Guest post: The power relationship isn’t what you think it is
Originally a comment by Your Name’s not Bruce? on As they wish to be addressed.
A matter of politeness, then, even if that requires one to indulge a certain fiction. Yet I also accept that it is easier for me — a man —to take this view, or grant this indulgence, since doing so comes at no cost to me whatsoever.
I would argue that there is a cost to anyone and everyone indulging in this fiction. It is a surrender to someone else’s rude, unreasonable, reality-denying demand. The power relationship isn’t what you think it is. You’re not deigning to play along, you’re following orders. That’s certainly how those making the demand see it. You might think it’s condescension, but it’s actually submission. Your compliance and submission with pronouns emboldens these men to demand more and more.* Your initial cooperation makes it harder for you to say “No” when the demands become even more unreasonable and obtrusive, particularly when those paying the price are people other than you. Just ask Sandie Peggie how that escalation plays out. I’ll bet it all started with Upton getting a rainbow lanyard with Her/She beside his name. Was that too much to ask? Turns out it was. But you don’t think so. You think it’s “reasonable.” Think again.
Your being a “good ally” to the man whose “certain fiction” you are indulging ends in real harm to women. Ask yourself why “[n]o one is seeking access to spaces previously reserved for men and reserved such for good reason.” If you can see the danger to women as being “at no cost to me whatsoever” I feel sorry for all of the women in your life, because they deserve -and need- better than you.
*There’s an on line, two-panel editorial cartoon I can never re-find when I need it. Panel one shows a woman agreeing to use a TiM’s preferred pronouns because it seems to be such a small thing to ask. Panel two shows the woman being bowled over by the torrent of additional demands the TiM imposes on her.
Yes, I know the cartoon you’re referring to.
It’s a really good point, that the two people in the interaction perceive it in completely different ways. It’s now pretty well known that an abusive man will ‘test’ a potential victim with small inconveniences – texting just before the time agreed to meet on a first date saying he’s going to be late, asking to move tables because the one they’re sitting at is too loud or has a draft, etc. Any normal person would have zero problem with this – I certainly wouldn’t; anyone can be a little late, and I’ve had my own share of wanting to move away from the door or the music. To me these are perfectly reasonable accommodations and I’m always happy to do them. But to the abuser these are both tests to see how compliant his victim is, and ways to inculcate into his victim a willingness to do as he says. And I personally don’t know how to think about this.
I know the cartoon you mean. GC artist with a Japanese name. Has a big following on Twitter. Dammit, I forget her name. (I presume it’s a her?)
I am reminded again of that excellent 2019 essay by Barbara Kerr, Pronouns are Rohypnol.
@2 the guy (I understand it’s a ‘he’) you’re thinking of is Tatsuda Ishiya, and his strip is Sinfest. I think the OP’s cartoon is different – it’s just a simple two-panel cartoon, with a small woman and a large TIM, drawn abstractly – the first panel shows the TIM asking for ‘she’ and the woman consents; the second panel shows the TIM leaning over and basically spitting out dozens of slips of paper, each with an additional demand on it. I might be able to find it.
It is Tatsuda Ishida, and I have a copy saved.
Here’s the second panel…
https://janeclarejones.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/be-kind.jpeg?w=940
Ah, yes, the slips of paper gushing out of the mouth. I’ve seen that one, too! That is indeed a different comic. If I recall (hopefuly correctly this time) it’s black and white, not vivid colour, as is Ishida’s style. You are correct! My brain was confusing different things, as it often does.
(Just fifteen minutes ago I was absolutely CERTAIN that ELO was responsible for the cheesy ’70s disco-rock-orchestral song “Love Is Like Oxygen,” and I swear I even saw it on one of their album sleeves. But Spotify insists I have entirely misremembered it, and Wikipedia concurs: the song was actually by The Sweet, of “Ballroom Blitz” fame. I’m still struggling to re-calibrate my brain after that memory lapse.)
Artymorty, I know how you feel. I was giving Bob Dylan credit for a song written by Pete Seeger (Turn Turn Turn). In my defense, the Byrds have done songs by Dylan, so it might be a natural mistake (or I may just be justifying).
Pretty sure Tatsuda has gone batshit in the interim as so many in the anti-woke space seems to (though his journey may be unique having passed through being male 2nd waver as part of it).
@iknklast
Oh, wow, I had no idea Turn Turn Turn was written by Pete Seeger! I just knew it as a Byrds song and that it’s become something of a nostagic anthem of the hippie movement. But I could see it plausibly having been a Dylan song, too. It’s a tricky one, that song. I say it’s natural to be confused by it. Entirely understandable.
Re: Turn Turn Turn
Words from probably the least theistic book of the Bible
A while ago I looked for various versions of the song. I particularly liked the version done by a group called “The Seekers”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VRg9NkIdjVs