Discussion History Characters / ArcanaHeart

Magnum: Which conveniently ignores that privilege first must be examined and then abolished for there to be none, because it exists; and that assumes that any culture can produce a class, whether racial or financial or gendered or sexual, that is completely without privilege. Saying \\\"as an equalist, supporting equal rights for everyone, I am simply blind to all forms of privilege\\\" is actually an extremely privileged statement.

I\\\'d like to argue that none of the other plotlines have ever intersected this much, either. People complain that the Patriarchy takes up too much time dedicated to other stories, but the Patriarchy plot is unifying a bunch of previously-independent characters. That may be a less than popular choice, but think about it: if Ishida believes that his comic is rooted in content that he now finds objectionable and wants his comic to start GrowingTheBeard to get away from its roots, wouldn\\\'t it make sense to create a (mostly) protagonistic force to combat them? After all, it\\\'s his comic, it\\\'s not \\\'\\\'supposed\\\'\\\' to be funny if he doesn\\\'t \\\'\\\'want\\\'\\\' it to be funny anymore.

For all the complaining people do about it, you can find patriarchal concepts behind a lot of the casts\\\' problems long before the Patriarchy plot and Trike Girl were ever introduced:

Slick is an unsuccessful ladies man, despite the fact that he can, when he\\\'s not trying to be a macho jerk, be genuinely nice. His idea of masculinity (however inept, because that\\\'s not \\\'\\\'him\\\'\\\') is purely manufactured by the patriarchy. Even his evil side, when offering it for what is pretty definitely cheap, equally manufactured sex, stomps on his own heart when it\\\'s deemed \\\"insufficient\\\" for what he wants. (I personally found that strip to be something of a TearJerker, which is not something I\\\'m prone to in internet reading)

Monique\\\'s primary motivation is getting men\\\'s attention, just to deny them sex, as she\\\'s trapped in the virgin/whore conflict (ie, she can advertise sex, but not have or want any herself: there may have been other instances but the one that comes to mind is the strip where she has sudden horny feelings and then dances them out, even though she can have just about any man she runs across. Or any girl, for that matter, if she dresses right.)

Squid uses macho bullshit to cover up his insecurity and dissatisfaction with himself (his life is basically a Carl Jr.\\\'s ad, only with pot instead of bikini babes eating burgers on cars). He\\\'s a glutton (because, well. Pig.), but it\\\'s also implied that he\\\'s sensitive and occasionally even downright heroic... which he won\\\'t acknowledged because he\\\'s the embodiment of dude-bro culture.

The Devil, who abandoned Lil\\\'E for being naturally sweet, only to lock everything he loved away in a sealed vault because he\\\'s obsessed with overthrowing his father? What part of that \\\'\\\'isn\\\'t\\\'\\\' patriarchy?

Even the Fuschia/Criminy storyline wouldn\\\'t exist without the overtly sexualized nature of the devil girls as arm candy for The Devil, or (if you\\\'re willing to take a slightly more cartoonish interpretation) the difficulty as Fuschia struggles with crossing the boundary back to \\\"virgin\\\" after she\\\'s already been a \\\"whore\\\". There wouldn\\\'t be a middle ground even if she wanted one; I\\\'ve actually been eagerly awaiting the day when we find out how she became a Devil Girl in the first place. It\\\'s one of the best love-as-redemption stories I\\\'ve ever enjoyed.

I could go on for pretty much the entire cast, but I\\\'d be here all night. More of all night.

I\\\'m actually really disappointed that there are people who look at this comic as being just funny and are just screeching hate because Tats had the nerve to try his hand at something more serious. Maybe it\\\'s because I\\\'ve been reading things with a stronger mind for feminist critique the past few years, or maybe because I\\\'m an artist and would love to have what it takes to make a webcomic like this, but I\\\'ve fallen in love with Sinfest all over again because of this. I know I won\\\'t convince anyone to like something that they feel has disappointed them, but I can\\\'t stand to see people hating on something so enduring and so thoughtful, that has evolved so well artistically, and has more than stood the test of time, only to cite reasons that make so little sense as \\\"Trike Girl gave Charlie Brown a piece of paper, therefore, she hates men, and Ishida\\\'s only doing it for some skirt.\\\" Especially when they do it on TVTropes!

--

Nerdking: Well, they don\\\'t really do anything \\\'\\\'wrong\\\'\\\', do they? I can\\\'t think of anything they\\\'ve done that\\\'s actually harmful to anyone. The arguments that Slick and Squig (who are both long-running chauvinist pigs except when they have their bouts of real feelings and virtue) make against feminism in general are \\\'\\\'extremely common real-world criticisms of feminism\\\'\\\'. The later strips that show them \\\"dressing sexy for themselves\\\" or, more recently, Squig\\\'s \\\"third wave feminism\\\", are basically to illustrate that they\\\'re using feminist rhetoric to justify their own chauvinist attitudes. Again, that\\\'s something that happens in the real world all the time.

The Sisterhood absolutely \\\'\\\'is\\\'\\\' too extreme for real life, I agree, it\\\'s just that their core concept of patriarchy has a lot of basis in real life. I think that\\\'s part of what a lot of people hate about it: it\\\'s just too damn real to be funny.

I did think of the no-cookies-for-Legion thing when I was writing this up and I did think of one particular reason why that didn\\\'t necessarily have to be a gender thing (although it probably was, at the time): Legion isn\\\'t being harmed by his working at the sex club. He\\\'s not a dancer, nor is he being exploited sexually. (I admit I\\\'m running with the assumption that Legion is a hive mind of like, a hojillion demons and we just only ever see the one of him, but I realize that doesn\\\'t have a huge amount of basis other than his name). One could make the argument that his job as a bouncer is as gender-typed as the devil-girl dancers, but it doesn\\\'t harm him or make him vulnerable. He\\\'s a protector and a powerful, masculine presence with a measure of authority and agency: he doesn\\\'t \\\'\\\'need\\\'\\\' Trike Girl\\\'s sympathy or encouragement, he just wants a free snack.

I really can\\\'t agree that the Sisterhood is as extreme as Seymour, mainly because so far, they have never resorted to violence. They\\\'re shadowrunners and hackers, they freak the mundanes because that\\\'s what they do: they have never been openly threatened in a way that came to serious conflict, they have never denied anyone who wanted their help and they\\\'ve never condemned anyone for trying to change (although they do have finely-tuned bullshit-o-meters). They leave their books, they plant their flags, they build their playgrounds but they never attack anyone (minus slapping Legion\\\'s hand that one time), at least not that I can recall. To call them \\\'\\\'worse than Seymour\\\'\\\' in \\\"Bad Behavior\\\" is fundamentally untrue, I cannot disagree more strongly than that assessment.

I agree that Ishida\\\'s view of feminism is perhaps divisive in more than a few ways and he\\\'s being more than a bit hamfisted about it, but he also hasn\\\'t written sex-positive feminism from the point of view of sex-positive feminists: he\\\'s written about chauvinist jerks \\\'\\\'declaring themselves\\\'\\\' sex-positive feminists because they\\\'re.. basically chauvinist jerks who are being pretty transparent that they have entirely selfish motivations (which they\\\'ve consistently had through the \\\'\\\'entire run of the comic!\\\'\\\'). Squig and Slick don\\\'t want the benefit of a safe, joyous, healthy sexual culture for everyone, but because \\\'\\\' they want sex for themselves\\\'\\\'. Notice that Squig doesn\\\'t object to being called misogynist, probably because he has no idea what that word even means. (Personally I thought that strip was funny as hell, because I know guys that talk like that in real life.)

I\\\'m not saying it\\\'s a perfect arc or that Glossy isn\\\'t radical, because she is, and a lack of a legitimate foil or reasonable argument (Glossy hardly ever even \\\'\\\'talks\\\'\\\') doesn\\\'t fit very well with what is otherwise very gray morality.

But I am saying that the \\\'\\\'vast majority\\\'\\\' of the hate for the new, beardy Sinfest is laid at her feet unfairly. Whether you believe that it\\\'s become a feminist Author Tract or just isn\\\'t funny, that doesn\\\'t make it okay to \\\'\\\'lie to visitors to this site\\\'\\\' about what actually does or doesn\\\'t happen in the comic, or to cast aspersions on the author for writing it in the first place.

(minor edits for phrasing)

Magnum: Which conveniently ignores that privilege first must be examined and then abolished for there to be none, because it exists; and that assumes that any culture can produce a class, whether racial or financial or gendered or sexual, that is completely without privilege. Saying \\\"as an equalist, supporting equal rights for everyone, I am simply blind to all forms of privilege\\\" is actually an extremely privileged statement.

I\\\'d like to argue that none of the other plotlines have ever intersected this much, either. People complain that the Patriarchy takes up too much time dedicated to other stories, but the Patriarchy plot is unifying a bunch of previously-independent characters. That may be a less than popular choice, but think about it: if Ishida believes that his comic is rooted in content that he now finds objectionable and wants his comic to start GrowingTheBeard to get away from its roots, wouldn\\\'t it make sense to create a (mostly) protagonistic force to combat them? After all, it\\\'s his comic, it\\\'s not \\\'\\\'supposed\\\'\\\' to be funny if he doesn\\\'t \\\'\\\'want\\\'\\\' it to be funny anymore.

For all the complaining people do about it, you can find patriarchal concepts behind a lot of the casts\\\' problems long before the Patriarchy plot and Trike Girl were ever introduced:

Slick is an unsuccessful ladies man, despite the fact that he can, when he\\\'s not trying to be a macho jerk, be genuinely nice. His idea of masculinity (however inept, because that\\\'s not \\\'\\\'him\\\'\\\') is purely manufactured by the patriarchy. Even his evil side, when offering it for what is pretty definitely cheap, equally manufactured sex, stomps on his own heart when it\\\'s deemed \\\"insufficient\\\" for what he wants. (I personally found that strip to be something of a TearJerker, which is not something I\\\'m prone to in internet reading)

Monique\\\'s primary motivation is getting men\\\'s attention, just to deny them sex, as she\\\'s trapped in the virgin/whore conflict (ie, she can advertise sex, but not have or want any herself: there may have been other instances but the one that comes to mind is the strip where she has sudden horny feelings and then dances them out, even though she can have just about any man she runs across. Or any girl, for that matter, if she dresses right.)

Squid uses macho bullshit to cover up his insecurity and dissatisfaction with himself (his life is basically a Carl Jr.\\\'s ad, only with pot instead of bikini babes eating burgers on cars). He\\\'s a glutton (because, well. Pig.), but it\\\'s also implied that he\\\'s sensitive and occasionally even downright heroic... which he won\\\'t acknowledged because he\\\'s the embodiment of dude-bro culture.

The Devil, who abandoned Lil\\\'E for being naturally sweet, only to lock everything he loved away in a sealed vault because he\\\'s obsessed with overthrowing his father? What part of that \\\'\\\'isn\\\'t\\\'\\\' patriarchy?

Even the Fuschia/Criminy storyline wouldn\\\'t exist without the overtly sexualized nature of the devil girls as arm candy for The Devil, or (if you\\\'re willing to take a slightly more cartoonish interpretation) the difficulty as Fuschia struggles with crossing the boundary back to \\\"virgin\\\" after she\\\'s already been a \\\"whore\\\". There wouldn\\\'t be a middle ground even if she wanted one; I\\\'ve actually been eagerly awaiting the day when we find out how she became a Devil Girl in the first place. It\\\'s one of the best love-as-redemption stories I\\\'ve ever enjoyed.

I could go on for pretty much the entire cast, but I\\\'d be here all night. More of all night.

I\\\'m actually really disappointed that there are people who look at this comic as being just funny and are just screeching hate because Tats had the nerve to try his hand at something more serious. Maybe it\\\'s because I\\\'ve been reading things with a stronger mind for feminist critique the past few years, or maybe because I\\\'m an artist and would love to have what it takes to make a webcomic like this, but I\\\'ve fallen in love with Sinfest all over again because of this. I know I won\\\'t convince anyone to like something that they feel has disappointed them, but I can\\\'t stand to see people hating on something so enduring and so thoughtful, that has evolved so well artistically, and has more than stood the test of time, only to cite reasons that make so little sense as \\\"Trike Girl gave Charlie Brown a piece of paper, therefore, she hates men, and Ishida\\\'s only doing it for some skirt.\\\" Especially when they do it on TVTropes!

--

Nerdking: Well, they don\\\'t really do anything \\\'\\\'wrong\\\'\\\', do they? I can\\\'t think of anything they\\\'ve done that\\\'s actually harmful to anyone. The arguments that Slick and Squig (who are both long-running chauvinist pigs except when they have their bouts of real feelings and virtue) make against feminism in general are \\\'\\\'extremely common real-world criticisms of feminism\\\'\\\'. The later strips that show them \\\"dressing sexy for themselves\\\" or, more recently, Squig\\\'s \\\"third wave feminism\\\", are basically to illustrate that they\\\'re using feminist rhetoric to justify their own chauvinist attitudes. Again, that\\\'s something that happens in the real world all the time.

The Sisterhood absolutely \\\'\\\'is\\\'\\\' too extreme for real life, I agree, it\\\'s just that their core concept of patriarchy has a lot of basis in real life. I think that\\\'s part of what a lot of people hate about it: it\\\'s just too damn real to be funny.

I did think of the no-cookies-for-Legion thing when I was writing this up and I did think of one particular reason why that didn\\\'t necessarily have to be a gender thing (although it probably was, at the time): Legion isn\\\'t being harmed by his working at the sex club. He\\\'s not a dancer, nor is he being exploited sexually. (I admit I\\\'m running with the assumption that Legion is a hive mind of like, a hojillion demons and we just only ever see the one of him, but I realize that doesn\\\'t have a huge amount of basis other than his name). One could make the argument that his job as a bouncer is as gender-typed as the devil-girl dancers, but it doesn\\\'t harm him or make him vulnerable. He\\\'s a protector and a powerful, masculine presence with a measure of authority and agency: he doesn\\\'t \\\'\\\'need\\\'\\\' Trike Girl\\\'s sympathy or encouragement, he just wants a free snack.

I really can\\\'t agree that the Sisterhood is as extreme as Seymour, mainly because so far, they have never resorted to violence. They\\\'re shadowrunners and hackers, they freak the mundanes because that\\\'s what they do: they have never been openly threatened in a way that came to serious conflict, they have never denied anyone who wanted their help and they\\\'ve never condemned anyone for trying to change (although they do have finely-tuned bullshit-o-meters). They leave their books, they plant their flags, they build their playgrounds but they never attack anyone (minus slapping Legion\\\'s hand that one time), at least not that I can recall. To call them \\\'\\\'worse than Seymour\\\'\\\' in \\\"Bad Behavior\\\" is fundamentally untrue, I cannot disagree more strongly than that assessment.

I agree that Ishida\\\'s view of feminism is perhaps divisive in more than a few ways and he\\\'s being more than a bit hamfisted about it, but he also hasn\\\'t written sex-positive feminism from the point of view of sex-positive feminists: he\\\'s written about chauvinist jerks \\\'\\\'declaring themselves\\\'\\\' sex-positive feminists because they\\\'re.. basically chauvinist jerks who are being pretty transparent that they have entirely selfish motivations (which they\\\'ve consistently had through the \\\'\\\'entire run of the comic!\\\'\\\'). Squig and Slick don\\\'t want the benefit of a safe, joyous, healthy sexual culture for everyone, but because \\\'\\\' they think it will get them chicks\\\'\\\'. (Personally I thought that strip was funny as hell, because I know guys that talk like that in real life.)

I\\\'m not saying it\\\'s a perfect arc or that Glossy isn\\\'t radical, because she is, and a lack of a legitimate foil or reasonable argument (Glossy hardly ever even \\\'\\\'talks\\\'\\\') doesn\\\'t fit very well with what is otherwise very gray morality.

But I am saying that the \\\'\\\'vast majority\\\'\\\' of the hate for the new, beardy Sinfest is laid at her feet unfairly. Whether you believe that it\\\'s become a feminist Author Tract or just isn\\\'t funny, that doesn\\\'t make it okay to \\\'\\\'lie to visitors to this site\\\'\\\' about what actually does or doesn\\\'t happen in the comic, or to cast aspersions on the author for writing it in the first place.