In case you haven’t heard the news, the once great Dave Sim has demanded that anyone who corresponds with him must pledge that Sim isn’t a misogynist. The whole business has erupted into a sad and terrible train wreck in which Sim has nearly alienated his friend Chester Brown and spurned long-time fans. And it’s all because Sim doesn’t appear to be acquainted with Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights:
Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.
Calling Sim a misogynist is not libelous. It is the truth. A misogynist is someone who hates women. And the man who wrote, “It wouldn’t be that big of a stretch to categorize my writing as Hate Literature against women,” in Issue #186 of Cerberus, speaking in his own voice, is most certainly a misogynist. For years and years, Sim has been spewing out this bile. And rather than take his lumps and be the man he thinks he is, he instead wants to set terms and alienate everyone in the process. These are not the actions of a civilized person.
For years, I’ve tried to overlook Sim’s hateful ramblings for the great wonders contained within the early books of Cerberus. But if Sim is going to set terms for us, I’m going to set a few terms for him. Until Sim can confess that he is the working definition of a misogynist, I will never buy another comic written or illustrated by Dave Sim or acknowledge Dave Sim in any way ever again. The great talent Dave Sim has been replaced by an atavistic creature who now calls himself “Dave Sim,” who believes himself to be some small-time Stalin and perpetuates this sad despotism as long as his delusional hubris will let him. He has now fully disappeared from my cultural radar. And it’s too damn bad. Because when he was still sane, he was an innovator.
The Call by Yannick Murphy: The always interesting author of Here They Come and Signed, Mata Hari returns with a novel that whips up a worldview from a rather quirky set of limitations: namely, the call logs that a veterinarian maintains as his son is unexpectedly put into a coma and an unforgiving economy denies him work. What emerges is a surprisingly optimistic, often funny, and very moving account on how one family uses acceptance and forgiveness as a way to atone for hard knocks. (
Birds of Paradise by Diana Abu-Jaber: Forget Franzen and Eugenides. If you're looking for a social novel that counts, Diana Abu-Jaber is the author you're looking for. Building from the free-form exploration of consciousness and identity in Crescent and the gripping procedural structure of Origin, Abu-Jaber's latest novel is her finest, equally fluent with gutterpunk culture and smarmy real estate men. It has been suggested by The Washington Post's Ron Charles that you will likely gain some pounds while reading this novel. This is certainly true. Abu-Jaber's description of food is so precise that it often made me want to do more cooking. But I very much admired the way in which Abu-Jaber presents all her characters as unwitting victims of rough capitalism, which permits them some dignity even as they perform terrible acts.
The Last of the Live Nude Girls by Sheila McClear: This memoir isn't so much about the decline of the Times Square peepshow, as it is about one young woman's efforts to pull herself up by by her bootstraps when presented with few economic options. Filled with self-introspective candor and a quiet dignity, McClear's story is one that might befall any of us in these volatile times. While McClear does get back on her feet, her book leads one contemplating the terrible fates of other young women now moving to New York and falling into deadlier vocations. (
I so need to write my “My Life with Dave Sim” article. Maybe after I finally rewrite the “My Life with Kerouac” article.
Still, I’m not going to stop buying his stuff, only because I can’t look away. Did you see Glamourpuss? That’s one of the most bizarre things I’ve ever read. He really has lost it at this point.
Again we see the hate machine fired up and striking out at it’s easiest and most favored target, Dave Sim.
Dave isn’t anti women, he’s anti feninist. They aren’t the same thing. Yes, he wrote that it wouldn’t be much of a stretch to call it hate speech toward women, but it would be a stretch.
In the context which he said it he was making the example that the feminists would want him locked up and most likely would try to do it by doing just what you are doing here, spinning it into hate speach.
This continued attack on Sim is a sad state of affairs. He is a genius who’s only real cardinal sin is having conservative views in a field inudated with liberal philosophy.
It’s a shame that you are letting your opinion be swayed by these loud, angry voices who feel justified and safe inside their own groups.
Take up golf, it would require less energy than all this pointless raging against Dave Sim.
Stalin indeed, you should be ashamed.
As I said, Logan, I’m not mentioning his name or looking at the man’s work again. I’ve got better things to do than reply to those who use the fallacy of equivocation to propel flaccid arguments, as you have here. Wait a minute, why am I replying to you?
Proudfoot
‘This continued attack on Sim is a sad state of affairs. He is a genius who’s only real cardinal sin is having conservative views in a field inudated with liberal philosophy.’
Steve Dikto has conservative views. He is an advocate of Ayn Rand’s philosophy of Objectivism yet he is a legendary writer.
A more recent example could possibly be Frank Miller, what with works like 300 and his support for the war in Iraq.
I’ve come across the ‘Dave Sim is anti-feminist, not anti-women’ argument before. It just seems like a rather desperate attempt by fans to whitewash a particulaly nasty aspect of his work. I’d say that yes, he is extremley anti-women. I’d provide examples but I doubt that you’d have to look about the net long to find some perfectly good ones.
As far as I could see, there were two issues for Dave here.
1. The social and dictionary definition of ‘Misogyny’ being extended to include ‘dislike’ or ‘mistrust’ (etc, etc) of women, makes any dissent from the viewpoint of feminists (ie. most women) – synonymous to ‘hatred’… which is STILL the foremost definition of the word, and the reason why it’s such a powerful indictment when applied to someone.
2. Dave was tired of being slandered behind his back by so-called friends and supporters, and then being used by the same people at signings, interviews, etc… where Dave Sim was temporarily ok.
No. It basically came down to Dave asking people to go ‘on record’ as NOT thinking him a woman hater (by the historic/nominal use of the term). If you don’t see it in his frame of reference, then fine, you need not have to put up with Dave and his awful views ever again.
-Bobby.N