Print

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

yes

no

good question

but she's a robot

spathe ham

[Boxer]

The problem with this storyarc so far is that Brun is still completely oblivious to the fact that Millefeuille interprets her behavior increasingly as flirting, while Brun herself just tries to be a good friend by following the rules that Renee has given her about friendship.

I have been thinking that Mille is confused and if she was being flirty she wouldn't have missed a few other opportunities earlier like about feelings, or when Brun referred to her prized butt. etc.  That line is too cliche.
I think you got a case of the blind leading the deaf her.

How would Mille react if she found out she could of just thought Bigger Butt and it just went Pop!

[Thrillho]

Perpetuating it isn't going to reduce the likelihood of people living up to the stereotype or being excluded for not doing so.

[Tormuse]

I feel like Jeph did that first panel just for an excuse to draw a butt. 

[Shremedy]

Might I recommend not multi-posting?

What the EFF is "wrong" with keeping replies to separate individual posts, with separate individual points to be made, separated?  Who pissed in your Cheerios?  It doesn't suit YOUR sensibilities of How To Post?  GET OVER YOURSELF.

[Shremedy]

Comic’s up. Millefeuille has discovered an undocumented feature. Pop!

She needs to change her name to MilleFLOOF!

[Shremedy]

Might I recommend not multi-posting?

Sorry...I won't bother posting again.

While I had some (perhaps overly harsh) words for sitandspin, you're not exactly in the clear either.  The rebuke was mild (if perhaps a little passive-aggressive), and you're acting like you've been stomped flat, which is assuredly not the case.  Taking your ball and going home is SUPER passive-aggressive, and isn't helpful for people (like me) of a mind to defend you.  If you have good reasons to format things the way you do, then just do it, and let other people's opinions about such trivialities be damned.  There are other far more cardinal sins to commit in this forum (covered in clearly posted FAQs).  Worry about the written, not the unwritten; if the something of the latter becomes genuinely problematic enough, it WILL become written!

[dutchrvl]

Might I recommend not multi-posting?

What the EFF is "wrong" with keeping replies to separate individual posts, with separate individual points to be made, separated?  Who pissed in your Cheerios?  It doesn't suit YOUR sensibilities of How To Post?  GET OVER YOURSELF.

This.....seems like an overly emotional and over-the-top response to somebody merely making a suggestion. As Trillho also mentioned, multi-posting is generally discouraged. This is not to say it's illegal, but a suggestion to a relatively new person to avoid it seems fairly reasonable, no? Perhaps sitnspin could've added a sentence explaining why it's discouraged, but ya know...

[anahata]

That's short for 'cuckhold', here, and we use it to mean a dude who's SO is having sexual relations with someone else while they watch.

I think the original meaning was a man whose wife was being unfaithful, but I'm pretty sure that having to watch wasn't part of the definition. It was considered shameful for the cuckold, because he was supposed to "keep his wife under control". (We are talking 17th century and earlier here, attitudes were obviously different then.)

[BlueFatima]

Might I recommend not multi-posting?

What the EFF is "wrong" with keeping replies to separate individual posts, with separate individual points to be made, separated?  Who pissed in your Cheerios?  It doesn't suit YOUR sensibilities of How To Post?  GET OVER YOURSELF.

What they asked of you is reasonable netiquette. In fact, it is probably a favor they told you. Multiposting—like posting in all caps—makes you look like a discussion board newbie...or just plain rude. It is generally frowned upon on most groups. I guarantee most of us got told not to do that by someone else at some point on a discussion board. Nothing to feel bad about or offended for.

Edit - And—yes—I see the irony/hypocrisy of saying this as I double-posted a page back on this thread. 

[oddtail]

That's short for 'cuckhold', here, and we use it to mean a dude who's SO is having sexual relations with someone else while they watch.

I think the original meaning was a man whose wife was being unfaithful, but I'm pretty sure that having to watch wasn't part of the definition. It was considered shameful for the cuckold, because he was supposed to "keep his wife under control". (We are talking 17th century and earlier here, attitudes were obviously different then.)

That's correct, AFAIK. The modern use of the word is due to the shortening of the phrase "cuckold fetishism". The phrase is unwieldy, and the word "cuckold" in itself was, before being reintroduced into common speech, somewhat antiquated and infrequently used.

Being cuckolded (in the original sense) carried a sense of shame to it - as you say, because it meant the man was not man enough to make sure his wife was faithful (and also subtextually, that there was something "wrong" with him if his wife was looking for gratification elsewhere. Also, toxic masculinity* about the other man being obviously higher in the pecking order).

The "having to watch" in the word's modern context comes from the fact that "it's shameful and humiliating" is, from what I understand, part of the appeal of the fetish, so adding the passive watching would add to the feeling of power disparity.

*The term may be new, but the attitude is, I imagine, as old as the notion of "manly" exists, so probably older than written word.

[BlueFatima]

I feel like Jeph did that first panel just for an excuse to draw a butt. 

And what’s wrong with that???   

[Cornelius]

Might I recommend not multi-posting?

Sorry...I won't bother posting again.

While I had some (perhaps overly harsh) words for sitandspin, you're not exactly in the clear either.  The rebuke was mild (if perhaps a little passive-aggressive), and you're acting like you've been stomped flat, which is assuredly not the case.  Taking your ball and going home is SUPER passive-aggressive, and isn't helpful for people (like me) of a mind to defend you.  If you have good reasons to format things the way you do, then just do it, and let other people's opinions about such trivialities be damned.  There are other far more cardinal sins to commit in this forum (covered in clearly posted FAQs).  Worry about the written, not the unwritten; if the something of the latter becomes genuinely problematic enough, it WILL become written!

About that unwritten thing: I actually do believe there's something in the rules section about adding to your post, rather than adding a new one underneath.

[Thrillho]

Might I recommend not multi-posting?

What the EFF is "wrong" with keeping replies to separate individual posts, with separate individual points to be made, separated?  Who pissed in your Cheerios?  It doesn't suit YOUR sensibilities of How To Post?  GET OVER YOURSELF.

Global Moderator Comment

This really wasn't necessary, and nor was your follow up to the previous poster. Cool it down, please.

[Case]

hmmMMmmMMmmmm ...

hmMmmhmmMmmMmHmmm ...!

(zOMG this comic has me lauging so hard ...  )

[Case]

Beautiful women dont get away with a lot of things in your reality ?

Not really, no.

(click to show/hide)

https://www.jurist.org/news/2020/02/incarcerated-women-receive-harsher-punishments-than-men-us-report/

https://hbswk.hbs.edu/item/women-receive-harsher-punishment-at-work-than-men

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/women-get-tougher-sentences-than-men-cjpdx65q7

https://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2019/jan/12/intimate-partner-violence-gender-gap-cyntoia-brown

https://www.prisonstudies.org/news/federal-report-says-women-prison-receive-harsher-punishments-men

https://www.law.umich.edu/newsandinfo/features/Pages/starr_gender_disparities.aspx

Your links all refer to differences between genders, not the difference of beautiful vs ugly.

True. Also true that neither will even try to accomodate for obviously subjective criteria - for obvious reasons - nor for ironclad solipsism, a penchant for moving the goalposts upon encountering unexpected information or a rock-hard belief that the outcome of a mental process subject to the combined effects of such cognitive distortions constitutes a deep insight or cutting rebuttal (Dunning-Krueger effect).

P:S: If it were true that beauty, not gender, was the deciding factor that the veracity of your claim is desperately clinging to - then why restrict the claim to women in the first place?

[Perfectly Reasonable]

I can see the wheels spinning as Brün considers Millie in several different bodies, then Millie's body with several different personas. It's a non-trivial problem!

It's not sub-text, it's sign text.

[Wingy]

Kind of like building a house with recycled wood.

This is done all the time.  What do you think OSB is?

You tell us.

Oriented strand board.  Some people call it chip board.  If you look at a piece carefully, you'll see it's made from glued-together slivers of wood.  Sometimes you can find a piece where the slivers are more or less the same shape and you can infer the rough outline of the original piece of wood that was sliced up to make the OSB.  See also: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oriented_strand_board  Whether the wood flakes come from recycled wood is up to the manufacturer.

[Is it cold in here?]

Global Moderator Comment

I have written to awkwardness and assured them that multi-posting is a small thing and they are welcome here.

[BlueFatima]

I wonder if Brun could end up hired by Bubs and Faye? It seems like she has a good skillset (as well as passion about mechanical parts) that could make her an amazing asset. If their business grows, it would probably pay her better and be more rewarding to her over working at a bar.

[Potato Farmer]

Man, I wish you could ask folks questions like that and get such a considered, honest answer. (I guess that's the same as saying "It would be wonderful if everyone thought about stuff and was honest," which isn't exactly deep. But still, it would be great. I don't mean I'd go around pestering people with questions--I think Brun would get annoyed if everyone she met asked for her personal evaluation of them.)

It does make life a lot easier.

Personally I probably would have been amused by Brun thinking about it so hard, in part because depending on the mood I'm in I'm liable to do something similar.
On the cuckolding thing, I always interpreted it on two levels.

As a fetish I relate it to voyeurism and exhibitionism, and a sign of trust if both sides are comfortable with it.

Outside of the fetish thing it's the exact opposite since it's essentially cheating on someone and then rubbing it in their face. Which I wouldn't connect to gender roles because being cheated on is massive ass, cheating on someone is being a massive dickwad, and watching it happen is just insult to injury.

Gotta admit given that I always figured that the issue was unfaithfulness I never considered the angle of it having to do with inadequate masculinity.

[Case]

<snip>

I don't know you, despite your being on this board for so long. Until now, I had no reason to think ill of you - maybe we'd get along splendidly if we knew each other better. That being said:

I consider SitnSpin a dear personal friend and all-around Good Person^TM. Maybe you don't often read the 'Depression'-thread: She's been the best of all possible friends to so many people who found themselves in all-out war with their own minds and badly in need of a kind word. She's the kind of friend you want at your side when shit gets rough, and cherios are being pissed onto. And she'll do that for you even if she doesn't know you from Adam - just because it needs to be done, and she's someone who can.

She will never stand alone on this board.

[Gyrre]

Kind of like building a house with recycled wood.

This is done all the time.  What do you think OSB is?

You tell us.

One of the the three main reasons you don't want a home from an American housing development from the last two decades.

The other two are the foundation not being allowed to set long enough leading to issues after around a decade, and mold issues from improperly sealed roofs and walls.

[Gyrre]

Her looks shouldn't. Nobody's should. But as long as simps and desperate horndogs are around....

Can we please not use the word "simp". It has enough negative implications (such as the idea that a man would only be kind to a woman to get sex and that the particular woman in question is not attractive enough to be worth being kind to) that it feels slimy to use it.

My apologies. I was unaware of the second half to that.

I don't believe I've ever encountered the second portion. Just the part insulting the guy being a sucker/simpleton.

The first half shouldn't be even remotely acceptable to you, either. The idea that the only reason a man would ever treat a woman with kindness is to get in her pants is disgusting no matter how you slice it.

Vile, yes. But I have actually met them.
They're misogynistic turds who usually still have the maturity of a 13 to 16 year-old, despite being well into their 20s, 30s, or 40s.

[Case]

<smip>

Vile, yes. But I have actually met them.
They're misogynistic turds who usually still have the maturity of a 13 to 16 year-old.

You and pretty much any het-cis bepenised person. The problem is that as long as it's being trodden out as 'just the way men are', it's both hugely damaging to us (men) - the first people poisoned by toxic masculinity is ourselves - as well as the victims of those slimy asshats.

(click to show/hide)

If you're interested: I read some research a while back how serial male predators will check out their male friends' attitudes and 'tolerance thresholds' with the kind of just-a-joke jokes that aren't really jokes for them (No guarantee the bookmark survived my latest 'oopsies' with the bookmarks folder, though). The point is to see who of them - of Us! - can be groomed so they'll be ready to defend the perdator when a survivor accuses them. 'They' really do that shit, it's really strategic and planned. And they can do that crap - turning us into accomplices, into instruments of their sick shite - right in front of our f**kin noses because ... well, we do tell each other lots of crappy jokes, don't we? Easy to hide the not-at-all-funny ones among the 'Yeah, not really for public consumption'-stuff that generations of men have known since kindergarten.

Really scared the crap out of me: I have met such guys, and even considered one of them sort of a friend. He was our clan-leader back in the CS days, and we both studied at the same Uni. One day, we had a female guest/proby-for-membership visit us on a big public Lan in Leipzig - I guess we were all a bit sheepish bcs of the sudden rush to the showers once word got round she'd come (early oughts ...).

At some point, we sat in a circle with her sitting beside my 'kinda-friend' ... and suddenly she jumps and squirms a bit (I did find it hard not to shoot the occasional glance her way, granted ...). Afterwards, she came over and told me he'd reached into her pants from behind while sitting next to her. I ... didn't know what to say. Didn't even know there were people who'd do something like that - it was so bizarre, so alien to me. We were all sitting right there, it was broad daylight, no visual cover whatsoever - and this bastard makes a calculated bet that she wouldn't make a scene, and that if she did, we'd be hesitant to believe her. Or too confused. Right in front of our goddamn blind eyes!

And he'd gotten it all worked out perfectly correct - had worked us out just fine - and had played us like the string section in his very own orchestra. We trusted this guy - and he knew, and it gave him the mother of all kicks to see what he could do right in front of us.

I gave him a lift home. At some point, he made a 'joke' out of grabbing my right knee, and pushing it down, so that the car accelerated for a second. That was the moment I understood - for this guy, other peoples' boundaries are interesting things meant to be worked out, and worked around.

I didn't work all of that out instantly - I even was a guest at his wedding. It's reallyreally hard to revise your mental model of someone once it's settled in - especially of people you like. But ... I've been around a couple of people who got me to ask myself what this mental model is really based on. How much of it is really just the equivalent of snapshots, and how much our brain fills in from it's 'standard assumptions about human behaviour'-folder. And how difficult it is to tell one from the other.

And that is why those "little things that don't really mean much, c'mon" - all the 'boys will be boys' and 'women use tears as a weapon' and all the other shit you and I and every other guy since time immemorial have heard and laughed along with, and told yourself it's OK, because you don't really believe it, you're just being polite - why that shit is actually really a lot more important that you and I and all the other dick-bearers tend to give it credit for. That it can be turned into a weapon. That it can be used to turn us into instruments against our own wills or convictions.

[BlueFatima]

<smip>

Vile, yes. But I have actually met them.
They're misogynistic turds who usually still have the maturity of a 13 to 16 year-old.

You and pretty much any het-cis bepenised person. The problem is that as long as it's being trodden out as 'just the way men are', it's both hugely damaging to us (men) - the first people poisoned by toxic masculinity is ourselves - as well as the victims of those slimy asshats.

That attitude hurts *everyone*—especially kids who get stuck in those kinds of stupidity when adults with those beliefs decide to become parents. It is destructive, self-destructive, and all-around ignorant. This isn’t to say a person shouldn’t embrace stereotypical gender roles if it feels good to them and makes them happy, but looking down on your partner for being the opposite sex and projecting that crap on others is sad, limiting and damaging.

[Farideh]

<smip>

Vile, yes. But I have actually met them.
They're misogynistic turds who usually still have the maturity of a 13 to 16 year-old.

You and pretty much any het-cis bepenised person. The problem is that as long as it's being trodden out as 'just the way men are', it's both hugely damaging to us (men) - the first people poisoned by toxic masculinity is ourselves - as well as the victims of those slimy asshats.

(click to show/hide)

If you're interested: I read some research a while back how serial male predators will check out their male friends' attitudes and 'tolerance thresholds' with the kind of just-a-joke jokes that aren't really jokes for them (No guarantee the bookmark survived my latest 'oopsies' with the bookmarks folder, though). The point is to see who of them - of Us! - can be groomed so they'll be ready to defend the perdator when a survivor accuses them. 'They' really do that shit, it's really strategic and planned. And they can do that crap - turning us into accomplices, into instruments of their sick shite - right in front of our f**kin noses because ... well, we do tell each other lots of crappy jokes, don't we? Easy to hide the not-at-all-funny ones among the 'Yeah, not really for public consumption'-stuff that generations of men have known since kindergarten.

Really scared the crap out of me: I have met such guys, and even considered one of them sort of a friend. He was our clan-leader back in the CS days, and we both studied at the same Uni. One day, we had a female guest/proby-for-membership visit us on a big public Lan in Leipzig - I guess we were all a bit sheepish bcs of the sudden rush to the showers once word got round she'd come (early oughts ...).

At some point, we sat in a circle with her sitting beside my 'kinda-friend' ... and suddenly she jumps and squirms a bit (I did find it hard not to shoot the occasional glance her way, granted ...). Afterwards, she came over and told me he'd reached into her pants from behind while sitting next to her. I ... didn't know what to say. Didn't even know there were people who'd do something like that - it was so bizarre, so alien to me. We were all sitting right there, it was broad daylight, no visual cover whatsoever - and this bastard makes a calculated bet that she wouldn't make a scene, and that if she did, we'd be hesitant to believe her. Or too confused. Right in front of our goddamn blind eyes!

And he'd gotten it all worked out perfectly correct - had worked us out just fine - and had played us like the string section in his very own orchestra. We trusted this guy - and he knew, and it gave him the mother of all kicks to see what he could do right in front of us.

I gave him a lift home. At some point, he made a 'joke' out of grabbing my right knee, and pushing it down, so that the car accelerated for a second. That was the moment I understood - for this guy, other peoples' boundaries are interesting things meant to be worked out, and worked around.

I didn't work all of that out instantly - I even was a guest at his wedding. It's reallyreally hard to revise your mental model of someone once it's settled in - especially of people you like. But ... I've been around a couple of people who got me to ask myself what this mental model is really based on. How much of it is really just the equivalent of snapshots, and how much our brain fills in from it's 'standard assumptions about human behaviour'-folder. And how difficult it is to tell one from the other.

And that is why those "little things that don't really mean much, c'mon" - all the 'boys will be boys' and 'women use tears as a weapon' and all the other shit you and I and every other guy since time immemorial have heard and laughed along with, and told yourself it's OK, because you don't really believe it, you're just being polite - why that shit is actually really a lot more important that you and I and all the other dick-bearers tend to give it credit for. That it can be turned into a weapon. That it can be used to turn us into instruments against our own wills or convictions.

That is... terrifying, frankly.

[Gyrre]

<smip>

Vile, yes. But I have actually met them.
They're misogynistic turds who usually still have the maturity of a 13 to 16 year-old.

You and pretty much any het-cis bepenised person. The problem is that as long as it's being trodden out as 'just the way men are', it's both hugely damaging to us (men) - the first people poisoned by toxic masculinity is ourselves - as well as the victims of those slimy asshats.

(click to show/hide)

If you're interested: I read some research a while back how serial male predators will check out their male friends' attitudes and 'tolerance thresholds' with the kind of just-a-joke jokes that aren't really jokes for them (No guarantee the bookmark survived my latest 'oopsies' with the bookmarks folder, though). The point is to see who of them - of Us! - can be groomed so they'll be ready to defend the perdator when a survivor accuses them. 'They' really do that shit, it's really strategic and planned. And they can do that crap - turning us into accomplices, into instruments of their sick shite - right in front of our f**kin noses because ... well, we do tell each other lots of crappy jokes, don't we? Easy to hide the not-at-all-funny ones among the 'Yeah, not really for public consumption'-stuff that generations of men have known since kindergarten.

Really scared the crap out of me: I have met such guys, and even considered one of them sort of a friend. He was our clan-leader back in the CS days, and we both studied at the same Uni. One day, we had a female guest/proby-for-membership visit us on a big public Lan in Leipzig - I guess we were all a bit sheepish bcs of the sudden rush to the showers once word got round she'd come (early oughts ...).

At some point, we sat in a circle with her sitting beside my 'kinda-friend' ... and suddenly she jumps and squirms a bit (I did find it hard not to shoot the occasional glance her way, granted ...). Afterwards, she came over and told me he'd reached into her pants from behind while sitting next to her. I ... didn't know what to say. Didn't even know there were people who'd do something like that - it was so bizarre, so alien to me. We were all sitting right there, it was broad daylight, no visual cover whatsoever - and this bastard makes a calculated bet that she wouldn't make a scene, and that if she did, we'd be hesitant to believe her. Or too confused. Right in front of our goddamn blind eyes!

And he'd gotten it all worked out perfectly correct - had worked us out just fine - and had played us like the string section in his very own orchestra. We trusted this guy - and he knew, and it gave him the mother of all kicks to see what he could do right in front of us.

I gave him a lift home. At some point, he made a 'joke' out of grabbing my right knee, and pushing it down, so that the car accelerated for a second. That was the moment I understood - for this guy, other peoples' boundaries are interesting things meant to be worked out, and worked around.

I didn't work all of that out instantly - I even was a guest at his wedding. It's reallyreally hard to revise your mental model of someone once it's settled in - especially of people you like. But ... I've been around a couple of people who got me to ask myself what this mental model is really based on. How much of it is really just the equivalent of snapshots, and how much our brain fills in from it's 'standard assumptions about human behaviour'-folder. And how difficult it is to tell one from the other.

And that is why those "little things that don't really mean much, c'mon" - all the 'boys will be boys' and 'women use tears as a weapon' and all the other shit you and I and every other guy since time immemorial have heard and laughed along with, and told yourself it's OK, because you don't really believe it, you're just being polite - why that shit is actually really a lot more important that you and I and all the other dick-bearers tend to give it credit for. That it can be turned into a weapon. That it can be used to turn us into instruments against our own wills or convictions.

Sorry, not certain if that's meant to be accusatory towards me directly or echo chamber affected speech.

As for the 'jokes', I'm quite aware. It's why I try to shut that sort of thing down immediately. I refuse to let someone try to drag me into that sort of thing.

[TieDyeKat]

Whaddya know, that does look like Joyce's hair.

This is exactly what I came here to post.

When I saw it, it took me out of the strip for a moment.

[Farideh]

New comic.

My, who is that dark haired gentleman in the library? He looks familiar...

[Case]

<snip>

Sorry, not certain if that's meant to be accusatory towards me directly or echo chamber affected speech.

Accusatory? Certainly not! More like 'riffing on your post'? My starting point was the thought that the societal expectation for men to be awful can also sometimes prove a godsent for really awful men, and my feeling that we - men in general - should generally be more aware of that and more thoughtful of how society shapes our thinking and can sometimes limit our ability to 'see' the things we look at.

That was about the only tangential connection with your good person, or the post you made - I don't really feel I 'know' your well enough to 'critisize' your attitudes, and the point is also somewhat subtle, IMO.

I didn't even think of drawing a line between you and my 'not-friend from 15 years ago', if that is your worry? -> I'm sorry if I caused you distress and am happy to affirm that 'Nope, I didn't mean to imply that Gyrre is like Mr.Asshole Pantsgrabbing Gaslighter'.

As for the 'jokes', I'm quite aware. It's why I try to shut that sort of thing down immediately. I refuse to let someone try to drag me into that sort of thing.

Then you're a lot more aware than I was for ... far too long a time, I have to admit to my shame.

[RNV EPM]

(click to show/hide)

[snip]

I was that type of person. It was all about testing everything without anybody noticing. That meant doing the smallest things. It always surprised me, that anyone was ever convicted of anything. I thought they must be stupid or insane. I was never convicted of anything.
It was also about control. That meant knowing exactly how each person might act. That meant testing them.
At some point, I just stopped. Then I forgot. Thank you for reminding me.
I wish I could go back, to not hurt who i hurt, and to not stop knowing people so exactly. I'll be thinking how to do that.

[Zebediah]

Comic’s up.

Robot Bodies: How Do They Work?

[Gnabberwocky]

And the worlds collide. For a moment, anyway.

I really hope this storyline concludes with Marten inviting them to get drinks or something in some way that incorporates them more into the former main cast (Marten, Hanners, Dora, etc). There was that one time that they all ended up in Marten and Faye's apartment, but that didn't really amount to anything.

[TheEvilDog]

So wait....who is the guy with the black hair? I've never seen this guy before!

[Gyrre]

And the worlds collide. For a moment, anyway.

I really hope this storyline concludes with Marten inviting them to get drinks or something in some way that incorporates them more into the former main cast (Marten, Hanners, Dora, etc). There was that one time that they all ended up in Marten and Faye's apartment, but that didn't really amount to anything.

Marten goes home and excitedly rambles about the maybe human AI couple he met at the library to Faye and Bubbles. Bubbles likely being the first to piece together who they are after a potentially planned three couple get together drops down to a double date.


EDIT: If Jeph takes the comic in this direction, he had it planned before I posted this comment. I take no credit for any such or similar plot points. I will only be ecstatic about my predictive abilities.

[shanejayell]

Hey, Marten! Been awhile.

[Penquin47]

Oriented Strand Board?

If this 'eye for an eye' view extends to reality, then we are simply different people.

An 'eye for an eye' can mean different things, in this instance I don't believe Faye has fully realised the consequences of her actions and still acts, and gets away with, being 'snarky' because its her 'thing' whereas in reality its still just being mean albiet at a lesser level than before

I see, often, a misconception about `eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth,' as though it were about retaliation---that the dis-toothed has a right to dis-tooth his dis-toother. Really, restitution's the thing: Poked out my eye? Replace it! There is, of course, more to restitution than merely replacing things into proper places---all bad consequences must be covered. (Sometimes, figuring out the sufficient restitution might be difficult, and some things might not be restorable.)

That's... not a misconception?  That is the literal meaning of the law of Hammurabi from which the phrase comes.
Law 196: "If a man destroy the eye of another man, they shall destroy his eye. If one break a man's bone, they shall break his bone."  (And of course because classism has been with us as long as differentiated classes have, if it was a lower-class freeman or a slave, you just paid a fine...)

[DaiJB]

...Then the guy in the library (Marty? Marvin? Marshall? Whatever...) comes back with a trolley loaded with everything from "Robot Maintenance for Dummies" to "The AI Kama Sutra"...

[awkwardness]

...damnit, I have the Reading Rainbow theme song stuck in my head now. It took me a week to get it out last time I heard it!

[BlueFatima]

Oh, look—it’s whatshisnface! Or maybe just a random library dude who looks like him?

J/K - “Long time no see you, Marten!“

[Case]

So wait....who is the guy with the black hair? I've never seen this guy before!

It's on the tip of my tongue ... I think had a pet mustelid?

[Tova]

Pretty sure I’ve seen him before. I think he’s a recurring background character.

[jwhouk]

Marten: “Oh great, I’ve become a running gag in my own comic’s forums.”

[BenRG]

Okay, so here is the question here: Does Millie really want to read books about how her body is constructed or is reading books whilst close to Brun the attractive thing to her? I do like how Brun is struggling to include Millie in what she wants to do. It's obviously very difficult for her and that makes it all the sweeter that she'd going to the effort.

Given Marten's reaction, I'm thinking that the library has a standing policy that visitors (biological and synthetic alike) should not be encouraged to attempt self-repair based on half-understood and possibly out-of-date textbooks!

For some reason I can see Brun asking Marten if there is a rule about making out in the stacks or at the reading tables. Marten's bitter response is that, based on his experience of the students, making out in the stacks or at the reading tables is what they are there for!

So wait....who is the guy with the black hair? I've never seen this guy before!

This would be funny if someone didn't post something like this literally every time Marten appears these days.

[ihaveavoice]

Her looks shouldn't. Nobody's should. But as long as simps and desperate horndogs are around....

Can we please not use the word "simp". It has enough negative implications (such as the idea that a man would only be kind to a woman to get sex and that the particular woman in question is not attractive enough to be worth being kind to) that it feels slimy to use it.

My apologies. I was unaware of the second half to that.

I don't believe I've ever encountered the second portion. Just the part insulting the guy being a sucker/simpleton.

The first half shouldn't be even remotely acceptable to you, either. The idea that the only reason a man would ever treat a woman with kindness is to get in her pants is disgusting no matter how you slice it.

Vile, yes. But I have actually met them.
They're misogynistic turds who usually still have the maturity of a 13 to 16 year-old, despite being well into their 20s, 30s, or 40s.

Everyone's met them. They're everywhere. Trust me, you don't need to explain them to one of the people they try to prey on. And it seems my point didn't get across: I wasn't suggesting I didn't believe that these fuckers are real. I was saying that only apologizing because you didn't know about the second half of the definition makes it seem like the first half is fine and acceptable, which it is very much not. Implications matter, so we shouldn't just let them slide.

And, um...what are the implications Jeph referenced meant to be? Learning about bodies -> sex? Is that what we're meant to be thinking about? Did Jeph just call me too pure? 

[...] The idea that the only reason a man would ever treat a woman with kindness is to get in her pants is disgusting no matter how you slice it.

Its pretty bad behavior, yes.

So is making a fire and then intentionally inhaling the smoke.

Doesnt mean people dont do these things.

How did multiple people think I was saying I don't think that's real?? I was calling the nasty behavior that our society openly encourages and tells us is deeply engrained in all men disgusting. It needs to be called out as often as possible as deeply revolting and NOT something men are just ~naturally going to do. I wasn't declaring that I'm somehow unaware of the world that we live in. I live here. I am a damn target for men like this. I KNOW.

[snubnose]

I like how in todays comic Jeph managed to actually work Marten into the story.

P:S: If it were true that beauty, not gender, was the deciding factor that the veracity of your claim is desperately clinging to - then why restrict the claim to women in the first place?

Just checking - you need really explained why a beautiful woman benefits a lot more from her looks than a handsome man ? Just because I'm really surprised somebody needs that explained. Its like, super obvious in everyday life.

Thats because men, on average, care a lot about visuals, and thus care a lot about how beautiful a woman is. While women are more into other senses, namely touch and smell, and care more about factors like the wealth of a man. I've even met women who claim they dont care about how people look at all, though I have no way of testing if thats actually true.

Vile, yes. But I have actually met them.
They're misogynistic turds who usually still have the maturity of a 13 to 16 year-old, despite being well into their 20s, 30s, or 40s.

Err ... thats usually the people who have been like that between 13 and 16.

Because as a former 13 to 16 year old, I'm quite insulted that you sugggest I, and many others, would ever have been like that.

Sure, the sex drive is very strong at that age, and sure, one lacks experience with the opposite gender. That doesnt mean one doesnt want romance though. Or isnt into knightly ideals of honor.

How did multiple people think I was saying I don't think that's real?? [...]

So are smockers, unfortunately.

I'm a man and thus not potential prey for the people you describe. But theres surely a lot of people who think its okay to make me a passive smoker. I have very sensible lungs, cigarette smoke litereally hurts them, so I'm pretty angry at smockers.

So yeah, I didnt suggested you said it wasnt real.

[DaiJB]

I've got it! I remember who it is! That's Netram Deer, international financier and ostrich racer...

[BlueFatima]

This comic adorkably wholesome...even moreso if you read it while eating homemade cookies. 

[Zebediah]

Did you bring enough to share with everyone?

[BlueFatima]

Did you bring enough to share with everyone?

I send you all happy cookie vibes! Cookies for breakfast for everyone!