Citizens,

Our congratulations and esteem for your excellent Report against Normality, published by Editions Champ Libre.[1] We have appreciated its dignity, clarity, rigor and intrepidity, which are such rare and necessary things today.

But shame on the Maoist bitches who jam-up your columns with their "phallocracy."[2] And who, because they are a bunch of cunts [une masse de connes], think they must be something necessarily other than real bitches [reelles connasses]. And who confound the proletariat with a mass of pricks and cunts. The proletariat only exists insofar as its knows itself. The Maoists' verbiage, their stupidity and their confusion detestably undercuts the clear determination of the rest of the Report.

On the other hand, these bitches insult me personally, me, the General Secretary of this Institute,[3] as a man, that is to say, a human individual of the male sex, when they say that this world is my world because my gender is on display in it. That is to say: I, as a masculine individual, I have more than another person free use of my life; I have a real interest in maintaining this world, whereas there of course exists an illusory interest that shapes the fronts of an entire humanity. That is to say, I retain a daily, permanent advantage; I awake in good spirits every morning, simply because my gender symbolizes the scepter and the billy club.

These bitches insult me by saying that language, which is actually at the service of a power that is not mine nor that of my fellows [semblables], is my language and that it serves me, who is assaulted with isolation.

They insult me by insinuating that, this world being the world of "men," it would be my possession, me, who doesn't even possess full use of my own life.

You bitches: what interest is it to concrete, existing individuals, men and women, whom you obviously haven't ever met, because your fuckery has blinded you; what advantage is there, I ask, if the masculine sex is exploited and glorified specially for commercial ends and for the enslavement of [human] farm animals, of which I am one and who are male as well as female? None.

No, the phallocracy -- if one understands it to be advertising's version of the masculine sex -- isn't the enemy of "women."

The worst enemy of "women," as well as the worst enemy of "men," is their stupidity, to which this sampling of bitches bears scandalous witness and [4] for production, the maintenance of which everything in this society is done, for the dominant classes in the west, east and far east.

These bitches are particularly insulting with respect to this population [un peuple] of slaves, of which I am one, by claiming that something belongs to them, to those who have nothing, a population among which they are already partisans of Spartacus, who could have been among the editors of the Rapport. And though the proletariat hears many appropriate insults when it is not revolutionary (slaves, pricks and cunts, students, small cadres, old fucks, Stalinists, unionists, Maoists, Trotskyists, Castroists, bureaucrats, Leninists, former combatants, automobile drivers, vacationists, racists, televisionaries, soccer fans, big gamblers, unfortunates, etc.), it was necessary that those bitches chose the sole insult inappropriate by definition: man, thrown into a crowd to which the quality of being a man is denied every day.

Finally, there is no dominant sexuality. There is only a real absence of sexuality, a real poverty of sexuality, on the one hand, and images, spectacles, ideas that are dominant; a perfect and happy sexuality, an image, a spectacle, an idea that is so dominant, so terroristic that it is this reality that condemns real poverty to silence, to what's secret, to terror, to isolation. Fortunately, the truth more and more appears, the truth of universal sexual poverty, hetero- as well as homosexuality, which is heterosexuality's scapegoat. It is the very universality of this poverty that makes the spectacle of sexual liberation so profitable.

In all this, who are the ones who ceaselessly reinvent power? The bitches are mistaken about editing: they will be hired by Elle[5] where they will be very well-received, because Lesbians are in fashion today, and we think might even become a profitable sector of the spectacle.[6] One must not confound the insolent lie of ideology with the reality of poverty.

Yes, homosexuality is male homosexuality, but not because of the "weakness" of the sex of "women," as the bitches think, but due to a historical and social fact: only male homosexuals were treated like animals, like Jews, by the Nazis. History doesn't exist for these bitches. The "man" of whom they speak only exists in their little minds, placed there like an aberrant thought by the spectacle of the "man" who maintains this society, which is an enemy of the human being. If they weren't such cunts and so pretentious, they would only be unfortunate victims of this odious staging. It isn't their sex that has failed them, but their brains and the means of using them. The prose of these bitches, worthy of the prose of the M.L.F.,[7] can be summarized in a single phrase, said by a blind man to a paralyzed man: "You bastard, you can see!"

Citizens of the FHAR: my colleagues and I can only strongly encourage you to choose your associates [more] scrupulously in the future. Everyone who has some knowledge of life knows well that female homosexuality is, fortunately, hardly repressed in current society. We know the excellent principled reasons that have incited you to associate female homosexuals with your movement. Unfortunately, this experience proves that you haven't not found real ones (or at most a few maladroit women who haven't easily managed to get young women into their beds). With the result that here we have the simple continuation of the militant opportunism for which women are still, sadly, distinguished; the causes of which are obviously a surplus of alienation in current society of which they are the victims. While the real lesbians are, as a whole, in the avant-garde of the women of today, the fakes or incompetents who unfortunately participated in your Report bear full witness to feminine backwardness and aspire to conserve it, by the simple contrast between the stupidity of their "thought" and their language with respect to what the other authors wrote.

If these bitches know something about pleasure, even between heterosexuals, they would not speak of the myth of "phallocracy."

And even if heterosexuals remain the most reduced of the "sexual minorities," it wouldn't merit any less being approved, like all the others, by the society without classes, without Mao and without Lin Piao.

Bravo for the manner in which you have scolded the petit bourgeois of Voie Ouvriere.[8]

P.S. To reassure the male homosexual comrades: they do not have a sad monopoly on insults alluding to "shit" and "buttfucking." Their female colleagues, who are ours, are quite comfortable with the universal and quite bisexual use of "fuckery" [connerie], etc. . . . Without counting the workers who could also take offense -- and so soon perhaps -- to terms such as "riff-raff," "plebs," "drunks," and "idiots."

(Translated from the French, 30 May 2008, by NOT BORED! All footnotes by the translator.)

[1] Front Homosexual d'Action Revolutionaire (Homosexual Front for Revolutionary Action), Rapport contre la normalite, Paris, Champ libre, 1971.

[2] See "The Red Dykes" in the FHAR's text Proletarians of all nations: caress yourselves!.

[3] The Institute for Contemporary Prehistory: the self-publisher named Jean-Pierre Voyer.

[4] There seem to be words missing here.

[5] Founded in France in 1945.

[6] Howard Stern, Private Parts (1997): "Lesbians equals ratings."

[7] Mouvement de liberation des femmes (Women's liberation movement).

[8] Workers' Way, a Trotskyist rag.