Comic Discussion > QUESTIONABLE CONTENT
WCDT Strips 4331-4335 (18-22, August 2020)
eschaton:
--- Quote from: de_la_Nae on 18 Aug 2020, 21:00 ---if you go to the quiet and semi-secret places where men actually discuss their attractions and their fantasies, if you look at what men actually do in their lives, this statement doesn't hold water. for what rather seems to be the majority of men, this is not how it works, despite the propaganda lines too many of them too-often spout when they fear loss of status. The ideas put forth in this statement, that fantasies resolve confusion, are inadequate to explain reality.
--- End quote ---
I mean, I get what you're saying here. My comment about fantasy was a bit off base, because what people have an erotic fantasy about and what people are attracted to in real life are different.
However his "not even sure how to tell if you are attracted to a guy" thing in the first panel does not sound like something a guy who has ever questioned his sexuality would say.
I mean, I'm straight, more or less. I'm 41, married, never had any sort of sexual activity with a guy. But when I was younger I'd very occasionally see guys I was attracted to (like maybe once a year). Usually it was very "fem" guys who I saw from a long distance away, and started checking out thinking they were women, and then realized my mistake. Since it was a different, much more homophobic time, it made me feel all weird and confused at the time. But by the time I reached Clinton's age I realized that for every 1 guy that happened with, there were like 100+ women I checked out on the street. Furthermore, it was hard enough for me as a socially awkward geeky guy to get the interest of women (I didn't seriously date anyone till I was 23). The chances of ever being in a situation to do something with a guy I actually was attracted to were thus close to nil, so I was comfortable with saying I'm straight, for all intents and purposes.
I think everyone around my age who is a straight guy had something like this in their back history. Lots of my male friends growing had some sort of homoerotic young adolescent experience (like a mutual j/o session) but they seemed to be blase about it when thinking back at 18 or 22. A couple like made out with dudes on a dare or something similar. There were tons of homoerotic jokes and the like. Looking back, the ones who didn't talk about or participate in this stuff were the ones who actually ended up gay...probably because they were afraid of being outed.
Anyway, maybe it's different now with younger dudes, since society is not as homophobic, and passing same-sex attraction or activity in adolescence doesn't lead to years of navel gazing until you "figure out" your sexual identity. But Jeph is around my age, and it's never entirely clear when QC is supposed to be set.
As an aside, I have been holding out hope that Clinton, Elliot, and Brun would form a stable triad. if it's just Clinton/Elliot and then something happens between Brun and the robot lady Millie, it will be up to three lesbian relationships, one gay male relationship, one arguably queer relationship (Martin and Claire - trans people are queer even in a heterosexual relationship correct?), and then Dale/Marigold who we seldom see any longer. We need some poly representation.
Case:
--- Quote from: Gus_Smedstad on 18 Aug 2020, 23:18 ---
--- Quote from: Tyr on 18 Aug 2020, 23:00 ---Or maybe he's just a polite young man who has yet to have any sort of long-enough term romantic relationship for sex to really be on his radar and he's making an effort to not get ahead of himself with fantasies.
--- End quote ---
That's not how males work. Sex is definitely on your radar long, long before relationships are a possibility or sex is at all likely.
--- End quote ---
Next time you feel the urge to assert simple 'truths' about the inner experiences of half the species?
Don't.
jesslc:
--- Quote from: Tyr on 18 Aug 2020, 23:00 ---I can't really justify it, but on further reflection the phrasing of panel one has put idea of Clinton being Biromantic and whatever the appropriate term for a greysexual who hasn't quite figured that out about themselves.
--- End quote ---
I'd love to see Jeph go down the path of having a character whose romantic orientation and sexual orientation don't fully match up. And exploring how that affects dating & relationships for them etc... For example pan/bi-romantic and heterosexual (or homosexual or asexual). Or another combination. It could work well with a polyamory storyline too.
From a meta perspective - given that this is something we haven't seen in the comic yet and that Jeph is very big on inclusion - I think there's a decent chance that this is where this is leading. *Gets out my probably-panromantic-and-grey-heterosexual flag to wave vigorously*
(And hopefully it would still lead for happiness for Elliot #TeamElliot)
BenRG:
Jeph does seem to like this whole 'the one exception' trope in his romantic writing. We've seen it literally almost every time that a major cast member gets into a long-term relationship since the Dorapocalypse. These examples come to mind:
* Marten is basically hetero and very, very mildly bicurious yet he has fallen head-over-heels with Claire without even a blink of hesitation other than a concern about professional ethics; indeed his reaction to her was 'You're beautiful';
* Faye has never shown the slightest bisexual interest before meeting Bubbles (who, let's not be squeamish about it, isn't even her species);
* May and Sven are clearly in a mutual orbit despite the fact neither of them have shown the slightest interest in anything beyond sex before;
* Now Clinton, who has never shown even the slightest bi tendencies, is clearly very, very attracted to Elliot on a physical level as well as clearly having a strong emotional rapport.My point? I think that Jeph's view is that your one true partner is quite frequently the last person you'd expect and actually quite different from your 'type'. Although, arguably, Marten/Claire diverges from that last part as Claire is, in personality terms, quite similar to Faye, Dora and Padma (assertive, strong-willed but with strong insecurities). In any case, this viewpoint is clearly being reflected in a lot of his characters' most serious romantic relationships: It is the interpersonal match between those two individuals that matters, not any pre-existing labels about romantic and sexual attraction.
JoeCovenant:
--- Quote from: BenRG on 19 Aug 2020, 05:18 ---Jeph does seem to like this whole 'the one exception' trope in his romantic writing. We've seen it literally almost every time that a major cast member gets into a long-term relationship since the Dorapocalypse. These examples come to mind:
* Marten is basically hetero and very, very mildly bicurious yet he has fallen head-over-heels with Claire without even a blink of hesitation other than a concern about professional ethics; indeed his reaction to her was 'You're beautiful';
* Faye has never shown the slightest bisexual interest before meeting Bubbles (who, let's not be squeamish about it, isn't even her species);
* May and Sven are clearly in a mutual orbit despite the fact neither of them have shown the slightest interest in anything beyond sex before;
* Now Clinton, who has never shown even the slightest bi tendencies, is clearly very, very attracted to Elliot on a physical level as well as clearly having a strong emotional rapport.My point? I think that Jeph's view is that your one true partner is quite frequently the last person you'd expect and actually quite different from your 'type'. Although, arguably, Marten/Claire diverges from that last part as Claire is, in personality terms, quite similar to Faye, Dora and Padma (assertive, strong-willed but with strong insecurities). In any case, this viewpoint is clearly being reflected in a lot of his characters' most serious romantic relationships: It is the interpersonal match between those two individuals that matters, not any pre-existing labels about romantic and sexual attraction.
--- End quote ---
Not much to debate there.
I think (my) concern (problem is too strong a word) is that these "exceptions" are all occurring within a very small group of people.
Like... "Hmmm... which two characters can I use to squeeze into a relationship/situation which might be deemed something other than what wider society views as "normal", today...?"
And unfortunately, using these things in such a way as Ben describes above - makes them almost smack of tokenism...
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version