THESE FORUMS NOW CLOSED (read only)

Comic Discussion => QUESTIONABLE CONTENT => Topic started by: Kugai on 01 Nov 2014, 18:06

Title: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Kugai on 01 Nov 2014, 18:06
Have at ye!!
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Gladstone on 01 Nov 2014, 18:13
Aww, darn.  I had a poll all ready to go, but they said it didn't need to be posted till noon-ish on Sunday  :-(
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: DSL on 01 Nov 2014, 18:30
Well, doesn't that just melt your lug wrench.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Gladstone on 01 Nov 2014, 18:32
I should've declaired my intentions louder.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Kugai on 01 Nov 2014, 18:41
Aww, darn.  I had a poll all ready to go, but they said it didn't need to be posted till noon-ish on Sunday  :-(

Well, to be fair it's 14:40 here on Sunday.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Gladstone on 01 Nov 2014, 18:46
Well, to be fair it's 14:40 here on Sunday.

Blast!  Foiled by geography and time zones!

But you've got seniority, so I'll let it slide this time.  :-)
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Is it cold in here? on 01 Nov 2014, 19:06
It's common to update the poll during the week, which would give your entry another chance.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Blackbird on 01 Nov 2014, 19:10
Well, to be fair it's 14:40 here on Sunday.

Blast!  Foiled by geography and time zones!


Here, it's 3:15 on Tuesday.  I mean how crazy have the last two comics been, amirite?  First, Marten breaks up with Claire and spits on her face and then we find out Momo and Clinton have been dating for weeks.  I for one didn't see it coming.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Gladstone on 01 Nov 2014, 19:13
It's common to update the poll during the week, which would give your entry another chance.

Meh, it was related to Friday's comic ("Claire and Marten are 'kind of a thing, now!' Who will be the last to find out?", with appropriate punny choices) and probably won't be very relevant by mid-week.  I'll pass.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Gladstone on 01 Nov 2014, 19:24
and then we find out Momo and Clinton have been dating for weeks.  I for one didn't see it coming.

That sounds quite shocking!
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: ReindeerFlotilla on 01 Nov 2014, 20:03
Clinton must find it electrifying!
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Gladstone on 01 Nov 2014, 20:08
Clinton must find it electrifying!

The things Momo can do to him really knock his socks off.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: ReindeerFlotilla on 01 Nov 2014, 20:09
I'll be he gets a charge out of it.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Rghfrgl on 01 Nov 2014, 20:15
 I was positive that was going to happen.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Gladstone on 01 Nov 2014, 20:16
It'll certainly give a jolt to the current storyline.  Things were starting to get static.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: SubaruStephen on 01 Nov 2014, 20:20
Ohm y Gods, will the puns never stop?
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Neko_Ali on 01 Nov 2014, 20:30
You just need to build up a resistance to the puns. Or the capacity to use them yourself. Personally I find it shocking that people dislike puns.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Endellion on 01 Nov 2014, 20:34
Well, to be fair it's 14:40 here on Sunday.

Blast!  Foiled by geography and time zones!


Here, it's 3:15 on Tuesday.  I mean how crazy have the last two comics been, amirite?  First, Marten breaks up with Claire and spits on her face and then we find out Momo and Clinton have been dating for weeks.  I for one didn't see it coming.

I vote that we change the poll to whether we fire you out of a cannon into a volcano or put you through a wood chipper and feed you to whale sharks for somehow implanting that horrible idea into Jeph's mind.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: DSL on 01 Nov 2014, 20:36
Revolting.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Kugai on 01 Nov 2014, 20:46
I can hear the resistance to that from here.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: ReindeerFlotilla on 01 Nov 2014, 20:48
Calmly now. Let's say it together:

Ohm.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Border Reiver on 01 Nov 2014, 20:49

Ohm y Gods, will the puns never stop?

No.

Sometimes they slow down, but they never stop.




Questions, comments, queries , problems, bitches, rude gestures and/or remarks
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: ReindeerFlotilla on 01 Nov 2014, 20:50

Ohm y Gods, will the puns never stop?

No.

Sometimes they slow down, but they never stop.




Questions, comments, queries , problems, bitches, rude gestures and/or remarks

Suggesting the puns stop just amps things up.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Border Reiver on 01 Nov 2014, 20:55
And currently, I could not respond with sufficient power, so I will simply ground myself til later.


Questions, comments, queries , problems, bitches, rude gestures and/or remarks
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Kugai on 01 Nov 2014, 21:03
Just relax till the erg passes
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: ReindeerFlotilla on 01 Nov 2014, 21:08
It doesn't pass. It's always current.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: SubaruStephen on 01 Nov 2014, 21:19
You just need to build up a resistance to the puns. Or the capacity to use them yourself. Personally I find it shocking that people dislike puns.

I don't mind good puns, but right now they are alternating currently between good and bawd so frequently it's pushing me to the breaker point, I mean it almost physically hertz to read some of them
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: DrBear on 01 Nov 2014, 21:59
Actually, seeing all these puns has me wired.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: cesium133 on 01 Nov 2014, 22:02
Actually, seeing all these puns has me wired.
Still, we must be careful not to zap the potential of this thread by allowing the puns to become static.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: cesariojpn on 01 Nov 2014, 22:20
Ohm-y......
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Is it cold in here? on 01 Nov 2014, 22:36
As long as everyone is following the arc of the story.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Skewbrow on 01 Nov 2014, 22:48
Good puns compete with Pintsize's raw electromagnetism. Bad puns just induce zappiness.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: ReindeerFlotilla on 01 Nov 2014, 22:50
As long as everyone is following the arc of the story.

I see watt you did there.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Blackbird on 01 Nov 2014, 23:06
Good puns compete with Pintsize's raw electromagnetism. Bad puns just induce zappiness.

Making electricity puns is easy.  People just need an outlet.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Gladstone on 01 Nov 2014, 23:25
Making electricity puns is easy.  People just need an outlet.

*thunderclap*
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Is it cold in here? on 01 Nov 2014, 23:33
Defuse this already.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Gladstone on 01 Nov 2014, 23:46
Oh, it'll fizzle out on its own, as long as no one sparks something.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: who? on 01 Nov 2014, 23:49
Maybe we should have a thread for the puns running in parallel, rather than a long series clogging up the WCDT thread.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Gladstone on 01 Nov 2014, 23:52
But then the wires will get tangled and something will get put in the wrong outlet and one of the moderators will blow a fuse.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Gladstone on 01 Nov 2014, 23:59
But as delightful as this has been, I don't think I can generate any more, so I'm off to bed to recharge my batteries.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: BenRG on 02 Nov 2014, 00:54
Actually a week from the perspective of the denizens of The Secret Bakery might be interesting as well as a totally new way of looking at the story. Faye coming for her muffin hit, Angus coming to drown his sorrows in pastries and cocoa, Dora and Jim talking shop and, of course, Veronica doing her motherly duty by gently teasing Marten and Claire.

And you don't want to know the stuff Sam puts into the brownies that she found out in the woods!

Seriously, you don't!

I really would like it to be Sam who brings Faye out of her funk. Sometimes, the obvious wisdom of children goes where adults fear to tread.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: jwhouk on 02 Nov 2014, 05:39
C-c-c-combo breaker!
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: DSL on 02 Nov 2014, 06:28
Circuit breaker, is more like.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Zebediah on 02 Nov 2014, 06:29
I really would like it to be Sam who brings Faye out of her funk. Sometimes, the obvious wisdom of children goes where adults fear to tread.

Yeah, Faye just needs to retreat to childhood for an hour or two and do some totally goofy stuff with Sam.

Scenario: Jim asks Faye to supervise Sam and Momo on an afternoon outing to the woods. Momo winds up supervising Sam and Faye.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: ReindeerFlotilla on 02 Nov 2014, 08:58
I could see Faye cutting loose with Sam, but it still seems unlikely. Sam brings out the mother in Faye. The totally awesome mother who lets you make swords and offers you unlimited skull power, but still a mom. She cuts through Sam's irresponsible behavior and has no compunction against reminding Sam that they aren't "friends."

At no point does Faye have any conflicts about this. It's just her natural mode with the girl. I just don't see Faye reaching a level where she needs to reined in. She might exceed Momo's sense of the appropriate.

Faye's sense is arguably not a good yard stick, but I submit that the stuff Faye lets Sam get upto is no less dangerous than the stuff Sam does on her own (See: Snake!). At least at CoD, Sam is engaged in supervised mayhem.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Half Empty Coffee Cup on 02 Nov 2014, 10:19
Also, Sam actually learns things when around Faye. Not necessarily the sort of things Jim would want her to learn (welding!), but...
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: osaka on 02 Nov 2014, 12:56
Not necessarily the sort of things Jim would want her to learn (welding!), but...

Well, she also learned how to make an old fashioned. (http://questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=2180)
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Estron on 02 Nov 2014, 15:06
It's only 5:05 pm in the Midwest, but I see I've looked up this week's thread too late.  The trend of electrical puns is no longer current.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Is it cold in here? on 02 Nov 2014, 16:10
Yeah, wire people still doing that?
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: cesium133 on 02 Nov 2014, 16:12
Yeah, wire people still doing that?
Watt are you talking about? I volt we change the topic. I amp here just for the puns.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: SubaruStephen on 02 Nov 2014, 18:57
I second! The continuation of the electrical puns is a situation that must be rectified.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: NemoX on 02 Nov 2014, 19:02
how shocking. The frequency of these puns has me ex-static. I mean, I almost want to double up and volt out of hertz.

Really, you should all feel ashamed of yourselves, watt are you? 1.21 gigawatts or pure puns?
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: FunkyTuba on 02 Nov 2014, 19:08
That might push my beyond my capacity.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Blackbird on 02 Nov 2014, 19:24
Comic's up.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: ASB84 on 02 Nov 2014, 19:25
So, that's probably a "no" from Hanners.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: MooskiNet on 02 Nov 2014, 19:25
"I would literally murder you" sounds a lot creepier from Hanners than pretty much any other cast member,

Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: jwhouk on 02 Nov 2014, 19:30
"I would literally murder you" sounds a lot creepier from Hanners than pretty much any other cast member,

And a lot truer.

She also delivered the line almost as if she was telling her she preferred stevia in her tea instead of Sweet 'n Low.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: K1dmor on 02 Nov 2014, 19:33
"I would literally murder you" sounds a lot creepier from Hanners than pretty much any other cast member,

 And it's not the first time she mentions the possibility of killing her friends:
 1171 (http://questionablecontent.net./view.php?comic=1171)
 1172 (http://questionablecontent.net./view.php?comic=1172)
 1576 (http://www.questionablecontent.net/1576)
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: sitnspin on 02 Nov 2014, 19:34
I can definitely relate to Hanners here. I have friends I feel that way about. Most people, actually. I love them dearly and I enjoy our time together, but living with them? That's just a police report waiting to happen.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: cesium133 on 02 Nov 2014, 19:37
"I would literally murder you" sounds a lot creepier from Hanners than pretty much any other cast member,

And a lot truer.

She also delivered the line almost as if she was telling her she preferred stevia in her tea instead of Sweet 'n Low.
No, stevia is what she puts in other people's drinks to kill them. She's secretly Walter White.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Kugai on 02 Nov 2014, 20:06
The Odd Couple
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: HauntingPoem on 02 Nov 2014, 20:24
Marigold is the cutest I have ever seen her in Panel two today.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: ReindeerFlotilla on 02 Nov 2014, 20:45
While literally now also means figuratively, I don't think Hanners is using it in that sense. She means she would murder Marigold. At the very list, Marigold would suffer serious hertz.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Somebody on 02 Nov 2014, 20:57
Marigold is the cutest I have ever seen her in Panel two today.
When did Marigold sprout rabbit-teeth, anyway?
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: SubaruStephen on 02 Nov 2014, 20:58
Marigold is the cutest I have ever seen her in Panel two today.

Leave it to the anime fanatic to use the pleading anime eyes.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: ReindeerFlotilla on 02 Nov 2014, 21:09
Marigold is the cutest I have ever seen her in Panel two today.
When did Marigold sprout rabbit-teeth, anyway?

Since she went into space.

And since Jeph changed styles again. Marigold's teeth were often like that, but the new "loose" style apparently makes them bigger.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Smallest on 02 Nov 2014, 21:10
I think, although I don't know if they know each other other than in passing, her and Emily could work. Emily seems tidy, and she'd probably get along with Hannelore and Dale, and she's weird which probably means even if she doesn't like it (it=gaming/fandoms/anime/whatever), she's not going to make fun of nerds (especially because she seems nice; I know there are weird jerks).

Or that could be how they reintroduce Gabby. But I feel like Gabby was a bit stern (unless I'm blending her with early-Claire) and thus might not like the anime marathons and not-totally-cleanly-without-Hannelore-ness.

Or she could just move into a one bedroom.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Natswash on 02 Nov 2014, 21:10
Hooray for Hanners featuring more!

Warning - while you were typing a new reply has been posted. You may wish to review your post.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Dev Null on 02 Nov 2014, 21:32
Hannelore's hands are not visible in any frame, but she's wearing elbow-length gloves and sterilizing Marigold's fridge...
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Half Empty Coffee Cup on 02 Nov 2014, 21:34
Glad to see she's sane enough to avoid considering Dale, at least. Although, it would be more amusing to see their situation blow up in their faces...
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Natswash on 02 Nov 2014, 21:45
Hannelore's hands are not visible in any frame, but she's wearing elbow-length gloves and sterilizing Marigold's fridge...
I support this headcanon
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: hedgie on 02 Nov 2014, 21:45
Actually, Momo taking on a second job or getting extra shifts would make the most sense.  May might also work, since she doesn't want condom wrappers and gawds know what else on her face when she comes out of sleep mode, and maybe the robot odd-couple might prefer that life than deal with humans getting physical all the time.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Rghfrgl on 02 Nov 2014, 22:28
Glad to see she's sane enough to avoid considering Dale, at least. Although, it would be more amusing to see their situation blow up in their faces...

I don't know, I thought this might be the setup for that.

Also, panel 1 Marigold is a dwarf. But then she got better.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: ReindeerFlotilla on 02 Nov 2014, 22:30
But Hanners is not wearing shoes. This fact, alone, is messing with my mind.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Rghfrgl on 02 Nov 2014, 22:45
She has a roomba to keep the floor spotless.

I think. Something horrible may or may not have happened to it.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Gladstone on 02 Nov 2014, 22:49
She has a roomba to keep the floor spotless.

I think. Something horrible may or may not have happened to it.

It met the singing dildo in the hallway.  What happened next shocked even Yelling Bird.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: ReindeerFlotilla on 02 Nov 2014, 23:06
But... but...

That'snotHannelore'skitchen!
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Smallest on 02 Nov 2014, 23:20
Actually, Momo taking on a second job or getting extra shifts would make the most sense.  May might also work, since she doesn't want condom wrappers and gawds know what else on her face when she comes out of sleep mode, and maybe the robot odd-couple might prefer that life than deal with humans getting physical all the time.

May would be interesting.

I think Momo's paycheques are going pretty heavily into paying off the chassis, for now. I imagine the bulk of any leftovers already go to help with bills because Momo really wants to be a full, contributing citizen, and paying bills thus probably feels good, but I don't think she's probably making enough to significantly work on both.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: BenRG on 02 Nov 2014, 23:35
Now... To me, the question is why Jeph chose to use a strip to remind us of something that we already knew so well. To wit: that Hannelore has made lots of progress, but not enough to deal with someone who is as terminally messy as Marigold! Friend or not, the stress would make her flip!

On a more serious note, I have no doubt that anti-psychotics are included in the constellation of medications that Hanners takes. She may brush it off as a joke ssometimes, but I believe that she genuinely struggles with hallucinatory voices and extremely violent impulses and we've seen strips where this has driven her to tears.

Well, Marigold is a sensible girl - notice that she hasn't even suggested moving in with Dale. There are precisely three options right now, IMHO:
There is, of course the wildcard possibility of a new character, possibly associated with Faye or some other main character's story.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: osaka on 02 Nov 2014, 23:38
Now... To me, the question is why Jeph chose to use a strip to remind us of something that we already knew so well: to wit, that Hannelore has made lots of progress, but not enough to deal with someone who is as terminally messy as Marigold! Friend or not, the stress would make her flip!

We know it, but Marigold may not. And it's also to let us see if Marigold had made any actual progress towards basic hygiene, which Hanners confirms didn't happen.
Also the punch line. Always useful.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Loki on 02 Nov 2014, 23:57


There is, of course the wildcard possibility of a new character, possibly associated with Faye or some other main character's story.
Sara or Vespavenger.
IIRC, Marigold doesn't know either.

Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: cesariojpn on 03 Nov 2014, 00:56


There is, of course the wildcard possibility of a new character, possibly associated with Faye or some other main character's story.
Sara or Vespavenger.
IIRC, Marigold doesn't know either.

Didn't JJ write out Vespaavenger?
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: BenRG on 03 Nov 2014, 01:12
Didn't JJ write out Vespaavenger?

FWIW, my headcanon is that Vespa had her brain thoroughly laundered (to the point she can't actually remember a life before her membership of The Project) was cybernetically upgraded by EC Defence Systems and is now part of an experimental 'plugsuit super soldier' program. Woman and machine! Power X-treme!
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Blackjoker on 03 Nov 2014, 01:24
Possible ideas that strike me,  :claireface:  is a possibility if only because it moves her closer to Marten and it does seem like there's been a lot with her lately. Only other ideas I can think of are, as mentioned Momo, is another possibility. The other chance is that this gets used to bring another new character in, which actually would make some sense and could be a potential new source of drama and interactions.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: cesariojpn on 03 Nov 2014, 02:21
FWIW, my headcanon is that Vespa had her brain thoroughly laundered (to the point she can't actually remember a life before her membership of The Project) was cybernetically upgraded by EC Defence Systems and is now part of an experimental 'plugsuit super soldier' program. Woman and machine! Power X-treme!

Dude, stop binging on Evangelion.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Smallest on 03 Nov 2014, 02:23
Possible ideas that strike me,  :claireface:  is a possibility if only because it moves her closer to Marten and it does seem like there's been a lot with her lately. Only other ideas I can think of are, as mentioned Momo, is another possibility. The other chance is that this gets used to bring another new character in, which actually would make some sense and could be a potential new source of drama and interactions.

I was also thinking Dora since she's ALL THE WAY in Amherst, but I don't really see it happening. For also intangible reason, I don't see Claire. Also, there's been a lot of 'wow we all live in one building? Crazy" already, so that's a thing.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: ElsaStegosaurus on 03 Nov 2014, 02:24
Hanners, you kinda scary.  Murder is the operative word here.  Not kill.  Murder.  And I kind of believe her, too.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: osaka on 03 Nov 2014, 02:27
I was also thinking Dora since she's ALL THE WAY in Amherst, but I don't really see it happening. For also intangible reason, I don't see Claire. Also, there's been a lot of 'wow we all live in one building? Crazy" already, so that's a thing.

That somehow sprung "Natasha" to mind. Why did it do that.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Smallest on 03 Nov 2014, 02:30
Well, Marigold is a sensible girl - notice that she hasn't even suggested moving in with Dale.
I agree (living with someone you are dating can be great but they haven't been for, well, at all long really. Although I did like the idea before of Momo/May roommates if Dale and Marigold lived together), but Marigold with Dale is unlikely, as Faye mentioned that there's a lease on Angus' apartment and so she probably can't move (and probably won't want to, seeing as Hanners is her best friend and right there, and moving is hard).

That does not rule out Dale moving in, but other than the robots I'm not keen on the idea. This double reinforces May going there, I suppose, since that's the part of this idea I like.
There is, of course the wildcard possibility of a new character, possibly associated with Faye or some other main character's story.
This would be neat but it also seems weird to just pop in a random new person. Whether she knows them online, or it's a craigslist person, or whatever, it just seems like it'll be jarring.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Smallest on 03 Nov 2014, 02:32
As an aside, thinking about their household arrangements is reminding me of how excited I was when I moved out for living in an apartment complex where maybe I'd make friends and they could visit a lot and we could have spontaneous outings. That never happened.

I was also thinking Dora since she's ALL THE WAY in Amherst, but I don't really see it happening. For also intangible reason, I don't see Claire. Also, there's been a lot of 'wow we all live in one building? Crazy" already, so that's a thing.

That somehow sprung "Natasha" to mind. Why did it do that.

Oh no.

Although THAT reminds me, Amir was homeless last we checked. Hanners knows him, so that's an alright reference.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Krald on 03 Nov 2014, 03:04
Maybe it's just because iv never much cared for Marigold, but her body language in the first panel to me screams "im a spoiled brat"
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: BenRG on 03 Nov 2014, 03:09
Maybe it's just because iv never much cared for Marigold, but her body language in the first panel to me screams "im a spoiled brat"

My understanding of the character makes it say more: "I don't know what do do! Someone tell me what to do!"
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: osaka on 03 Nov 2014, 03:15
Although that is just a softer way of saying "I'm a spoiled brat". Speaking as one.

Regarding Amir: That sounds like a much MUCH better idea than mine, and it could trigger more band practice (and even a newfound interest in music on Marigold's part)
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: BenRG on 03 Nov 2014, 03:20
egarding Amir: That sounds like a much MUCH better idea than mine, and it could trigger more band practice (and even a newfound interest in music on Marigold's part)

I must admit, I've always liked the idea of Emily being a keyboards savant. It would be a way to keep her in the main thread of the strip after her internship ends.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Krald on 03 Nov 2014, 03:23
Although that is just a softer way of saying "I'm a spoiled brat". Speaking as one.


And....instead of just asking, since she clearly knows what she wants, she does the slightly manipulative thing and tries to get the other person to suggest the idea
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: osaka on 03 Nov 2014, 03:26
The other person then counters with murder. I'm assuming that 1: she doesn't know Hanners as much as she'd like to and 2: Her plan backfireded.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Krald on 03 Nov 2014, 03:32
I would to, certainly after the  May thing at Dale's place, after they had banged like, one time, telling Dale he cant let someone move into HIS apartment like she owns the place.... Brat.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: BenRG on 03 Nov 2014, 04:00
The other person then counters with murder. I'm assuming that 1: she doesn't know Hanners as much as she'd like to and 2: Her plan backfireded.

Marigold has never demonstrated much of what I call 'social awareness'. She has no idea how to read people properly and she has a lot of trouble deciding if an when it is appropriate to push her own wants and desires (other than her overriding neurotic need to be anonymous and unseen).

Her RL social circle is basically just Momo, Dale and Hannelore with Marten, Dora and the rest of the CoD ladies at a first degree of separation via her immediate friends. There is also May who is essentially Dale's room-mate and to whom she owes a favour or two along the line but the two don't really like each other. So, let's be brutal here: Apart from Hannelore she knows no one who might be interested in moving in with her that she knows at much more than 'acquaintance' level.

At this stage, I've got a feeling that Jeph is planning to use the crisis of Angus' departure as the catalyst for a 'Girl Meet World' scenario where Marigold is thrown into the deep end of the real world and just has to sink or swim.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Neko_Ali on 03 Nov 2014, 04:34
Marigold has gotten better about the whole personal hygiene and cleaning part, but Hanners takes things to an extreme. She has toned that down as well since working at the coffee shop but she still is obsessive about cleaning. Not to mention some of her other habits like staying up for days until she has a psychotic episode and collapses from exhaustion. I really don't think Hanners is ready to be living with anyone else right now.

May would be an obvious choice of someone in the cast who needs a place but can't afford one on their own. Since she's basically couch surfing with Dale right now, he apparently has a one bedroom place. I doubt she could afford a half place on her own, but between her job at the store and Momo's job they can probably make up Angus' half of the rent. Momo could continue rooming with Marigold, or she and May could share Angus' old room, if they can stand living together.

Amir is an option, possibly. But it seems likely because I don't think he and Marigold have even met, and her thing is she doesn't want to live with a stranger. Marten would probably vouch for him... but that doesn't necessarily make him a good room mate. Other options were maybe Tai? She was living on campus before wasn't she? And now she's graduated. It could get Gabby back into the cast, but all the same problems with Amir are there with Gabby as well.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: BenRG on 03 Nov 2014, 04:56
Well, Marigold has got a month to work something out. As I've already said, I suspect that Jeph is setting this up for a Marigold arc, her learning to deal with social interaction with strangers and accepting that someone is going to be coming into her life whose only prior contact with her is responding to a Craigslist ad and several written references from previous roomies/landlords.

Regarding time-frame, I suspect that this is Monday evening. Marten talking to Faye the evening after his Monday shift at the library just happened and now we've jumped scene to Marigold visiting Hanners. I just don't think it is credible that Marigold would have waited a whole day (all of Monday and into Tuesday) to talk to Hannelore about this; she'd be too anxious about Angus moving out and would be looking looking for help, reassurance and a quick solution.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: osaka on 03 Nov 2014, 06:28
The "Marigold Louise Farmer meets world" prediction seems accurate and hits close to home, since I did have a similar problem (in a much more immediate way) when my father's respiratory system collapsed - I had been sharing the flat with my mother until then. This still doesn't rule out Amir, it just gives a story on how they ended up getting together. Maybe Hanners spreads the word of Marigold's problem, then Marten overhears, goes tell Amir, they meet, Marigold cowers, that sort of thing.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Is it cold in here? on 03 Nov 2014, 07:41
I second! The continuation of the electrical puns is a situation that must be rectified.

Elton John discovered how difficult that is. He wrote a song in memory of Princess Di but nothing got better. Some things can't even be rectified with a Di ode.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Krald on 03 Nov 2014, 10:09
Why would hanners, even if she wasn't crazy about cleaning, want to live with someone else, when its not financially needed, and not with someone she is romantically involved with anyway?
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Zebediah on 03 Nov 2014, 10:21
It would give her good experience at dealing with social situations. However, Marigold isn't the best possible roommate for that purpose. Hannelore should start with someone easy, like, um, nobody else in the main cast.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Pilchard123 on 03 Nov 2014, 10:28
Just for funsies:

FWIW, my headcanon is that Vespa had her brain thoroughly laundered (to the point she can't actually remember a life before her membership of The Project) was cybernetically upgraded by EC Defence Systems and is now May.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: osaka on 03 Nov 2014, 10:30
It would give her good experience at dealing with social situations. However, Marigold isn't the best possible roommate for that purpose. Hannelore should start with someone easy, like, um, nobody else in the main cast.

I'd say that Marten Tiberius Reed is a pretty easygoing dude to live around honestly
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: DSL on 03 Nov 2014, 10:44
It would give her good experience at dealing with social situations. However, Marigold isn't the best possible roommate for that purpose. Hannelore should start with someone easy, like, um, nobody else in the main cast.

I'd say that Marten Tiberius Reed is a pretty easygoing dude to live around honestly

Hm. Would Momo join in that arrangement? That'd turn Pintsize's world upside down ...
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Kugai on 03 Nov 2014, 11:13
I second! The continuation of the electrical puns is a situation that must be rectified.

Elton John discovered how difficult that is. He wrote a song in memory of Princess Di but nothing got better. Some things can't even be rectified with a Di ode.


TO THE CHAIR FOR THAT ONE!!
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: MooskiNet on 03 Nov 2014, 11:20
I second! The continuation of the electrical puns is a situation that must be rectified.
Elton John discovered how difficult that is. He wrote a song in memory of Princess Di but nothing got better. Some things can't even be rectified with a Di ode.
TO THE CHAIR FOR THAT ONE!!

It's not his fault; you know he couldn't resist.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: ReindeerFlotilla on 03 Nov 2014, 11:53
...and now we've jumped scene to Marigold visiting Hanners...

Seriously, people. That isn't Hannelore's kitchen.  Unless it's an extreme continuity glitch. The color and layout of Hanners's kitchen is the same as Marten's.

If it was Hanners's normal kitchen, it would be beige, with a blank wall to the left of the fridge, and the cabinets to the right. The view from the door, looking out, would show either a blank wall, or part of the wall with one of the two large windows of the living room.

Instead, the kitchen wall, counter, and living room wall colors match the McPhee-Farmer apartment as seen in first pancakes. Banners is visiting Marigold.

Hannelore Ellocott-Chatham is barefoot in someone else's home.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: ItsNotATumor on 03 Nov 2014, 12:21
Marigold is infantilized here. "And now Angus is moving away and I hafta find a new roommate!" sounds like it came out of Family Circus. The body language is childish and petulant. The terms "hafta" and "wanna" exacerbate the impression.

Did she use baby talk like "hafta" and "wanna" in past strips? I don't think so... perhaps a more knowledgeable forum goer would know.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Aziraphale on 03 Nov 2014, 12:26
Instead, the kitchen wall, counter, and living room wall colors match the McPhee-Farmer apartment as seen in first pancakes. Banners is visiting Marigold.

Is First Pancakes one of the Apocrypha?  :angel:
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Endellion on 03 Nov 2014, 12:36
Hannelore Ellocott-Chatham is barefoot in someone else's home.

Isn't that one of the signs of the apocalypse?

Anywho, one very, very off the wall and probably not happen theory: Faye goes back to Savannah to regroup after the break up and, after flunking/dropping out of college, reluctantly brings someone back north to live with the Yankees to start a new life.

Amanda.

Amanda'd be a unknown for Marigold but Faye and Marten could vouch for her so she'll be 'safe' as a housemate and will fit in with the circle of friends. Also she'll be a good rebound fling for Tai when Dora leaves her to become Veronica's protege as she retires.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: ReindeerFlotilla on 03 Nov 2014, 12:38
First Pancakes was the beginning. Second Pancakes changed everything.

Now the world hangs in the balance. Can Third Pancakes be prevented? Who is fated to start Third Pancakes? And what does it have to do with the Human Insturmentality Project?
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Neko_Ali on 03 Nov 2014, 12:40
Third Pancakes: The Syruping.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: osaka on 03 Nov 2014, 12:55
Hannelore Ellocott-Chatham is barefoot in someone else's home.

Am I the only one who thinks this makes absolute sense? She might not have slippers and she'd certainly not wear anyone else's. And she wouldn't like to fill Marigold's floor with the outside filth. She just had to compromise and probably holding on to freak out in her shower, when she's scrubbing herself furiously to get rid of whatever the hell is on that floor.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Zebediah on 03 Nov 2014, 13:31
Consider that this is not just Marigold's kitchen. Angus probably has set some hygiene standards. Also Momo lives there, and while she doesn't eat, she's probably more than willing to help Angus enforce those minimum hygiene standards.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: ReindeerFlotilla on 03 Nov 2014, 13:48
I don't believe Marigold's kitchen is messy. Hanners seems well adapted to the fact that Mar-bear is not a very clean person. (Thank you for lying to me.)

I also know that Hannelore is a sandals kind of girl. For someone with hypochondria and a dose of don't touch me, she's always shown a lot of skin. Probably because bare skin signals vulnerability, and Jeph hasn't thought about it much.

I just can't interpret Hanners being barefoot on a surface she did not clean, sanitize, sterilize, and test. It's probably a throwaway art choice, but I can't stop seeing it and asking what does it mean?

I am also wondering what it says about me that this thing was the first thing I noticed. As in, before reading any dialogue, I knew it was Marigold's kitchen, for one. I know the kitchens we've been to at a glance. That, right there suggests I need a hobby and some friends. Then I noticed Hannelore's state of dress.  Then I read the comic.

On the up side, I didn't notice that Marigold was two inches short in panel one until someone else mentioned it.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Pilchard123 on 03 Nov 2014, 13:52
Banners? Auto cow wreck?
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: ReindeerFlotilla on 03 Nov 2014, 13:58
Yup.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: questionablydiscontent on 03 Nov 2014, 14:16
Marigold, I wonder if Angus' girlfriend would like to sub in for him. You and Faye can bond over missing him.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: stingray on 03 Nov 2014, 15:31
I second! The continuation of the electrical puns is a situation that must be rectified.

Elton John discovered how difficult that is. He wrote a song in memory of Princess Di but nothing got better. Some things can't even be rectified with a Di ode.

Resurrected a long dead account after lurking for a while because of this post. Wire you continuing such a horrible line of puns?
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Blackbird on 03 Nov 2014, 15:51
First, I'm calling return of Raven for Marigold's roommate again.  If I say it enough times, it comes true.  That's how the world works, right? Right? Guys...?

Second, why does it seem like some forumgoers think Angus and Marigold live in Marten, Faye, and Hannelore's building? I thought they lived in a different building a short walk away.

Third, what do these electrical puns have it common with Clinton?  No it's not that they're annoing! Silly voices in my head.  It's that they both have a transistor. (  :claireface: )
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: MooskiNet on 03 Nov 2014, 15:53
Third, what do these electrical puns have it common with Clinton?  No it's not that they're annoing! Silly voices in my head.  It's that they both have a transistor. (  :claireface: )

If they're taking votes, my vote is you win the thread.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: SubaruStephen on 03 Nov 2014, 16:01
And the Prize for winning the best pun is the same as winning The Lottery....

(by Shirley Jackson)
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: SubaruStephen on 03 Nov 2014, 16:05
Hannelore Ellocott-Chatham is barefoot in someone else's home.

I don't think she knows. NOBODY TELL HER! We don't want to freak her out!
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: ItsNotATumor on 03 Nov 2014, 16:23
Third, what do these electrical puns have it common with Clinton?  No it's not that they're annoing! Silly voices in my head.  It's that they both have a transistor. (  :claireface: )

HAHA! That was an outstanding pun!
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: FunkyTuba on 03 Nov 2014, 17:06
Third, what do these electrical puns have it common with Clinton?  No it's not that they're annoing! Silly voices in my head.  It's that they both have a transistor. (  :claireface: )

If they're taking votes, my vote is you win the thread.
Yes. Joule go home with the prize, for sure.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: who? on 03 Nov 2014, 17:30
Third, what do these electrical puns have it common with Clinton?  No it's not that they're annoing! Silly voices in my head.  It's that they both have a transistor. (  :claireface: )

If they're taking votes, my vote is you win the thread.
Yes. Joule go home with the prize, for sure.

Now you're just getting caloried away
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Smallest on 03 Nov 2014, 17:35
First, I'm calling return of Raven for Marigold's roommate again.  If I say it enough times, it comes true.  That's how the world works, right? Right? Guys...?

I forgot about her. Raven doesn't seem like she's in town to stable-ly, but on the other hand she's got money I think so she could probably keep covering rent.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: jwhouk on 03 Nov 2014, 17:42
That is Hannelore's kitchen. Head back to 2683 (http://questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=2683).
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Iristindhe on 03 Nov 2014, 17:46
What does Marigold actually do for a living, again? Gotta get the money for her half of the rent somewhere, but I can't seem to recall any mention of an actual job...

...ad revenues from playing games online?  :psyduck:
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: bhtooefr on 03 Nov 2014, 17:49
Webmaster for her dad, IIRC.

And Hannelore's kitchen is a different color.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: jwhouk on 03 Nov 2014, 17:49
She's an IT head for her dad's online shoe sales website. Her dad pays her, probably a monthly fee based out of the sales figures of the website.

And comic: The Little Light Bulb is slowly turning on over Marigold.

Prediction: Dale moves in by next Monday.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: jwhouk on 03 Nov 2014, 17:50
And Hannelore's kitchen is a different color.

Not quite. It's the same color for the cabinets. The fridge moves around, though - but so did the one in Marten & Faye's place.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Aziraphale on 03 Nov 2014, 17:56
She's an IT head for her dad's online shoe sales website. Her dad pays her, probably a monthly fee based out of the sales figures of the website.

And comic: The Little Light Bulb is slowly turning on over Marigold.

Prediction: Dale moves in by next Monday.

I think that Dale moving in is a bit premature, but barring a new character for a roommate, it's also the least contrived scenario if she's going to have someone else picking up the rent. I also don't think Jeph's sadistic enough to do a week's worth of strips with Marigold going through the rest of her social circle and getting turned down by all of them before she gets to Dale.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: cesium133 on 03 Nov 2014, 17:58
I still kinda think Momo would be a logical choice (Momo wants more space and to gain the rights and responsibilities of an adult human), but it looks like Marigold is probably going to make the mistake of moving in with Dale...
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Blackbird on 03 Nov 2014, 17:59
Webmaster for her dad, IIRC.

I thought she did web design/upkeep/etc. as a freelancer and her dad was just one of her clients.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Zebediah on 03 Nov 2014, 18:08
Comic's up.

Well, Hannelore went ahead and said it.  :facepalm:
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Aziraphale on 03 Nov 2014, 18:20
I still kinda think Momo would be a logical choice (Momo wants more space and to gain the rights and responsibilities of an adult human), but it looks like Marigold is probably going to make the mistake of moving in with Dale...

Momo would be a logical choice, too (but technically already a roommate). She could pay toward the rent over and above what she's paying towards the new chassis, presuming she's not already contributing to the rent.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Is it cold in here? on 03 Nov 2014, 18:30
Marigold, that's not a good way to pick a roommate.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: GarandMarine on 03 Nov 2014, 18:39
Well. I didn't see that coming.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Aziraphale on 03 Nov 2014, 18:54
Is it just me, or is the pace of the storytelling a bit more brisk lately? I like it.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: TRVA123 on 03 Nov 2014, 19:56
I think Marigold is going to ask Dale to move in, and Dale will quite sensibly say "no, its too soon."

and their first (in relationship) fight will happen.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: lot_jockey on 03 Nov 2014, 20:33
"and preferably tall."

Classic roommate quality.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Blackbird on 03 Nov 2014, 21:02
"and preferably tall."

Classic roommate quality.

You need someone who can reach the stuff on the high shelves, after all.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Is it cold in here? on 03 Nov 2014, 21:25
And help with the cleaning. A friend of my wife's visited and said she could tell by the state of the house that we're both short.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Half Empty Coffee Cup on 03 Nov 2014, 21:32
Read as far as the third panel before I facepalmed and thought: "She's describing Dale. Here we bloody go." Then I read the last and Hanners agreed. Looks like this is happening. Mistakes, ahoy!
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: ReindeerFlotilla on 03 Nov 2014, 22:19
Read as far as the third panel before I facepalmed and thought: "She's describing Dale. Here we bloody go." Then I read the last and Hanners agreed. Looks like this is happening. Mistakes, ahoy!
Quote from: Charles Montgomery Burns
Excellent. *Steeples fingers.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Natswash on 03 Nov 2014, 22:22
Read as far as the third panel before I facepalmed and thought: "She's describing Dale. Here we bloody go." Then I read the last and Hanners agreed. Looks like this is happening. Mistakes, ahoy!

Relationship arguments off the starboard bow!

I think that Marigold will seek the advice of Marten  and maybe Hanners while Dale of the other CoD employees.
Main characters for this arc: Marigold/Dale/Hanners/Faye(?)
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: BenRG on 03 Nov 2014, 23:13
To me, this just proves how narrow and shallow poor Marigold's socialisation is: Her prior positive experiences of humanity are limited to Hannelore and Dale!

Meanwhile, from Jeph's Twitter feed, I see that this strip is the result of a great struggle! So, extra thanks and hang in there, Jeph!
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: snubnose on 04 Nov 2014, 00:58
Well, that one problem had a really quick solution.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Storel on 04 Nov 2014, 01:17
That is Hannelore's kitchen. Head back to 2683 (http://questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=2683).

Back up a few strips from that one. That whole scene is taking place in Marten and Faye's apartment, so that's Marten and Faye's kitchen in 2683.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: BenRG on 04 Nov 2014, 01:37
That is Hannelore's kitchen. Head back to 2683 (http://questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=2683).

Back up a few strips from that one. That whole scene is taking place in Marten and Faye's apartment, so that's Marten and Faye's kitchen in 2683.

No, because the first panel shows Hannelore coming in through her front door whilst in her 'happy place' trance. So, yes, that is her apartment.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: ReindeerFlotilla on 04 Nov 2014, 02:24
That is Hannelore's kitchen. Head back to 2683 (http://questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=2683).

Back up a few strips from that one. That whole scene is taking place in Marten and Faye's apartment, so that's Marten and Faye's kitchen in 2683.

No, because the first panel shows Hannelore coming in through her front door whilst in her 'happy place' trance. So, yes, that is her apartment.

Indeed. The kitchen in the referenced strip is Hanners's. And the kitchen from Mondays strip is definitely not Hanners's. Wrong color, wrong arrangement, Wrong everything.

And Tuesdays strip seals it. They're on Marigold's couch. There's a window behind them. Hannelore's couch is against a blank wall. Hanners is in the same building as Faye and Marten, and I'm pretty sure we've seen her windows are the same as Marten's.

Her couch moves between the wall with the bathroom (Adjacent to the kitchen door, if her apartment has the same layout as Marten and Faye's) and the wall to the right of the kitchen door. In 1884 (http://questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=1884) and 1885 (http://questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=1884) you can see into Hannelore's kitchen from the living room. Note that her living room is an eggshell pale beige and the kitchen a yellowish beige. Marigold's living room is a darker, green beige. All evidence points to Monday's strip being in Marigold's home.

Never doubt my ability to detect a kitchen. For that kind of doubt, there is no room.







 :clairedoge:
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: ZoeB on 04 Nov 2014, 03:31
Some things can't even be rectified with a Di ode.
Well of course. As any Vogon knows... resistance is useless.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Zebediah on 04 Nov 2014, 04:49
And help with the cleaning. A friend of my wife's visited and said she could tell by the state of the house that we're both short.

Absolutely. The top of the fridge is a dead giveaway. You have no idea how much dust collects up there. But I do.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Schmorgluck on 04 Nov 2014, 08:46
Marigold is infantilized here. "And now Angus is moving away and I hafta find a new roommate!" sounds like it came out of Family Circus. The body language is childish and petulant. The terms "hafta" and "wanna" exacerbate the impression.

Did she use baby talk like "hafta" and "wanna" in past strips? I don't think so... perhaps a more knowledgeable forum goer would know.
She's somewhat panicking. Which is totally understandable given her condition.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: kerky on 04 Nov 2014, 10:53
You just need to build up a resistance to the puns. Or the capacity to use them yourself. Personally I find it shocking that people dislike puns.
Ohmmmm.. Isn´t this the IEEE forum

[Duck & run]  :-D
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: osaka on 04 Nov 2014, 10:59
But it is the SquEEE forum.

 :clairedoge:
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Pilchard123 on 04 Nov 2014, 11:20
KawaiiEEE?
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: ItsNotATumor on 04 Nov 2014, 11:50
Ohmmmm.. Isn´t this the IEEE forum

These puns are becoming a real impedance to the forums.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Thrudd on 04 Nov 2014, 12:26
If Claire had anything to say about all these puns, it would be with a rebel yell "Mho Mho Mho"   :clairedoge:
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Krald on 04 Nov 2014, 12:31
I'm not sure claire should go anywhere near these puns, the amount of static would cause that hair of hers to possibly strangle anyone nearby
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Endellion on 04 Nov 2014, 12:31
Ohmmmm.. Isn´t this the IEEE forum

These puns are becoming a real impedance to the forums.

I know, I'm thus going to resist making an electric pun as Clairely we need a new direction.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: osaka on 04 Nov 2014, 12:36
KawaiiEEE?

Creators of the chibi Anthro-PC standard.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: bhtooefr on 04 Nov 2014, 13:44
I just want to make sure that this forum is compliant with the RFSquees.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Kugai on 04 Nov 2014, 14:41
We're alternating between two current ideas I think.



Dale moving in with Marigold would be ......... interesting.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: DrBear on 04 Nov 2014, 15:09
This general electric thread is lighting up the forum.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: DSL on 04 Nov 2014, 15:19
The rain where I am is interfering with my pun power. I will have to await a fairer day.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: cesium133 on 04 Nov 2014, 15:21
I have to be careful when walking outside. You never know when a gauss will fly over.  :psyduck:
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: who? on 04 Nov 2014, 15:26
After this latest batch of puns I was like tLDR

(I don't know if that's not technically a pun, but I don't care)
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: cesium133 on 04 Nov 2014, 15:30
I was like tLDR
Watt?
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: DSL on 04 Nov 2014, 16:28
Hanners thinks Marigold is describing Dale. Marigold still thinks she is describing Hanners.

EDIT: Hangers? Shut up, spellcheck.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: ReindeerFlotilla on 04 Nov 2014, 17:12
Hanners thinks Marigold is describing Dale. Marigold still thinks she is describing Hangers.

Good point, +1
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: jwhouk on 04 Nov 2014, 17:34
Is it just me, or is spellcheck causing a lot of issues with people as of late?
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Is it cold in here? on 04 Nov 2014, 17:42
At least the puns sparked a discussion.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Krald on 04 Nov 2014, 18:07
We're alternating between two current ideas I think.



Dale moving in with Marigold would be ......... interesting.

I think that may be a bit to direct, current living arrangements should stay the way they are
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: valkygrrl on 04 Nov 2014, 18:15
Comic.

Daaaaaate.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Gladstone on 04 Nov 2014, 18:17
Daaaaaate.

Fancy hats!  FANCY HATS.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: MooskiNet on 04 Nov 2014, 18:17
Awww yiss.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: valkygrrl on 04 Nov 2014, 18:22
yesssssss the fancy hats, he sees.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Emperor Norton on 04 Nov 2014, 18:24
Marten is so chill, his laid back personality is the perfect calming effect for Claire's nervous anxiety over something so new to her. I also like how in this relationship he has managed to be more assertive without losing any of that laid backedness.

Also. Fancy Hats. Yes.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Gladstone on 04 Nov 2014, 18:26
Also, if they go to the Horrible Revelation (surely they have some food?) they can RENT fancy Victorian outfits, so Claire doesn't need to worry about not wearing something nice right now...

(SOMEDAY it'll happen, just you wait!)
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Is it cold in here? on 04 Nov 2014, 18:29
If this does not happen I will be sad.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Gladstone on 04 Nov 2014, 18:30
If I was on Twitter I would badger Jeph mercilessly until it did.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Zebediah on 04 Nov 2014, 18:38
Jimbo has a hat that Marten can borrow.

What, you think Jimbo's hat isn't fancy? IT IS TO JIMBO!
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: McFace on 04 Nov 2014, 18:39
Marten the relationship coach! Should be fun!
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Zebediah on 04 Nov 2014, 18:51
Oh, and: Claire, relax already. Everything is going to be fine.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: ReindeerFlotilla on 04 Nov 2014, 19:18
Squeeeeeeeeeeee!
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Kugai on 04 Nov 2014, 19:26
Relax Claire, it's only dinner.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Nyithra on 04 Nov 2014, 19:47
Are we going to get an adorable scene tomorrow?! I can't stand the tension someone hold me
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: eschaton on 04 Nov 2014, 19:51
There's something very creepy about Martin's face in panel three. 

I'm not sure if it's actually seeing a character's face dead on (which Jeph seldom does) or actually having a first-person look out of Claire's eyes (which I don't think Jeph has ever done before). 
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Gladstone on 04 Nov 2014, 19:55
Are we going to get an adorable scene tomorrow?! I can't stand the tension someone hold me

We're going to get adorable scenes several times a month (minimum) for the next YEAR (minimum).  Conserve your squees!
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Stoon on 04 Nov 2014, 20:00
OMG!  I'm just as clueless about the intricacies of dating as Claire.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Rimwolf on 04 Nov 2014, 20:10
There's something very creepy about Martin's face in panel three. 

I'm not sure if it's actually seeing a character's face dead on (which Jeph seldom does) or actually having a first-person look out of Claire's eyes (which I don't think Jeph has ever done before).

He's been doing FPV for a while: I first noticed it in #2680 (http://www.questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=2680)

EDIT: See also 2691, 2700, 2724, 2768, 2776, 2783, 2813
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Toe on 04 Nov 2014, 20:20
Marten's also busting out his special 'gel' for his hair...
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: SubaruStephen on 04 Nov 2014, 20:37
And help with the cleaning. A friend of my wife's visited and said she could tell by the state of the house that we're both short.

Absolutely. The top of the fridge is a dead giveaway. You have no idea how much dust collects up there. But I do.

Jeez, me too, I'm 6 foot 1, and the only refrigerator I've seen that didn't have 1/4 inch of dust on top of it was at my uncle's place (he's 6 foot 6).

And $5 says Claire overdresses for the date. (I hope it's the big fluffy pink Kaylee dress)
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: GarandMarine on 04 Nov 2014, 20:39
Yesssss the fancy hats!
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Penquin47 on 04 Nov 2014, 20:45
And help with the cleaning. A friend of my wife's visited and said she could tell by the state of the house that we're both short.

Absolutely. The top of the fridge is a dead giveaway. You have no idea how much dust collects up there. But I do.

Jeez, me too, I'm 6 foot 1, and the only refrigerator I've seen that didn't have 1/4 inch of dust on top of it was at my uncle's place (he's 6 foot 6).

And $5 says Claire overdresses for the date. (I hope it's the big fluffy pink Kaylee dress)

My parents' refrigerator never has dust on the top of it.  It wouldn't survive the layers of cat fur.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Natswash on 04 Nov 2014, 20:54
There's something very creepy about Martin's face in panel three. 

I'm not sure if it's actually seeing a character's face dead on (which Jeph seldom does) or actually having a first-person look out of Claire's eyes (which I don't think Jeph has ever done before). 
It's a little uncanny valley to me

Although I have the same question as Claire, what is proper first date attire?
(Although Fancy hats are proper attire for anything except sports/manual labour)
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: valkygrrl on 04 Nov 2014, 21:12


Although I have the same question as Claire, what is proper first date attire?
(Although Fancy hats are proper attire for anything except sports/manual labour)

Fancy Doublet, breeches, short cape, tall boots, court sword. Can't go wrong.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Is it cold in here? on 04 Nov 2014, 21:14
The Blue Dress With White Piping would not be overdoing it. It will be really awkward if that's what Marten wears too.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Natswash on 04 Nov 2014, 21:17
I think a visit to Horrible Revelations is in order for both Marten and Claire, and for this forum
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Gladstone on 04 Nov 2014, 21:23
I think a visit to Horrible Revelations is in order for both Marten and Claire, and for this forum

I still can't believe they didn't go there on The Night of the Scritches.  Jeph loves drawing his characters in Victorian outfits, and he never wastes an opportunity to depict Claire looking adorable, so it surprised me that he passed up the opportunity to do both at once.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Natswash on 04 Nov 2014, 21:29
Well he's getting another shot to do by right by the Victorian outfits
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Gladstone on 04 Nov 2014, 21:34
Like I said a page ago, it'll happen eventually.  The Night of the Scritches and Pancake Morning were already loaded with adorable moments; he probably didn't want to overdo it.  Their First Date is probably going to be equally squeeful, though, so maybe it's best to wait.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Natswash on 04 Nov 2014, 21:42
You're the kind of person who can really savor a bar of chocolate instead of eating it all, aren't you?
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: who? on 04 Nov 2014, 21:42
Hopefully Claire will be able to relax a bit and we'll see a smile from her this week
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Gladstone on 04 Nov 2014, 21:46
You're the kind of person who can really savor a bar of chocolate instead of eating it all, aren't you?

I used to hoard empty M&M's Minis tubes because they smelled like chocolate for months after you ate all the candies.

(So what I mean is, I'm good at savoring things longer than necessary, before enjoying the next good thing.)
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Rghfrgl on 04 Nov 2014, 21:49
There's something very creepy about Martin's face in panel three. 

Marten is happy and it's been so long his face doesn't know what to do about it.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: lot_jockey on 04 Nov 2014, 22:39
There's something very creepy about Martin's face in panel three. 

I'm not sure if it's actually seeing a character's face dead on (which Jeph seldom does) or actually having a first-person look out of Claire's eyes (which I don't think Jeph has ever done before). 
It's a little uncanny valley to me

I agree -- it's a really creepy expression. I know the expression is intended to show that Marten is happy about dating Claire, but it comes off poorly.

I find it puzzling that Marten would want to date Claire. Today's comic reaffirmed this feeling. For one thing, Marten is 25 or 26 and Claire is 24 (http://questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=2281). However, Marten has much more romantic experience than Claire. Marten has had four or five girlfriends (http://questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=2569). In contrast, Claire has kissed one person (http://questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=2571). I guess Marten is that uncommon 26 year-old who is willing to date someone with essentially no romantic experience.

Marten's paternalism towards Claire also baffles me. If you have to protect and advise someone in a paternal way, to me, that person would not feel like an equal partner. When Marten advised Claire that she "might wanna change out of that dress... so you won't be heartbroken when someone spills a shitty beer on it" (http://questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=2790), it came across like she, a 24 year old, had never been to a bar and didn't know how to dress herself. Marten also had to comfort Claire after she freaked out about harmless snuggling (http://questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=2432). Today, he told her she can wear whatever she wants on a date. Again, I don't get how one could be attracted to someone when he has to hold her hand through so many scenarios. 

Now, the heart wants (http://questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=2807) what it wants (http://questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=2808). That's why Marten and Claire are "kind of a thing. (http://www.questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=2825)" But I imagine trouble must be on the horizon.

----

As a side note, the way Jeph has been drawing eyes recently has bugged me. Whenever he draws someone close up, the eyes and pupils are way (http://questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=2763) too (http://questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=2810) big (http://www.questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=2826). It is too much like anime. I miss the more realistic style from 1600 to 1800.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: BenRG on 04 Nov 2014, 23:28
I get the impression that the reason why early Claire's personality was so abrasive was because she's been socially excluded by choice during her transition. She's probably never had any serious adult relationships other than very limited academic ones during her studies; she really didn't know how to relate to people properly. She really doesn't know how to do this. All she's got are the influences of literature and media. Consequently, she probably thinks that there is always more to dating than there is in this case (going out for an informal meal).

This is another area where Marten's niceness helps: He is willing to walk her through her questions and nervousness without getting impatient. That said, I think that Claire would enjoy going on a fancy, formal date with all the trimmings. I hope Marten thinks to do that for her one day!

I think that Jeph is deliberately comparing Claire to Marigold here. Both are somewhat inexperienced at adult relationships and the requirements of life, if for different reasons. Both need guidance from wise figures; Hanners and Marten are unlikely candidates but are doing the job.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Rghfrgl on 04 Nov 2014, 23:55
Quote
I find it puzzling that Marten would want to date Claire.

Marten gets to take the lead with Claire and I think that's the appeal, for him and the readers. Marten likes strong women and I'd say Claire is a strong woman, she's going after her dreams and just being herself must have taken a lot of courage. But compared to other strong women Martens shown interest in like Dora and Faye she's not a aggressive woman. Marten can't keep up with a Faye or Dora and I think he's figured that out.

Well, that and Claire is super cute.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Natswash on 05 Nov 2014, 00:07
Cute is frequently a factor
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: snubnose on 05 Nov 2014, 00:40
So far Marten and Claire are a pretty conventional couple.

I mean breakfast at her mother, kiss before work, first date ... if Claire was a normal woman, people might complain this story is almost boring.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: osaka on 05 Nov 2014, 00:48
Claire's face on panel 5 is the face of someone who has just had her whole dressing paradigm destroyed. "All that time lost in the wardrobe and it never even MATTERED!"

Which of course is not true, but it can feel like that in the moment.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Akima on 05 Nov 2014, 00:51
The Blue Dress With White Piping would not be overdoing it. It will be really awkward if that's what Marten wears too.
Hee hee... Yes, that could be a good option.

"Normal woman" would not be my choice of words.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Xfraze on 05 Nov 2014, 00:59
I actually liked his face in panel three. I didn't really get the creep vibe or an uncanny feeling.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Natswash on 05 Nov 2014, 01:07
I dunno if it's just me, but Hanners, Claire, and Marigold seem to be very similar characters to me. They are deeply nuanced and unique but they seem very similar and I can't put my finger on why
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: BenRG on 05 Nov 2014, 01:22
Are we going to get an adorable scene tomorrow?! I can't stand the tension someone hold me

*Holds Nyithra* There, there! It's going to be okay!

Seriously, it wouldn't surprise me if the date isn't until next week. I can see tomorrow's strip being more of Hanners and Mar-bear with the latter being led towards the realisation that Dale is basically a gender-swapped Hannelore without the physical contact phobia. Then Friday, I think, will be Claire running to CoD to beg one of the ladies to be allowed to use their emergency lipstick before running back to rejoin a weirded out Marten, who is still outside the Library, waiting for her.

I dunno if it's just me, but Hanners, Claire, and Marigold seem to be very similar characters to me. They are deeply nuanced and unique but they seem very similar and I can't put my finger on why

It's because, whilst they're full grown adults with adult desires, they are socially and emotionally less well developed. This makes them come across as very innocent and even child-like. It is a common theme in a lot of the ladies of Questionable Content (with the exception of Tai and possibly Dora).
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Thrillho on 05 Nov 2014, 01:30
I find it puzzling that Marten would want to date Claire. Today's comic reaffirmed this feeling. For one thing, Marten is 25 or 26 and Claire is 24 (http://questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=2281).

CALL THE COPS

Seriously, my parents are six years apart. And I am six years older than my girlfriend. And I'm 26.

Quote
However, Marten has much more romantic experience than Claire. Marten has had four or five girlfriends (http://questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=2569). In contrast, Claire has kissed one person (http://questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=2571). I guess Marten is that uncommon 26 year-old who is willing to date someone with essentially no romantic experience.

So he's a nice guy willing to overlook someone's lack of experience and see the person, rather than just how many people they've kissed. I again fail to see why this is that puzzling.

Quote
Marten's paternalism towards Claire also baffles me. If you have to protect and advise someone in a paternal way, to me, that person would not feel like an equal partner.

Precious few relationships are properly 100% equal, and even if they are, there is room for paternalism or maternalism, besides which dominance does not mean inequality, experience does not mean inequality, age does not mean inequality.

Quote
When Marten advised Claire that she "might wanna change out of that dress... so you won't be heartbroken when someone spills a shitty beer on it" (http://questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=2790), it came across like she, a 24 year old, had never been to a bar and didn't know how to dress herself.

Why would Marten's friendly advice give any indication of whether Claire has been to a bar? I've got plenty of friends who are practically drunks but still dress pretty for dive bars. Could just be an indication that she's not been to a wedding before. And if she hasn't been to a wedding or a bar, to paraphrase the late Bill Hicks, four questions: Yeah? And? So? What?

Quote
Marten also had to comfort Claire after she freaked out about harmless snuggling (http://questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=2432). Today, he told her she can wear whatever she wants on a date. Again, I don't get how one could be attracted to someone when he has to hold her hand through so many scenarios.

Okay so given how insulting that is to anyone who's ever had anxiety issues, I just stopped caring whether I offend you with this post or not.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: ReindeerFlotilla on 05 Nov 2014, 01:34
I want to make a relevant comment but my current emotional state has eliminated my capacity for rational thought.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Emperor Norton on 05 Nov 2014, 02:01
@Gareth. Thank you. I read that and wanted to say something, but couldn't articulate everything about what that post made me feel and why it made me feel that way, but you managed it.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Thrillho on 05 Nov 2014, 02:27
No problem. I might have been a bit nicer if I'd not already been in a bad mood.

Actually no I wouldn't because that post pissed me off throughout.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: ZoeB on 05 Nov 2014, 04:50
if Claire was a normal woman
CLANG!

http://idioms.thefreedictionary.com/drop+a+clanger!

See also, Church, farting in  :laugh:

Not to worry. I actually laughed when I read this. Then again at Akima's elegantly understated comment.
Fortunately, we're all friends here, so no more than mildly chucklesome rather than hurtful.

Now in the UK it would be "dropping a brick", but the US meaning of the phrase is quite different.

OK nuff said, don't want to cause embarrassment.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: BenRG on 05 Nov 2014, 05:01
Actually, Zoe, I do see Snubnose's point. I wonder if Jeph is going to hammer home just how conventional, normal, boring and utterly average Marten and Claire actually are. The point would be that Claire's gender identity doesn't matter because the two of them are just a couple testing out whether they can make a relationship work like millions of others around the world.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: valkygrrl on 05 Nov 2014, 05:03


Now in the UK it would be "dropping a brick", but the US meaning of the phrase is quite different.



And please don't do _that_ in the forum either. kthx.
I want to make a relevant comment but my current emotional state has eliminated my capacity for rational thought.

How about 'butts?'
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: BenRG on 05 Nov 2014, 05:14
So, onto the timeline information (for April's benefit). Based on clothing, this is definitely the same day (probably Monday) that Marten officially informed Tai that he and Claire are a couple and that he is willing to co-operate with any changes to his assignment that management impose as a result.

So, this means that we have events probably something like this through the day:
Goodness! I've just realised what a geek I am!

Obligatory self-mockery aside, it occurs to me that it has taken something like 40-50 strips to take us from the trip to the bar on Saturday night to the latter part of Monday! That's actually a very dense bit of story-telling. I'm wondering if, after the Angus situation is resolved (possibly around Thanksgiving) we might have a big time skip.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: osaka on 05 Nov 2014, 05:52
It makes sense that it's a dense bit of story telling, there are at the very least 3 storylines going at the same time right now (QCSS Clarten setting sail to the horizon, Steam Paddler FAngus crashing down Niagara falls, Angus moving to NY and having Marigold looking for roomie). Granted that Marigold's "struggles" are more of a background thing that has just been noted, but this is still a webcomic loosely based on strips and that limits the possible Progress per Unit of Comic (tm)
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: snubnose on 05 Nov 2014, 06:02
I dunno if it's just me, but Hanners, Claire, and Marigold seem to be very similar characters to me. They are deeply nuanced and unique but they seem very similar and I can't put my finger on why
I think ALL of Jephs characters have a certain lightheartedness to them. Even if they all have their issues, on a certain level they are deeply relaxed, ever able to made the trademark jokes of Jeph.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Somnus Eternus on 05 Nov 2014, 06:04
The way Jeph's drawing him, Marten's eyes make it clear he's so into her that it's giving me warm and fuzzies and I'm starting to worry it might actually be heart problems.

Does anyone have an aspirin?  I want to head this off before I get the tingling down the arm.

It makes sense that it's a dense bit of story telling, there are at the very least 3 storylines going at the same time right now (QCSS Clarten setting sail to the horizon, Steam Paddler FAngus crashing down Niagara falls, Angus moving to NY and having Marigold looking for roomie). Granted that Marigold's "struggles" are more of a background thing that has just been noted, but this is still a webcomic loosely based on strips and that limits the possible Progress per Unit of Comic (tm)

You're forgetting the most important one - Pintsize and Winslow: Entrepreneurs.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Blackbird on 05 Nov 2014, 06:22
if Claire was a normal woman
CLANG!

Giving snubnose the benefit of the doubt, Claire is NOT a normal woman.  She's an anxiety-ridden nutbar with questionable social skills (I should know, we can smell our own).  There's room for the comment to be alot more innocent than it comes off as at first. 
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: MooskiNet on 05 Nov 2014, 06:39
if Claire was a normal woman
CLANG!
Giving snubnose the benefit of the doubt, Claire is NOT a normal woman.  She's an anxiety-ridden nutbar with questionable social skills (I should know, we can smell our own).  There's room for the comment to be alot more innocent than it comes off as at first. 

Without trying to be the thought police or nothin', I think the word 'normal' used to define a set of criteria that someone does not meet (no matter what the criteria are) is problematic.

Claire has a set of challenges that makes otherwise boring situations interesting (sometimes in the way of the Chinese curse) is another way of saying it, I guess.

I don't think there's any malice intended, so maybe just nod wearily and chuckles all around.

We'll get there.  :-)
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: bhtooefr on 05 Nov 2014, 07:56
You know, lot_jockey's post actually really bothers me.

I'm 26 years old, and I've never kissed anyone, and have no dating experience whatsoever, and don't really know what I'm doing in that regard. While the reasons for that are rather different from Claire's reasons (mine is caused primarily by my anxiety issues and the social structures of my upbringing, whereas hers was caused by her transition primarily and her explicitly not wanting to date while she was still figuring herself out), the end result is the same. So, what is someone in their mid-20s with zero dating experience supposed to do, date high-schoolers (which absolutely is creepy - according to age / 2 + 7, 19 is the youngest Claire could date with it being socially acceptable)? Or is Claire supposed to exclusively date people in situations like hers, and if she wants to date someone more experienced than her, sorry, she's too old to be inexperienced and date someone experienced even if (or especially if?) they're really quite close to her in age? (And, it's well within the age / 2 + 7 rule - I'll note that she could date someone as old as 34 and it wouldn't be creepy under that rule.)
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Neko_Ali on 05 Nov 2014, 08:01
Pleeease, the Uncomfortable Revelation on Friday. On please please please. Give us a weekend of Claire in a cute Victorian dress...
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Blackbird on 05 Nov 2014, 08:33
You know, lot_jockey's post actually really bothers me.

I'm 26 years old, and I've never kissed anyone, and have no dating experience whatsoever, and don't really know what I'm doing in that regard. While the reasons for that are rather different from Claire's reasons (mine is caused primarily by my anxiety issues and the social structures of my upbringing, whereas hers was caused by her transition primarily and her explicitly not wanting to date while she was still figuring herself out), the end result is the same.

lot_jockey's line about "Marten being the rare 26 year old who would date somebody with no experience" really rings untrue to me.  I'm my girlfriend's first adult relationship (I'm 28, she's 30) and I was 26 when we started dating. She figured out that she liked girls pretty late, barely dated men before that, yadda yadda yadda, it is what it is. Her inexperience in relationshippy things can be irritating as hell sometimes, but most of the time, it's nice to just be with somebody who doesn't have all of that baggage from past relationships.  If I'm being a bitch, I just get told I'm being a bitch rather than hearing "you're acting just like (ex's name)!" (See?  That right there is something my ex used to do, and I brought that bag with me right into this relationship.)

There are plenty of people willing to put up with the pitfalls of having an inexperienced partner, because there are some real perks to it too.

That said, get on that horse, friend. Because 26 and inexperienced can be cute, but you don't want to wake up one day 40 and still inexperienced.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: lot_jockey on 05 Nov 2014, 08:52
I find it puzzling that Marten would want to date Claire. Today's comic reaffirmed this feeling. For one thing, Marten is 25 or 26 and Claire is 24 (http://questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=2281).

CALL THE COPS

Seriously, my parents are six years apart. And I am six years older than my girlfriend. And I'm 26.

Quote
However, Marten has much more romantic experience than Claire. Marten has had four or five girlfriends (http://questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=2569). In contrast, Claire has kissed one person (http://questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=2571). I guess Marten is that uncommon 26 year-old who is willing to date someone with essentially no romantic experience.

So he's a nice guy willing to overlook someone's lack of experience and see the person, rather than just how many people they've kissed. I again fail to see why this is that puzzling.

Quote
Marten's paternalism towards Claire also baffles me. If you have to protect and advise someone in a paternal way, to me, that person would not feel like an equal partner.

Precious few relationships are properly 100% equal, and even if they are, there is room for paternalism or maternalism, besides which dominance does not mean inequality, experience does not mean inequality, age does not mean inequality.

Quote
When Marten advised Claire that she "might wanna change out of that dress... so you won't be heartbroken when someone spills a shitty beer on it" (http://questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=2790), it came across like she, a 24 year old, had never been to a bar and didn't know how to dress herself.

Why would Marten's friendly advice give any indication of whether Claire has been to a bar? I've got plenty of friends who are practically drunks but still dress pretty for dive bars. Could just be an indication that she's not been to a wedding before. And if she hasn't been to a wedding or a bar, to paraphrase the late Bill Hicks, four questions: Yeah? And? So? What?

Quote
Marten also had to comfort Claire after she freaked out about harmless snuggling (http://questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=2432). Today, he told her she can wear whatever she wants on a date. Again, I don't get how one could be attracted to someone when he has to hold her hand through so many scenarios.

Okay so given how insulting that is to anyone who's ever had anxiety issues, I just stopped caring whether I offend you with this post or not.

Gareth, I agree with most of what you're saying. I'm not going to address your comments point by point, but yes: Marten is incredibly nice and is willing to overlook / take on Claire's issues because he likes her so much as a person (I believe I said this in my original post, but I should have lead with that statement). I was going to try to re-articulate my general point, but I (a) have offended a few people and (b) other people's life experiences are different than my experiences and my circle of friends' experiences. So, I'm going to drop it.

bhtooefr, I apologize. 
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Thrillho on 05 Nov 2014, 08:56
Damn I was all set for you to be an asshole about it and you've been really nice. Was in the mood for an argument too.

Ultimately we all only have our own life experience to go from!

(And I was in a bad mood.)
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: osaka on 05 Nov 2014, 09:18
It makes sense that it's a dense bit of story telling, there are at the very least 3 storylines going at the same time right now (QCSS Clarten setting sail to the horizon, Steam Paddler FAngus crashing down Niagara falls, Angus moving to NY and having Marigold looking for roomie). Granted that Marigold's "struggles" are more of a background thing that has just been noted, but this is still a webcomic loosely based on strips and that limits the possible Progress per Unit of Comic (tm)

You're forgetting the most important one - Pintsize and Winslow: Entrepreneurs.

DAMMIT I KNEW I FORGOT SOMETHING. Now I won't get my pledged singing dildo :(
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Is it cold in here? on 05 Nov 2014, 09:39
if Claire was a normal woman
CLANG!

Giving snubnose the benefit of the doubt, Claire is NOT a normal woman.  She's an anxiety-ridden nutbar with questionable social skills (I should know, we can smell our own).  There's room for the comment to be alot more innocent than it comes off as at first.

(mod)Thank you all for not exploding. Everyone covered the points I might have made. Well done. To leave nothing unsaid, the worst interpretation of that would definitely be a moderation issue.(/mod)

(regular user)This would definitely be an interesting story line even if Claire weren't a library science major. Marten is showing character development by dating a woman who's less domineering than Dora or Faye. Claire may even be more ambitious than Dora.(/)
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: NemoX on 05 Nov 2014, 10:20
I don't understand the few people who are making their ages an issue. For one, they are not that far apart anyway. Secondly, as you get older age gaps become less and less noticeable/relevant/worth mentioning. Lots of couples I know are a good 8-12 years apart. It's when we are really young that its social taboo. People forget too those times before when a 15 year old would be set to wed a 30+ "gentleman".

I like the half your age +7 rule myself, and I am not encouraging creeps to date well under their age group, I'm just saying its all in context, situation, timing and compatible personalities/maturities.

Marten is not that much older than Claire and he himself is not that "mature" if it comes down to it. They like each other, they click. That's all that should matter.

Also, I agree that this is different in that Marten took the lead. Tho it seems to me that his reactions so far have less to do with him being a nice guy helping guide Claire through unknown relationship territory and more of his brain being so happy he is just enjoying the fact of the relationship existing and being pretty zen about it all, without really thinking about what he says or does. Which is good. Marten overthinks everything so far. This is the first time he is not only acting on impulse and what feels right at the moment (example: the stolen kiss before work without verbal reply) but the first time he is happy with the results from it (previous example of it not going his way are his one night stand, he took the impulse to joke about getting paid in makeouts but after it all discovered it wasn't his thing)
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Dalillama on 05 Nov 2014, 10:25
I dunno if it's just me, but Hanners, Claire, and Marigold seem to be very similar characters to me. They are deeply nuanced and unique but they seem very similar and I can't put my finger on why

I think that BenRG has a finger on it:
I think that Jeph is deliberately comparing Claire to Marigold here. Both are somewhat inexperienced at adult relationships and the requirements of life, if for different reasons.

All three of them are kind, sweet people with massive, massive social issues of various sorts.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: ReindeerFlotilla on 05 Nov 2014, 10:27
I want to make a relevant comment but my current emotional state has eliminated my capacity for rational thought.

How about 'butts?'

That would fail to articulate my intentions or come anywhere near my meaning. I suppose, the closest I could get, whilst being emotionally compromised beyond the capacity for rational thought would be, "tits."
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Half Empty Coffee Cup on 05 Nov 2014, 11:06
The way Jeph's drawing him, Marten's eyes make it clear he's so into her that it's giving me warm and fuzzies and I'm starting to worry it might actually be heart problems.

Does anyone have an aspirin?  I want to head this off before I get the tingling down the arm.

It makes sense that it's a dense bit of story telling, there are at the very least 3 storylines going at the same time right now (QCSS Clarten setting sail to the horizon, Steam Paddler FAngus crashing down Niagara falls, Angus moving to NY and having Marigold looking for roomie). Granted that Marigold's "struggles" are more of a background thing that has just been noted, but this is still a webcomic loosely based on strips and that limits the possible Progress per Unit of Comic (tm)

You're forgetting the most important one - Pintsize and Winslow: Entrepreneurs.
Also, the Svenectomy is still pushed into the background. That could erupt at some point.

... Also, I agree that this is different in that Marten took the lead. Tho it seems to me that his reactions so far have less to do with him being a nice guy helping guide Claire through unknown relationship territory and more of his brain being so happy he is just enjoying the fact of the relationship existing and being pretty zen about it all, without really thinking about what he says or does. Which is good. Marten overthinks everything so far. This is the first time he is not only acting on impulse and what feels right at the moment (example: the stolen kiss before work without verbal reply) but the first time he is happy with the results from it (previous example of it not going his way are his one night stand, he took the impulse to joke about getting paid in makeouts but after it all discovered it wasn't his thing)
Sometimes, being zen about things is a great way to help people out without even noticing that you are. Yay for things just working out!

Going to chortle if she goes for one of the frilly pink dresses. Marten's reaction would be fun.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: osaka on 05 Nov 2014, 11:12
It makes sense that it's a dense bit of story telling, there are at the very least 3 storylines going at the same time right now (QCSS Clarten setting sail to the horizon, Steam Paddler FAngus crashing down Niagara falls, Angus moving to NY and having Marigold looking for roomie). Granted that Marigold's "struggles" are more of a background thing that has just been noted, but this is still a webcomic loosely based on strips and that limits the possible Progress per Unit of Comic (tm)

You're forgetting the most important one - Pintsize and Winslow: Entrepreneurs.
Also, the Svenectomy is still pushed into the background. That could erupt at some point.

NEXT UP: Dilly enters CoD preceeding Sven. Dilly goes straight to Faye. Angus sees everything happen as he approached. Hell breaks lose. This actually happens. (http://www.questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=2126) (Although the harbringer of nuclear fallout would be Dora, and Pintsize would wear the wedding dress as he always wanted)
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: HeavyP on 05 Nov 2014, 11:45
Just weighing in with what appears to be the standard opinion, that I don't see anything particularly odd about the relationship.  I've been in a number of relationships of varying lengths and wouldn't have a problem dating someone with little to no experience in that regard (though given how long it's been, I might be equally in need of "figuring things out," or in need of some mental WD-40 at the least).  Age gaps don't matter so much, either, I think life experience has more to do with it.  For example, while I'd not have a problem dating a 21 year old (I refuse to consider younger, you gotta be able to buy your own hooch, dammit), the likelihood of someone that young matching my level of life experience and/or maturity is pretty low, as is having anything meaningful in common.

In the end, though, as was previously said, the heart wants what it wants, and if you're really into someone, you'll find a way to work through the problems. 
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Aziraphale on 05 Nov 2014, 13:07
This is going to sound odd, but experience is overrated. I mean, yes, we learn stuff about ourselves in each relationship we're in, and hopefully we eventually figure out what we want and need out of relationships in that process. But the flip side of that is that huge parts of that experience also has to be checked at the door when you start a new relationship. Somebody hurt you? Okay, be careful next time, but you also need to go in with enough of an open heart and mind to trust that the next time can be different. Communication styles, interests, turn-ons and so much else differs quite a bit from one person to the next, so sometimes the best thing you can do is realize that each new relationship's a blank slate. You've both got a lot to learn about each other, and sometimes what you've experienced and what you know or think you know as a result can hold you back as much as it helps. So the inexperience issue isn't really much of an issue if you approach it right (namely, by realizing that neither one of you knows all there is to know, either about each other or much of anything else).

The same applies in a roundabout way to the age thing. I've known people in their early 20's who had it a lot more together than other people I've known who were decades older than me. As long as it's two consenting adults going in with their eyes open (which certainly applies here), it's up to them to figure out what's right for them.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: ReindeerFlotilla on 05 Nov 2014, 13:59
Experience can be overrated, but inexperience has qualities all its own. It's possible to not want to deal with those qualities.

I'm not saying that applies to Claire. I am saying it is possible for a person to project that stance on to Marten.

Everyone has their own style in these things. Marten is not concerned about that issue in any visible way. That may bite them both, but the fact is, something will. They'll either get past it or they won't. But I can't see this being anything but a good experience for both of them either way.

Marten needs to experience not being passive. Claire really couldn't ask for a better first relationship guy than
Marten. I just don't see the down side.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Endellion on 05 Nov 2014, 15:04
I smell another dressing montage  :claireface:

Although I do wonder where the "we're two library employees and nothing more" rule went, it looks like it's still in working hours.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: BenRG on 05 Nov 2014, 15:30
Although I do wonder where the "we're two library employees and nothing more" rule went, it looks like it's still in working hours.

Hey! All he did was ask her to meet him for dinner! It isn't as if they've ducked into the copy room to make out or something!
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: AprilArcus on 05 Nov 2014, 15:36
Obligatory self-mockery aside, it occurs to me that it has taken something like 40-50 strips to take us from the trip to the bar on Saturday night to the latter part of Monday!
Pedantic reminder that this strip can only be happening on a Monday if there was a six-day gap between 2780 and 2781, which doesn't seem right to me. Otherwise it's has to be a Tuesday.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: ItsNotATumor on 05 Nov 2014, 15:37
Wow Marten's face is creepy in panel 3. Looks like a serial killer about to go to work. "You don't have to dress up if you don't want to", he said to his blood soaked, sobbing victim...

SCARY
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Aziraphale on 05 Nov 2014, 17:08
Wow Marten's face is creepy in panel 3. Looks like a serial killer about to go to work. "You don't have to dress up if you don't want to", he said to his blood soaked, sobbing victim...

SCARY

Could be the exaggerated shadow, combined with a maybe-slightly-too-earnest facial expression.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Krald on 05 Nov 2014, 18:18
Comic!

Oh god the amount of cute is sickening
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: McFace on 05 Nov 2014, 18:24
Marten showing great ability to reassure/pick up Claire when she is sinking into self deprecation.

Even if the relationship doesn't work out in the end I hope that she will be able to take his reassurance to heart and end up with better self esteem.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Gladstone on 05 Nov 2014, 18:24
Comic! Handholding! Claire smile! Hooray!
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: valkygrrl on 05 Nov 2014, 18:29
Banter. hand-holding.... *squeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee*
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: ReindeerFlotilla on 05 Nov 2014, 18:29
She smiled. Are you happy now???
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Krald on 05 Nov 2014, 18:33
She smiled. Are you happy now???

Does his best Russell Crowe impersonation "Are you not entertained?!"
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: valkygrrl on 05 Nov 2014, 18:35
She smiled. Are you happy now???

Does his best Russell Crowe impersonation

Don't sing!
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Kugai on 05 Nov 2014, 18:36
Just so long as there's no Gladius Throwing, it should be alright.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Estron on 05 Nov 2014, 18:40
Finally!  Yes!  I had been waiting for something like this.

Claire has for the first time in-strip made a conscious joke about their kind-of-thing, and has a wry smile going on in panel 4.

Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Half Empty Coffee Cup on 05 Nov 2014, 18:44
Mhmm... Good wisdom, that, avoiding hitting someone Reich in the nads.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Natswash on 05 Nov 2014, 18:45
Just so long as there's no Gladius Throwing, it should be alright.

Throwing swords is another first date no-no
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: ReindeerFlotilla on 05 Nov 2014, 18:48
Mhmm... Good wisdom, that, avoiding hitting someone Reich in the nads.

Yes, But Martin didn't rule out Göring.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Emperor Norton on 05 Nov 2014, 18:50
My Headcanon: Marten is actually describing bad dates he has had in both cases.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: greywolfe on 05 Nov 2014, 18:50
Maybe it's the fact that Marten is taking the lead on this that makes the whole situation seem strange. I think it's the complete lack of snark that is throwing me off.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Kugai on 05 Nov 2014, 18:56
Just so long as there's no Gladius Throwing, it should be alright.

Throwing swords is another first date no-no

You save that kind of thing for the third date.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Magniras on 05 Nov 2014, 19:04
Just so long as there's no Gladius Throwing, it should be alright.

Throwing swords is another first date no-no

You save that kind of thing for the third date.

I believe that sword throwing before marriage is immoral.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Gladstone on 05 Nov 2014, 19:10
My Headcanon: Marten is actually describing bad dates he has had in both cases.

I think he's describing his first date, which we already know was pretty disastrous already. (http://questionablecontent.net./view.php?comic=1014)
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: McFace on 05 Nov 2014, 19:12
Maybe it's the fact that Marten is taking the lead on this that makes the whole situation seem strange. I think it's the complete lack of snark that is throwing me off.

Has that ever really been their dynamic though?
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Gladstone on 05 Nov 2014, 19:14
I believe that sword throwing before marriage is immoral.

What about knife-play?  Oh, who am I kidding.  You probably don't even mumblety-peg on your own, you prude.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: SubaruStephen on 05 Nov 2014, 19:20
What about axes?
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: NemoX on 05 Nov 2014, 19:21
liked the hand holding. 'tis cute ^_^
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: cesium133 on 05 Nov 2014, 19:25
My Headcanon: Marten is actually describing bad dates he has had in both cases.
Off-panel, Marten has already gone on a first date with Emily. It went badly because she set literal pitfalls for him. The junk-punching was obviously an off-panel incident with Faye during the pre-Talk days. The Hitler yelling is left as a Noodle Incident (TV Tropes link omitted).
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Krald on 05 Nov 2014, 19:33
Just so long as there's no Gladius Throwing, it should be alright.

Throwing swords is another first date no-no

But what about dwarf throwing?
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Rghfrgl on 05 Nov 2014, 19:36
She smiled. Are you happy now???

I think people were over analyzing the not smiling thing.

But a smiling Claire does make me happy.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Natswash on 05 Nov 2014, 19:59
Just so long as there's no Gladius Throwing, it should be alright.

Throwing swords is another first date no-no

But what about dwarf throwing?

Nobody tosses a dwarf

Just so long as there's no Gladius Throwing, it should be alright.

Throwing swords is another first date no-no

You save that kind of thing for the third date.

I believe that sword throwing before marriage is immoral.

While I disagree I respect your right to sword throwing decisions of your own.
What is your opinion on Spear throwing?

EDIT: Grammar
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: ReindeerFlotilla on 05 Nov 2014, 20:18
She smiled. Are you happy now???

I think people were over analyzing the not smiling thing.

But a smiling Claire does make me happy.

Me too. On both counts.

I think what the nay-sayers underestimate about this relationship is how comfortable these two are with each other. Anxiety about stuff can be a problem, but what really kills it is bottling it up, or talking about it only with someone other than the person it's related to. As much as Claire is over worrying, she's basically just laid out her issue to the person in question. "I'll do something stupid" implies, "And then you'll reject me."

"Don't invoke Hitler, or attack my gonads and we'll be okay" is a humorous way of saying, "I'm not going to bail because you fail to be perfect."

Someone pointed out, during Claire X Marten: The Squeeeining--just after Second Pancakes, that these two are pretty hardcore about consent. I don't think that's a conscious on their part. They are hardcore about communication. I'm not sure that's conscious either but, as long as it lasts, they are going to get along fine.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: greywolfe on 05 Nov 2014, 20:19
Maybe it's the fact that Marten is taking the lead on this that makes the whole situation seem strange. I think it's the complete lack of snark that is throwing me off.

Has that ever really been their dynamic though?

It's the QC dynamic in general, thus the strangeness.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Magniras on 05 Nov 2014, 20:23
I believe that sword throwing before marriage is immoral.

What about knife-play?  Oh, who am I kidding.  You probably don't even mumblety-peg on your own, you prude.

Please.  My body is a temple, and I'll not sully it with unclean acts like that.

Just so long as there's no Gladius Throwing, it should be alright.

Throwing swords is another first date no-no

You save that kind of thing for the third date.

I believe that sword throwing before marriage is immoral.

While I disagree I respect your right to sword throwing decisions of your own.
What is your opinion on Spear throwing?

EDIT: Grammar

I mean, if it was with the right person... Its not like spear throwing really counts, right?
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Natswash on 05 Nov 2014, 20:30
I mean, if it was with the right person... Its not like spear throwing really counts, right?

I mean so long as you're both careful I see no problems.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Aziraphale on 05 Nov 2014, 20:33
I believe that sword throwing before marriage is immoral.

What about knife-play?  Oh, who am I kidding.  You probably don't even mumblety-peg on your own, you prude.

Please.  My body is a temple, and I'll not sully it with unclean acts like that.

Just so long as there's no Gladius Throwing, it should be alright.

Throwing swords is another first date no-no

You save that kind of thing for the third date.

I believe that sword throwing before marriage is immoral.

While I disagree I respect your right to sword throwing decisions of your own.
What is your opinion on Spear throwing?

EDIT: Grammar

I mean, if it was with the right person... Its not like spear throwing really counts, right?

Or Speer throwing.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: cesariojpn on 05 Nov 2014, 21:26
What about knife-play? 

I know a couple that met thru a fetish party that involved knife play. Kinda.........weird. Especially when they began to wax poetic about Bayonets.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: sitnspin on 05 Nov 2014, 21:39
Knife play is sexy, one of my biggest kinks. Sadly, find other queer ladies who share it is rare.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Indicible on 05 Nov 2014, 22:01
Quote
Especially when they began to wax poetic about Bayonets.

As long as they don't pour wax on bayonets before the knife-play.
Oh, well, it's for the thrill. As long as it's SSC, everything is fine. To each his own, to every bedroom its kinks.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: valkygrrl on 05 Nov 2014, 22:09
Prediction. Marten gets his Sven on.

First to a rare books store. Then Chinese food where they talk and giggle over chopstick related mishaps along with other food accidents. He walks her home while they share a box of Mrs field's cookies. Then a kiss on the porch, Claire touches martin's butt and it's all interrupted by Clinton opening the door.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Gladstone on 05 Nov 2014, 22:22
Then a kiss on the porch, Claire touches martin's butt and it's all interrupted by Clinton opening the door.

I predict his reaction will not be evenhanded.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Is it cold in here? on 05 Nov 2014, 22:26
Well said.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: zmeiat_joro on 05 Nov 2014, 22:43
What does Marten mean by "lucky me" when Claire says it's her first date?
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Gladstone on 05 Nov 2014, 22:48
What does Marten mean by "lucky me" when Claire says it's her first date?

She's never punched anyone in the junk while yelling about Hitler before.  He's her first. 
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: tragic_pizza on 05 Nov 2014, 23:03
"Lucky me" means that he gets to be the person who shows Claire how it is done, romance and hand-holding and kissing and all the awesome stuff that goes along with first loves. No one, no one else will ever be her first date.

I am so stinkin' jealous of dat boy right now.

Edit: Clarification: Not because "ooh i wish i could dare teh comic girl" but because he gets to do something that no one else has ever done.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: neurocase on 05 Nov 2014, 23:07
Oh shazbot, I'd forgotten about Clinton. I'm calling it now. Write it in blood on my skin: The Inevitable Emotional Reaction of Younger Sibling Clinton (IERYSC, ee-er-isk. Working title) is gonna go down next week.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: GarandMarine on 05 Nov 2014, 23:17
No literal pitfalls? Shit have I been dating wrong.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: BenRG on 05 Nov 2014, 23:26
Now, this is what I've been hoping to see. Just look at the way Marten and Claire are walking together. There is a comfortable air about them. Claire is at ease enough around Marten to share her anxieties and not to be offended by him turning it into a joke. What's more, she replies in kind, showing that they have similar senses of humour - another positive sign.

Why is Marten lucky? Claire is new to this, so won't compare him to previous dates. Additionally, he has the rare pleasure of enjoying the company of someone who is a bit more innocent than most of his rather cynical and/or world-weary social circle. Finally, and most importantly, it means that he's the one Claire trusts enough for her to take this step with him.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: snubnose on 05 Nov 2014, 23:49
She's not as good as Dora at it yet, but Claire is starting getting the hang of these martenesque joke marathons. :-)




Prediction. Marten gets his Sven on.
You mean he's already hitting on another women 5 minutes into the date ?
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: CrowFairy on 06 Nov 2014, 00:28
Ugghhh, I love today's strip so much. It reminds me a lot of conversations that I have on a daily basis, and I love that. I love how natural and funny they are with each other. They finally have found someone who gets them, who not only understands their humor but also appreciates it. Holy crap. This is awesome.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: TinPenguin on 06 Nov 2014, 00:43
Just so long as there's no Gladius Throwing, it should be alright.

Throwing swords is another first date no-no

But what about dwarf throwing?

Nobody tosses a dwarf

Not without the dwarf's active consent.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: HiFranc on 06 Nov 2014, 00:52
I try to remind myself that this is just a comic and these people aren't real.  Oh *bleep* it!

SQUEEEEE!
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Thrillho on 06 Nov 2014, 00:57
Knife play is sexy, one of my biggest kinks. Sadly, find other queer ladies who share it is rare.

Knife play really is the shit, man. I'm interested to know it's uncommon among queer ladies.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: BenRG on 06 Nov 2014, 01:16
Yeah, I'm getting the feeling that tomorrow will be arriving at wherever they're going to dine (I'm not expecting anything too fancy). Next week will mostly be a series of one-strip jokes with panel-4 punchlines during the date in which Claire proves she can match Marten move-for-move when it comes to snarky humour. Friday's strip will be Marten dropping off Claire at home and them kissing on the porch in panel 2. The final panel (#3) will be full-width and be a time-lapse of Claire dancing down the hall, singing about having a boyfriend before darting upstairs to change out of her working clothes.

At the very end of the panel will be Mrs A and Clinton looking out of the kitchen door as Claire vanishes up the stairs, looking very weirded-out.

Nobody tosses a dwarf

Not without the dwarf's active consent.

And some dwarves give said consent, indeed regard it to be their profession (weird but true)!
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Skewbrow on 06 Nov 2014, 03:11
Mhmm... Good wisdom, that, avoiding hitting someone Reich in the nads.

Yes, But Martin didn't rule out Göring.

I'm glad to see they did not trying to secretly sneak out to their dinner place while on clock. That would have surely ended with a Heimlich.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: ZoeB on 06 Nov 2014, 03:46
Or Speer throwing.

I think the Hitler prohibition extends to Hess, Borman, Goebbels, Himmler, Goering and Speer too.


Not many people realise Goering was a WWI fighter ace. Never popular though.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Akima on 06 Nov 2014, 04:13
Claire seems to be keeping up nicely with Marten. Her sense of humour is obviously not limited to puns. She's pretty good at snark-hunting too. Someone should write a poem about it. Or maybe a carol.

No literal pitfalls? Shit have I been dating wrong.
Me too, possibly.
Well of course I expect a qīnggōng duel over the rooftops with traditional weapons from my suitors. But I reserve the right to have the victor executed if his calligraphy is bad, or he can't compose classical jěntǐshī (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shi_(poetry)#Jintishi) praising my beauty and character.  :wink: 

Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Schmorgluck on 06 Nov 2014, 05:03
Obligatory self-mockery aside, it occurs to me that it has taken something like 40-50 strips to take us from the trip to the bar on Saturday night to the latter part of Monday!
Pedantic reminder that this strip can only be happening on a Monday if there was a six-day gap between 2780 and 2781, which doesn't seem right to me. Otherwise it's has to be a Tuesday.
Please be more specific, because I don't understand where you get that timing from.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: osaka on 06 Nov 2014, 05:06
She keeps a thread with the passage of time in QC. With a lot of attention to detail actually.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: valkygrrl on 06 Nov 2014, 06:04
At the very end of the panel will be Mrs A and Clinton looking out of the kitchen door as Claire vanishes up the stairs, looking very weirded-out.

Clinton sure, he doesn't appear to think very highly of Marten but why would Mrs. A be weirded out? She thinks he's a nice boy.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: BenRG on 06 Nov 2014, 06:07
At the very end of the panel will be Mrs A and Clinton looking out of the kitchen door as Claire vanishes up the stairs, looking very weirded-out.

Clinton sure, he doesn't appear to think very highly of Marten but why would Mrs. A be weirded out? She thinks he's a nice boy.

Because Claire is behaving very out-of-character by dancing and singing down the hall.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: osaka on 06 Nov 2014, 06:11
Pretty sure Mrs. A knows how someone feels when they're in love, and she knows that Claire's in love.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: sitnspin on 06 Nov 2014, 06:16
Knife play is sexy, one of my biggest kinks. Sadly, find other queer ladies who share it is rare.

Knife play really is the shit, man. I'm interested to know it's uncommon among queer ladies.
Well queer ladies are already in relatively shorter supply, thise that share a specific kink even more so. A minority of a minority.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: GarandMarine on 06 Nov 2014, 06:19
Claire seems to be keeping up nicely with Marten. Her sense of humour is obviously not limited to puns. She's pretty good at snark-hunting too. Someone should write a poem about it. Or maybe a carol.

No literal pitfalls? Shit have I been dating wrong.
Me too, possibly.
Well of course I expect a qīnggōng duel over the rooftops with traditional weapons from my suitors. But I reserve the right to have the victor executed if his calligraphy is bad, or he can't compose classical jěntǐshī (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shi_(poetry)#Jintishi) praising my beauty and character.  :wink: 

I could probably win the duel handily. My calligraphy however would have me resigned to the medical profession and I have no experience with Jěntǐshī poetry. Ah well.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: osaka on 06 Nov 2014, 06:22
Claire seems to be keeping up nicely with Marten. Her sense of humour is obviously not limited to puns. She's pretty good at snark-hunting too. Someone should write a poem about it. Or maybe a carol.

No literal pitfalls? Shit have I been dating wrong.
Me too, possibly.
Well of course I expect a qīnggōng duel over the rooftops with traditional weapons from my suitors. But I reserve the right to have the victor executed if his calligraphy is bad, or he can't compose classical jěntǐshī (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shi_(poetry)#Jintishi) praising my beauty and character.  :wink: 

*Slowly retires himself from the battle.*

Even if my sister would argue that I'm a natural for poetry (something really strange for an engineer), just like Garand I have no experience, and my calligraphy's been horrible ever since I learned how to write. And it's only getting worse.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: daphne on 06 Nov 2014, 06:24
I've been reading the comic for years, but haven't yet registered here. Accidentally posted this in the wrong thread first.. I have to comment because I, too, see this as mirroring my own experiences.

I like the development of Marten here, from passive to active, but I somewhat agree with the person who said that they aren't a fan of relationship dynamics here. I think Jacques will in future show us more how they interact, but so far I feel like there's Claire navigating through her insecurities, in some ways learning life and social interaction, and Marten coaching her through that patiently and caringly. I'd prefer to see some balance where Claire gets to act like an adult woman, because since the comic has been focusing on her insecurities it reads like there is a maturity gap. Which is not necessarily a bad thing, but I don't know if it's the intent in the comic. And if it's the intent, I'd like to get a better understanding of what Marten sees in her except that she's cute. But I think we'll see this in time.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Rimwolf on 06 Nov 2014, 06:25
Claire seems to be keeping up nicely with Marten. Her sense of humour is obviously not limited to puns. She's pretty good at snark-hunting too. Someone should write a poem about it. Or maybe a carol.

Did you write that with Alice aforethought?
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: valkygrrl on 06 Nov 2014, 06:32
Because Claire is behaving very out-of-character by dancing and singing down the hall.

Hello? She's a _Disney_ princess. They're always singing.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: cesium133 on 06 Nov 2014, 06:33
Claire seems to be keeping up nicely with Marten. Her sense of humour is obviously not limited to puns. She's pretty good at snark-hunting too. Someone should write a poem about it. Or maybe a carol.

Did you write that with Alice aforethought?
How Ardent of you.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: BenRG on 06 Nov 2014, 06:37
Because Claire is behaving very out-of-character by dancing and singing down the hall.

Hello? She's a _Disney_ princess. They're always singing.

Well, can't argue with that...

Wait a minute! If she's a Disney Princess, she needs a cute talking animal/magical creature comedy sidekick! Where's her comedy sidekick? ((Someone points at Emily)) Oh... yeah...
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: MooskiNet on 06 Nov 2014, 06:57
Wait a minute! If she's a Disney Princess, she needs a cute talking animal/magical creature comedy sidekick! Where's her comedy sidekick? ((Someone points at Emily)) Oh... yeah...

Um, I think maybe this (http://questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=2459) instead.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: BenRG on 06 Nov 2014, 07:06
Wait a minute! If she's a Disney Princess, she needs a cute talking animal/magical creature comedy sidekick! Where's her comedy sidekick? ((Someone points at Emily)) Oh... yeah...

Um, I think maybe this (http://questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=2459) instead.

Nah, Pintsize is Marten's comedy sidekick. Fortunately Tangled and Frozen establishes that a Disney male protagonist can also have a comedy sidekick or an animal straight-guy, so this need not raise issues about Marten's role in the strip.

In terms of proof that Emily and Claire are a double act, I enter into the record this strip (http://questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=2423) although there are many others, most notoriously the hair tangling (http://questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=2360).
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: MooskiNet on 06 Nov 2014, 07:13
Wait a minute! If she's a Disney Princess, she needs a cute talking animal/magical creature comedy sidekick! Where's her comedy sidekick? ((Someone points at Emily)) Oh... yeah...

Um, I think maybe this (http://questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=2459) instead.

Nah, Pintsize is Marten's comedy sidekick. Fortunately Tangled and Frozen establishes that a Disney male protagonist can also have a comedy sidekick or an animal straight-guy, so this need not raise issues about Marten's role in the strip.

There's that.  Yeah, I guess Emily's the best choice.

Edited to add: 

Looking at today's comic (again), I have to say I'm impressed with the subtlety in panel 4.  Not only is she smiling (yeah, I was one of those who was waiting to see her smile again), but she's moved closer and her body language is more relaxed - she's sort of leaning into him.  I use the word 'awesome' a lot - maybe too much - but that's an awesome panel.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: BenRG on 06 Nov 2014, 07:22
Oh, and following up another point from a few threads back, I suggested that Claire is a bibliophile. It's only anecdotal but in this strip (http://questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=2366), Claire is wearing a shirt for something called "ReaderCon" back in 2009. This is a guess, but I suspect it was a convention for book lovers.

So, yeah, if Marten wants to show he's picked up on Claire's personal interests, a trip to a book store might work out at least once.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Rimwolf on 06 Nov 2014, 07:25
Because Claire is behaving very out-of-character by dancing and singing down the hall.

Hello? She's a _Disney_ princess. They're always singing.

Yeah, Jeph may not own up to it, but the truth is revealed (http://questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=2749) in one of the guest strips.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Thrudd on 06 Nov 2014, 08:05
Just so long as there's no Gladius Throwing, it should be alright.
Throwing swords is another first date no-no
But what about dwarf throwing?
Nobody tosses a dwarf
Not without the dwarf's active consent.
Or a hefty dose of ipecac ~ Smaug



Hello? She's a _Disney_ princess. They're always singing.
Well, can't argue with that...
Wait a minute! If she's a Disney Princess, she needs a cute talking animal/magical creature comedy sidekick! Where's her comedy sidekick? ((Someone points at Emily)) Oh... yeah...
If she is a Princess then I pick the Leia archetype but instead of a blaster pistol she is armed with Puns.
Leia had Chewie which was Solo's sidekick as well as R2D2 and that toddling **** C3PO, so Pintsize would fit the same role but with a whole new meaning to the epithet "shag rug".
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: RealityXcursion on 06 Nov 2014, 08:46
Oh, and following up another point from a few threads back, I suggested that Claire is a bibliophile. It's only anecdotal but in this strip (http://questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=2366), Claire is wearing a shirt for something called "ReaderCon" back in 2009. This is a guess, but I suspect it was a convention for book lovers.

So, yeah, if Marten wants to show he's picked up on Claire's personal interests, a trip to a book store might work out at least once.

ReaderCon (http://www.readercon.org/) is a real convention in Boston, which focuses on speculative fiction literature. The shirt actually indicates, not just that she's a bibliophile, but that she's a sci-fi/fantasy geek.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Aimless on 06 Nov 2014, 09:41
Dunno what it is but both Marten and Claire have seemed unusually, er, flat, for the past couple of weeks.

Like,

Claire: *possible problem*

Marten: *zen-like calm and solution to problem*

Looking forward to getting back to the regular programming :o
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Blackbird on 06 Nov 2014, 09:55
Dunno what it is but both Marten and Claire have seemed unusually, er, flat, for the past couple of weeks.

Like,

Claire: *possible problem*

Marten: *zen-like calm and solution to problem*

Looking forward to getting back to the regular programming :o

I agree that its been a little flat, but neither of them has been acting out of character.  Marten's always been really chill when not faced with unfamiliar territory, and he's well versed in dealing with anxiety.  He's been through it with Faye, Dora, Hanners, Tai, his mom, and even Steve back in the 1000s.  And Claire has always been like this. 

Honestly, I think Jeph is trying to show that they've quickly gotten to that level of dull, relationshippy comfort so the SS Martenclaire can be at full sail when all of the ramifications of Hurricane Fangus come falling.  Between Faye and Marigold, the angst spillout only holds one or two degrees of separation from the entire cast, so it's best to have the new A-couple fully established before it hits. 
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Aziraphale on 06 Nov 2014, 09:58
Dunno what it is but both Marten and Claire have seemed unusually, er, flat, for the past couple of weeks.

Like,

Claire: *possible problem*

Marten: *zen-like calm and solution to problem*

Looking forward to getting back to the regular programming :o

Marten's generally been good at providing perspective on other people's issues. Like most of us (well, me), he's just not as good when it comes to objectivity with his own problems. What's going to be interesting is when the first in-relationship problem comes up that impacts him as much as (or more than) Claire; that's when we'll see how much Marten has or hasn't learned, and how much of Marten's zen has rubbed off on Claire.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: MooskiNet on 06 Nov 2014, 10:17
I'd prefer to see some balance where Claire gets to act like an adult woman, because since the comic has been focusing on her insecurities it reads like there is a maturity gap. Which is not necessarily a bad thing, but I don't know if it's the intent in the comic. And if it's the intent, I'd like to get a better understanding of what Marten sees in her except that she's cute. But I think we'll see this in time.

I think that's definitely coming - one of the first things I said when I registered here is that I was pretty sure Claire would love Marten like there's no tomorrow if he gave her a chance, and I've seen nothing to indicate I'm wrong about that.  Yeah, she has insecurities, and yeah, Marten's going to help her through them where he can, but I think Claire's going to turn out to be hard as steel when it comes to helping and supporting Marten - she'll show him her softer side, but when he needs her, she's going to be a rock.

And if the various story threads are any indication, he's going to need her.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Is it cold in here? on 06 Nov 2014, 11:00
I'd prefer to see some balance where Claire gets to act like an adult woman, because since the comic has been focusing on her insecurities it reads like there is a maturity gap.

Welcome, new person!

I too would like to see the situations that will show where Claire is more grown up than Marten.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Half Empty Coffee Cup on 06 Nov 2014, 11:12
I'd prefer to see some balance where Claire gets to act like an adult woman, because since the comic has been focusing on her insecurities it reads like there is a maturity gap. Which is not necessarily a bad thing, but I don't know if it's the intent in the comic. And if it's the intent, I'd like to get a better understanding of what Marten sees in her except that she's cute. But I think we'll see this in time.

I think that's definitely coming - one of the first things I said when I registered here is that I was pretty sure Claire would love Marten like there's no tomorrow if he gave her a chance, and I've seen nothing to indicate I'm wrong about that.  Yeah, she has insecurities, and yeah, Marten's going to help her through them where he can, but I think Claire's going to turn out to be hard as steel when it comes to helping and supporting Marten - she'll show him her softer side, but when he needs her, she's going to be a rock.

And if the various story threads are any indication, he's going to need her.
Indeed. We're seeing 'fair-weather' Marten here. We've also seen him bitter regarding frustrating and intractable things. ("It was mutual. We're both sick of her shit.", anyone?) If shit hits the fan somewhere, I don't expect him to act bitter, necessarily, but he's not likely to take it well. No clue what form the shit will take either. Veronica 'delightfully' trespassing where she shouldn't? Faye breaking down? (The steampaddler is limping along at half speed instead of being sunk, given the last conversation Faye and Dora had.) Clinton giving him shit? Who can say?
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Gladstone on 06 Nov 2014, 11:14
If shit hits the fan somewhere, I don't expect him to act bitter, necessarily, but he's not likely to take it well. No clue what form the shit will take either. Veronica 'delightfully' trespassing where she shouldn't? Faye breaking down? (The steampaddler is limping along at half speed instead of being sunk, given the last conversation Faye and Dora had.) Clinton giving him shit? Who can say?

The head librarian offering Claire a full-time job--taking Marten's soon-to-be-previous position?

No, that would be waaaayyyy too cruel.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Half Empty Coffee Cup on 06 Nov 2014, 11:18
If shit hits the fan somewhere, I don't expect him to act bitter, necessarily, but he's not likely to take it well. No clue what form the shit will take either. Veronica 'delightfully' trespassing where she shouldn't? Faye breaking down? (The steampaddler is limping along at half speed instead of being sunk, given the last conversation Faye and Dora had.) Clinton giving him shit? Who can say?

The head librarian offering Claire a full-time job--taking Marten's soon-to-be-previous position?

No, that would be waaaayyyy too cruel.
No, this would be cruel: Claire being acknowledged to have better qualifications than already-graduated-Tai, and taking her job. The intern thing gets flipped on its head.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Gladstone on 06 Nov 2014, 11:23
No, this would be cruel: Claire being acknowledged to have better qualifications than already-graduated-Tai, and taking her job. The intern thing gets flipped on its head.

Realizing she's Marten's superior now, she goes to Veronica for some, er, "leadership" advice.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: MooskiNet on 06 Nov 2014, 11:29
Well, of the three interns, we have Claire, who dreams of being a librarian, the now-absent Gabby, who just likes books, and Emily, who likes how old books smell.  And greem pepperth. (http://questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=2298)

Claire's sorta the shoo-in.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Half Empty Coffee Cup on 06 Nov 2014, 12:03
No, this would be cruel: Claire being acknowledged to have better qualifications than already-graduated-Tai, and taking her job. The intern thing gets flipped on its head.

Realizing she's Marten's superior now, she goes to Veronica for some, er, "leadership" advice.
Congratulations. We've collectively discovered the Bermuda Triangle into which this ship must not sail, lest it never be found again.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Gladstone on 06 Nov 2014, 12:13
the now-absent Gabby, who just likes books

I think it's time to ackowledge that she went browsing without a pole one day and got eaten by a bibliodon. (http://questionablecontent.net./view.php?comic=1210)
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Emperor Norton on 06 Nov 2014, 12:22
Welcome, new person!

I too would like to see the situations that will show where Claire is more grown up than Marten.

I think this will come out the more they are together though. When she works through her initial anxiety over dating, and we start dealing with the fact that she is incredibly driven (to be a librarian), and he is very... go with the flow.

I expect it will mostly work out though, and she will be a good influence on Marten.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Aziraphale on 06 Nov 2014, 12:31
Welcome, new person!

I too would like to see the situations that will show where Claire is more grown up than Marten.

I think this will come out the more they are together though. When she works through her initial anxiety over dating, and we start dealing with the fact that she is incredibly driven (to be a librarian), and he is very... go with the flow.

I expect it will mostly work out though, and she will be a good influence on Marten.

The potential is there for each of them to balance the other out very well.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: katsmeat on 06 Nov 2014, 12:38

Not many people realise Goering was a WWI fighter ace. Never popular though.
That  prompted me to do some idle Wiki reading that led to another  Göring, Albert Günther,  the younger brother of Herman,

He's an individual much more worth talking about. Sadly, what he did seems to have been only recognized after his death.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_G%C3%B6ring (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_G%C3%B6ring)
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: AprilArcus on 06 Nov 2014, 13:02
Because Claire is behaving very out-of-character by dancing and singing down the hall.

Hello? She's a _Disney_ princess. They're always singing.

Yeah, Jeph may not own up to it, but the truth is revealed (http://questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=2749) in one of the guest strips.

She is, specifically, Ariel, whose trans status is barely subtext:

I. Meet our protagonist. She is a young CAFAB (Coercively Assigned Fish At Birth) with culturally inappropriate toys, hobbies, and love interests.


II. Her tradition-bound parental figure is prejudiced and unsupportive of her species-identity.


III. Her friends try to placate her with tales of fish privilege.


IV. Unpersuaded, and despairing of finding acceptance in her dysfunctional home environment, she seeks out back-alley medical services from a sketchy provider. Gets the looks, but not the voice.


V. Interlude. A chef tries to eat Sebastian. This scene has nothing to do with gender anything, but do note that this character is voiced by René Auberjonois, who played the shape-shifting, putatively genderless yet inexplicably consistently male-identified Constable Odo on Star Trek: Deep Space Nine. Also it is a fun musical number.


VI. Deep Stealth, Day 1: Mastery of subtle mannerisms is an important aspect of passing.


VII. Deep Stealth, Day 2: Without a full suite of vocal skills, seduction can prove complicated.


VIII. Deep Stealth, Day 3: OUTED!


IX. DRAMA ENSUES


X. Dad repents of his intolerance, pays for bottom surgery, voice lessons, and a lavish heteronormative wedding. The happy couple sail off into a GIANT PRIDE RAINBOW. And they all lived happily ever after!


Upon rewatching this as an adult, my first thought was to be much less upset that they gave the story a happy ending, but my second was how did cis people make this? And then I read Wikipedia's article on Hans Christian Andersen (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hans_Christian_Andersen):

Quote
[Andersen] wrote to Edvard Collin: "I languish for you as for a pretty Calabrian wench... my sentiments for you are those of a woman. The femininity of my nature and our friendship must remain a mystery." Collin, who preferred women, wrote in his own memoir: "I found myself unable to respond to this love, and this caused the author much suffering."

And it occurred to me that well, maybe they didn't.

Quote
“I know what you want,” said the sea witch; “it is very stupid of you, but you shall have your way, and it will bring you to sorrow, my pretty princess. You want to get rid of your fish’s tail, and to have two supports instead of it, like human beings on earth, so that the young prince may fall in love with you, and that you may have an immortal soul.” And then the witch laughed so loud and disgustingly, that the toad and the snakes fell to the ground, and lay there wriggling about. “You are but just in time,” said the witch; “for after sunrise to-morrow I should not be able to help you till the end of another year. I will prepare a draught for you, with which you must swim to land tomorrow before sunrise, and sit down on the shore and drink it. Your tail will then disappear, and shrink up into what mankind calls legs, and you will feel great pain, as if a sword were passing through you. But all who see you will say that you are the prettiest little human being they ever saw. You will still have the same floating gracefulness of movement, and no dancer will ever tread so lightly; but at every step you take it will feel as if you were treading upon sharp knives, and that the blood must flow. If you will bear all this, I will help you.”

“Yes, I will,” said the little princess in a trembling voice, as she thought of the prince and the immortal soul.

“But think again,” said the witch; “for when once your shape has become like a human being, you can no more be a mermaid. You will never return through the water to your sisters, or to your father’s palace again; and if you do not win the love of the prince, so that he is willing to forget his father and mother for your sake, and to love you with his whole soul, and allow the priest to join your hands that you may be man and wife, then you will never have an immortal soul. The first morning after he marries another your heart will break, and you will become foam on the crest of the waves.”

“I will do it,” said the little mermaid, and she became pale as death.

“But I must be paid also,” said the witch, “and it is not a trifle that I ask. You have the sweetest voice of any who dwell here in the depths of the sea, and you believe that you will be able to charm the prince with it also, but this voice you must give to me; the best thing you possess will I have for the price of my draught. My own blood must be mixed with it, that it may be as sharp as a two-edged sword.”

“But if you take away my voice,” said the little mermaid, “what is left for me?”

“Your beautiful form, your graceful walk, and your expressive eyes; surely with these you can enchain a man’s heart. Well, have you lost your courage? Put out your little tongue that I may cut it off as my payment; then you shall have the powerful draught.”

“It shall be,” said the little mermaid.

Then the witch placed her cauldron on the fire, to prepare the magic draught.

“Cleanliness is a good thing,” said she, scouring the vessel with snakes, which she had tied together in a large knot; then she pricked herself in the breast, and let the black blood drop into it. The steam that rose formed itself into such horrible shapes that no one could look at them without fear. Every moment the witch threw something else into the vessel, and when it began to boil, the sound was like the weeping of a crocodile. When at last the magic draught was ready, it looked like the clearest water. “There it is for you,” said the witch. Then she cut off the mermaid’s tongue, so that she became dumb, and would never again speak or sing. “If the polypi should seize hold of you as you return through the wood,” said the witch, “throw over them a few drops of the potion, and their fingers will be torn into a thousand pieces.” But the little mermaid had no occasion to do this, for the polypi sprang back in terror when they caught sight of the glittering draught, which shone in her hand like a twinkling star.

So she passed quickly through the wood and the marsh, and between the rushing whirlpools. She saw that in her father’s palace the torches in the ballroom were extinguished, and all within asleep; but she did not venture to go in to them, for now she was dumb and going to leave them forever, she felt as if her heart would break. She stole into the garden, took a flower from the flower-beds of each of her sisters, kissed her hand a thousand times towards the palace, and then rose up through the dark blue waters. The sun had not risen when she came in sight of the prince’s palace, and approached the beautiful marble steps, but the moon shone clear and bright. Then the little mermaid drank the magic draught, and it seemed as if a two-edged sword went through her delicate body: she fell into a swoon, and lay like one dead. When the sun arose and shone over the sea, she recovered, and felt a sharp pain; but just before her stood the handsome young prince. He fixed his coal-black eyes upon her so earnestly that she cast down her own, and then became aware that her fish’s tail was gone, and that she had as pretty a pair of white legs and tiny feet as any little maiden could have.

Yours in exegesis,

April

(http://i.imgur.com/lalnksq.jpg)
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Natswash on 06 Nov 2014, 13:06
And here I thought HCA was just bi. I tip my hat to you and your powers of research, analysis, and willingness to sit through some of my least favorite Disney music.

EDIT: The videos don't appear to be working for me. I know the scenes though
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: MooskiNet on 06 Nov 2014, 13:07
Mother of God.

I'd post the obligatory clapping gif, but I'd not insult your work with a cut and paste reply.

Damn, woman, you're good.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: osaka on 06 Nov 2014, 13:09
DAMMIT APRIL. The story was sad enough without knowing the backstory.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: GarandMarine on 06 Nov 2014, 13:13
Ariel isn't trans. She's a furry at best.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: osaka on 06 Nov 2014, 13:17
You see, 's an ALLEGORY. Like Jimbo's sci-fi book about slutty space pirate chicks taking over the world. (http://www.questionablecontent.net/1370)
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Half Empty Coffee Cup on 06 Nov 2014, 13:22
Well now!

I think we've reached the high-water mark for this thread. Nothing tops that.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Nepiophage on 06 Nov 2014, 13:24
Ariel isn't trans. She's a furry at best.

A scaly.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: AprilArcus on 06 Nov 2014, 13:26
EDIT: The videos don't appear to be working for me. I know the scenes though

Should be fixed.

Ariel isn't trans. She's a furry at best.

A scaly.

A skinny, surely?
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Natswash on 06 Nov 2014, 13:36
Apparently I didn't know the scenes. Videos fixed.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Storel on 06 Nov 2014, 13:38
Another incredibly well researched post from AprilArcus. You are amazing; thank you for being here.  8-)
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: GarandMarine on 06 Nov 2014, 14:12
Skinny is a derogatory term for Somalis so likely best not to use it outside of discussions of Black Hawk Down.

Going with April's analysis of one of the first major otherkin films. Could poseidon going all out for a wedding be considered negative? A reestablishment of parental control, etc..
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: AprilArcus on 06 Nov 2014, 14:21
Going with April's analysis of one of the first major otherkin films. Could poseidon going all out for a wedding be considered negative? A reestablishment of parental control, etc..

I don't see that at all.

Quote
Sebastian: Like I always say, Your Majesty, "children have got to be free to lead their own lives."
Triton: You always say that, Sebastian?
Sebastian: [nervous] Tee-hee.
Triton: Well I guess there's one problem left.
Sebastian: And what's that, Your Majesty?
Triton: How much I'm going to miss her.

Triton has just barely survived the consequences of his overbearing authoritarianism spiraling out of control, and in the wake of being saved by a human's bravery, has completely renovated his parenting philosophy and racial politics. He's too in shock to be anything but utterly genuine in this moment.

There is some unfortunate storytelling in Ariel's relegation to the role of damsel in distress during the finale (saved from Ursula by Triton only to be saved from her again by Eric minutes later), only somewhat mitigated by her earlier active role in rescuing Eric from Ursula/Vanessa's designs, and the usual problematic Disney tropes of absent mother figure and female protagonists motivated only by the men in their lives, but Triton's character arc taken by itself is a clear progression from controlling bigot to tolerant and mature parent.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: GarandMarine on 06 Nov 2014, 14:22
This whole conversation makes me crave sushi.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Natswash on 06 Nov 2014, 14:27
You're right. A salmon roe roll is calling to me, calling to me I say! Luckily it's on the other line while my wallet discusses the concept of emptiness
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: ReindeerFlotilla on 06 Nov 2014, 15:22
Woah, now folks. Until she actually breaks into song, Claire is just another girl who's fallen victim to Disney's marketing department.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: valkygrrl on 06 Nov 2014, 15:38

She is, specifically, Ariel, whose trans status is barely subtext:


Very good dear. And now what do you see in this (http://blogs.psychcentral.com/humor/files/2010/08/4-UR-Mental-Health-Ink-Blot-Test-Mental-Games-for-Mental-Health-humor.jpg) inkblot?
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: valkygrrl on 06 Nov 2014, 16:07
Skinny is a derogatory term for Somalis so likely best not to use it outside of discussions of Black Hawk Down.

And Starship Troopers surely?
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Kugai on 06 Nov 2014, 16:38
Down here Skinny is a no frills prepaid Mobile Phone Service.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: DSL on 06 Nov 2014, 16:41

She is, specifically, Ariel, whose trans status is barely subtext:


Very good dear. And now what do you see in this (http://blogs.psychcentral.com/humor/files/2010/08/4-UR-Mental-Health-Ink-Blot-Test-Mental-Games-for-Mental-Health-humor.jpg) inkblot?

Fellow goes in for some psychological testing and the doctor pulls out the ol' inkblot. First one, guy says: "Man and woman having sex." Second one: "Two guys having sex." Third: "Two ladies having sex and the dog is watching." Fourth -- well, you get the idea. And the examiner says, "Mr. Smith, you have a preoccupation with sex" And Mr. Smith replies: "I'm preoccupied? You're the one with a desk drawer full of dirty pictures!"

EDIT to correct the effin' spellcheck.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: valkygrrl on 06 Nov 2014, 18:35
Comic! More squeee.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: AprilArcus on 06 Nov 2014, 18:38
:D
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: valkygrrl on 06 Nov 2014, 18:43
Why am I grinning like an idiot? They're fictional dammit there's no reason to... sooooooo cute. Seriously this is nice representation of... omygosh most adorable thing ever. But their body language shows... 20% cuter!

I give up.

*squeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee*
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Gladstone on 06 Nov 2014, 18:44
Dammit, Jeph, are you TRYING to kill us all?  Because I can't handle the cute!
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Half Empty Coffee Cup on 06 Nov 2014, 18:45
D'awwwwwwwww

Warning - while you were typing a new d'awww has been posted. You may wish to review your d'awww.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Rghfrgl on 06 Nov 2014, 18:47
 Filler strips shouldn't feel this good.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: cesium133 on 06 Nov 2014, 18:49
I think I've been reading Dumbing of Age too much lately. I now assume that this much squee is about to be followed by something really horrible.  :psyduck:
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: SubaruStephen on 06 Nov 2014, 18:54
Gahh! Cute overload!
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: davedig on 06 Nov 2014, 18:56
I might be on edge over nothing but...this isn't the final strip is it?
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: cesium133 on 06 Nov 2014, 18:57
I dunno. Try hitting the right arrow key on your keyboard.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Half Empty Coffee Cup on 06 Nov 2014, 19:00
I might be on edge over nothing but...this isn't the final strip is it?
Nope. Too many loose ends to end it here. Lest you forget: Steampaddler Fangus floundering, the Svenectomy, Marigold needs a roommate, Veronica and Jim will have more dates in the future, and there's a singing dildo on the loose that Pintsize and Winslow need to wrangle.

And May is still a new character that Jeph will presumably do things with in the future.

That said, a one-panel comic like this would have me worrying if these unresolved plot threads weren't around.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: davedig on 06 Nov 2014, 19:02
Yeah I guess that is too much. I think this would be my ideal final page so that's why I went 'oh no is it over already!?'
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Gladstone on 06 Nov 2014, 19:07
Yeah I guess that is too much. I think this would be my ideal final page so that's why I went 'oh no is it over already!?'

I know what you mean.  Obviously, I want this to go on for another 5000 strips, but this would also be the perfect one to end it on.

At least we have the weekend before it's updated again.  *refreshes page* d'awwww.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: greywolfe on 06 Nov 2014, 19:08
I feel something this cute this can only end badly....dooooooooom
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Gladstone on 06 Nov 2014, 19:12
I feel something this cute this can only end badly....dooooooooom

Silence, knave!
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: cesium133 on 06 Nov 2014, 19:18
Now, now. Nobody here is a knave. We are an anarcho-syndicalist commune.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: davedig on 06 Nov 2014, 19:33
I feel something this cute this can only end badly....dooooooooom

Is this where my fear of Delilah coming back is coming from?
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: PopuluxeCowboy on 06 Nov 2014, 19:36
That image of the two of them hand in hand and smiling just makes me feel really good about this relationship. Like this is something positive for both of them, and it's going to last, and that makes me happy.

If people want some relationship anguish, there's still Faye and Angus to wallow in.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: techkid on 06 Nov 2014, 19:39
My reactions to the comic, a comparison:

2808 (http://www.questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=2808): Aww, my heart is melting...
2830 (http://www.questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=2830): MY HEART IS MELTING! OH MY GOD!

Warning - while you were undergoing coronary failure a new heart has been harvested. You may wish to contact your cardiologist.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Gladstone on 06 Nov 2014, 19:43
Is this where my fear of Delilah coming back is coming from?

Along with Vicky, Padma, Dora, Faye, and Cosette.  Lt. Potter also shows up, but eventually enters a triad relationship with Elliot (http://www.questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=2080) and Bob. (http://www.questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=2618)
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Comic Strip Critic on 06 Nov 2014, 19:53
Why am I grinning like an idiot? They're fictional dammit there's no reason to... sooooooo cute. Seriously this is nice representation of... omygosh most adorable thing ever. But their body language shows... 20% cuter!

I give up.

*squeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee*

It is cute, yes, and maybe it's just me, but this is more calm. More content. It's quieter than a squee. It's more like a warm fire under a blanket late at night.

So basically what I'm saying is still squee, but a different flavor.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: AprilArcus on 06 Nov 2014, 19:54
I might be on edge over nothing but...this isn't the final strip is it?
Nope. Too many loose ends to end it here. Lest you forget: Steampaddler Fangus floundering, the Svenectomy, Marigold needs a roommate, Veronica and Jim will have more dates in the future, and there's a singing dildo on the loose that Pintsize and Winslow need to wrangle.

And May is still a new character that Jeph will presumably do things with in the future.

That said, a one-panel comic like this would have me worrying if these unresolved plot threads weren't around.

And Deathmřle needs to play a show, and Faye's nascent sculpture career needs follow-up, and Dora hasn't really worked through any of her interpersonal issues, and I really hope Momo gets to have a relationship arc, and I need a page of half-dressed Claire and Marten being adorable (http://www.questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=870) in (http://www.questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=1887) bed (http://www.questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=2057) together (http://www.questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=2584).
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Magniras on 06 Nov 2014, 19:55
Very good dear. And now what do you see in this (http://blogs.psychcentral.com/humor/files/2010/08/4-UR-Mental-Health-Ink-Blot-Test-Mental-Games-for-Mental-Health-humor.jpg) inkblot?


I see the end of time itself, the unfathomable void coming to take us all.

IA NYARLATHOTEP!  THE BLACK GOAT OF THE WOODS WITH A THOUSAND YOUNG CREEPS INTO MY DREAMS TO STEAL YOUR SOULLLLLS.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Gladstone on 06 Nov 2014, 20:10
I need a page of half-dressed Claire and Marten being adorable (http://www.questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=870) in (http://www.questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=1887) bed (http://www.questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=2057) together (http://www.questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=2584).

Or a sleeping montage (which I can't seem to find at the moment, but there are at least two of them) showing various characters and couples in bed, although this fan-art (http://harrysde.tumblr.com/post/99020747316/be-the-small-spoon-marten) is probably what we'll see from M&C.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: SubaruStephen on 06 Nov 2014, 20:12
Very good dear. And now what do you see in this (http://blogs.psychcentral.com/humor/files/2010/08/4-UR-Mental-Health-Ink-Blot-Test-Mental-Games-for-Mental-Health-humor.jpg) inkblot?

Is it me or does anyone else just see some random ink on a piece of paper?
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: davedig on 06 Nov 2014, 20:19
I need a page of half-dressed Claire and Marten being adorable (http://www.questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=870) in (http://www.questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=1887) bed (http://www.questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=2057) together (http://www.questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=2584).

Or a sleeping montage (which I can't seem to find at the moment, but there are at least two of them) showing various characters and couples in bed, although this fan-art (http://harrysde.tumblr.com/post/99020747316/be-the-small-spoon-marten) is probably what we'll see from M&C.

Oh darn I was looking through old strips a few hours ago and spotted one. In a little while Faye will be by herself and Martin and Claire will be together. Cosette's snoring will still keep Steve up while he has cereal.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Gladstone on 06 Nov 2014, 20:23
Oh darn I was looking through old strips a few hours ago and spotted one. In a little while Faye will be by herself and Martin and Claire will be together. Cosette's snoring will still keep Steve up while he has cereal.

If memory serves, the first strip has Marten and Dora (with Marten awake and sighing), Faye and Sven (Faye sighing), Penelope (sighing, missing Wil), and Hanners and Pintsize (Pintsize sighing, Hanners telling him to go away). 

The second one has Faye and Angus (I think?), Dora and Tai snuggling, Cosette snoring and keeping Steve awake, and Marten and Pintsize ("Would you rather be the bigger spoon?").

Now that I remember the details of the first one, I think I can find it.  Still not sure where the second one is.

Edit: The first one is 1328. (http://questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=1328)
Edit edit: The second one is 2554 (http://questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=2554) (with thanks to davedig)

A new one could include Faye alone, Marigold and Dale, [FREE SPACE], and Marten and Claire.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: davedig on 06 Nov 2014, 20:30
Found the second!
http://questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=2554
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: tragic_pizza on 06 Nov 2014, 20:32
Very good dear. And now what do you see in this (http://blogs.psychcentral.com/humor/files/2010/08/4-UR-Mental-Health-Ink-Blot-Test-Mental-Games-for-Mental-Health-humor.jpg) inkblot?

Is it me or does anyone else just see some random ink on a piece of paper?
You are not alone.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Gladstone on 06 Nov 2014, 20:34
Found the second!
http://questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=2554

Aha!  Knew it had to be somewhere before 2600 (http://questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=2600) when the layout changed but I just could. not. find it.  Thanks!
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: davedig on 06 Nov 2014, 20:39
Perhaps the Free Space panel could be for Clinton and his robo hand?
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Gladstone on 06 Nov 2014, 20:41
Marigold and Dale (happy), Veronica and Jim (happy), Marten and Claire (happy happy happy), Faye and Pintsize (punches).

(Why yes, we are outlining future comics, what of it?)
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: GarandMarine on 06 Nov 2014, 20:42
Skinny is a derogatory term for Somalis so likely best not to use it outside of discussions of Black Hawk Down.

And Starship Troopers surely?

A given of course.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Estron on 06 Nov 2014, 20:43
I sit in absolute awe of AprilArcus.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Is it cold in here? on 06 Nov 2014, 21:16
I don't like emoticons but will consider installing something to represent "Squeeeeeeeeeeeeee".
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: valkygrrl on 06 Nov 2014, 21:17
I sit in absolute awe of AprilArcus.

Sort of reminds you of this http://wellbehavedmormonwoman.blogspot.com/2014/02/movie-frozen-gay-homosexual-agenda.html#.VFxU9zSH-NA doesn't it?
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: hedgie on 06 Nov 2014, 21:49
I see the end of time itself, the unfathomable void coming to take us all.

IA NYARLATHOTEP!  THE BLACK GOAT OF THE WOODS WITH A THOUSAND YOUNG CREEPS INTO MY DREAMS TO STEAL YOUR SOULLLLLS.
You're thinking Shub-Niggurath (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shub-Niggurath). 
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: NemoX on 06 Nov 2014, 21:50

Sort of reminds you of this http://wellbehavedmormonwoman.blogspot.com/2014/02/movie-frozen-gay-homosexual-agenda.html#.VFxU9zSH-NA doesn't it?

I could say "people see what they want to see".

It seems in this forum people like to overanalyze and just contemplate alternative interpretations of things. Which is fine, it's their right. Same as its this woman's right to express what she believes to be true. But while here its done in good fun, I don't think she realizes how closed minded her perception of the world and that movie is, and how hurtful it can be.

"Reality, is that which , when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away" - Philip K. Dick

While I respect her right to belief things and have a different opinion, I still find it appalling that such way of thinking is still a thing and they won't face reality.

In regards to today's comic...I already stated yesterday how I thought their hand-holding was way too cute. Now this....






squeeee :P
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Magniras on 06 Nov 2014, 21:54
I see the end of time itself, the unfathomable void coming to take us all.

IA NYARLATHOTEP!  THE BLACK GOAT OF THE WOODS WITH A THOUSAND YOUNG CREEPS INTO MY DREAMS TO STEAL YOUR SOULLLLLS.
You're thinking Shub-Niggurath (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shub-Niggurath).

Him too.  Its an elder god party in my brain.  And the whole world is invited!
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: AprilArcus on 06 Nov 2014, 22:21
Sort of reminds you of this http://wellbehavedmormonwoman.blogspot.com/2014/02/movie-frozen-gay-homosexual-agenda.html#.VFxU9zSH-NA doesn't it?

Frozen does have a queer subtext. And Mulan has an overtly trans masculine text. It's not exactly a reach. If "Questionable Content" had an east Asian trans guy character engaged in a simmering romance with, say, straight guy beefcake Steve, expressed through contests of strength and daring-do, I would have certainly pointed that out. But alas, it doesn't. And QC's blonde-haired Scandinavian bisexual character predates Elsa, so if anything it's "Frozen" that's referencing "QC".

But that's neither here nor there. I pointed out "The Little Mermaid"'s trans subtext to illuminate an interesting visual parallel to people who might not have picked up on it otherwise, not to shame trans people for existing or Disney for telling our stories. The comparison really hurts my feelings.

I know that valkygrrl doesn't care for my flavor of feminism or my gender politics. We've talked about it in private to the extent that that was useful, and I would like to think that these are things that reasonable people can disagree about. Why take potshots? If something I said upset you, just say so plainly and let's see if we can't come to an understanding.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: jwhouk on 06 Nov 2014, 22:26
It's not upsetting. It's just... wow, I didn't think you could REACH that level of over-analysis. ;)
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Schmorgluck on 06 Nov 2014, 22:34
That image of the two of them hand in hand and smiling just makes me feel really good about this relationship. Like this is something positive for both of them, and it's going to last, and that makes me happy.

If people want some relationship anguish, there's still Faye and Angus to wallow in.
Nooooo, don't tempt fate!
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: hedgie on 06 Nov 2014, 22:41
Him too.  Its an elder god party in my brain.  And the whole world is invited!
But the poor schoolgirls.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: theMarc on 06 Nov 2014, 22:44
:D This is the best thing.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Rghfrgl on 06 Nov 2014, 22:54
Or a sleeping montage (which I can't seem to find at the moment, but there are at least two of them) showing various characters and couples in bed, although this fan-art (http://harrysde.tumblr.com/post/99020747316/be-the-small-spoon-marten) is probably what we'll see from M&C.

I love that fanart.

Quote
Marigold and Dale (happy), Veronica and Jim (happy), Marten and Claire (happy happy happy), Faye and Pintsize (punches).

(Why yes, we are outlining future comics, what of it?)

Last panel is back to Marten and Claire with pintsize flying overhead after being punched through the wall.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Half Empty Coffee Cup on 06 Nov 2014, 22:55
That image of the two of them hand in hand and smiling just makes me feel really good about this relationship. Like this is something positive for both of them, and it's going to last, and that makes me happy.

If people want some relationship anguish, there's still Faye and Angus to wallow in.
Nooooo, don't tempt fate!
Fate isn't likely to be tempted by that. Nobody in QC is anywhere near the level of buttmonkey that Davan McIntyre exists at. Also, nobody's died in this strip yet.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Orkboy on 06 Nov 2014, 23:05
Re: This Comic

Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: davedig on 06 Nov 2014, 23:07
Oh oh fan art! I found an adorable re-draw of Martin telling Claire his feelings then kissing. Another of Martin and Claire looking at clouds, both are on DA though not sure if I'd get trouble for linking though.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: BenRG on 06 Nov 2014, 23:12
This is probably just me, but I think that this is the poster that Jeph has been waiting a long time to draw. Whilst personally supporting Marten with Hannelore, I can see that Japh has been working towards a Marten and Claire relationship from as far back as the wedding.

So... Enjoy the convention, Jeph (although going to Canada in November strikes me as a calculated risk) and we'll see you when you get back!

Marigold and Dale (happy), Veronica and Jim (happy), Marten and Claire (happy happy happy), Faye and Pintsize (punches).

Having someone to regularly punch strikes me as a happy outcome for Faye! :wink:
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: osaka on 06 Nov 2014, 23:25
Him too.  Its an elder god party in my brain.  And the whole world is invited!
But the poor schoolgirls.

Pintsize would have a field day with that.

Very good dear. And now what do you see in this (http://blogs.psychcentral.com/humor/files/2010/08/4-UR-Mental-Health-Ink-Blot-Test-Mental-Games-for-Mental-Health-humor.jpg) inkblot?

Is it me or does anyone else just see some random ink on a piece of paper?

It's random ink on a piece of paper with a surprising resemblance to a moth.

And about today's comic: Cute indeed.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: BenRG on 07 Nov 2014, 01:33
Marigold and Dale (happy), Veronica and Jim (happy), Marten and Claire (happy happy happy), Faye and Pintsize (punches).

I'm an old softie but I'd like the last panel to be divided in two: Faye on her own in a bar of some kind and the last panel her looking up with a surprised expression at a new male character who has stepped up and is trying to start a conversation with her.

The message? Life goes on.

Or a sleeping montage (which I can't seem to find at the moment, but there are at least two of them) showing various characters and couples in bed, although this fan-art (http://harrysde.tumblr.com/post/99020747316/be-the-small-spoon-marten) is probably what we'll see from M&C.

I love that fanart.

Anybody want to place bets on the likelihood that Marten is going to develop a weird 'thing' about snuggling in Claire's hair? I mean, after the 'skritch-skritch', I think he's developing a definite liking for it!
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: ZoeB on 07 Nov 2014, 04:04
My squee meter just overloaded.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: NemoX on 07 Nov 2014, 05:10

But that's neither here nor there. I pointed out "The Little Mermaid"'s trans subtext to illuminate an interesting visual parallel to people who might not have picked up on it otherwise, not to shame trans people for existing or Disney for telling our stories. The comparison really hurts my feelings.

The times I have seen you analyze something you always seem to just state facts and observations and use them to formulate and share ideas and possible interpretations of something, but not as opinions and merely as "hey guys this could also be seen as this" or "have you ever considered this interpretation?", you don't force people to see things your way or claim everybody else is wrong if they don't see it your way or decry other points of view.

That article is a whole lot more biased opinions than actual observations and that is what I had a problem with. It's aim is not to spark a healthy discussion but to put down a whole community because of opposing beliefs. Yes, the movie could be interpreted and seen to have undertones of different things, but end of the day, unless it's a conscious effort of the writer (and in the case of movies maybe writers in plural, hence more difficult to coordinate that kind of thing) its more likely that somebody wrote a story without even realizing or thinking about possible interpretations and just wanted to share a story. People will see what they want to see.

I too find the comparison of what you do to that particular article rather...out of place and unnecessary. Like I said, the approach and tone are completely different. Just keep doing what you do, the rest of us here enjoy it immensely. :)
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: pwhodges on 07 Nov 2014, 05:22
Oh oh fan art! I found an adorable re-draw of Martin telling Claire his feelings then kissing. Another of Martin and Claire looking at clouds, both are on DA though not sure if I'd get trouble for linking though.

I couldn't find the first; the second is OK-ish, I suppose, given Jeph's predeliction for butts!  Link it in the fanart thread.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: valkygrrl on 07 Nov 2014, 05:54
although this fan-art (http://harrysde.tumblr.com/post/99020747316/be-the-small-spoon-marten) is probably what we'll see from M&C.

This, a thousand times this.

Protip: If you have long hair, braid it before being the small spoon. It saves the hair being eaten and/or ending up under the other person's body/limbs/head.

The times I have seen you analyze something you always seem to just state facts and observations and use them to formulate and share ideas and possible interpretations of something, but not as opinions and merely as "hey guys this could also be seen as this" or "have you ever considered this interpretation?", you don't force people to see things your way or claim everybody else is wrong if they don't see it your way or decry other points of view.

That is one way to read things. What with all the weasel wordy maybe filled passive voice... Oh wait. Short declarative active voice. Hmmm.

but end of the day, unless it's a conscious effort of the writer (and in the case of movies maybe writers in plural, hence more difficult to coordinate that kind of thing) its more likely that somebody wrote a story without even realizing or thinking about possible interpretations and just wanted to share a story. People will see what they want to see.

And that, not the the vile views in the linked article is the point.

People fixated on certain topics can always find them anywhere they want to and move any conversation to be about them. Even when it means twisting the general Disney theme these days of be yourself because you're really wonderful and accept people because they're wonderful too, to be about something _very_ specific. The little kids in the audience don't need subtext, that guideline alone covers all the bases.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: GarandMarine on 07 Nov 2014, 07:49
Sort of reminds you of this http://wellbehavedmormonwoman.blogspot.com/2014/02/movie-frozen-gay-homosexual-agenda.html#.VFxU9zSH-NA doesn't it?
And QC's blonde-haired Scandinavian bisexual character predates Elsa, so if anything it's "Frozen" that's referencing "QC".


Elsa is older than Jeph's grandparents by a significant amount of time, much less the comic itself. Did you miss The Snow Queen when doing your research on HCA?


Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Aziraphale on 07 Nov 2014, 08:55

Sort of reminds you of this http://wellbehavedmormonwoman.blogspot.com/2014/02/movie-frozen-gay-homosexual-agenda.html#.VFxU9zSH-NA doesn't it?

I could say "people see what they want to see".

It seems in this forum people like to overanalyze and just contemplate alternative interpretations of things. Which is fine, it's their right. Same as its this woman's right to express what she believes to be true. But while here its done in good fun, I don't think she realizes how closed minded her perception of the world and that movie is, and how hurtful it can be.

"Reality, is that which , when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away" - Philip K. Dick

People have different ways of approaching art, and differing opinions based on what they see based on that approach. Some people are passive -- "Nice thing you've got there. I think I'll enjoy it for a bit before moving on to the next thing." -- and "consume" art; I get the feeling, based on your reactions to people taking a more analytical approach, that you tend to fall more into this camp. Others see something and say, "Okay, what's this thing trying to say? And might it, in fact, be saying something else that might not be as readily apparent?" I think there are several of us who fall into this camp (I include myself, and based on what I've seen written here, I would probably also include Ben, April, and Mooski among others -- I'm sure they'll correct me if I've misinterpreted where they're coming from).

The thing is, if you're going to approach a text that way -- interpretation and exegesis versus plain 'ol consumption -- each person's going to bring different things to the table. There are different critical methodologies that come into play even when you're not entirely conscious you're using them; there's the body of work you've engaged prior to that, whether it's web comics, music, SF, fairy tales or political theory; and there's the personal experience that changes not only your perception of the world, but also on things that either portray or comment on that world. That's not a matter of belief (or not) in reality... instead, it speaks to the ways in which each of us perceive and experience it. That's neither closed-minded nor hurtful; on the contrary, it involves being open-minded enough to consider that there are other ways of looking at something, and to consider what those things mean in the bigger picture.

While I respect her right to belief things and have a different opinion, I still find it appalling that such way of thinking is still a thing and they won't face reality.

Except you don't seem to respect it; "find[ing] it appaling that such a way of thinking is still a thing" -- dismissing critical thinking as an aberration -- isn't an expression of respect by any rational measure.


But that's neither here nor there. I pointed out "The Little Mermaid"'s trans subtext to illuminate an interesting visual parallel to people who might not have picked up on it otherwise, not to shame trans people for existing or Disney for telling our stories. The comparison really hurts my feelings.

The times I have seen you analyze something you always seem to just state facts and observations and use them to formulate and share ideas and possible interpretations of something, but not as opinions and merely as "hey guys this could also be seen as this" or "have you ever considered this interpretation?", you don't force people to see things your way or claim everybody else is wrong if they don't see it your way or decry other points of view.

That article is a whole lot more biased opinions than actual observations and that is what I had a problem with. It's aim is not to spark a healthy discussion but to put down a whole community because of opposing beliefs. Yes, the movie could be interpreted and seen to have undertones of different things, but end of the day, unless it's a conscious effort of the writer (and in the case of movies maybe writers in plural, hence more difficult to coordinate that kind of thing) its more likely that somebody wrote a story without even realizing or thinking about possible interpretations and just wanted to share a story. People will see what they want to see.

I too find the comparison of what you do to that particular article rather...out of place and unnecessary. Like I said, the approach and tone are completely different. Just keep doing what you do, the rest of us here enjoy it immensely. :)

I'm not sure of April's precise background, but speaking as someone who majored in Lit and got in the habit very early on of citing sources that backed my opinions, I don't see these as statements of fact necessarily as the habit of someone who's used to sourcing her work to back her opinions. That's not "forc[ing] people to see things [her] way," that's just what you do when you're trying to make a point. It ought not to be necessary to place a disclaimer or special "opinion" tag on things just to avoid hurting the feelings of those who prefer not to hear someone else's opinions.

In terms of not knowing the writer's motives... well, that's exactly the point of interpretation. We don't always know. Some writers tell their stories in one dimension -- everything they intended to say is right there on the page. That kind of writer, and that kind of writing, is exceedingly rare (and exceedingly boring). From our classical literature all the way up to "Rambo" (yes, even "Rambo"), the story on the page or the screen is only part of the story; there's nuance, subtext, and sometimes entire other plots, some hidden in plain sight and others revealing themselves only after time and careful thought. Some of us enjoying the rest of the story certainly doesn't preclude you from ignoring it, thereby "seeing what you want to see." See how that works?

You don't force people to see things your way or claim everybody else is wrong if they don't see it your way or decry other points of view.

But at least we can agree on this much. She didn't. ;)
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Ustrello on 07 Nov 2014, 09:02
or...


(click to show/hide)
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: FunkyTuba on 07 Nov 2014, 09:11
She is, specifically, Ariel, whose trans status is barely subtext:
[...]

Brilliant! Especially this:

V. Interlude. A chef tries to eat Sebastian. This scene has nothing to do with gender anything, but do note that this character is voiced by René Auberjonois, who played the shape-shifting, putatively genderless yet inexplicably consistently male-identified Constable Odo on Star Trek: Deep Space Nine. Also it is a fun musical number.

A++ Would Read Again
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: AprilArcus on 07 Nov 2014, 10:25
but end of the day, unless it's a conscious effort of the writer (and in the case of movies maybe writers in plural, hence more difficult to coordinate that kind of thing) its more likely that somebody wrote a story without even realizing or thinking about possible interpretations and just wanted to share a story. People will see what they want to see.

And that, not the the vile views in the linked article is the point.

So let's talk about the history of this reading of Frozen. It was first pointed out (http://www.slantmagazine.com/film/review/frozen-2013) by R. Kurt Osenlund on November 13th in Slant Magazine. Rosie of "Fandoms and Feminism" took it an ran with it (http://fandomsandfeminism.tumblr.com/post/68687586103/be-the-good-girl-you-always-have-to-be-is) a few weeks later, on December 1st. By January 17th, the Daily Dot wrote a roundup (http://www.dailydot.com/fandom/disney-frozen-lgbtqia-reading-elsa-tumblr/) of the full-swing debate about the reading raging on Tumblr. Valerie Anne rehashed (http://www.afterellen.com/what-gay-girls-can-get-from-frozen/02/2014/) the argument for AfterEllen on February 17th. Only after all of that did "A Well Behaved Mormon Woman" write her vicious take on February 19th.

So why did you post a link to the nastiest, cruelest possible version of this story when so many other positive readings were out there in the blogosphere, if you didn't want to communicate a feeling of cruelty and nastiness yourself?

The times I have seen you analyze something you always seem to just state facts and observations and use them to formulate and share ideas and possible interpretations of something, but not as opinions and merely as "hey guys this could also be seen as this" or "have you ever considered this interpretation?", you don't force people to see things your way or claim everybody else is wrong if they don't see it your way or decry other points of view.

That is one way to read things. What with all the weasel wordy maybe filled passive voice... Oh wait. Short declarative active voice. Hmmm.

I think there was a missed opportunity here. I imagine a more positive version of this conversation could have played out like this:

valkygrrl: April, your forceful, declarative rhetoric is giving me the impression that you believe that your reading is the only valid one. I would prefer to just watch a movie and not try to look for politics everywhere.

April: I'm sorry my style hurt your feelings! Analyzing fiction is fun for me, and speaking forcefully is how I speak when I'm trying to make a point. I don't mean to take anything away from the way you like to enjoy your media. I'm curious, did you think my interpretation was off-base for any particular reason, or just a reach too far?

and then we'd have been talking to each other like adults, instead of lobbing snark bombs.

Elsa is older than Jeph's grandparents by a significant amount of time, much less the comic itself. Did you miss The Snow Queen when doing your research on HCA?

Elsa isn't in HCA's "The Snow Queen", and although "Frozen" originated as an adaptation of that story early in its production history, the version up on the screen has little to do with it other than its setting and an ice theme. For a great account of the many rewrites that "Frozen"'s script went through, check out Jim Hill's terrific article, Countdown to Disney "Frozen": How one simple suggestion broke the ice on the "Snow Queen" 's decades-long story problems (http://jimhillmedia.com/editor_in_chief1/b/jim_hill/archive/2013/10/18/countdown-to-disney-quot-frozen-quot-how-one-simple-suggestion-broke-the-ice-on-the-quot-snow-queen-quot-s-decades-long-story-problems.aspx#.UmbFXxZPrTQ).
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: NemoX on 07 Nov 2014, 10:39
The thing is, if you're going to approach a text that way -- interpretation and exegesis versus plain 'ol consumption -- each person's going to bring different things to the table. There are different critical methodologies that come into play even when you're not entirely conscious you're using them; there's the body of work you've engaged prior to that, whether it's web comics, music, SF, fairy tales or political theory; and there's the personal experience that changes not only your perception of the world, but also on things that either portray or comment on that world. That's not a matter of belief (or not) in reality... instead, it speaks to the ways in which each of us perceive and experience it. That's neither closed-minded nor hurtful; on the contrary, it involves being open-minded enough to consider that there are other ways of looking at something, and to consider what those things mean in the bigger picture.

like you said, if that is the case, it's not a conscious thought. It paints how we see the world and our opinions, we are after all a collection of our experiences (which as an aside I've always felt has stronger sway in the whole nature vs nurture argument, but I digress), and it's fine if people want to interpret a work or piece of art and expression around what they perceive as individuals. My issue is when the artists are accused of knowingly, and with malicious intent, to say something different with their work, specially like I said when said work is not a single source thing, multiple people come together to make it what it is.

Except you don't seem to respect it; "find[ing] it appaling that such a way of thinking is still a thing" -- dismissing critical thinking as an aberration -- isn't an expression of respect by any rational measure.

I don't have a problem with her as a person thinking or believing what she does. But that attitude of hers, claiming she respects people enough to allow them to have different sexual preferences, and says they should be allowed to have them, but that its "morally wrong" and they should essentially hide who they are and abandon so, and that they are hence condemned to not have happiness in the afterlife or whatever is NOT critical thinking. I respect that she has a different opinion, but I do not respect the essence of people acting against what to them is their nature because other people are not the same. That is not acceptance, no matter how much she claims it is. That is what I find appalling. If she would have said she doesn't like it or approve of it, but didn't make that particular claim that it's morally wrong to acknowledge in public their differences and that they have to keep it to themselves, it would have had a completely different tone and I would not have so many issues with it.

I'm not sure of April's precise background, but speaking as someone who majored in Lit and got in the habit very early on of citing sources that backed my opinions, I don't see these as statements of fact necessarily as the habit of someone who's used to sourcing her work to back her opinions. That's not "forc[ing] people to see things [her] way," that's just what you do when you're trying to make a point. It ought not to be necessary to place a disclaimer or special "opinion" tag on things just to avoid hurting the feelings of those who prefer not to hear someone else's opinions.

Maybe I worded it wrong, but that is what I was getting at. Citing sources is a good thing, yes she is using them to back her opinion, but if she didn't have an opinion then the whole "have you considered this point of view" wouldn't happen. What I mean is that she presents an argument based on some things that are concrete examples and they make sense. The article however, seemed (to me at least) the other way around. She wrote the "therefore" line before anything else and THEN felt like she had to stretch what she decided to use as examples to validate her argument, rather than using examples to lead to a conclusion...I don't think I'm making sense, I apologize for that, but I'll leave it at saying that in both cases the examples are being used in a very different manner to justify vs rationalize an already decided bottom line. One sparks a conversation, the other a controversy.

In terms of not knowing the writer's motives... well, that's exactly the point of interpretation. We don't always know. Some writers tell their stories in one dimension -- everything they intended to say is right there on the page. That kind of writer, and that kind of writing, is exceedingly rare (and exceedingly boring). From our classical literature all the way up to "Rambo" (yes, even "Rambo"), the story on the page or the screen is only part of the story; there's nuance, subtext, and sometimes entire other plots, some hidden in plain sight and others revealing themselves only after time and careful thought. Some of us enjoying the rest of the story certainly doesn't preclude you from ignoring it, thereby "seeing what you want to see." See how that works?

yeah, I think I already addressed this point in the first part of these reply :)

But at least we can agree on this much. She didn't. ;)

Hey, so long as the conversations derived from any of this are civil, I'm happy. I always enjoy a good conversation, specially one where I can most likely learn something new or at the very least makes me consider new points of view. Whether it changes my own or not is not even a concern, if it happens it happens, but just being exposed to different opinions and ideas is never a bad thing, helps us grow as people :)

edit: fixed some quotes bb code
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: ReindeerFlotilla on 07 Nov 2014, 10:49
Faye on her own in a bar of some kind and the last panel her looking up with a surprised expression at a new male character who has stepped up and is trying to start a conversation with her.

The message? Life goes on.

Riker's beard! I hope not. If Claire exists to be Marten's girl, Jeph did a good job of establishing her as her own person first. I would hope he would do the same with anyone meant for Faye. Otherwise, it just seems like another pit stop on the road back to Sven.

I have had issue with Angus as a character, but I liked him as Faye's other half. I wanted to see them try, if only because I see breaking up as the easiest form of story conflict. Since all signs point to this being the end, I'd rather get directly to the conflict between Sven, Faye, and Dora.

I can see all kinds of different ways Sven could redeem his selfish behavior by just being there for Faye. That sets up a nice internal conflict for Sven (doing what needs doing vs getting what he wants for Christmas) and sets up the core conflict of Dora's Svenectomy, with a number of different reaction options for Faye (can a supportive Sven be taken at face value? Why is Dora being weird? What hasn't she told me? Wait? Marten knows and I don't?)
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: ReindeerFlotilla on 07 Nov 2014, 11:25
On the topic of analysis, I have to ask: how many of you saw Pacific Rim?

Wait? What?

Okay, Pacific Rim is not the deepest screen play ever written. But that is what makes it so useful for this point. Of those who saw the movie, how many of you noticed that the Russian pilot saw the main character as a sexual/romantic rival?

Some might argue that that isn't in the movie. Nothing is said about it and there's no obvious consequences from it. I would argue it is. It's especially apparent in the mess a hall scene, when the Russian takes a protective/possessive position around the other Russian pilot as the MC passes by, shooting the MC a look that screams "stay away from my man."

You thought I was talking about the husband of the husband and wife team?

Here's my point. That happened. Unlike a lot of things under discussion here, it probably happened as part of a plan. But whose plan? Del Toro? Heather Doerksen, the actor who played Lt. Kaidanovsky? The cinematographer? Does it mean what I think it means? It's all body language and significant looks.

Analysis relies on interpretation. Interpretation is prone to following paths dictated by the tools one tends to favor. When you prefer hammers, everything looks like nails. On the flipside, it's a poorly kept secret that the Animation house at Disney loves tossing in "subversive" subtexts. Possibly for the same reason that the old Looney Tunes guys liked putting in jokes that would fly over a child's head. They want their work to capture the attention of adults, too.

Are all of these films political statements? Is Lt. Kaidanovsky really concerned that Beckett has designs on her husband? I don't know. But it doesn't hurt anyone to listen to the hypothesis and consider the implications. I wouldn't say anything if the discussion was merely disagreement about the analysis, itself. But the discussion is edging closely to,  if not trampling totally on, criticism of the analyst's motives.

Edit: sorry for double post. I didn't think I would finish that before someone else chimed in.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: davedig on 07 Nov 2014, 11:31
I love Pacific Rim! It's a personal favorite of mine.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: MooskiNet on 07 Nov 2014, 11:47
Well said, RF.

"I disagree with this bit and that bit and this other thing because...." is perfectly fine. "This puts me in mind of a hateful diatribe I read once," not as much.

("RF?"  Maybe I shoulda said ReindeerFlotilla instead, 'cause now I've got Randall Flagg on the brain)
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Kugai on 07 Nov 2014, 11:53
Dawwwww

Cute couple
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: ReindeerFlotilla on 07 Nov 2014, 12:15
Well said, RF.

"I disagree with this bit and that bit and this other thing because...." is perfectly fine. "This puts me in mind of a hateful diatribe I read once," not as much.

("RF?"  Maybe I shoulda said ReindeerFlotilla instead, 'cause now I've got Randall Flagg on the brain)

Pleased to meet you.





Hope you guess my name  :evil:

Edit: my avatar is an Angel and I was just compared to the devil. I am a confuse. Well, at least both are bad guys.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: NemoX on 07 Nov 2014, 12:28
I wouldn't say anything if the discussion was merely disagreement about the analysis, itself. But the discussion is edging closely to,  if not trampling totally on, criticism of the analyst's motives.

I think the issue was more about approach than motives. Or at least that's how I perceived it. Then again somebody else might perceive it some other way. And a third would interpret the whole thing in yet another perspective. So I may be wrong. But that's part of the argument itself, people's interpretation of something and how they express it.

Never saw Pacific Rim, so I can't objectively comment on your point, might watch it sometime and see for myself :)
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Mad Cat on 07 Nov 2014, 12:50
That should totally be the cover of a collected volume of QC in dead tree format.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Estron on 07 Nov 2014, 13:03
I sit in absolute awe of AprilArcus.

Sort of reminds you of this http://wellbehavedmormonwoman.blogspot.com/2014/02/movie-frozen-gay-homosexual-agenda.html#.VFxU9zSH-NA doesn't it?

No, no, no, it does not remind me of that article.  I like AprilArcus's posts, very much -- they are well-written and extremely well-documented.  And I absolutely LOVE her self-description as an "adoxographical exegete."  Remember what Dick Cavett once said:   exegesis saves.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Estron on 07 Nov 2014, 13:07
It's not upsetting. It's just... wow, I didn't think you could REACH that level of over-analysis. ;)

Precisely what about any of the analysis thus far has been excessive?
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: BenRG on 07 Nov 2014, 13:10
That should totally be the cover of a collected volume of QC in dead tree format.

I did get the impression that we're now at the end of Questionable Content vol.3 and that's the cover image. We're now moving onto a new phase including (warning - wild guesses):
All this and more in Questionable Content - Volume 4! [/list]
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Aziraphale on 07 Nov 2014, 13:18
That should totally be the cover of a collected volume of QC in dead tree format.

1: Agreed
2: Unrelated: I misread your sig line as "The Quakers were masters of siege welfare," which cracked me up.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: davedig on 07 Nov 2014, 13:23
Hey BenRG did you get my reply okay?
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: ReindeerFlotilla on 07 Nov 2014, 13:31
I wouldn't say anything if the discussion was merely disagreement about the analysis, itself. But the discussion is edging closely to,  if not trampling totally on, criticism of the analyst's motives.

I think the issue was more about approach than motives. Or at least that's how I perceived it. Then again somebody else might perceive it some other way. And a third would interpret the whole thing in yet another perspective. So I may be wrong. But that's part of the argument itself, people's interpretation of something and how they express it.

Never saw Pacific Rim, so I can't objectively comment on your point, might watch it sometime and see for myself :)

Whenever you discuss approach you discuss motivation. They are inextricably linked. More to the point, the specific language of saying that X is more about Y than it is about elements of the story is language that takes to task the analyst rather than the analysis.

I make no claim about anyone's motives here. But the focus on critiquing the approach as opposed to the facts, evidence, and conclusions, has the effect of conveying an extremely civil attack on the author.

Someone once criticized my pointing out a broad ad hominem as "you think that was ad hominem?" But the thing is, ad hominem means "at the man" literally and "at the person" in general .

No matter how civil one is, when one structured their argument based on the approach/motivation of the author, it's not cool. Unless one can show that the author will derive profit and thus has motive to act unethically.

The fact that our national debates tend to revolve around that tactic muddied the waters an makes it seem reasonable. But the fact is that extremely civil ad hominem is just a manipulation tactic. Don't listen to this person, listen to how I make you feel, it says. That it is, inarguably, civil doesn't make right. But everyone involved profits from the audience not seeing the manipulation involved. As a result, the audience starts to view the method as appropriate discourse.

I make no comment on what you mean. I am telling you what I read, from many, comes across as aimed at April, not her logic. I expect I will disagree with April in the future. I don't really agree now. But her analysis is sound. If I think of a counter argument I will be comfortable stating it. Unless that happens I am going to consider the possibility that April has a point.

Sometimes subtext exists in a work even though the author had no intention of putting it there. That applies to Disney and your argument.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: AprilArcus on 07 Nov 2014, 14:30
I did get the impression that we're now at the end of Questionable Content vol.3 and that's the cover image. We're now moving onto a new phase including (warning - wild guesses):
  • The Chronicles of Marten and Claire;
  • The Post-Angus life of Faye Whitaker;
  • The Wedding That Shook Northampton (Jim and Veronica put on a party);
  • The Sundering and Reconciliation of the Bianchi Children;
  • What Kind of a Name for a Band is 'Deathmole'?
All this and more in Questionable Content - Volume 4! [/list]

I definitely agree with this. How would you chop QC up into volumes? I would probably cut it up like so:


I would be tempted to split Season 2 in half along the 1310/1311 four-month time skip, which cuts Marten/Dora neatly into "the good part" and "the bad part", and ends with the Wil/Penelope cliffhanger.

There isn't really an equivalent midway point in Season 3, but if you needed to make one up it would be the two-week time skip between 2375/2376, which puts Marten/Padma and the early Dora/Tai stuff into Season 3.0, and Marten/Claire and Dale/Marigold into Season 3.5.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: NemoX on 07 Nov 2014, 14:31
I make no comment on what you mean. I am telling you what I read, from many, comes across as aimed at April, not her logic. I expect I will disagree with April in the future. I don't really agree now. But her analysis is sound. If I think of a counter argument I will be comfortable stating it. Unless that happens I am going to consider the possibility that April has a point.

That is partly what I was referring to before when I said I'd rather something spark a discussion than an argument. If you do think of a counter argument to something, and present it also in a sound manner, then you have yourself a good thing. Agreeing or not, the point is to hear different points of view and discuss their merits, hopefully in a civil manner with no feelings of being personally attacked. But this is the internet and this is human nature, so I know it just happens in a perfect world. On my part, all I can do is try.

Quote
Sometimes subtext exists in a work even though the author had no intention of putting it there. That applies to Disney and your argument.

yeah, that was mentioned before too and I acknowledged that yes, that is the case, even subconsciously we all do it. But if we are talking about intent, whether the subtext is there or not does not warrant assuming its on purpose, but it does warrant discussion.

For the record, I would like to state that I do mean it when I say I just like an actual conversation and to hear other points of view and try to learn new things, if I ever say something that may be perceived as an attack to anybody here, my apologies, I assure you that unless I specifically say so, it is not my intent
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Akima on 07 Nov 2014, 15:05
And Mulan has an overtly trans masculine text.
Pretty much every modern adaption the Hua Mulan legend has transgender text and homoerotic subtext. The Disney version has strong female self-expression and broadly feminist themes. None of this is present in the original poem, where the main themes are patriotism and filial piety. So, referring back to that idiotic Venn-diagram quoted above, who is the "author" of the story, and what did they "mean" when they wrote it? Does the original story change in meaning because it is being read with 21st century eyes, rather than those of the 6th century when it was probably written? If it does, how decisive can the author's intent be?

As Disney's adaption shows, we tend to see a feminist theme in the story, which the original writer certainly did not "mean" when he placed Hua's service firmly in a Confucian context of filial respect for her father and the king, ultimately crowned by her submission to her proper role as a wife and mother. Does that mean that a feminist reading is invalid? Does it mean that a "Western" non-Confucian reading, or even adaption, of the story is invalid because it does not conform to what the original author "meant"? If the answer to those questions is no, as I believe it is, what the author meant cannot be regarded as the last word. I believe one test for the worth of a work of literature, or art generally, is whether it continues to speak to people who live in a very different world from that in which it was created, but this inevitably means that its meaning will be created, at least in part, by the audience, rather than the author.

Friday's comic/poster is awwwsome.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Dalillama on 07 Nov 2014, 15:23

While I respect her right to belief things and have a different opinion, I still find it appalling that such way of thinking is still a thing and they won't face reality.

Except you don't seem to respect it; "find[ing] it appaling that such a way of thinking is still a thing" -- dismissing critical thinking as an aberration -- isn't an expression of respect by any rational measure.
I realize NemoX has already replied to this, but I'd also like to point out that it is quite possible to respect someone's right to hold a belief without in any way respecting the belief itself.  'I respect your right to believe that' means 'I don't think you should suffer legal consequences for that belief', but does not, in any way, imply ' I consider that belief to be valid, true, or accurate'.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: hedgie on 07 Nov 2014, 15:28
There is the matter of whether or not someone wants to create a "faithful" adaptation of a particular work, or make a re-interpretation based on their own culture and time.  I'd consider Disney's "Mulan", with *their* cultural influences and message to be more along with the lines of Kurosawa's "Throne of Blood" and "Ran" (MacBeth and King Lear, respectively), than something that was supposed to be faithful to the original. 
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Akima on 07 Nov 2014, 15:48
'I respect your right to believe that' means 'I don't think you should suffer legal consequences for that belief'
So "respect" means no more than "I don't think you should be flung in jail", but any insult, expression of contempt, or social ostracism short of that is just fine?

There is the matter of whether or not someone wants to create a "faithful" adaptation of a particular work, or make a re-interpretation based on their own culture and time.
And where does authorial intent fit into that? Who is the author of "Throne Of Blood"; Kurosawa or Shakespeare or both?
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: FunkyTuba on 07 Nov 2014, 16:13
...ultimately crowned by her submission to her proper role as a wife and mother.

I see a similarity in the ending state of this and Taming of the Shrew (though not many other similarities)... I am not well-studied in such things, but I seem to remember that notwithstanding the speech's content, the fact that Katherine even gets a speech at the end to speak of such things was sufficiently scandalous as to give a feminist-in-its-time quality to the play.

The significance being that what starts as a farce leads up to a backdoor discussion of Weighty Matters and the audacity of it coming from a female character.

Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: GarandMarine on 07 Nov 2014, 16:14
And Mulan has an overtly trans masculine text.
Pretty much every modern adaption the Hua Mulan legend has transgender text and homoerotic subtext. The Disney version has strong female self-expression and broadly feminist themes. None of this is present in the original poem, where the main themes are patriotism and filial piety. So, referring back to that idiotic Venn-diagram quoted above, who is the "author" of the story, and what did they "mean" when they wrote it? Does the original story change in meaning because it is being read with 21st century eyes, rather than those of the 6th century when it was probably written? If it does, how decisive can the author's intent be?

As Disney's adaption shows, we tend to see a feminist theme in the story, which the original writer certainly did not "mean" when he placed Hua's service firmly in a Confucian context of filial respect for her father and the king, ultimately crowned by her submission to her proper role as a wife and mother. Does that mean that a feminist reading is invalid? Does it mean that a "Western" non-Confucian reading, or even adaption, of the story is invalid because it does not conform to what the original author "meant"? If the answer to those questions is no, as I believe it is, what the author meant cannot be regarded as the last word. I believe one test for the worth of a work of literature, or art generally, is whether it continues to speak to people who live in a very different world from that in which it was created, but this inevitably means that its meaning will be created, at least in part, by the audience, rather than the author.

Friday's comic/poster is awwwsome.

I think it's a sign I'm getting old when I see chain of conversation I want to engage on (especially the original story of Hua Mulan) and just say to myself "Nah. Akima will get it."
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Half Empty Coffee Cup on 07 Nov 2014, 16:22
There is the matter of whether or not someone wants to create a "faithful" adaptation of a particular work, or make a re-interpretation based on their own culture and time.
And where does authorial intent fit into that? Who is the author of "Throne Of Blood"; Kurosawa or Shakespeare or both?
Doesn't matter to me. The author is dead either way. (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/DeathOfTheAuthor)
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: hedgie on 07 Nov 2014, 16:26
'I respect your right to believe that' means 'I don't think you should suffer legal consequences for that belief'
So "respect" means no more than "I don't think you should be flung in jail", but any insult, expression of contempt, or social ostracism short of that is just fine?
Good question.  And I'm not sure how to answer.  Shunning/isolation is a useful extra-legal tool for dealing with totally horrible people without resorting to violence.  Then again, it can also be used against innocent people, for say just being to "x" for their gender/race/class/culture/religion, etc.  Which raises the question of if || when it's okay to do so.  I know personally, I have no problem shunning and insulting racists/homophobes/sexists, and the like.

Quote
There is the matter of whether or not someone wants to create a "faithful" adaptation of a particular work, or make a re-interpretation based on their own culture and time.
And where does authorial intent fit into that? Who is the author of "Throne Of Blood"; Kurosawa or Shakespeare or both?
I'd say Kurosawa, but inspired by Shakespeare.  It's not like Joss' "Much Ado About Nothing", or the '90s "Romeo and Juliet" where they just changed the setting, but kept the same dialogue, or various opera or theatre productions that just re-arrange what was already there.  It's more about taking certain ideas and themes and then reimagining them into a different context.  I don't think that I'm in a position to say whether or not "Mulan" was cultural appropriation, especially since I'm not familiar enough with the original source, or its cultural/historical context.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Estron on 07 Nov 2014, 16:38
Um . . . there are some pretty deep and weighty discussions here.  I'm just here because I like a webcomic about romance, technology, and weird references to obscure bands.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: ReindeerFlotilla on 07 Nov 2014, 16:53
Good question.  And I'm not sure how to answer.  Shunning/isolation is a useful extra-legal tool for dealing with totally horrible people without resorting to violence.  Then again, it can also be used against innocent people, for say just being to "x" for their gender/race/class/culture/religion, etc.  Which raises the question of if || when it's okay to do so.  I know personally, I have no problem shunning and insulting racists/homophobes/sexists, and the like.

The tools of culture are just that. Tools. They can be used  constructively or destructively.

To insult, express contempt, or ostracize is to show a lack of respect. I think it is important to recognize that distinction. It's possible to disagree with a position without taking action to harm those who hold it. Say Billy thinks his god demands no homosexuality. Respect is Billy saying to LGB's, "I'm not getting involved in your faith." There's nothing wrong with that. But telling them "I'm not getting involved with you, at all and I will encourage others to do the same" we've moved from a personal choice to the use of social tools to do harm. That is not respect.

The only counter is the use of similar tools against Billy and his followers. This is also not respect. If respect is always the right thing to do, then sometimes you have to be wrong to defend what you believe.

I, for one, don't believe respect is always right. Sometimes you gotta roll the hard six.

Um . . . there are some pretty deep and weighty discussions here.  I'm just here because I like a webcomic about romance, technology, and weird references to obscure bands.

As are a bunch of intellectually curious others. We have to do something with the nearly 168 hours we spend each week NOT reading the comic.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: AprilArcus on 07 Nov 2014, 16:57
And where does authorial intent fit into that? Who is the author of "Throne Of Blood"; Kurosawa or Shakespeare or both?
I'd say Kurosawa, but inspired by Shakespeare.  It's not like Joss' "Much Ado About Nothing", or the '90s "Romeo and Juliet" where they just changed the setting, but kept the same dialogue, or various opera or theatre productions that just re-arrange what was already there.  It's more about taking certain ideas and themes and then reimagining them into a different context.

This is an unanswerable question that literary critics have gone boringly back and forth on for as long as there have been literary critics. The answer is somewhere on a continuum between "The Unique Timeless Embodied Authorial Soul Akira Kurosawa: Auteur, Fountainhead & Demiurge" and "the entire light cone stretching backward from the moment the film was sealed up and shipped to its premiere screening to the quantum fluctuations of the Big Bang itself, all of which have butterfly-effected the formation of the solar system, the evolution of intelligent life, and the politics of 16th century England and 20th century Japan in a stochastic, entangled, un-analyzable way and aren't movies intensely collaborative endeavors produced by hundreds of people each performing a job to the best of their ability but themselves deeply enmeshed in a web of interpersonal influences and interactions totally inaccessible to us, the viewers, and when you get right down to it aren't the very notions of 'consciousness' and 'intent' just illusions and social constructions anyway?"

There is no single correct answer to these kinds of questions, just methodological frameworks for teasing apart the influences and counter-influences that lead to the creation of a work of art. In the case of the Little Mermaid, we can talk productively about Hans Christian Andersen's life circumstances at the time of the original writing, preserved in his and Edvard Collins' letters; the economic pressures and sexual politics of middle-class life in 19th century Denmark; the production history of the film version; lyricist Howard Ashman's own history of gay life in the 70s and 80s and his struggle with AIDS during the writing of the film; the dueling ethos of moral conservatism and artistic freedom at work in the Walt Disney Company; Walt Disney's own politics and legacy in his company... a piece of art has an endless list of authors; but some are more interesting and relevant than others.

My go-to framework for talking about this kind of stuff is Harold Bloom's theory of The Anxiety of Influence (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Anxiety_of_Influence). We are all inescapably in the grasp of those who have come before us, and challenged to overcome that influence to produce something original. But by the same token, a completely original work would have no grounding in any existing cultural context, and would have no audience to receive it. The measure of "authorship" is the artist's ingenuity in accommodating both these irreconcilable forces.

Are Momo and Emily just Chiyo and Ayumu from "Azumanga Daioh", or are they original characters? Is Jeph an author or an imitator? Does R.K. Milholland deserve a sort of shared authorship in "Q.C." by writing its emotional antithesis in parallel for over ten years? Is Jeph acting or reacting?

My answer is that these kinds of questions are framed in the wrong way. It is not an "either/or?" — it is a "how much of each?"
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: valkygrrl on 07 Nov 2014, 17:18

I think there was a missed opportunity here. I imagine a more positive version of this conversation could have played out like this:

valkygrrl: April, your forceful, declarative rhetoric is giving me the impression that you believe that your reading is the only valid one. I would prefer to just watch a movie and not try to look for politics everywhere.

April: I'm sorry my style hurt your feelings! Analyzing fiction is fun for me, and speaking forcefully is how I speak when I'm trying to make a point. I don't mean to take anything away from the way you like to enjoy your media. I'm curious, did you think my interpretation was off-base for any particular reason, or just a reach too far?

and then we'd have been talking to each other like adults, instead of lobbing snark bombs.

April: I see you joking and basking in a happy moment. What I don't see you doing is talking about my politics and we can't have that. Lucky for me you referenced an old joke and I've thought of a way to link it to the only thing I want to talk about, even if there's already a thread in discuss for days when the comic isn't related to that subject. Thanks for the opening!

valkygrrl: Huh? What? The squee.... where did the squee go? Oh, OH MY. Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar you know.

April: Cigars are phallic and obviously relate to the trans....

valkygrrl: *headdesk* There are other people out there who see only what they want to see.

April: Meanie.

I know that valkygrrl doesn't care for my flavor of feminism or my gender politics. We've talked about it in private to the extent that that was useful, and I would like to think that these are things that reasonable people can disagree about. Why take potshots? If something I said upset you, just say so plainly and let's see if we can't come to an understanding.

If we're going to speak about private discussions, 'as long as it was useful' ended with flinging some words that you consider Bad Things at me and then ignoring my answer. I was given to understand _that_ was to be the pattern for interactions.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: AprilArcus on 07 Nov 2014, 17:22
If we're going to speak about private discussions, 'as long as it was useful' ended with flinging some words that you consider Bad Things at me and then ignoring my answer. I was given to understand _that_ was to be the pattern for interactions.

I recall us going back and forth for six rounds (and 3600 words between the two of us) before I decided I had nothing to say that would move you, and didn't want to hear more from you that would hurt me.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: osaka on 07 Nov 2014, 17:26
I am offended you would consider Emily to be anything more than a loving homage to Kasuga Ayumu, April. I mean, she's most certainly not as awesome.

(Btw, this is not that I haven't read your post. I just think that I'd probably rush some conclusion or say something utterly dumb and ruin it for everybody even more. I do agree that doing something that literally nobody's seen before is both hard and an exercise in futility as not many people would vouch for it)
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: AprilArcus on 07 Nov 2014, 17:30
I am offended you would consider Emily to be anything more than a loving homage to Kasuga Ayumu, April. I mean, she's most certainly not as awesome.

Where would you draw the line between homage and expy (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/Expy), if it were up to you?
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: valkygrrl on 07 Nov 2014, 17:39


I recall us going back and forth for six rounds (and 3600 words between the two of us) before I decided I had nothing to say that would move you, and didn't want to hear more from you that would hurt me.

And the things you said were what? All hearts and flowers? What did you expect out of future interactions?
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: AprilArcus on 07 Nov 2014, 17:41
Let's just agree to leave each other alone, okay? Keep on squeeing. There is enough room in this forum for both of us.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: osaka on 07 Nov 2014, 17:42
I could probably see more of Osaka on Emily if they didn't have different interests or Emily didn't take up the space of 3 osakas.

Seriously, Emily is really huge.

Now to the serious part. The defining trait of osaka is not straight-up wackyness. Osaka is a quick wit, with a very laid back personality, different worries (like why does the cream bun have bumps), and a frame of mind that allows her to be awesome at puns and riddles. The part where the homage comes is that all those characteristics end up in Osaka being weird at times (more like most of the time), but it's a consequence more than an end, and Emily is weird in a way vaguely resembling that of Osaka. But she's not weird as a consequence, it's more like an act. But apart from that and the last name "Azuma", there's little more in her of Kasuga.

I will believe expy when she proves able to outrun Momo in a vocabulary riddle, since that little moment is what truly defines Osaka.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: AprilArcus on 07 Nov 2014, 17:44
Well said, osaka! :)
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: GarandMarine on 07 Nov 2014, 17:45


I recall us going back and forth for six rounds (and 3600 words between the two of us) before I decided I had nothing to say that would move you, and didn't want to hear more from you that would hurt me.

And the things you said were what? All hearts and flowers? What did you expect out of future interactions?
Let's just agree to leave each other alone, okay? Keep on squeeing. There is enough room in this forum for both of us.

Now now, we can all be friends and settle these little tiffs reasonably.

*holds up a two battle spatulas.*

"The winner is in the right. May the odds be ever in your favor."
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: osaka on 07 Nov 2014, 17:47
5 bucks say they both have to fix different parts of the coffeeshop afterwards.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Gladstone on 07 Nov 2014, 17:47
Marigold and Dale (happy), Veronica and Jim (happy), Marten and Claire (happy happy happy), Faye and Pintsize (punches).

I'm an old softie but I'd like the last panel to be divided in two: Faye on her own in a bar of some kind and the last panel her looking up with a surprised expression at a new male character who has stepped up and is trying to start a conversation with her.

The message? Life goes on.

Nah, I don't see that happening--not for a bedtime strip, at least.  1328 and 2554 both showed the major relationships going on at the time, along with Pintsize bothering one of the single characters, and with the latter comic showing the changes since the first:

1328 (http://questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=1328): Marten & Dora, Faye & Sven, Penelope & Wil, with Hannelore & Pintsize as a punchline.
2554 (http://questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=2554): Dora & Tai, Faye & Angus, Steve & Cosette, with Marten & Pintsize as a punchline.


So my original outline--Marigold & Dale, Veronica & Jim, Marten & Claire, Faye punching Pintsize--still stands.  It took over a thousand strips for all the changes between Sleeping Montages #1 & #2 to occur, but less than 300 for these new developments to happen. Whether or not Jeph eventually depicts these changes in Sleeping Montage #3 is another thing entirely.  Hope so.  Otherwise this post is just going to look silly and obsessive for nothing.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: valkygrrl on 07 Nov 2014, 17:58
Let's just agree to leave each other alone, okay? Keep on squeeing. There is enough room in this forum for both of us.

Be a good little woman and back away so my betters can talk about politics? Sorry, not going to stand back so you can dominate the threads. If another POV needs to be offered, it'll be offered.

Now now, we can all be friends and settle these little tiffs reasonably.

*holds up a two battle spatulas.*

"The winner is in the right. May the odds be ever in your favor."

Am I on Iron Chef? Are we making pancakes?
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: GarandMarine on 07 Nov 2014, 18:02
I normally use Kukris for this sort of thing, but battles to the death with Malaysian battle spatulas is a forum tradition.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: AprilArcus on 07 Nov 2014, 18:07
[Marten and Claire will] probably take things slow, but I can still see them spending a few nights together before getting too intimate).

That would be pretty unremarkable, as QC relationships go:

(http://i.imgur.com/2EnUVDf.png) (http://www.questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=504)
(http://i.imgur.com/reBbEQg.png) (http://www.questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=1854)
(http://i.imgur.com/B2BP2Tn.png) (http://www.questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=2369)
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: osaka on 07 Nov 2014, 18:15
In the other hand, Dale and Marigold; Steve and Cosette*, and Veronica and Jim, all three couples got to bonin' pretty quickly. There's been many relationships in QC over the years, so I'd say that both tendencies would be unremarkable based on earlier relationships.

This second trend would be more remarkable in this case for reasons mentioned in other threads.

*Although Cosette had to postpone it mid-sex because she felt her whole back snapping. Point still stands.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: hedgie on 07 Nov 2014, 18:16

*holds up a two battle spatulas.*
I'll see your battle spatulas and raise you one war ladle.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: AprilArcus on 07 Nov 2014, 18:16
Be a good little woman and back away so my betters can talk about politics? Sorry, not going to stand back so you can dominate the threads. If another POV needs to be offered, it'll be offered.

What the actual fuck?

Why did your "POV" that my commentary was reminiscent of a homophobic "well behaved mormon woman (http://wellbehavedmormonwoman.blogspot.com/2014/02/movie-frozen-gay-homosexual-agenda.html#.VFxU9zSH-NA)" "need to be offered"? Why not link The Slant's article (http://www.slantmagazine.com/film/review/frozen-2013)? Or Fandoms and Feminism's (http://fandomsandfeminism.tumblr.com/post/68687586103/be-the-good-girl-you-always-have-to-be-is)? Or The Daily Dot's (http://www.dailydot.com/fandom/disney-frozen-lgbtqia-reading-elsa-tumblr/)? Or After Ellen's (http://www.afterellen.com/what-gay-girls-can-get-from-frozen/02/2014/)? There were four ways to make the exact same point without placing my rhetorical style beside a horrible bigot's.

Please. Leave. Me. Alone. Say whatever you want about the stubborn, hypercritical, hair-splitting wrongness of my arguments, but leave me out of it.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Gladstone on 07 Nov 2014, 18:18
[Marten and Claire will] probably take things slow, but I can still see them spending a few nights together before getting too intimate).

That would be pretty unremarkable, as QC relationships go

Yeah, good point.  Yay for taking things slow.

In the other hand, Dale and Marigold; Steve and Cosette*, and Veronica and Jim, all three couples got to bonin' pretty quickly.

Also Faye and Sven.  So, yay for bonin' pretty quickly, too.  Yay for consent and respecting comfort levels, etc.  Anyway, 'twas just an observation.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: valkygrrl on 07 Nov 2014, 18:26
I normally use Kukris for this sort of thing, but battles to the death with Malaysian battle spatulas is a forum tradition.

What the hell! I don't want to _kill_ April.

Be a good little woman and back away so my betters can talk about politics? Sorry, not going to stand back so you can dominate the threads. If another POV needs to be offered, it'll be offered.

What the actual fuck?

Why did your "POV" that my commentary was reminiscent of a homophobic "well behaved mormon woman (http://wellbehavedmormonwoman.blogspot.com/2014/02/movie-frozen-gay-homosexual-agenda.html#.VFxU9zSH-NA)" "need to be offered"? Why not link The Slant's article (http://www.slantmagazine.com/film/review/frozen-2013)? Or Fandoms and Feminism's (http://fandomsandfeminism.tumblr.com/post/68687586103/be-the-good-girl-you-always-have-to-be-is)? Or The Daily Dot's (http://www.dailydot.com/fandom/disney-frozen-lgbtqia-reading-elsa-tumblr/)? Or After Ellen's (http://www.afterellen.com/what-gay-girls-can-get-from-frozen/02/2014/)? There were four ways to make the exact same point without placing my rhetorical style beside a horrible bigot's.

Please. Leave. Me. Alone. Say whatever you want about the stubborn, hypercritical, hair-splitting wrongness of my arguments, but leave me out of it.

Single minded zealotry.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: osaka on 07 Nov 2014, 18:27
For some reason I read that my comment put you in an uncomfortable spot Gladstone. If that's the case I'm sorry. I was just trying to make a point and lighten the mood, and I though a bit of crassness would help.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: AprilArcus on 07 Nov 2014, 18:29
Single minded zealotry.

Do you really not see the difference between arguing against the thing that was said and attacking the person who said it?
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Gladstone on 07 Nov 2014, 18:37
For some reason I read that my comment put you in an uncomfortable spot Gladstone. If that's the case I'm sorry. I was just trying to make a point and lighten the mood, and I though a bit of crassness would help.

Nah, no worries.  I wanted to acknowledge your comment but I also couldn't think of anything interesting to add, so the awkwardness is all me.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: valkygrrl on 07 Nov 2014, 18:48
Single minded zealotry.

Do you really not see the difference between arguing against the thing that was said and attacking the person who said it?

Do you really not see that when you made your comment we weren't talking about the little mermaid or trans-anything? We can talk about those things, it comes up in conversation often enough, but you couldn't let things pass without turning the conversation around to it. That's zealotry.

The Mormon woman said, you're enjoying a movie OMG don't know know you should be talking about the evil gay agenda.

You said, hey a funny reference to a guest strip OMG you should talk about trans themes in fish related media.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: bhtooefr on 07 Nov 2014, 18:58
(https://bhtooefr.org/images/HanneloreExploding.png)
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Fenriswolf on 07 Nov 2014, 19:09
I'll put my lurking hand up and say that valkygrrl needs to back off. Other people declared to enjoy April's input, you're welcome to ignore it if it's not your cup of tea. As it stands, I do not appreciate reading your harassment when she is clearly trying to not engage with you/certainly not in any way attacking you.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: DSL on 07 Nov 2014, 19:23
Perhaps it's time for a separate thread? Anyone else's posts seem to be getting swamped in the turbulence at the confluence of the Exegesis and Response rivers.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Gladstone on 07 Nov 2014, 19:26
Perhaps it's time for a separate thread? Anyone else's posts seem to be getting swamped in the turbulence at the confluence of the Exegesis and Response rivers.

I was going to try to start next week's poll & thread tomorrow afternoon in order to preempt Kugai or anyone else in Far Eastern Timezones, but I could always do it now instead?  The poll I was gonna do last week is still relevant, kinda.

(Not bitter about missing my chance last week AT ALL.)
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: DSL on 07 Nov 2014, 19:27
Go for it and let's see what happens.

NOTE: Not a mod, don't even play one on TV.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Gladstone on 07 Nov 2014, 19:40
NOTE: Not a mod, don't even play one on TV.

Oops, wasn't paying attention, assumed you were.  Ah well, we can spend the weekend filling up next week's discussion, then start a new discussion for the following week?  It's never too early to talk turkey.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Kugai on 07 Nov 2014, 20:14
Go for broke Gladstone, I ain't got nuttin'
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Storel on 08 Nov 2014, 01:00
'I respect your right to believe that' means 'I don't think you should suffer legal consequences for that belief'
So "respect" means no more than "I don't think you should be flung in jail", but any insult, expression of contempt, or social ostracism short of that is just fine?
Good question.  And I'm not sure how to answer.  Shunning/isolation is a useful extra-legal tool for dealing with totally horrible people without resorting to violence.  Then again, it can also be used against innocent people, for say just being to "x" for their gender/race/class/culture/religion, etc.  Which raises the question of if || when it's okay to do so.  I know personally, I have no problem shunning and insulting racists/homophobes/sexists, and the like.

“We must respect the other fellow’s religion, but only in the sense and to the extent that we respect his theory that his wife is beautiful and his children smart.” — H.L. Mencken, 1956

Which I interpret to mean that we don't disrespect it to his face, but snickering about it behind his back is perfectly okay.  8-)
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: DSL on 08 Nov 2014, 03:35
Oh, heavens to Murgatroyd. I demand protection from my opinions being disagreed with. </sarcasm>
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Akima on 08 Nov 2014, 03:48
The Mormon woman said, you're enjoying a movie OMG don't know know you should be talking about the evil gay agenda.

You said, hey a funny reference to a guest strip OMG you should talk about trans themes in fish related media.
And... We're supposed to see these statements as completely equivalent?
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Ashilana on 08 Nov 2014, 05:12
I'll put my lurking hand up and say that valkygrrl needs to back off. Other people declared to enjoy April's input, you're welcome to ignore it if it's not your cup of tea. As it stands, I do not appreciate reading your harassment when she is clearly trying to not engage with you/certainly not in any way attacking you.

I hate that this is my first post, but I have to agree with Fenriswolf.

I really wish I had registered a while back and made a random squee post. 
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Orkboy on 08 Nov 2014, 07:27
I think it's a sign I'm getting old when I see chain of conversation I want to engage on (especially the original story of Hua Mulan) and just say to myself "Nah. Akima will get it."

See, I take it as a sign that I'm getting old when I look at an argument, decide pretty much immediately which side I agree with and which side has their heads up their asses, and then decide that I don't give enough of a shit to get involved in internet drama.  Unless I'm poking the zealots.  Poking the zealots to watch them froth is always funny, even if I nominally agree with whatever they're fanatical about. 
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Is it cold in here? on 08 Nov 2014, 11:36
(mod)Poking people to see them froth is trolling. If you want to have that fun, have it on another forum.

Global Moderator Comment The Valkygrrl/AprilArcus quarrel does not belong here and one way or another it will go elsewhere.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2826-2830 (03 - 07 November 2014) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
Post by: Dalillama on 09 Nov 2014, 15:58
'I respect your right to believe that' means 'I don't think you should suffer legal consequences for that belief'
So "respect" means no more than "I don't think you should be flung in jail", but any insult, expression of contempt, or social ostracism short of that is just fine?
'I respect your right to that belief' is not the same statement as 'I respect that belief'.  The former, as I noted, states only one thing, although usually 'legal sanction' is expanded to include things like opposing private employment and housing discrimination based on e.g. religion.
For instance, I respect people's right to believe that the Earth is 6000 years old, (but not to teach same in schools), but I will invariably mock such beliefs, and generally the people who hold them, and feel no guilt about it, because it's a patently stupid thing to believe. 
Then there are beliefs that I don't respect people's right to have, or at any rate to act on; for instance, the belief that praying over a sick child is equivalent to seeking medical help is one that damn well should carry legal sanction (but doesn't in most of the U.S.).