent, but what is the voluntatio of this something has to do with the juridicality, what is expressed in a contract. In addition, I do not know if, even in my opinion, the word decision, that is, the voluntatio is much more decision, although I do not want to remove responsibility to the word of the Seas, because many people through the desire impose force on others, but I still understand that the voluntatio is something more rational, because, in fact, it is explained very clearly that one can

15:27be things that the voluntatio wants to do. Exactly, and also, Javier, why can't you want things that you do not want to do, that is, even in sexual interne, you have to accept it, that is, in couples, I can many times occur that one of the two parties does not have the desire to make a polpo and in short, because for affection, because for the other the ptc much, for the other the ptc much, because it is a force, and there what is there is only the voluntatio of agreeing to the other, but if the voluntatio has to see the decision, look, that is, let's say, the center itself of moral decisions, I mean, in love and in all the Christian tradition, let's say, it is the voluntat permanently fighting against the desire, that can be produced in an exercise of puritanism and reflection, but let's say that it is what the moral decision is based on, on top of my desire, and I, as a

16:33rational subject, I say, even against my own happiness, not doing certain things, or imposing myself to do certain things that are adjusted to the law, to the moral law, but therefore if the voluntatio has to do with the decision, it has to do with love, it also has to do with the right, with that the right can, can, in some way, determine that the right should not be legislated on the desire, it should never intervene in the desires, the only thing I can say is if there is, or there is, there is, or there is no consent, and consent is of the, is of the voluntat, is the only thing that matters the right and therefore the right is always limited, as well, it explains clearly, we need a criteria, and that criteria can only be with the voluntatio, but of course, it is also a claim, something more than a simple consent, of course, therefore, the right as a moral, yes, that can be imposed on the voluntatio, and that is

17:36the best argument for the sexual aggressors, when they say, it is not that it is left to take for an impulse that I cannot control, yes, that I can control it, because that is why it has the voluntatio, and if I do not control it, that is why it is purely punishable, and also morally, exactly that is exactly that, and therefore, well, yes, what happens, true, that it is interesting, that interesting discussion, that keeps hunting in machine, or use battle, what is presented to the other one, not hunting in machine, although it begins in some way, demanding that it is contextualized the relationship of power, that is, it is the consentment, and therefore, there are contexts in which the consentment is invalid, where there is not only violence, but prevailing, where there is abuse of power, where there is instrumentalization of the other, where there is hunting, obviously, the consentment is invalid, such as many false contracts,

18:38in which the inequality of power is such that consent is null, but you know that machinon takes this to the end, to the establishment of an equation between masculine sexuality and violation, in such a way that does not accept that no consentment is valid, and that is where Judit Padler intervenes to remember that it is a utopia, to think of a sexuality that is going beyond domination, that in some way it says, there is no sexuality, never innocent of all the relation of power, it is very extensive, it is not a extensive, it is the power and sexuality, and this is precisely for cases like this, the relationship between a singer or a star, the relationship between a patron and his employee, or his employee, the relationship between

19:39a teacher and his alumna, because he is a university, we are always doing it, there is where there is majority of age, and therefore capacity to accept or not a relationship, a sexual relationship, but well, the difference is that machinon considers all violence, there is where there is a minimum power relation, and Judit Padler, who does not contemplate the utopian possibility of a sexual relationship without power, he says that no, that those relationships are legitimate, so it is a necessary therefore to contextualize how the first machinon tells you, but to do it in such a way that we do not leave the woman without agency, that we allow to develop strategies, that we allow her even to leave seducing for that desiguality of power, a alumna cannot be enamored sincerely of her teacher, whose hour of prestige that is not his, because he knows that he

20:44vehicles it in some way, indeseable, he does not have a right, an alumna to decide if they do not want to marry with his teacher, Quarenton, because Judit Padler would say that yes, I agree with Judit Padler, another thing, yes, suddenly that teacher is interested in that teacher, and that alumna, as we have seen in recent cases, because what has been a unilateral chantage, a pressure for that alumna to do nothing that does not want to do, there is pressure, where there is chantage, where there is prevailing, and obviously the consentment is valid, but there are situations in which consentment we have to accept, be valid, because not accepting it is not protecting the masculinity of intervention of the criminal code, it is prima la mujer de la agencia, prima la mujer de la autonomía, prima la mujer de su libertad sexual, because understanding also that power from any

21:48place, or to make a certain excitation, that is, the power of others can excite us, because it seems obvious to me, I agree with Judit Padler the teacher, it is a huge dark thing, I think there is, in the most intimate of the teacher, and we all know from Freud, whose investigations generate a large scandal at the time, there is nothing really cannibal in the teacher, there is something that requires not only the annulation of the others, but also the annulation itself, the annulation of the teacher is, it is a little cannibal, he wants to devour everything and it is autophagy, he also wants to devour himself, this dark side of the teacher has to do with power, many times it has increased, socially, structurally, because of power relations that in some way are inseparable

22:49from this cannibalism, inscribed in sexual passions, it cannot be supposed to suppress, I think, because if we do it, we are incurring this against what we have struggle so many times to talk about the history, not against churches, fanatics that impose the caste, or against sectarian groups, puritan, that do not allow to exercise the sexual freedom itself, against people who do not accept the homosexuality, who do not accept that there can be a pact between two free subjects to maintain a more subtle relationship, etc., it is not the freedoms that we have always defended during the last centuries and that it has cost us a lot of work to conquer, but it is true, they cannot suppress themselves, but there is to try to mark that darkness in the

23:51will of the other, and we go back to the question of, that is, the own wish, we have to mark it, necessarily in the will of the other, preferably also in the wish of the other, because there, that is what I was saying at some times, it is the domino of light, of love, when when two wishes come out, which is the cause of the wish, which is what is activated by the wishes, a relationship of power of equal or not, when the two wishes come out, they come out, they are fed up with each other and they seek to be one another, because that is the domino, the domino of light, and that is what we call consent, when we mark that darkness in the will of the other, by saying so, Javier Du nomarera un poco literaria, yes, there are two darkened ones that have the tentacles and the teeth of mutuacuerdo, and that must be the sexuality. I think there is no need to be without power, but there is no need to be, let's say, in the

24:57which is the power in a relationship of equal, in a way renounce, renounce it, look at your power, I think it is a question involving the case of Julio Iglesias, and then we go to other cases, there is the question that the desire to be able to be the absolute power that one does not have to take to the inclination of the other, when one only thinks in his own power, then let's say that in some way the desire that was completely interiorized in power, but when one is thinking about the desire of the other, then power renounce itself, and there we find that it is possible and it happens every day that two bodies are found in the margin, let's say, of the power apparatus, of the power

26:03procedures that have been able to activate the desire. I would say that the desire, this says Simón Valle, several times, along with his work, in the gravity and grace that the desire in a way confuses Mirari Comer, and it is true, it is this difference that, for me, my own work is very important, the desire to look at Mirari Comer, because what we look at, and we are talking about it again, is something we renounce to eat, but in a way to the lovers, to those who are dominated by the desire, that occurs, that they would have the same time, to the other, to the other, to the love, to the love, to the distance from a mirada, to the distance, but at the same time within the own body, and the love of the heroes is that balance between, or that passage, that while someone who eats, looks or always considers something from the other to the mirada, that power

27:09that in Carlos Julio Iglesias is the triumph of the desire to eat over the desire of Mirar, and the desire to meet the two things, when the desire to look is capable of braking the desire to eat, then we can talk about love, or heroes, or relationships, concerned and more or less placenteras, when in exchange the power becomes desire to eat, and that desire to eat triumph over the desire of Mirar, we can say that we find in a case like the Julio Iglesias, or how do you notice that we remember that in some other ancient rotters we pass through that terrible book, which is the 120 days of Sodom, of the Marquess of Salt, because there you know that in the four libertines, together with a lot of victims, men and women,

28:14in the castle of one of them, the castle of Silin, this is the moment of the absolute moon here, in France, and it is interesting for us to create a relationship that exists between the power in this case, and the desire and sexuality, as a triumph of cannibalism without limits, see that who are these four libertines, represent the four powers of the France of the time, but it is a aristocrat, a sacerdote, an ecclesiastic, a banker and a judge, here we see all the power, the revolutionary dynamite of the work of Sad, that many times it is forgotten, because it can be read 120 days of Sodom, as something that at the Marquess of Salt would like to do, but having a look at the active participation of the Marquess of Salt in

29:18the French Revolution, it can also be interpreted as a logo, and we continue to do it, it interprets Pasolini in his movie, Salon, it can be interpreted as a criticism, precisely of this type of power, where the victims are no longer in absolute body, there is an excellent book from a great feminist writer, Gela Carter, many finalists of the 90s, which is called the sadian woman in which it explains very well what happens in this recent Castillo de Silin and how cannibalism is more, how to say it, more mechanical cannibalism, more meticulous, more scenographic, it is imposed on the autonomy of the other and on that era in which the other always appears to live at the distance of a mirada, in that book in the 120th day of his

30:22album, Sad puts in the power of absolute, in which the reality of the victims is only that, the place where the power is turned around, and that is the power of absolute that becomes the desire, the desire of eating, in the pleasure of annular to the other. That is what we are seeing now, that is what we are seeing now with characters like Trump, who are looking for the absolute power. That is exactly, that is the passage that I would like to have suggested that you have understood very well in this conversation, the passage of Julio Iglesias to Trump, and that is what I told you, there is a there is a fascism of Pascal in his thoughts, very briefly, which is a question, but it is a rhetorical question, he only says this, he says, why do you kill me if you are the most open, you could think that Pascal is suggesting the possibility of someone who

31:29dominates so much absolutely the other, who does not need to kill him because he is precisely his dream, but there is something there in that power that is desire, that only we can answer this question with a kind of autonomy, why do you kill me if you are the strongest, the answer is this, I am precisely because of that, because I am the strongest, and this is what we are seeing in Trump, because I can, because of my eggs, that is, because I can, because I can say that, but I have used an expression that does not stick to me much in your mouth, and neither mine, but it is like that, because I can, yes, or by my eggs, because I can, but I was wondering in my eggs, in this case, because there you are also in invention, if you want sublimated or retarded or tangential, which is very false and very masculine, tell me that I read, javier, the other day, a well, an article I have been convinced

32:33that explained why this desire, which is a libidinal desire, sexual, of Trump, respect of Groenlandia, and you know why it is between other reasons, because Trump loves the maps, and obviously it has a map that has been designed with the rule of the Mercator scale in which Groenlandia appears much bigger than what it is, it seems bigger than Africa, when it is much smaller than Africa, and then there the desire of Trump has been disparaged, this demand of the great one takes him to want to wish, to wish that island above all, because it is because it is very large, because it is very big, and look, it is true that Trump is going to look at how he eats, you know what I tell you, exactly, that is, it is that it is that it is not different between looking and eating, there is no distance,

33:37that distance, the head of thought, the one that falls on the other, Trump is an artistic personality that does not tolerate the existence of any independent life of his body, everything he wants to incorporate to his body and look at it that I, the other day, I do not know who he is and we remember the scene of Chaplin, of the great dictator, when the dictator Hitler gave that fly to the floating world, and of course, that really took him to Trump, Chaplin was satirizing to a guy who was a black man and he was a black monster, a black monster, but much more intelligent than Trump, and of course, the problem is that Trump can not caricaturize him, because he is his own caricature, but that he did Chaplin caricaturizing Hitler with the flying world, is what he is doing

34:43already, Trump, with the Netherlands, with Venezuela, with Iran, with Gaza, constantly and in the way, more if you want, for Lesca, more caronabalesca, and more hilarante, if it was not a tragedy. Look, in a book that I just read very little, it is called Back to Facha, it is precisely that caronabalesca that has everything that is happening and how in what was called the party of the tons or of the idiots that was in part, when the way that the low classes had to differ from high classes and to caricaturize them, because now we are seeing that force, that bubble, but being the high classes that directly differ from buffoons, as is the case of Trump, and in addition to that book, this phrase is remembered that I think it has to do with what we have talked about, from the most beautiful part of the state-of-the-state technique, a book from 1931, why? I recommend a lot to read and that it says that

35:45the dictatorship or the absolute power is the maximum expression of the cells, and it is true, of course, because you want to cover everything, you can't let anyone have anything, and then there are some terrorist cells, which is what the democracy would be, the power, the reparting power, and as you can't support that the power is reparted, that the will is reparted, because you have to impose yourself on it with your absolute desire to have everything, then I thought of a wonderful definition of what is dictatorship, it is the greatest expression of the cells. I recommend it as you, the lecture of Curze is bad, perhaps all his work is not only about the state-of-the-state technique, but it is true what he says, and this is important, because we need to divide power, precisely because if not power, it remains in a sub-sumid way in the cannibal desire of those who do it, that is, if we do not divide power,

36:47if we do not keep it, if we do not keep the distances between powers, what happens is that someone from their desire is broken and monopolizes all the power, and this is what you say is important, and I think it is very important to emphasize it, not only when we fight against power, and it will take us to do it, as we did not believe, in a long time of our lives, that we had to do it, but we are also in our relationships, we say personal or political, but the most dear ones do not forget that in effect the dimension of the power consists basically of what you have said, do not deny yourself to recognize the independent existence of the others in the world, already in countries or in bodies, and what we have to impose against our desire, through a political, democratic will, is to leave

37:55living in freedom the bodies of the others, and that is why we need both these conversations that we have, that are also shared by many others and others that are on the other side, and they constantly tell me that how much they like to spend with their words and the Sabinans,