Apr 09 2006

Patriarchy, Woo!

About 487 of you have written to advise me of the existence of this comic strip. If you are the one person who hasn’t seen it yet, by all means, do hop to it. It’s fawken hilarious.

UPDATE: By the way, you can all stop sending that Britney-Bush thing. I have already hurled up everything there is to hurl up.


1 ping

Skip to comment form

  1. guerillawomentn.blogspot.com

    I guess that one person would be me. Thanks Twisty! And Happy Birthday last week or whenever it was.

  2. nobloodforhubris.blogspot.com

    Good comic. Woo!

  3. norbizness.com

    Ah, Patriarchy U.! I had some good times at that metaphor.

  4. Thank you, I had not but I will now.

  5. castironbalcony.media2.org

    Twisty, I’m sorry to do this to you.

    Time for that subpar merlot again, drink to forget…

  6. The comics were great. I’m liking girl and cat. I spent way too much time browsing the archives.

    On the crowning moment, Is it me or does it seem the feet and arms have been damaged and repaired?

  7. (Referring to the previous post) Oh.My.God. Who was it that said bad taste is a serious moral issue? I would love, however, to see a giant-size reproduction of this work in front of National Right-to-Life Headquarters, the way Michelangelo’s David was once posted in front of the Florentine Duomo. Also, small-size versions should be issued to every godbag home, to sit on the end table right underneath their signed reproduction of a Thomas Kinkade.

  8. Love the comic. I’m having a hard time reading it, but does the poster being held up behind her say “Go Hetero Normative”?

  9. I loved the comic too… thanks for introducing it to us.

  10. kjonassignment.blogspot.com

    I LOVE it.

    I read Cat & Girl weekly and when I pulled it up yesterday my first thought was

    “I need to email this link to Twisty.”

    My second thought was

    “Twisty is hipper than I am, she must already be onto the C&G buzz”


  11. nomorenuts.org

    The comic goes a way toward revealing the one of the mostly lost issues that has been trying to pop like a headless zit in our blabs back and forth about Sassy’s survey: Which side is the patriarchy? Both. Anne, who posted with her acknowledgement of that sick, silent, hidden kind of coercion so prevalent among the patriarchy, is witness to it. Sigh. I need a sammich…maybe a little grilled eggplant…or maybe I’ll just go dry my hair and take a little rest…

  12. Oh it’s here Annie just search the archives.

  13. nomorenuts.org

    Thanks, Pony, Will do. Am new to the site, but not blaming. LOL!

  14. saraarts.com

    Ah, cute, thanks.

    I am happy to say I don’t know what you’re talking about re “that Britney-Bush thing.” Please don’t tell me.

  15. Watch it, Twisty, before one of your frequent little trolls pinches the title to this post as title for his new, anti-Twisty blog. I can see it on a masthead now.

    Great comics. I’m hooked.

  16. wolfangel.calltherain.net

    For those who really are curious about the Britney-Bush thing:

    a) rethink this curiosity: it will burn your eyes out.
    b) rethink again: you’ll never want to eat again.
    c) keep rethinking: can any combination of Britney and Bush be good? Remember what has recently been in the news about Britney.
    d) fine: ignore the warnings at your peril. NB: link goes straight to a page with an image.

  17. nomorenuts.org

    Ohh, wolfa, I shoulda listened to ya…it’s enough to put a girl off her feed!

  18. wolfangel.calltherain.net

    Yeah, Annie, I know what you mean. But I always hated feeling like I was the only person who didn’t know what was being referred to, so I added the link. It’s remarkable what people do with Photoshop, though.

  19. okay, I gotta ask: is that ANYTHING like what a crowning baby head would look like if it were possible to give birth in that position? Y’all outta read the Go Fug Yourself “britney diary entry’ that goes with this sculpture.

  20. sashaundercover.blogspot.com

    Wolfa I always warn folks to have bleach ready for pouring into the eyes.

  21. Woh, just woh.

    I don’t know whats worse, seeing that or realizing that someone actually sculpted it.

  22. angryforareason.blogspot.com

    #8–> yes.

    Funny I just blogged about Cat and Girl yesterday. I love the Dense Fog of Privilege one.

  23. grannyvibe.blogspot.com

    I’m such a sucker for cats who wear glasses.

  24. I liked the cat and girl very much and the dense fog cartoon was just as great. I want that on a t-shirt.

    Yes, I think the pro-lifers would do us all a service by making up a plastic version of this that can be placed in front of all the adoption/propaganda pro-life set-ups.

    I finally got the idea behind her holding onto a bear’s head; there is nothing like the birth experience that places humans on exact par with animals. To reproduce takes no intelligence whatsoever, it is primal and primitive. In a way, ironically, the whole thing seems to speak to that truth, of course making a shambles of the whole lie that the pro-life movement banties about, that birth and motherhood are the highest form of existance a woman can aspire to.

    What absolute bullshit.

  25. Oh damn it all to hell with these computers and the temptation to post so quickly. I made the transition from cat and girl to britney spears without informing any readers.

    Sorry to lead you down the path without guidance.

    britney and birthing have no relation in my post and one should not meld into the other.

  26. Cat and girl have no relation to britney! Damn it!

    I really used to be able to write well, I mean it! I could! Long ago! I could make sense.

  27. hedonisticpleasureseeker.wordpress.com

    That comic strip site is a freakin GOLD MINE. As a proto-blogger I have an etiquette question: Does a blogger need to get specific consent/blessing from other bloggers’ sites to use their creative work, or is everything ok so long as you give credit where it is due?

  28. You know, hedo, I read a writer’s blog talking about how many good writers use blogs to get exposure and find that their stories are hijacked by the mainstream press without proper credit or permission.

    Any writing or creative work is the property of that one who created it and proper ethics and procedure I would think demands that one at least send off an email and ask permission to use it in such and such.

    Many of these people use blogs to gain exposure for their work and I am sure would be happy to gain the exposure and if renumeration is involved, then obviously that should go to the creator of the peice.

  29. Speaking as one who formerly earned her living as a writer (I know that’s hard to believe but the explanation is personal) I have never met a professional writer who didn’t welcome the exposure and the compliment. Of course one asks permission. It’s only the wannabees who refuse.

  30. faultline.org/place/toad

    What Pony said. Though I’m not sure about the only-wannabees part. I’m trying to imagine what I’d say if some wingnut wanted permission to post something of mine. I’d like to think that what I write is unambiguous enough that it wouldn’t matter wher it showed up, but then I remember that Steve Gould has been used by the creationists to “prove” some point of theirs.

    Then again, that stuff was short enough, yanked out of context, to be subject to fair use and quotation rules.

    Last week I ran into someone who asked if that was me, and quoted something I’d had posted on Counterpunch a few years ago. Shocked my socks off.

  31. The thing is, you can’t deny anyone permission to quote you, even if their politics make you gag, or even if they use substantial parts of your article when they are discussing it or reviewing it or tearing it apart. (See Salon today). As for the internet, moving an article from one website to another is still up in the air. Was Google the source of your Counterpunch quote? Is it copyright infringement to move something from Counterpunch website to IBTP? No one knows for sure, no matter who threatens what, the law is a swamp on this. The recent freelancers lawsuit for newspaper contractees and freelancers applies to a miniscule proportion of those who have membership in ‘writers’ unions. It’s for Shannon Brownlee and Barbara Ehrenreich, not the first person guest column in the weekend section.

  32. faultline.org/place/toad

    Pony, Counterpunch posted my piece with my permission — in fact, I rewote it a bit for that; it started life as a Usenet post, IIRC. It was just that I was startled that anyone had read it, let alone remembered it that long.

    Come to think of it, I was thrilled when a nurses’ website linked to a piece I wrote for Orion magazine about urban trees and their health effects (good and bad) and meant to send them the whole ms, since they could only cite the Orion summary; the whole article wasn’t put online, just a teaser. (Just to reinforce your point.)

    OTOH, a Napa newspaper ran something that Joe had written for Chris Clarke’s Faultline site — as a “guest editorial” in the paper without Joe’s knowledge, let alone permission. Chris talked to the guy, but Joe never did hear from him, even a “sorry ’bout that.” Dumb fuck, he could’ve had it for free if he’d credited the site.

    I’ve let my NWU membership lapse, mostly because we’re both losing venues and we’re jointly broke. That lawsuit, I figure it might help someone someday, maybe. If it helps Ehrenreich, good.

    What I was getting at was that fair use rules would allow any jerkoff to quote me in whatever misleading way it wanted to, whether quoting print or pixels. So venue would be less of a consideration than I’d started out thinking.

    I’m rambling. G’night.

  33. I know some writers and even some very otherwise geeky people who are startled to see their work of years gone by on Google, either cited by someone or just in whole on a quasi website. As will all our posts here will be in about 36 hours after we make them.

    I’d love to see the whole Orion article.

    One of my favourite sites, and people.


  34. mythago.com/blog

    As for the internet, moving an article from one website to another is still up in the air.

    Do you mean, copying an article from somebody else’s website and posting it to your own?

  35. You won’t make many friends if you do that without the writer’s permission, but he/she won’t get far with any copyright complaint if you do take something and post it somewhere else. It’s on the web, as soon as they post it on their blog or whatever, it’s on google. Copyright is lost right there in the case of any actual working copyright law. But since there isn’t any working copyright law. Now if someone takes your work and sells it and makes money on it, and pretend it’s theirs the owner of the original work has more of a case, but probably still can’t do much more than blacken your name to some of his/her friends in writer’s unions and some publishers (who probably aren’t buying your work anyway). Again, we are not Shannon Brownlee and we aren’t working contract for the NYTimes.

  36. saraarts.com

    Look, I don’t know everything there is to know about all this by any means, but I’m a professional artist and sometimes writer with a website and two blogs. I also worked for lawyers for 18 years, my father became an intellectual property lawyer after he got done being a rocket scientist, and my mother was a professional artist and writer who also went to law school. Consequently, I have a little background in this area. Here’s my take:

    Unless there is a specific notice on a website telling you that you don’t have to ask to reuse specific material in large part or in its entirety, you should always ask first, and then act in accordance with whatever answer you get. It’s polite, and it also keeps you undeniably on the good side of the law.

    If you are merely quoting a portion of something, or even several portions, this is usually considered “fair use,” and so you usually don’t have to ask, but you must give credit for the source.

    To reuse original images not already in the public domain (which would include things the creators have specifically put into the public domain or things that are old enough that not only the creator but the creator’s heirs are deceased, usu. over a hundred years old), you must ask in order to legally — and politely — republish them in any context whatsoever, and you must receive written permission (e-mail counts). If you never hear back on your request, you must not construe silence as permission.

    Lots of bloggers take care of questions like this with something called a Creative Commons license, and they will usually display a symbol for this in one of their blog’s sidebars. There are various levels; if you want to use something on a site with a CC license, you should first confirm that the specific license at that site actually grants you the right to do so in the manner you intend. You can read more about this at http://www.CreativeCommons.org.

    Others, such as myself, put very specific instructions in the sidebar, watermark all images, and mark everything as copyrighted. You must follow directives of these types to stay on the good side of the law and to keep it all friendly.

    Even if no such directives are posted, and even if there is no notice of a Creative Commons license or similar device, I would strongly advise you to ask permission before reusing any material.

    The fact that laws regarding certain types of copyright infringement may be unclear, or even that they may or may not be enforceable, is irrelevant. By blogging you have entered a worldwide community of people who create intellectual property. It’s a good rule of thumb not to do anything to them or their work (even if it’s play) that could have consequences you wouldn’t like to experience yourself. Exposure is one thing, and it’s delightful. Being prevented through unpaid overexposure from ever earning even part of a living from any aspect of something you spent a lot of yourself creating is something else, something not so pleasant.

  37. Sara

    Not to argue with all you have said good common sense, manners, business sense, respect etc, and sounds real nice and legal, but:

    This relates to the WORLD WIDE WEB exactly how?

    (rhetorical question)

  38. faultline.org/place/toad

    Pony, that aurora site is so gorgeous, I’ll send you the (un-edited-to-death) article if you go over to my blog and leave your email address just by way of thanks.

    I’ve seen an aurora display like that exactly once, in northeastern Pennsylvania, in what was otherwise a bad date on which I was not quite being nagged into having sex because I was on the rag. The lights in the sky put a stop to everything except sitting on the car hood in the middle of nowhere and looking at them, and I got back to the dorm after curfew (yeah, really) and the nun looked at me funny because I was still dazzled.

    I didn’t know till then that you can hear them, the lights I mean. A sort of space-deep soft crackle, like slow static from the other rim of the galaxy.

    Another thing I learned, thinking about it later, is that a guy doesn’t have to be particularly insensitive or brutish to think that what’s called for on a date is nagging a woman into having sex. Nevertheless, you want deus ex machina, I got some.

  39. Yes they crackle. Native lore has it that you can howl them down. We always thought we were. They romp across the sky from side to side and up and down, so you have the impression they are descending on you. They are not static. The picture I posted to your site needed the car lights to allow the photographer to use a high shutter speed, because in a nanosecond the aurora was another shape and somewhere else.

    Here’s a site to track aurora activity. Not good now. Dominic also runs a yahoo aurora group. I think there’s a link there on his PBase site, as there is to his other galleries. Check out the owl shot


  1. Alas, a blog » Blog Archive » Link Farm and Open Thread #19

    […] This Comic Strip Rocks Curtsy: I Blame The Patriarchy […]

Comments have been disabled.