THESE FORUMS NOW CLOSED (read only)
Comic Discussion => QUESTIONABLE CONTENT => Topic started by: MC on 31 Aug 2010, 01:45
-
if I were Marten this is the point where I would tell Dora to hit the road. For real, a relationship can't work if there is quite literally no trust what so ever. Yes I know I'm taking the comic WAY to seriously :P but shut up! :P Thats my human right!! :P
-
I think you're right, but I think Marten should give it a day or so.
Marten and Faye staying away from Dora for a little while (like hours, not weeks) for everybody to cool off is probably the best thing right now, but it can't be drawn out.
If Dora hasn't cooled off and realized she's being an unreasonable Hell-bitch by the time Coffe of Doom closes the next day, Marten needs to assert his right as an independant person to not be terrorized by Dora's problems.
He needs to call her on her bullshit, and they need to talk about things she can do to address that aspect of her personality.
If she can't handle that, Marten needs to let her know that her behavior is unacceptable and can't continue.
And if it does continue, or if Dora doesn't recognize her culpability in this matter, Marten needs to DTMFA.
-
I agree. It was her friggin' idea for them to move in with them anyway, wasn't it? Then she decides she can start throwing her weight around, telling Fay she can't work the next day and Marten he can't stay in his own room? Unacceptable. I hate seeing any person being terrorized by the person they're dating, so this pisses me off even though it's fiction... mainly because this kind of thing does happen. I wouldn't put up with that garbage. She needs to check herself before she wrecks herself.
-
Yeah, Dora crossed the line here. If she doesn't apologise first thing then this is a pretty big deal.
As has been said previously, Dora just kicked Marten out of his own bed for helping out his best friend. If it had been me (in either position) putting pants on would've been the last thing on my mind.
Interested to see how this plays out.
-
actually, since she moved in isn't it her bed room too?
I agree she is over-reacting way too much but people do that when it's their emotionally invested significant other. I think her brain thought "marten in undies, Faye in undies, faye liked marten, marten liked faye, they like liking each other?! Dora smash!"
I can't tell if she told faye not to come into work the next day as a way of lashing out, discipline (like a parent), or because she is so angry that she just cannot see Faye all day.
As for marten, I totally saw this coming when he sat down with her in his boxers. Sorry old buddy but sleep on the couch tonight an hope she realizes she was overreacting tomorrow.
-
I agree.
One day. If she doesn't get over her anger and figure out she's about to ruin the two best relationships she has, Dora needs to get hit with the Brick Wall of Rejection.
One day...then DTMFA!
-
On the Faye side, we also have Dora, who not twelve hours ago gave the new baristas the speech about separating work and not-work, effectively cutting Faye's hours over something not-work related. Which is, y'know, a bad thing. I'm belligerent enough to say that Faye needs to show up for work as scheduled and lay a verbal smackdown if required.
-
I get the feeling someone at CoD will point something out about how self centered Dora is being. Because if she actually thinks about this and STILL decides she's in the right without letting either of them explain then I would be seriously talking about problems here.
-
I get the feeling someone at CoD will point something out about how self centered Dora is being. Because if she actually thinks about this and STILL decides she's in the right without letting either of them explain then I would be seriously talking about problems here.
You are allowed to say "Hannelore" around here.
My money's on her pulling her "Going Critical" routine on Dora.
-
Every relationship is going to have dumb late night fights. It's part of the scenery. Dora really crossed two lines though:
1) She's taking money out of Faye's pocket. You don't work at a coffee shop because you like coffee, you generally need the money.
2) The way she said "Can you not see how I might find this a little inappropriate." It's such a detached way of expressing herself. She's not saying she's mad, or upset about what she saw, but because she feels entitled to the anger. In the earlier comic, she even says "I don't know what this looks like, but it isn't good."
Now, people don't always pick the best words (in RL or in text), but she never actually can come up with a reason for her anger. All she does is state that Marten should know that she would be upset by this. Because after six months of cohabitation for all three, there's apparently some sort of underwear taboo.
IIRC we've seen some fights between Marten and Dora before, usually with at least some fault on either side. I'm sure there will be a tidy resolution, (despite that look on Marten's face when Dora says Toto sucks), she made the mistake of messing with Faye. Marten's spineless, but Faye isn't going to go down for this.
-
Eh. They need to have a talk, but I can't see Marten dumping her. 1) They'll be able to work it out. 2) Marten is dating up. Hot, take-charge small business owner with an aimless skinny-indie library worker? He should be counting lucky stars. ;)
-
Why do women never seem to give the man time to explain, they either yell and leave or just leave outright?
-
I want to see it go something like this:
Faye quits her job, citing constructive dismissal (Dora has treated her unreasonably here, and personal issues are no reason to cut someone's shifts).
Dora refuses to pay her severance package and Faye takes Dora to court, bankrupting Coffee of Doom.
Back at the house, Faye asks Marten who he'd rather live with, her or Dora. Since Faye and Marten are good friends, he picks her and they kick Dora out. Dora disappears from the QC cast for undisclosed reasons (think Steve on a bender).
-
I'm kinda thinking this might be when we finally get to hear about Dora's backstory.
-
I'm kinda thinking this might be when we finally get to hear about Dora's backstory.
Between this, the whole you-got-your-hair-cut-without-checking-with-me-first bullshit, and a few other choice moments that I can say with confidence were building up to this, I myself am gonna be seriously pissed if we don't get at least one of the following:
(1) Dora has some real serious shit going on and has been hiding it really really well, or burried it and isn't even aware of it, and we're all in for a big tearjerker.
(2) Deep down inside, Dora's just an insatiable cunt who wears a veil of civility so thick and often, even she forgets it's there.
(3) Marten was IN FACT CURSED BY VOODOO ZOMBIES and that's why every girl he dates, no matter how intelligent or emotionally stable they are, are destined to be fucking psychos.
-
I'm mostly disappointed that today's strip was entirely predictable after seeing the last panel in yesterday's strip.
I'm also disappointed because Dora doesn't strike me as this strong, and neither Marten nor Faye strike me as this weak. Faye especially I would expect to snap and just yell SHUT UP! at Dora.
-
I honestly think you guys are blowing this out of proportion. Almost every single person in existence has at least one issue like this, and it is usually every bit this severe. Mine is that I can't take being lied to.
The measure of any relationship isn't whether or not things like this happen, it's how they're dealt with when they do (and it is when, not if). If they can navigate through this smoothly within maybe 48 hours and if Marten makes it clear that this can't be a regular occurrence (and Dora complies), then the relationship is still a healthy one by any reasonable standards. Bear in mind that for all the times Dora's jealousy has been a problem for her relationship with Marten, not once has he ever said anything to the effect of "Your jealousy is starting to become a problem and I can't keep dealing with it forever." I get the feeling that by the time this is all said and done, that will have been said, and it's what comes after that that defines the relationship, not whether or not Dora has a single major issue.
Jealousy is a serious personality flaw, but so is having high standards for the people around you. If you completely reject someone over a single issue that you haven't even brought up with them, then you are doing the very same thing you are bemoaning the jealous person for: hurting those around you to further your own unrealistic expectations of what is acceptable. Just as Dora is causing undue grief to Marten and Faye, so would Marten be inflicting upon Dora if he made the decision to break up with her before confronting her. If she refuses to change, or is unable to change, then Marten would be in the right to end things with her, but until that is made apparent, the best thing to do is ride the situation out and be assertive.
Love is a bond you share with someone, not an assessment of their worth. If you can't forgive someone a flaw and help them to work through it, then you are not in love, and the chance of that ever changing with someone different diminishes significantly.
Edit: I want to clarify that by "you guys" I don't mean all of you collectively. I just mean those who are being unduly judgmental.
-
I was a little shocked by Dora's reaction at first, but then came to the forum and remembered her insecurity in the past. While I ultimately hope that Marten and Faye will be together someday, I hope that this is just a rough patch and that Dora and Marten will get through it
-
Damn, you guys are taking this really seriously.
Too seriously.
Faye and Dora should get into a fight - like, some John Woo-style shit. It'll be like the fight between Uma Thurman and Lucy Liu in Kill Bill, only more epic because instead of swords they will have LASER SWORDS
Marten will, initially, be altruistic and try to reconcile everyone's problems by interceding in the fight, but Steve will make him realize that girl fights with LASER SWORDS are awesome
Pintsize will record the entire thing and upload it to Youtube
Of course at the end of all this there will be an obligatory orgy between all of the QC characters. Crisis averted.
-
Tbh I like the pairings that are going on now (but then I specifically didn't read the first 500 comics) and I hope this is a minor blip that will be sorted, I'll be very sad if it doesn't.
That and the fact that yeah, this has to be sorted quickly otherwise it just makes no sense, and as daft as Dora can sometimes be about stuff like this? Well I do hope she realises she's being daft.
-
got to be honest here... the people clamouring for a breakup are just demonstrating that they don't know what it takes to make a real relationship work.
-
Pardon me if any or all of this sounds like it's right out of a Glenn Beck show, I hope I'm not invalidating my IQ score by stating this:
Part of the reason Dora's reaction pisses me off (a lot) is because of a perception that many MANY people have, both men and women. The perception is that the woman in a relationship is entitled to be as unreasonable as possible because (a) "that's just how women are" and (b) she "holds all the cards" and it's up to the guy to beg, plead, obey, kiss up, etc. You don't see TV ads with women staring at hot guys and then their husband or boyfriend looking at them with contempt as their woman tries to explain. There are A LOT of men who in Marten's situation would probably spend whole days begging and pleading for the wife/gf to forgive him, as well as women who feel like it's their duty to act like Dora is. Switch genders and you have a Lifetime movie.
I guess it shouldn't bug me but it does. So if you're wondering why I'm being so trollbait butthurt over a comic, trust me it's not that, it's the society of humanity that it's reflecting.
-
I think it's time for Marten and Dora to sit down and for Marten to spell out to Dora that her behavior is ridiculous and not acceptable. You have to remember: this isn't the first time Dora's freaked out over what wasn't a big deal.
First time was when Faye and Sven hooked up. Dora has unresolved self-worth issues and sibling rivalry issues, and this let Marten know about them. Free pass for Dora as long as she calmed down and talked about it, which she did.
Second time was when Marten mentioned still having feelings for all of his exes. Because of Dora's self-worth issues, she also has jealousy issues. Marten calmed her down and they discussed it.
Those two might be backwards or even conflated as part of the same fight, I don't really remember.
Third time was when she found out about Cosette asking Marten out. Dora had already acknowledged her jealousy issues, and eventually realized that she needed to deal with those.
This is the fourth time. Obviously, that "intent to change" didn't stick. However, this *was* a slightly bigger deal than Cosette, as Faye is one of the girls Marten still has feelings for and there really isn't any way that finding them hugging in their underwear is going to look good right off. From what we've seen, though, they didn't get the chance to explain without Dora cutting them off and yelling some more. If she doesn't calm down and take the initiative to apologize, then yes, Marten probably *should* look into an ultimatum - get help or get out. Marten and Faye did nothing wrong aside from maybe make a poor decision about whether to get dressed before/while discussing things.
-
...when Faye and Sven hooked up .... feelings for all of his exes .... Cosette asking Marten out ....This is the fourth time.
hm .. yeah ok that kinda trumps the haircut thing XD
-
got to be honest here... the people clamouring for a breakup are just demonstrating that they don't know what it takes to make a real relationship work.
That or we've been in relationships with crazy bitches.
Also, stop being a twat.
-
Tomorrow. Someone says, "Now, just wait one god-damned minute!" and calls her on how unreasonable she's being. They may let her cool down some first, but I'm not sure that's in Faye's character.
Of course, the last time that happened there was a fight. Dora may blow up more, she may not. We'll see. There will be punch lines, tears, attempts at reconciliation, comfort, recriminations (self- and otherwise), probably a few more misunderstandings,
and then life (and the comic) will go on.
got to be honest here... the people clamouring for a breakup are just demonstrating that they don't know what it takes to make a real relationship work.
That or we've been in relationships with crazy bitches.
Also, stop being a twat.
Dora's not a crazy bitch. Bitch-ette, at best. Issues, yes, but crazy? No.
Sorry if you've really been involved with a truly crazy person before, but that's unfortunate, and not their fault.
-
Pardon me if any or all of this sounds like it's right out of a Glenn Beck show, I hope I'm not invalidating my IQ score by stating this:
Part of the reason Dora's reaction pisses me off (a lot) is because of a perception that many MANY people have, both men and women. The perception is that the woman in a relationship is entitled to be as unreasonable as possible because (a) "that's just how women are" and (b) she "holds all the cards" and it's up to the guy to beg, plead, obey, kiss up, etc. You don't see TV ads with women staring at hot guys and then their husband or boyfriend looking at them with contempt as their woman tries to explain. There are A LOT of men who in Marten's situation would probably spend whole days begging and pleading for the wife/gf to forgive him, as well as women who feel like it's their duty to act like Dora is. Switch genders and you have a Lifetime movie.
I guess it shouldn't bug me but it does. So if you're wondering why I'm being so trollbait butthurt over a comic, trust me it's not that, it's the society of humanity that it's reflecting.
Um, Jeph did show the gender roles reversed. Remember Cosette and Steve? Marten just told Cosette that her shirt looked nice, and Steve totally overreacted. Yeah, they aren't major characters in the webcomic, but it does show that unreasonableness and jealousy go both ways.
Steve realized he was being unreasonable and apologized. Dora will most likely do the same. I think people are being unreasonable by saying that Marten and Dora need to break up now. She just need to let off a little steam and realize that she was being stupid.
-
I disagree. Recall that Dora obviously knows that Marten once really wanted to be with Faye. What is she supposed to think immediately upon seeing this? If ANYONE walked in on their love interest snuggling someone they once had feelings for IN the middle of the night WHILE in their undergarments, the first reaction would not be complete trust and an assumption of platonic happenings. Sorry, but if you claim otherwise you're just being silly. It doesn't mean Dora's right. It's just probably how any person would react. I don't think her reaction even shows undue jealousy. She should have allowed for more explanation, but no one is perfect. Also, we've only seen Dora's reaction after like 1 minute.
-
Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah ....
blah blah blah blah blah perception blah blah blah unreasonable blah blah blah blah cards blah blah blah blah begging blah blah blah genders blah blah blah blah Lifetime blah.
Um, Jeph did show the gender roles reversed. Remember Cosette and Steve? Marten just told Cosette that her shirt looked nice, and Steve totally overreacted. Yeah, they aren't major characters in the webcomic, but it does show that unreasonableness and jealousy go both ways.
Steve realized he was being unreasonable and apologized. Dora will most likely do the same. I think people are being unreasonable by saying that Marten and Dora need to break up now. She just need to let off a little steam and realize that she was being stupid.
.... I fucking LOVE THIS COMIC!!! >_<
(Don't get me wrong, I'm complaining about people in general and why Dora pissed me off, not about the series or the plot.)
-
... right out of a Glenn Beck show ...
Part of the reason Dora's reaction pisses me off (a lot) is because of a perception that many MANY people have, both men and women. The perception is that the woman in a relationship is entitled to be as unreasonable as possible because (a) "that's just how women are" and (b) she "holds all the cards" and it's up to the guy to beg, plead, obey, kiss up, etc.
... A LOT of men who in Marten's situation would probably spend whole days begging and pleading for the wife/gf to forgive him, as well as women who feel like it's their duty to act like Dora is.
? I thought Glenn Beck was just a right-wing Republican rabble-rouser. Tell me, please, which side of the above delusion is he on? (Rubs hands in gleeful anticipation of potential delicious red-meat debatatribes [Not really; they get ugly, not to mention off-topic.] )
Yeah, that particular TOTALLY UNFAIR female manipulation pathology seriously bugs me too. But I'm not raging at Dora yet because:
1. her behavior & words are from a guy
2. like he says, her previously-defined issues pretty much pre-wrote her parts in the last two strips
3. we've only seen a minute or so after the awkward discovery
But it's a bad sign that she's stomping on her two closest friends without even fucking LISTENING TO THEM... and she's crossing the line, as someone points out, mixing business with personal issues, ...UNLESS it's for the reasonable reason that she'll be able to calm down better without having to face Faye at work before working any of this out. (She can always pay Faye for the day later, in effect giving her an extra paid vac day.) I'm hoping Dorian reasonableness ensues fairly soon, with that generous gesture topping the relieved smiles all around.
-
(3) every girl he dates, no matter how intelligent or emotionally stable they are, are destined to be fucking psychos.
a curiously similar trope Don't go there! (http://www.tvtropes.org) recurs in another good long-running webcomic, Something Positive, where Davan even has a cynical phrase, "sticking it in the crazy"...
-
Did Randy make that up? I could've swore I'd heard that expression before. Of maybe I've just incorporated too much S*P into my life...
:-P
-
Hmmmm
How about this:
Marten, completely reasonably, breaks up with Dora and kicks her out, and then comes to the sinking realization that with Penelope with Wil, Faye with Angus, Tai with Multiple People, all female, Sara with an Allosaurus, Cosette with Steve, the only single girls currently in his life are Hanners, Marigold and Raven. Raven is not there, and if she were there, couldn't keep a relationship and would be a lesbian every other day. Marigold is too much of a shut-in recluse and too addicted to WoW(and probs gonna end up with Dale) to have a relationship outside of her own apartment. Hanners is afraid of sex, kisses, germs and physical contact, end of story.
Due to this, He walks to Steve's place, drags him by the arm to the bar, and there they find Jimbo making out with a very drunk Tai, and Sven passed out in the bathroom. Jimbo, Tai, Steve, Marten and Sven then drink all their troubles away, while exchanging classy small-talk. As Marten is walking home, he and Steve encounter a familiar foe in an alley...the Vespavenger. Pizza Girl arrives to save the day, but is knocked out, and then unmasked(spoiler: It's Penelope) by another supervillain, arriving on the scene...some chick. She, the Vespavenger and Vespabot then murder Steve, and tie up Marten and force him to watch. They're about to kill Marten, when both Vespavenger and unnamed supervillain are shot in the face, and cinderblocks are dropped on the Vespabot's head(Again, by Pintsize). The assailant? None other than a now-conscious Penelope, who utters the catchphrase 'Did you order a pizza, EXTRA DEATH?'
We then find out that the unnamed supervillain and the Vespavenger are secretly Dora and Raven. With both of them gone, Faye begins a tyrannical rule over Coffee of Doom until she is shot by a now-crazed Hannelore, who proceeds to kill Penelope, Wil, Angus, a couple slaves, Cosette, Marten(Who was at the time dating Cosette), Sven, Tai, Jimbo, and anyone else in the vicinity before being killed by an unknown female heroine, masked in shadows.
We then get an introductory comic to the character, because now, she is the focal point of the strip(Every other character being dead(Except for Sara, Ellen, and anyone else who completely disappeared), with her newly adopted Robo-sidekicks, Pintsize, Winslow and Momo, as well as her pets, a loudly-chirping English-speaking Bird, with the amazing power to insert a reference to sex into every sentence, and a Dog with the amazing power to punch things long distances. with these as her sidekicks, she is...
Sweet-Tits. Well, her real name is Rosemary Moore, but ever since her secret identity went public, she went from 'Hey, who's that weird chick' to 'Hey, isn't that Sweet-Tits?'
Anyway, Sweet-Tits is a cool gal, seh fights crime and doesn't afraid of anything.
-
Sshhh! No spoilers!
-
[Snip]
The way she said "Can you not see how I might find this a little inappropriate." It's such a detached way of expressing herself. She's not saying she's mad, or upset about what she saw, but because she feels entitled to the anger. In the earlier comic, she even says "I don't know what this looks like, but it isn't good."
Now, people don't always pick the best words (in RL or in text), but she never actually can come up with a reason for her anger. All she does is state that Marten should know that she would be upset by this. Because after six months of cohabitation for all three, there's apparently some sort of underwear taboo.
IIRC we've seen some fights between Marten and Dora before, usually with at least some fault on either side. I'm sure there will be a tidy resolution, (despite that look on Marten's face when Dora says Toto sucks), she made the mistake of messing with Faye. Marten's spineless, but Faye isn't going to go down for this.
That's fear. Because if Dora says what she really thinks, it might be true. The more I think about it, the more she's actually trying (badly, but trying) not to do something irrevocable here. After all, she could simply leave.
I wouldn't count too much on Faye. As memory serves, Faye only stands up for herself when the other side isn't really fighting back—or what's at stake has nothing to do with her personally, which, of course, is in keeping with her own issues.
-
I have to agree with the OP. You can say we take this "too seriously", but what's the point of posting if you're not going to discuss it? Are we all supposed to blow sunshine up eachother's asses and have a big circle jerk about how awesome these really well crafted characters are as people? No, fuck that. We're passionate about the comic, so shut your dismissive ass.
ANYwhoooo.... Yeah, there's just NO way I could stand being in a relationship with someone who's shown repeatedly that they don't trust me, despite my absolute faithfulness, complete devotion, and in Marten's case, practical submissiveness with her. Especially when that person gets pissed over little things like a haircut. Dora IS a really well made and believable character. But for the life of me, I cannot see what Marten see's in her AT ALL. Yeah. She's hot in her own way when she's not being a first class, grade-A bitch, but if I had my integrity as man and someone you supposedly love called into question repeatedly with clearly NO attempt to see any other side to the situation or no attempt to even change that aspect about yourself then what is the point? What's the point of going through a relationship terrified of every little thing because the girl you're with could just go off like a banshee at any moment? A relationship is not a fucking minefield. I've known women like Dora. Women who get pissed and filled with their self righteous indignation that they won't even bother to hear your side, because how could they be wrong? The "I'm yelling the loudest, so I win" mentality. Yeah, Dora may come around later, but not before terrorizing and putting the people she claims to care about through hell. To say that people calling for a break up don't know what it's like in a committed relationship is downright ignorant. I mean, seriously, if you act that way in your relationships, you deserve to be alone.
-
For me, this would be the straw that breaks the camels back. Even if for some idiotic reason I were to stay in the relationship for as long as Marten has and put up with all her crap, this would do it for me. Whether or not this is how anybody would react is inconsequential... what matters is the fact that this stupidity with Dora happen too frequently, and I have NEVER actually seen this be Marten's fault.
Honestly, this kind of brings out why Dora is my least favorite character. In fact, I rather dislike her. She becomes this heinous witch when things don't go her way or she thinks she sees something that isn't really there and she goes crazy, then realizes she's made a mistake and gets all apologetic. Lather, rinse, repeat.
It's been more than three strikes and she's been given more than enough chances. If I were in his shoes and wasn't super submissive like he is, I'd let her go to work in the morning to open up her coffee shop. Throw all her personal belongings in the parking lot outside, change the locks on the door. Indignant and simultaneously ignorant behavior drives me up a wall.
-
Damn. You guys are harsh.
I find that Dora is usually a likable character. She's generally pretty friendly, and it seems that Marten and her get along the majority of the time. Yes, she can be unreasonable, but she realizes this. In fact, every time she has apologized, and I recall her telling Faye that she's trying to work on her jealousy issues.
Dora does not act like a bitch 24/7, and I don't think Marten and her should break up. If she apologizes and opens up to Marten about her jealousy issues, then I think everything will work out okay.
-
I mean, seriously, if you act that way in your relationships, you deserve to be alone.
Remind me why divorce is so common now as to be considered normal.
Everyone has their quirks; a degree of tolerance, understanding, and eventually help, is necessary to stable marriage - and in the end, society.
-
I mean, seriously, if you act that way in your relationships, you deserve to be alone.
Remind me why divorce is so common now as to be considered normal.
Everyone has their quirks; a degree of tolerance, understanding, and eventually help, is necessary to stable marriage - and in the end, society.
Agreed, but where is the line drawn? There is quirkiness... and then there is major baggage and just plain intolerable INSANITY. If she said she was gonna work on her issues, she should work on them. THIS is not working on them. This is falling back into the same slump again and again.
-
Why do women never seem to give the man time to explain, they either yell and leave or just leave outright?
Rule of Drama.Or maybe I've just incorporated too much S*P into my life...
If such a thing were possible, you mean.It's just probably how any person would react. I don't think her reaction even shows undue jealousy.
Really? I mean, do you really, honestly believe that?
Not even being snarky.
You know what I think is a reasonable reaction?
"Hey guys what the fuck are you doing it's like 3 in the morning I was ASLEEP."
"Oh [NAME] was just having a crisis about her date thing and wanted me to talk her down."
"Oh okay well is she fine now?"
"Yes."
"I'm glad. Now everyone shut the fuck up and go back to sleep because we all have work in the morning."
At the very worst, mild annoyance at being woken up god-knows-when to find your boyfriend holding his best friend.
Anything else is overemotional.
But then again Dora is not really known for being calm and rational when it comes to Marten. Which I guess is why I'm not on either side of the "Dora is such a fucking bitch you guys" debate. Her actions are intolerable, but in-character. Therefore, there's no real reason to be upset about it.
To me, anyway.
-
Part of the reason Dora's reaction pisses me off (a lot) is because of a perception that many MANY people have, both men and women. The perception is that the woman in a relationship is entitled to be as unreasonable as possible because (a) "that's just how women are" and (b) she "holds all the cards" and it's up to the guy to beg, plead, obey, kiss up, etc. You don't see TV ads with women staring at hot guys and then their husband or boyfriend looking at them with contempt as their woman tries to explain. There are A LOT of men who in Marten's situation would probably spend whole days begging and pleading for the wife/gf to forgive him, as well as women who feel like it's their duty to act like Dora is. Switch genders and you have a Lifetime movie.
Yeah, because contemporary pop-cultural depictions of women are completely accurate, and don't buy at all into stereotypes that have remained pretty much unchanged since Aristophanes wrote Lysistrata. You know, that we're inherently irrational, because we've got wombs (just for fun, look up the origin of the word "hysteria").
-
Part of the reason Dora's reaction pisses me off (a lot) is because of a perception that many MANY people have, both men and women. The perception is that the woman in a relationship is entitled to be as unreasonable as possible because (a) "that's just how women are" and (b) she "holds all the cards" and it's up to the guy to beg, plead, obey, kiss up, etc. You don't see TV ads with women staring at hot guys and then their husband or boyfriend looking at them with contempt as their woman tries to explain. There are A LOT of men who in Marten's situation would probably spend whole days begging and pleading for the wife/gf to forgive him, as well as women who feel like it's their duty to act like Dora is. Switch genders and you have a Lifetime movie.
Yeah, because contemporary pop-cultural depictions of women are completely accurate, and don't buy at all into stereotypes that have remained pretty much unchanged since Aristophanes wrote Lysistrata. You know, that we're inherently irrational, because we've got wombs (just for fun, look up the origin of the word "hysteria").
Indeed. Even more fun: What is the origin/root of evil? The word itself, I mean.
That's right. Eve.
Here, have an apple.
-
I mean, seriously, if you act that way in your relationships, you deserve to be alone.
Remind me why divorce is so common now as to be considered normal.
Everyone has their quirks; a degree of tolerance, understanding, and eventually help, is necessary to stable marriage - and in the end, society.
Remind me again why divorce is a bad thing?
Wait, hold on, I've got to go help gramma up the stairs - she don't walk too good since grampa broke her fucking leg.
Wait, hold on, I've got to go help my bro Ben move a couch - oops, he's in jail for the rest of his life because his wife convinced him to take the fall for her killing their baby.
Wait, hold on, I've got to go over to my father's house and help him fix the roof - he can't afford a contractor since his ex-wife squandered the savings.
I could go on for hours.
-
I have to agree with the OP. You can say we take this "too seriously", but what's the point of posting if you're not going to discuss it? Are we all supposed to blow sunshine up eachother's asses and have a big circle jerk about how awesome these really well crafted characters are as people? No, fuck that. We're passionate about the comic, so shut your dismissive ass.
Truth. Right here. Even though the swearing hides the very good point somewhat.
I see this attitude on a few webcomic forums and it really confuses me. People like to talk about things that interest them. Some people really like to dive into them and look at them in real detail, this usually means the work has really grabbed them one way or an other.
If you're someone who's tried to squash one of these discussions or passive-aggressively snipe at those taking part, just close the thread down. Forums probably aren't for you.
-
Remind me why divorce is so common now as to be considered normal.
There are good and bad reasons for divorce. And note that, yes, I have been divorced - but I was married for 22 years first (17 in my second marriage, so far), which is well over average these days.
-
I'm trying to remember the statistics I heard about people who live together before marriage and divorce rates, but the numbers are escaping me.
Only thing I do remember, though, was that the numbers weren't good. Couples who lived together before marriage more than likely didn't get married, and those who did get married were like about three times more likely to get divorced.
Somehow that makes me sadder than seeing Marten with a pair of Faye's jeans on.
-
If I'm remembering right, the results fall under the heading of "Doesn't Help; Makes It Worse" -- basically people see moving in together as a safety valve, but then feel too wrapped up into it and decide that after living together for a while they're supposed to get married, with the net result being that people who would have broken up if they weren't living together end up getting married when they shouldn't and contribute to the divorce rate when they can't take it any more.
-
It also comes out as a good argument for not living together in the first place.
Before you come at me with that weird broom, some self-disclosure: my wife and I lived together for several months before we got married. I admit it.
-
Honestly I think the biggest problem with moving in together is that it's done way, way too soon. Moving in together is a huge relationship step that a lot of times seems to get treated like it's not a big deal.
-
me and my current girlfriend started kind of living with each other since the beginning of the relationship, partly because we live in the same apartment complex, and partly because at the beginning we were snowed in for over a week.
-
As in, don't rush it? You've got me thinking of the late, great Robert B Parker's detective Spenser, who was in a monogamous relationship with the same woman for some thirty years, but they never moved in together (tried once, backed off) or married.
-
My wife and I lived together for two years before getting married. We'd been good friends for about 3 years before that, and what started out as rent sharing evolved into genuine love. We've been together now for 26 years, and yes, there have been stupid fights. But we know each other well, and love each other enough, to forgive and work hard to get through the occasional bullshit.
Course, the last kid's off to college next year... we'll see if we can survive that change!
-
Just to give you a target to aim for - my parents will be celebrating their 63rd wedding anniversary this month.
-
If I'm remembering right, the results fall under the heading of "Doesn't Help; Makes It Worse" -- basically people see moving in together as a safety valve, but then feel too wrapped up into it and decide that after living together for a while they're supposed to get married, with the net result being that people who would have broken up if they weren't living together end up getting married when they shouldn't and contribute to the divorce rate when they can't take it any more.
Ah, but there's also an alternate way to interpret the results - people who move in together are more likely to have progressive social attitudes, or at least progressive enough not to believe moving in together before marriage is a SIN OF HELLFIRE. That means they probably also don't believe that divorce should almost never be an option, and might therefore be more inclined to break up/get divorced if the relationship becomes intolerable, rather than sticking it out for reasons of "til death do us part", "marriage is always forever so you'd better bloody well stick with it" reasons.
This is coming from a person who was once told by a religious education teacher, with regard to her grandparents' marriage, "... well, God never said you needed to be happy!"
-
I mean, seriously, if you act that way in your relationships, you deserve to be alone.
Remind me why divorce is so common now as to be considered normal.
Everyone has their quirks; a degree of tolerance, understanding, and eventually help, is necessary to stable marriage - and in the end, society.
Remind me again why divorce is a bad thing?
Wait, hold on, I've got to go help gramma up the stairs - she don't walk too good since grampa broke her fucking leg.
Wait, hold on, I've got to go help my bro Ben move a couch - oops, he's in jail for the rest of his life because his wife convinced him to take the fall for her killing their baby.
Wait, hold on, I've got to go over to my father's house and help him fix the roof - he can't afford a contractor since his ex-wife squandered the savings.
I could go on for hours.
Well, for normal people it's considered a bad thing.
When divorce happens because you're too lazy to even get along with the person you promised to love for the rest of your life, you're weak.
-
[...]
Well, for normal people it's considered a bad thing.
When divorce happens because you're too lazy to even get along with the person you promised to love for the rest of your life, you're weak.
It depends on the situation:
If a person is divorcing someone because they've seen someone more attractive then I would agree with you. If a person is divorcing someone because their spoused attacke them and put that person in the hospital then the person is being sensible (especially if it's not the first time).
-
[...]
Well, for normal people it's considered a bad thing.
When divorce happens because you're too lazy to even get along with the person you promised to love for the rest of your life, you're weak.
It depends on the situation:
If a person is divorcing someone because they've seen someone more attractive then I would agree with you. If a person is divorcing someone because their spoused attacke them and put that person in the hospital then the person is being sensible (especially if it's not the first time).
I really tried to word it in such a way that made it clear that I wouldn't expect abuse victims to stay with their abuser.
-
Yo dawg, I heard that marriage is the leading cause of divorce. A full 100% of people who have been divorced have, at some point or another, been married. The statistics wouldn't lie to you, would they? If you don't want to get divorced, don't get married, and you'll never have that problem! 8-)
-
Yo dawg, I heard that marriage is the leading cause of divorce. A full 100% of people who have been divorced have, at some point or another, been married. The statistics wouldn't lie to you, would they? If you don't want to get divorced, don't get married, and you'll never have that problem! 8-)
The world bows to the superior intelect.
-
Which world are you talking about? (It's certainly not this one.)
-
If you don't want to get divorced, don't get married, and you'll never have that problem! 8-)
My sister-in-law is a divorce lawyer, and she specialises in (and has written a book on) "divorce" of unmarried couples. It's clearly no less traumatic in some cases!
-
Yo dawg, I heard that marriage is the leading cause of divorce. A full 100% of people who have been divorced have, at some point or another, been married. The statistics wouldn't lie to you, would they? If you don't want to get divorced, don't get married, and you'll never have that problem! 8-)
<facepalm=EPIC>
-
No, not epic. Just
oblivious obvious.
-
man after reading today's comic I feel like a total douche :P so Dora has had nothing but shitty boyfriends. That explains alot :angel:
-
My sister-in-law is a divorce lawyer, and she specialises in (and has written a book on) "divorce" of unmarried couples. It's clearly no less traumatic in some cases!
well here's the thing. Marriage is a lifelong commitment, or so it's intended to be. In other cultures the purpose goes kind of far beyond just "being in love". It's often to provide a solid setting for a family or to provide a means of partnership. Thats why other cultures set up arranged marriages. The whole idea of an arranged marriage assumes that love is not necessarily the goal.
so the point is this. If marriage exists to be a diagnoses for some of the problems caused by, lets say, divorce. Than we kind of need marriage :) besides I don't think a child is damaged any less by an "unmarried" couple who has a father leave, than by a married couple who gets a divorce. At least if you get married you have tried to make a solid foundation in that regard, it may have not worked out the way you hoped, but at least you tried.
-
"at least you tried"
That's a pretty big assumption, from what I've seen...
-
"... well, God never said you needed to be happy!"
UGH.
That goes against pretty much my whole religion.
-
In other cultures the purpose goes kind of far beyond just "being in love". It's often to provide a solid setting for a family or to provide a means of partnership. Thats why other cultures set up arranged marriages. The whole idea of an arranged marriage assumes that love is not necessarily the goal.
I don't know from which perspective you identify "other cultures" (your profile gives no clue), but I think marriage in all cultures goes beyond the romantic relationship between the partners. Even it the most individualistic jurisdictions, the copious body of family law with its attendant procession of disputes over property, alimony, child custody etc. is ample evidence of that. In Australia at least, tax law, superannuation (pension) entitlement, employment law and many other things are heavily influenced by marital status.
-
[flamethrower]
Until about 100 years ago marriage, all marriage, in any culture, was based on the assumption that a woman of any age was incapable of being able to take care of herself or make her own decisions. When she was a child, her father was responsible for her, then her husband, and after he died, her sons (in-law, if she only had daughters)
There was also the assumption that any children were the progeny of the husband, regardless of who actually provided the sperm.
The purpose of traditional marriage was for men to be able to control the uteruses of the world, and wives ranked only slightly above slaves in the social pecking order.
Marriage was never intended to be a partnership of equals until very recently.
[/flamethrower]
-
[flamethrower]
Marriage was never intended to be a partnership of equals until very recently.
[/flamethrower]
yes you are quite right, but why let the wrong-doings of the past take away what is clearly a very good thing today. Besides your claims don't prove that marriage is bad, it only assumes that it's been abused. Many good things can be abused. Also just because this was the way of the ancient past doesn't mean it was it's intended purpose.
Lets not throw the baby out with the bath water :)
-
[flamethrower]
Marriage was never intended to be a partnership of equals until very recently.
[/flamethrower]
yes you are quite right, but why let the wrong-doings of the past take away what is clearly a very good thing today. Besides your claims don't prove that marriage is bad, it only assumes that it's been abused. Many good things can be abused. Also just because this was the way of the ancient past doesn't mean it was it's intended purpose.
Lets not throw the baby out with the bath water :)
Marriage was initiated as a way to buy and sell life-long sex partners for men without it being considered prostitution (and often without even restricting the man to the woman he bought, just the woman to the man). Remember that women have always been considered to be property up until within the last century around the world (and even today everywhere not first-world).
-
Always is a bit broad. There have been matriarchal cultures at various times, most of which included marriage of some sort.
-
clearly a very good thing today
Bullshit.
Marriage is a sham, and it's just another tool of the religious right to discriminate against everyone who doesn't follow their narrow worldview.
-
[flamethrower]
<snip>
Marriage was never intended to be a partnership of equals until very recently.
</snip>
[/flamethrower]
<snip>
yes you are quite right, but why let the wrong-doings of the past take away what is clearly a very good thing today.
</snip>
Until a 100 years ago, leeches were used for medicinal purposes in some countries, too.
-
They still are, for real; see here (http://www.biopharm-leeches.com/), here (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/3858087.stm), here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hirudo_medicinalis).
-
clearly a very good thing today
Bullshit.
Marriage is a sham, and it's just another tool of the religious right to discriminate against everyone who doesn't follow their narrow worldview.
Clearly. That's why no one except fundamentalist evangelical christians get married. It's fine if you don't plan to marry or don't believe in monogamy (long or short term) or whatever, but to dismiss the notion of marriage out of hand says more about you than about society.
-
clearly a very good thing today
Bullshit.
Marriage is a sham, and it's just another tool of the religious right to discriminate against everyone who doesn't follow their narrow worldview.
Clearly. That's why no one except fundamentalist evangelical christians get married. It's fine if you don't plan to marry or don't believe in monogamy (long or short term) or whatever, but to dismiss the notion of marriage out of hand says more about you than about society.
Seconded
-
Thirded. I think the exact purpose of marriage in secular society is this: It's the extra step two people in love can take if they feel they need to take an extra step. If you don't agree that an extra step is needed, it's not for you. Personally I'm happy without that extra step and think I can be equally in love without it, but I'm not going to heap scorn on people who want one. It's a matter of personal taste.
-
Well, gee, if we Evangelicals are the only ones getting married and having tons of babies, then we should be the majority within a generation or two, right? :angel:
-
Well, gee, if we Evangelicals are the only ones getting married and having tons of babies, then we should be the majority within a generation or two, right? :angel:
Not if those damn Hommaseckshuls keep up their protestin'. If'n we let those queer folk marry, why, all their damn hommaseckshul kids'll be runnin' around an' soon there won't be no more breedin'!
-
Marriage was, and still is, an incredibly patriarchal institution. Acting like that's not the case is laughable, but common. That doesn't take away from marrying for love, but denial doesn't change reality.
In New Zealand, you can get married, which is still a hetero-only institution. Great.
You can have a civil union, which is open to all couples, and basically you get the same rights as marriage.
Or you can be a defacto couple, which means if you have been living together in a relationship (any orientation) for 3 years you are, again, afforded the same rights as married couples.
The only thing I would personally change about that is to abolish "marriage" as a legal state and keep civil unions - people can and will still call it marriage, people can and still will use Mr and Mrs (or Mrs and Mrs), and people can still get married in a church with a minister - or not.
Until marriage is no longer kept in place as the "superior" option, our relationship options are still not equal as far as I'm concerned. But it's a damn sight better than what the rest of the world has (certainly any English-derived countries).
Note: being monogamous, vanilla and hetero is not an innately superior choice. You are better off splitting up amiably (yes, it will hurt) and being fucking adults like no one seems to be capable of when it comes to kids and pets than staying together when it's not working. That doesn't mean you don't fight for your relationship, it just means it's better for both of you and any dependants for you to be happy apart than miserable together.
-
Marriage was, and still is, an incredibly patriarchal institution. Acting like that's not the case is laughable, but common. That doesn't take away from marrying for love, but denial doesn't change reality.
In what way is marriage still an incredibly patriarchal institution? Actually, I should rephrase that, in what way is it still inherently patriarchal, because obviously certain variations of marriage are patriarchal. Sure things like arranged marriages are obviously patriarchal, but I'm interested to see the patriarchy in marriage as I know it.
In New Zealand, you can get married, which is still a hetero-only institution. Great.
You can have a civil union, which is open to all couples, and basically you get the same rights as marriage.
Or you can be a defacto couple, which means if you have been living together in a relationship (any orientation) for 3 years you are, again, afforded the same rights as married couples.
The only thing I would personally change about that is to abolish "marriage" as a legal state and keep civil unions - people can and will still call it marriage, people can and still will use Mr and Mrs (or Mrs and Mrs), and people can still get married in a church with a minister - or not.
I'd go the other way and call all three marriage. To me, the only necessary definition of a marriage is a relationship with a legal status (this doesn't mean there aren't other types of marriage, but that that's all that's definitionally necessary to be a marriage).
Until marriage is no longer kept in place as the "superior" option, our relationship options are still not equal as far as I'm concerned.
Agreed completely.
-
Love and marriage, love and marriage, go together like a horse and carriage…
Which, I suppose, means once you either allow yourself to be or are forced to let others strap you into the thing, you can't get away.
Silly? Maybe, but no more than some of the other assumptions and stances I've seen on this thread. Well, except for Fenriswolf. I have to agree that so long as the couple's new 'identity' is the mans' (My grandparents were "Mr. and Mrs. Athos LeFere" and she was often referred to as "Mrs. Athos LeFere"), or only the woman is expected to in any way alter her name, that's pretty damned patriarchal. At the same time, there are enlightened souls, rebels, call them what you will, who don't do this. That the woman can keep her full 'maiden' name at all tells me the male dominance of marriage is weakening. (Stupidities like the miserable "Promise Keepers" movement is another good example).
Uterus control? Sometimes. But the controller is not always a man. Sometimes it's a matriarch, or sometimes it's the families involved. Then we're talking about marriage as a means of alliance, increasing influence, or pure financial gain for the family, which, unlike what some other person claimed earlier, seems to be the most ubiquitous purpose of getting hitched, at least until recently. Time was, any marriage in any culture, including western, where the families involved had any power, influence, and/or wealth whatsoever* was often at least as much a contract between the two families as between the actual individuals involved—indeed, sometimes they were a rather secondary consideration, the specific children involved actually less important than the marriage itself taking place. "Oh, my son Henry drowned yesterday. But fear not, old bean—Richard can marry your daughter." (I still think this is the real reason behind the taboo against incest—your son won't cement any alliances marrying his sister. Also note how quickly the 'universal taboo' is discarded where power is accrued or better retained by brother-sister marriages).
So, we replace the male-controlled uterus with the family-controlled uterus (said family not always being controlled by males, whatever the culture believes) or, say, in the case of Charles Windsor and Diana Spencer, a state-controlled uterus. That's one of the real problems with unfaithfulness, btw—if your wife has a child by, or you father one with a member of yet another family, you can throw the whole thing into a state of higgly-piggly, because the perfect receptacle of their hopes and stuff now has a rival who can possibly 'cash in'. This is one place where women are definitely on the short end of things, because it's much easier to prove she's had a child, and if the husband's been off fighting for eleven months, he and his kin can do the math (which is one reason math sucks), at least if they won't buy the 'Zeus did it' excuse. Which in turn leads to putting wifey under lock and key, and then forming all sorts of asshat rationalizations to justify that. In other words, since marriage is about transmitting property, and the woman is obviously integral to that, she herself becomes property of a sort, with even more patriarchal asshattery dreamed up to justify that.
Then religion sometimes gets involved (note that the ancient upper-class Greeks were perfectly capable of doing the above without any particular religious justification that I'm aware of) and makes the rationalizations god's fault. (Judiaism, Islam, and Christiantity all dig on this, btw, with the degree varying from sect to sect.) One basis, though, remains when Dad buys it, who gets his best goat? Still, these religions transformed marriage from a contract between to families to that AND an act of faith. And if marriage is an act of faith, what is divorce? Unfaith? Felating the devil's penis? Although it may not be all there is to it, this is quite likely one reason that grandma and grandpa stayed married for sixty years: God, together with tradition said they had to.
Thing is, though, things have changed a helluva lot in the US in the last 100 years. For one thing, the consequences to possible offspring don't matter nearly so much in the US, at least most of the time (or so we like to pretend). I suspect part of this comes from the fact we have lawyers who've managed to largely circumvent the consequences of 'unsuitable' matches at will—if your grandmother really wants to, she can disinherit you and leave the family business to your friend Jim, and if her lawyer's good enough, there's probably not a damn thing you can do about it no matter who you marry. Also, despite what we like to believe, many of these marriage traditions really have more to do with aristocracy, or at least wealth and influence, then those who have comparatively little of either; whereas the U.S. is simply stiff with commoners, many of whom, shockingly, aren't particularly wealthy (by their standards, anyway). In the last century, many of them have turned to imitating Hollywood instead of dukes and earls. More on that in a trice.
Because these consequences matter less, these folks worry less about their families and 'good matches' and more about—ROMANCE. Which has a good side—it tends to reduce the patriarchal nature of the institution, since both of the people who are actually involved have to agree to give ye wedded blisse a try, but it also means the happy pair are free to believe the twaddle pumped out in third-rate novels, films, and music*, and be shocked, shocked, I tell you, when RL doesn't quite work that way.
One consequence of romantic marriage: a higher divorce rate. If your marriage keeps you and/or your family in power and/or social standing, or there will is a dowry that must be paid back, or land lost, or your children's future thrown in limbo, you tend to think twice, then again about divorce (unless you can 'put away' your spouse, a truly nasty piece of business). But if you marry purely for twu wuv without other, more temporal considerations, why, when that goes away (which it will, if you don't work at keeping it), why stay married? For better or worse, the traditional answer to that question, "Because God says so," carries less weight than it once did. And U.S. society was made to accept divorce by Ronald Reagan, so go blame him. (I don't think he cares any more now than before he croaked.) So no 'stigma' there, either, or at least less.
Not exhaustive, and probably incorrect in so many little ways I shudder to count them (because it's math, dammit), but something to chew on.
Note: I keep using the man's point of view because, like it or not, that's the way things're set up, which is why I must give Fenriswolf a nod. The 'holiness of motherhood' (my phrase, not theirs) that judges in the U.S. tend semi-invariably to back (at least until recently) in their decisions concerning child custody is a distinct thing from marriage itself, although it is a big turnaround from times past, when the woman could be cast on the trash-heap while the man kept everything. Sadly, it's not always as much of an improvement so much as a way to avoid considering each case on its own merits.
Note 2: Although Hollywood's product serves as inspiration for some, the antics behavior of the people who create the fantasies has also gotten its devotees. Thus, for those of you who enjoy such commentary, the common schmoo in the U.S. has gone from imitating those who, on the surface, in any case, are traditionally supposed to be moral paragons, to those who are traditionally supposed to be some of the most amoral shits on the face of the earth. What truth there is to such traditions is arguable, but the shift of emulation has clearly occured. So you can also blame the actors. Which leads you back to Reagan. Funny, that.
*Namely that love goes on and on without a fair amount of effort expended to keep it doing so by both pirates**, aka 'soul mates.' There are other errors propagated, but this one is my 'favorite.'
**I meant parties, but this was such a funny error by the spell checker I couldn't bear to remove it.
-
quote from Raoullfere: "...effort expended by both pirates**..."
If I'm remembering accurately from the 3rd Pirates of the Caribbean DVD commentary, a line cut from the film has Jack Sparrow opining: "I love marriage. It's like a bet as to who will fall out of love first." :roll:
-
Thinking about marriage as a way of preserving inheritances and thinking about Questionable Content at the same time brought to mind a possible future in which Dora becomes the literal heir to the Vance family business.
-
Having mentioned this situation, had to link this:
(http://www.nicky510.com/comics/2010-09-09OT89Virgin.jpg)
http://www.nicky510.com/?pw-ab=5561
-
What's additionally funny to me, in early Christianity (or some parts, at least) women had to wear headscarves in church so the angels didn't notice that they're women and rape them.
-
That's not a reason I've ever heard for hair covering in Judaeo-Christian theology. The most commonly cited reasons were "modesty" - the idea that a married woman should only reveal her hair to her husband, because a woman with uncovered hair was considered erotically beautiful in a way similar to a woman who was dressed "provocatively".
-
To be honest, the comic would be better for me if they were wearing Greek mantles, etc. Think of all those heroes who were fathered by various gods. Showers of gold, bulls, swans…I do wonder if somewhere amongst all that there was "Well, I confess he looked like your cousin Antipanes, and that is what the serving-girl saw. But it was Zeus, I swear it! Antipanes has not so large a member."
Husband. sighs. "Very well, wife…wait."
-
clearly a very good thing today
Bullshit.
Marriage is a sham, and it's just another tool of the religious right to discriminate against everyone who doesn't follow their narrow worldview.
thats a bit extreme :P I'm certainly not a right-wing extremist psychopath :) I come from a divorced home and I wish my mother and father would've remained married.
I think if you remove marriage, you will remove something that has been a great deal of good for alot of people. It seems the only logical reason people are presenting is "marriage causes divorce" and "marriage CAN [not always is] a system that is used for selfish purposes". Which is not only shaky...... it's actually pretty sad. I wonder about some of the homes people grew up in :(
-
clearly a very good thing today
Bullshit.
Marriage is a sham, and it's just another tool of the religious right to discriminate against everyone who doesn't follow their narrow worldview.
thats a bit extreme :P I'm certainly not a right-wing extremist psychopath :) I come from a divorced home and I wish my mother and father would've remained married.
I think if you remove marriage, you will remove something that has been a great deal of good for alot of people. It seems the only logical reason people are presenting is "marriage causes divorce" and "marriage CAN [not always is] a system that is used for selfish purposes". Which is not only shaky...... it's actually pretty sad. I wonder about some of the homes people grew up in :(
Seems pretty telling that you'd wish a lifetime of misery with someone they don't love on your parents (not to mention hilarious, since you're thinking Marriage =/= Happy Childhood).
-
What's additionally funny to me, in early Christianity (or some parts, at least) women had to wear headscarves in church so the angels didn't notice that they're women and rape them.
That's not a reason I've ever heard for hair covering in Judaeo-Christian theology. The most commonly cited reasons were "modesty" - the idea that a married woman should only reveal her hair to her husband, because a woman with uncovered hair was considered erotically beautiful in a way similar to a woman who was dressed "provocatively".
this actually goes back to prebiblical mythology. in the older versions, the angels that rebelled against god did not so much 'revolt' as secede, and left heaven to go live on earth. there they taught humanity things we weren't supposed to know, such as herb-lore (which included things that would later be declared witchcraft), cosmetics & how to abort pregnancies. one of the things about these earth bound angels was that they apparently had a thing for long hair. another thing about them is that they apparently had huge massive dicks. as in cubit length, don't point that thing at me, handle of the ubmeod kind of dicks. the kind of dicks that a good and pure and decent woman would run screaming from. therefor, 'moral' women covered their hair, because to do otherwise risked attracting the attention of these angels and there huuuuuuge dicks, something only an immoral slut would want to do.
if you're interested in this stuff, check out this talk from dragoncon in 2009 (http://media.blubrry.com/writing/www.talechasing.com/media/broadcasts/ep_24_dc_angels.mp3) the bit about the falen angels and their dicks starts around 20min.
-
I think people are being too harsh on Dora here.
Maybe I identify with her too much, as I also have major trust issues. I can understand why she would be uncomfortable with what happened given her past. You don't think reasonably when you would first see something like that. I mean she knows Marten is not the other guys she's been with, but at the same time she's probably been in too many situations where it was; "C'mon, it was just a harmless kiss", or "It was an accident I was drunk". After these experiences you keep telling yourself; "I'm not going to fall for that trick again". It becomes the way you think. You just expect it, so that way you're not hurt when the 'truth' comes out.
She did apologize the next day.
Everyone has issues they need to get over, we give the other characters time we should give her time as well.
I mean, look at how far Hanners has come!!
(That said I understand the issues of the others is generally more serious).
-
She also didn't have a Faye-type come out and ream her for what she said.
Believe it or not, I think Faye's little tirade may have actually helped in the long run. It made her realize that this situation is NOT like the others that may have preceded it, and that she has something pretty darn special going on with Marty.
-
Two things:
1) It is not feminist for a woman to keep her own maiden name during marriage, as that name is given to her by her father thus continuing the patriarchy, similarly with her mothers maiden name. Some feminists to counter-act this have taken their mother or grandmothers first name and made it their last name. I.e. Jennifer Olivia.
2) Why does everyone dislike Dora so much? Similarly, a lot of people seem to adore Faye. I've seen so much of it in the forums, can anyone point me into the direction of an old thread where this is explained? Or is it just people who dislike Dora/Love Faye are a lot more vocal?
-
'Twas a time you couldn't read four posts in these forums without coming across a Faye-detractor. Had one guy, Mr. wosnamewosname, (yes, that means I've no memory to speak of) who 'lived' to point out that Faye was a horrendous bitch who was Ruining Everything.
It's the Great Circle of Post. (Cue 'inspirational' shitty music.)
-
Maybe there's a Law of Conservation of Hatred.
-
2) Why does everyone dislike Dora so much? Similarly, a lot of people seem to adore Faye. I've seen so much of it in the forums, can anyone point me into the direction of an old thread where this is explained? Or is it just people who dislike Dora/Love Faye are a lot more vocal?
Back when Faye was literally bashing Marten's arm, many of us got sick and tired of her abusing like, the nicest guy in the (QC) world...
Now that Faye is his best old friend and Dora is a hair-trigger psycho bitch (sometimes) to the nicest guy in the world, .... see?
We're protective of good people. :-)
-
Interestingly, Dora has been also: ref. strip 467.
-
.... see?
We're protective of good people. :-)
But... but... they're all good people.
Even Sven.
:-D
-
Probably the wrong thread to bring this up, but I could get behind a little Faye hatred at this point (http://questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=1759). I've said it before, and I'll say it right here (http://forums.questionablecontent.net/index.php/topic,25053.msg964191.html#msg964191)
-
Those seem all like reasonable suggestions. I'm beginning to wonder how much longer Marten will be the good guy.
I'm wondering how much he actually regrets not being with Faye, the whole thing with Toto etc. I wonder what will happen, if their relationship is solid still or if it's beginning to be reassessed?
-
Equine-necro-sadism time!
This thread went wayyyy off target a whhile ago, so let's bring it back...
I was looking for something else, and the last panel of 960 (http://questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=960) jumed out at me. I just am stunned at the generous sprinkling of Dora's backstory all through the strip. The whole Dorapocolypse was foretold!
-
Yes, I actually think she's the most developed character in the strip, save Marten. When you think about it, we know very little about Faye's past other than her relationship with her father, but Dora's is there, as you say, scattered throughout the comic.
The thing with Dora that throws readers as well as the rest of the cast, I suspect, is that she's not usually all that insecure about other parts of her life. Plus, like a ton of people I know with low self-esteem, particularly when it's focused in one area more than others, Dora presents a strong front that says everything but 'I don't feel good about myself.'
On the other hand, I get a strong impression that prior to becoming a part of Marten's 'circle' (or whatever you'd call it) Dora was entirely focused on her business, and might have even been celibate, despite all her come-ons to Faye and Marten that would tend to make one think she was a sexual dynamo.
-
On the other hand, I get a strong impression that prior to becoming a part of Marten's 'circle' (or whatever you'd call it) Dora was entirely focused on her business, and might have even been celibate, despite all her come-ons to Faye and Marten that would tend to make one think she was a sexual dynamo.
Well, her previous circle didn't sound very appealing (http://questionablecontent.net./view.php?comic=132). Clove cigarettes? Ew!
-
Equine-necro-sadism time!
This thread went wayyyy off target a whhile ago, so let's bring it back...
I was looking for something else, and the last panel of 960 (http://questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=960) jumed out at me. I just am stunned at the generous sprinkling of Dora's backstory all through the strip. The whole Dorapocolypse was foretold!
interesting. i came across this one (http://questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=1262) awhile back after hitting 'random' a few times.
-
might have even been celibate, despite all her come-ons to Faye and Marten that would tend to make one think she was a sexual dynamo.
Her mom certainly thought so, to the extent of figuring that Dora needed a PulseMaster 9000.
-
Celibacy may have been a more recent development related to the running of a small business.
Really, who has the time?
-
.... see?
We're protective of good people. :-)
But... but... they're all good people.
Even Sven.
:-D
Even Beatrice Chatham and Vespavenger?
-
BC had a softer side. Tried to show her daughter that she loved her. And Vespavenger was just severely misguided.
-
It's noteworthy that the strip has a paucity of villains
-
Don't forget Meena. Meena was evil—that was why Saint Dave of the Good Works had to marry her, to protect others.
-
Wait, wasn't Dave a serial killer in his sleep or something?
Or was he just a NiceGuyTM?
Oh you spin doctor, you...
-
Oh, great googly moogly, let's not start in about dreaded, evil NiceGuyTM again. Geeezus.
It's noteworthy that the strip has a paucity of villains
Truthfully, it doesn't need 'em. Or have you not noticed that most of the cast members' worst enemy is him or herself*? Probably more of Jeph writing what he knows.
*and Pintsize, of course. But I'm not sure he means to be. Or perhaps he means to be but wants them all to beleive he doesn't, therefore leaving him free to pursue his reign of nervousness (Pintsize hasn't really made it to terror yet, aside from that brief time with the chest laser).
-
BC had a softer side. Tried to show her daughter that she loved her. And Vespavenger was just severely misguided.
You're definitely great at making excuses. :-D
Don't forget Meena. Meena was evil—that was why Saint Dave of the Good Works had to marry her, to protect others.
ROTFL :-D
-
You're definitely great at making excuses. :-D
I consider myself an amateur apologist
<_<
>_>
o_~
-
Part of the reason Dora's reaction pisses me off (a lot) is because of a perception that many MANY people have, both men and women. The perception is that the woman in a relationship is entitled to be as unreasonable as possible because (a) "that's just how women are" and (b) she "holds all the cards" and it's up to the guy to beg, plead, obey, kiss up, etc. You don't see TV ads with women staring at hot guys and then their husband or boyfriend looking at them with contempt as their woman tries to explain. There are A LOT of men who in Marten's situation would probably spend whole days begging and pleading for the wife/gf to forgive him, as well as women who feel like it's their duty to act like Dora is. Switch genders and you have a Lifetime movie.
Yeah, because contemporary pop-cultural depictions of women are completely accurate, and don't buy at all into stereotypes that have remained pretty much unchanged since Aristophanes wrote Lysistrata. You know, that we're inherently irrational, because we've got wombs (just for fun, look up the origin of the word "hysteria").
So... wait - I can't tell what side of the argument you're on.
It sounds like you are saying that Dora's behavior is unrealistic (while ignoring the fact that just because not everybody acts like that doesn't mean nobody acts like that - and it's not something we've seen from anyone except Dora and maybe Faye). But the placement of your argument (i.e. who you are bringing it out in response to) seems to be like you are saying that her behavior is justified.
Since, you know, jordinyc was arguing against the same cultural stereotypes you're arguing against, only s/he was arguing against the equally present idea that such things are _justified_.
-
I think the argument was that the attitude towards women in relationships that jordi was describing is much less prevalent or acceptable to the majority of people in real life than in fictional depictions of relationships, and that people tend to overstate the degree to which "women can get away with anything" in the media, just as they overstate the idea that "women are irrational, and therefore should be able to get away with anything".
-
True story, I once had a woman I was dating undergo a near-psychotic breakdown in front of me, quoting things I'd never said and panicking about everything she saw until she was finally in tears, shaking and near-suicidal. When I asked her what it was all about, she just responded "I don't know, I'm on my period." Of the people I asked, it was almost evenly split between those who said she had serious issues and those who said it was more or less par for the course.
It's true, there is a dynamic that our society that ultimately makes life harder on everyone. As should be obvious to any observer, women are on average no more irrational than men (and no less, fuck you daytime sitcoms), however when women are irrational, the men (or women) they're with are just expected to deal with it as it's considered just a normal part of existence. And sometimes it's really fucking hard. By that same token, when those same women act irrationally, there's an overwhelming sentiment that it can be attributed to the fact that she's a woman. So the extreme majority of women who are calm and rational under any reasonable circumstances get labelled as ultimately irrational and perhaps just doing their best to fight their own "instincts".
Men who date women with issues should only have to put up with their irrationality to the same degree as women who date men with issues. Support them, love them and help them get through it, but never accept it and under no circumstances reframe your viewpoint to make it something you "just have to deal with". And women without issues should not have to deal with the stigma of being believed irrational until proven otherwise. While the majority of the population is waking up to the fact that people are people and gender is neither an excuse for nor a cause of irrationality, there is still a sentiment to the contrary that is toxic and needs to go away because it benefits no one. It forces men to internalize a large amount of emotional suffering, it causes women to have to work harder than they should have to to be taken seriously, it furthers the stigma surrounding men with emotional issues because it also reclassifies them as effeminate and it also validates and reinforces the behaviour of women who actually do suffer from psychological issues because it causes them to not recognize their own problems and seek help.
-
(3) Marten was IN FACT CURSED BY VOODOO ZOMBIES and that's why every girl he dates, no matter how intelligent or emotionally stable they are, are destined to be fucking psychos.
They exist?!? I must find these Voodoo zombies and exterminate them, for I think they got me with their curse, too.
(No, I don't think all women are psychos. I just think I either have horrible luck or need to readjust my dating pattern.)
Faye and Dora should get into a fight - like, some John Woo-style shit. It'll be like the fight between Uma Thurman and Lucy Liu in Kill Bill, only more epic because instead of swords they will have LASER SWORDS
Marten will, initially, be altruistic and try to reconcile everyone's problems by interceding in the fight, but Steve will make him realize that girl fights with LASER SWORDS are awesome
Pintsize will record the entire thing and upload it to Youtube
Of course at the end of all this there will be an obligatory orgy between all of the QC characters. Crisis averted.
Hellz yeah. I never realized, before, that what QC really doesn't have enough of is laser swords. Of course, perhaps that could be said about all webcomics...... :lol:
Hmmmm
How about this:
Marten, completely reasonably, breaks up with Dora and kicks her out, and then comes to the sinking realization that with Penelope with Wil, Faye with Angus, Tai with Multiple People, all female, Sara with an Allosaurus, Cosette with Steve, the only single girls currently in his life are Hanners, Marigold and Raven. Raven is not there, and if she were there, couldn't keep a relationship and would be a lesbian every other day. Marigold is too much of a shut-in recluse and too addicted to WoW(and probs gonna end up with Dale) to have a relationship outside of her own apartment. Hanners is afraid of sex, kisses, germs and physical contact, end of story.
Due to this, He walks to Steve's place, drags him by the arm to the bar, and there they find Jimbo making out with a very drunk Tai, and Sven passed out in the bathroom. Jimbo, Tai, Steve, Marten and Sven then drink all their troubles away, while exchanging classy small-talk. As Marten is walking home, he and Steve encounter a familiar foe in an alley...the Vespavenger. Pizza Girl arrives to save the day, but is knocked out, and then unmasked(spoiler: It's Penelope) by another supervillain, arriving on the scene...some chick. She, the Vespavenger and Vespabot then murder Steve, and tie up Marten and force him to watch. They're about to kill Marten, when both Vespavenger and unnamed supervillain are shot in the face, and cinderblocks are dropped on the Vespabot's head(Again, by Pintsize). The assailant? None other than a now-conscious Penelope, who utters the catchphrase 'Did you order a pizza, EXTRA DEATH?'
We then find out that the unnamed supervillain and the Vespavenger are secretly Dora and Raven. With both of them gone, Faye begins a tyrannical rule over Coffee of Doom until she is shot by a now-crazed Hannelore, who proceeds to kill Penelope, Wil, Angus, a couple slaves, Cosette, Marten(Who was at the time dating Cosette), Sven, Tai, Jimbo, and anyone else in the vicinity before being killed by an unknown female heroine, masked in shadows.
We then get an introductory comic to the character, because now, she is the focal point of the strip(Every other character being dead(Except for Sara, Ellen, and anyone else who completely disappeared), with her newly adopted Robo-sidekicks, Pintsize, Winslow and Momo, as well as her pets, a loudly-chirping English-speaking Bird, with the amazing power to insert a reference to sex into every sentence, and a Dog with the amazing power to punch things long distances. with these as her sidekicks, she is...
Sweet-Tits. Well, her real name is Rosemary Moore, but ever since her secret identity went public, she went from 'Hey, who's that weird chick' to 'Hey, isn't that Sweet-Tits?'
Anyway, Sweet-Tits is a cool gal, seh fights crime and doesn't afraid of anything.
Now... this has convinced me that QC has the greatest tinfoil-hatted fan theorists in the history of online fiction. Well, actually, I was already convinced, back during that guest comic where they go to the moon. But now I know that it's definitely a pattern.
...Phew... from this point on we get into the reeeeeally long marriage debate. While a lot of it was quite intelligent and insightful, it's just not what I came here to discuss; I think it deserves its own topic. Sooooo... I'll keep those replies to a minimum.
My sister-in-law is a divorce lawyer, and she specialises in (and has written a book on) "divorce" of unmarried couples. It's clearly no less traumatic in some cases!
I wanted to chime in and second that. Last year I was dating a live-in S.O., and it ended with a breakup and a moving out.
No one wants to be living with the person they just dumped. It is extremely hard on both parties since they can't completely move on until one moves out. And in many ways, living together is functionally similar to being married. So ending such a relationship feels a lot more like a divorce, because there's nothing casual about it. And man, the packing process is definitely not pleasant.
True story, I once had a woman I was dating undergo a near-psychotic breakdown in front of me, quoting things I'd never said and panicking about everything she saw until she was finally in tears, shaking and near-suicidal. When I asked her what it was all about, she just responded "I don't know, I'm on my period." Of the people I asked, it was almost evenly split between those who said she had serious issues and those who said it was more or less par for the course.
It's true, there is a dynamic that our society that ultimately makes life harder on everyone. As should be obvious to any observer, women are on average no more irrational than men (and no less, fuck you daytime sitcoms), however when women are irrational, the men (or women) they're with are just expected to deal with it as it's considered just a normal part of existence. And sometimes it's really fucking hard. By that same token, when those same women act irrationally, there's an overwhelming sentiment that it can be attributed to the fact that she's a woman. So the extreme majority of women who are calm and rational under any reasonable circumstances get labelled as ultimately irrational and perhaps just doing their best to fight their own "instincts".
Men who date women with issues should only have to put up with their irrationality to the same degree as women who date men with issues. Support them, love them and help them get through it, but never accept it and under no circumstances reframe your viewpoint to make it something you "just have to deal with". And women without issues should not have to deal with the stigma of being believed irrational until proven otherwise. While the majority of the population is waking up to the fact that people are people and gender is neither an excuse for nor a cause of irrationality, there is still a sentiment to the contrary that is toxic and needs to go away because it benefits no one. It forces men to internalize a large amount of emotional suffering, it causes women to have to work harder than they should have to to be taken seriously, it furthers the stigma surrounding men with emotional issues because it also reclassifies them as effeminate and it also validates and reinforces the behaviour of women who actually do suffer from psychological issues because it causes them to not recognize their own problems and seek help.
I don't normally just post to echo what somebody said, but in the case of your contribution, I feel the unusual urge to simply reply with a one-word response that proclaims "THIS."
But since I've obviously far exceeded the one-word mark, I will instead leave you with this ever-so-slightly verbose and yet roughly equivalent statement, which still seeks to express a simple sentiment which could be expressed as follows: "word, bruthah." :mrgreen: