I think most men would rather not be forced to get vasectomies, than women want abortions; also the woman in the cartoon is supposedly more overtly pro-choice by identity, yet in this she’s anti-choice for men.
The point is in your face and you miss it. Many men advocate to control women’s bodies by taking their right to autonomy away. If seeing a woman with a shirt saying something like that makes you uncomfortable, how can you say it’s just “a man being a bit sarcastic?” How do you think women feel? Again, if this comic makes you uncomfortable, imagine how uncomfortable women are.
Her signs in the first and third panels are okay, as well as what’s written on her T-shirt in the 2nd panel. The sign in the second panel is dumb—it’s not discomforting, it’s just dumb.
What he said was also dumb as well as sarcastic, but he didn’t advocate violence. In the second panel she calls him “bitch” (normally a sexist term), holds him as a male collectively responsible for the actions of relatively few men, and then says that he should pray that she and others don’t get more violent.
Do you think her tirade convinced him to be more sensitive and sympathetic?
What if she replied to his sarcasm with “What’s wrong with Summers of Love or protests?”
how do you think women feel when their rights are stripped away?
They probably don’t like it.
So is the tactic here is to create sympathy in men by attacking them? or maybe her audience are women. Maybe as a man I shouldn’t even be commenting about it, except maybe to praise it, or attack men.
He said 2 sentences consisting of 13 words (though 1 was a contraction of 2 words). He didn’t directly insult her except for “fucking protesters” which these days is kind of mild.
e.g. Fucking Christians going to their fucking church, fucking bikers on their fucking motorcycles, fucking radio types going on about fucking Drake’s fucking accomplishments: these are arguably more the words of annoyance than hate. The man’s words are stupid: IIUC 1967 was the Summer of Love, 1968 was the year of protests (Paris, Prague, and Chicago (as well as MLK’s and IIRC RFK’s assassinations)) and anti-abortion-types also protest. Her reply was more personal and more insulting. Granted, the pronoun “you” is not specific to plurality (much like “they” is these days), but I doubt she cared about distinguishing between plural and singular use.
And that’s how women feel when they can’t get abortions.
I think most men would rather not be forced to get vasectomies, than women want abortions; also the woman in the cartoon is supposedly more overtly pro-choice by identity, yet in this she’s anti-choice for men.
The point is in your face and you miss it. Many men advocate to control women’s bodies by taking their right to autonomy away. If seeing a woman with a shirt saying something like that makes you uncomfortable, how can you say it’s just “a man being a bit sarcastic?” How do you think women feel? Again, if this comic makes you uncomfortable, imagine how uncomfortable women are.
Her signs in the first and third panels are okay, as well as what’s written on her T-shirt in the 2nd panel. The sign in the second panel is dumb—it’s not discomforting, it’s just dumb.
What he said was also dumb as well as sarcastic, but he didn’t advocate violence. In the second panel she calls him “bitch” (normally a sexist term), holds him as a male collectively responsible for the actions of relatively few men, and then says that he should pray that she and others don’t get more violent.
Do you think her tirade convinced him to be more sensitive and sympathetic?
What if she replied to his sarcasm with “What’s wrong with Summers of Love or protests?”
I’m saying that if those things make you uncomfortable as a viewer of this comic, how do you think women feel when their rights are stripped away?
They probably don’t like it.
So is the tactic here is to create sympathy in men by attacking them? or maybe her audience are women. Maybe as a man I shouldn’t even be commenting about it, except maybe to praise it, or attack men.
I don’t think there’s a magically perfect way to respond to this comic, but framing the man’s position as “a little sarcastic” is certainly not it.
He said 2 sentences consisting of 13 words (though 1 was a contraction of 2 words). He didn’t directly insult her except for “fucking protesters” which these days is kind of mild.
e.g. Fucking Christians going to their fucking church, fucking bikers on their fucking motorcycles, fucking radio types going on about fucking Drake’s fucking accomplishments: these are arguably more the words of annoyance than hate. The man’s words are stupid: IIUC 1967 was the Summer of Love, 1968 was the year of protests (Paris, Prague, and Chicago (as well as MLK’s and IIRC RFK’s assassinations)) and anti-abortion-types also protest. Her reply was more personal and more insulting. Granted, the pronoun “you” is not specific to plurality (much like “they” is these days), but I doubt she cared about distinguishing between plural and singular use.
You’re just as bad as the guy in the comic.