welcome to the fest

Indeed. I think this one well illustrates that many of us see gender as just another kind of misogynist oppression. I think an alternate Patrix statement in the first panel could be: "You're a radical... to be silenced by men."

*rubs eyes*

Man, I've got to watch what mood I'm in before reading this comic. As a guy I get that it's one thing to be supportive of women and recognize the existance of a patriarchy vs. living as a woman with the proverbial / literal boot on your throat. I get that being a guy and self-labeling as an ally is suspect to the point of being laughable. But some days as a person who does his best I read the strip and the whole radfem approach strikes me as so adversarial that I'm left wondering what is the point of being involved.

I had a great exchange with foxglove in another thread over masculinity. The upshot ( credit to her if I get it right, mistakes are mine if I don't ) was that while we we had a semantic debate over the role of the word, at the end of the day we agreed expectations shouldn't be put on either gender. I read this strip and ...expectations are being put on my gender. This isn't a "pity me, I'm a guy" moment, it's more I can't figure out how to work constructively with the information I'm being given.

Look, if I ever end up taking a mental health break from the strip / forums, I hope that doesn't read as rejecting the virtues of radical feminism or the validity of the points made. The most I can say is I can't figure my place in it. Which is a bummer in terms of this comic and forum because, heck. Neat stuff, you know?

Anyway. One of those days.

I wonder what sort of ally you think you are if you can't differentiate between men and the patriarchy as a class, and the individual. It's always been clear that the seeing in to the code pages of Sinfest have been what is sort of pushed as the reality behind the glamour, in this case, the truth that women and men ARE told that women are a commodity for men. You say this isn't a pity moment, but that's exactly what it comes across as. What do you want? An apology that it hurts your feelings that you're part of the oppressive sex? An acknowledgement that Tatsuya Ishida didn't write in Men (especially GothHick) in the panel?

If you want to do your best, then don't take everything as a personal attack and realise that when Radical Feminists say men, they usually mean men as a class. If you want to be a good ally, stand up to other men about their bullshit, don't look for pats on the back about how we don't really mean you.

I have a lot of gratefulness to Sinfest, seeing it evolve over the last decade has opened my eyes to a lot of shit, and forced me to become aware of my gendered power in society, in what ways I've been complicit in patriarchy, and has caused me to change my behavior and social circles accordingly.

So it's heartbreaking to see this turn. I mean, today's? Patriarchy: "Femininity is an identity to be worn by men"? You have to jump through all sorts of mental hoops to justify that as anything besides transphobia (though it's juuuust vague enough to have plausible deniability, which opens the door to that hoop-jumping a lot of us who believe in the comic and trust Tat are doing).

Maybe Tat has had experiences where nonbinary/trans stuff has been weaponized along the traditional lines of patriarchy (e.g. the scenario of the last few days of Threats). I don't want to undermine anybody's personal experiences. But if it's hypothetical, it's just punching down and hateful.

Hey Gothhick, I understand how you're feeling. You're reading literature that centers a point of view about men that's very detached from how you are used to seeing yourself. Subconsciously you might feel like there should be some leeway for you to imagine being the hero in any given scenario- because the dominant narrative has trained you to believe so. And that can be jarring, for most men to experience a narrative in which men are not the center. Unthinkably, even, villainized. The worst reactions I've seen to this phenomenon is men suddenly believing they must be women because they gained the ability to empathize with fictional women against villainous men. The idea that if you are a man with empathy, or any qualities perceived as "feminine", then you've surpassed the label of "man". But that's not how it works. Male and female are realities. Traits are just traits applicable to anyone.

If you feel like you need to step back and rethink your position or how you relate to radical feminism, that's fine. But you need to go into it with the understanding that radical feminism is about women centering women, regardless of whether men react to it with fear, anger, violence, sadness or envy. And men do react to it in all sorts of ways. All that radical feminism asks of men is to be aware and understanding of the real problems, and not to perpetuate the behaviors that makes radical feminism necessary as an ideology in the first place. We don't need cheerleaders.

That said, if you want to learn about how other men come to terms with patriarchy, pomo queer theory, etc you could check out /r/GenderCriticalGuys if you frequent reddit at all.

Zhathil wrote: ↑

Thu Jun 20, 2019 8:30 am

I wonder what sort of ally you think you are if you can't differentiate between men and the patriarchy as a class, and the individual.

I don't think that differentiation should be allowed. I mean, it'd be nice, but that's too easy, isn't it? I can only use myself as a subject, because everything else is just a thought experiment. Separating myself as an individual from my class (here, men) would be the same thing as not recognizing the privileges I've been born into, which aside from making me an ass would also make me complicit in devaluing the experiences of the oppressed. So it seems like to take the message of the comics to heart I need to cop to being a manifestation of the oppressing class.

I get that your wondering is probably rhetorical but fwiw I don't think it matters what sort of ally I think I am. Self-appointed allies are obnoxious. That's a substantial portion of the joke behind Wokeman, isn't it?

Zhathil wrote: ↑

Thu Jun 20, 2019 8:30 am

You say this isn't a pity moment, but that's exactly what it comes across as. What do you want?

Tsk, that's on my poor skill as a writer, then. I should've just stuck with the second half of that line and been more clear than "work constructively." I acknowledge the reality as presented and am looking for a way to move forward. Since I can't address the situation as a woman I am, necessarily, left to ask how to advance change as a member of the oppressing class.

janelane wrote: ↑

Thu Jun 20, 2019 8:47 am

Hey Gothhick, I understand how you're feeling.

This is a lovely opening but after that you made so many uncharitable assumptions that I'm not sure you do and I hope you'll pardon a little pushback. While I am very much an amateur in these matters I am pretty aware the radfem narrative is about women centering on women. That doesn't include me, and I'm ok with that ( grateful, even). I'm not trying to change the focus of this forum nor do I want to repurpose Sinfest to be about men because I can't wrap my tiny wee head around a comic which doesn't include men as main characters.

I could be a passive observer. Goodness knows I'm well practiced there. I'm trying to deal with how to implement solutions to resolve a conflict in which I'm the antagonist without - and mind you, I'm aware of the absurdity - being the antagonist. This comic/forum is in no way obligated to solve this problem for me as I fall outside the scope of radfem's focus, I get it. But if I can't ask for advice here, what business would I have asking it anywhere else?

janelane wrote: ↑

Thu Jun 20, 2019 8:47 am

All that radical feminism asks of men is to be aware and understanding of the real problems, and not to perpetuate the behaviors that makes radical feminism necessary as an ideology in the first place.

This is incredibly useful. It is not new news to me but it is a concise line which bears repeating. It is also reactive, as opposed to proactive. Any proactive suggestions? Things to be done before problems arise?

Also thank you for the reddit suggestion. I'm probably the only person on the planet who doesn't frequent it, but I'll keep that in mind.

I don't know what to say, except this gave me the chills.

"An identity to be worn by men." I never saw it that way...

Patriarchy is the same

Zhathil wrote: ↑

Thu Jun 20, 2019 8:30 am

I wonder what sort of ally you think you are if you can't differentiate between men and the patriarchy as a class, and the individual. It's always been clear that the seeing in to the code pages of Sinfest have been what is sort of pushed as the reality behind the glamour, in this case, the truth that women and men ARE told that women are a commodity for men. You say this isn't a pity moment, but that's exactly what it comes across as. What do you want? An apology that it hurts your feelings that you're part of the oppressive sex? An acknowledgement that Tatsuya Ishida didn't write in Men (especially GothHick) in the panel?

If you want to do your best, then don't take everything as a personal attack and realise that when Radical Feminists say men, they usually mean men as a class. If you want to be a good ally, stand up to other men about their bullshit, don't look for pats on the back about how we don't really mean you.

☝
I'm glad you put in words. Thank you!

woodsorrel wrote: ↑

Thu Jun 20, 2019 8:34 am

Patriarchy: "Femininity is an identity to be worn by men"? You have to jump through all sorts of mental hoops to justify that as anything besides transphobia (though it's juuuust vague enough to have plausible deniability, which opens the door to that hoop-jumping a lot of us who believe in the comic and trust Tat are doing).

Maybe Tat has had experiences where nonbinary/trans stuff has been weaponized along the traditional lines of patriarchy (e.g. the scenario of the last few days of Threats). I don't want to undermine anybody's personal experiences. But if it's hypothetical, it's just punching down and hateful.

The only people jumping throught hoops to rebrand sexism as "gender identity" are transactivists. Especially when it comes to destroying sex-segregated spaces feminists fought for to be out in the public and protected from male violence.

What's "punching down" is the current idea that a men get to decide what being a woman is - again! - and the idea that homossexuality is based on "genital preference" or a "genital fetish" which is a fucking oxymoron by definition.

It's not "transphobia" and it's not "hateful".

What's hateful is trying to destroy women's right because some men think they should redefine what being a woman means to fit them, instead of redefining manhood. It's sexism, it's misogyny, it's just another facet of patriarchy. If you can't see that, don't worry A lot of people can't and don't even try to see it either.

You don't need to "identify" as enby or any other kind of bullshit to be gender non-conforming. You really don't. Women and men aren't forced to behave a certain way, they are born that way; the rest is patriarchy, sexism, misogyny. It's gender, as in it's original feminist definition: sexist roles and stereotypes.

People like you are cleary unaware of what radical feminist theory really is about and it shows.

CopperRose wrote: ↑

Thu Jun 20, 2019 10:54 am

I don't know what to say, except this gave me the chills.

"An identity to be worn by men." I never saw it that way...

It should give you chills. When enough people think being a woman has no clear definition, that's the end of feminism. If you can't define women and men, you can't define who to protect and who is opressing women. It's as simple as that. Women are female human beings, and anyone trying to complicate that situation is either a polyanna or ill-intentioned.

I'm not sure this is accurate understanding of transpeople. At least not from my experiences with transwomen and transmen. They aren't attempting to subvert the definition of men and women. They are men and women. It is more basal than behavior, or 'acting a certain way'. Transpeople don't recognize their biology as being who they are. It's indelible to themselves; it isn't a behavioral aberration it's who they are; full stop end of sentence.

Like, being a transman or a transwoman is akin to being a homosexual. It isn't just a lifestyle or an 'identity' to be worn like a wardrobe and discarded willy-nilly whenever it's convenient or inconvenient. It's an indelible part of who they are. The transwoman can't be a man because the trasnwoman is a woman (regardless of their genitalia) anymore than a lesbian can be attracted sexually/intimately/emotionally to a man because they are sexually/intimately/emotionally attracted to other women. Transpeople inhabit a physical existence that they simply do not identify as being themselves. For some it can be a physical and psychological trauma to simply look in the mirror and acknowledge that they are not who their physical existence is. It is more than a man wanting to fully embrace a 'feminine lifestyle' or a woman wanting to embrace a 'masculine lifestyle'; it's deeper than that there is an indelible part of themselves that does not recognize the physical expression of their biology as being themselves.

From my experiences with transpeople, which is limited but seems to be at least gist-wise true; though they may be on the extreme side of things dysphoria speaking, their phenotype (physical expression of their biology) is unrecognizable from their 'self'. IE when they look in the mirror the image reflected back to them is not what they see as themselves. For transwomen usage of the woman's bathroom isn't some secret weapon to sneak into women's bathrooms/lockers and see women using the restroom or changing in the locker. It's largely to use the restroom/locker as a woman would...because they are women. Now some on here would argue that it's a way that the patriarchy could set a precedent to dissolve sex segregations of intimate areas, but to blame/demonize transwomen for this is to conflate two separate things...IE the goal of the transwoman (to live life as the woman that they are with all the rights and privileges there in) and the patriarchy's which is to force the submission of all those who aren't men.

Misgendering a transperson is akin to using a racial slur or the denigration of a homosexual person. Because of the above, traumatic nature of the disconnect between the physical biological expression and the self's ideation. And I'm not sure the vast majority of transpeople even use the 'parody made up pronouns' utilized in the Sinfest. Most would like to be simply called him/he, her/she as they identify (IE transwoman would like to be recognized as her/she and transmen he/him) with the caveat that they/their/them are acceptable singlular neuter pronouns ('it' is denigrating objectification and dehumanizing). I can only think of a few intersex individuals for whom the novel 'pronouns' would apply and even then currently it would seem at least from the source that singular 'they and them' work for them. And even if we were to entertain the rabbit-hole spelunking of them wanting us to use novel pronouns for intersex individuals....is that such a heavy lift? I mean the way the comic's been parodying the 'xhe/xher' stuff is akin to how some white racists were teasing African Americans about what they wanted to be called back in the 70s and 80s. And I realize that the tumblr-genders are over the top but at least from my experiences a good number of those were designed as parody of transpeople to denigrate them or goth-chic teenage attempts to subvert the placid normalcy of whatever authority they were rebelling against....not to erode the definition of woman so as to obliterate feminism at its base.

Hmm. What if we believe there's no such thing as the "self?" What if we only have our bodies (mostly male and female, some intersex) and our ever-changing mind? But 99% of the progressive movement today posits femininity and masculinity as innate "self" qualities, meaning GNC people and allies can say stuff like you see at the beginning of https://sexgenderandjustice.com

Personalities and long-term states of mind, we can agree exist. Sexuality can be innate, but it's easy to imagine how that works one way or the other. But, it's a pretty big claim that humans have lifelong, inherent, unique nature's, "selves" or "souls." It's clear that many people are working backwards from positive gay rights activist compassion, not proving their axiom. And some, as Sinfest wants us to see, may just want social capital.

Careful, betterway, or you might imply that people are ever allowed to dismiss magical thinking....

janelane wrote: ↑

Fri Jun 21, 2019 5:16 pm

Careful, betterway, or you might imply that people are ever allowed to dismiss magical thinking....

hehehehe