Okay, time for the second-level bingo challenge: [i]only[/i] count those squares where you can name the famous person being portrayed. (You’ll still almost certainly get bingo, but at least it will provide you with a few extra moments of entertainment.)
Khal Draugrsays
Which one is Thunderf00t? He’s particularly annoying because I keep getting his (and other atheists’) misogynistic videos in my YouTube recommendations. Even though I’ve already blocked him and ‘The Amazing Atheist’.
It’s a pity that atheism and misogyny are so associated with each other online.
The Vicar
I get 6. I’m missing Dawks. I guess he’d be #33: The Free Speech Fetishist. Speech bubble: If your feelings are hurt by discrimination you must lock yourself up for all eternity!!!
Athywren - Frustration Familiarity Pandasays
BINGO!
What do I win? Show me the prizes!
W-wait… why are all of these prize boxes marked “despair”?
auntbenjysays
Giliell, professional cynic -Ilk- @ 6
I had Dawkins pegged as The Comparison Shopper for “Dear Muslima”.
laurentweppesays
I’m missing Dawks. I guess he’d be #33
Naaaah: he’s #13: the comparison shopper, the Dear-Muslima, the “look, there are countries where brown-skinned Muslims can commit rape with impunity while brandishing the Quran, therefore anything that happens in countries where white dudes act like creeps without hiding behind religious texts doesn’t count“
Nick Gottssays
One I’ve come across occasionally: the Class Warrior:
“Feminism is just a tool of the ruling class , to force dedicated revolutionaries to waste time washing up and making sammiches!”
Saadsays
Sam Harris on 3rd row 2nd column or 7th row 2nd column?
Intagliosays
@11 Saad – Pretty sure it’s 7:2
Off topic sorta, seems like the Mormons made a bit of a mistake.
UnknownEric the Apostatesays
I’m missing Dawks. I guess he’d be #33: The Free Speech Fetishist. Speech bubble: If your feelings are hurt by discrimination you must lock yourself up for all eternity!!!
Which is especially unamusingly amusing when you remember his multi-year temper tantrum because Rebecca Watson hurt his feelings.
Lesbian Catnipsays
This comic is completely unrealistic! No gamergater is that well dressed.
antepreprosays
I swear almost all of the right side ones are common while the left side is uncommon.
Notable exceptions on left: Rationalist, Good Girl, It’s Science!, and Creepy
Notable exceptions on right: Won’t Get Fooled Again (though I could be wrong about that!)
blfsays
There is no mention of cooties, the real reason for the inane sputtering of all the various categories portrayed (and all of those not portrayed).
Well, it’s something Dawkins would say, but I don’t think the person portrayed is him.
Silisays
The pick-up ‘artist’ makes me think of a young Dawk. It’s the hair, I think.
The Evil Twinsays
Which one is:
“Women love babies! The only reason a woman would get an abortion is if a MAN forced her to! So, support women’s right and BAN ABORTION!”
Note this was said to me by a female. One who firmly believes that if you held a vote to ban abortion and only allowed females of reproductive age to vote, it would win in a massive landslide.
gmacssays
Anti-feminist feminist: That’s totally Christina Hoff Sommers, right?
illdoittomorrowsays
Lesbian Catnip at 14: Indeed, none of the characters is even wearing a fedora. Checkmate, feminists!
I posted a link to this on a Facebook group I’m a member of and another member noted it was missing the, “get back up on your pedestal, m’lady” breed of anti-feminist. You know, the ones who consider women to be fragile, wilting, childlike creatures incapable of the hard thinky or of weathering the slings and arrows of everyday life and so must be kept locked up for their own safety.
fernandosays
In my opinion, most people that is anti-feminist, act that way, not because they are evil, despicable persons, but because of pure ignorance of what is the feminist movement: it is, simply, give to the Woman the same rights – “de ivre” and “de facto” – of Man, turning the, still opressed, feminine part of Humanity, in the counterpart with full rights and a full respect by her dignity, of the masculine part of Humanity.
In a more personal note, years ago, i thinked that feminism was something like “fanatical women, that hated men”, and was only my curiosity to know a more about feminism and its History, that changed my opinion.
And with that i wanted to leave a sugestion: always think that an anti-feminist is, most probably, someone ignorant about feminism, and try to inform him (or her) correctly of what is feminism, instead of starting by making fun of that anti-feminist, no matter how much tempting that is.
Of course, there are anti-feminists, that are, simply, obnouxious and despicable people.
@10: Nick Gotts
Thta gave me shivers, mostly for reminding me that although I’m reasonably sure Brocialists are more common (and that Brocialist is a better name), I, personally, have *FAR* more experience with the inverse. “Why re you talking about the rights of the worker when we’re talking about something that would screw workers over? There’s feminism to perpetrate!”
leerudolphsays
@#24, The Vicar:
@#20, gmacs
Anti-feminist feminist: That’s totally Christina Hoff Sommers, right?
I was thinking Camille Paglia, myself.
I don’t remember ever having seen (even a photograph of) Paglia. But I was a colleague of Hoff Sommers for about 10 years (we were in different departments, but served on a committee together, sometimes attended the same university-wide faculty meetings, etc.), and that cartoon doesn’t look like much of a caricature of her (as she looked then, anyway). Also she hasn’t published nearly as many books as Paglia, has she? So I vote Paglia if that’s the choice.
I don’t recall her ever calling herself a feminist (though she may have); I do recall her once (at my first meeting of that committee) proclaiming “I’m conservative!”; she did manage to force her way into the Women’s Studies Program (much to the disgust of everyone else in it that I knew).
Nick Gotts
The Brocialist, also known as “lie back and think of the revolution, baby!”
The deep convictiion that if only we get exploitation behind us everything else will just automatically follow.
Athywren - Frustration Familiarity Pandasays
@Giliell, 29
The deep convictiion that if only we get exploitation behind us everything else will just automatically follow.
Wouldn’t it be awesome if that worked, though? Social Justice Dominoes!
Athywren
yeah, it would, but personally I’m convinced that it’S one of the major reasons why trying to do socialism failed the first time. They thought that just because there is no bigwig making the big bucks people would stop being misogynists, racists, etc.
Looking at the extreme conservatism currently running rampant in Eastern Europe it shows that failed big time.
laurentweppesays
yeah, it would, but personally I’m convinced that it’S one of the major reasons why trying to do socialism failed the first time.
Socialism works rather well when it’s implemented.
It’s Leninism which failed big time: but what else to expect from an ideology whose seminal manifesto can be summarized as “The rubes are a herd of morons who need a benevolent intellectual aristocracy to think in their stead“
w00dviewsays
@ anteprepro
I swear almost all of the right side ones are common while the left side is uncommon.
Notable exceptions on left: Rationalist, Good Girl, It’s Science!, and Creepy
The Amazing Twitterman, Comparison Shopper (Dear Muslima) and Subject Changer (What about the MENSZ1!1!) are also depressingly common varieties of anti-feminist shown on the left side of this cartoon.
I don’t remember ever having seen (even a photograph of) Paglia.
I have, and it doesn’t look anything at all like Camille “if rape is inevitable, lie back and enjoy it” Paglia. It does resemble Hoff Sommers, in all senses. Paglia mostly keeps busy spouting libertarian shit, calling rape culture hysterical propaganda (rape is intrinsic in man’s nature, ya know), and delighting Christians with her anti-transgender stance*.
I don’t recall her ever calling herself a feminist
CHS coined the term equity feminist**, and denies that she’s anti-feminist. She’s written three books so far, and seems to always be on the lookout to write another one.
*Paglia says:
Sex reassignment surgery, even today with all of its advances, cannot in fact change anyone’s sex. You can define yourself as a trans-man, or a trans-woman, as one of these new gradations along the scale, but ultimately, every single cell in the human body, the DNA in that cell, remains coded for your biological birth,” she told Roda Viva.
**To distinguish herself from all those awful victim/gender feminists, who brazenly stole feminism. Yep.
Please look up strawman. Hint: a caricature/exaggeration is NOT a strawman.
gmacssays
*Paglia says:
Sex reassignment surgery, even today with all of its advances, cannot in fact change anyone’s sex. You can define yourself as a trans-man, or a trans-woman, as one of these new gradations along the scale, but ultimately, every single cell in the human body, the DNA in that cell, remains coded for your biological birth,” she told Roda Viva.
See, she’s sorta technically correct there. But that’s why folks now use the word “transgender” instead of “transsexual“. Yeah, biologically speaking, a trans-woman is male. But to crudely mix biology and sociology, we are not our genotypes, but rather our phenotypes.
Chaos Engineersays
@5: Which one is Thunderf00t?
In his brief stay at freethoughtblogs, he was mostly arguing, “If conventions have sexual harassment policies, then no one will be allowed to have any fun at all, not even consensual fun.” So 6/4: “Wee bit paranoid”.
I haven’t seen his latest videos but from what I’ve heard, he’s doing 1/1: “Molehill Grower”.
Yeah, biologically speaking, a trans-woman is male.
:Sigh:
Oh, fucke this, I’m out of here today.
Rowan vet-techsays
gmacs-
What about people who are xxy? What about people born with ambiguous genitalia that are assigned specific genders at birth but are not genetically tested? What about people with complete androgen insensitivity that outwardly appear stereotypically female, and have been raised as such, and those of whom are comfortable as such and/or never doubted or disagreed with their assigned gender?
The biology is not cut and dry.
Azkyroth, B*Cos[F(u)]==Ysays
And with that i wanted to leave a sugestion: always think that an anti-feminist is, most probably, someone ignorant about feminism, and try to inform him (or her) correctly of what is feminism, instead of starting by making fun of that anti-feminist, no matter how much tempting that is.
Oh, wow, I’m sure no one around here has heard that before.
gmacssays
Sorry, all. My point (very poorly made) was that biological sex is kind of meaningless in a sociological context. I don’t substantially agree with Paglia.
My sincerest apologies, Caine.
To give explanation of my thought behind it: you could technically say that an XY human cell was from a genetically male human. This only works for the majority of humans who are XX or XY (thank you for reminding me Rowan), and it is a specific definition of sex for organisms with chromasomally-determined sexes. So in a lineage-tailored and subsequently-simplified definition of dichotomous sex which excludes various individuals (ie a useless definition), Paglia would be correct. But not in any definition applicable to humans.
I hope I have cleared up confusion from my shitty shitty communication skills. And I am again sorry.
There was nothing at all wrong with Fernando’s reminder (Fernando @ 23, since you were too rude to address him), we should all keep that in mind. It’s up front with Fernando because he was ignorant about feminism, but that was quickly corrected, and I think it’s nice that he wants to help others to understand and correct their ignorance as well. Fernando is aware that there are asshole anti-feminists out there, he said as much, he just doesn’t want to lose those who don’t know any better. It wouldn’t have cost you anything to keep your fucking rudeness to yourself.
I have, and it doesn’t look anything at all like Camille “if rape is inevitable, lie back and enjoy it” Paglia. It does resemble Hoff Sommers, in all senses. Paglia mostly keeps busy spouting libertarian shit, calling rape culture hysterical propaganda (rape is intrinsic in man’s nature, ya know), and delighting Christians with her anti-transgender stance*.
I’m not sure the graphics are meant to match the celebrities. But for what it’s worth, Camille Paglia has changed her hairstyle around a lot during her career, and the caricature that Salon.com used to use for her articles (for which she was paid long after Salon started kicking out other, better paid authors) looked somewhat like this image.
I stopped reading her articles when she said something along the lines of “the Republicans win elections because they run sexy men for office and women will naturally support them”. (That’s an exaggeration, but the gist was in that direction.)
leftwingfoxsays
I don’t have a witty title for this archetype, but it’s the kind of person who goes: “I’m never wrong, but a feminist criticized me, so feminism must be wrong.”
You know, the “allies” who, when accused of friendly fire, become worse.
weird bingo card
Well that filled up a hundred Bingo cards of mine.
the pick-up artist
row 3 column 3
bwahahahhaaahahaha
Okay, time for the second-level bingo challenge: [i]only[/i] count those squares where you can name the famous person being portrayed. (You’ll still almost certainly get bingo, but at least it will provide you with a few extra moments of entertainment.)
Which one is Thunderf00t? He’s particularly annoying because I keep getting his (and other atheists’) misogynistic videos in my YouTube recommendations. Even though I’ve already blocked him and ‘The Amazing Atheist’.
It’s a pity that atheism and misogyny are so associated with each other online.
The Vicar
I get 6. I’m missing Dawks. I guess he’d be #33: The Free Speech Fetishist. Speech bubble: If your feelings are hurt by discrimination you must lock yourself up for all eternity!!!
BINGO!
What do I win? Show me the prizes!
W-wait… why are all of these prize boxes marked “despair”?
Giliell, professional cynic -Ilk- @ 6
I had Dawkins pegged as The Comparison Shopper for “Dear Muslima”.
Naaaah: he’s #13: the comparison shopper, the Dear-Muslima, the “look, there are countries where brown-skinned Muslims can commit rape with impunity while brandishing the Quran, therefore anything that happens in countries where white dudes act like creeps without hiding behind religious texts doesn’t count“
One I’ve come across occasionally: the Class Warrior:
“Feminism is just a tool of the ruling class , to force dedicated revolutionaries to waste time washing up and making sammiches!”
Sam Harris on 3rd row 2nd column or 7th row 2nd column?
@11 Saad – Pretty sure it’s 7:2
Off topic sorta, seems like the Mormons made a bit of a mistake.
Which is especially unamusingly amusing when you remember his multi-year temper tantrum because Rebecca Watson hurt his feelings.
This comic is completely unrealistic! No gamergater is that well dressed.
I swear almost all of the right side ones are common while the left side is uncommon.
Notable exceptions on left: Rationalist, Good Girl, It’s Science!, and Creepy
Notable exceptions on right: Won’t Get Fooled Again (though I could be wrong about that!)
There is no mention of cooties, the real reason for the inane sputtering of all the various categories portrayed (and all of those not portrayed).
Well, it’s something Dawkins would say, but I don’t think the person portrayed is him.
The pick-up ‘artist’ makes me think of a young Dawk. It’s the hair, I think.
Which one is:
“Women love babies! The only reason a woman would get an abortion is if a MAN forced her to! So, support women’s right and BAN ABORTION!”
Note this was said to me by a female. One who firmly believes that if you held a vote to ban abortion and only allowed females of reproductive age to vote, it would win in a massive landslide.
Anti-feminist feminist: That’s totally Christina Hoff Sommers, right?
Lesbian Catnip at 14: Indeed, none of the characters is even wearing a fedora. Checkmate, feminists!
I posted a link to this on a Facebook group I’m a member of and another member noted it was missing the, “get back up on your pedestal, m’lady” breed of anti-feminist. You know, the ones who consider women to be fragile, wilting, childlike creatures incapable of the hard thinky or of weathering the slings and arrows of everyday life and so must be kept locked up for their own safety.
In my opinion, most people that is anti-feminist, act that way, not because they are evil, despicable persons, but because of pure ignorance of what is the feminist movement: it is, simply, give to the Woman the same rights – “de ivre” and “de facto” – of Man, turning the, still opressed, feminine part of Humanity, in the counterpart with full rights and a full respect by her dignity, of the masculine part of Humanity.
In a more personal note, years ago, i thinked that feminism was something like “fanatical women, that hated men”, and was only my curiosity to know a more about feminism and its History, that changed my opinion.
And with that i wanted to leave a sugestion: always think that an anti-feminist is, most probably, someone ignorant about feminism, and try to inform him (or her) correctly of what is feminism, instead of starting by making fun of that anti-feminist, no matter how much tempting that is.
Of course, there are anti-feminists, that are, simply, obnouxious and despicable people.
@#20, gmacs
I was thinking Camille Paglia, myself.
@10: Nick Gotts
Thta gave me shivers, mostly for reminding me that although I’m reasonably sure Brocialists are more common (and that Brocialist is a better name), I, personally, have *FAR* more experience with the inverse. “Why re you talking about the rights of the worker when we’re talking about something that would screw workers over? There’s feminism to perpetrate!”
@#24, The Vicar:
I don’t remember ever having seen (even a photograph of) Paglia. But I was a colleague of Hoff Sommers for about 10 years (we were in different departments, but served on a committee together, sometimes attended the same university-wide faculty meetings, etc.), and that cartoon doesn’t look like much of a caricature of her (as she looked then, anyway). Also she hasn’t published nearly as many books as Paglia, has she? So I vote Paglia if that’s the choice.
I don’t recall her ever calling herself a feminist (though she may have); I do recall her once (at my first meeting of that committee) proclaiming “I’m conservative!”; she did manage to force her way into the Women’s Studies Program (much to the disgust of everyone else in it that I knew).
…32 men of straw.
32 people of the barest hyperbole.
Nick Gotts
The Brocialist, also known as “lie back and think of the revolution, baby!”
The deep convictiion that if only we get exploitation behind us everything else will just automatically follow.
@Giliell, 29
Wouldn’t it be awesome if that worked, though? Social Justice Dominoes!
Athywren
yeah, it would, but personally I’m convinced that it’S one of the major reasons why trying to do socialism failed the first time. They thought that just because there is no bigwig making the big bucks people would stop being misogynists, racists, etc.
Looking at the extreme conservatism currently running rampant in Eastern Europe it shows that failed big time.
Socialism works rather well when it’s implemented.
It’s Leninism which failed big time: but what else to expect from an ideology whose seminal manifesto can be summarized as “The rubes are a herd of morons who need a benevolent intellectual aristocracy to think in their stead“
@ anteprepro
The Amazing Twitterman, Comparison Shopper (Dear Muslima) and Subject Changer (What about the MENSZ1!1!) are also depressingly common varieties of anti-feminist shown on the left side of this cartoon.
leerudolph @ 26:
I have, and it doesn’t look anything at all like Camille “if rape is inevitable, lie back and enjoy it” Paglia. It does resemble Hoff Sommers, in all senses. Paglia mostly keeps busy spouting libertarian shit, calling rape culture hysterical propaganda (rape is intrinsic in man’s nature, ya know), and delighting Christians with her anti-transgender stance*.
CHS coined the term equity feminist**, and denies that she’s anti-feminist. She’s written three books so far, and seems to always be on the lookout to write another one.
*Paglia says:
**To distinguish herself from all those awful victim/gender feminists, who brazenly stole feminism. Yep.
How about the “Feminists aren’t really women” woman? Real world example: Canadian antifeminist group REAL Women. Capitalisation is theirs.
Chill girls are also conspicuously absent.
wayside
Please look up strawman. Hint: a caricature/exaggeration is NOT a strawman.
See, she’s sorta technically correct there. But that’s why folks now use the word “transgender” instead of “transsexual“. Yeah, biologically speaking, a trans-woman is male. But to crudely mix biology and sociology, we are not our genotypes, but rather our phenotypes.
@5: Which one is Thunderf00t?
In his brief stay at freethoughtblogs, he was mostly arguing, “If conventions have sexual harassment policies, then no one will be allowed to have any fun at all, not even consensual fun.” So 6/4: “Wee bit paranoid”.
I haven’t seen his latest videos but from what I’ve heard, he’s doing 1/1: “Molehill Grower”.
gmacs @ 38:
:Sigh:
Oh, fucke this, I’m out of here today.
gmacs-
What about people who are xxy? What about people born with ambiguous genitalia that are assigned specific genders at birth but are not genetically tested? What about people with complete androgen insensitivity that outwardly appear stereotypically female, and have been raised as such, and those of whom are comfortable as such and/or never doubted or disagreed with their assigned gender?
The biology is not cut and dry.
Oh, wow, I’m sure no one around here has heard that before.
Sorry, all. My point (very poorly made) was that biological sex is kind of meaningless in a sociological context. I don’t substantially agree with Paglia.
My sincerest apologies, Caine.
To give explanation of my thought behind it: you could technically say that an XY human cell was from a genetically male human. This only works for the majority of humans who are XX or XY (thank you for reminding me Rowan), and it is a specific definition of sex for organisms with chromasomally-determined sexes. So in a lineage-tailored and subsequently-simplified definition of dichotomous sex which excludes various individuals (ie a useless definition), Paglia would be correct. But not in any definition applicable to humans.
I hope I have cleared up confusion from my shitty shitty communication skills. And I am again sorry.
Azkyroth @ 42:
There was nothing at all wrong with Fernando’s reminder (Fernando @ 23, since you were too rude to address him), we should all keep that in mind. It’s up front with Fernando because he was ignorant about feminism, but that was quickly corrected, and I think it’s nice that he wants to help others to understand and correct their ignorance as well. Fernando is aware that there are asshole anti-feminists out there, he said as much, he just doesn’t want to lose those who don’t know any better. It wouldn’t have cost you anything to keep your fucking rudeness to yourself.
Gmacs @ 43:
Thank you, and no worries!
@#34, Caine
I’m not sure the graphics are meant to match the celebrities. But for what it’s worth, Camille Paglia has changed her hairstyle around a lot during her career, and the caricature that Salon.com used to use for her articles (for which she was paid long after Salon started kicking out other, better paid authors) looked somewhat like this image.
I stopped reading her articles when she said something along the lines of “the Republicans win elections because they run sexy men for office and women will naturally support them”. (That’s an exaggeration, but the gist was in that direction.)
I don’t have a witty title for this archetype, but it’s the kind of person who goes: “I’m never wrong, but a feminist criticized me, so feminism must be wrong.”
You know, the “allies” who, when accused of friendly fire, become worse.