Mangasexuals and the Council of Woke Nicaea

Yesterday I posted the first in my series for paid supporters, called “Open Manuscript Notes.” Those will be frequent discussion threads about thoughts I’m having while writing my upcoming manuscript on the woke (tentatively titled The Trace, though that’s just a working title).

These won’t be the only chances to discuss some of these ideas, however, as I’ll continue to do my monthly “open thread” posts, including this one.

I want to throw out a question for you all in this one, something that keeps coming up in many discussions about this here and elsewhere.

You’ve probably noticed there’s a tendency among those who are deeply invested in social justice, Antifa, or general woke ideology to say “that’s not really happening” whenever abuses or extremes are brought to their attention. One example that comes immediately to mind is the belief that anorexics have “thin privilege,” an idea I saw many people deny (“no one actually thinks that”) and then later come to actually support and defend on an essay I wrote. Another example is the pressuring of gay men and lesbian women to expand their “dating pool” or change their desire to include trans people. Often times people deny this ever happens, and then in the face of evidence then defend the behavior. Yet another example relates to “interracial” marriage or adoption. When it is brought to some people’s attention that some anti-racist activists are arguing all interracial marriages and adoptions involving white people are abusive and oppressive, usually the response is denial. But then soon after a social media post by an anti-racist activist (however that is defined) making that very claim will go viral, leading to the same people who denied such a thing was being said to suddenly defend it as if it was the most obvious conclusion in the world.

Of course, much of this is internet-related, and this cannot be dismissed as a factor. Usually these ideas themselves originate on the internet, as for example “animatesexuality” (previously animesexuality or mangasexuality), the sexual identity of people who are only sexually attracted to anime characters.

That’s their flag, by the way. And yes it really exists. You can purchase one on Amazon. And I had a roommate who identified this way, so as much as I would like to pretend it’s not really a thing, I cannot.

There’s also ideas like “retroactively withdrawn consent” that originated not in academia but on the internet, yet nevertheless became prominent in woke discourse. As explained by one of the most popular iterations of it, from a short essay called “Yes, You Can Take it Back:”

In such a model, if Bob and Andy have sex, and Andy says, “Yes,” “Sure,” “Okay, fine, whatever,” or even, “Ooh baby, do it to me!” but still wakes up the next morning feeling like he was raped, that means Andy was raped.

And yes this is also a thing. I was in a very disorienting conversation with a person who explained to me how they were struggling with the “trauma” of realising that their six-month relationship with someone, which had at the time been in their words fully consensual, was in retrospect rape because they no longer would consent to sex with their ex-partner. Their ex-partner, incidentally, had also come to the same conclusion, so they both agreed they’d been raping each other the entire relationship.

To speak of such things can feel really maddening and a little crazy, but to understand the problems with woke ideology we have to look at such things. And as absurd as this stuff can get, becoming reactive and outraged in the way a right-wing news commentator might is deeply unhelpful as well.1

Of course, there’s no canon here. No Council of Nicaea has ever yet met to decide what ideas should be included in woke ideology and which ones are heretical. Also, as I alluded to in the Open Manuscript Notes post, there will always probably be a large gap between the academic theories around gender, race, consent, and justice and the populist enactment of these theories. Again like religion, it’s difficult to define what the “true” iteration really is. Is it the stated beliefs and teachings of the priests, clerics, or professors? Or the actually-lived experience of those who believe in them?

That’s what I’d love to talk about in this post. Where do these lines get drawn, or should they even be drawn? Is the original iteration of ideas like intersectionality and identity politics to be privileged over the way those ideas are being enacted? Should we even try to separate out the mass politics of woke ideology from the theories behind it?

And also, what’s something you’ve encountered lately that you’re trying not to scream about?