Comic Discussion > QUESTIONABLE CONTENT

WCDT 14 Mar-18 Mar 2011 (1881-1885)

<< < (46/85) > >>

Mr_Rose:
Wait, do we even know he has a job at tSB? He could just hang out there like Marten used to do at CoD.

Alternatively, it's just been assumed that the Elliot that hangs out at tSB is the Elliot that bounces for Wil's bar; it could easily be another guy named Elliot. Or girl. Did we ever find out the name of the "Ladie's Night" bouncer that nearly defenestrated Sven?

Odin:

--- Quote from: IanClark on 16 Mar 2011, 02:31 ---
--- Quote from: Odin on 15 Mar 2011, 09:08 ---A big part of where I'm coming from on this one can be found the lengthy OP of a thread on another forum (especially the "you are not a unique snowflake" and Rule #1 portions).

--- End quote ---

See, this is what I have a problem with. I don't regard relationships as a social convention.
--- End quote ---

Neither does the thread you spend two paragraphs failing to write-off as if it does, go back and read it again.


--- Quote ---Take Rule #1 for example. It gets violated all the time. There are tons and tons of stories of couples breaking up, but for some reason or another neither of them really felt it was time to move on and they ended up getting back together and living happily (whether permanently or not). For every time that article (I'd call it an article) says "This is never true" or "Don't tell yourself this, it's always a lie" or "Don't delude yourself into thinking this" there are hundreds of people who can honestly say "Actually, that happened to me." People break up for any myriad of reasons, some of them leave more than a little room for reconciliation. Believing that a relationship isn't truly over just because someone says it is may usually prove wrong, but there are more than enough exceptions that someone might be justified in thinking otherwise. And even in those situations where it turns out the relationship is really over, who's to say they couldn't have rekindled it if they'd acted differently? Even if most of the things they said in that post were usually true, that doesn't mean they're always true and it definitely doesn't mean that someone should think it's automatically true just because that's the way things usually go. It has nothing at all to do with thinking yourself a unique snowflake and everything to do with being aware of the almost immeasurable complexity of the human condition.
--- End quote ---

pwhodges already touched on this, but the intended audience for that thread is a very limited section of the population so most of your objections are already out the window (males in the US, where there is somewhere between a 2:1 & 3:1 ratio of women:men in many areas of the country). All of that aside, Rule #1 is a very good rule to keep in mind and you're confusing it with one of the other rules, apparently (Rule #1 is "The relationship that just broke up is over, get the fuck over it!", not "Don't Talk to an ex until you're over the breakup!", but that is still a very good rule as well).


--- Quote ---
--- Quote ---If this is true of the vast majority of people out there, we are a world of people in desperate need of therapy because this is a really fucked up outlook on life that requires validation from every ex you have to let you know that you're worth loving.
--- End quote ---

I never said it had anything to do with requiring validation from every ex.
--- End quote ---


--- Quote from: You, in the post I quoted leading up to this part ---You're not just asking for permission to be with a person, you're asking for permission to be the one to shatter your friend's perception of what the relationship they had was. You're asking permission to be the one to send them into that period of doubt and what's almost the second breakup.
--- End quote ---

Comes pretty close to that, though.


--- Quote ---Personally, at the end of every serious relationship I've ever been in, I take stock in exactly what went wrong and how I could've stopped myself from getting hurt. By the time the next relationship comes along, I've got a plan. This time I'm going to be more vigilant for the warning signs, I'm not going to let myself fall in love until I'm absolutely sure it's not going to happen again. Okay, I've been vigilant enough, I've kept myself guarded properly, I'm finally going to let my feelings out and completely fall for this woman, and son of a bitch, it happened again!

Realizing that someone is completely over you means realizing that you actually have no idea what the hell you're doing. No matter how sure you were that they loved you enough that they'd never hurt you the way they did, you were wrong. And you may never be right. And for the reasons I've outlined above, the moment of realizing someone's done with you doesn't always come with when they said they were done with you.
--- End quote ---

Hey, guess what, you just posted that you did exactly what was advised in the OP of the thread you're complaining about. Go read it again.


--- Quote ---
--- Quote ---Going to stop you there and say that it has nothing to do with "not getting deeply involved", but failing to get over past relationships reveals some severe codependency issues and you have to admit that is a huge red flag for a need to seek therapy. It is a pretty well established point in psychiatric circles that codependency is a huge deal and not normal or healthy, are you and others on here disputing this?
--- End quote ---

First of all this argument is obviously going to be a contentious one because there is no DSM criteria for codependency. Codependency is defined as excessive emotional or psychological reliance on a partner, and I think anyone who's ever been in an argument with anyone ever can tell what the key word there is.
--- End quote ---

It is also extremely common and often misdiagnosed due to other DSM-accepted disorders where there is some overlap in symptoms (http://smith.soehd.csufresno.edu/codependence.html).


--- Quote ---In fact, the very fact that the word "excessive" is there means that there is such a thing as non-excessive reliance. If you love someone, it would logically follow that you would be sad if they were gone. That's what love is. Love is wanting to be close to someone, and it therefore follows that if you do love someone, you should be sad to see them walk out of your life. The more you love someone, the more sad you should be. It doesn't classify as codependence if your reaction is proportionally appropriate to the situation. Codependence only applies if you get too close too fast, or if you take a lot longer than you should to get over it. If you get over a relationship as soon as it's over, that's fine, but it also means you didn't love the person (which does happen in a lot of relationships). Maybe from there you can argue that love only holds us back, but that's a whole separate argument.

--- End quote ---

I bolded the relevant bit, there. Stop straw-manning my argument, guys, I never said it was okay to immediately start dating a friend's ex (not bothering to respond to the idiot that took it to the level of asking out a freshly divorced woman the day her divorce papers were signed, holy shit that guy was dumb). If it's been long enough that the ex is interested in dating and you're interested in dating them, your friend really has no authority to stop you so why patronize them by acting like you give a damn about whether they approve? Again, this is someone who is looking to date again anyway and you're already interested in them, this implies that enough time has gone by that your friend should be over it, too.

To make this relevant to the comic, we must be getting very bored with the more recent strips for things to derail this badly so quickly.

Akima:

--- Quote from: justanotherbrick on 15 Mar 2011, 19:21 ---Think about how many different pairs of glasses Faye has had! Most people only get a new pair of glasses every two years or so.
--- End quote ---
Ah, but have they really been new glasses, or merely art-change glasses? And Will is a complete nitwit, it's official.

Odin:

--- Quote from: Akima on 16 Mar 2011, 03:19 ---
--- Quote from: justanotherbrick on 15 Mar 2011, 19:21 ---Think about how many different pairs of glasses Faye has had! Most people only get a new pair of glasses every two years or so.
--- End quote ---
Ah, but have they really been new glasses, or merely art-change glasses? And Will is a complete nitwit, it's official.


--- End quote ---

Will has been a nitwit since he was introduced. I would comment on being surprised that he could maintain a relationship at all, but he's dating a barista (not exactly known for being the most stable people in the world, both in the QC verse and in ours).

pwhodges:
Penny may acknowledge her attraction to Wil's (one "l", folks) literary side, bad though it is; but I can't help feeling that there are also elements of both desperation and pity in that relationship.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page