Log in

No account? Create an account

Previous Entry | Next Entry

Cue music.

Hey to lucyrachel and alkor in the xkdc feed!  Yeah!

My feminism also says that I don't like today's comic.  Or the comments that try to engage with others who say it's sexist with, "well, if it's sexist, blame reality."  Being political really cuts down on the number of jokes that are funny to me.


( 14 comments — Leave a comment )
Feb. 22nd, 2008 06:39 pm (UTC)
Oh my god. So freaking true. I find SO MANY jokes just downright unfunny and stupid.
Feb. 22nd, 2008 07:41 pm (UTC)
I really appreciate the validation here. I just feel dull and humorless so often. Here are things that I don't think are funny:
-gender essentialism
-Comparative Oppressions 101
-sex negativity
->And much, much more!
Feb. 22nd, 2008 07:42 pm (UTC)
-Ranking Oppressions 101
Feb. 22nd, 2008 06:47 pm (UTC)
Hi! Heehee.

I didn't like today's so much, either.
Feb. 22nd, 2008 07:36 pm (UTC)
I also really didn't like todays...

Not funny, not true, and insulting.
Feb. 22nd, 2008 08:03 pm (UTC)
As an English major I have to point out that a character's point of view may not be that of the narrative containing him or her.
Feb. 22nd, 2008 08:16 pm (UTC)
Which doesn't always amount to a bean's worth of humor either way at times, but let that pass.

Let's look at the comic though. Now, it could be that this is just the author making some sort of statement that many would find sexist. Is this woman just defined by her ability pump out babies? Is she being objectified as a "factory"? Or maybe there is a distinct intention between the male character's opinion and the author's? After all, these two stick figures are identical, save for the long hair. I know men with long hair and women with short hair, and since it takes both sperm and egg to procreate, males could be just as easily be likened to "factory that makes more of you." So maybe the shebang (or is it hebang?) is just a joke about gender norms.

Now, if we really wanted to get into things we could ask whether the authorial intent actually matters, or only the meaning we derive from it. But I think I've relived enough of my Methods of Interpretations class for today.
Feb. 24th, 2008 06:01 pm (UTC)
Sounds like set theory. I have a hard time divorcing comics from the invisible "I" writer, even though this is valid.
(Deleted comment)
Feb. 23rd, 2008 12:25 am (UTC)
agreed. i didn't find it funny either.
Feb. 23rd, 2008 04:52 am (UTC)
Am I the only person who read the guy as being amazed and awed at what a female body can do*?

*Granted, it takes more than just a woman to make a baby, but the idea of growing another person inside strikes me as incredible.
Feb. 24th, 2008 03:15 am (UTC)
That's exactly how I took it, too. Being someone born into the male sex* and raised/developing myself in a more or less masculine/male gender, that more or less mirrors my own amazement - particularly since I am not able to do so - at the idea of a life developing in another person.

*Sex is the biological component, correct? I remember the basics, but I sometimes forget which word describes which attribute.
Feb. 24th, 2008 05:52 pm (UTC)
You're right that there's been a big move to say that gender is socially constructed, but sex is static and [insert science-y justifications on physical anatomy, chromosomes, and some gender essentialism about thinking-style].
But this is wrong, too. Sex is also socially constructed:
1. Sex reassignment surgery for newborn babies with a penis length deemed insufficient for heterosexual sex still goes on.
2. Biological variations in chromosomes including XXY, XXX, XYY, do not alter rigid binaries about maleness and femaleness.
3. Thinking styles can be fostered. I'm thinking of:
a) Boys who write well are on the path to being gay logic which is really a statement of deficient masculinity.
b) Girls who have a stronger visual orientation are rewarded for being masculine and then become lesbian prone logic. More statements about deficient gender performance coded in sexuality.

Okay, that aside, I'm pretty damn amazed at the womb's capacity, too. But as a feminist, I insist that there's some gender retrenchment that makes me really uneasy about this strip:
1) Not all women can/wish to procreate.
2) We know that sperm are equally essential to childbearing, yet, this strip re-enforces the idea that pregnancy is just a woman's job.
3) Further exaggeration that the only function of the vagina is the baby-canal, saying nothing about her autonomous sexual pleasure.
Feb. 26th, 2008 07:36 am (UTC)
I really didn't see the comic as saying pregnancy is -all- women's bodies can do, or that men aren't part of it. IMHO, all that the comic expresses is "oh, wow, I think it's really cool that your body has the capacity to do this! I do not have a uterus, so I think it's a little mysterious." Maybe a little blunt, but well-intended.
( 14 comments — Leave a comment )