Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

Amanda or Evie asks how long Faye and Bubbles have been dating

Evie has a horrible realization

Melon is their waitress and the bug thing was just a metaphor.

Evie apologizes to Bubbles back at U.R.

Melon reports back the next day that the "robo-penis" seems much happier and is "rather attached to Aurthur".

Amanda on the floor of Union Robtics laughing uncontrollably  followed by a flashback alluding to the above option.

Evie asks Bubbles to critic her presentation.

Melon invites Pintsize over to play with her new pet

Brun, Clinton, Elliott and Reneé standing in awkward silence.

Emily bumps into Melon as she's leaving Union Robotics

Steve eats cereal

Martin and Claire eat cereal

Marigold eats cereal for dinner

[Wombat]

Really, who are these self-aware freaks who know what's going on in their hearts. Damn things are like a 100X100X100 Rubik's cube.

(I once crushed on a girl for three years before realizing it; granted, I was around ten when it started, but that didn't stop me from being like, "Damn, I am dense" once I figured it out.)

Really, however Faye ends up feeling, I expect her to need some time to reflect to figure out whatever it is. I think it'd be good for her to consider loving Bubbles (romantically) as a possibility even if she realizes in the end that no, she doesn't feel that way.

[Is it cold in here?]

She's asking good questions. I wouldn't say she's forcing the issue. Just gently prodding Faye into exploring it.

Hmm. Strikes me that Evie is using her powers for good. Blatantly, however, without Faye's consent.

Why do you say "without Faye's consent?" Evie is asking questions, Faye is consenting to answer.

What's setting off my alarms is that this is a psychology major asking potentially analytical questions in a strip titled "Psychoanalysis". The Pugnacious Peach has not consented to a therapy relationship though as you note she is voluntarily answering the questions.

[Is it cold in here?]

Hello! I've been reading the comic for a long time now, and reading the forum for a couple of months, and I figure now's the time to throw in my two cents.

The thing about Faye's sexuality here is that it can be surprisingly easy to not realize you might not be entirely straight. I went until well into high school before realizing that I wasn't straight and I'm still not entirely sure how to label myself anymore, heheh. But if Faye's had no reason to seriously question her sexuality before, any hypothetical crushes she might have ever had on other women might not have registered as 'crushes' and might have registered as something more like 'huh I like that style'.

Welcome, new person with relevant life experience! Welcome sotajumala as well!

[Is it cold in here?]

Bubbles might be a superb choice for a life partner for Faye.

The other way around?

I think Bubbles needs somebody steadier. Though they are clearly getting along well.

[OldGoat]

Evie is indeed coming disturbingly close to Shrinking Heads Without a License.

[Cornelius]

Well, at least Faye'll see what Amanda and Evie were on about. Evie is asking the right questions. To be honest, consent or no, there have been times I could have used someone asking me those questions.

[Tyr]

If Evie uses the phrase, "let's go deeper, deeper..." I'm gonna start watching the background for a bespectacled woman with purple hair, or a pink-haired woman in a finely-tailored suit...

[BenRG]

This is an intriguing strip in many ways. Firstly and most importantly, it shows that, for whatever reason (I'm betting low self-esteem), Faye has never confronted her own feelings for Bubbles before. However, yes, she wants Bubbles for herself. That's selfish, true but it is is also a fact that most relationships find their birth in the realisation that you want this person in your life.

I also suspect that panel 8 reflects what I said in my comment on yesterday's strip: Faye genuinely has issues with the idea that she has any right to approach Bubbles about her feelings; that lack of self-worth is clearly holding her back. That's sad but it doesn't entirely surprise me, given Faye's past travails.

Finally, I have to agree with iicih: I'm feeling a little uncomfortable with Evie analysing and diagnosing Faye without her informed consent. It's pushing on the boundaries of professional ethics a little. At least she isn't taking notes or suggesting new prescriptions!

Oh, and Amanda is being a typical little sister by giggling at her sister's issues. She still has a bit of growing up to do!

The thing that gets me here is that Bubbles has outright told Faye she has feelings for her. Awkwardly, unintentionally, but unambiguously. Like, Faye has absolutely no excuse to not realize where Amanda and Evie are going with this.

Like I said above, there is a part of Faye that cannot believe it or at least cannot believe that she is the right choice.

[Shjade]

On the otherhand, it's very obvious that Evie see's this as the perfect opportunity to document a human/AI romantic relationship as it unfolds in real time, and the last thing these two needs is for Evie to go Steve Irwin on them.

Yeah, this is really only increasing my concern about what impact she'll have on their relationship.

Not in an "I think this is bad for the comic" way, though. It definitely fits the character.

[Frankquith]

Speaking as someone who's brother completed a PhD (in Engineering, but nonetheless), it is completely fair that Evie is going way too psychoanalytical. Depending on how far through it she is, her PhD might be most of what Evie thinks about, if not almost her entire life right now.

There were weeks where I almost didn't see him, despite us living at the same address.

[WoaLG]

Speaking as someone who's brother completed a PhD (in Engineering, but nonetheless), it is completely fair that Evie is going way too psychoanalytical. Depending on how far through it she is, her PhD might be most of what Evie thinks about, if not almost her entire life right now.

There were weeks where I almost didn't see him, despite us living at the same address.

This is my thought too. It's probably just the way Evie processes the world, not deliberately trying to psychoanalyze Faye.

I still think that there are too many problems with Bubbles and Faye being together.

[Bad Superman]

I'm still arguing with myself about today's comic.

Personally, I would respond very poorly to this kind of questioning by someone I barely know, even to the point of telling the other person to shut the hell up. On the other hand, in Faye's case maybe a little "professional" nudging toward the (hopefully) right direction is better than "OMG!! You totally have the hots for Bubbles, why can't you see that??!"

Hm… let’s see how this works out.

[Case]

EDIT: @Frankquith: Ignore this if you did not mean "Evie might see Fayebubs as potentional research subjects" 

(And yes, graduatebrain is weird, obsessive and generally a jerk. You could call it a hideous egomaniac if it'd acknowledge the concept of "other people" in the first place. Speaker at the graduation ceremony seriously suggested to us that the first thing we should do after getting our 'new surname' was to apologize profusely to everybody who was still talking to us.)

On the otherhand, it's very obvious that Evie see's this as the perfect opportunity to document a human/AI romantic relationship as it unfolds in real time, and the last thing these two needs is for Evie to go Steve Irwin on them.

Speaking as someone who's brother completed a PhD (in Engineering, but nonetheless), it is completely fair that Evie is going way too psychoanalytical. Depending on how far through it she is, her PhD might be most of what Evie thinks about, if not almost her entire life right now.

There were weeks where I almost didn't see him, despite us living at the same address.

Speaking as someone who holds a PhD (in theoretical physics, but nonetheless): Nurrr-urrrh. Nope. Never would.

And that's before thinking about ethics committees and rules on conduct with human subjects in research (not that I have the first idea what those rules are, I just know that Zimbardo raised quite a stink with his Stanford Prison experiment) - it's not Berkely in the 1960s anymore. The finest paper ain't worth it when you don't have a career left because no researcher outside North Korea will even talk to you (let alone be seen with you) ...

https://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/regulations-and-policy/belmont-report/index.html
http://www.apa.org/research/responsible/human/index.aspx?tab=4

Not to mention that your SO's sister is probably a really bad choice for a testing subject in the first place, because:
a) She's connected to you. Means that your presence has a high chance of influencing the resultant data in unforeseen ways. Did I hear anybody say "Re-pro-du-cea-bili-ty"?
b) You wanna keep that SO? Or ever again have anyone with relatives & and an internet connection consider you for the role of SO again? Like ever? Yeah, bad choice ...

Edit: One of your testing subjects is a combat veteran who smells of Black Ops so badly the Army denies knowing how to spell her name? Right, let's dive right into her artificial brainmeats, potentially full of stuff that Really Scary People^TM don't want anybody to know about ... ("Key members of parliament. Key ...")

EditEdit: Chapter 1.4 of the American Psychological Association's "Ethics in Research With Human Participants" is titled "Informed Consent" - a whole chapter in the first section of a 215 page guidebook (not even the actual legal protections or institutional procedures) devoted to the one term "informed consent" alone.

[JoeCovenant]

"Yes, these people are responsible for me living the lifestyle that I have, and appreciate my artistic output... but their all weirdos and I want nothing to do with them."   ... kinda thing ??

That saddens me.

When you look at how this forum reacted to, for instance, Tilly, a character Jeph actively enjoyed drawing, can you really blame him?

What reason does this forum give him to like it?

I'm tempted to point at your own "sig line" as response...

[JoeCovenant]

I guess one could say that an author is incapable of speculating about their own intentions for future developments in their creations, because they know what their intentions are.

OTOH, it is not uncommon for writers to say they do not know their character's mind until it appears in the writing, and that sometimes they are surprised.

Absolutely.
When I look back at my first scribblings, and then at the books that emerged, I am often shocked.

My worst (or best) example was my 'Werewolf' book where I had the whole thing plotted out.
Stuff happens, friendship between teenage boy and young man (the wolf), stuff happens, stuff happens, Teenage Boy saves the world.

And then I wrote the book... and the Teenage Boy was torn apart half way through the book.
Even as I was writing it I was actually saying out loud to myself.. "What the hell are you doing!?"

The only way I can explain it is that the story didn't want to be written the way I wanted it...
And ultimately I think it was all the better for it.

So, yeah... Authors are often just as in the dark about what they are going to write than those reading the final work.
(And it's the departures from the "expected" that cause the drama... (both ON and OFF the page*!)

*Tilly / The Last Jedi... 

[traroth]

I like Evie. She seems to master maieutics. In a socratic way, I mean.

Asking some accurate questions without freaking out is a far fetch from "psychoanalysis", guys...

[Tova]

I would argue that it’s without Faye’s consent due to Evie asking the kind of questions that you hear in a therapy session. She’s asking her girlfriend’s sister deeply probing questions over dinner, with her girlfriend right next to her. Evie is the proof of the old adage that a little knowledge is a dangerous thing.

There is a time and a place to ask these questions and dinner the first evening you’ve met the sister is not it.

And yet Faye is completely comfortable in answering, so I don't understand the fuss.

This is the problem with getting offended on behalf of someone else who is perfectly capable of taking care of themselves.

[gopher]

To me this  is very similar to Claire's "involvement" with her brother's lovelife. Creepy and unwanted.

[Case]

And yet Faye is completely comfortable in answering, so I don't understand the fuss.

This is the problem with getting offended on behalf of someone else who is perfectly capable of taking care of themselves.

Generally, we tend to think similarly about "getting offended on behalf of others", but here, I have to cry "Objection, your honor!"

"Consent" is not the same as "going along with leading questions" - There's myriad reasons why someone might answer questions they don't want to even have people ask them. Conflict-avoidance. Submitting to authority ... or plain old "not understanding where this is going before it's too late".

"Consent" is not the same as "informed consent" - and apparently, that's something that shrinks (and especially research-shrinks) discuss a lot about. Like: A! LOT! I've not even really started poking (let alone skimming the stuff that turns up) and I'm already drowning in regulations, best practises, ethics codes, landmark congressional comittees & hearings and dozens of high-powered dedicated monitoring institutions.

http://www.apa.org/ethics/code/
http://www.apa.org/news/press/releases/2014/06/informed-consent.aspx
http://www.apa.org/monitor/jun04/ethics.aspx

[traroth]

To me this  is very similar to Claire's "involvement" with her brother's lovelife. Creepy and unwanted.

Knowing Faye as we know her after all those years, I think we can safely assume that if Evie was doing something "unwanted", Faye would let her know in very direct and non-ambiguous terms...

[traroth]

Seriously, just compare Amanda's and Evie's reactions. Which one seems to be the healthiest and the most willing to help?

[sitnspin]

Evie is actually making the attempt to learn how Faye feels. Amanda on the other hand is projecting, assuming, and poking fun. Evie hasn't asked anything inappropriate and is being perfectly polite.

[Jeemy]

I know we (if I may include myself, a long-time lurker and infrequent poster) are in the habit of over-analysing these strips. We enjoy discussing the ramifications and debate is healthy. We must not however forget that they are entertainment.

In addition I feel that in the current circumstance, when you are out to dinner with sisters and partners, asking 'personal' questions is nothing more than getting to know one another.

My family is scattered all over the world. When we meet, its for a few intense days and then we may not see each other for a long time. On that basis, I don't actually "know" my sisters-in-law, and other relatives *that well*. But to not ask personal questions means never getting to know them better.

Of course people are welcome to take offense or decline to answer. But I don't think its overstepping boundaries in such a scenario to jump straight into deeply personal matters when its family.

[Zebediah]

And that's before thinking about ethics committees and rules on conduct with human subjects in research (not that I have the first idea what those rules are, I just know that Zimbardo raised quite a stink with his Stanford Prison experiment) - it's not Berkely in the 1960s anymore. The finest paper ain't worth it when you don't have a career left because no researcher outside North Korea will even talk to you (let alone be seen with you) ...

Seriously? You honestly believe that Evie would be professionally blacklisted because she once talked to her girlfriend’s sister about feelings?

She hasn’t tried to use this in her research and I don’t see her doing so in the future, so how would her professional peers even know in the first place?

[Cornelius]

While I agree that in the comic itself there is no cause yet for alarm, the context, both of Evie's research, and the title of today's comic, might infer that such research might not be too far fetched. And in that case, it would not be unthinkable. Thus far, it's unlikely.

Personally, I don't think that that is what is going to happen. But then, I consider Evie more as a handy character to provide exposition (hence her field of study), and as a catalyst (hence her relationship with Amanda).

But then, that's my interpretation of her function in this narrative. It might be that the story will still take us elsewhere.

Edited for spelling, as always.

[Case]

And that's before thinking about ethics committees and rules on conduct with human subjects in research (not that I have the first idea what those rules are, I just know that Zimbardo raised quite a stink with his Stanford Prison experiment) - it's not Berkely in the 1960s anymore. The finest paper ain't worth it when you don't have a career left because no researcher outside North Korea will even talk to you (let alone be seen with you) ...

Seriously? You honestly believe that Evie would be professionally blacklisted because she once talked to her girlfriend’s sister about feelings?

She hasn’t tried to use this in her research and I don’t see her doing so in the future, so how would her professional peers even know in the first place?

Yeah, I probably read Frankquith's post under the premise of this one by ChipNoir

On the otherhand, it's very obvious that Evie see's this as the perfect opportunity to document a human/AI romantic relationship as it unfolds in real time, and the last thing these two needs is for Evie to go Steve Irwin on them.

Thanks for pointing that out to me. Apologies to all concerned, "This isn't my soapbox at all! How did that get here?"

Edit: If you're dying to know what I think is going on (and who wouldn't be?) - Cornelious' post above, ditto everywhere.

[Is it cold in here?]

Faye is someone who hasn't said "no" but doesn't know where the interaction is going.

In other contexts we've learned not to call that "consent".

Reproducibility at least used to be a non-requirement for publishing about psychotherapy. Case studies were the norm in the older things I've looked at. If Evie is going there (no evidence she is) she damn well better get Faye and Bubbles to give explicit verbal consent, as soon as possible and ideally an hour ago.

[Is it cold in here?]

Bubbles did say she has feelings for Faye. She didn't say what those feelings are. "Affection" is ambiguous. Bubbles said she wished she knew herself what she had meant by it.

Put it together with calling Faye "beautiful" and it gets clearer.

I hope Bubbles doesn't get hurt, but that's not the way relationships work. I hope that whatever goes wrong will be like a bruise that she can quickly recover from and not like re-breaking a bone that's still healing.

[traroth]

Tomorrow is the last comic of the week, and in my opinion, we are in for a major cliffhanger for the week end. I bet on something like Faye getting (or being made) aware of things, and us not knowing how she feels or what she will do about it. And if JJ really wants to torture us, monday will be like "and now, something completely different!", with Pintsize farting. Or even something we can't possibly say no to, like "In the meantime, Hannelore..."

[Shjade]

I'm tempted to point at your own "sig line" as response...

It says to love them anyway.

It doesn't say anything about liking them.

[OldGoat]

Seriously? You honestly believe that Evie would be professionally blacklisted because she once talked to her girlfriend’s sister about feelings?

She hasn’t tried to use this in her research and I don’t see her doing so in the future, so how would her professional peers even know in the first place?

Who knows what evil lurks in the hearts of jealous academics?

I notice that person-who-from-the-back-resembles-Brun is still very much there, and it is a college town.  And Evie is steepling her fingers, a sure sign she's wielding her mojo.  "Look over there.  That woman is making shrink-eyes across the table and steepling.  Start taking video, this is going to be interesting." 

That may attract attention.  Or not.

Seriously, Evie is another Spookybot, written in to move one part of the story along.  She's much more gracefully executed, but she's serving the same narrative function.

[themacnut]

I think many of us are jumping the gun. We still don't know yet whether Amanda and Evie are seeing something that isn't there, or if Faye is the one not recognizing her real feelings. It is entirely possible for someone to have a close and deep friendship with someone else without romantic or sexual feelings being involved, and also have a selfish desire to want their friend to all to themselves.

Although if Faye does end up going "robosexual", she will be the second main female character (after Dora) to find no satisfaction in hetero relationships and end up turning to alternative sexuality for fulfillment. I find this...interesting.

[SpanielBear]

I have to say, I'm not getting that bad a vibe from Evie in this instance. It's very different from her lecturing at Bubbles about how bad AI discrimination is. There she was talking over someone who was clearly upset, and treating a personal subject as an academic thought experiment.

Here, to me at least, that isn't the case. She's asking questions not telling Faye how she should feel, and Faye seems comfortable asking them.

I get that the nature of the questions is quite analytic, but I think that may be more a case that Evie just talks that way- she has an academic background, she's used to talking in that environment, so it's become her normal tone. It definitely doesn't strike me as an impromptu public therapy session, just sort of Socratic questioning- not to trap someone, but to get them to consider their assumptions.

They *are* personal questions, that is very true, and if Faye were to tell her that she has no business to ask them, she would be well within her rights to do so. But she hasn't. And as others have said, if you make Faye uncomfortable she *will* let you know.

Again, I'm not defending Evie's treatment of Bubbles, I just don't think that interaction should lead to assumptions about how this one is being taken.
Also, if you would personally find Evie's line of questioning offensive if you were in Faye's position- that's fine and legit. No one has the right to demand you answer their questions about your personal life. I think that should be your choice, as much as it is Faye's.

[Ghanima Atreides]

Although if Faye does end up going "robosexual", she will be the second main female character (after Dora) to find no satisfaction in hetero relationships and end up turning to alternative sexuality for fulfillment. I find this...interesting.

Dora is (and has always been presented as) bisexual; there's nothing unusual about it. She's always been open to dating both men and women, she just happened to date a man, it didn't work out, and now she's dating a woman. There's no "turning" there, things like this just happen. Some relationships work out, others don't.

As for Faye discovering she is bisexual/biromantic/robosexual...I am getting the feeling that it may be heading in that direction, whereas before it felt very much ambiguous. Whether this involves just romantic feelings or sexual ones too, remains to be seen, but she reminds me a lot of myself and how I felt about a friend I didn't realise (or didn't want to acknowledge) I had feelings for. The wanting to keep them to yourself, feeling jealous of potential romantic partners. I'd be surprised if this lead to Faye giving Evie a bemused "what? No, she's just a friend and nothing more" reply once she realises where this is going. There is something there; we just don't yet know exactly what.

[Neko_Ali]

The 'Oblivious character falling in love with their best friend and everyone sees it but them' is a well worn trope and clearly what Jeph is going for here. Any doubt should have been put to rest after Faye's talk about how she feels about Bubbles and dating in today's comic. Pretty much everyone around them sees this happening. Some have been keeping it to themselves because they know of Faye's history or out of fear maybe. Some have come right out and said/asked about it. At this point I think that Faye is the only one who hasn't figure it out, which will probably change tomorrow.

And it makes sense that they don't want to vocalize it or think too much on it. Both have been seriously hurt in the past by the loss of people close to them. Both feel a lot of self loathing and believe themselves to be unworthy or are afraid to hope. Both tend to hold most people at arm's length to keep from getting hurt and both are afraid to get too close to someone lest they lose them again. So it make sense to not want to think or talk about it. And again, most of the people around them know better than to push the issue.

And then we meet Evie, who is custom tailored to be the kick in the butt Faye needs to think about this. She has a link to Faye through Amanda, yet has no direct stake in dancing around the subject. She's got psychology knowledge to not only see what's not being said but to push Faye into realizing it. Amanda or one of her friends just telling Faye she's got the hots for Bubbles wouldn't do anything. Faye would just brush it off, and I think Evie realizes that. Which is why she's using leading questions to get Faye to actually think and talk about her feelings towards Bubbles.

I don't get why people are hating on Evie for doing this though. Unless they think Faye should just continue to wallow in denial? At some point that trope has to have a pay off and the storyline has to resolve, or it's just bad writing. Evie isn't psychoanalyzing or pushing Faye into doing anything. Just asking some leading questions to get Faye to think. If a mechanic hear's a friend's car and starts asking questions or pointing out that the timing seems off, should they be yelled at for butting in? Why specifically does Evie's psychology training preclude her from talking about the very subject she's studying except in a professional environment?

Although if Faye does end up going "robosexual", she will be the second main female character (after Dora) to find no satisfaction in hetero relationships and end up turning to alternative sexuality for fulfillment. I find this...interesting.

I think you are reading way to much into that. Dora was established almost from the beginning as being bisexual. Her issues with Marten had nothing to do with him being male or even really to do with Marten at all. They had to do with her trust issues. Something that breaking up with Marten made her finally realize she needed to address. The fact that she's been in a stable relationship with Tai for so long is more an indication that Dora has realized that learned to trust more and that Tai was willing to put in the emotional labor that Marten wasn't. None of this have anything to do with their respective genders or sexualities.

Most of the relationships shown in the comic have been heterosexual, with at least as many stable, working hetero relationships as homosexual ones, possibly more. Faye and Angus has a long term successful relationship until Angus got his dream job and got on the bus. It wasn't his gender that was an issue, but distance and Faye's fear of abandonment.

We have seen people with close and deep friendships that don't lead to romance. Brun and Renee for one. Notice how they don't blush and swoon while complementing each other or talk about each other the way Faye and Bubbles do. I don't know where Jeph will take the story, but I can plainly see he's been dropping hints all along. Had one of them been male I don't think people would be questioning so hard that there was some attraction at work there.

Also, the phrase 'alternate sexuality' is loaded with bad subtext. By describing homosexual attraction as 'alternate' it establishes that heterosexual attractions as being 'normal' or at least baseline. That to have homosexual attractions is different from what is expected/normal/baseline.

[ChipNoir]

I'm really not that worried about what Evie is doing 'now', because I've been there. I suppose  LGBT member sometimes you look at other people who haven't realized their own feeling and you look at yourself and think "...I owe this person a nudge because they have no idea who they actually are." People have many a time said they had no idea for years that they were gay, because social conditioning puts a block against that being a thing.

Personally I find that bizarre. I pretended to have crushes on girls, and then the moment puberty hit I knew instantly that I wanted to think about boys. A lot. In very overtly hormonal ways. I guess it's just different depending on what you're nurtured into.

Regardless, this could be as simple as Evie, who IS a at least bisexual, seeing someone like herself struggling with complicated feelings and trying to push her towards the truth. The two DID fangirl the hell out if it till they hit a brick wall with Faye's lack of undestanding.

My concern isn't Evie pushing her towards this. My concern is what Evie will do once something actually happens.

[OldGoat]

Just asking some leading questions to get Faye to think. If a mechanic hear's a friend's car and starts asking questions or pointing out that the timing seems off, should they be yelled at for butting in? Why specifically does Evie's psychology training preclude her from talking about the very subject she's studying except in a professional environment?

But you don't normally need a state license to practice as a mechanic.  Electrician or plumber, yes, but I don't know of any state that licenses mechanics.  Evie, however, aspires to a professional level beyond that.  A medical student would need to tread carefully, and have you seen what practicing attorneys do to law students who cross the line into practicing law before they're admitted to the state bar?

[SpanielBear]

But you don't normally need a state license to practice as a mechanic.  Electrician or plumber, yes, but I don't know of any state that licenses mechanics.  Evie, however, aspires to a professional level beyond that.  A medical student would need to tread carefully, and have you seen what practicing attorneys do to law students who cross the line into practicing law before they're admitted to the state bar?

The problem is, the line between professional analysis and asking someone about their personal life is quite thin, but anyone can do the latter. To put it another way, if it was Amanda asking the same questions, this wouldn't be an issue. But there really isn't any proffesional malpractice in asking an acquaintance, who is talking about their friend and if they should find them a partner, "do you think that is what they really want?" That kind of insightful question doesn't take training to ask, nor is it particularly out of place.

[OldGoat]

f it was Amanda asking the same questions, this wouldn't be an issue.

But Amanda doesn't aspire to licensure as a clinical psychologist.  Even if nothing ultimately came of it, even if it was logged out as unfounded and the malicious action of a jealous busy-body, the sort of attention a complaint would generate is seldom if ever welcome.

[SpanielBear]

f it was Amanda asking the same questions, this wouldn't be an issue.

But Amanda doesn't aspire to licensure as a clinical psychologist.  Even if nothing ultimately came of it, even if it was logged out as unfounded and the malicious action of a jealous busy-body, the sort of attention a complaint would generate is seldom if ever welcome.

I am really, really confused as to what the issue is here. Evie hasn't diagnosed Faye, hasn't pathologised her, hasn't prescribed any therapy or medication. She has just asked a question. It's like saying a doctor would be risking their career if they asked a friend "how are you feeling?". I know there are huge ethical issues around analysing or doing any kind of work with anyone without their knowledge or consent, I do. But I just cannot see any way in which Evie might be violating proffesional boundaries here.

[dutchrvl]

f it was Amanda asking the same questions, this wouldn't be an issue.

But Amanda doesn't aspire to licensure as a clinical psychologist.  Even if nothing ultimately came of it, even if it was logged out as unfounded and the malicious action of a jealous busy-body, the sort of attention a complaint would generate is seldom if ever welcome.

I am really, really confused as to what the issue is here. Evie hasn't diagnosed Faye, hasn't pathologised her, hasn't prescribed any therapy or medication. She has just asked a question. It's like saying a doctor would be risking their career if they asked a friend "how are you feeling?". I know there are huge ethical issues around analysing or doing any kind of work with anyone without their knowledge or consent, I do. But I just cannot see any way in which Evie might be violating proffesional boundaries here.

^This. I am seriously baffled sometimes by analysis taking place on this forum going overboard.
So far all Evie has done is ask questions that, while more intrusive than I would appreciate, are not at all out of the ordinary for normal conversation.

[Cornelius]

I don't see anything wrong with what she's doing here, either, really. My only concern is if she should turn it into a case study, but as I said before, I think that is very unlikely.

If asking this kind of questions of your acquaintances is liable to get aspiring psychologists blacklisted, I feel pretty confident that very quickly there would be a shortage of psychologists.

Is she, in fact, practicing here?

There's a difference between practicing medicine, or law, or what have you, and using techniques you glean from your profession in your daily life. And, as such, if asking questions in this way is this specific, I know quite a few people who must be equally censured, despite having no formal training in psychology whatsoever.

As I noted before, without the context, outside the box, and any other character, would this be a problem?

[Tova]

You're all jumping to conclusions about where Evie is going with this, if anywhere.

You need to set aside your readers' omniscience again.

[Tova]

If Evie is going there (no evidence she is) she damn well better get Faye and Bubbles to give explicit verbal consent, as soon as possible and ideally an hour ago.

Yes, this I agree with.

[SpanielBear]

If Evie is going there (no evidence she is) she damn well better get Faye and Bubbles to give explicit verbal consent, as soon as possible and ideally an hour ago.

Yes, this I agree with.

To be fair, me too. If she *does* turn this into an academic exercise, I agree she is way out of line. I just don't see that as having happened yet.

[TheEvilDog]

Considering that the information Evie has about Faye come from a secondhand source (Amanda) and likely to be a little out of date (due to Faye moving to Northampton), and considering she has no idea how messed up Bubbles' life was until recently, using this as an opportunity to force a revelation in Faye, well to me, it feels like a recipe for disaster.

Its kind of why I feel like Jeph is using this story to enter the idea of shipping and how out of control it can get. Instead of asking Faye if she could see Bubbles as a romantic partner, Evie is using skills she's only learned recently in an impromptu therapy session over dinner.

The thing is, is it her (or Amanda's) place to play the matchmaker? There's taking an interest, then there's trying to set up to people to fulfil your own gratification (I mean, look at Amanda). I think that's what I'm taking umbrage with.

[Tova]

Well, yes. I don't think I need to reiterate my feelings about shippers. 

[Cornelius]

You need to set aside your readers' omniscience again.

And let's not forget the auctorial fallacy.

Anyway, tomorrow we'll probably see where this is going.

Is anyone else wondering how Bubbles is doing in the mean time? I'm not sure we left her in the best of places.

[Is it cold in here?]

Here's another way to express what's disturbing me about Evie and raising uncertainties which may or may not get comforting answers.

Evie is asking questions which she, of all people, should know are the type of questions that lead to insights and revelations.

The Pugnacious Peach has not given permission to be made self-aware.

[OldGoat]

There's a difference between practicing medicine, or law, or what have you, and using techniques you glean from your profession in your daily life. And, as such, if asking questions in this way is this specific, I know quite a few people who must be equally censured, despite having no formal training in psychology whatsoever.

As I noted before, without the context, outside the box, and any other character, would this be a problem?

If the other character intended to pursue a career as a licensed psychologist, yes indeed, it certainly could become one. 

If you're applying for a tow operator's license and they discover that you've previously operated an unlicensed tow truck, you're going to face additional scrutiny before you're issued a license.

If you are seeking to be licensed as a massage therapist and your name has been associated with massage parlors specializing in "happy endings," you're probably in for a hassle.

If you are seeking to be licensed as a real estate agent and they have reason to believe you've been involved in selling swampland in Florida...

If you are trying to become licensed as a used car dealer and they have reason to believe you've curbsided a dozen flood cars from out of state over the past six months....

Yes.  If you've come to the attention of licensing authorities any whiff of practicing prior to obtaining licensure may cause you problems.  If it turns out to be unfounded so so insignificant that the authorities opt not to take action, the problem goes away.  But the subject has still been on the hot seat for a while and will probably not remember the experience fondly.

And then, here in the US, there's HIPAA.  For non-USAians, it's a federal law involving privacy of patient medical records, including psychotherapy (and much, much more, but that's the nutshell version).  That's another potential wrinkle Evie may find difficult to iron out, especially if the other customer (the one who looks like Brun from the back) recognizes her and is a gossip.  You're non-professional friend having an identical conversation has no obligations under HIPAA, but an aspiring clinician does.