The author is in fact a guy. This guy:
The implications of that fact on his opinions on feminism are left as an exercise for the reader.
Ohhhhh, now I get it.
Can you explain? I don't get it.
Because the cartoonist is a guy it means that a) He is not a feminist. b) A guy telling how women/feminists should act is badwrong.
Well, let's just say that the pathetic straw-feminist and the fact that UP thought it was a good political cartoon set off all my red flags. Men instructing feminists on how to behave properly comes off as patronizing and the straw feminist really didn't help.
Look, I'm a feminist, but there are certain types of feminism, and certain aspects of the movement that I'm critical of. One of the things I'm critical of is certain feminists trying to dictate how women "should" act.
Now, a lot of you may be asking if it's really my place to criticize. I'm going to be blunt with you: yes, it is. Even if I weren't a feminist, feminism still has effects on my life. The cartoonist may identify as a feminist, or he may not. It doesn't matter either way. Assuming he isn't, he still recognizes the fact that there are good types of feminism out there, which is more than can be said for certain people. Furthermore, I believe that nothing is above criticism.
And a common refrain is that "feminism is for men too". If it's supposedly for me, why aren't I allowed to express my opinion on it?
Besides, by that logic, an atheist isn't allowed to have an opinion on religion.
