Print

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

Elliot + Clinton

12 (21.8%)

Elliot + Brun

3 (5.5%)

Elliot + Clinton + Brun

15 (27.3%)

Clinton + Brun (Sorry Elliot)

7 (12.7%)

Millie + Brun (Sorry Elliot, Clinton)

18 (32.7%)

Total Members Voted: 42

[Timemaster]

There might be a chance for Elliot and Clinton: Clinton once said that he would be open for the possibility if the right guy came along

I completely forgot about that. Thanks for the reminder. Now I‘m even more interested how this will go on. 

[N.N. Marf]

Those two really need to learn how to just deal with the fact that things involving deeper emotions are always weird and just get on with their lives. No, I'm not expecting them to do that either!

I think the only way to make it not weird is to let it be weird. Does that make sense? I think it does somehow.

the bit at UR when she made a crack to her friend about her being 'made of biodegradable matter' was a bit too aggressive for my liking. there is an aspect of snobbishness and cruelty that doesn't quite work for me.

Maybe they are past the stage of maintaining scatanecrological niceties in that relationship, but how can they know cybrids can't die? Psychical errors they don't know how to correct would accumulate.

Let's avoid even inadvertent offense to our trans members. It turns out, for example, that "transgenders" can cause offense. https://ischoolsjsu.libguides.com/geist/2. It's a high degree of care but it is what's needed to be decent. UPDATE: to put it more positively, "trans people" is a good phrase to use.

I didn't see ``trans people'' suggested anywhere on that page. I saw ``transgender people,'' which I think is better than ``trans people,'' because ``trans people'' is vague about what the crossing is. The context might make it clear, but that puts a little extra work for each reader, which is probably in sum greater than the work of typing out the 6 letters more.
Related, but more generally, I usually recommend using ``persons'' instead of ``people,'' because we usually care about the members of the class of persons, rather than the class itself. I think the point against ``transgenders'' is the same. When an adjective is used as a noun meaning an item that has that quality (it's called ``nouning an adjective'' (and that's called ``verbing a noun'')). That's not necessarily bad, but when you pluralize it, as the word ``transgenders'' is, the plural moves the emphasis slightly away from the persons of that type to the class of persons. Of course, confusing a member of a class with the class is usually inaccurate. I'm rarely offended by anything much, but I can understand that a person might be offended by persons assuming he represents a class that's is so variegated, or assuming that what's in common among the members of such a variegated class is his only quality, is reasonable.
(I usually think about it not as crossing genders, but as returning to his proper gender, because that's what it's really about.)

[ihaveavoice]

"Transgenders" isn't great for the same reason that saying "the Blacks" instead of "Black people" isn't a good thing to do. And the idea that people who are transgender are somehow tricking cisgendered people is hugely transphobic. It really isn't some huge thing that trans women are like going around trying to lure straight cis men into bed with them without them knowing they're trans. Why would anyone be so eager to up their chances that they're going to be murdered in a violent bigoted rage? And it's not like it's safe for people to just go around announcing to everyone that they're transgender - that's generally a delicate subject for people and needs to wait for a specific private conversation, like we've seen with Claire and the people she's told. The fact that Claire doesn't wear a "Hello, I'm trans" nametag doesn't mean that she's misleading people into thinking she's cis. That "I'm just saying they shouldn't be lying about it" thing is really just transphobes trying to pretend they're just being reasonable by trying to protect the innocent against those scary, scary trans liars.

[Mr_Rose]

The reason transphobes want trans* people to “be honest” i.e. wear a name tag is the same reason the Nazis wanted Jews to wear a yellow star; so they know who to target.

[Marco]

When I saw today's strip, all I could think was "Thank God it's not friday". Unless, of course, Steve's back tomorrow as some of you suggested.
(I hope Jeph is not reading this and having ideas)

IIRC, Jeph has been forcing himself to have a buffer of already finished strips for several years now - so I'd say it's unlikely your comments today could influence tomorrow's strip.

He also insists he doesn't read the forums, for his own sanity.

A buffer of cereal strips to use when appropriate?

[snubnose]

The reason transphobes want trans* people to “be honest” i.e. wear a name tag is the same reason the Nazis wanted Jews to wear a yellow star; so they know who to target.

Eh ?

I have never heard of people who demand that transpeople have to wear public tags ?

And by the way, the goal of the Nazis was to further victimize the jews. They became very outraged when they found out that people by vast majority instead expressed how bad they felt for jews when they saw people wearing these signs.

[jwhouk]

Before we completely Godwin this thread (EDIT: Too late), I wonder about something - will Clinton let slip about Claire?

[BenRG]

Before we completely Godwin this thread (EDIT: Too late), I wonder about something - will Clinton let slip about Claire?

It would have to be a very specific circumstance to a very specific audience because I think he's sufficiently aware of her vulnerabilities that he wouldn't normally even think of doing something like that, no matter how much he trusts (or is annoyed with) the person to whom he is talking.

I'm thinking that if he met someone else whose circumstances were similar to Claire and found himself in a corner trying to explain his otherwise-inexplicable statement that he 'gets where you're coming from'.

[Cornelius]

I'm not sure he will, even then. He's very protective and concerned about her, even if they have some sibling quarrels. Even if he's younger, he very much feels like the protective big brother.

[Perfectly Reasonable]

You know, just about every time we see the ladybot at the serving window, she's saying something snarky and/or rude. That doesn't make her that unusual in the cast of QC but the bit at UR when she made a crack to her friend about her being 'made of biodegradable matter' was a bit too aggressive for my liking. I know that Jeph has created the character solely for the purpose of delivering the snappy punchline but there is an aspect of snobbishness and cruelty that doesn't quite work for me.

That she chose a heart with a line through it as a spray suggests she considers herself above fluffy pink sentimentality. Would probably regard Millie with contempt. I see it as Jeph showing us that the range of AI viewpoints is pretty broad.

[cybersmurf]

When I saw today's strip, all I could think was "Thank God it's not friday". Unless, of course, Steve's back tomorrow as some of you suggested.
(I hope Jeph is not reading this and having ideas)

IIRC, Jeph has been forcing himself to have a buffer of already finished strips for several years now - so I'd say it's unlikely your comments today could influence tomorrow's strip.

He also insists he doesn't read the forums, for his own sanity.

Doesn't mean he could throw some fresh Melons at us.
And Mister JJ checks in every now and then, mostly when some specialist gets reported. But yeah, he usually doesn't, for his sanity's sake.



Does today's strip count as semi-cliffhanger? Clinton has gotten the message, but there is no answer yet.

There might be a chance for Elliot and Clinton: Clinton once said that he would be open for the possibility if the right guy came along

AND Clinton says Elliot would be quite a catch! So, personally, I think there actually is a chance for... Ellton? Better not have me go there. In that corner of my mind there is only madness.

[cesium133]

There might be a chance for Elliot and Clinton: Clinton once said that he would be open for the possibility if the right guy came along

AND Clinton says Elliot would be quite a catch! So, personally, I think there actually is a chance for... Ellton? Better not have me go there. In that corner of my mind there is only madness.

Ellton? Hopefully they don't meet a rocket man named Johnn.

[de_la_Nae]

let slip about claire about what?

[Cornelius]

Out her, they mean, I think. At least that's what I responded to, even if it's a non sequitur.

[Mr_Rose]

The reason transphobes want trans* people to “be honest” i.e. wear a name tag is the same reason the Nazis wanted Jews to wear a yellow star; so they know who to target.

Eh ?

I have never heard of people who demand that transpeople have to wear public tags ?

And by the way, the goal of the Nazis was to further victimize the jews. They became very outraged when they found out that people by vast majority instead expressed how bad they felt for jews when they saw people wearing these signs.

You mean except those people who tried (and are trying) to pass laws to force trans* people to use the ‘correct’ (according to their birth certificate) bathroom? Using propagandist fear-mongering lies as ‘justification’ for their blatant bigotry? With specific clauses to allow “concerned citizens” to confirm that “suspicious individuals” were in compliance, presumably by some form of ID check? You never heard of those guys? Well now you have; don’t forget.

As for the rest of your post: yes, and? Further victimisation (over and above the increased suicide rate, enormously inflated risk of physical and sexual assault, and outrageously inflated medical costs) of trans* people is the transparently blatant goal. And yes, they all got very upset when the bill(s) were struck down before they could become laws because of massive public outcry.

[Gnabberwocky]

The gender of any given person is entirely up to them.

The people they choose to tell (and when they tell them) about their trans* status is entirely up to them.

Denying anyone either of those rights is a hateful act.

Case fucking closed.

[Is it cold in here?]

Except for the important point that it's not a matter of choice.

[Thrillho]

I have absolutely no idea how Claire's gender ended up involved in a discussion about whether Clinton and Elliot were going to have butt-based fun together. Will Elliot perhaps tell Clinton a deep dark secret about Renee for no reason?

For the record, if they aren't gonna, I will be - to coin a phrase - bummed out about that.

[Beast_Reborn]

Gay sex isn't necessarily "butt-based." Especially given that Clinton has never done anything with a guy before (for that matter, we don't know for sure if Elliot has), jumping straight into anal might not be the best idea. Admittedly this is nitpicking what might just be a rhetorical flourish.

[Case]

And by the way, the goal of the Nazis was to further victimize the jews. They became very outraged when they found out that people by vast majority instead expressed how bad they felt for jews when they saw people wearing these signs.

- The goal of the Nazis was the literal eradication of European Jewry. They were terrifyingly effective in that.

- Individual expressions of 'sympathy and pity' from gentile Germans towards their Jewish compatriots made to wear the Judenstern are reliably, documented, eg in reports of the Sicherheitsdienst, or accounts from survivors of the Holocaust.

However, I have never even heard anyone claim that the "vast majority" of Germans made such gestures, or shared the sentiment - and the reactions of the German populace to the barbaric repressions, as well as their knowledge about their full extend has been a major focus of German historiography since at least the 1990s. Nor was I able to find anything corroborating your claim on the Germanophone interwebbertubes (I found metric shittons of evidence for widespread tolerance or tacit approval of the repressions, as well as for active support from ordinary citizens).
 
I look forward to your presenting credible evidence for your assertion.

More important would be the question whether the outrage that the "vast majority" of our grantparents' generation allegedly felt compelled them to discharge their ethical duty in meaningful, tangible ways. Six million victims of industrialized murder provide an exhaustive answer.

[Kairi]

just appreciating the (intentional? unintentional? beautiful!) bisexual imagery in that they are currently standing in front of a taco poster and for one of their last conversational dances around this topic they were standing in front of a banana poster

[Thrillho]

Gay sex isn't necessarily "butt-based." Especially given that Clinton has never done anything with a guy before (for that matter, we don't know for sure if Elliot has), jumping straight into anal might not be the best idea. Admittedly this is nitpicking what might just be a rhetorical flourish.

Hit the nail on the head with the last sentence, friend

The comparative physical frames alone of these two guys and one has a goddamn ROBOT HAND

Look after your sphincters, children

[marbledmurrelet]

Hey, I found my barely used account from 2014! Coming out of lurking again to try and get this thread away from sphincters and back to topics I have thoughts about...

re: Being attracted to someone, but not sure if it's a crush:
I've been there. I suppose it was (or is) a combination of overthinking, denial, and my feelings being messy and fluctuating at times. A "crush" in my understanding is intense romantic attraction, but I'm not sure what exactly THAT means. Or what exactly it is that I want from that person that I'm strongly but kind of diffusely attracted to. I suspect it also depends on how much I think the other person could be interested in. I might be perfectly happy (ok, mostly happy) just having a meaningful connection with deep conversations and cuddles, but I really really long for closeness in SOME way. I've had obvious crushes on other people, but sometimes it's not that clear.

re: things being "weird":

I think the only way to make it not weird is to let it be weird. Does that make sense? I think it does somehow.

It makes sense to me. I'm not even sure what everyone means by "weird" in this context, but it's not necessarily bad? IME it's much better to acknowledge things than try and pretend they're not there or that everything's cool.
Things did feel weird and uncomfortable (to me) between me and my not-quite-sure-if-crush friend while I spent most of my spare time trying to figure out if it was mutual without being open with him. So I ended up telling him about my feelings and learnt that they weren't mutual, but he was really chill about it. Now it may still feel weird sometimes in that it's not "normal", but it doesn't get in the way. I actually got the impression that those open conversations deepened our friendship (because he's a very, very awesome person).

re: "transgenders":
Trans here. If someone uses that term, I assume they're transphobic. From experience. If they proceed to defend JK Rowling, I DEFINITELY assume that they're transphobic or at least the type that feels the need to broadcast opinions that are based on ignorance.

[Gnabberwocky]

Except for the important point that it's not a matter of choice.

For sure. I actually rewrote that because my original post included the term "choose," which was obviously inaccurate. I guess I didn't quite get it anyway.

I guess...it's up to them how they want to express how they identify? If anyone has a better way to say that, please let me know.

[Case]

Except for the important point that it's not a matter of choice.

For sure. I actually rewrote that because my original post included the term "choose," which was obviously inaccurate. I guess I didn't quite get it anyway.

I guess...it's up to them how they want to express how they identify? If anyone has a better way to say that, please let me know.

There's a clunky term in German constitutional law called "(The right to) informational self-determination". It's considered a basic right. Austria and Switzerland have similar legislation. The thrust of the concept is more in the privacy direction, and especially in the sense of a defensive right against state surveillance and/or what we'd call data-mining today,  One of the relevant categories of personal data mentioned in commentary is sexual orientation (pretty sure that trans/cis status would be considered the same way). It's related to the US concept of the right to privacy.

The German term is informationelle Selbstbestimmung. It is formally defined as "the authority of the individual to decide himself, on the basis of the idea of self-determination, when and within what limits information about his private life should be communicated to others.[1]" Freedom of speech, protection of privacy, right to active private life, right to education, protection of personal data, and the right to public sector information all fall under the umbrella of informational self-determination.

[Gnabberwocky]

I don't see why you say that when Elliot and Renee have been through this situation, and things are not weird between them.

Haha, yes! Finally a sort of valid counter-example!

[Tova]

Just to remind you, what I was pointing out was that things don't need to remain weird between Elliot and Clinton just because things momentarily got weird.

The comic you've cited is precisely the example I used to support my statement. It's not a counter-example.

[ihaveavoice]

And by the way, the goal of the Nazis was to further victimize the jews. They became very outraged when they found out that people by vast majority instead expressed how bad they felt for jews when they saw people wearing these signs.

-snip- I have never even heard anyone claim that the "vast majority" of Germans made such gestures, or shared the sentiment - and the reactions of the German populace to the barbaric repressions, as well as their knowledge about their full extend has been a major focus of German historiography since at least the 1990s. Nor was I able to find anything corroborating your claim on the Germanophone interwebbertubes (I found metric shittons of evidence for widespread tolerance or tacit approval of the repressions, as well as for active support from ordinary citizens).
 
I look forward to your presenting credible evidence for your assertion.

More important would be the question whether the outrage that the "vast majority" of our grantparents' generation allegedly felt compelled them to discharge their ethical duty in meaningful, tangible ways. Six million victims of industrialized murder provide an exhaustive answer.

I would also be very interested in seeing snubnose explain this statement. It is AT BEST an incredibly irresponsible and inaccurate thing to state as fact on a public forum.

[cybersmurf]

One of the relevant categories of personal data mentioned in commentary is sexual orientation (pretty sure that trans/cis status would be considered the same way). It's related to the US concept of the right to privacy.

Basically, that's one of the reasons how and why Austria now has same-sex marriage. Before marriage was opened up there was "civil union* for same-sex couples, and same-sex couples only. Since you have to divulge the information about being married/in a civil union to your employer for social security reasons (among other), you had to out yourself. So, somebody sued, and won. Since "Homosexuality is still stigmatised, and as it forces you to give away sexual orientation" it was deemed unconstitutional.



Anyways, to me it seems once Clinton regains enough mental capacity to fully process this, I think he may give it a try.

[chris73]

It might be cute if these were kids but for 20-somethings its something else...

[cybersmurf]

It might be cute if these were kids but for 20-somethings its something else...

Growing old is mandatory, growing up is optional.

[Gyrre]

It might be cute if these were kids but for 20-somethings its something else...

Everyone progresses at different rates. Not everyone gets a lot of dating experience as a teen, and --for some-- it can be quite bad over all.

[Dock Braun]

Except for the important point that it's not a matter of choice.

For sure. I actually rewrote that because my original post included the term "choose," which was obviously inaccurate. I guess I didn't quite get it anyway.

I guess...it's up to them how they want to express how they identify? If anyone has a better way to say that, please let me know.

I'm very sorry I'll use the cliche schrodinger's cat metaphor, but it's the best way I know so far to explain my gender situation.
So my gender is more complicated than just male of female or some other fixed gender in the space of possible genders. It's also not just that it varies depending on the circumstance (fluid gender), but sometimes, there are multiple genders that I am simultaneously (polygender? I don't remember what the word for it is). Even more complicated than that is that of all the genders I could be, sometimes I'm in a "gender superposition" of some of those genders, and I do have some control over how the "superposition" "collapses" to one of those genders. It's weird for me to think about, too, and I don't exactly understand it all yet, but I do, sometimes, have some choice over what specific gender I am a given time. The point is that even if it's not a choice in many cases for many persons, forcing me to choose the gender that someone else want's me to choose when I can choose, is really oppressive.

[Thrillho]

It might be cute if these were kids but for 20-somethings its something else...

They may neither have dealt with this scenario in a male on male interaction.

Lots of people who discover their queerness later in life report a feeling of repeating teenage experiences because of the new context. I can personally attest to this to as a recently out person in their 30s.

[jwhouk]

As I read through the comments here, I realized that Jeph probably wouldn't be the type to have an accidental "because of my sister" comment come out of Clinton's mouth. (That, by the way, is what I was thinking when I mentioned about accidentally "outing" Claire to Elliott.) Clinton is very careful when it comes to his sister, and has shown he can keep the secret.

[Is it cold in here?]

Welcome, mind-expanding new person!

It is humbling that I'm constantly learning new variations on gender identity and expression.

-----

I wonder if snubnose was thinking about the widely reported story of the King of Denmark and his subjects wearing yellow stars under occupation. I'd read about it many places and was sad to find it did not actually happen: https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/a-star-is-borne/

[TV4Fun]

This whole week of comics is just blowing my mind that in the QC-verse people are still going out to restaurants and eating inside at tables.

[Theta9]

This whole week of comics is just blowing my mind that in the QC-verse people are still going out to restaurants and eating inside at tables.

Because in our world there are AI robots walking around among us?

[Gyrre]

This whole week of comics is just blowing my mind that in the QC-verse people are still going out to restaurants and eating inside at tables.

Because in our world there are AI robots walking around among us?

Sort of in some places. Though, the intent behind them seems a fair bit different in some cases (buy robot and fire staff vs intended to actually help people).

[Theta9]

This whole week of comics is just blowing my mind that in the QC-verse people are still going out to restaurants and eating inside at tables.

Because in our world there are AI robots walking around among us?

Sort of in some places. Though, the intent behind them seems a fair bit different in some cases (buy robot and fire staff vs intended to actually help people).

Are those sentient, speaking AI? Where?

[TV4Fun]

This whole week of comics is just blowing my mind that in the QC-verse people are still going out to restaurants and eating inside at tables.

Because in our world there are AI robots walking around among us?

Yeah, I got over that a while ago. Seeing people eat in restaurants like normal human beings just makes me nostalgic right now.

[hedgie]

Are those sentient, speaking AI? Where?

From what I see whenever I go out, I'd think that Siri or Cortana, or whatever is closer to sentient than most of the bipeds.

[Gyrre]

This whole week of comics is just blowing my mind that in the QC-verse people are still going out to restaurants and eating inside at tables.

Because in our world there are AI robots walking around among us?

Sort of in some places. Though, the intent behind them seems a fair bit different in some cases (buy robot and fire staff vs intended to actually help people).

Are those sentient, speaking AI? Where?

Not fully, no.
But Japan has these little dudes deployed in malls and apparently they're rolling out some more in convenience stores.
https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2020/07/19/business/tech/japan-robot-convenience-store-automation/