Comic Discussion > QUESTIONABLE CONTENT
WCDT: 2554-2558 (14 October - 18 October, 2013) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Barmymoo:
Whilst I'm sure we can have an interesting scientific discussion on whether the adjective "wet" still applies to ice or steam (I posit that it does), you are being deliberately facetious in response to a serious concern that this forum is trying to deal with, and I'd advise against that particular approach both in general and right now in particular.
I like Hanners' headband. Also loved her first response - why on earth would she assume that Momo was leaking fluid?!
DSL:
--- Quote from: Is it cold in here? on 17 Oct 2013, 21:03 ---It was funny to have Hannelore field the question but wouldn't it have been more logical to have asked Momo?
--- End quote ---
So Hanners' assumption there's something wrong with Momo is not only funny, but makes logical sense.
Overkillengine:
--- Quote from: ackblom12 on 18 Oct 2013, 00:59 ---Excusing sexism in such a manner is kinda fucked up.
--- End quote ---
Huh, must have missed the memo about the next PC witch hunt.
So let me get this straight, what we are supposed to be outraged about is a silly and probably not serious statement about expected gendered behaviors when it comes to dating that potentially frame women in the role of sex object, but ignore that it also puts men in a stereotypical role of sex and beer obsessed simpletons.
Just wanted to know where I am supposed to aim the pitchfork to keep in lockstep with the rest of the hive mind.
Zebediah:
Uh-oh, here we go again... :roll:
In a desperate but probably futile attempt to divert attention back to the comic, I'll just imagine the crude jokes that Pintsize would make about Momo leaking fluid.
:facepalm:
pwhodges:
--- Quote from: Overkillengine on 18 Oct 2013, 04:30 ---Huh, must have missed the memo about the next PC witch hunt.
--- End quote ---
Not a witch hunt; I also hate the term PC, because it implies that something is done for effect rather than for real. We are, in our tiny corner of the world, trying to improve some things that really do affect people in the larger outside world - do you think that belittling this effort is how you wish to be seen? Oh, and the memo's here. I accept that we have been less alert to this sort of thing than we should have been for a while, but the underlying policy has not changed - we are merely sharpening up our application of it. The rules suggest that we should respect each other; this kind of thing erodes that respect (I plan to add some more explicit remarks about various forms of discrimination to the rules).
--- Quote ---So let me get this straight, what we are supposed to be outraged about is a silly and probably not serious statement about expected gendered behaviors when it comes to dating that potentially frame women in the role of sex object, but ignore that it also puts men in a stereotypical role of sex and beer obsessed simpletons.
--- End quote ---
Not at all; I object to the beer part of that stereotype as well. But I chose to address the more harmful stereotype first.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version