I mean, ‘That which was to be shown’ is really a longer and more complex way of saying ‘Like I said three pages of equations ago’, so that’s barely even lies-to-children
AbacusWizard
“As per my previous email, the angles at the base equal one another.”
It’s great to see everyone getting a costume upgrade. I need more comic costumed hijinks with all this (gestures) going on in the world. Let the hero save the day and also get laid.
AG’s costume was more or less done. Dorothy just decided to change it without asking first. We have yet to see if Dorothy’s “finishing it correctly” is going to be welcomed/unwelcomed or helpful/neutral/harmful.
No, he thinks he’s a hero. He 100% believes that he is a hero. This is how narcissists operate. They legitimately think that bullying you into conforming is a moral victory.
By contrast, a lot of people happily think of themselves as the villain online.
They don’t see being the bad guy as anything bad.
PedanticJerkass
Even those people don’t see themselves as “the bad guy,” even if they’re straight up intentionally trolling or literally harassing someone (or issuing death threats or doxxing or SWATting or whatever). And if you call them out on it, they’ll claim “I was just joking bruh. Lighten up. Welcome to the Internet. Get a thicker skin. Etc. Etc.” They’ll go to their graves still thinking they were in the right, no matter how heinous they may be behaving.
Taffy
Get a thicker skin, the SWAT team with grenade launchers and machine guns are just an opinion.
Charles Phipps
Eh, I think this fails to account for the fact a large chunk of narcissists don’t actually CARE about morality. So being the bad guy or the good guy doesn’t matter to them.
eh, whatever
Or they have blue-and-orange morality: they = good, obstacle to them = evil. Trump very, very obviously works like that.
personality I would refrain from ascribing bigots personality disorders until proven otherwise. One doesn’t need to be a narcissist, or a schizophrenic or have borderline personality disorder to think women are sub-human. Sadly that thought can be achieved just by being a shitty person!
Ascribing mental illness to bigotry does more harm to mentally ill people than anything.
PedanticJerkass
If only there was a legitimate medical cure/preventative for “being a shitty person.”
There is a treatment, and Amazi-Girl is about to apply it
Rolf of Many Doors
Corporal punishment consistently fails to work as a treatment for being a shitty person – in fact, it often exacerbates the problem. It is, however, successful as a deterrent for acting on one’s being a shitty person.
Cybersnark
Not corporal punishment per se, but education is generally a deterrent, and “talk shit, get hit” can be a valuable lesson for those who won’t learn the easy way.
thejeff
It only works when consistently applied and when it’s applied only to the shitty.
In reality “talk shit, get hit” leads to those most willing to use violence setting the standard for what “talk shit” means.
HueSatLight
weird thing to say in a comment section that routinely absolves a character of murdering a potential snitch because the potential snitch was incidentally abusive.
jflb96
When and how did Amazi-Girl get a Tokarev?
Mark
Where?
jflb96
Presumably somewhere between Leningrad and Vladivostok
Most sadly, at least 99% of shitty people stay that way for decades. Or for their entire lifetimes. You can’t cure or help them. You can only take away their power to enshittify.
ian livs
As someone with a PD, thank you so much for this. I’m sick as hell of seeing bigotry even in the most leftist of spaces, just because it’s the Scary Mental Illness du jour. Pop psychology has kept so many people from being able to access help, because you literally can’t google your own disorder without being reminded that 99% of the internet hates us and wants us eradicated. Idk why it doesn’t compute with these people that “there’s a disorder that means someone is Inherently Evil” is just ableism.
deliverything
Just to add: due to my own mental disorder(s), I seem to lack the empathy for suffering that so many people seem to have instinctively… but I also don’t have any desire to cause harm. Besides, it’s better strategy to make friends than make enemies.
Maybe, if I were a Rich White Guy™, I’d be in a position to better make use of my emotional shortcomings, and might have been raised to value mindless greed over consequences? If so, I’d be fine with that hypothetical alternative me getting the same treatment as that recent United Healthcare CEO. A better world would benefit us all, even those who don’t care about others.
ian livs
Empathy =/= actions. I know a lot of people who feel strong empathy for others but have done horrible things to them regardless (and that’s not even starting on all the self-labeled Empaths who treat people with personality disorders like shit). And I know a lot of very kind people who treat others well, yet don’t experience true empathy–and that’s okay! You can know it’s right to treat people in a certain way without experiencing empathy for them.
Incel ideology can make recruits like this dude out of the most ordinary seeming of people.
If they’re not the kind resorting to physical attacks they’re hacking email accounts
either way the key is to understand “evil” as less down to personal flaws or immutable-seeming human natures, but to the pervasive influence of long-standing social institutions
this guy thinks the only way he’s ever going to get a girl is if a system of coercive power entitles and guarantees him one.
But WHY does every guy need a girl anyway? does that necessarily guarantee an end to loneliness? or to feeling more complete in life? or is necessarily the most affective way of getting what a different sex partner is SUPPOSED to entail?
or is it because our society is one which has always favored straight couples who own houses and build equity and all that, via tax policy and otherwise? and does it necessarily HAVE to be that way for society’s benefit?
in the pre-Civil War South, slaves were a luxury and their society’s primary mode of production, so of course, romanticized traditions and customs and religion and social order revolved around that to make it seem like a natural, universal social order
resentful poor white men were raised to respect slave owners and to aspire one day to owning slaves themselves in very much the same way men today aspire to hetero marriages, for the sake of all the benefits that would be bestowed upon them in their society’s pre-designated Path To Happiness.
traditions that were “just always there and always worked” made them oblivious to the fact that the institution of slavery was there to keep the rich rich and the poor poor
likewise Incelerator commits to this ideology because, alongside thousands of others recruited into this ideology, he’s *convinced* it’s a given that getting a woman partner is the only effective path to happiness and fulfillment in life because of being entrenched in the traditions, culture, customs and language of a religious red state, which feed into the pervasive impression that hetero-marriage-centric patriarchy is some natural, universal order, and that having to submit to this order is a necessity to get anywhere and a fact of life.
thejeff
I think wanting a romantic and sexual partner goes far deeper than being entrenched in the traditions, culture, customs and language of a religious red state. Some level of pair bonding goes way the hell back in our evolutionary history. It can even be traces in our relative lack of sexual dimorphism compared to our closest primate relatives.
But largely, you’re still right. It’s just even deeper than “favored straight couples who own houses and build equity and all that”. We’ve got at least millennia of people who fucked and overwhelmingly paired off to successfully raise the offspring in our ancestry.
Until very, very recently (and long before modern notions of tax breaks and equity) and before the nuclear family really was a thing, much of the world was sufficiently patriarchal that making on your own as a woman really wasn’t an option for the vast majority. That gave even the less desirable men a leg up on finding a partner.
That’s changed and it’s definitely a change for the better, but it’s one we’re still figuring out how to live with.
Pair bonding, yes. Patriarchy and mono-romantic obligations there-of? Not so much.
Spider monkeys, bonobos, lemurs and many other species of primate are matriarchal.
Not to mention a majority of primate societies are that in which sex has a role that has just about nothing to do with lifelong partnership entailed by the human institution of marriage. For instance chimpanzees and other great apes give each other hand jobs regardless of sex for the sake of altruistic group cohesion.
Same was also true of human societies for a majority of history, besides polyamory being commonplace, sex and romantic love didnt really have anything to do with each other. You could love someone without having extra ordinary sex, and you could have extraordinary sex with someone who aint necessarily your life partner. Only fairly recently did romantic schools of thought compel humans to reserve sex as the ultimate expression of romantic admiration for their life partners.
Truth be told, very little of human life is natural. Hell, Homo sapiens as a species survived and continue to exist largely in defiance of nature. Every tradtition and it’s pervasive consequence, every form of oppression is a thing that wasn’t always there, but was something humans created.
Long standing patriarchal mono-romantic traditions and their oppressive consequences are by no means natural or a given in life. They are human-made problems, and they have human-made solutions.
thejeff
In a sense. Romance and marriage weren’t tied until relatively recently, but marriage itself goes far back in history – not prehistory necessarily.
And it was very much about men controlling access to “their” women, even if men were still socially allowed to seek sex elsewhere.
That’s not completely universal of course, but it’s also not some weird modern aberration.
I don’t think that he’s necessarily an actual clinical narcissist tbh. “Some people think that bullying you into conforming is a moral victory,” though, is spot on.
ian livs
Sadly, 99% of people even in leftist spaces don’t care about the fact that it’s inaccurate/ableist to label every bad person(/person they don’t like) a narcissist
I think it’s more of a “you’re either with me or you’re my enemy” type of thing.
… I hadn’t encountered the phrase “gender traitor” before today, I’m guessing because I avoid this… erm, subculture. But I’m not the least bit surprised by it. Feels like a similar concept to “race traitor”.
It’s been thrown around for decades on the lunatic fringe of feminism. Incels believe that by adopting this term they’re pwning teh libtards super hard.
thejeff
It’s always funny how bigots adopt terms that were clear markers of bigotry.
The GCs/TERFs have come so close a couple times to taking up “sex realist”.
Pretty sure he thinks he’s a villain. He teamed up with a self-proclaimed supervillain last time (that is, Amber’s dad) and at no point here did he identify as a hero. On the contrary, he gave a villain speech — “Females who have too many skills, I’m calling you out, for today, you face the INCELLERATOR”. That’s a villain speech, not a hero speech, because if sexism is wrong, dude doesn’t want to be right.
He believes sexism is right, though. Sure he can see he behaves like a villain – but he believes the ends justify the means. He’s pretty much saying out loud in the strip that the only way to get people to listen to the truth is violence, and that violence is therefore justified.
eh, whatever
…both justified and necessary.
Mark
Nobody is evil in his own eyes. If one sets aside the notion of an absolute moral authority then “good” and “evil” are labels given by consensus — and consensus depends on whom you are polling.
344 thoughts on “Gender traitor”
Ana Chronistic
Q.E.D.
(quickly ‘e dies)
Decidedly Orthogonal
Kick his ass
c-bassAmazigirl!AbacusWizard
I usually tell my students that QED is Latin for “see I told you so.”
jflb96
I mean, ‘That which was to be shown’ is really a longer and more complex way of saying ‘Like I said three pages of equations ago’, so that’s barely even lies-to-children
AbacusWizard
“As per my previous email, the angles at the base equal one another.”
Mr D
Q.E.P.D.
cain
quickly “e phuckin’ dies
Deanatay
Incelerator: Not so quippy now, eh, NightGuy? Nothing to say?
NightGuy: …sdrtinyoyadyt…
I: *leans in* What was that?
N: I said, I was distracting you, ya idiot!
darkoneko
aaand here she comes
Charles Phipps
BUT can she trust Nightguy?
Has he fallen victim to Incelerator’s Purple Man-esque powers?
Decidedly Orthogonal
to save the day! ?
Rose by Any other Name
hashtag Igotthatreference.jpeg
But yeah, I can’t read that line without mentally singing the rest too.
Opus the Poet
Don’t feel like the
Stanistani
Andy Kaufman vibes strong.
jeffepp
With truth and justice on the way!
ktbear
I know thats what we’re led to expect but I’m not sure it’s going to be that simple.
stePH
Do you think Mighty Mouse could beat up Superman?
Opus the Poet
Lone Ranger. Stupid phone keyboard. But yes I watched Mighty Mouse back in the ’60s.
Casi
Here comes speed racer, she’s a demon on wheels
Charles Phipps
Oh no! Amazi-Girl is attacking a white dude in broad daylight! This could lead to Sal being expelled!
Michael Steamweed
No, no, it’s okay. Sal-with-mask is a white girl. See? No expulsion.
NGPZ
that was a sucker punch and you know it! D:<
time to get your ass kicked by a real one!
*plays “Too Good Too Bad” by the seatbelts on hacked muzak*
Sirksome
There really has been some kind of costume sale….is what I want to say, but maybe Dorothy should start a side hustle.
Vanessa
It’s great to see everyone getting a costume upgrade. I need more comic costumed hijinks with all this (gestures) going on in the world. Let the hero save the day and also get laid.
HueSatLight
AG’s costume was more or less done. Dorothy just decided to change it without asking first. We have yet to see if Dorothy’s “finishing it correctly” is going to be welcomed/unwelcomed or helpful/neutral/harmful.
Rowen Morland
It’ll cause the top to pop open, flashing only Joyce and no one else.
BBCC
Ahhhhh, yes! I hope this guy is ready for his 5th ass kicking by AG.
Thag Simmons
I hope she gets him good enough that he doesn’t come back.
Decidedly Orthogonal
If he was smart enough to count, he may not be dumb enough to believe his rhetoric.
Aww who am I kidding? Jordan Peterson was (past tense) smart enough to get a PhD. Yet here we are.
tim gueguen
He’s moved to Arizona because Canada is supposedly a dictatorship. And because his equally kookie daughter lives down there.
Adam Black
i thought Florida.
But he’s such a drama Queen ! : It probably was just because hes a sunbird; hes old and Canada is cold.
This is a guy who cant blow his own Nose, without first pretending kleenex are a tool of the Soviet Left.
Taffy
Nobody tell him the Soviet Union collapsed the same year Sonic the Hedgehog came out.
staszu13
Oh fuck. If he thinks THAT is a dictatorship, wait about a month. ?
thejeff
He won’t have any problems with that. Trump won’t try to keep him from being mean to trans people.
Nono
Does he still think that he’s a hero when he’s punching people unprovoked, or is he the ‘ends justify the means, CLEANSE AND PURGE THE UNBELIEVERS’?
Bryy
No, he thinks he’s a hero. He 100% believes that he is a hero. This is how narcissists operate. They legitimately think that bullying you into conforming is a moral victory.
Charles Phipps
By contrast, a lot of people happily think of themselves as the villain online.
They don’t see being the bad guy as anything bad.
PedanticJerkass
Even those people don’t see themselves as “the bad guy,” even if they’re straight up intentionally trolling or literally harassing someone (or issuing death threats or doxxing or SWATting or whatever). And if you call them out on it, they’ll claim “I was just joking bruh. Lighten up. Welcome to the Internet. Get a thicker skin. Etc. Etc.” They’ll go to their graves still thinking they were in the right, no matter how heinous they may be behaving.
Taffy
Get a thicker skin, the SWAT team with grenade launchers and machine guns are just an opinion.
Charles Phipps
Eh, I think this fails to account for the fact a large chunk of narcissists don’t actually CARE about morality. So being the bad guy or the good guy doesn’t matter to them.
eh, whatever
Or they have blue-and-orange morality: they = good, obstacle to them = evil. Trump very, very obviously works like that.
Derek
personality I would refrain from ascribing bigots personality disorders until proven otherwise. One doesn’t need to be a narcissist, or a schizophrenic or have borderline personality disorder to think women are sub-human. Sadly that thought can be achieved just by being a shitty person!
Ascribing mental illness to bigotry does more harm to mentally ill people than anything.
PedanticJerkass
If only there was a legitimate medical cure/preventative for “being a shitty person.”
Ray Radlein
There is a treatment, and Amazi-Girl is about to apply it
Rolf of Many Doors
Corporal punishment consistently fails to work as a treatment for being a shitty person – in fact, it often exacerbates the problem. It is, however, successful as a deterrent for acting on one’s being a shitty person.
Cybersnark
Not corporal punishment per se, but education is generally a deterrent, and “talk shit, get hit” can be a valuable lesson for those who won’t learn the easy way.
thejeff
It only works when consistently applied and when it’s applied only to the shitty.
In reality “talk shit, get hit” leads to those most willing to use violence setting the standard for what “talk shit” means.
HueSatLight
weird thing to say in a comment section that routinely absolves a character of murdering a potential snitch because the potential snitch was incidentally abusive.
jflb96
When and how did Amazi-Girl get a Tokarev?
Mark
Where?
jflb96
Presumably somewhere between Leningrad and Vladivostok
Opus the Poet
+1!
Michael Steamweed
Most sadly, at least 99% of shitty people stay that way for decades. Or for their entire lifetimes. You can’t cure or help them. You can only take away their power to enshittify.
ian livs
As someone with a PD, thank you so much for this. I’m sick as hell of seeing bigotry even in the most leftist of spaces, just because it’s the Scary Mental Illness du jour. Pop psychology has kept so many people from being able to access help, because you literally can’t google your own disorder without being reminded that 99% of the internet hates us and wants us eradicated. Idk why it doesn’t compute with these people that “there’s a disorder that means someone is Inherently Evil” is just ableism.
deliverything
Just to add: due to my own mental disorder(s), I seem to lack the empathy for suffering that so many people seem to have instinctively… but I also don’t have any desire to cause harm. Besides, it’s better strategy to make friends than make enemies.
Maybe, if I were a Rich White Guy™, I’d be in a position to better make use of my emotional shortcomings, and might have been raised to value mindless greed over consequences? If so, I’d be fine with that hypothetical alternative me getting the same treatment as that recent United Healthcare CEO. A better world would benefit us all, even those who don’t care about others.
ian livs
Empathy =/= actions. I know a lot of people who feel strong empathy for others but have done horrible things to them regardless (and that’s not even starting on all the self-labeled Empaths who treat people with personality disorders like shit). And I know a lot of very kind people who treat others well, yet don’t experience true empathy–and that’s okay! You can know it’s right to treat people in a certain way without experiencing empathy for them.
NGPZ
this
Incel ideology can make recruits like this dude out of the most ordinary seeming of people.
If they’re not the kind resorting to physical attacks they’re hacking email accounts
either way the key is to understand “evil” as less down to personal flaws or immutable-seeming human natures, but to the pervasive influence of long-standing social institutions
this guy thinks the only way he’s ever going to get a girl is if a system of coercive power entitles and guarantees him one.
But WHY does every guy need a girl anyway? does that necessarily guarantee an end to loneliness? or to feeling more complete in life? or is necessarily the most affective way of getting what a different sex partner is SUPPOSED to entail?
or is it because our society is one which has always favored straight couples who own houses and build equity and all that, via tax policy and otherwise? and does it necessarily HAVE to be that way for society’s benefit?
in the pre-Civil War South, slaves were a luxury and their society’s primary mode of production, so of course, romanticized traditions and customs and religion and social order revolved around that to make it seem like a natural, universal social order
resentful poor white men were raised to respect slave owners and to aspire one day to owning slaves themselves in very much the same way men today aspire to hetero marriages, for the sake of all the benefits that would be bestowed upon them in their society’s pre-designated Path To Happiness.
traditions that were “just always there and always worked” made them oblivious to the fact that the institution of slavery was there to keep the rich rich and the poor poor
likewise Incelerator commits to this ideology because, alongside thousands of others recruited into this ideology, he’s *convinced* it’s a given that getting a woman partner is the only effective path to happiness and fulfillment in life because of being entrenched in the traditions, culture, customs and language of a religious red state, which feed into the pervasive impression that hetero-marriage-centric patriarchy is some natural, universal order, and that having to submit to this order is a necessity to get anywhere and a fact of life.
thejeff
I think wanting a romantic and sexual partner goes far deeper than being entrenched in the traditions, culture, customs and language of a religious red state. Some level of pair bonding goes way the hell back in our evolutionary history. It can even be traces in our relative lack of sexual dimorphism compared to our closest primate relatives.
But largely, you’re still right. It’s just even deeper than “favored straight couples who own houses and build equity and all that”. We’ve got at least millennia of people who fucked and overwhelmingly paired off to successfully raise the offspring in our ancestry.
Until very, very recently (and long before modern notions of tax breaks and equity) and before the nuclear family really was a thing, much of the world was sufficiently patriarchal that making on your own as a woman really wasn’t an option for the vast majority. That gave even the less desirable men a leg up on finding a partner.
That’s changed and it’s definitely a change for the better, but it’s one we’re still figuring out how to live with.
NGPZ
Re: evolutionary history
Pair bonding, yes. Patriarchy and mono-romantic obligations there-of? Not so much.
Spider monkeys, bonobos, lemurs and many other species of primate are matriarchal.
Not to mention a majority of primate societies are that in which sex has a role that has just about nothing to do with lifelong partnership entailed by the human institution of marriage. For instance chimpanzees and other great apes give each other hand jobs regardless of sex for the sake of altruistic group cohesion.
Same was also true of human societies for a majority of history, besides polyamory being commonplace, sex and romantic love didnt really have anything to do with each other. You could love someone without having extra ordinary sex, and you could have extraordinary sex with someone who aint necessarily your life partner. Only fairly recently did romantic schools of thought compel humans to reserve sex as the ultimate expression of romantic admiration for their life partners.
Truth be told, very little of human life is natural. Hell, Homo sapiens as a species survived and continue to exist largely in defiance of nature. Every tradtition and it’s pervasive consequence, every form of oppression is a thing that wasn’t always there, but was something humans created.
Long standing patriarchal mono-romantic traditions and their oppressive consequences are by no means natural or a given in life. They are human-made problems, and they have human-made solutions.
thejeff
In a sense. Romance and marriage weren’t tied until relatively recently, but marriage itself goes far back in history – not prehistory necessarily.
And it was very much about men controlling access to “their” women, even if men were still socially allowed to seek sex elsewhere.
That’s not completely universal of course, but it’s also not some weird modern aberration.
Derek
*PERSONALLY, not personality, goddamn
Joy
I don’t think that he’s necessarily an actual clinical narcissist tbh. “Some people think that bullying you into conforming is a moral victory,” though, is spot on.
ian livs
Sadly, 99% of people even in leftist spaces don’t care about the fact that it’s inaccurate/ableist to label every bad person(/person they don’t like) a narcissist
NGPZ
even without the unwitting ableism part, I guess we can always count on them actin like 12-year-olds who just discovered the word “communist” 9-9
Decidedly Orthogonal
Yes/yes. He doesn’t see a contradiction in his actions.
Reltzik
I think it’s more of a “you’re either with me or you’re my enemy” type of thing.
… I hadn’t encountered the phrase “gender traitor” before today, I’m guessing because I avoid this… erm, subculture. But I’m not the least bit surprised by it. Feels like a similar concept to “race traitor”.
eh, whatever
It’s been thrown around for decades on the lunatic fringe of feminism. Incels believe that by adopting this term they’re pwning teh libtards super hard.
thejeff
It’s always funny how bigots adopt terms that were clear markers of bigotry.
The GCs/TERFs have come so close a couple times to taking up “sex realist”.
Mark
Cf. “class traitor” which is possibly parent of both of these.
mneme
Pretty sure he thinks he’s a villain. He teamed up with a self-proclaimed supervillain last time (that is, Amber’s dad) and at no point here did he identify as a hero. On the contrary, he gave a villain speech — “Females who have too many skills, I’m calling you out, for today, you face the INCELLERATOR”. That’s a villain speech, not a hero speech, because if sexism is wrong, dude doesn’t want to be right.
eh, whatever
He believes sexism is right, though. Sure he can see he behaves like a villain – but he believes the ends justify the means. He’s pretty much saying out loud in the strip that the only way to get people to listen to the truth is violence, and that violence is therefore justified.
eh, whatever
…both justified and necessary.
Mark
Nobody is evil in his own eyes. If one sets aside the notion of an absolute moral authority then “good” and “evil” are labels given by consensus — and consensus depends on whom you are polling.