Jeph Jacques's comics discussion forums

  • 16 Oct 2019, 02:40
  • Welcome, Guest
Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

Poll

Yes, it's finally here: the MOMENT OF THE WEEK!

Finally startin' to check out other girls, huh?
- 0 (0%)
Well I mean it's been WEEKS, I AM a single dude... now..
- 0 (0%)
SLAP! (I'm out of practice!)
- 4 (4.5%)
Don't tell me you're still hung up on Dora.
- 0 (0%)
WE ARE BROS, MAN! WE! ARE! BROS!
- 8 (9%)
UMASS Guys! "BROS! BROS! BROS! BROS!"
- 14 (15.7%)
I know it's over, I just... still miss her, y'know?
- 1 (1.1%)
The other night, Cosette...
- 15 (16.9%)
Good talk, bro.
- 9 (10.1%)
Who's that waving? Why, it's PADMA!
- 6 (6.7%)
My baby bird's finally left the nest!
- 3 (3.4%)
I wouldn't wipe my eyes with that towel...
- 2 (2.2%)
Mister coffee-and-a-danish
- 1 (1.1%)
Padma, Renee and Elliot.
- 0 (0%)
So... So...
- 2 (2.2%)
Who's your cute friend over at the bar?
- 15 (16.9%)
Elliot's look of sheer HORROR
- 9 (10.1%)

Total Members Voted: 77


Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 9   Go Down

Author Topic: WCDT 14-18 February 2011 (1861-1865)  (Read 65556 times)

Odal

  • Larger than most fish
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 113
Re: WCDT 14-18 February 2011 (1861-1865)
« Reply #50 on: 14 Feb 2011, 00:52 »

No other Pintsize lovers?  She's totally a cutie imo.
Logged

DSL

  • Older than Moses
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4,029
    • Don Lee Cartoons
Re: WCDT 14-18 February 2011 (1861-1865)
« Reply #51 on: 14 Feb 2011, 00:53 »

I figure at some point during the checking-out, once it's obvious the woman's noticed you, it's good form to at least smile, wave or look away, unless it seems that introductions are in order/welcome. This is another human, after all. But I'm even rustier at this than Marten is.

As for the poll. I picked Raven, figuring her business cards (with all the modes of contact spelled out) and the legion of "cute dorky boys (who play D&D) who will treat you like a total princess if you're a hottie who gives them the time of day" would shower her with cards and chocolates, not to mention her own pairs of 12-sided dice.

Marigold would doubtless get tons of greetings from Warcrafters who realize she's a girl'n'stuff, but I assume it would be mostly online and voice messages. Would they necessarily know where to send cards and heart-shaped boxes of Pocky?

Also about the poll: Pintsize is a girl? What'd the Pugnacious Peach DO to him with/since that last toss?
Logged
"We are who we pretend to be. So we had better be careful who we pretend to be."  -- Kurt Vonnegut.

pwhodges

  • Admin emeritus
  • Awakened
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 16,155
  • I'll only say this once...
    • My home page
Re: WCDT 14-18 February 2011 (1861-1865)
« Reply #52 on: 14 Feb 2011, 00:55 »

To my knowledge, the point of going to a bar, alone or with a 'wing (wo)man', is to meet members of the opposite sex. If that girl wasn't expecting to be looked at, why was she there?

Are people's world-views so limited that this is all they can think of?  Or are we just seeing a whole lot of immaturity being waved around?

I never got the "Look at me!"/"Don't look at me!" dichotomy of how women present themselves and dress in public

Now this is a more interesting matter.  There are two aspects to it: (1) How often is the desire to be ogled a genuine reason for the style of presentation, as opposed to the interpretation put on it by the opposite sex, and (2) How much is it a truly free choice as opposed to an expectation foisted on people by advertising, the cult of celebrity, and the other manifestations of the big money machine that is the dark side of our supposedly enlightened age?
Logged
"Being human, having your health; that's what's important."  (from: Magical Shopping Arcade Abenobashi )
"As long as we're all living, and as long as we're all having fun, that should do it, right?"  (from: The Eccentric Family )

akronnick

  • Only pretending to work
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2,188
  • I'm freakin' out, man!!!!
Re: WCDT 14-18 February 2011 (1861-1865)
« Reply #53 on: 14 Feb 2011, 00:58 »

<snip>
...so I guess we should just DWI.

No, you should never do that. Drunk driving kills and nobody wants a DWI on their record.






...Oh you meant "Deal with it."

I agree that that's what we should do.

I don't expect that to happen.
Logged
Akronnick, I can think of no more appropriate steed for a Knight Of The Dickbroom than a foul-mouthed, perpetually shouting, lust-crazed bird with a scrotum hanging from its chin and a distinctive cry of "Gobble gobble gobble".   --Tergon

Carl-E

  • Awakened
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10,291
  • The distilled essence of Mr. James Beam himself.
Re: WCDT 14-18 February 2011 (1861-1865)
« Reply #54 on: 14 Feb 2011, 01:09 »

That one took me a minute too, even though in these parts it's called DUI (driving under the influence) rather than DWI (driving while intoxicated). 

As for dealing with it, we are.  In our usual hyperbolic way. 
Logged
When people try to speak a gut reaction, they end up talking out their ass.

est

  • this is a test
  • Admin emeritus
  • Older than Moses
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4,294
  • V O L L E Y B A L L
Re: WCDT 14-18 February 2011 (1861-1865)
« Reply #55 on: 14 Feb 2011, 01:12 »

The point of going to a bar is often just to hang out with friends and probably drink a little/lot.  Bars aren't just pickup joints.

And as for the "look at me/don't look at me" business, it's really simple.  She wants the people she's interested in to look at her, and the people she isn't interested in to leave her alone.  If you pay attention for about 10 seconds you'll find out pretty quick-smart which category you fall into and if you have any respect for her you'll modify all your future interactions with her accordingly.  Just because she's walking around "in public" doesn't mean she's giving you explicit permission to ogle her assets.
Logged

pwhodges

  • Admin emeritus
  • Awakened
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 16,155
  • I'll only say this once...
    • My home page
Re: WCDT 14-18 February 2011 (1861-1865)
« Reply #56 on: 14 Feb 2011, 01:15 »

No, the dressing thing isn't entirely simple.  When you look at the pressure that primary school kids are put under to conform to this warped convention long before it should matter to them, you can see cause to worry.
Logged
"Being human, having your health; that's what's important."  (from: Magical Shopping Arcade Abenobashi )
"As long as we're all living, and as long as we're all having fun, that should do it, right?"  (from: The Eccentric Family )

Odal

  • Larger than most fish
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 113
Re: WCDT 14-18 February 2011 (1861-1865)
« Reply #57 on: 14 Feb 2011, 01:17 »

Also about the poll: Pintsize is a girl? What'd the Pugnacious Peach DO to him with/since that last toss?
Pintsize is anything you want it to be.  
Logged

est

  • this is a test
  • Admin emeritus
  • Older than Moses
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4,294
  • V O L L E Y B A L L
Re: WCDT 14-18 February 2011 (1861-1865)
« Reply #58 on: 14 Feb 2011, 01:21 »

The root cause is pretty complex yes, but I was trying to answer the "if she's not there to be looked at, why is she there?" question.  It doesn't take telepathy to know whether or not you are her target market.
Logged

westrim

  • Guest
Re: WCDT 14-18 February 2011 (1861-1865)
« Reply #59 on: 14 Feb 2011, 01:22 »

That one took me a minute too, even though in these parts it's called DUI (driving under the influence) rather than DWI (driving while intoxicated).  

As for dealing with it, we are.  In our usual hyperbolic way.  
Hyperbole? Why, that never happens here!

The point of going to a bar is often just to hang out with friends and probably drink a little/lot.  Bars aren't just pickup joints.

And as for the "look at me/don't look at me" business, it's really simple.  She wants the people she's interested in to look at her, and the people she isn't interested in to leave her alone.  If you pay attention for about 10 seconds you'll find out pretty quick-smart which category you fall into and if you have any respect for her you'll modify all your future interactions with her accordingly.  Just because she's walking around "in public" doesn't mean she's giving you explicit permission to ogle her assets.
It's public. Permission doesn't come into it - simply by being visible, anyone has permission to view you, and you don't get to commit a felony to express your displeasure with being viewed, nor choose in general. That's been settled by several tussles about what government/private surveillance can and can't do, and whether or not its okay to take someones' camera because you don't like them shooting you. Or, in this case, ogle a bottom that has been squeezed into formfitting jeans, not average loose ones - though I hear from me female compatriots that it's hard for them to find regular jeans anymore.

EDIT: Eh, I just saw Hodges on # 52. I will admit to my knowledge of alcohol imbibing culture being limited (that being the trouble here, I see bars (not the ones in restaurants, the exclusively bar ones) as dank dirty places, and alcohol as just another drug to addle the mind - to me, going to a bar is an immature act, so I expect immature things of those who go to them. That's just the way I pre judge it.), but to my knowledge the major reasons for a single person to go to a bar all alone are to unwind after work, to get drunk, or to hook up.  As to the second part, that would take 30 minutes and a few paragraphs to respond to, which I don't have right now.
« Last Edit: 14 Feb 2011, 01:40 by westrim »
Logged

est

  • this is a test
  • Admin emeritus
  • Older than Moses
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4,294
  • V O L L E Y B A L L
Re: WCDT 14-18 February 2011 (1861-1865)
« Reply #60 on: 14 Feb 2011, 01:25 »

You have got to be kidding me
Logged

westrim

  • Guest
Re: WCDT 14-18 February 2011 (1861-1865)
« Reply #61 on: 14 Feb 2011, 01:28 »

You have got to be kidding me
What did one volcano do when the other volcano told a joke?
Logged

est

  • this is a test
  • Admin emeritus
  • Older than Moses
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4,294
  • V O L L E Y B A L L
Re: WCDT 14-18 February 2011 (1861-1865)
« Reply #62 on: 14 Feb 2011, 01:31 »

The tightness of the woman's jeans should play no part in how much respect you afford her as a fellow human being.
Logged

est

  • this is a test
  • Admin emeritus
  • Older than Moses
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4,294
  • V O L L E Y B A L L
Re: WCDT 14-18 February 2011 (1861-1865)
« Reply #63 on: 14 Feb 2011, 01:35 »

I think it's pretty important I say that I don't mean you shouldn't look at her at all.  There's a big difference between an appreciative glance and ogling a girl so badly she feels like she needs a shower.
Logged

Odal

  • Larger than most fish
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 113
Re: WCDT 14-18 February 2011 (1861-1865)
« Reply #64 on: 14 Feb 2011, 01:41 »

I think the middle ground here is that a guy can ogle all he wants.  As long as he's willing to accept that she'll likely slap him across the face as hard as she wants.
Logged

pwhodges

  • Admin emeritus
  • Awakened
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 16,155
  • I'll only say this once...
    • My home page
Re: WCDT 14-18 February 2011 (1861-1865)
« Reply #65 on: 14 Feb 2011, 01:42 »

Respect is an important part of it.  Looking at someone as a body without a personality is a bad thingTM
Logged
"Being human, having your health; that's what's important."  (from: Magical Shopping Arcade Abenobashi )
"As long as we're all living, and as long as we're all having fun, that should do it, right?"  (from: The Eccentric Family )

CompSarge

  • Furry furrier
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 165
  • I put the "sexy" in "dyslexic"
    • Sarge's Art and Story Blog
Re: WCDT 14-18 February 2011 (1861-1865)
« Reply #66 on: 14 Feb 2011, 01:58 »

I couldn't help but laugh about today's comic. All talk about "THE REAL WORLD" aside, Marten getting slapped for staring too long, too obviously, and too creepily (Come on, did you even LOOK at his expression in panel 3?) is a comedy staple dating back to the earliest days of comedy. It's slapstick (pun intended) humor, and should not be read into any further than that.

As for the rest of the argument, all I have to say is...
 :psyduck: Psy-yi-yiiiiii!  :psyduck:
Logged

westrim

  • Guest
Re: WCDT 14-18 February 2011 (1861-1865)
« Reply #67 on: 14 Feb 2011, 02:02 »

The tightness of the woman's jeans should play no part in how much respect you afford her as a fellow human being.
And we are missing one salient point. Staring at anyone for more than 10 seconds is bound to be creepy, no matter the circumstances. I'm not factoring Marten staring too long to my position on look/don't look.

As to whether or not to look,  I point to the below.

Respect is an important part of it.  Looking at someone as a body without a personality is a bad thingTM

I disagree. Whether we realize it or not, that's exactly what we're doing whenever we look at a stranger and think "wow, they're hot". You always notice the body first, because that's what you can see. It's what you think after that that matters. and how you appraise the person. Marten never got to afterwards, he was still at the "nice ass" phase. A respect/no respect judgment has not been added yet. The closest example I can think of is Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs. Marten's still at the third step, respect is the next step up.

I couldn't help but laugh about today's comic. All talk about "THE REAL WORLD" aside, Marten getting slapped for staring too long, too obviously, and too creepily (Come on, did you even LOOK at his expression in panel 3?) is a comedy staple dating back to the earliest days of comedy. It's slapstick (pun intended) humor, and should not be read into any further than that.

As for the rest of the argument, all I have to say is...
 :psyduck: Psy-yi-yiiiiii!  :psyduck:
Of course it shouldn't. Did that ever keep us from over analyzing before? *insert bob the builder/ Obama voice here*  No! It! Didn't!
« Last Edit: 14 Feb 2011, 02:14 by westrim »
Logged

akronnick

  • Only pretending to work
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2,188
  • I'm freakin' out, man!!!!
Re: WCDT 14-18 February 2011 (1861-1865)
« Reply #68 on: 14 Feb 2011, 02:07 »

I think staring too long is inherently disrespectful.

Yes your initial reaction is hot/not hot, but if it gets to the point where someone can whip out the old "take a picture it'll last longer" phase, you're being disrespectful.
Logged
Akronnick, I can think of no more appropriate steed for a Knight Of The Dickbroom than a foul-mouthed, perpetually shouting, lust-crazed bird with a scrotum hanging from its chin and a distinctive cry of "Gobble gobble gobble".   --Tergon

snubnose

  • Scrabble hacker
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1,310
  • Cape diem
    • Google
Re: WCDT 14-18 February 2011 (1861-1865)
« Reply #69 on: 14 Feb 2011, 02:34 »

Oooh, Raven. Totally missed Raven. Hmm, nah, my choice is still Hanners. By far. :-D


For once Jeph, just for once, please recognize that when you make Marten engage in these antics, they are not so heinous that he deserves frigging abuse.  :psyduck:
Uh, Jeph has said he loves being mean to his characters, and thats what many of the strips of this Comic is about.


I always knew Marty was an ass man.
Uh ... ? He oggles her other assets, doesnt he ?


But unless you choose to wear a burka, anyone has the right to just look - so long as that's all they do.
If we don't want to be stared at we should wear a burka? :psyduck:
I am as amazed as you are ... no woman should ever wear a Burka. It makes them to non-people.

Or highheels, while we're on that topic. Highheels kill feet. And they really look akward. Especially while the woman moves.


No other Pintsize lovers?  She's totally a cutie imo.
She is a he, not cute at all - and your taste in women is Shar-Teel from Baldurs Gate 1, right ?


That one took me a minute too, even though in these parts it's called DUI (driving under the influence) rather than DWI (driving while intoxicated).  

As for dealing with it, we are.  In our usual hyperbolic way.
I never heard of either acronym but then again I dont live in an english speaking country.


The tightness of the woman's jeans should play no part in how much respect you afford her as a fellow human being.
They should still be respected even if they would run around in the nude.
« Last Edit: 14 Feb 2011, 03:00 by snubnose »
Logged
Laws of sexual dynamics:
1. In a given dispute, the female is more likely to be correct.
2. If you think a girl is attracted to you, you are wrong.
Or in short: As a man, you can't win, you can't break even, and you can't quit !

J

  • Scrabble hacker
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1,389
  • Godkiller
    • My GlobalComicJam profile
Re: WCDT 14-18 February 2011 (1861-1865)
« Reply #70 on: 14 Feb 2011, 03:25 »

i would like to preface this post by stating that staring at a woman's assets is generally bad form, and generally avoid doing so in the absence of some persuasive reason to.

I think it's pretty important I say that I don't mean you shouldn't look at her at all.  There's a big difference between an appreciative glance and ogling a girl so badly she feels like she needs a shower.

that's the part of the argument right there. what, objectively speaking, is the difference, and what constitutes the distinction? i would also like to ask exactly how someone is supposed to deduce what a given woman's 'target market' is?



i also think it highlights one of the main difference between 'male' and 'female' thinking (no, i am not saying that all individuals in any given group conform to either stereotype. just follow me on this one please) please consider the following:

Researchers analyzed the number of self-reported offences and apologies made by 66 subjects over a 12-day period. And yes, they confirmed women consistently apologized more times than men did. But they also found that women report more offenses than men. So the issue is not female over-apology. Instead, there may be a gender difference in what is considered offensive in the first place

the thing is not that men get to set the rules as akima suggested, but rather that men and women tend to operate out of slightly different rule books. conflicts like this happen when those rules conflict and both sides insist that their version is the more valid.

my understanding of the female point of view is as follows: martin had no right to make this woman feel uncomfortable. what he did is not important, it triggered a negative emotional response and therefor was wrong by default. because her emotional state was provoked by his actions, he is responsible for them. what he did to make her feel that way has no bearing on the situation.

whereas to my cold mechanical male brain, martin here has done nothing to this woman. he has not interfered or even interacted with her in any way shape or form. because she is under no obligation to care where he points his eyeballs and could easily just ignore him, any discomfort she may feel is irrational and entirely her responsibility. how anyone feels has no bearing on the situation.

the thing is that most men learn somewhere along the way that with only a few exceptions, no one in the world cares what they think or how they feel. accepting this fact is part of becoming an man, and acting otherwise is childish/unmanly. therefor, we are disinclined to complain if someone is doing something that bothers us, and do our best to ignore it. because of this, the fact that women appear to expect their feelings to matter to complete strangers can be hard to wrap our heads around. taking said feelings into account and accommodating them can be down right frustrating. trying to do so predicatively is a feat beyond many men.



i do not think it is wrong to look at any part of another human being for any length of time, and am well within my rights to do so. but i don't stare at women for the same reasons i don't order a BLT at a jewish deli. the other person does not like it, and it's generally not worth the trouble. now in order to get along and continue perpetuating this species, we really need to realize these things and accept them and occasionally make compromises.

sometimes men are jerks.
sometimes women are crazy.




this whole thing reminds me of an earlier argument from this forum as to whether poking someone in the chest constitutes assault. in that case it was the objective, quantifiable, and action based "no physical harm is done" vs the emotionally based and subjective "the victim feels intimidated".
Logged

Antario

  • Larger than most fish
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 101
  • Evil eye is watching you
Re: WCDT 14-18 February 2011 (1861-1865)
« Reply #71 on: 14 Feb 2011, 04:38 »

Society would be so much more pleasant if people had thickers skins and wouldnt get their panties in a twist every time somebody 'offends'  them as offence is always taken, not given
Logged

VonKleist

  • Psychopath in a hockey mask
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 618
  • First I lol'd. But then I serious'd.
Re: WCDT 14-18 February 2011 (1861-1865)
« Reply #72 on: 14 Feb 2011, 04:42 »

´tis only a comic  :psyduck:
Logged

Border Reiver

  • Born in a Nalgene bottle
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3,192
  • Yes, I painted this.
    • The Pet Patch
Re: WCDT 14-18 February 2011 (1861-1865)
« Reply #73 on: 14 Feb 2011, 05:34 »

Society would be so much more pleasant if people had thickers skins and wouldnt get their panties in a twist every time somebody 'offends'  them as offence is always taken, not given

Then explain the expression" to give offense". 

Offense - the gift that everyone will give at some point, and receive.
Logged
"It's a futile gesture that my sense of right and wrong tells me I should make." Is It Cold Here, 19 Mar 2013, 02:12

Castlerook

Re: WCDT 14-18 February 2011 (1861-1865)
« Reply #74 on: 14 Feb 2011, 06:20 »

There is a big difference between a casual glance, and staring so hard someone might think you have pyrokinetic abilities and using them to burn off someone else's pants.

A casual glance is a little cheeky and can, at times, be playful. Staring...is not. In fact, any form of staring is rude, its one of the first things we're taught as children. If you stare someone, you're making them feel uncomfortable, which is even worse when they're meant to be in a relaxed setting like a bar. Regardless of what anyone might say about having an "license" or "inherent right" to check out the "merchandise", no one has the right to make anyone feel uncomfortable, or weirded out if they go out.

A glance can be a compliment, a brief way of showing that they've caught your eye. But leave it at that.

And in all fairness, Marten probably deserved the comedy slap because he was standing right next to the girl,his speech trailing off as he began to stare at her. Thats like sticking your hand into the tiger cage, you're begging to get hurt.
Logged
Whenever someone says "I'm not book smart but I am street smart.", all I hear is "I'm not real smart, but I am imaginary smart."

kent_eh

  • Balloon animal serial killer
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 97
Re: WCDT 14-18 February 2011 (1861-1865)
« Reply #75 on: 14 Feb 2011, 06:56 »

<internal_voice> Keep out of this thread.. Don't reply.. Just lurk.. Shut up.. Noooo...</internal_voice>

And as for the "look at me/don't look at me" business, it's really simple.  She wants the people she's interested in to look at her, and the people she isn't interested in to leave her alone.  If you pay attention for about 10 seconds you'll find out pretty quick-smart which category you fall into and if you have any respect for her you'll modify all your future interactions with her accordingly.

There's the problem.
Most of us guys suck horribly at reading signals from the ladies. Or even noticing.

Many's the time I have been told (later) that I was being a creep.
And an equal number of times I have found out later "dude, why didn't you go talk to that girl? She was totally coming on to you."

In both types of situation I was all "huh.. who.. What??"  
« Last Edit: 14 Feb 2011, 07:05 by kent_eh »
Logged

frogfactory

  • Not quite a lurker
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7
Re: WCDT 14-18 February 2011 (1861-1865)
« Reply #76 on: 14 Feb 2011, 06:58 »

My question is: Why does the woman have two noses/chins/necks in panel 3?
Logged

Somnus Eternus

  • Furry furrier
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 166
  • IT'S DEFINITELY LUPUS.
Re: WCDT 14-18 February 2011 (1861-1865)
« Reply #77 on: 14 Feb 2011, 07:02 »

I'm a little surprised so many people voted for Hanners in the poll.  I mean, I know a lot of people here would want to send her one, but in-universe she has this worrying habit of freaking men out...
Logged

themacnut

  • Vagina Manifesto
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 689
    • The Vanguard-Superhero Space Opera Action
Re: WCDT 14-18 February 2011 (1861-1865)
« Reply #78 on: 14 Feb 2011, 07:41 »

Society would be so much more pleasant if people had thickers skins and wouldnt get their panties in a twist every time somebody 'offends'  them as offence is always taken, not given

No, some people do go out of their way to give offense as well. They'll do things they know, or can guess will offend, mainly to gain amusement from others' offended reactions. A relevant example from the ongoing discussion is the guy who keeps staring at a woman's ass long after she's noticed and shown, by her body language at least, that she doesn't appreciate his attention. He doesn't care that he's made her uncomfortable, and may even be enjoying her discomfort. (not that this is what Marten did of course, he just got caught up in the moment)

Of course it can be difficult to tell if someone meant to give offense, and if they did they're most likely looking for you to react, so growing a thick skin is still a good idea.

I'm a little surprised so many people voted for Hanners in the poll.  I mean, I know a lot of people here would want to send her one, but in-universe she has this worrying habit of freaking men out...

And thus, those men don't stick around long enough to get to know Hanners better. If they did, it might be a different story.
« Last Edit: 14 Feb 2011, 07:44 by themacnut »
Logged
The Vanguard - superhero space opera

The Seldom Killer

  • Only pretending to work
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2,215
  • More witless shite ----->
Re: WCDT 14-18 February 2011 (1861-1865)
« Reply #79 on: 14 Feb 2011, 07:43 »

Yeah, you may want to send her one, or even just see her receive some. But I suspect that receiving the most valentines cards would leave her feeling rather freaked out, kicking off a paranoia/crazy cycle. This would not be a good thing. You wouldn't do it if you really liked her.
Logged

MillionDollar Belt Sander

  • 1-800-SCABIES
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 810
Re: WCDT 14-18 February 2011 (1861-1865)
« Reply #80 on: 14 Feb 2011, 08:08 »

My question is: Why does the woman have two noses/chins/necks in panel 3?


That's why Martin was staring.     :-P



...and I don't see this so much as "abuse" or any of the other deep-meaningful conversations.

Nice tie-in to the strip's origin and a nice homage to an earlier strip.    Plus a cute reminder that "it's not going to be EXACTLY like it was before."
Logged
...

pwhodges

  • Admin emeritus
  • Awakened
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 16,155
  • I'll only say this once...
    • My home page
Re: WCDT 14-18 February 2011 (1861-1865)
« Reply #81 on: 14 Feb 2011, 08:09 »

My question is: Why does the woman have two noses/chins/necks in panel 3?

I see a dimpled chin, hair falling strangely down the neck (I'd say the perspective was screwed on that one), and one nose (maybe a dimple in the upper lip).
Logged
"Being human, having your health; that's what's important."  (from: Magical Shopping Arcade Abenobashi )
"As long as we're all living, and as long as we're all having fun, that should do it, right?"  (from: The Eccentric Family )

Is it cold in here?

  • Administrator
  • Awakened
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 19,798
  • He/him/his pronouns
Re: WCDT 14-18 February 2011 (1861-1865)
« Reply #82 on: 14 Feb 2011, 09:18 »

Someone once pointed out about fixed unsmiling stares, "Ask any dog what that body language means".
Logged
"Non-compliance is a social skill"
Quote from: an unnamed minister's sermon
In your face, darkness!  We are the light and we outnumber you!

Antario

  • Larger than most fish
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 101
  • Evil eye is watching you
Re: WCDT 14-18 February 2011 (1861-1865)
« Reply #83 on: 14 Feb 2011, 09:55 »

Society would be so much more pleasant if people had thickers skins and wouldnt get their panties in a twist every time somebody 'offends'  them as offence is always taken, not given

No, some people do go out of their way to give offense as well. They'll do things they know, or can guess will offend, mainly to gain amusement from others' offended reactions. A relevant example from the ongoing discussion is the guy who keeps staring at a woman's ass long after she's noticed and shown, by her body language at least, that she doesn't appreciate his attention. He doesn't care that he's made her uncomfortable, and may even be enjoying her discomfort. (not that this is what Marten did of course, he just got caught up in the moment)

Of course it can be difficult to tell if someone meant to give offense, and if they did they're most likely looking for you to react, so growing a thick skin is still a good idea.

No matter how much provocation...you'd still have to take offense to it, one girls creepy stare is another's flattery
Any person can dish out the same amount of provocation, the levels of tolerance from the other side is what matters

So therefor i think my point still stands, thicker skin > all
Logged

Black Sword

  • The German Chancellory building
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 497
Re: WCDT 14-18 February 2011 (1861-1865)
« Reply #84 on: 14 Feb 2011, 09:56 »

I'm ashamed of Marten. Dude, her ass wasn't that hot. It was a quick look and continue, not even worth a second glance. If you're going to get slapped for looking, look at better goods. Being single for weeks doesn't mean you should lower standards. Jeez, we can't take him anywhere.  :oops:

LoveJaneAusten

  • Emoticontraindication
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 56
Re: WCDT 14-18 February 2011 (1861-1865)
« Reply #85 on: 14 Feb 2011, 10:02 »

I never got the "Look at me!"/"Don't look at me!" dichotomy of how women present themselves and dress in public (yes, I get the various aspects of it and the superficial logic of it, but it's faulty).

So long as you analyze social behavior like an algorithm and conclude that "it's faulty", no, you really don't "get" it.

I will admit to my knowledge of alcohol imbibing culture being limited (that being the trouble here, I see bars (not the ones in restaurants, the exclusively bar ones) as dank dirty places, and alcohol as just another drug to addle the mind - to me, going to a bar is an immature act, so I expect immature things of those who go to them. That's just the way I pre judge it.),

It might be hard to be taken seriously if you conceive of socializing in bars as "an immature act".
« Last Edit: 14 Feb 2011, 18:06 by LoveJaneAusten »
Logged

The Duke

  • Cthulhu f'tagn
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 531
  • Flea was a classy kid.
Re: WCDT 14-18 February 2011 (1861-1865)
« Reply #86 on: 14 Feb 2011, 10:10 »

As for the comic: OW. This is one of the reasons I keep my glasses instead of wearing contacts: I can stare as long as I want simply by taking them off as pretending to clean them in the direction of the woman I wish to look at.

Reminds me of this.
Logged
You know, they tell you, "Never hit a man with a closed fist," but it is, on occasion, hilarious.

jwhouk

  • Awakened
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10,369
  • The Valley of the Sun
Re: WCDT 14-18 February 2011 (1861-1865)
« Reply #87 on: 14 Feb 2011, 10:30 »

Which one of the girls would get the most Valentines in the QC Universe?

Faye    - 4 (4%)
Dora    - 0 (0%)
Hannelore    - 24 (24%)
Cosette    - 2 (2%)
Penelope    - 3 (3%)
Raven    - 27 (27%)
Padma    - 0 (0%)
Renee    - 0 (0%)
Veronica Reed    - 22 (22%)
Marigold    - 1 (1%)
Pintsize!    - 1 (1%)
Winifred the Waffle Maker!    - 3 (3%)
TAI! (Oh, how could I forget TAI?)    - 13 (13%)

Total Voters: 100
« Last Edit: 14 Feb 2011, 10:36 by jwhouk »
Logged
"Character is what you are in the Dark." - D.L. Moody
There is no joke that can be made online without someone being offended by it.
Life's too short to be ashamed of how you were born.
8645

celticgeek

  • GET ON THE NIGHT TRAIN
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2,681
  • Linux Geek
    • The Celtic Geek
Re: WCDT 14-18 February 2011 (1861-1865)
« Reply #88 on: 14 Feb 2011, 10:32 »

Didn't Raven get more votes?
Logged
a 'dèanamh nan saighdean airson cinneadh MacLeòid
We Wear Woad When We Write Code
Ní féidir liom labhairt na Gaeilge.
Seachd reultan, agus seachd clachan, agus aon chraobh geal.

jwhouk

  • Awakened
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10,369
  • The Valley of the Sun
Re: WCDT 14-18 February 2011 (1861-1865)
« Reply #89 on: 14 Feb 2011, 10:36 »

...I have NO idea what you're talking about.  :roll: :wink:
Logged
"Character is what you are in the Dark." - D.L. Moody
There is no joke that can be made online without someone being offended by it.
Life's too short to be ashamed of how you were born.
8645

celticgeek

  • GET ON THE NIGHT TRAIN
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2,681
  • Linux Geek
    • The Celtic Geek
Re: WCDT 14-18 February 2011 (1861-1865)
« Reply #90 on: 14 Feb 2011, 10:47 »

Oh.  My bad. Sorry.
Logged
a 'dèanamh nan saighdean airson cinneadh MacLeòid
We Wear Woad When We Write Code
Ní féidir liom labhairt na Gaeilge.
Seachd reultan, agus seachd clachan, agus aon chraobh geal.

elddiremsiht

  • Notorious N.U.R.R.
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2
Re: WCDT 14-18 February 2011 (1861-1865)
« Reply #91 on: 14 Feb 2011, 11:04 »

I can't figure out what's going on with the back of the girl's head/neck in the first panel. Am I just stupid?  :psyduck:
Logged

Castlerook

Re: WCDT 14-18 February 2011 (1861-1865)
« Reply #92 on: 14 Feb 2011, 11:05 »

Hmmm, new poll.

Well, I went with the comment about asking if the beer tasted funny. Which reminded me of when I was about 18. Started drinking cider, before working up to beer. Anyway, one night, my friends and I were out having a couple of drinks, when I noticed my drink tasted funny. Complained to the barman, who looked at the taps, and then the hoses connected to them. I caught a glimpse, and found the inside of the hose looked like it hadn't been cleaned in years. I've been a barman, and I know what a clean pipe to the tap should look like, and what I saw there wasn't it. Two things happened that night. First off, I haven't touched another cider since, and secondly, I never ordered anything from the tap anywhere since.

Anyway, anyone else surprised that Dora didn't get a single vote? No? I thought so. Carry on.
Logged
Whenever someone says "I'm not book smart but I am street smart.", all I hear is "I'm not real smart, but I am imaginary smart."

Castlerook

Re: WCDT 14-18 February 2011 (1861-1865)
« Reply #93 on: 14 Feb 2011, 11:06 »

I can't figure out what's going on with the back of the girl's head/neck in the first panel. Am I just stupid?  :psyduck:

That would be called a mirror. Hence why little miss slappy later in the comic looks a little off as well.
Logged
Whenever someone says "I'm not book smart but I am street smart.", all I hear is "I'm not real smart, but I am imaginary smart."

CEOIII

  • Obscure cultural reference
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 134
Re: WCDT 14-18 February 2011 (1861-1865)
« Reply #94 on: 14 Feb 2011, 12:34 »

As for the comic: OW. This is one of the reasons I keep my glasses instead of wearing contacts: I can stare as long as I want simply by taking them off as pretending to clean them in the direction of the woman I wish to look at.

Reminds me of this.

A second option. If I could wear shades.
Logged
Between HannErsatz and PseuDora, I crown you the king of doppelganger names.
ALL HAIL THE KING OF DOPPLEGANGER NAMES!
I'm Charlie Owens, good night, and good luck.

Kugai

  • CIA Handler of Miss Melody Powers
  • Awakened
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11,503
  • Crazy Kiwi Shoujo-Ai Fan
    • My Homepage
Re: WCDT 14-18 February 2011 (1861-1865)
« Reply #95 on: 14 Feb 2011, 13:07 »

Marten shoulda started out slowly to get back into the swing of things


A day at the park would have been a good start.
Logged
James The Kugai 

You can never have too much Coffee.

tomart

  • Curry sauce
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 297
  • tactile telemetry nexus
Re: WCDT 14-18 February 2011 (1861-1865)
« Reply #96 on: 14 Feb 2011, 13:50 »

<internal_voice> Keep out of this thread.. Don't reply.. Just lurk.. Shut up.. Noooo...</internal_voice>
There's the problem.
Most of us guys suck horribly at reading signals from the ladies. Or even noticing.
Many's the time I have been told (later) that I was being a creep.
And an equal number of times I have found out later "dude, why didn't you go talk to that girl? She was totally coming on to you."
In both types of situation I was all "huh.. who.. What??"  
THIS!     QFT.
I have been HORRIBLE at this, most of my life, so I've given up on women, I can't read your minds, your signals, what you want or don't want...  Most of your responses presume the looker knows what's appropriate and thus you feel ENTITLED to resent anyone doing anything that makes you uncomfortable.  But appropriateness VARIES wildly between situations, neighborhoods, groups, countries, etc, and some of us avoid people because of this unfair drama.
Logged
Irresponsible Adult GOM

Carl-E

  • Awakened
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10,291
  • The distilled essence of Mr. James Beam himself.
Re: WCDT 14-18 February 2011 (1861-1865)
« Reply #97 on: 14 Feb 2011, 14:08 »

Takes scads of practice. 

So stop avoiding people.  And try and find a tutor, since you're coming late to the game.  It's like adding a course mid-semester - you've got a lot of catching up to do, but it's not impossible! 

[/dearabby]
Logged
When people try to speak a gut reaction, they end up talking out their ass.

Akima

  • Preventing third impact
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6,235
  • ** 妇女能顶半边天 **
Re: WCDT 14-18 February 2011 (1861-1865)
« Reply #98 on: 14 Feb 2011, 14:41 »

How do you feel about the ethical implications of this line: "If women don't like the way men behave, there is something intrinsically wrong about the male behaviour in question and said behavoiour must be stopped, punished and banned."
What I think, is that it depends on the behaviour. Some ways in which some men behave that women dislike, are also shunned by ethical men, and banned and (ideally) punished in all civilised societies. Rape would be an obvious example. Some behaviours are merely sleazy and obnoxious, not rising to the level of formal sanctions (at least in a bar; the same behaviour in a workplace might well be viewed differently), but certainly quite enough for me to categorise men who engage in them as ones to avoid. Some are merely tiresome and dismissed with a sigh. Some insults are so routine as to be barely noticed, kind of like air-pollution.

Society would be so much more pleasant if people had thickers skins and wouldnt get their panties in a twist every time somebody 'offends'  them as offence is always taken, not given
More pleasant for whom? Certainly more pleasant for those who find it too much trouble to care about other peoples' feelings or self-respect. According to you, when I "took" offense at the truck-driver who called me a "fucking gook" on the street a few weeks ago, the only problem was that I'm thin-skinned? Thank you for your support...

the thing is that most men learn somewhere along the way that with only a few exceptions, no one in the world cares what they think or how they feel. accepting this fact is part of becoming an man, and acting otherwise is childish/unmanly. therefor, we are disinclined to complain if someone is doing something that bothers us, and do our best to ignore it. because of this, the fact that women appear to expect their feelings to matter to complete strangers can be hard to wrap our heads around. taking said feelings into account and accommodating them can be down right frustrating. trying to do so predicatively is a feat beyond many men.
I cannot really comment on what men expect from other men, but the idea that men don't expect their feelings to be considered by women is downright laughable. In my experience, if we are insufficiently tactful and considerate of their cotton-candy sensibilities, even in relatively emotionally-neutral places like the office, never mind personal relationships, they give us charming names like "bitch" and "ball-crusher".

The idea that women are some sort of impenetrable mystery is essentially a cop-out. Anyone who decides something is impossible is guaranteed to fail. Women are socialised into different styles of communication from men, but this is hardly a big secret; there are libraries of books out there on the subject. Mostly you just have to pay attention rather than just "tuning us out". In the comic, Marten completely ignored the stink-eye he was being given. She still shouldn't have hit him, but this is a comic.
Logged
"I would rather have questions that can't be answered, than answers that can't be questioned." Richard Feynman
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 9   Go Up