|
Fangz posted:If it's not your story to share details about it's a breach of trust to share that story without permission. you right! editing it out now.
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2019 08:08
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 07:53 |
|
|
Nvm
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2019 08:13
|
|
|
Vandar posted:Viz just released the third volume of the physical version of Homestuck, and the fourth is releasing at the start of February. How does that work with the interactive bits?
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2019 23:45
|
|
|
Big Bad Voodoo Lou posted:Yeah, New Mutants Special Edition #1 and X-Men Annual #9. I got that Asgardian Wars TPB at Waldenbooks way back in the late '80s, when I was in 5th or 6th grade, and back then, I was pleasantly surprised and a little shocked by how pretty Arthur Adams drew his ladies. Of course, Chris Claremont being a kinky perv had a lot to do with some of those choices as well (see also: the Hellfire Club's costumes, the Goblyn Queen's outfit, Psylocke's transformation, etc.) I thought Pyslock was more to do with Jim Lee wanting more Asians in the group? Also one he could sex up because Jubilee is like 15. But yea, Amora basically getting supper raping and changing Illyana into a baby and back is groooooosssssss on so many levels. But my 8 year brain just saw underboob and i was straight. Homestuck is kind of fascinating. The creator has nothing but contempt for his hardcore fans.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2019 09:06
|
|
|
dunno if anybody remembers the chelsea cain trans exclusionary man-eaters thing from a couple months ago but she's back https://twitter.com/thalestral/status/1081555580584673281 https://twitter.com/thalestral/status/1081743857040179200
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2019 21:11
|
|
|
I saw that last night and was unsure whether or not it was worth posting here. It's such bog-standard white middle-class oblivious entitlement, and her dopiness on gender is 100% unsurprising given what a mess Maneaters is.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2019 22:14
|
|
|
Didn't she write Mockingbird?
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2019 22:26
|
|
|
Roth posted:Didn't she write Mockingbird? That's her. One of the focal points for CG.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2019 22:28
|
|
|
Maybe it’s a good thing we didn’t get her Marvel series about the robot family.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2019 22:29
|
|
|
Oh no, someone targeted by comicsgate is kind of lovely. I guess we were the real racists the whole time. If only it was possible to hate two people at the same time.
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2019 23:14
|
|
|
Lurdiak posted:Oh no, someone targeted by comicsgate is kind of lovely. I guess we were the real racists the whole time. I have no idea what this is in response too, I don't think anyone in this thread was at all suggesting that comicsgate was right about, um, anything ever.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2019 23:49
|
|
|
Roth posted:Didn't she write Mockingbird? Trans Exclusionary "Radical" Feminist
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2019 23:57
|
|
Archyduchess posted:I have no idea what this is in response too, I don't think anyone in this thread was at all suggesting that comicsgate was right about, um, anything ever. I'm talking about those tweets that are inexplicably indicting everyone who's anti-comicsgate for this creator's actions, as if saying harrassment campaigns are bad somehow means we endorse everything the creators do.
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2019 00:00
|
|
|
I do suddenly have a lot more questions about her feminist agenda.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2019 00:01
|
|
|
What exactly did Cain do that was transphobic? All I can find is people calling her that for not including a trans character in Maneaters
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2019 00:14
|
|
|
Retro Futurist posted:What exactly did Cain do that was transphobic? All I can find is people calling her that for not including a trans character in Maneaters The tweets have her stating that everyone should be referred to with gender neutral pronouns only.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2019 00:25
|
|
|
Retro Futurist posted:What exactly did Cain do that was transphobic? All I can find is people calling her that for not including a trans character in Maneaters 1) Maneaters has a premise that potentially inflects interesting on trans-femininity but instead chooses to act like trans women don't exist-- it's position equates "menstruating" and "being a woman" as taxonomically identical which is, hm, not satisfying. There's also a bit of world building about lacing all the water supply with estrogen which, again, raises potentially interesting world-building questions but is instead ignored. Essentially, it's a two-fold issue, and one which was understated enough that a lot of people were willing to give her the benefit of the doubt: a) she treats womanhood as entirely biologically determined, which, fine, I don't like it obviously but sometimes allegory is broad and stupid, b) she actively forecloses elements of the setting that invite or even demand a bit of thought, care, and finesse about transness. Basically she's ostensibly writing a book about being a woman, but is actually writing about a specific variety of gendered experience/ 2) The tweet which kicked off the current hubbub-- the one about pronouns, not the one about spirit animals, which is imo worse really-- takes on an influential but mistaken reading of Judith Butler, which presumes to celebrate a fluidity and plasticity of gender-as-performance but actually trivializes the experience of trans, NB, intersex, or other gender non-conforming people for whom choosing a pronoun is not necessarily or exclusively a ludic, fun, or political gesture, but an actual articulation of identity. It's like-- and this is reductive and probably unfair-- the difference between someone saying that race and racial difference is largely socially constructed, and someone saying "ergo I should be able to wear a head-dress on Halloween." It's adopting something of deep and often traumatic import to many vulnerable and marginalized people and treating it like a bumper sticker or enamel pin. It's not evil, per se, and again, it's a very common misreading of a very influential book, but it's tacky, and it's a worrying point in one of the most well-trod slippery slopes down into TERFdom. I hope none of this came off as condescendingly or overly-explainy-- it's finnicky, semantic, and even as a super over-sensitive trans-woman I hesitated a minute before deciding that, yeah, I was actually pretty fed up with her over it. That's the broad strokes of it though-- she positions herself as a left-wing feminist ally but is really just sort of curating a pretty cushy position of wealthy white normativity. It's less that she's saying egregiously hateful things and more that she's showing a pattern of not caring enough to learn, or to apologize for when she messes up. How Wonderful! fucked around with this message at 00:32 on Jan 7, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2019 00:29
|
|
|
Archyduchess posted:The tweet which kicked off the current hubbub-- the one about pronouns, not the one about spirit animals, which is imo worse really I agree with all of the Maneaters/pronoun stuff that you articulated better than I could, but the spirit animal stuff has always been a little confusing to me. On a base level, I agree that her spirit animal 'joke' was worse because Cain's pronoun stuff was expressed out into the ether (as much as a tweet can be), not directed at a specific person, whereas her spirit animal tweet was in direct response to someone telling her that it's offensive. I am still not 100% who is actually taking offense at spirit animal memes, but that doesn't super matter; if someone politely informed me that I should stop calling clothes of a violet hue "purple" because it upsets any sort of marginalized group, I would shrug my shoulders stop labeling things "purple", what does that hurt me? If someone said that to me and I went "LET ME GO WRITE THAT DOWN WITH MY PURPLE MARKER WHILE I LISTEN TO PURPLE STUFF BY BIG MOE" I would be an rear end in a top hat. Also I'm realizing this might just be exposing my own personal bias because most of the links I initially found about spirit animals were focused on (almost universally white) pagans talking about how people calling Snorlax their "spirit animal" belittles their deeply held beliefs. Paganism in general has always struck me as closely adjacent to edgelordy Satanists/Majickians/witches/Subgenius/freaking out the squares performativeness that in itself is usually based on some sort of appropriation and belitting of deeply held beliefs so countering that just seems like concern trolling, though I do realize that a) the various older belief systems they're cribbing from still exist and the spirit animal stuff is probably offensive to them, no matter how relatively small or non-vocal those groups may be b) I'm being a judgey rear end in a top hat about pagans Anyway, If there's something deeper I'm missing here (besides the directed aggression/overall jerkiness) of Cain's spirit animal stuff, I would be grateful to know.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2019 02:41
|
|
|
I guess I was reading the pronoun thing with benefit of the doubt, where it came off more as terminally liberal than anything, but yeah I can see how reading it from a trans perspective would sound like erasure. Thank you for the involved answer, it did help
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2019 03:26
|
|
|
I thought Maneaters had an interesting albeit clumsy premise that I still kind of hope explores marketing products to masculine-identifying folks that promotes toxic masculinity. But you make a good point with referencing trans people and how the thing is tied into menstruation and other AFAB biological functions. And considering how it's gone whole hog with satirizing toxic marketing in such a shallow and broad way, I don't think I trust it to ever get around to recognizing trans people slash don't necessarily expect it to be a meaningful or good address. So in all seriousness thanks for the effortpost, Archy, because it's making at least one person reconsider giving this person the time of day. oh also cg chuds should be deplatformed and silenced in addition to one of their targets doing better next time.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2019 03:30
|
|
|
When I've read about spirit animal stuff it's been in reference to beliefs held by various indigenous peoples rather than pagan beliefs. My understanding is that the context spirit animal is usually used in popular culture is not really any different than some white person putting on a headdress to be fun or goofy. It's casually lifted wholesale from their belief systems without any other acknowledgement of them and so in effect serves as another facet of erasure.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2019 03:36
|
|
|
Also, I wouldn’t call those groups “non-vocal” as much as being groups consistently denied the means to be broadly vocal about these issues of appropriation. There are absolutely people discussing and writing about the issue with appropriating “spirit animal” as a concept that aren’t white people angry you’re not appropriating correctly.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2019 03:43
|
|
|
muscles like this! posted:How does that work with the interactive bits? That's what I've wondered since I first saw them in the bookstore.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2019 03:50
|
|
|
Mr. Maltose posted:Also, I wouldn’t call those groups “non-vocal” as much as being groups consistently denied the means to be broadly vocal about these issues of appropriation. There are absolutely people discussing and writing about the issue with appropriating “spirit animal” as a concept that aren’t white people angry you’re not appropriating correctly. Are there any good pieces about it? Like I said I don't really need any convincing but I'd like to know more about it. Part of me feels like outside of power dynamics it's not a turn of phrase than a lot of other religious terms used casually (i.e. Jeph Loeb is the Patron Saint of Cannibal Supervillains, SDCC is a Pop Culture Mecca, etc.) but I admittedly know very little about indigenous religions and the first 8-10 links i clicked through to were either pagans being upset or people explaining how it's offensive without any links to anything. I'm being completely honest here, I don't want to assume that many/most Native Americans have Spirit Animal beliefs because that in itself seems like making a bunch of assumptions.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2019 03:55
|
|
|
I’m going to be honest, the reason I didn’t directly link to some examples in my post is because most of the discussion I’ve read about it, like a lot of ‘niche’ minority issues, were in Twitter threads which are good for a lot of people weighting in on an issue but absolute garbage for trying to locate things six months or so after the fact. I can take a poke around but I don’t have anything longform on hand.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2019 04:29
|
|
|
Mr. Maltose posted:I’m going to be honest, the reason I didn’t directly link to some examples in my post is because most of the discussion I’ve read about it, like a lot of ‘niche’ minority issues, were in Twitter threads which are good for a lot of people weighting in on an issue but absolute garbage for trying to locate things six months or so after the fact. I can take a poke around but I don’t have anything longform on hand.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2019 04:50
|
|
|
Thanks for this, I was struggling to figure out how Maneaters was transphobic. gently caress, i liked that series.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2019 05:04
|
|
|
Edge & Christian posted:No problem. I'm not questioning its existence, I just like to have resources on hand for when someone goes "what's the big deal?" and in this case those proved weirdly difficult to find. I think it's a good question and to answer your initial formulation of it, honestly I don't know why I reacted more viscerally to that tweet. I guess on the most basic level it was primarily her response to being called out-- if she hadn't doubled down seemingly out of nothing but snide defensiveness I wouldn't have even really registered it as anything more than a certain je ne sais basic, but I think that her reaction to being lightly challenged was to strike a weird nyah nyah pose at the person critiquing her is telling. I mean, conditions being what they are, I imagine Cain must have had to have developed a pretty prickly hide and not much of an inclination to giving anonymous critics the benefit of the doubt, but as you mentioned, it would have cost her nothing to just say, like, oops, sorry, I didn't realize it would bother anyone. As for spirit animal stuff in particular-- to be frank once I sat down to think about it I realized I don't actually know a lot about it, and mainly have just agreed to not use it having been told not to use it. Offline I mostly see this critique levied by Native American/First Nations student groups, not so much from neopagans or whatever, although online, who knows, I'm sure I first ran into it on Tumblr eight years ago and just internalized it. I'm also having some trouble turning up solid-looking, academically vetted citations on this issue, but it might be the all-too common issue of academia lagging behind groundswell consensus on a social issue. How Wonderful! fucked around with this message at 06:57 on Jan 7, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2019 06:49
|
|
|
I picked the term up in college in the early 00s both from internet culture and having some neopagan folks in my friend circles. I kinda never thought of it as a Native thing until that was pointed out to me, and I really should have. I grew up in the hippie part of New Mexico; our major export is lovely fetishization of Native iconography/traditions/et cetera and I was definitely already aware of that. Fortunately that also means that once I DID recognize the issues with it, I had a pile to put it in and didn't feel the need to defend my use of the term. Really the main issue is not when people say something unpleasant without meaning to, it's when they try to rationalize "I didn't mean any harm" into "therefore it's fine to keep saying."
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2019 07:00
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/marclombardi/status/1082023090329214977 lol
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2019 15:31
|
|
|
He's also saying it's Mark Waid's fault, though wisely keeping Waid's name out of his mouth (that's the "tortious interference" he he refers to in the last sentence).
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2019 16:31
|
|
|
Skwirl posted:He's also saying it's Mark Waid's fault, though wisely keeping Waid's name out of his mouth (that's the "tortious interference" he he refers to in the last sentence). It became CG's favorite term for a while. They think they're all members of the bar association now.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2019 16:47
|
|
|
In related news, Mike Miller threw a fit and threatened to dox somebody asking him for a refund on a late book:
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2019 16:49
|
|
|
Dawgstar posted:It became CG's favorite term for a while. They think they're all members of the bar association now. I'm pretty sure he's referring to Mark Waid emailing a publisher/friend (don't remember the name, the one that publishes Steam Punk Sarah Palin books) to say "hey are you sure you want to do business with someone who doxxes comic shop employees if they don't carry his book?"
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2019 16:55
|
|
|
Skwirl posted:I'm pretty sure he's referring to Mark Waid emailing a publisher/friend (don't remember the name, the one that publishes Steam Punk Sarah Palin books) to say "hey are you sure you want to do business with someone who doxxes comic shop employees if they don't carry his book?" Antarctic Press, yeah. The kicker is AP said that Waid applied no pressure (not that he had pressure to apply anyway) and decided not to do it on their own and you can find them saying that.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2019 16:59
|
|
|
I'm mostly amused that supposedly these guys don't know how to use Dropbox.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2019 18:29
|
|
|
You just wait until his mimeograph is back from the shop. Then you'll be sorry.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2019 19:10
|
|
|
Dawgstar posted:Antarctic Press, yeah. The kicker is AP said that Waid applied no pressure (not that he had pressure to apply anyway) and decided not to do it on their own and you can find them saying that. And yeah Dick Meyers still sued. That's where the money went, most likely. Covering his legal expenses. It pleases me to no end that the MAKE COMICS CISHETWHITE AGAIN people will only have Ironsights to read, with two failed (Jawbreakers, Alt-Hero) projects to their name. Mmm, yes, such amazing proof of how GREAT their comics are.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2019 20:15
|
|
|
Fangz posted:I'm mostly amused that supposedly these guys don't know how to use Dropbox. The pages are definitely done, and definitely exist. For definite. There are just technical difficulties which I won't go into but they, much like the pages, definitely exist.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2019 20:53
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 07:53 |
|
|
Covok posted:And yeah Dick Meyers still sued. That's where the money went, most likely. Covering his legal expenses. I'm looking to add cyber frog to the failure list. He's 15 pages behind and has no script.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2019 21:55
|
|
