Perhaps AC readers were thrown off a bit this week—“The Feminist” is not an article, after all, it’s a short story. A fiction. It’s SATIRE.
A friend shared that this response is an example of an internet phenomenon known as Poe’s Law. Somehow at this point in the 21st century, we appear to be losing recognition of a grand genre in literature represented from Ancient Rome through the Renaissance, the Age of Reason, to Dickens, and right on up to Tony Thaliamutte’s hilariously biting parody of an incel.
POE’S LAW: “an adage of Internet culture stating that, without a clear indicator of the author’s intent, it is impossible to create a parody of extreme views so obviously exaggerated that it cannot be mistaken by some viewers or readers as a sincere expression of the parodied views.”
Why do I feel like the Joker wanting to say “WHY SO SERIOUS”? Oh, come ON, people—this guy’s the male equivalent of Dickens’ Miss Havisham!
“The Feminist” shows how “woke” lingo does NOT a feminist make, but how men damage their own interests by believing the hype in expectations patriarchy has engorged them with for millennia. He thinks he’s rejected for his narrow shoulders; I think he’s read too many comic books, or seen too many Marvel flicks urging slender guys to hulk out, from companies owned by men! It’s not his looks—great gods, we live in a world where reedy Harry Styles or Timothée Chalamet in a dress is a sex god for millions of girls!—it’s his whingeing neediness that women reject. Nor should women be blamed for succumbing to the tropes and traps of toxic masculinity; they are trained from birth to acquiesce. Why can’t men admit patriarchy wounds them, too? Isn’t it heartless to deny a little boy the release of his own tears—worse, to deprive tears to men wracked by real grief? Isn’t it the same cruelty to judge a man as weak because he’s thoughtful and giving, as a woman too fat to deserve love?
Surely no one can or would expect a woman to share any part of her body or mind with someone who actually believes women are “treacherous, evasive, giggly yeastbuckets”?? This is a caricature, NOT a person, consumed by a hate that’s poisoning him, as all hate does, from the inside out. It makes great copy by being outrageous; the author only lacked the rat-infested wedding cake. Must we be so sympathetic for the truly deluded? I don’t recall any such compassion for ol’ Miss Havisham—& SHE only damaged the ONE boy.
We would live in a much better world, if only the miseries inflicted on women were to be received with as much compassion as we have here for one fictional guy whose own odiousness deprives him of a decent lay. Multiply him by many thousands in real life and I’m sorry, I still see no equivalence between the brutalities and deaths among women, being inflicted daily by men who think women pee from their vaginas—and the unhappiness of men who can’t get laid. I have read that some young men feel so deprived they consider suicide. I’ve also read the average male thinks of sex 19X/hr. Whether that’s a blessing or a curse, the one thing it categorically is NOT is a burden women must carry for them.
That was a truly disturbing story. A few moments of laugh out loud brilliant satire and many more of sheer cringe. I agree with David about potential mental illness which did elicit some sympathy. It also reminds me of an acquaintance I avoid who fiercely virtue signals (is that a conservative thing or just a thing?) with barely concealed rage beneath the surface. Last line gave me a shudder.
In The Feminist our main character struck me as someone with a mental illness who fails to get treatment and goes downhill. The story read like a tragedy and I felt sorry for this guy even though he changes in such a negative way. What I found interesting was the way he used the vocabulary of empathy and sensitivity while objectifying people around him. Is that what conservatives call "virtue signalling?" By the end of the story I felt disturbed and sad.
Thank you for reading the short story and for sharing your perspective, David. I especially appreciated your point about how the main character on the one hand knows all the progressive things to say but on the other hand does things that are objectifying and hurtful. That's why I didn't quite know how much to have compassion for him and where to draw the line. It gets me thinking: What's the author's commentary here of people who identify as well-meaning and liberal?
To answer your question, Mark, I can only hope Tony Tulathimutte would suggest people believing themselves to be well-meaning and liberal should continually redefine their terms and explore their motivations. The wonderfully caring and liberal person I thought I was as a 1950s Catholic frankly horrifies me in 2024. (I’m also very comfortable in my oldest pair of socks, but they still need to be washed regularly.)
Thank you for the compliment, David! As for “loving the sinner,” riddle me this (sorry, I seem to be stuck in Gotham today): do people mired in hate and self-loathing, who inflict moral damage on others, have capacity to ACCEPT love?
Once again I feel the need to thank you for your comment. I appreciate the way you've cut to the chase and focused on what I should have made clear all along - this character's hate and self-loathing is central to this story.
Thankfully I can delete comments on this platform so that my offensive, ill reasoned note can be dispatched. I apologize for my offense.
Re: The Feminist—I did have compassion for this guy, it's the nature of reading fiction I always go in on the narrator's side. But as the story went on I found him to be kind of a caricature more than an actual character. He checks off every basic assumption one could make about an incel, and there's nothing else going on in his life. He's only ever shown scheming about getting sex. It's a short story so it makes sense to keep it tight but with that it loses nuance and he just doesn't seem real. So of course I lost compassion for him and found him to be one-note by the end (although it was jarring to read the last sentence!).
Perhaps AC readers were thrown off a bit this week—“The Feminist” is not an article, after all, it’s a short story. A fiction. It’s SATIRE.
A friend shared that this response is an example of an internet phenomenon known as Poe’s Law. Somehow at this point in the 21st century, we appear to be losing recognition of a grand genre in literature represented from Ancient Rome through the Renaissance, the Age of Reason, to Dickens, and right on up to Tony Thaliamutte’s hilariously biting parody of an incel.
POE’S LAW: “an adage of Internet culture stating that, without a clear indicator of the author’s intent, it is impossible to create a parody of extreme views so obviously exaggerated that it cannot be mistaken by some viewers or readers as a sincere expression of the parodied views.”
Got it.
Why do I feel like the Joker wanting to say “WHY SO SERIOUS”? Oh, come ON, people—this guy’s the male equivalent of Dickens’ Miss Havisham!
“The Feminist” shows how “woke” lingo does NOT a feminist make, but how men damage their own interests by believing the hype in expectations patriarchy has engorged them with for millennia. He thinks he’s rejected for his narrow shoulders; I think he’s read too many comic books, or seen too many Marvel flicks urging slender guys to hulk out, from companies owned by men! It’s not his looks—great gods, we live in a world where reedy Harry Styles or Timothée Chalamet in a dress is a sex god for millions of girls!—it’s his whingeing neediness that women reject. Nor should women be blamed for succumbing to the tropes and traps of toxic masculinity; they are trained from birth to acquiesce. Why can’t men admit patriarchy wounds them, too? Isn’t it heartless to deny a little boy the release of his own tears—worse, to deprive tears to men wracked by real grief? Isn’t it the same cruelty to judge a man as weak because he’s thoughtful and giving, as a woman too fat to deserve love?
Surely no one can or would expect a woman to share any part of her body or mind with someone who actually believes women are “treacherous, evasive, giggly yeastbuckets”?? This is a caricature, NOT a person, consumed by a hate that’s poisoning him, as all hate does, from the inside out. It makes great copy by being outrageous; the author only lacked the rat-infested wedding cake. Must we be so sympathetic for the truly deluded? I don’t recall any such compassion for ol’ Miss Havisham—& SHE only damaged the ONE boy.
We would live in a much better world, if only the miseries inflicted on women were to be received with as much compassion as we have here for one fictional guy whose own odiousness deprives him of a decent lay. Multiply him by many thousands in real life and I’m sorry, I still see no equivalence between the brutalities and deaths among women, being inflicted daily by men who think women pee from their vaginas—and the unhappiness of men who can’t get laid. I have read that some young men feel so deprived they consider suicide. I’ve also read the average male thinks of sex 19X/hr. Whether that’s a blessing or a curse, the one thing it categorically is NOT is a burden women must carry for them.
That was a truly disturbing story. A few moments of laugh out loud brilliant satire and many more of sheer cringe. I agree with David about potential mental illness which did elicit some sympathy. It also reminds me of an acquaintance I avoid who fiercely virtue signals (is that a conservative thing or just a thing?) with barely concealed rage beneath the surface. Last line gave me a shudder.
In The Feminist our main character struck me as someone with a mental illness who fails to get treatment and goes downhill. The story read like a tragedy and I felt sorry for this guy even though he changes in such a negative way. What I found interesting was the way he used the vocabulary of empathy and sensitivity while objectifying people around him. Is that what conservatives call "virtue signalling?" By the end of the story I felt disturbed and sad.
Thank you for reading the short story and for sharing your perspective, David. I especially appreciated your point about how the main character on the one hand knows all the progressive things to say but on the other hand does things that are objectifying and hurtful. That's why I didn't quite know how much to have compassion for him and where to draw the line. It gets me thinking: What's the author's commentary here of people who identify as well-meaning and liberal?
To answer your question, Mark, I can only hope Tony Tulathimutte would suggest people believing themselves to be well-meaning and liberal should continually redefine their terms and explore their motivations. The wonderfully caring and liberal person I thought I was as a 1950s Catholic frankly horrifies me in 2024. (I’m also very comfortable in my oldest pair of socks, but they still need to be washed regularly.)
Thank you for the compliment, David! As for “loving the sinner,” riddle me this (sorry, I seem to be stuck in Gotham today): do people mired in hate and self-loathing, who inflict moral damage on others, have capacity to ACCEPT love?
Once again I feel the need to thank you for your comment. I appreciate the way you've cut to the chase and focused on what I should have made clear all along - this character's hate and self-loathing is central to this story.
Thankfully I can delete comments on this platform so that my offensive, ill reasoned note can be dispatched. I apologize for my offense.
Also, thanks for the book recommendation.
Re: The Feminist—I did have compassion for this guy, it's the nature of reading fiction I always go in on the narrator's side. But as the story went on I found him to be kind of a caricature more than an actual character. He checks off every basic assumption one could make about an incel, and there's nothing else going on in his life. He's only ever shown scheming about getting sex. It's a short story so it makes sense to keep it tight but with that it loses nuance and he just doesn't seem real. So of course I lost compassion for him and found him to be one-note by the end (although it was jarring to read the last sentence!).
You're right, Kayleigh - the last sentence!