For Allen Ginsberg and this Queer State
See here's another problem with the whole objective/subjective duality. It's a problem that stems with the birth of biology that grew into what we now honor in modern medicine. Well not completely modern medicine, but what has become due to maybe conglomerate corporate control of modern medicine. Also let's marry that to the fact that everyone, meaning every individual it seems of the modern progressive world, has this sense of agency to own their health and their own medical history along with the ability and prowess to define and prescribe for other's own medical state of well being.
Let's extrapolate on this mess. The problem is that objectivity is derived from the field of modern science. We use objectivity to explain things, scientifically, from there whereabouts to where-we-are-going. Medicine is the same way, it is used as objectively as possible, with error, to explain your personal make-up's whereabouts and also explain or possibly tell where-you-are-going. The only problem with that is that instead of operating on a multi-functioning spectrum of diverse variation, it functions on a very strict binary created by the conglomerate autonomous society of the numerous selfs of this world. That binary is: functioning (healthy, normal) / malfunctioning (unhealthy, abnormal).
There are two unsupposed prescriptions for society. The Normal being and the abnormal individual. You see it don't you! It's the fact that there exists an objective level of normalcy when it comes to one's health or availability to being normal. However if someone be born with a difference, a biological difference say in amino acid construction that may cause a change in physical or physiological makeup that person now has a physical telling of abnormalcy. True the size or state of abnormalcy may reside on a value scale of abnormalcy, but the initial judgement of being abnormal or malfunctioning renders a person to be anti-normal.
That's the problem with this nature of objectivity. Not purely the value of objectivity, but the almost innate nature to couple this level of objectivity with the binary of normal and abnormal. This self acknowledged level of normalcy may exist in the mind, however in the reality that we seem to all share, normalcy doesn't exist, rather difference does. The key is to challenge normalcy with difference.
I will resign a subtle level of medical objectivity be assigned to the common person. I think scientific or medical objectivity should be assigned to the pros and be used in a professional atmosphere where the logic behind the objectivity is not to separate the perfect from the imperfect nor to capitalize monetarily on a person's difference, but to help those whose difference lend them to a disadvantage in a societal setting; or be it a person or a person's guardian's choice to better their own situation. I understand there also are many things of the psyche that are unobservable by the naked eye and that come about more by conditions and less by nature--things derived from the environment that alters one's decision making capabilities or even mental state (perversions of mental stability that can cause serious malfunctions in the decision making process)--and need help to keep society, the interplay of all people's, in a state of cohesion; in those instances medical objectivity must be employed to again help stabilize the individual in order to create a functioning (partly broken) society.
What I'm saying is more of critique on the way society has evolved to an easy remedy of using this binary when the levels of construction don't have a valid existence. Normal meaning perfection as one pole and the other pole being abnormal which is valued as an extreme response to other pole. So when one is labeled, prescribed, or described with a biological imperfection, or even one that may be derived by an environmental setting, or albeit, one that we know not as both natural or nature conceived, that person's understanding of their social value and personal value is steeped deep in a discretionary misunderstanding. All due to a corrupt value system which is scientifically produced but unfortunately mishandled by an imperfect society.
Again I want to be sure that this isn't seen as a ridiculous attack on modern science or modern medicine and for that even an attack on the processes created in order to create a more healthy stable world. (I mean we used to lobotomize people a few decades prior and now look where we're at; that's some progress)But more this is a construction of a critique, a semiological or linguistic critique; the signs of normalcy and the language of society. Because truly understood, abnormalcy due to one's makeup, be it biologically explained or not, is self acknowledged but prescribed by standards codified by society. And one modern channel for creating this codified standard is through a malfunction in the understanding of objectivity and its power in the hands of all rather in the hands of the appropriate few.