Topic: WCDT Strips 3206 to 3210 (25 to 29 April 2016) (Read 54735 times)

Blackbird · « **Reply #100 on:** 26 Apr 2016, 23:06 »

I haven't been on the forums for quite a while, but I had to come back just to see the reaction to this strip. Clinton was entirely justified, but I know Claire is the pet character of many posters on here. I'm kind of proud of all of you that the reactions are ranging from "Yup, that'll happen" to "I mean, yeah he's right, but why did he have to act so much like he's acted in every single Clinton storyline before now!?!?"

(That said, regarding the misgendering thing: even if some here might take it as such, you know Clinton himself (and thus Jeph) did not view it as a misgendering, because Clinton didn't immediately stop and profusely apologize for it. One of Clinton's best traits is how unconditionally supportive he is of Claire's transition and there's a big gulf between "I'm telling you that I think you're being self-centred and shitty" and "I'm saying shit intentionally to hurt you". Clinton is an immature shithead who's pissed off at his sister, but he's not a hateful immature shithead.)

Is it cold in here? · « **Reply #101 on:** 26 Apr 2016, 23:14 »

Quote from: QuestionableIntentions on 26 Apr 2016, 22:55

Clinton was always angry before when Claire has meddled. He just didn't say anything because it worked out or he was distracted by something else. This time it didn't and so he finally said what he wanted to say before.

Also, "gendered insults" seriously? As if it matters what "gender" an insult has. This is just getting ridiculous.

Global Moderator Comment Doesn't it make sense a priori that there's something insulting to women in general about, say, calling someone a "cunt"? Isn't that at least plausible? The moderators have heard from women we trust that things like that make them feel less welcome, and inclusiveness is a core value here.

creatureshock · « **Reply #102 on:** 26 Apr 2016, 23:21 »

Quote from: Is it cold in here? on 26 Apr 2016, 23:14

Doesn't it make sense a priori that there's something insulting to women in general about, say, calling someone a "cunt"? Isn't that at least plausible? The moderators have heard from women we trust that things like that make them feel less welcome, and inclusiveness is a core value here.

Then are any insults talked about in the comic as something that could make people feel less welcome and included? And yes, I am serious about that and not just being a dick. If people have to worry about general insults, just where do you draw the line? Is even mentioning the insult going too far?

pwhodges · « **Reply #103 on:** 26 Apr 2016, 23:26 »

Using an insult and talking about it are completely separate matters. We couldn't even have a view without being able to discuss it.

But note that "asshole" is not inherently a gendered insult - we all have one.

Penquin47 · « **Reply #104 on:** 26 Apr 2016, 23:27 »

Quote from: Blackbird on 26 Apr 2016, 23:06

(That said, regarding the misgendering thing: even if some here might take it as such, you know Clinton himself (and thus Jeph) did not view it as a misgendering, because Clinton didn't immediately stop and profusely apologize for it. One of Clinton's best traits is how unconditionally supportive he is of Claire's transition and there's a big gulf between "I'm telling you that I think you're being self-centred and shitty" and "I'm saying shit intentionally to hurt you". Clinton is an immature shithead who's pissed off at his sister, but he's not a hateful immature shithead.)

If it *is* misgendering, I'm thinking it's of the sort where he's falling into patterns that have been established since childhood, well before Claire's transition, that he's never examined to see if maybe they should change because they're no longer appropriate. Like you, I think if Claire feels misgendered and calls him out on it, he'll be contrite and apologetic and promise to do better in the future, because his support of Claire's transition is so strong. (That said, my brother calls me an asshole when he thinks I deserve it, and I'm a cis woman. I do the same to him. So I never really thought of asshole as in any way gendered.)

BenRG · « **Reply #105 on:** 26 Apr 2016, 23:30 »

OUCH! Still, as I posted yesterday, this outcome was pretty much inevitable, given the emotional context for all the characters involved. I'm still unsure if Claire will now get into an argument with Emily for hurting Clinton (a difficult prospect, given Emily's essential nature) or just run to Marten for comfort.

I've posted this before but, in the end, one of the real problems here is that, whilst Claire loves her brother, she neither likes or respects him. Add to this the fact that she is manipulative in nature (as she's shown with Pintsize) and her basically treating Clinton's personal life as a problem to solve, with or without his cooperation, was pretty much inevitable.

Her intentions were good but, in the end, it was all torn down by her basically assuming that she is so smart that everything will happen according to her scheme, even though she didn't even clear it with Emily first.

As I say, it will be interesting to see where Claire goes from here. It will tell us a lot about her as a person.

Timemaster · « **Reply #106 on:** 26 Apr 2016, 23:45 »

For the record (as most things about Clintons outburst have already been pointed out here), I think his reaction may be a bit harsh, but his intention isn´t. Claire tried to manipulate him twice, and while the first time still was kinda sweet and well executed, this time it was blunt and indiscrete. This simply was one time too much. She could have asked him if she should arrange another meeting with Emily, but if he´d rejected she should have let it be. He may be immature, but he´s a grownup after all.
It´s his own decision. And Claire must learn to respect that.

And I don´t put too much weight into that insult. He´s simply angry, furious and sad. He insulted her, but she is still his sister. He didn´t tell her to get out of his life forever or worse things. Give them some time to get their feelings sorted out, and they´ll patch up again. He loves her and cares for her, he made that clear several times.

Blood is thicker than water after all.

TM

gopher · « **Reply #107 on:** 26 Apr 2016, 23:47 »

Good to see Clinton asserting himself, though it is in a thoroughly unpleasant way. Claire needs to realise life isn't a romantic comedy.

MrNumbers · « **Reply #108 on:** 27 Apr 2016, 00:04 »

Quote from: Timemaster on 26 Apr 2016, 23:45

Blood is thicker than water after all.

Oooh this one grinds my gears.

The original saying is; "The blood of brotherhood is thicker than the waters of the womb", which is to say, it means the exact opposite of how it's traditioally abbrviated.

For good reason too. You owe nothing, not even respect, to people simply for shared genetics. They earn that with their actions, and by being good family to you. I see way too many people get pushed back into abusive relationships with family under the guise of; "But they're your X!" as if that somehow means a contractual obligation to forgiveness.

(Which is not to say Clinton isn't going to forgive Claire, or shouldn't forgive Claire. That's different. He's just super mad at the moment. As soon as he stops being super angry he's going to get super sad, and maybe he'll be in a huggy-forgivey mood then. Because his relationship with Claire, for the most part, is super healthy and affectionate sibling stuff, shown time and time again. But they love each other because they prove it on their own terms, not just because they were born into it, damn it!)

anahata · « **Reply #109 on:** 27 Apr 2016, 00:12 »

Quote from: BenRG on 26 Apr 2016, 23:30

whilst Claire loves her brother, she neither likes or respects him.

She also has a long history of teasing and embarrassing him in ways only a sibling can get away with, and that's influenced the way she's gone about setting this up. Maybe she'll realise it's a childish habit and it's about time she learned to grow out of it.

katsmeat · « **Reply #110 on:** 27 Apr 2016, 00:13 »

Quote from: BenRG on 26 Apr 2016, 23:30

I've posted this before but, in the end, one of the real problems here is that, whilst Claire loves her brother, she neither likes or respects him. Add to this the fact that she is manipulative in nature (as she's shown with Pintsize) and her basically treating Clinton's personal life as a problem to solve, with or without his cooperation, was pretty much inevitable.

I came on the forum to write something along the lines of "This is the horrible fallout that happens when somebody sees too many romantic comedy movies and tries to replicate their imbecilic scenarios in real-life"

I now think that's nonsense. The comment from BenRg absolutely nails it.

Pilchard123 · « **Reply #111 on:** 27 Apr 2016, 00:25 »

Quote from: MrNumbers on 27 Apr 2016, 00:04

The original saying is; "The blood of brotherhood is thicker than the waters of the womb", which is to say, it means the exact opposite of how it's traditioally abbrviated.

I doubt it. It's seen in similar form in

1180 - Reinhart Fuchs - "I also hear it said, kin-blood is not spoiled by water"
1412 - Troy Book - "For naturally blood will be of kind / Drawn-to blood, where he may it find."
1670 - English Proverbs
1815 - Guy Mannering - "Weel — Blud's thicker than water — she's welcome to the cheeses."
1857- tom Brown's School Days - "Blood is thicker than water"

MrNumbers · « **Reply #112 on:** 27 Apr 2016, 00:48 »

Quote from: Pilchard123 on 27 Apr 2016, 00:25

Quote from: MrNumbers on 27 Apr 2016, 00:04
The original saying is; "The blood of brotherhood is thicker than the waters of the womb", which is to say, it means the exact opposite of how it's traditioally abbrviated.

I doubt it. It's seen in similar form in
SNIP

My apologies. What I was quoting was probably a partially remembered elongated explanation of the 1180 version, or a modern translation of it.

Still, it seems to corroborate that the saying still means the opposite of what other people think, even if my phrasing of it was wrong.

Addendum; Following up on your citations brought further evidence in that there is a very similar saying in Middle Eastern cultures, and Mongolian ones, where 'water' is replaced with 'milk', referring to breasts, referring to a shared mother.

BenRG · « **Reply #113 on:** 27 Apr 2016, 00:50 »

Quote from: katsmeat on 27 Apr 2016, 00:13

I came on the forum, something along the lines of "This is the horrible fallout that happens when somebody sees too many romantic comedy movies and tries to replicate their imbecilic scenarios in real-life"

I now think that's nonsense. The comment from BenRg absolutely nails it.

FWIW, the romcom addiction is a problem too, I think; just not the main one.

Tova · « **Reply #114 on:** 27 Apr 2016, 01:10 »

Well, you know what they say. Every aphorism has an equal and opposite aphorism.

Is it cold in here? · « **Reply #115 on:** 27 Apr 2016, 01:11 »

Quote from: creatureshock on 26 Apr 2016, 23:21

Quote from: Is it cold in here? on 26 Apr 2016, 23:14

Doesn't it make sense a priori that there's something insulting to women in general about, say, calling someone a "cunt"? Isn't that at least plausible? The moderators have heard from women we trust that things like that make them feel less welcome, and inclusiveness is a core value here.

Then are any insults talked about in the comic as something that could make people feel less welcome and included? And yes, I am serious about that and not just being a dick. If people have to worry about general insults, just where do you draw the line? Is even mentioning the insult going too far?

It's a cromulent question.

A discussion of Clinton's emotional state and character legitimately includes quoting his insults and asking whether they're targeted at Claire's gender. Imagine if he'd used some insult specific to her assignment at birth. That would be a thing of total horror.

pwhodges · « **Reply #116 on:** 27 Apr 2016, 01:34 »

Quote from: MrNumbers on 27 Apr 2016, 00:04

The original saying is; "The blood of brotherhood is thicker than the waters of the womb", which is to say, it means the exact opposite of how it's traditionally abbreviated.

The talk page of the Wikipedia article on the saying argues that the only sources for this assertion are modern, and do not cite any sources in turn. They do bring up the Arabic version with milk as well.

QuestionableIntentions · « **Reply #117 on:** 27 Apr 2016, 02:25 »

Quote

Imagine if he'd used some insult specific to her assignment at birth. That would be a thing of total horror.

Yes, but he didn't. The people claiming insults have genders turn this insult into an attack on Claire's gender.

Analogy · « **Reply #118 on:** 27 Apr 2016, 02:37 »

If someone in the comic had said "Faye is being an asshole," how would you have interpreted that? I don't think you would have leaped to "they're using a male insult because she's butch" or whatever, I think you would have accepted it as a non-gendered insult. The only reason you're wondering whether it's a gendered insult or not is because Claire has a "special" gender identity and so your impulse becomes to read all of her interactions in that light. I don't think that's how Jeph writes her, I don't think the interactions she has are "about" her gender identity unless it's explicitly given. I think Jeph is mostly interested in writing a human female who happens to be genetically XY, and in writing a world where there's been enough social progress that this isn't a big deal to anyone.

pwhodges · « **Reply #119 on:** 27 Apr 2016, 02:57 »

Quote from: QuestionableIntentions on 27 Apr 2016, 02:25

The people claiming insults have genders

Many insults have genders, and in this forum we care about that. However the one used in this case does not inherently have gender. Some people are reacting to the fact that in their perception it is mainly used against men, but this is not universal even in the US (and the US is not the whole world, remember!).

I believe that Jeph used a non-gendered insult precisely to try to avoid this kind of problem, but the forum illustrates that there are times when there is no answer that works exactly the same for everyone. In such instances it is important that we are understanding rather than critical of each others' reactions.

bhtooefr · « **Reply #120 on:** 27 Apr 2016, 03:41 »

Quote from: Analogy on 27 Apr 2016, 02:37

I think Jeph is mostly interested in writing a human female who happens to be genetically XY, and in writing a world where there's been enough social progress that this isn't a big deal to anyone.

While I agree that the focus of her character isn't on her being trans, it's on her being her, Jeph has had story arcs that discuss her fears relating to her trans status. As far as the world having social progress, a counterpoint to that is that there's been discussion of violent transphobia existing in the QC universe, even though everyone who knows has been shown as quite supportive so far.

The comic's setting likely affects the amount of social progress, too, relative to the rest of the US. I'd guess that Northampton (real or QC) is far more accepting of trans people than, say, the real or QC version of rural North Carolina.

As far as "asshole", it really depends on some context we don't have as of this strip. I could see Clinton, out of unthinking anger (he wouldn't intentionally misgender Claire), reverting to slightly gendered epithets that he used before Claire transitioned (although it's worth noting that Claire didn't react to that, as someone else pointed out), or I could see him just calling everyone that.

neurocase · « **Reply #121 on:** 27 Apr 2016, 03:45 »

I agree with Analogy; the only reason the insult was brought up at all is because of Claire's gender identity. Directed at anyone else in the comic, it wouldn't have garnered mention whatsoever. There are certain insults that are only targeted toward certain genders, yes, but making this about gender is utterly pointless. If Claire was cis, it wouldn't have come up. Not everything needs to be made about gender.

USS Martenclaire · « **Reply #122 on:** 27 Apr 2016, 03:58 »

Quote from: neurocase on 27 Apr 2016, 03:45

I agree with Analogy; the only reason the insult was brought up at all is because of Claire's gender identity. Directed at anyone else in the comic, it wouldn't have garnered mention whatsoever. There are certain insults that are only targeted toward certain genders, yes, but making this about gender is utterly pointless. If Claire was cis, it wouldn't have come up. Not everything needs to be made about gender.

I'm inclined to agree in this case. Clin-ton is furious at Claire right now but that doesn't instantly change him from a caring loving brother into a raging transphobe. Remember when Claire first said to him that she'd told Marten she was trans? "He wasn't a dick about it, was he?!" In short, I feel that it is possible to read *too* much into a momentary angry word.

Yet even while angry, we still have our "NOPE" lines. Lines that we don't cross no matter how pissed we are at someone. I think with Claire, Clinton's NOPE line is anything that would make her feel ashamed of being trans. That's not the same as making her want to feel ashamed of interfering in his life.

creatureshock · « **Reply #123 on:** 27 Apr 2016, 04:09 »

The fact that someone brought up Claire's gender at all is ridiculous and looking for a problem where there isn't one. I cannot speak for all transgendered people, but I can speak from my own experience with my wife (who is transgender, just in case that wasn't clear), being known as "the trans one" makes things very difficult for people that don't want it known. Going with my wife to trans support groups, it's pretty rare to find a trans person that wears that fact that they are trans on their sleeves. Most every trans person I've ever met doesn't want to anyone to say "And this is Bob, he used to be a woman!" or "This is Rachael, she used to be a man!" even to other trans people. I don't know if Claire is pre or post op, and frankly I don't give two shits either way. What I do care about is that Claire is a cool character that fucked up. Clinton is a cool character that got fucked over. Claire owes Clinton an apology. Clinton doesn't own Claire shit, but he should forgive her from my point of view. I'm sorry if I'm coming off like an asshole, but if the first thing you jump to is "was that because XXXX is trans?" when is clearly wasn't, you seriously need to figure out what is wrong with you. Calling someone an asshole isn't a trans insult. If Clinton had said "Dude! You fucking asshole!" THEN I'll consider it might have something to do with gender.

pwhodges · « **Reply #124 on:** 27 Apr 2016, 04:27 »

Quote from: creatureshock on 27 Apr 2016, 04:09

The fact that someone brought up Claire's gender at all is ridiculous

It isn't if you believe (as some seem to, but I don't) that the insult used was gender-specific.

Quote from: creatureshock on 27 Apr 2016, 04:09

being known as "the trans one" makes things very difficult for people that don't want it known.

Remember that we are not in the same universe as Claire. We are observing a representation, and considering how Jeph is handling the issue (when relevant, which of course it usually isn't) of Claire's being trans. As such, a matter like this insult can be a valid subject for discussion by us, even when it would not be within a single universe (whether the comic universe or real life) - though such discussion should be held sensitively, assuming the likelihood of trans people being part of it.

In this case, I think from my point of view that the matter did not even need to be raised, simply because the word used is not really a gendered insult; however, clearly some people are conscious of the possibility that it might be used that way (and thus the reaction of the comic characters if they see it that way might be worth discussing), and I guess that fact alone is something we can usefully learn from.

brightwings00 · « **Reply #125 on:** 27 Apr 2016, 04:38 »

*raises hand*

I'm the one who first brought up 'asshole' as a gendered insult, because I'd mostly heard it applied to men in the past. But I can definitely see how it's a gender-neutral term (everyone has one) and how Jeph would have wanted to avoid anything more salty.

Now I'm thinking about how women get insulted. $:-\$

Zebediah · « **Reply #126 on:** 27 Apr 2016, 04:42 »

Quote from: bhtooefr on 27 Apr 2016, 03:41

The comic's setting likely affects the amount of social progress, too, relative to the rest of the US. I'd guess that Northampton (real or QC) is far more accepting of trans people than, say, the real or QC version of rural North Carolina.

God yes. I don't want to go too far down the rabbit hole of RL politics, but having lived both places, I can assert that Massachusetts is FAR more accepting of trans people than most of North Carolina. And Claire is living in one of the most tolerant parts of Massachusetts. She's in possibly the safest place for her in the entire US, and she STILL has to worry about her safety if she's outed.

That being said, Clinton wasn't misgendering Claire in any way. It's one of his best character traits that he's always been very supportive of Claire's transition.

DSL · « **Reply #127 on:** 27 Apr 2016, 04:49 »

I think that in _this particular_ discussion, the "gendered insult" topic snowballed from a relatively offhand observation, and to me is starting to resemble the "so what you're rrally saying is ... " method of argument, a method I find somewhat odious. Odorous. Whatever.

I admit my first thought on reading the comic was that Clinton, in his rage, will do something rash with bad consequences for Claire. Two things mitigate against that: Jeph has presented the Augustus sibling dynamic as fighting like cats with each other, but each defending the other against all outside comers with equal ferocity; and Jeph's pattern of presenting what looks like an insurmountable crisis only to show at least parts of it resolving themselves or fading out in short order, if only through the characters' own impulse to just keep on keepin' on.

Wherr Clinton may have _really_ stepped in it, though, is in going off on not only his sister, but on Emily's much-admired possibly Very Best Friend, possibly in full view through the CoD front window. Jeph has presented enough hints that We Wouldn't Like To See Emily When She's Angry. Of coirse, we're bavk to the Jeph Pattern as a possible mitigator.

I keep thinking Jeph shows that pattern repeatedly only to make it all the more jarring if/when he finally does choose to show an absolutely irreparable blowup.

blt · « **Reply #128 on:** 27 Apr 2016, 04:58 »

Quote from: BenRG on 26 Apr 2016, 23:30

I've posted this before but, in the end, one of the real problems here is that, whilst Claire loves her brother, she neither likes or respects him. Add to this the fact that she is manipulative in nature (as she's shown with Pintsize) and her basically treating Clinton's personal life as a problem to solve, with or without his cooperation, was pretty much inevitable.

Her intentions were good but, in the end, it was all torn down by her basically assuming that she is so smart that everything will happen according to her scheme, even though she didn't even clear it with Emily first.

As I say, it will be interesting to see where Claire goes from here. It will tell us a lot about her as a person.

This post honestly made me rethink a lot of my opinion about Claire. Before, I was still on Clinton's side, yeah, because I'm just not a fan of meddling, especially as a surprise to both parties, but I just felt like Claire was well intentioned and made a stupid mistake.

Now I actually sort of see Clinton's "manipulated" angle (some of the stuff she did to Pintsize was kinda messed up too), and hopefully the strip might go that way for her character development thread, cause I still really like Claire.

Method of Madness · « **Reply #129 on:** 27 Apr 2016, 05:03 »

I'm pretty sure Claire is going to talk to Emily tomorrow, what I'm not sure about is whether she'll apologize, blame Emily, or something in between.

Also, I think people are being way too hard on Claire. This isn't the first time she's done this with Clinton and Emily, and the other times it's ended up well and Clinton probably seemed grateful at the time. Why should she not expect it to work again?

MrNumbers · « **Reply #130 on:** 27 Apr 2016, 05:14 »

Quote from: Method of Madness on 27 Apr 2016, 05:03

This isn't the first time she's done this with Clinton and Emily, and the other times it's ended up well

Plus or minus the cost of new designer glasses, a tattoo of a powerpoint, and/or a broken facenose (AKA boopsnoot)

BenRG · « **Reply #131 on:** 27 Apr 2016, 05:19 »

Quote from: Method of Madness on 27 Apr 2016, 05:03

Also, I think people are being way too hard on Claire. This isn't the first time she's done this with Clinton and Emily, and the other times it's ended up well and Clinton probably seemed grateful at the time. Why should she not expect it to work again?

The problem is, or so we perceive in hindsight, that this whole strategy was a ticking time-bomb from the start. It was just a matter of time before she misread the situation (or, due to previous successes, decided that she didn't need to think things through) and we ended up in a situation like this.

In many ways, this is a nicely nuanced bit of long-term writing from Jeph. Yes, it worked before but, in truth, it was no nicer then than it is now. It's just that things worked out well enough that Clinton didn't complain about it (and Emily just isn't the sort of woman who would complain about it).

Don't get me wrong, I'm not casting Claire as the villain here. If she's guilty of anything, it's of overconfidence and, basically, thinking that she understands what her friends and family might want without actually asking them. IMO, that's very in-character for her.

Perfectly Reasonable · « **Reply #132 on:** 27 Apr 2016, 05:36 »

Panel 2:

There is no Claire. There is only Hair.

aliensporebomb · « **Reply #133 on:** 27 Apr 2016, 06:27 »

Wow. The new strip was like getting punched in the stomach. I understand the way Clinton is feeling but his anger let him go way over the top.

Analogy · « **Reply #134 on:** 27 Apr 2016, 07:55 »

A thought just occurred to me about GLBT characters in fiction. One could devise a sort of GLBT version of the Bechdel Test, regarding how fully-realized they are as a character apart from their sexuality/gender identity.

What should the criteria be for a character to pass the Gay Literary Bechdel Test?

bhtooefr · « **Reply #135 on:** 27 Apr 2016, 08:05 »

Well, the Bechdel test is intended to be a very low bar to pass, that doesn't indicate that a work is necessarily feminist in nature, but that it's not contributing to a specific non-feminist media representation.

The test being that there be two women, who speak to each other, about something that isn't a man.

So, would a LGBT version be, two LGBT people, who speak to each other, about something that isn't a cisgender and heterosexual person (be it other LGBT people, themselves, their careers, their hobbies, whatever)? In which case QC passes multiple times - Dora and Tai satisfy it (by talking about each other), Tai and Claire satisfy it somehow (although Tai doesn't know that), and I can't think of other examples at the moment.

TheEvilDog · « **Reply #136 on:** 27 Apr 2016, 08:33 »

Quote from: Method of Madness on 27 Apr 2016, 05:03

Also, I think people are being way too hard on Claire. This isn't the first time she's done this with Clinton and Emily, and the other times it's ended up well and Clinton probably seemed grateful at the time. Why should she not expect it to work again?

I just highlighted the problem a lot of people are having.

It isn't the first time Claire has done this to Clinton, manipulating him into a situation that he had no preparation for or any idea was coming up. Siblings tend to have a pattern in their interactions with each other, one that repeats throughout their entire lives. So presumably, Claire has manipulated Clinton on more than one occasion in some misguided belief that he needs the help.

Well for one, that attitude is infantilizing and basically saying that "I can't really trust you to make your own decisions so I'm going to make them for you." Now imagine that attitude being the prevailing one you have had to deal with your entire life. It gets old very, very quickly.

Secondly, Clinton might not have blown up at Claire like that had she not involved Emily. Its one thing if your brother or sister manipulates you, its something else entirely when they drag a third party into their idiotic scheme. A person can handle being humiliated or hurt by a sibling, but its different when they do it in front of an audience or inadvertently hurt another person.

The problem is that Claire's entire romantic experience is probably limited to Marten and romantic comedies. As we all know, what happens in a romantic comedy can be meant to look "awww" inducing and look incredibly romantic. Thing is, you try that in real life it doesn't look romantic, it just looks creepy and stalkerish.

jheartney · « **Reply #137 on:** 27 Apr 2016, 08:39 »

Quote from: Analogy on 26 Apr 2016, 20:52

You need to put yourself in the shoes of a weird, introverted, nerdy dude with little to no romantic experience, and experience that interaction he just had through those eyes rather than your own.

I was that guy years ago. I know exactly how it is to face all that. I figured it out without the kind of outburst Clinton just had.

Quote from: Analogy on 26 Apr 2016, 20:52

Introverts need to be able to approach social interactions on their own terms. Claire should have known this about her own brother.

Introvert here as well. I know how it is to have to steel myself to talk to strangers. But sometimes you just have to swallow hard and do it.

Clinton's problem isn't that he didn't prepare himself. His problem was that he'd blown off facing this at all for months.

RyanW1019 · « **Reply #138 on:** 27 Apr 2016, 09:56 »

Quote from: jheartney on 27 Apr 2016, 08:39

Quote from: Analogy on 26 Apr 2016, 20:52
Introverts need to be able to approach social interactions on their own terms. Claire should have known this about her own brother.

Introvert here as well. I know how it is to have to steel myself to talk to strangers. But sometimes you just have to swallow hard and do it.

Clinton's problem isn't that he didn't prepare himself. His problem was that he'd blown off facing this at all for months.

Yeah, but there's a difference between Claire telling Clinton he needs to man up and do it and "Surprise! Now you have to ask her out right now with no preparation or warning!"

Let me try to use a different example from the comics. Claire decided that she wanted to get her ears pierced, after weeks of trying to work up the courage to do so. She brought Marten along for support, but the actual decision to do it came from her. This ended up having a good outcome, and Claire got a little more self-confident because she overcame her fears. Plus, her relationship with Marten got a little deeper because he was there for her when she needed support. Now, imagine that Marten hears Claire wants to get her ears pierced, so he takes her to the mall, walks her into a piercing booth, and says "Surprise! Now you can get your ears pierced!" If Claire freaks out and runs away, is she within her rights to be mad at Marten? Absolutely. The difference between working up the courage to choose to do something you're afraid to do, and being forced into it by somebody else, is huge in terms of your personal development. Clinton doesn't grow as a person by being set up like this, even if it ends up going well.

Ysobel · « **Reply #139 on:** 27 Apr 2016, 09:59 »

Regarding a "Gay Bechdel Test", GLAAD proposes this: (cited from http://www.glaad.org/sri/2015/vitorusso )
"To pass the Vito Russo Test, the following must be true:

* The film contains a character that is identifiably lesbian, gay, bisexual, and/or transgender.
* That character must not be solely or predominantly defined by their sexual orientation or gender identity. i.e. they are comprised of the same sort of unique character traits commonly used to differentiate straight/non-transgender characters from one another.
* The LGBT character must be tied into the plot in such a way that their removal would have a significant effect. Meaning they are not there to simply provide colorful commentary, paint urban authenticity, or (perhaps most commonly) set up a punchline. The character should "matter.""

To this some people add, therewith lowering the number of passing films significantly :
* The LGBT character(s) must survive the film. (Somewhat implied by the existing points, but still...)

themacnut · « **Reply #140 on:** 27 Apr 2016, 10:07 »

Quote from: jheartney on 27 Apr 2016, 08:39

Clinton's problem isn't that he didn't prepare himself. His problem was that he'd blown off facing this at all for months.

That's the thing, though, and a big part of the reason for Clinton's anger; Claire doesn't seem to respect that Clinton's issues with women are his problem to deal with, not hers. Yes, he wasn't dealing with it well, but it was still his business. Claire tries to intervene to "fix" things and it backfires. I can't blame Clinton for being pissed at Claire as a result, especially considering the way she just threw them together with no warning or even a 'by your leave'.

Besides, it wasn't like Clinton went into a screaming tirade calling Claire all kinds of female-specific insults then hitting her. He mostly told her exactly what he thought of her meddling in his romantic affairs (such as they were), and then told her to butt out unless asked. Rather reasonable, all things considered.

I'd say he hopefully learned a valuable lesson about hesitation and procrastination; but I'm pretty sure he already suspected he'd blown his chance with Emily by waiting too long. Claire's actions forced Emily to confirm his suspicion (part of the reason he's pissed at Claire, for putting Emily on the spot as well as him - she owes Emily an apology for this IMO).

sitnspin · « **Reply #141 on:** 27 Apr 2016, 10:24 »

Quote from: jheartney on 27 Apr 2016, 08:39

Clinton's problem isn't that he didn't prepare himself. His problem was that he'd blown off facing this at all for months.

Clinton's problem is Claire and her incessant need to enforce her will on others. No matter how well meaning, she was manipulative and controlling. That shit does not fly. It is shitty behavior regardless of intent. She deserved to be called out in it.

Case · « **Reply #142 on:** 27 Apr 2016, 13:50 »

Quote from: sitnspin on 27 Apr 2016, 10:24

Quote from: jheartney on 27 Apr 2016, 08:39
Clinton's problem isn't that he didn't prepare himself. His problem was that he'd blown off facing this at all for months.
Clinton's problem is Claire and her incessant need to enforce her will on others. No matter how well meaning, she was manipulative and controlling. That shit does not fly. It is shitty behavior regardless of intent. She deserved to be called out in it.

+1

Matchmaking without the consent (or even knowledge) of the people involved = big red flag for boundary issues.

Zebediah · « **Reply #143 on:** 27 Apr 2016, 13:58 »

The whole Augustus clan seems to have trouble with appropriate boundaries.

oeoek · « **Reply #144 on:** 27 Apr 2016, 14:14 »

Just wondering; would Clinton have been this mad if Emily had said agreed on a next date?

themacnut · « **Reply #145 on:** 27 Apr 2016, 14:27 »

He might have been, but his objections would have been more easily swatted down by Cllaire;

"Dammit Claire, what if she said no?.."
"Well she didn't, so get over yourself! I know what I'm doing."
"This time..."
"Last time too, brother dear."

hedgie · « **Reply #146 on:** 27 Apr 2016, 14:35 »

Quote from: Case on 27 Apr 2016, 13:50

Quote from: sitnspin on 27 Apr 2016, 10:24
Quote from: jheartney on 27 Apr 2016, 08:39
Clinton's problem isn't that he didn't prepare himself. His problem was that he'd blown off facing this at all for months.
Clinton's problem is Claire and her incessant need to enforce her will on others. No matter how well meaning, she was manipulative and controlling. That shit does not fly. It is shitty behavior regardless of intent. She deserved to be called out in it.

+1

Matchmaking without the consent (or even knowledge) of the people involved = big red flag for boundary issues.

Matchmaker, Matchmaker fuck the hell off.

jheartney · « **Reply #147 on:** 27 Apr 2016, 14:51 »

Claire didn't make Clinton ask out Emily; all she did was take him to the coffee shop where Emily worked. He could have just said hello to her. He's the one that A. pitched a fit at Claire in front of Emily and then B. made a hamfisted date ask, and then C. went medieval on Claire after Emily said no. I don't see how he could have handled it any worse.

Had Claire told Clinton Emily was there ahead of time, he probably would have chickened out. At least this way the whole thing is resolved, and Clinton can move on to blowing it with some other gal. Or just hanging out alone forever because he's chicken.

swapna · « **Reply #148 on:** 27 Apr 2016, 15:34 »

Quote from: jheartney on 27 Apr 2016, 14:51

Claire didn't make Clinton ask out Emily; all she did was take him to the coffee shop where Emily worked. He could have just said hello to her. He's the one that A. pitched a fit at Claire in front of Emily and then B. made a hamfisted date ask, and then C. went medieval on Claire after Emily said no. I don't see how he could have handled it any worse.

Had Claire told Clinton Emily was there ahead of time, he probably would have chickened out. At least this way the whole thing is resolved, and Clinton can move on to blowing it with some other gal. Or just hanging out alone forever because he's chicken.

Well, she also (indirectly) informed Emily that Clinton wanted to ask her out; but yeah, he's not very good at it. The point here is - he had the option to ask her out any time, and he didn't. They see each other; they have classes together. He thought about it (and trusted Claire with his problems), but it's still his problem. Claire forced a decision, and she immediately forced a romantic direction. If he'd asked her to spend time with him as a friend, he would have looked dishonest and sleazy.

And yes, he might have chickened out, but where's the harm in that? Maybe the reason why he didn't ask her out again is because he didn't know if they were a good fit, after the first date. She seems to think so (or she genuinely doesn't have the time, could be both with Emily). Why make her shoot him down when he knows that it's probably going to happen, instead of accepting the missing romantic connection? It's not as if 'resolving' anything makes it better somehow, on the contrary.

Edit: Also, he's 21. He's still figuring everything out - he might be a late bloomer, just as his sister. As far as we know, Claire only started dating when she was 24, and that is because Marten made the first move. He is clearly uncomfortable with dating, and he has a lot to learn about himself and others. It's not as if there's no time, or as if he has to date or as if he's going to be "forever alone" if he doesn't ask out a lot of girls. Which is a bad motivation to ask someone out anyway; would you go out with someone who just wants a warm body next to them and fakes interest as a means to an end, if you could actually hang with people who are interested in you as a person?

Roxtar · « **Reply #149 on:** 27 Apr 2016, 15:52 »

it's disheartening how many people are excusing Claire's bullshit behavior. then again, most people are willing to overlook massive flaws in characters they happen to like... which is why people remain in toxic relationships for so long.

THESE FORUMS NOW CLOSED (read only)

Poll

What Can We Expect for This Week?

Author Topic: WCDT Strips 3206 to 3210 (25 to 29 April 2016) (Read 54735 times)

TheEvilDog