Comic Discussion > QUESTIONABLE CONTENT
WCDT Strips 3241 - 3245 (13-17 June 2016)
oddtail:
--- Quote from: Tova on 18 Jun 2016, 19:35 ---Everyone seems to constantly forget that Renee is in the dark and we are not.
--- End quote ---
Has she done anything to change that? Even the slightest sliver of effort? Not only she hasn't, but she dismisses any suggestions to the contrary of her preconceived notion. It's kinda hard to excuse her "being in the dark" when she makes a very valiant effort to stick to being in the dark.
--- Quote ---So, is Renee's suspicion without cause? Maybe, maybe not. We don't know their history.
--- End quote ---
She has (probably) no history with Clinton specifically. Her own fears and prejudices are not a "cause" to be suspicious. I'm not saying it's not understandable that she might be overly cautious. I don't think anyone is disputing that. People are flawed and their objectivity can be flawed, too.
But the fact that she may have some history that makes her suspicious is not the point. The point is whether her approach is, for the lack of a better word, "right". And personal bias aside, this behaviour in this situation is not warranted. Clinton behaved in a way that may raise some red flags initially, but if we look in slightly more detail at what Renee knows, he did nothing unreasonable or dangerous. And, again, she learnt what she learnt not on her own, but was told by both Clinton and Brun their own interpretations of the recent events, and she stuck to her guns. Not only that, she didn't probe, she didn't question, she moved straight to aggression. Even in the event Clinton *was* a bad guy in this whole situation, that would accomplish nothing productive. And she has nothing to support the idea that he was, other than the fact that there are bad guys out there. I'm sorry, that's pretty weak a thing to go on.
It's OK to advise caution to Brun, but Renee completely dismisses the possibility that Clinton might be just a random stranger that helped.
And I'm sorry, but if I were in the exact same situation as Renee, I'd spend a good minute thanking the kind stranger for helping my friend, not YELLING at them. I would talk to the friend, make sure they are OK, advise to take the kindness with a grain of salt, and then proceed to assume the most reasonable, most probable, and most productive scenario - there was a guy and the guy decided to help. Because as someone pointed out in the thread, that's what people *do*.
And on the other side of the equation, if someone yelled at me for helping someone out, on the sole basis of my gender, I would (I think I may have made that point) immediately go "fuck you too, then". And stay the Hell away from the person I helped, just to make sure. I'm sorry, but being judged guilty on the basis of my Y chromosome just because someone has had possibly bad experiences with people is not reasonable levels of caution. It's insulting, it's counterproductive and the person who is overly worried should, at the very least, dig a little deeper to confirm their suspicions. Not do... this.
And I know there is no symmetry here, but imagine Renee had bad experiences with [insert group here]. And she behaved the exact same way to a member of that group (because hey, you can't PROVE a member of [insert group here] is not acting on bad intentions). I can't know for sure, granted, but I think you'd be less likely to give her the benefit of the doubt if the [insert group here] was, say, a racial (or other) minority. And again, I know this would not be the *exact* same situation, because white heterosexual men have had a completely different history, culturally, than any minority. But while white men are not an oppressed group, being one is not a crime, either. If it's unreasonable to jump to conclusions based on someone's race, sexuality, nationality, occupation, religion or whatever, jumping to conclusions based on being part of half the world's population doesn't strike me as justified, either.
chaospersonified:
I'm seriously wondering now if I'm just surrounded by emotionally-broken people who've had horrible lives all day every day, or if you people arguing that Renee couldn't possibly have had an experience with an emotionally-manipulative predator are just lucky not to have met many victims of that sort of thing.
I've absolutely seen people do what Renee thinks Clinton is doing, and I'm pretty sheltered for my area. Would I respond in that exact way? No, but these things happened to acquaintances, not close friends, and I would probably feel differently if it were a close friend who'd gone through that.
oddtail:
--- Quote from: chaospersonified on 19 Jun 2016, 13:29 ---I've absolutely seen people do what Renee thinks Clinton is doing, and I'm pretty sheltered for my area.
--- End quote ---
I don't understand the reasoning. I've been cheated out of my money, but I still buy things online. I was once a punching bag (EDIT: emotional, not literal) for bullies for years, but I don't assume everyone is a bully. I've been beaten up, mugged and left bloodied on the pavement, but I don't assume I'm gonna be mugged every single time a stranger walks up to me to ask a question (and when I do, e.g. my "this guy has a shaven head and seems in good shape" alarm bells go off, I take a moment to collect myself and set aside my fear-based first assumption).
I'm sure I have it better than most people, but I assume even those extremely unlucky haven't had exclusively bad experiences with strangers. And assuming cruel and evil intentions from strange people, which *is* an attitude I've had in the past, tends to turn itself into a self-fulfilling prophecy, at least on occasion. Plus, assuming every person I pass on the street is out to get me? I don't think I'd be able to leave my house if I assumed that by default.
jheartney:
My (hopefully final) take on Renee is she's written as a cartoonish paranoid for comic effect. Going forward, she might serve as a dramatic foil to push Brun in an uncomfortable direction, which might then include more tongue-in-cheek interactions with Clinton. Jeph might take it dark with a revelation of old deep trauma, but more likely it's all about launching Brun into a spot in the ever-growing QC cast. Given Brun's evident introversion, this might need a temporary antagonist (Renee) to force Brun out of her shell.
pwhodges:
--- Quote from: chaospersonified on 19 Jun 2016, 13:29 ---I've absolutely seen people do what Renee thinks Clinton is doing,
--- End quote ---
You've seen people who are involved in a disaster immediately take advantage of other victims as their response?
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version