Thursday, 15 November 2012

Tony Harris depicts women is sexist ways.

Tony Harris, you might be familiar with his recent attack on attractive women cosplayers in the comics community, he labelled them fakes, apparently being attractive makes one not a geek and all geek girls are ugly.

During it, he claims not to draw women in sexist ways, this is total f'ing bollocks. Let's take a look at some of his work and the very few women in it.

First we have this:

Because hey, nothing says cool character who happens to be a woman like getting groped while pseudo masturbating on a cover. Not to mention the outfit or lack thereof; the man gets full coverage, she gets boob windows, multiple cut outs, short shorts, and pony tails, because you can't be a woman without having long hair and showing it, never mind that it would make an excellent handle in a fight.

Then we have this: There are two women here, decent dressed, but they're right in the background and largely covered up by men.

Tony likes to shove women into the background a lot, most of his females are overshadowed by male characters.

Here's another example of women in the background: this time wearing very little and "posing" "sexily".

How about: Even when it's a headshot, women are required to pose "sexily", because hey, I totally go around pointing to my mouth for no reason whatsoever because men find it attractive.

Or: The men again get swords and something to do, the women gets to be naked and passive.

Or:  All the men get weapons or action poses, while Leia who is kick ass just sits there looking like she's having a massive sulk fit.

Or: Cos hey, nobody would ever pose a man in chains with his legs spread like that, and he'd probably be wearing pants!

Or: When was the last time you saw a male character in a comic book or on the cover wearing see thorough clothing? I'd be guessing -never-.

Or: Tony says boobs and butt is a pox, but breaks the spines of women anyway, this is one of the few images in which a woman is doing something in this gallery, and yet she's still required to pose absurdly.

Or: A woman with a weapon, but what the fuck is up with that pose?

Or: and because fog is a practical clothing choice for women. The second has an especially fucking ridiculous pose, apparently she decided to hold a gun fight while posing for playboy!

Or: Batman looks competent, the woman looks like she's posing for playboy again and has no fucking idea how to use that sword.

Or: Here she is again, yet another boobs and butt pose, what happened to those are a pox? Again, he makes her look incompetent by the random grasp on the pole, any competent fighter would be rolling with Batman's strike, not grabbing random bits of scenery to pose "sexily".

Or: Two strips of fabric are enough to hold up boobies right?

Or: Conan gets a dramatic pose, the women gets a "post orgasmic half naked flopping" pose.

Or: This is a bit better, but she might as well be posing for a catalog company for all the dynamicism she shows. She's a wooden prop.

Or: Chick with guns check, lack of proper fighting clothing check, stupid way of holding said guns, check. If she was a guy, she'd probably be striking a dramatic pose, perhaps aiming her guns at the viewer, instead she's slouching off balance, peering over her specs at you and impotently waving them in a manner that is supposed to be "sexy" but just looks silly.

Or: The men get full outfits, she gets mesh boobtube top and two pasties, cos hey, I'd totally go into a gun fight with most of my upper half exposed entirely. Fuck armour, boobs clearly repel bullets.

Or: Cos it's not like there's a problematic history of basically making Sue Storm, someone with awesome powers into a male accessory, oh wait, there is.

Or: Impractical and stupid pose go! Seriously, nobody jumps like this, the only reason for this stupid pose is to show her boobs and butt at the same time. Again, what happened to "it's a pox".

Or: One woman and she's shoved into the background and covered up by the sausage fest, not to mention naked. I mean seriously, you'd think wearing clothing got in the way of super powers given the amount of naked to near naked women in comics.

Or: Oh look, it's pseudo masturbation and groping again. I know vampirella is supposed to be sexy, but sexy doesn't mean stupidly posed. Not to mention the random boobies  in the background, cos clearly those are the only important bits.

Or: see thorough top, check, bland "demure" uninteresting pose? Check. A man wouldn't be drawn like this? Check.

Or: Don't forget women are background decoration at best.

Or: Everyone else gets to be moving, Sue storm gets to stand off balance and stare moodily into nothing in the name of the sexy.

Or: Porn face? Check, ridiculous boob and butt pose, check.

And these are just a few of the worst offenders. Fact is Tony Harris does depict women in sexist ways, his claim not to is a lie. He's also pretty fucking crappy at drawing women, the anatomy is often poorly done, freakishly so in some cases, especially when it comes to anything that isn't tits, pelvis/vag or their head ( and sometimes even the head isn't spared from the fact that Tony Harris doesn't look at women as people but as cartoon blow up dolls).

Monday, 12 November 2012

Everything positive is a symptom of Autism:

Everything positive that is considered a negative in the eyes of neurotypical people it seems.

The following are because I'm autistic it seems.

My ability and willingness to disagree with people.
My ability to state what I need and willingness to expect to get my needs fulfilled.
My refusal to be considered a second class citizen.
My refusal to be bullied or abused by "normal" people.

Of course the people who blame my autism for these use different terms. They say I am nasty, stubborn, entitled, or state that my care team need to come sort me out as if me having an opinion is somehow unfair or not allowed. Funnily enough nobody ever suggests that being an asshole is a function of being NT, despite the fact that neurotypical people often act the asshole towards people like me.

Being assertive is considered a bad thing, it's bad enough if you're perceived as female and you assert yourself, add in autism and other people knowing about it, and you land up being labelled "bad" for doing the things neurotypical people do everyday.

No non-autistic person would be expected to:

Be silent all the time.
To completely suborn their needs.
To tolerate being treated as a second class citizen.
To put up with abuse.

Yet routinely I and people like me are expected to, and when we "fail" to act as expected, aka we refuse to be a doormat, we are considered "bad" and that "badness" is considered symptomatic of our autism, even though speaking up, expecting your needs to be fulfilled, expecting to be treated decently overall has nothing to do with autism and is not a bad thing, it's a human thing that we are all entitled to do.

Some days it seems to me that being neurotypical and being able to navigate social waters comes with a lot of tolerance that will never be extended to people like me. From what I've seen an non-autistic can be a total asshole, frequently cruel, hypocritical and generally outright nasty but so long as they cosy up to the right people and play the social game, the reality of their behaviour will never be acknowledged, and god help any autistic who blurts out "Cripes, you're an asshole" to said non-autistic asshole because said asshole is being an asshole. That's considered mean and bullying.

We are held to a higher standard, even the smallest slips are reason why we're an "asshole", meanwhile many nasty NT folks can be as mean and as cruel as their shriveled black hearts desire and will never be called on it so long as they don't do it to someone who is socially higher than them.

I've seen this happen so many times, a NT person will harass the hell out of an autistic person and the minute the autistic dares to criticise the behaviour? The Autistic is the bad guy, even if the autistic just told the person to stop hitting them.

Monday, 5 November 2012

Why giving "equal time" isn't equal at all:

Recently I read this article: The author doesn't seem to understand why there is an issue with their whole "men should have a say as well" in the first part of the article, so I'm going to explain why it's extremely problematic.

"men should be able to openly defend a woman's right to an abortion, without being given backlash by those they're defending."

This is assuming that the man is actually defending it and not talking over women or presuming to tell women about their rights in a condescending fashion, which is what many men and privileged people in general do mistake for advocacy. There's nothing like having someone argue with you that they know your oppression better than you do and they're not even part of your group, especially when they're getting shit wrong.

It is also assuming that they're not saying something bloody offensive and ignorant like "I'm all for women having the right to choose, but abortion shouldn't be used as birth control!". That will get you backlash.

The right to have an opinion is not the right to have it taken seriously.

"Furthermore, I stated that reproductive rights in general, not specifically abortion, are human rights according to the World Health Organization, meaning everyone being able to decide when and if they had children."

Problem: If a woman is pregnant, then it would be a violation of her rights to force her to have an abortion/carry to term against her will. That is just one reason why male bodied people are not going to be able to decide when and where to have kids if they accidentally get a female bodied person pregnant despite using protection. Biology is against you on this one if you have a penis, so either develop artificial wombs or build a sex bot.

"I was saying in a movement that seeks equality, the supporters of that movements should give men equal respect when speaking on abortion, because it sets a good precedent for the movement."

 Problem: Demanding respect is a privileged fucking move, especially since men do not necessarily support us. Cis-men can have an opinion and have it respected when and only when it is their body that a fetus occupys. Unsurprisingly the author is a cis-man, and he clearly hasn't examined his privilege.

"However, while I took away a different viewpoint from some of the criticism, some criticism I received was aggressive, condescending, or just outright personal attacks, where all I took away was a sick feeling in my stomach."

Translation: Women were mean to me.

To be blunt, much of the time when women are "aggressive" "condescending" or outright "attack" a guy, either the guy is twisting what's said negatively because he's butthurt, or the guy has just shoved his foot so far down his throat that he can scratch his arse with his toes.

This is a tone argument, we should not have to be 'nice' for you to listen. Especially given the amount of provocation would be feminist men often blunder around dispensing, and which is seem clear this author dispensed.

" I was told I didn't understand feminism, that I was sexist, and that my right as a human to have an opinion on abortion should not be respected. I felt as if I was being compared to Rush Limbaugh, Todd Akin, or Ann Coulter of social issue writing, which is as far from the truth as you can get."

Maybe because you don't understand and because you are? Hence why you're trying to lecture women on how to do feminism "right" aka "don't be mean to me!11!!!" That is the action of someone who is ignorant and sexist.

Having your opinion "respected" is not a human right, it's not in any human rights act. You don't have a right to respect within feminist spaces, trying to demand it is seriously privileged. You get the "respect" everywhere else simply for being a man. Learn to let someone else speak for a change.

If you want to be equal in women's safe spaces in order to be an ally? You suck at allyhood. They're women's safe spaces for a reason, women's voices are more important within them. Unless you're a trans/cis woman or a female bodied person, your voice needs to be modulated. Women's safe spaces are about women, they are our place to have our say.

"But I soon began to understand that these feminists were very different from the feminist friends and teachers I knew and loved."

Cos we don't see enough "I know a feminist so I can't be sexist/condescending/offensive" arguments.

"They do not paint a representative picture of today's feminists. In this article, I'm going to reveal a little bit more about these feminist's ideology, discuss some of the things they said and criticize some of their ideas, in the hope that tomorrow's potential allies understand these feminists are different then today's majority,"

See Jay Todd, See Jay Todd Mansplain about how he a man gets to pick and choose who is a feminist and who is doing it right. See Jay Todd speak over women's voices to assert his opinion on women without realising how incredibly sexist it is to do that.

He has a point about the trans-a-phobia in feminist groups that he later criticises, but at the same time, wow, did this guy take a big smelly shit and demand a cookie for it in his first part. That said personally I'm not sure a trans-woman should be accorded any more respect for their opinion on abortion than a cis-man, a trans-woman will never risk pregnancy or their life via pregnancy, it's a non issue for them, just like it is for cis-men. Nobody is going to force a trans-woman to carry a baby to term after all. Unless you are capable of getting pregnant, well you aren't the ones whose voices should be prioritised.

"I can still say this: all these particular feminists have done is form an extremist separatist group where, rather than trying to further a discussion of fighting institutionalized sexism, all they have succeeded in doing is antagonized possible allies, such as Peter Jenkins, me, and others"

Why hello thar tone argument.

Transaphobia in feminist groups sucks, but "you're alienating men" sucks as an argument as well.

" in the feminism I knew, based on the advocacy or women on the basis of equal rights, I would have been allowed to speak on the issue of abortion, or any other issue, and be given creative criticism without being personally attacked; in their form of feminism, I was not allowed that respect, strictly because I was a man."

The problem Jay is you're speaking OVER women, you're demanding your voice be respected, be privileged, you're not checking your privilege and you're ignoring the central fact. You will never be pregnant. You will never face reproductive coercion that risks your life, you will never be forced to give birth. You having an opinion about abortion, something you will never need personally, makes about as much sense as cis-women having an opinion about testicular cancer and how it should be treated, then demanding men respect their opinion no matter how offensive or wrong they are about it.

"And this seemed, for lack of a better term … sexist."

Women can't be sexist, you need power to be *ist, has nobody explained this to you? They can be prejudiced, but telling you that you can't demand your opinion on a matter that doesn't affect you be respected and considered equal to the opinions of the people who the matter directly affects is not prejudice, it's merely pointing out that you need to check your privilege.

You can point out transaphobia in feminist circles without being privileged about it, Jay Todd however apparently was throwing his privilege around from word one. This is why cis-men cannot have "equality" in women's spaces, they pull this fucking shit.