Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

Gloomy Tai at the library

33 (43.4%)

Dora trying to make up with her GF

14 (18.4%)

Hannelore seeking vengeance on Juicy

8 (10.5%)

Marigold seeking medical aid

2 (2.6%)

Pintsize having an existential crisis

11 (14.5%)

Faye learning that 'creepy' is a state of mind

8 (10.5%)

Total Members Voted: 71

Voting closed: 10 Mar 2015, 08:40

[ReindeerFlotilla]

But then there is no point in speaking about selfishness at all and even a worker-ant's death, when attacking a piece of bubble-gum, can be said to be "motivated by selfishness". It is full-filling it's preference for attacking.

Don't destroy language. We need it.

Not destroying language dude. Look up the philosophy of the selfless act. (To expand, if selflessness is, indeed, impossible then "selfish" is actually an impediment to clear communication. "Selfish" would be the thing destroying language.)

Nope.

First and foremost there is a difference between the descriptive philosophical concept of psychological egoism and the everyday normative concepts of selfishness. Using them as synonyms are just confusing.

Selfish in everyday language means being self-centred and only interested in your own well being. Psychological egoism says that all acts, even those made to benefit others, are rooted in fulfilling your own preferences. If psychological egoism is correct, in that there is no truly selfless acts, it doesn't necessarily mean that there are no acts that are more or less self-centered. 

Tai is selfish in a normative everyday sense. She uses Marten as a tool without regard for his feelings. Everyday normative language is used in order to describe how people should and shouldn't act. The descriptive discussion regarding the possibility of selfless acts is something different and something that should be kept separately in order to avoid confusion. Otherwise I could destroy more or less ANY discussion by de-constructing the concept "self". 

I have a masters degree in philosophy and history. I know the discussion. For years I waved the flag of psychological egoism in more of less every normative discussion I was part of. Then I realised how fruitless it was.

I do not have a masters degree i English. Please bare with my language...

Everyday and normative are illusions. They assume words mean the same thing to most people, and that's not true. It's amazing that languge works at all, when you think about.

You claim that Tai is "selfish" and "not giving consideration to Marten." You mean to say the same thing twice, but one of those statements communicates something specific, by narrowing the potential ways to interpret the individual words. The other doesn't. It's merely pejorative, no different that calling a character "asshole." It communicates that the speaker doesn't like the character, but nothing more. Stating a character IS a thing (is selfish, is an asshole) communicates the speaker's opinion with the imperative that the audience should agree.

If you find it fruitless to discuss the philosophy of things, you really shouldn't make imperative statements about what language is, because that's pretty much nothing but philosophy. Even trying to define "normative" and "everyday" is a philosophic discussion. You can't have a meta-discussion without going down that rabbit hole.

Of course, my intent wasn't to be meta. Just to note the meaninglessness of the charge that Tai is acting selfishly.  Marten asked her about her feelings, as she pointed out. She also implicitly acknowledged Marten's desire not to get involved. Marten "got involved" anyway, at which point it was time for the punchline. Tai's actions certainly kept the subject on herself, but that was the subject.

Philosophically speaking, it minds me of the parable about the blind men and the elephant. This little slice of interaction is insufficient to describe the whole of the thing, yet it is used to draw a certain conclusion, without regard to its context. Yesterday, Marten was the bad guy, today it's Tai. It seems an unfair assessment, in the least. We know, now, that Marten didn't think he should get involved. Using your definition of normative language, why wasn't what he did labeled as selfish by you? (If it was, I apologize for misunderstanding.) He could have considered Tai's feelings and just stated his position, rather than dramatically backing out to sound of infinite "nope."

Marten did what he did because the author thought it would be funny. Tai's "in for a penny" is meant to serve the same purpose.

[aliensporebomb]

Whoa!  Marten blows his top.  Been a while since I've seen that and it's actually MORE anger than we saw when he and Dora split.

[pwhodges]

Administrator Comment

Bechdel Test conversation is now a separate thread.

The following are fragments that got caught up in the move:

Tai must be pretty desperate to seek relationship advice about Dora from someone who couldn't make a relationship with Dora work. Instead of doing what Marten would have done, she should do what she would do - it's her relationship, after all.

the behaviour displayed by the character tai is motivated by selfishness and a lack of any regard for marten's experiences with dora.

Describe a human behavior not motivated by selfishness.

Okay, trick challenge. No such behavior exists.

Why not keep cliff's notes on the phone? A 200GB microSD has been announced not too long ago, surely that's enough to keep track of everything xD

Sir, there are still terabytes of calculations required before an actual flight is attempted.

[Aziraphale]

Whoa!  Marten blows his top.  Been a while since I've seen that and it's actually MORE anger than we saw when he and Dora split.

He seems less angry than exasperated (with himself, no less).

[plusorminus]

Everyday and normative are illusions. They assume words mean the same thing to most people, and that's not true. It's amazing that languge works at all, when you think about.

You claim that Tai is "selfish" and "not giving consideration to Marten." You mean to say the same thing twice, but one of those statements communicates something specific, by narrowing the potential ways to interpret the individual words. The other doesn't. It's merely pejorative, no different that calling a character "asshole." It communicates that the speaker doesn't like the character, but nothing more. Stating a character IS a thing (is selfish, is an asshole) communicates the speaker's opinion with the imperative that the audience should agree.

If you find it fruitless to discuss the philosophy of things, you really shouldn't make imperative statements about what language is, because that's pretty much nothing but philosophy. Even trying to define "normative" and "everyday" is a philosophic discussion. You can't have a meta-discussion without going down that rabbit hole.

Of course, my intent wasn't to be meta. Just to note the meaninglessness of the charge that Tai is acting selfishly.  Marten asked her about her feelings, as she pointed out. She also implicitly acknowledged Marten's desire not to get involved. Marten "got involved" anyway, at which point it was time for the punchline. Tai's actions certainly kept the subject on herself, but that was the subject.

Philosophically speaking, it minds me of the parable about the blind men and the elephant. This little slice of interaction is insufficient to describe the whole of the thing, yet it is used to draw a certain conclusion, without regard to its context. Yesterday, Marten was the bad guy, today it's Tai. It seems an unfair assessment, in the least. We know, now, that Marten didn't think he should get involved. Using your definition of normative language, why wasn't what he did labeled as selfish by you? (If it was, I apologize for misunderstanding.) He could have considered Tai's feelings and just stated his position, rather than dramatically backing out to sound of infinite "nope."

Marten did what he did because the author thought it would be funny. Tai's "in for a penny" is meant to serve the same purpose.

RF, I think that for some people, and I'm not speaking about the person you were answering above because I don't know him/her, but for myself, at least, any dislike of Tai goes beyond this instance or this punchline.

Tai is selfish. She pushes boundaries. Whether it's because of some issue she has or not, I won't speculate, but this is real. This is not stuff that anyone is pulling out of their ass. She openly lusted after Dora when she and Marten were together, making him uncomfortable. She was a complete creep the first time she met Hannelore and had to be told by Marten, twice, to knock it the fuck off. I seem to recall that when Clinton acted like a creep to Hanners, he got much less slack. Tai sort of does whatever Tai wants to do, and the options are to fuck off from her or deal with it.

I think that not enough attention is paid to the fact that Tai is Marten's boss. It doesn't matter that she's stoned off her ass most of the time or that neither of them want to stay there forever. It is what it is. She is someone that Marten has to answer to. When Marten was an "Office B----" we saw how docile he was in the presence of his supervisor. He's not Faye - subconsciously he is aware that there is a hierarchy and that Tai has direct control over whether he remains employed, hence him being concerned about knowing whether she had graduated or not, because if she were leaving, his library days might be numbered. Subconsciously, Marten is not going to want to antagonize Tai. Yes, she is his friend and yes, he cares about her well-being, but Marten is Marten - I knew even before clicking on the comic for today that he was going to backtrack and help. That's who and what he is, and Tai knows it, which is why she was passive-aggressive in Monday's strip. She knows she can get away with that with him and he'll eventually cave.

I don't like Tai. I acknowledge that her feelings for Dora are real, and likely deeper than Marten's feelings for Dora were. But I don't like Tai as a character and I really find that she grates. I will acknowledge that it might just be me. I hate passive aggressive people and I hate people who use their position to get things out of others. I don't have any doubt that Tai understands on some level that as the boss, she has greater sway over what Marten does and how he responds. Would she fire him for no cause? Probably not, but Marten subconsciously does not want to take that chance.

[vidugavia]

Everyday and normative are illusions. They assume words mean the same thing to most people, and that's not true. It's amazing that languge works at all, when you think about.

No. It is not amazing. Languages works because there exists rather large practical agreements within them regarding what words mean. "Illusions" are just as real as everything else that exist. Illusions exist as illusions. Everyday language use and its collective agreements and definitions are something that exists and can be studied. Just like illusions can be studied. 

You claim that Tai is "selfish" and "not giving consideration to Marten." You mean to say the same thing twice, but one of those statements communicates something specific, by narrowing the potential ways to interpret the individual words. The other doesn't. It's merely pejorative, no different that calling a character "asshole." It communicates that the speaker doesn't like the character, but nothing more. Stating a character IS a thing (is selfish, is an asshole) communicates the speaker's opinion with the imperative that the audience should agree.

No. Being selfish is in everyday language, and in many more well defined ethical schools, generally to be self-centred and only interested in your own well being. There is always potential ways to interpret words in different ways, regardless of how many words you use. That doesn't change that language works because there exists common understandings of words.

There exists no "mere perjoratives". All perjoratives contain nuances that signal why and/or in what way we should dislike them/their acts. There are differences between calling a person selfish, an asshole, a cunt, a son of a whore, a looney or a traitor. Differences that are constantly defined in the living language. Trying to reduce that to "do not like" is language-destruction.

Stating that Tais behavior in the discussed situation is motivated by selfishness or stating that Tai is selfish in a certain act communicates that her actions are bad in a specific way, that she should change her behavior and that similar behavior should be avoided by others.

If you find it fruitless to discuss the philosophy of things, you really shouldn't make imperative statements about what language is, because that's pretty much nothing but philosophy. Even trying to define "normative" and "everyday" is a philosophic discussion. You can't have a meta-discussion without going down that rabbit hole.

I don't find it fruitless to discuss the philosophy of things, but I do find conversation-destructing deconstructionism rather impotent and boring. Dragging psychological egoism into a discussion regarding if an action is ethical doesn't help that discussion at all. The question regarding if Tai, or anyone else, can do truly altruistic acts or not doesn't help us an iota

Of course, my intent wasn't to be meta.

Then don't bring meta-ethics to the battlefield.

Just to note the meaninglessness of the charge that Tai is acting selfishly.  Marten asked her about her feelings, as she pointed out. She also implicitly acknowledged Marten's desire not to get involved. Marten "got involved" anyway, at which point it was time for the punchline. Tai's actions certainly kept the subject on herself, but that was the subject.

Then say that. That is a valid ethical re-evaluation of the situation that doesn't drag things down into a meta discussion.

Philosophically speaking, it minds me of the parable about the blind men and the elephant. This little slice of interaction is insufficient to describe the whole of the thing, yet it is used to draw a certain conclusion, without regard to its context. Yesterday, Marten was the bad guy, today it's Tai. It seems an unfair assessment, in the least. We know, now, that Marten didn't think he should get involved.

Is anyone but you speaking about bad guys? Both me and "rfrank dodelijk" are talking of what we view as bad behavior in a specific situation. We can NEVER speak about anything more than a slice of the elephant. We have no choice but making our judgements of the elephant from the small patches we can touch.

Using your definition of normative language, why wasn't what he did labeled as selfish by you? (If it was, I apologize for misunderstanding.) He could have considered Tai's feelings and just stated his position, rather than dramatically backing out to sound of infinite "nope."

His actions might be selfish, but that is not what our discussion is about. This is about you labeling all human behavior selfish.

Marten did what he did because the author thought it would be funny. Tai's "in for a penny" is meant to serve the same purpose.

Booring meta again. Make up your mind regarding what you are discussing. Otherwise I might start to make a freudian analysis regarding why you are writing what you are writing.

[ReindeerFlotilla]

..snip.. Length.
I don't like Tai. I acknowledge that her feelings for Dora are real, and likely deeper than Marten's feelings for Dora were. But I don't like Tai as a character and I really find that she grates. I will acknowledge that it might just be me. I hate passive aggressive people and I hate people who use their position to get things out of others. I don't have any doubt that Tai understands on some level that as the boss, she has greater sway over what Marten does and how he responds. Would she fire him for no cause? Probably not, but Marten subconsciously does not want to take that chance.

Angus basically stalked Faye, and was generally creepy as all hell about worming his way into her life up to the point the Marten invited him into the social circle--which really wasn't on Angus.

I'd respond to vidugavia's post, but it'd just be repeating what I already said in different words.

I point this out, not because I dislike Angus, but because it is "real." it's a thing that definitely happened. I am pretty much the only person I've seen comment on this.

You don't like Tai. Your analysis is colored by that dislike. Given all of the things that character in QC have done, there's really nothing special about Tai's excesses. You can point to her enthusiasm about Dora being inappropriate, but--given Marten's knowledge that Faye wasn't exactly comfortable with sexy time talk, his repeated innuendos were of the same caliber. That they all ended in punches and "I was joking" doesn't change anything. For those who don't dislike Marten, however, they get a pass. Just like Angus being creepy (or Dale), Faye's abusiveness, Dora's issues in general, and so on.

You dislike Tai. You see a thing Tai did and you evaluate that thing to support that dislike. I see the same things and it's just a character doing her thing. You say Tai IS selfish, as if it carries the same weight as "Tai IS a woman." But one of those is a fact and the other is just your interpretation. I don't mean to say that a thing being your interpretation is therefore unworthy of discussion. I'm just disagreeing with it. Tai has ribbed Marten about his reaction to her lust for Dora, but then again, Marten has ribbed her back. He did not punch her in response, so it would seem that Tai is still in the wrong. Punches make everything okay, it seems. Tai dramatically moped about Dora being single, but pursing her being an uncool thing to do so soon after a break up, but she didn't push the issue. She moped later when it seemed that Dora was ready to join the dating pool and missed her chance to Jim. When Marten questioned her about this dramatic mope, he joined in. Tai admitted, unprompted, that her interest in Dora could have been uncool and Marten pointed out (correctly, I might add) that while it was uncomfortable for him, he had no right to tell Tai she could not pursue Dora. Tai then offered a non-weasel-word apology which Marten accepted.

It's all a matter of perspective.

Everyone has one. I suppose everyone's entitled to share unless the rules state otherwise. My perspective is that labeling Tai as selfish doesn't communicate anything. My perspective on Tai's "selfish behavior" is above.

[plusorminus]

{snipped}
Everyone has one. I suppose everyone's entitled to share unless the rules state otherwise. My perspective is that labeling Tai as selfish doesn't communicate anything. My perspective on Tai's "selfish behavior" is above.

Maybe I'm just not understanding your point. What is supposed to be "communicated"? I don't come to this board to do anything except contribute my opinion, should I have one, about what is happening or has happened in the strip. Your statement that my post doesn't "communicate" anything does imply that you find my point of view useless, which is your prerogative, but that's kind of a shitty stance to take.

Yes, Angus was creepy. Not your problem that you don't know this, but I've stated that on the record several times. I sort of side-eyed Faye warming to him, but hey, it happens, I guess. I didn't have to like it, and I didn't, but it was what it was. Other people's creepiness doesn't preclude others from being creepy as well. Hannelore, who I like quite a bit, was quelle creepy in her intro. I don't see her as selfish because she has not exhibited traits that indicate, to me, a penchant for selfishness. Tai has. I don't know that my dislike of her colors that. I adore Dora and have no issues in calling her out on her self-sabotaging, strident behavior. If you don't agree, that's fine, but it's not really your place to tell me or anyone else that pointing out something that twigs as a personality trait "doesn't communicate anything."

[Endellion]

Why not keep cliff's notes on the phone? A 200GB microSD has been announced not too long ago, surely that's enough to keep track of everything xD

Sir, there are still terabytes of calculations required before an actual flight is attempted.

That is the actual best setup for a highly distasteful pun on the Dora Bianchi International Airport.

The airport has been officialy closed until the depressed Tai-phoon has blown over.

Question: Are you even aware of your 'blown over' double entendre?

Absolutely 

[ReindeerFlotilla]

{snipped}
Everyone has one. I suppose everyone's entitled to share unless the rules state otherwise. My perspective is that labeling Tai as selfish doesn't communicate anything. My perspective on Tai's "selfish behavior" is above.

Maybe I'm just not understanding your point. What is supposed to be "communicated"? I don't come to this board to do anything except contribute my opinion, should I have one, about what is happening or has happened in the strip. Your statement that my post doesn't "communicate" anything does imply that you find my point of view useless, which is your prerogative, but that's kind of a shitty stance to take.

Yes, Angus was creepy. Not your problem that you don't know this, but I've stated that on the record several times. I sort of side-eyed Faye warming to him, but hey, it happens, I guess. I didn't have to like it, and I didn't, but it was what it was. Other people's creepiness doesn't preclude others from being creepy as well. Hannelore, who I like quite a bit, was quelle creepy in her intro. I don't see her as selfish because she has not exhibited traits that indicate, to me, a penchant for selfishness. Tai has. I don't know that my dislike of her colors that. I adore Dora and have no issues in calling her out on her self-sabotaging, strident behavior. If you don't agree, that's fine, but it's not really your place to tell me or anyone else that pointing out something that twigs as a personality trait "doesn't communicate anything."

Did you really just tell a black man where his place was?

For serious? (But he didn't know you were black! Yeah, I know. But A: still happened. B: it's a crappy thing to say no matter who you say it to, unless there is actually a place and someone doesn't own it. Like say a moderator's position.)

Le sigh.

Look, you're entitled to your opinion. I'm entitled to mine. Yes, I said that "selfish" doesn't communicate anything, and I explained that rather clearly. "Tai is selfish" is no different than "Tai is an asshole." Both statements declare that you don't like Tai by hanging a pejorative label on her, but nothing beyond that. The stance you ascribe to me is your imagination. If you find it shitty, you did that to yourself. Why should I care that you don't like Tai? Why should you care that I don't care? Beyond that it says nothing about anything.

Moreover, my lack of care was primarily in reference to the standard the someone who is not you was using to judge Tai. That you share that standard is incidental, so still not personal (just like your "in your place statement" while shitty on it's own, wasn't actually racist). You interjected yourself into a discussion already in progress. To take my application, to your argument, of a theme I already expressed as a personal attack just feels like you are looking for something to view as a personal attack. So if you have an argument on how my not seeing the labels being hung on characters as important is shitty in itself, rather than as a perceived slight, share.

I stated that there is difference between labeling a character, which I suggest communicates nothing, and discussing--or calling out--what they did. I notice that here you label Dora's behavior, but not Dora. Why not hang "bitch" around Dora's neck, rather than label her behavior "strident?" Since my thesis is that "selfish," used as label, is no different than "asshole" it's no different than "bitch." I just have personal dislike for that word. That dislike is why I use it here. I could have asked about "asshole," but choosing the gendered term here underlines the reason I say labels don't communicate anything. I think most people will feel how bitch comes off wrong. I think selfish does the same thing, but people find it more socially acceptable.

Yes, we're all allowed opinions, and yes were all allowed to express them. I didn't say you could not express your labels. What is it that separates your right to aply the label from my right to comment on your application it? Why is it not my place to express my opinion, but it is okay for you express yours? I'm guessing it goes back to you viewing my opinion on the use of labels, and words that I opine to have limited meaning, as an opinion of you.

Just to be clear, I don't think you are being racist. I'm using hyperbole to underline that I do think you're overeacting.

[Consilium]

<digression>
The SMIF logo in the fourth panel is all wonky, like her shirt is crooked. But her face is adorable there.
Also, I've said this recently but I feel it warrants repetition: count me among those who are happy that QC is returning to its humorous nature.
</digression>

Warning - while you were typing a new reply has been posted. You may wish to review your opinions on altruism.

[pwhodges]

Administrator Comment

This thread, indeed this forum, is not for personal arguments.

[CaptainFish]

I think I'm gonna need a WCDTDT.

[Stanistani]

Marten is Everyman or perhaps 'Everyguy,' just trying to find love, and ultimately find out what he's going to do in life.

Fun to watch. That's what Jeph brings us here, five times a week.
... and butts.

[osaka]

I think I'm gonna need a WCDTDT.

That's only for when you get too sucked into the shenanigans. I basically decide to ignore it because my reflexes on that are usually "make everything a ton worse".

Really.

And most of the time I don't even want to. But it happens because I'm way more liberal with my language than I should be irl.

Warning - while you were typing Stani² contracted butts disease

Wait, you mean to tell me we weren't here specifically for the butts?

[Is it cold in here?]

If Faye has delirium tremens in the bathroom, is that WC DTs?

[ASB84]

RF, I think that for some people, and I'm not speaking about the person you were answering above because I don't know him/her, but for myself, at least, any dislike of Tai goes beyond this instance or this punchline.

Tai is selfish. She pushes boundaries. Whether it's because of some issue she has or not, I won't speculate, but this is real. This is not stuff that anyone is pulling out of their ass. She openly lusted after Dora when she and Marten were together, making him uncomfortable. She was a complete creep the first time she met Hannelore and had to be told by Marten, twice, to knock it the fuck off. I seem to recall that when Clinton acted like a creep to Hanners, he got much less slack. Tai sort of does whatever Tai wants to do, and the options are to fuck off from her or deal with it.

<snip>

I don't like Tai. I acknowledge that her feelings for Dora are real, and likely deeper than Marten's feelings for Dora were. But I don't like Tai as a character and I really find that she grates. I will acknowledge that it might just be me. I hate passive aggressive people and I hate people who use their position to get things out of others. I don't have any doubt that Tai understands on some level that as the boss, she has greater sway over what Marten does and how he responds. Would she fire him for no cause? Probably not, but Marten subconsciously does not want to take that chance.

I think you've perfectly put into words why Tai bugs me as well. I'm not sure that I outright dislike her, as I think she has some funny moments and isn't a bad person on the whole, but those traits do bug me. Like you, I'm reminded of behaviour and personalities that rub me the wrong way in real life, so I do find her less sympathetic and agreeable than I think is intended.

It does seem to be about whatever she wants, with little regard to the people around her: I want to be with Dora, so too bad that she's dating my friend and employee while I'm harbouring a crush. I want to be with Dora, so forget that she just broke up with said friend and employee. I want to hold a rave in the library because I want to party at work, so to hell with anyone who doesn't and those fuddy duddies running the college. I want to get high and watch cartoons at work, so Marten can go ahead and train those new interns. I want to be the one to invite Dora to Emily's party, so I'll act like a spoiled child and make the situation incredibly awkward. I need help with my relationship, so I'll ask Marten for advice, no matter how awkward or unpleasant that is for him. I want Dora to open up to me more, and it doesn't matter if she's not ready or not in a place to do so right now. I want to smooth over this fight, because I want to get back to getting it on.

It's not that all of those situations aren't understandable or completely unreasonable, nor is Tai being particularly malicious. She's no villain. But it does come back to her getting what she wants no matter what, and overlooking other people's feelings and/or discomfort along the way. At least, that's how it comes across to me (and I'm guessing you and a couple of others too, based on recent posts...our spiteful banned friend not withstanding). That's why that last line about make-up kisses just doesn't sit well with me. I can't help thinking..."Really? That's your takeaway from all this? Not acknowledging the bigger issue, but just looking for the magic words that'll sweep it under the rug so you can get make-up kisses?"

I know that's reading a lot into one line of dialogue, and making assumptions that she's not going to change her tact or deal with the bigger issue in a better way, but...well, history suggests that as long as Tai's happy and getting what she wants, everything's aces. I think she's setting herself up for a fall if she truly believes that.

[plusorminus]

{snip really insightful analysis}

It's not that all of those situations aren't understandable or completely unreasonable, nor is Tai being particularly malicious. She's no villain. But it does come back to her getting what she wants no matter what, and overlooking other people's feelings and/or discomfort along the way. At least, that's how it comes across to me (and I'm guessing you and a couple of others too, based on recent posts...our spiteful banned friend not withstanding). That's why that last line about make-up kisses just doesn't sit well with me. I can't help thinking..."Really? That's your takeaway from all this? Not acknowledging the bigger issue, but just looking for the magic words that'll sweep it under the rug so you can get make-up kisses?"

I know that's reading a lot into one line of dialogue, and making assumptions that she's not going to change her tact or deal with the bigger issue in a better way, but...well, history suggests that as long as Tai's happy and getting what she wants, everything's aces. I think she's setting herself up for a fall if she truly believes that.

Wow, a few of the incidents you brought up were ones I'd forgotten about, but yes, a thousand times yes to this post.

The one time I actually felt for Tai was when she and Dora ran into one of Tai's ex-FWBs. I completely agreed with Dora being weirded out by that, but I could understand Tai not understanding why Dora, her "dream girl" would be freaked out by someone Tai hadn't been all that into, to judge by their interaction in that strip. I liked the resolution, that they were going to give each other some slack. I also thought that Tai's approach to Dora dating her was refreshing, basically telling her "Hey, it may not work and I'm cool with that, but let's at least try."

But I just think that for me, Tai's personality is not sustainable. She wants what she wants, and you either get in line with it or get out. Dora's not Marten. She may attempt to compromise with Tai, but I have had this weird feeling that Dora wants Tai to turn it down a notch and if Tai pushes this, Dora might cut yet another person out of her circle.

I do not think the Dora/Tai relationship will last forever, but I don't see them breaking up unless/until Jeph really wants to downshift Dora's appearances in the comic, because Dora's relationship with Tai is really the only reason we would keep seeing her, IMO. When was the last time we even saw Claire or Emily for that matter in the coffeeshop, Veronica is busy with Jim, Faye's fired, etc., etc. Possibly during a Dale arc but it's been forever since we've seen him, too.

[hedgie]

If Faye has delirium tremens in the bathroom, is that WC DTs?

I dunno, but delerium tremens is a rather decent beer.

[TheEvilDog]

This is either foreshadowing for a major fight, or a dull pop to the end of the relationship.

[ysth]

Unexpected end of arc.

[jwilliams]

{snipped}
If you don't agree, that's fine, but it's not really your place to tell me or anyone else that pointing out something that twigs as a personality trait "doesn't communicate anything."

Did you really just tell a black man where his place was?

For serious? (But he didn't know you were black! Yeah, I know. But A: still happened. B: it's a crappy thing to say no matter who you say it to, unless there is actually a place and someone doesn't own it. Like say a moderator's position.)

{snipped}

RF - Serious, albeit off topic question on language.  I've often heard (and used) expressions like, "Hey, it's not my place to say if they should be doing X." Or many variations on that theme.  To me, that sort of expression is pretty neutral, as opposed to the (clearly offensive) language of saying, "He needs to know his place," or, "I'm going to put her in her place." I take it that you don't hear a difference between the different contexts?

I'm genuinely curious, given that the use of specific language is crucial in my profession, and I honestly hope not to offend a significant number of people with an expression (e.g. It's not my/your/his place to say...) I've always heard in a neutral way.

[ReindeerFlotilla]

{snipped}
If you don't agree, that's fine, but it's not really your place to tell me or anyone else that pointing out something that twigs as a personality trait "doesn't communicate anything."

Did you really just tell a black man where his place was?

For serious? (But he didn't know you were black! Yeah, I know. But A: still happened. B: it's a crappy thing to say no matter who you say it to, unless there is actually a place and someone doesn't own it. Like say a moderator's position.)

{snipped}

RF - Serious, albeit off topic question on language.  I've often heard (and used) expressions like, "Hey, it's not my place to say if they should be doing X." Or many variations on that theme.  To me, that sort of expression is pretty neutral, as opposed to the (clearly offensive) language of saying, "He needs to know his place," or, "I'm going to put her in her place." I take it that you don't hear a difference between the different contexts?

I'm genuinely curious, given that the use of specific language is crucial in my profession, and I honestly hope not to offend a significant number of people with an expression (e.g. It's not my/your/his place to say...) I've always heard in a neutral way.

Hyperbole.

[TRVA123]

I don't really get Dora/Tai as a couple. idk. I don't dislike it, I just don't really get the appeal for either of them.

I do think that Tai is immature. I don't remember how old Tai is in relation to the cast, but she acts much younger. I mean, she is still in that "college" mindset, and in the context of college her behavior makes sense. Idk, I do find her childish and some of her behavior is grating, but I don't think she is a bad person or anything. She just has a lot of living to do.

I kind of see a parent/child dynamic between Dora and Tai. Dora acts maternal to everyone (which doesn't exactly help her control issues) and Tai acts childish. The dynamic creeps me out.

[sitnspin]

{snipped}
If you don't agree, that's fine, but it's not really your place to tell me or anyone else that pointing out something that twigs as a personality trait "doesn't communicate anything."

Whether or not something gets communicated clearly ( or at all) is entirely up to the listener, not the speaker. It is not the speaker's place to decide if they communicated successfully.

[jwilliams]

{snipped}
If you don't agree, that's fine, but it's not really your place to tell me or anyone else that pointing out something that twigs as a personality trait "doesn't communicate anything."

Did you really just tell a black man where his place was?

For serious? (But he didn't know you were black! Yeah, I know. But A: still happened. B: it's a crappy thing to say no matter who you say it to, unless there is actually a place and someone doesn't own it. Like say a moderator's position.)

{snipped}

RF - Serious, albeit off topic question on language.  I've often heard (and used) expressions like, "Hey, it's not my place to say if they should be doing X." Or many variations on that theme.  To me, that sort of expression is pretty neutral, as opposed to the (clearly offensive) language of saying, "He needs to know his place," or, "I'm going to put her in her place." I take it that you don't hear a difference between the different contexts?

I'm genuinely curious, given that the use of specific language is crucial in my profession, and I honestly hope not to offend a significant number of people with an expression (e.g. It's not my/your/his place to say...) I've always heard in a neutral way.

Hyperbole.

Thank goodness.  I was afraid that you were a bit nutty.  Now I can enjoy your posts again. 

[valkygrrl]

Unexpected end of arc.

Not with a bang but a whimper.

Of course the last Dora/Marten fight happened pretty quickly after the one before it was resolved so there's still some hope.

[TheEvilDog]

I kind of see a parent/child dynamic between Dora and Tai. Dora acts maternal to everyone (which doesn't exactly help her control issues) and Tai acts childish. The dynamic creeps me out.

That might actually why it works for Dora. She has someone who can fulfil her need to control a given situation and Tai is emotionally immature enough to not realise what's happening.

It's not healthy for either of them.

Unexpected end of arc.

Not with a bang but a whimper.

Of course the last Dora/Marten fight happened pretty quickly after the one before it was resolved so there's still some hope.

Marten and Dora's relationship went through several cycles of Fight/Makeup/peace and quiet before it started again. We're just seeing the calm before the next storm.

[ReindeerFlotilla]

I am more than a bit nutty.

Show me someone who isn't and I will show you a corpse or an excellent liar.

[Gladstone]

Unexpected end of arc.

Yay, we survived our first fight.

[Toe]

3rd panel: since when does Tai have dat ass? Did she get implants?

[ysth]

RF - Serious, albeit off topic question on language.  I've often heard (and used) expressions like, "Hey, it's not my place to say if they should be doing X." Or many variations on that theme.  To me, that sort of expression is pretty neutral, as opposed to the (clearly offensive) language of saying, "He needs to know his place," or, "I'm going to put her in her place." I take it that you don't hear a difference between the different contexts?

I'm genuinely curious, given that the use of specific language is crucial in my profession, and I honestly hope not to offend a significant number of people with an expression (e.g. It's not my/your/his place to say...) I've always heard in a neutral way.

It's not my place to say is an idiom (and usually followed by but I will anyway); it's not someone else's place to say is confrontative.

[Gladstone]

3rd panel: since when does Tai have dat ass? Did she get implants?

Dora occasionally gets overzealous with the butt-grabbing, so she started wearing extra padding.

[CaptainFish]

The QC characters need to be careful with all the greeting card-itis that's going around. One of these days they'll get stuck that way.

[ASB84]

That resolved itself pretty quickly. Marten's distress at not knowing CoD had a secret menu remains the biggest point of contention between a couple to date...alright, alright, exaggeration. But yeah, that was fast.

Of course, it remains to be seen whether the lesson sticks with both of them. Tai's still got a bit of that college mindset, as TRVA123 put it, and Dora has promised to be more open before. If we could grow up, give up our bad habits, and change ourselves in a fingersnap, a lot of professionals would be out of a job.

I don't really get Dora/Tai as a couple. idk. I don't dislike it, I just don't really get the appeal for either of them.

I do think that Tai is immature. I don't remember how old Tai is in relation to the cast, but she acts much younger. I mean, she is still in that "college" mindset, and in the context of college her behavior makes sense. Idk, I do find her childish and some of her behavior is grating, but I don't think she is a bad person or anything. She just has a lot of living to do.

I kind of see a parent/child dynamic between Dora and Tai. Dora acts maternal to everyone (which doesn't exactly help her control issues) and Tai acts childish. The dynamic creeps me out.

I've always got that impression too, though I think TheEvilDog makes a good point about how that kind of suits both characters.

[Aziraphale]

I don't know that I'd go so far as to say it's like a parent/child relationship. They do, however, come across more like friends with benefits (with a hefty dose of codependence) than as a couple with a deep connection.

[Omega Entity]

3rd panel: since when does Tai have dat ass? Did she get implants?

Glad someone else noticed it too. I think I recall her not having much in the curves department/more androgynous body-wise, in previous comics.

[TheEvilDog]

I've always got that impression too, though I think TheEvilDog makes a good point about how that kind of suits both characters.

Don't get me wrong. I don't think it should suit them, because it isn't healthy, especially for Tai - this is her first major relationship, so she's going to go along with it because she doesn't know any better. Dora has some major control issues and the fact that Tai was the one to initiate the apology means that Dora remains in control.

Most of Marten and Dora's fights were initiated by Dora and in those situations, it was Dora who apologised first. We're seeing a slightly different dynamic here, but I can see more fights in the not too distant future.

Remember that Dora has said before she has control issues and she needs to work on that. It's easy to say you need to do something, but it's something else entirely to actually do it.

[Penquin47]

3rd panel: since when does Tai have dat ass? Did she get implants?

Glad someone else noticed it too. I think I recall her not having much in the curves department/more androgynous body-wise, in previous comics.

Tai even says so!

[Consilium]

So is in-comic-today the day that Faye goes to the group session? Cause we skipped to the next day right?

[tywren]

Well that was disappointing. I was kind of hoping for Tai moping for the first part of the week; then cut to the rave + orgy in the library for a strip or two where she gets her daily dose of Vitamin E; and closing with Dora coming to apologizes only to find Tai in a 3 way make-out session with a couple of co-eds.

This could have ultimately been what puts Tai, and Faye in the same support group, which some people here have been wanting.

[TheEvilDog]

Well that was disappointing. I was kind of hoping for Tai moping for the first part of the week; then cut to the rave + orgy in the library for a strip or two where she gets her daily dose of Vitamin E; and closing with Dora coming to apologizes only to find Tai in a 3 way make-out session with a couple of co-eds.

This could have ultimately been what puts Tai, and Faye in the same support group, which some people here have been wanting.

The rave is still coming up, and anything can happen. Give it time.

[Rghfrgl]

3rd panel: since when does Tai have dat ass? Did she get implants?

Butts disease.

[plusorminus]

Don't get me wrong. I don't think it should suit them, because it isn't healthy, especially for Tai - this is her first major relationship, so she's going to go along with it because she doesn't know any better. Dora has some major control issues and the fact that Tai was the one to initiate the apology means that Dora remains in control.

Most of Marten and Dora's fights were initiated by Dora and in those situations, it was Dora who apologised first. We're seeing a slightly different dynamic here, but I can see more fights in the not too distant future.

Remember that Dora has said before she has control issues and she needs to work on that. It's easy to say you need to do something, but it's something else entirely to actually do it.

I honestly don't get this line of thinking. Tai apologized first because she was in the wrong. Dora didn't want to talk about stuff and Tai pushed. On some level, Tai recognizes that but is too self centered to draw it out. Possibly Marten would have brought that up if their conversation had been longer.

It's not Dora's problem that this is Tai's first relationship. If things go south between Marigold and Dale tomorrow because of shit Marigold did, is it going to be Dale's fault because he was her first boyfriend and the first guy she slept with? It's immaterial. Tai's an adult. If she decides she's old enough to be in an adult relationship, then she has to take the consequences.

I see no evidence of "control issues" by Dora in her relationship with Tai. We barely bloody see any interaction between them, so I have no idea where you're even getting that from. Instead of stewing or immediately blowing up and accusing as she would do with Marten, when Dora was bothered by something, she talked it out calmly with Faye, realized where she was possibly being stubborn, and talked it over with Tai immediately. She didn't let the Jim awkwardness linger. She's not passed judgment on the way Tai runs the library or on her recreational drug use. So where are these "control issues" in this relationship?

[Aziraphale]

Well that was disappointing. I was kind of hoping for Tai moping for the first part of the week; then cut to the rave + orgy in the library for a strip or two where she gets her daily dose of Vitamin E; and closing with Dora coming to apologizes only to find Tai in a 3 way make-out session with a couple of co-eds.

This could have ultimately been what puts Tai, and Faye in the same support group, which some people here have been wanting.

Nope.

Remember, part of what led to Tai and Dora ending up together was Tai wanting to be in a monogamous relationship. As far as we know, they don't have an open relationship, and to have Tai just looking for random smooches/hookups/whatever seems like a pretty big stretch.

Don't get me wrong. I don't think it should suit them, because it isn't healthy, especially for Tai - this is her first major relationship, so she's going to go along with it because she doesn't know any better. Dora has some major control issues and the fact that Tai was the one to initiate the apology means that Dora remains in control.

Most of Marten and Dora's fights were initiated by Dora and in those situations, it was Dora who apologised first. We're seeing a slightly different dynamic here, but I can see more fights in the not too distant future.

Remember that Dora has said before she has control issues and she needs to work on that. It's easy to say you need to do something, but it's something else entirely to actually do it.

I honestly don't get this line of thinking. Tai apologized first because she was in the wrong. Dora didn't want to talk about stuff and Tai pushed. On some level, Tai recognizes that but is too self centered to draw it out. Possibly Marten would have brought that up if their conversation had been longer.

It's not Dora's problem that this is Tai's first relationship. If things go south between Marigold and Dale tomorrow because of shit Marigold did, is it going to be Dale's fault because he was her first boyfriend and the first guy she slept with? It's immaterial. Tai's an adult. If she decides she's old enough to be in an adult relationship, then she has to take the consequences.

I see no evidence of "control issues" by Dora in her relationship with Tai. We barely bloody see any interaction between them, so I have no idea where you're even getting that from. Instead of stewing or immediately blowing up and accusing as she would do with Marten, when Dora was bothered by something, she talked it out calmly with Faye, realized where she was possibly being stubborn, and talked it over with Tai immediately. She didn't let the Jim awkwardness linger. She's not passed judgment on the way Tai runs the library or on her recreational drug use. So where are these "control issues" in this relationship?

This.

While, as I mentioned before, I don't see a lot of depth in Dora and Tai's relationship (at least on the evidence in-comic), I think one thing that keeps them together, at least from where Dora's sitting, is that it's lower maintenance than her previous relationships (including the one with Marten). It's likely that she finds it refreshing/comforting to have at least one part of her life where she doesn't have to be in control all the time.

[Kugai]

Dawwwwwwww


Huggleses




But I think Jeph could have moved them a bit closer together.

[Half Empty Coffee Cup]

Huh. I stop checking the forum for two days and all that in the past four pages happens? Jeeze.

But hey, they made up! Whoo!

[slydon]

Welp, that resolved itself quickly

[tywren]

Nope.

Remember, part of what led to Tai and Dora ending up together was Tai wanting to be in a monogamous relationship. As far as we know, they don't have an open relationship, and to have Tai just looking for random smooches/hookups/whatever seems like a pretty big stretch.

To paraphrase Rick James "Ecstasy's a helluva drug". That, plus hurt feels due to the argument, plus Tai's immaturity, could lead her to do things in the heat of the moment that she wouldn't do otherwise, and would regret later.

[ReindeerFlotilla]

Dora was also wrong. Tai's well intentioned wrong doesn't make Dora right any more than Tai's good intent makes her right. Mistakes were made. Probably more to follow, but meh.

In fact, I think Dora is still wrong. She's trying, to her credit. But her mistake wasn't in not opening up. It was making her defensiveness offensive. The best defense is a good offense, but not in a relationship. Feelings are hard, and people who aren't feeling our feelings tend to want us to get over them before we're ready.

In the long term, it would be better for anyone to be less defensive and more open, but Dora probably just needs to work on not responding to so many things with pike walls and boiling oil. That's a thing that goes both ways. Dora tends treat herself the same way, and as someone with enough self-loathing for any ten men, I can say that's not a good thing.

Tai, on the other hand... her issue seems to be what it's always been. She's not big on waiting for gratification. She can do it. But she doesn't always stop to think that now would be a good time to employ that skill.

All that said, if they both drew the best possible lessons from this, it'd be kinda unrealistic.