OOTS #959 - The Discussion Thread

[Giggling Ghast]

Mmm, Haley is curvy.

[Keltest]

The reason I asked was that his entire argument was contingent on X not equaling X. Just as asking a stupid question gets you a stupid answer, making a stupid statement causes the response to be a stupid question.

Perhaps my remark that you weren't understanding my point should have clued you in that my argument distinctly did NOT have anything to do with that, or the question you asked. I have no problems with Rich including these messages in his comic, as I have said repeatedly, but I strongly object to being smacked upside the head with them, and this page seems to be leaning towards the latter.

[Jormengand]

Why does this one suddenly seem "forced" to you?

Because LGBTness is regarded as weird and offputting, the exact idea that Rich is trying to combat.

Perhaps my remark that you weren't understanding my point should have clued you in that my argument distinctly did NOT have anything to do with that, or the question you asked. I have no problems with Rich including these messages in his comic, as I have said repeatedly, but I strongly object to being smacked upside the head with them, and this page seems to be leaning towards the latter.

And as I said, it is clearly not. It mentions each once during the strip, no more than it might had her ex instead been swapped with her sister, or both her parents been the same colour.

EDIT:

See, it was either dropping them all in one comic, getting it over with, and then getting back to the comic, or it was spending a comic on lesbians, a comic on women, a comic on mixed race people, blah-di-blah. The comic made precisely nothing of the fact that she was mixed-race or a lesbian: it was shown to be so, and then they both moved on. If you read the webcomic Saturday Morning Breakfast Cereal, you will notice that more recent strips include homosexuals for no reason - but then, why not include homosexuals? Would the story have been any better if instead of "Ex... when we split" Bandanna had said "Sister... when she left home"? On that note, what difference would it have made if you had watched two blacks or two whites, one's hand holding that of her child? They are things which happen, which are irrelevant, which do not at all slow down the story, nor are they forced.

[The Troubadour]

I agree as well. Stories are about getting people's attention. What you do with that attention once you have it is up to you as the author, and Rich is more than welcome to use that attention to get a message across, but that is his choice, not something that stories themselves do.

Stories are a product of their own environment as much as of their authors. It's not that an author necessarily wants to portray a message in their work; but those messages will necessarily be there. What they are depends on a great many factors, but there's no story without any kind of discourse at all.

I'm more than happy to replace the "sell your soul and voice in exchange for a chance to be with a man you've never spoken to" moral of the Little Mermaid for the "love your abuser" message of Beauty and the Beast, if you'd rather.

You'd be wrong on that one, considering Belle only starts falling for Beast when he actually makes an effort to improve as a person. :-)

[Socksy]

-a very long post-

I'm not bothered at all by lesbian characters. I'm not too bothered about the rather forced strip this time around, although I really hope it's not going to go the way of other comics this stuff has happened to. You seem to think I don't care about social issues.

I just often see pieces of work by one author (often blogs) start out as "Here, have some logical feminist stuff" and a few months later, end up as "KILL ALL CISHETS TRANS MEN ARE SCUM TRANS WOMEN ARE STEALING FEMALE CULTURE WHITE PEOPLE ARE THE DEVIL!!1111", and turn into horrible pits of hatred and bigotry. I don't want that to happen to one of my favourite series!

It's probably illogical and a side effect of spending far too much time on tumblr before I decided to leave it, but it's what I'm used to seeing, so I automatically react pretty badly to any SJW-ing.

Your speech up there showed how social justice people SHOULD be, but that's very rarely how they ARE, in my experience.

[Emperordaniel]

I think one of the lawyers (Raul? Julio? My mind is ringing vague bells of a sterotypical Latino name) is gay.

Rodriguez?

[Sadsharks]

Perhaps my remark that you weren't understanding my point should have clued you in that my argument distinctly did NOT have anything to do with that, or the question you asked. I have no problems with Rich including these messages in his comic, as I have said repeatedly, but I strongly object to being smacked upside the head with them, and this page seems to be leaning towards the latter.

Really? A single mixed-race gay character is smacking you upside the head? If the Giant suddenly revealed that half the cast were closeted gays who began discoursing about bad representation of female bodies and racial minorities, maybe you would have a point. As it stands, this is a single page where these issues are each mentioned a single time. In all honesty I'll be a bit disappointed if it never comes up again, but I'm glad he at least included it in the first place.

[oppyu]

I'm always surprised (and depressed) that at some point, the internet managed to turn social justice into a pejorative. Truly this is a wretched hive we inhabit.

[Comrade]

I just often see pieces of work by one author (often blogs) start out as "Here, have some logical feminist stuff" and a few months later, end up as "KILL ALL CISHETS TRANS MEN ARE SCUM TRANS WOMEN ARE STEALING FEMALE CULTURE WHITE PEOPLE ARE THE DEVIL!!1111", and turn into horrible pits of hatred and bigotry. I don't want that to happen to one of my favourite series!

... notwithstanding the fact that I don't think I've ever seen that happen...

Do you honestly see that happening in OotS? I mean, honestly?

[Socksy]

Really? A single mixed-race gay character is smacking you upside the head? If the Giant suddenly revealed that half the cast were closeted gays who began discoursing about bad representation of female bodies and racial minorities, maybe you would have a point. As it stands, this is a single page where these issues are each mentioned a single time. In all honesty I'll be a bit disappointed if it never comes up again, but I'm glad he at least included it in the first place.

It's not the homosexuality a lot of people are uncomfortable about! It's the other bit, the END part of the strip! The bit with the midriff in her choice of adventuring gear and the "women's issues" and all that. It just seemed out of place and badly done.

EDIT:

Do you honestly see that happening in OotS? I mean, honestly?

No, I don't, but I didn't suspect it a lot of other times, and now I'm wary of it.

[Sadsharks]

It's not the homosexuality a lot of people are uncomfortable about! It's the other bit, the END part of the strip! the bit with the midriff in her choice of adventuring gear and the "women's issues" and all that. It just seemed out of place and badly done.

That's why I mentioned the "bad representation of female bodies" bit. And that's entirely your opinion; I thought it fit in just fine and was written quite neatly except maybe Bandanna's "and that's terrible" comment, but even that seemed more like humourous lampshading than anything else.

[Jormengand]

I'm not bothered at all by lesbian characters. I'm not too bothered about the rather forced strip this time around, although I really hope it's not going to go the way of other comics this stuff has happened to. You seem to think I don't care about social issues.

I just often see pieces of work by one author (often blogs) start out as "Here, have some logical feminist stuff" and a few months later, end up as "KILL ALL CISHETS TRANS MEN ARE SCUM TRANS WOMEN ARE STEALING FEMALE CULTURE WHITE PEOPLE ARE THE DEVIL!!1111", and turn into horrible pits of hatred and bigotry. I don't want that to happen to one of my favourite series!

It's probably illogical and a side effect of spending far too much time on tumblr before I decided to leave it, but it's what I'm used to seeing, so I automatically react pretty badly to any SJW-ing.

Your speech up there showed how social justice people SHOULD be, but that's very rarely how they ARE, in my experience.

See, I will never believe in anything other than complete equality of means for all people, regardless of their circumstances. I do not imagine Rich would turn into a raging cisphobe either.

In any case, one hopes that Rich is not suicidal enough to want to kill all cishets.

[oppyu]

It's not the homosexuality a lot of people are uncomfortable about! It's the other bit, the END part of the strip! the bit with the midriff in her choice of adventuring gear and the "women's issues" and all that. It just seemed out of place and badly done.

I honestly don't see the difference between that part and much of the other lampshading in the comic. The Giant brought up things he's done in the past, said 'haha, that wasn't great', and moved on. Yeah, Bandana called it terrible, but I think she was more referring to the mutual attempted murder than the gendered insults.

[zimmerwald1915]

You'd be wrong on that one, considering Belle only starts falling for Beast when he actually makes an effort to improve as a person. :-)

Beast only tried to improve as a person after Belle dragged him back to the castle and dressed his wound after the wolf attack. There was no reason for her to do that; she could have kept running home and left him to die. He didn't deserve the second chance, and she put herself in danger by giving it to him.

[CaDzilla]

I thought that the Bandana has had the most subtle reveal of both mixed descent and LGBTness I've seen in any medium.
I wonder how Tarquin would react to her, as he's pretty bigoted. EDIT: Also, every work of fiction is improved with the addition of an LGBT person

[rodneyAnonymous]

Debate tip: Making personal attacks against your opponents (such as telling them they have no idea how to refute your points, or accusing them of intellectual dishonesty) will usually cause the audience to decide you lose the debate, and your opponents to decide not to engage you in the future.

[Jormengand]

Debate tip: Making personal attacks against your opponents (such as telling them they have no idea how to refute your points) will usually cause the audience to decide you lose the debate.

Failing to refute people's points and dodging their questions long enough that they come to state that you have no idea how to refute their points is far more likely to do so, in my experience.

[Keltest]

Beast only tried to improve as a person after Belle dragged him back to the castle and dressed his wound after the wolf attack. There was no reason fer her to do that; she could have kept running home and left him to die. He didn't deserve the second chance, and she put herself in danger by giving it to him.

As hard as it is to believe, some people are simply selfless and empathetic enough to be unable to not help someone, regardless of how much legitimate justification there is for them to just walk away.

[Comrade]

The bit with the midriff in her choice of adventuring gear and the "women's issues" and all that. It just seemed out of place and badly done.

I don't see why you feel that way. The author has lambasted various fantasy and D&D tropes and each time it was every bit as 'heavy-handed', so to speak, as it is now. The only difference is in the subject matter being referenced. Why is it so much worse now-- because all of a sudden, the tropes being lambasted are too 'social justice warrior'-y for your taste?

[Socksy]

See, I will never believe in anything other than complete equality of means for all people, regardless of their circumstances.

That's very rare (but very nice) to hear from a self-proclaimed SJW.

I don't see why you feel that way. The author has lambasted various fantasy and D&D tropes and each time it was every bit as 'heavy-handed', so to speak, as it is now. The only difference is in the subject matter being referenced. Why is it so much worse now-- because all of a sudden, the tropes being lambasted are too 'social justice warrior'-y for your taste?

Not so much that as it wasn't funny in my opinion and it felt a bit clunky and out of place, whereas the rules jokes flowed more easily. Again, my opinion. It just seemed shoehorned in for the sake of using the characters to get the apology into the comic itself. Some people might appreciate that, I just don't happen to be one of them.

[gerryq]

I´ve been a lurker around here for many years, but i simply HAD to come here and comment after the last comic. It´s amazing how you managed to deal with so many important themes in a single page: (i) homosexuality; (ii) weight/beauty issues ("curvy"); (iii) women that always dreamed to fit in positions of authority; (iv) the stereotype that tells that girls are either sister-like friends or enemies that tell each other gender-oriented offenses (you b****, etc); (v) the "chainmail bikini" stereotype ("bare midriff"). I doubt those are mere coincidences. Congrats!

Hmmm, I also congratulate the Giant for dealing with all those important themes in a single page ;-D

[rodneyAnonymous]

Life hack / GITP forum tip: It's really easy to show a post by someone on your ignore list. I use it as a "do not respond to this person" flag.

[zimmerwald1915]

As hard as it is to believe, some people are simply selfless and empathetic enough to be unable to not help someone, regardless of how much legitimate justification there is for them to just walk away.

Very true. But also very optimistic. I happen to love Beauty and the Beast, and optimistic media in general, but it's just not very applicable when it comes to practical advice to apply in extreme situations.

[Haleth]

I'm not bothered at all by lesbian characters. I'm not too bothered about the rather forced strip this time around, although I really hope it's not going to go the way of other comics this stuff has happened to. You seem to think I don't care about social issues.

I just often see pieces of work by one author (often blogs) start out as "Here, have some logical feminist stuff" and a few months later, end up as "KILL ALL CISHETS TRANS MEN ARE SCUM TRANS WOMEN ARE STEALING FEMALE CULTURE WHITE PEOPLE ARE THE DEVIL!!1111", and turn into horrible pits of hatred and bigotry. I don't want that to happen to one of my favourite series!

It's probably illogical and a side effect of spending far too much time on tumblr before I decided to leave it, but it's what I'm used to seeing, so I automatically react pretty badly to any SJW-ing.

Your speech up there showed how social justice people SHOULD be, but that's very rarely how they ARE, in my experience.

Yeah, I think tumblr SJW's should be separate from the other SJW's, since most of the "justice" they practice ends up becoming foaming rallies against white cis people.

I don't *think* Rich will descend into that, though.

[Socksy]

Life hack / GITP forum tip: It's really easy to show a post by someone on your ignore list. I use it as a "do not respond to this person" flag.

Everyone thinks at least one other person here is BEING WRONG ON THE INTERNET.
Also, a lot of intelligent people, like the majority of giantitp forum-goers, like to debate and argue.
And you havne't mentioned HOW to hide posts by people. You just kinda smeared a layer of passive-aggressive over the thread.

EDIT:

Yeah, I think tumblr SJW's should be separate from the other SJW's, since most of the "justice" they practice ends up becoming foaming rallies against white cis people.

I don't *think* Rich will descend into that, though.

Well, if everyone seems so sure

Maybe we can call giantitp SJWs something different from the name the tumblr ones use for themselves and their hatefests, since they have to be better than that.
Perhaps... social justice druids

[Keltest]

Everyone thinks at least one other person here is BEING WRONG ON THE INTERNET.
Also, a lot of intelligent people, like the majority of giantitp forum-goers, like to debate and argue.
And you havne't mentioned HOW to hide posts by people. You just kinda smeared a layer of passive-aggressive over the thread.

Ignoring people is unfortunately rather non-intuitive. You have to actually go into their profile to add them to the ignore list. Click their name to go there.

[Jormengand]

That's very rare (but very nice) to hear from a self-proclaimed SJW.

See, there are people who claim to be feminists and turn out to be misandrists (incidentally, my spelling checker doesn't think misandrist is a word, but misogynist clearly is. Because sexism against males Clearly Doesn't Exist, but I digress). There are people who claim to fight for justice and really fight for the reversal of roles between the majority and the minority.

Maybe that's what most SJWs do, but I am not most SJWs. I am this social justice warrior. Do not confuse the two.

(This isn't aimed at you or meant to be aggressive, really. I just wrote it because I felt like writing it).

Everyone thinks at least one other person here is BEING WRONG ON THE INTERNET.
Also, a lot of intelligent people, like the majority of giantitp forum-goers, like to debate and argue.
And you havne't mentioned HOW to hide posts by people. You just kinda smeared a layer of passive-aggressive over the thread.

Now, don't be silly, Socksy! More passive-aggressive is just what this thread needs!

[Sadsharks]

Life hack / GITP forum tip: It's really easy to show a post by someone on your ignore list. I use it as a "do not respond to this person" flag.

I'm confused...what exactly is the point of these posts? You're just kind of coming in and smugly attacking people without naming them or making any actual arguments. Am I missing something?

[Keltest]

Now, don't be silly, Socksy! More passive-aggressive is just what this thread needs!

Nothing like sitting in the corner refusing to talk to someone to settle all your problems.

[DaggerPen]

You guys understand that people go onto Tumblr, make fake "social justice" posts, and then spread them around to laugh at "SJW's" all the time, yes?

Tumblr is a large website full of people with all kinds of opinions. There is a larger "social justice" community - because it has a disproportionately higher amount of women, people of color, disabled people, LGBTQ people, etc., who talk about their lives, than most sites. Instead of rolling your eyes about "Tumblr social justice" whenever a discussion that even remotely relates to media representation happens - conversations which, by the way, have been going on for so long that there are whole sociology textbooks dedicated to them - you might consider actually addressing the content of an argument. Just a thought.