Hilgya's the worst

[Kish]

I'm more skeptical that's actually happening to a particularly significant degree with Hilgya, specifically, however. That could admittedly be my own biases clouding me to certain thing, but (because I like torturing myself) I've looked into all of the many "is Hilgya evil or not" and their variety threads, and except for certain people (one in particular who everyone should know at this point), debate seems fairly even handed.

This is pretty much the page I'm on where Hilgya is concerned (with the note that there have been people who have posted that the crossbow wasn't really there, or wasn't really aimed at Hilgya, or if it was it should be assumed to be her fault for some reason, just not in the past few discussion threads). I'm also somewhat bemused that Rich seems to have doubled down on both "she's thoroughly evil" and "everything awful she does is a joke," which isn't something I'd say about any other character in the comic.

[Rrmcklin]

This is pretty much the page I'm on where Hilgya is concerned (with the note that there have been people who have posted that the crossbow wasn't really there, or wasn't really aimed at Hilgya, or if it was it should be assumed to be her fault for some reason, just not in the past few discussion threads). I'm also somewhat bemused that Rich seems to have doubled down on both "she's thoroughly evil" and "everything awful she does is a joke," which isn't something I'd say about any other character in the comic.

I think Xykon's usually like this. Except Xykon doesn't have a fair number of people going "you know, what he did isn't that bad." (I'm going to preemptively say, no, I don't think Hilgya is anywhere near as bad as Xykon, I'm just comparing how their evil is treated similarly.)

[Ruck]

I don't understand why you put "logic" in quotes. The argument is perfectly logical. If they can put aside their differences and in fact find that genuine companionship that they had again, they should marry and live a happy life. Like any reasonable people would do, they should settle their differences and hope for the best. The problem is that murdering the other partner of your relationship is a sign that you might be an unreasonable person.

I put it in quotes because of the bolded. I've been on the internet long enough that my patience with arguments that are internally logical but rely on assumptions that contradict the evidence is out. The bolded is evidence that the best solution is not, in fact, for the two of them to try to make it work, unless one of them changes significantly (and the other one a little bit, too, but the murdering one is the one that has further to go, IMO).

I don't like you implying that my subconscious though processes are inherently sexist.

I think it's important for everyone to question their assumptions and challenge themselves. Growth happens this way.

Anyway, I can totally believe a pattern of disproportionate animosity exists towards female characters on this forum (and in general).

I'm more skeptical that's actually happening to a particularly significant degree with Hilgya, specifically, however. That could admittedly be my own biases clouding me to certain thing, but (because I like torturing myself) I've looked into all of the many "is Hilgya evil or not" and their variety threads, and except for certain people (one in particular who everyone should know at this point), debate seems fairly even handed.

I think something similar was happening with the Andi debate, too, which is to say, the debate seemed heated because of a small minority of vocal people who were trying to argue for the goodness and righteousness of an obviously terrible act, and/or trying to pin responsibility for the character's actions on her victims. There's a reason "Bandi" and "auto-wrench" became running jokes.

[Kish]

Xykon is the main villain. Whether any vicious thing he does is played for laughs is debatable (I've never laughed at any of his jokes, personally), and there's no question in my mind that he's going to come to a very bad end.

Hilgya has been on the Order's side throughout this book. "Belkar kills her with a quip" is, I think, on the table now, but it only landed there as of the most recent strip--and "she leaves under her own power with Kudzu" still seems a good deal more likely.

[Rrmcklin]

Xykon is the main villain. Whether any vicious thing he does is played for laughs is debatable (I've never laughed at any of his jokes, personally), and there's no question in my mind that he's going to come to a very bad end.

Hilgya has been on the Order's side throughout this book. "Belkar kills her with a quip" is, I think, on the table now, but it only landed there as of the most recent strip--and "she leaves under her own power with Kudzu" still seems a good deal more likely.

I have been struggling with the elephant in the room of despite how obviously terrible Hilgya is "take Kudzu away from her" has never been on the table, and I doubt it will be.

[Liquor Box]

Youve managed to convince yourself of your own "impartial rationality" so hard youve completely missed my point.

No, quite the opposite

I am saying that none of us have sufficient impartial rationality to accurately judge whether female characters get more undeserved criticism on these boards than male characters. Anyone who thinks they are sufficiently unaffected by pre-conceived notions to judge is fooling themself. I am certainly not immune to such biases myself. Can you admit the same?

Intuitively I think that a male character would have attracted more criticism than Hilgya had he killed an ex-lover who spurned him after sex, because of the domestic violence undertones. So, with respect to that particular issue I think the bias is against men, but it may be that the whole 'seduction while married' played out worse for Hilgya as a female - I'm just not sure.

I have the data of "existing as a women on the internet", but the fact that you're even asking this probably means you accept anything but a peer reviewd study in Science for Men magazine

This is a strawman. I don't think anyone here is denying that sexism exists on the internet. Some people are questioning whether sexism means that females in OotS (or even just Hilgya) is being judged more harshly than male characters. That requires some evidence, particularly when it is just as possible that these debates form because some people are willing to defend female characters in circumstances where they would not defend a male character.

[zimmerwald1915]

I strongly doubt that Hilgya's "ending" will be anything other than Tarquin-esque. The only ongoing problem she represents once parted from the Order is how to settle Kuzdu's custody, and that is very much a problem that can and ought to be sorted out later.

[5crownik007]

this is pretending that the only discrimination is against females, while there is ample evidence that our society is discriminating against males regarding violence: women committing crimes get lesser sentences than their fellow males, men victims of abuse have a harder time convincing others of their plight, and domestic violence is considered not important if the woman is the perpetrator. the tradition of protection of women sometimes produces the opposite affect.
Several experiments showed that if a man is publicly abusing a woman, the crowd helps the woman, but if a woman is abusing a man, the crowd cheers her on.

the fact that some people are trying to minimize the severity of hilgya's actions is further proof of it.
and the fact that those people are seeing condemnation for hilgya as discriminatory shows how far this whole sexist crap has gone.
It's true, women committing the same crimes get lesser sentences. even in webcomic forums.

I have to agree with you. Hilgya committed a severe criminal act. I also agree that a certain fraction of forum users here would like to absolve Hilgya of any crime because she's a woman. Case in point,

If we want to play with definitions, we can argue (I personally am convinced, though it is a minority opinion and I have no illusions about changing that) that all female-on-male violence, even pre-emptive and in the absence of imminent threat of bodily harm, is self-defense.

Although I'd like to see everyone agree that the best possible situation is simply this:
Everyone stops hating each other?
Despite the apparent severity of the crime, the fact is that when Durkon comes back, he'll most likely forgive Hilgya for murdering him, and this probably absolves her of legal responsibility for the crime because there was no victim(unless we start to argue that Durkon is suffering Stockholm Syndrome). Then, if Hilgya can forgive Durkon for leaving her in the past, they'll both have moved past their differences and be able to continue their lives normally. Normally might include the rekindling of the romantic relationship they had, or it might not.

Also, Zimmerwald, that is an actually incorrect definition of self-defense. Giving special provisions to a woman over a man is sexist, and in this case, actually dangerous. Consider what would occur in the real world were such a provision added to law in your country. Ignoring that your wording is legally exploitable to absolve all women who have ever murdered a man, the point of legal self-defense is that in the case that you are in danger of sustaining bodily harm that you can prevent that harm. This means that in the case of an abusive partner who isn't presently committing any violent acts toward you, the correct reaction is to contact the police and not to shoot them. Self-defense only exists for situations where you are in direct danger of bodily harm at that moment. In cases where you're at danger of harm in the near or distant future, the correct legal response is to contact the police.

[Aveline]

I think a big difference between Hilgya and other characters is that her story, in the context of the work, is very one-sided. I don't remember off-hand any time where someone in-comic raised a legitimate complaint about her. We'll see what happens in #1150 but I suspect her killing Durkon will be brushed off.

[Keltest]

I strongly doubt that Hilgya's "ending" will be anything other than Tarquin-esque. The only ongoing problem she represents once parted from the Order is how to settle Kuzdu's custody, and that is very much a problem that can and ought to be sorted out later.

Personally I am rather skeptical that the resolution to Durkon's child being in the hands of his killer is going to be left to the end of the story.

[zimmerwald1915]

I have to agree with you. Hilgya committed a severe criminal act. I also agree that a certain fraction of forum users here would like to absolve Hilgya of any crime because she's a woman. Case in point,



Although I'd like to see everyone agree that the best possible situation is simply this:
Everyone stops hating each other?
Despite the apparent severity of the crime, the fact is that when Durkon comes back, he'll most likely forgive Hilgya for murdering him, and this probably absolves her of legal responsibility for the crime because there was no victim(unless we start to argue that Durkon is suffering Stockholm Syndrome). Then, if Hilgya can forgive Durkon for leaving her in the past, they'll both have moved past their differences and be able to continue their lives normally. Normally might include the rekindling of the romantic relationship they had, or it might not.

Also, Zimmerwald, that is an actually incorrect definition of self-defense. Giving special provisions to a woman over a man is sexist, and in this case, actually dangerous. Consider what would occur in the real world were such a provision added to law in your country. Ignoring that your wording is legally exploitable to absolve all women who have ever murdered a man, the point of legal self-defense is that in the case that you are in danger of sustaining bodily harm that you can prevent that harm. This means that in the case of an abusive partner who isn't presently committing any violent acts toward you, the correct reaction is to contact the police and not to shoot them. Self-defense only exists for situations where you are in direct danger of bodily harm at that moment. In cases where you're at danger of harm in the near or distant future, the correct legal response is to contact the police.

Please do not give legal advice on the forum. Especially not without first growing a sense of self-awareness.

[Lacuna Caster]

Honestly, I don't really disagree with any of this. I'm not sure I'm as harsh on Celia, because I'm willing to acknowledge she generally has good intentions and tries to do good, but this is definitely the stuff that falls under the "annoys the hell out of me" header...

Yeah, except that most of it doesn't actually happen. Celia doesn't expect Belkar to be punished with death, she doesn't refuse to help in battle, and she isn't shirking danger.

Miko read to me as others have said - classic backlash against the Paladin archetype. As a paladin fan, I was disappointed...but only for a little while. Not because of the story aspect of the character, or the execution (both seemed really good to me). It was disappointing because I was worried it was a one-sided presentation, but O-Chul told me to shut it.

In a way, I think O-Chul is still a pretty one-sided presentation, simply in terms of presenting all things not-Miko as good, at least for a particular version of Miko.

Redcloak, at least for a time, was probably the second-most-common source of "morally justified" debates, so I'm not sure the author himself attached the same value to that vein of discussion.

Despite all of this, I do hope that:
1) Hilgya forgives Durkon
2) Durkon forgives Hilgya
3) Durkon and Hilgya can enter a functional relationship
4) Durkon and Hilgya raise Kudzu.

Why? To minimize suffering. If Hilgya and Durkon remain separate, Kudzu will be raised by a single parent, which is statistically proven to be a sub-optimal family situation. Children raised by single parents do worse on average...

Yes, but only for genetic reasons. (Though if one is going to argue for the influence of parenting, I could see a very reasonable argument for Durkon getting sole custody.)

To be frank, I rather don't want Hilgya and Durkon getting together, because that sends all kinds of wrong messages about the kind of behaviour one should put up with in a romantic partner. Or other sentient beings in general.

[Caerulea]

Please do not give legal advice on the forum. Especially not without first growing a sense of self-awareness.

I don't think that stating an obvious consequence of a provision that would (hopefully) never be added to any countries law code is legal advice. Also, I am unsure if you are joking about that statement? Are you?

[5crownik007]

Please do not give legal advice on the forum. Especially not without first growing a sense of self-awareness.

Can you please explain further what you mean by this? I'd like to know if I'm actually being a complete idiot and missing a gaping hole in my argument there.

Yes, but only for genetic reasons. (Though if one is going to argue for the influence of parenting, I could see a very reasonable argument for Durkon getting sole custody.)

To be frank, I rather don't want Hilgya and Durkon getting together, because that sends all kinds of wrong messages about the kind of behaviour one should put up with in a romantic partner. Or other sentient beings in general.

No, it's to do with psychology. Children raised by two parents in a stable family situation do better than every other category. I do believe that it's rather apparent that this is a sub-optimal romantic situation and this is what not to do. I suppose I'll use my fall back point: insufficient data to determine relationship outcome. Hilgya just committed an emotionally charged violent act, but it's unknown whether or not prolonged exposure to each other could lead to a functioning situation.

tl;dr insufficient data, romance machine broke

[rbetieh]

Two things...

1) I can't believe this started a gender war of all things... But I wont get into that.

2) I think the Giant already spoke to the unreasonable nature of flame striking a domestic partner for any reason, as he had Roy speak on it here (and I can't see any difference between Roy's hypothetical and this actual event)

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0408.html

[Keltest]

Can you please explain further what you mean by this? I'd like to know if I'm actually being a complete idiot and missing a gaping hole in my argument there.



No, it's to do with psychology. Children raised by two parents in a stable family situation do better than every other category. I do believe that it's rather apparent that this is a sub-optimal romantic situation and this is what not to do. I suppose I'll use my fall back point: insufficient data to determine relationship outcome. Hilgya just committed an emotionally charged violent act, but it's unknown whether or not prolonged exposure to each other could lead to a functioning situation.

tl;dr insufficient data, romance machine broke

As a rule of thumb, when one partner tries to and/or succeeds at murdering the other, the relationship is fundamentally unhealthy and should be broken up.

[Ruck]

Yeah, except that most of it doesn't actually happen.

Except your wording of things isn't what was said. Let's look point by point and how you changed the phrasing of each to mean something else.

First:

Celia doesn't expect Belkar to be punished with death

1) when Belkar killed the gnome: she didn't object at all at the idea that Belkar should be killed as punishment for what he did, but she wanted Haley to do that.

"didn't object, but wants someone else to take responsibility" is not the same as "expects."

Second:

she doesn't refuse to help in battle

she admitted she didn't intervene to help Haley, because she didn't want to kill. So she was accepting to let Haley die, again to stick to her principles. Even if Haley was the victim and, more important, her ally who went there in her help, to fix her mistakes.

"Refuses to intervene out of pacifist principles and was willing to let Haley die until Belkar bailed them out" isn't "refuses to help in battle."

Third:

and she isn't shirking danger.

Nobody says this at all. The third point is:

she repeats over and over that she doesn't know about humans, then she disobeys Haley and goes to Greysky, thinking to know better than her what she could find there.

Want to try again, addressing what was actually written rather than your caricature of it?

[Lacuna Caster]

Children raised by two parents in a stable family situation do better than every other category...

Yes, I'm aware of this. My point is that the overwhelming bulk of data on the influence of home environment suggests that it mostly disappears after controlling for genetic factors. In other words, the same parents that are genetically predisposed to get along with eachother and maintain a stable marriage also tend to have children that are genetically predisposed to do well in other areas of life. But it's not the marriage influencing the child, it's genetics influencing both the child and the marriage.

[Lacuna Caster]

Except your wording of things isn't what was said. Let's look point by point and how you changed the phrasing of each to mean something else...

{Scrubbed}

[Rrmcklin]

this is pretending that the only discrimination is against females, while there is ample evidence that our society is discriminating against males regarding violence: women committing crimes get lesser sentences than their fellow males, men victims of abuse have a harder time convincing others of their plight, and domestic violence is considered not important if the woman is the perpetrator. the tradition of protection of women sometimes produces the opposite affect.
Several experiments showed that if a man is publicly abusing a woman, the crowd helps the woman, but if a woman is abusing a man, the crowd cheers her on.

the fact that some people are trying to minimize the severity of hilgya's actions is further proof of it.
and the fact that those people are seeing condemnation for hilgya as discriminatory shows how far this whole sexist crap has gone.
It's true, women committing the same crimes get lesser sentences. even in webcomic forums.

You know, it doesn't have to be "only men are discriminated against, not women" wor "only women are discriminated against, not men." It's possible that both genders face very specific types of discrimination in different ways and areas. That you can point to ways in which men legitimately aren't treated fairly doesn't invalidate the point of female characters generally being judged more harshly for things in media than male characters.

[Ruck]

{scrubbed}

On the one hand, I can't say I'm surprised that someone whose arguments so frequently rely on being wrong about the facts, has nothing but snide ad hominem when directly confronted with being wrong about the facts. On the other, I figured that, with your deep conviction that literally everyone except you is wrong about this comic, you would at least try.

[Caerulea]

Yes, I'm aware of this. My point is that the overwhelming bulk of data on the influence of home environment suggests that it mostly disappears after controlling for genetic factors. In other words, the same parents that are genetically predisposed to get along with eachother and maintain a stable marriage also tend to have children that are genetically predisposed to do well in other areas of life. But it's not the marriage influencing the child, it's genetics influencing both the child and the marriage.

Hey Lacuna, can you provide some studies backing up what you say? I would like to read further. My entire exposure to this topic was an Intelligence Squared debate.

[RatElemental]

Think we might want to get away from the real world politics lest this thread get locked, guys.

[Lacuna Caster]

Hey Lacuna, can you provide some studies backing up what you say? I would like to read further. My entire exposure to this topic was an Intelligence Squared debate.

Happy to. I linked a couple in the other thread, with the most pertinent here and here. The most comprehensive review of the subject is The Nurture Assumption by Judith Rich Harris, which you can sample here, and comes with an extensive bibliography.

[King of Nowhere]

You know, it doesn't have to be "only men are discriminated against, not women" wor "only women are discriminated against, not men." It's possible that both genders face very specific types of discrimination in different ways and areas. That you can point to ways in which men legitimately aren't treated fairly doesn't invalidate the point of female characters generally being judged more harshly for things in media than male characters.

wasn't my intention to imply that only men are discriminated. it's clearly not true. I was specifically referring to violence, where there is a double standard that excuses women more easily than men. in other fields, it's women who are on the bad side of the double standard.

I was mostly replying to statements like "always consider that you may be prejudiced. against women. (the chance of prejudice against men isn't even considered)"

And regarding this specific case, I still think hilgya is not judged harsly because of her sex, and in fact if she was a male she'd be judged worse. She did, after all, stalk and badly hurt a former lover who spurned them.
My argument is that females are not more hated; there are more heated debates around them because they are defended. Males do not generate heated debates because nobody step in to defend them.

This argument applies to this forum, and to a majority of posters. I am sure, statistically speaking, that some posters are prejudiced. I am also sure that other places in the internet are more prejudiced; rich tried hard to be politically correct, and that must surely have caused most of the more prejudiced reader to abandon this forum.
It is perfectly possible that female characters are judged more harshly in movies, because movies' audiences are different from this webcomic's.
It is also possible that such debates grow heated because they invariably reference sexism, with cross accusations of "you are only accusing her because she is a woman - no, you are only defending her because she is a woman".
Certainly, the recent wave of feminism has made everything about women become a topic of greater contention. On one side we have "women have achieved equal rights by law, but they still take crap on a regular base" and on the other we have "this has gone too far, women are getting unfair advantages with the excuse of figthing discrimination", and everything involving women becomes a battlefield for those two sides. I fully take responsibility for it; being on the "women are getting unfair advantages" field I jumped on this chance to bash excessive feminism just like feminists jumped on the chance to bash the men-lead movie industry during the sexual scandals.

Do notice that both sides are right; it is both true that women are still not getting their rights fully recognized and that fights for equality has overstepped its boundaries. and most people on both sides recognize the reasons of the other side and pretty much agrees with it. the main difference is what one is likely to be vocal about.

[Dr.Zero]

No, I don't think I'm going to follow you down this garden path, Ruck. Wake me up when you develop some self-awareness.

Since the quoted parts are mine, I have to point out that I thought exactly the same things Ruck is writing, about changing the meaning of each phrase. If I didn't object and reply more, it is not because I didn't realize that, but because I realized I am spending enough time already debating and bickering about a comic, and open a new, endless discussion over a largely irrelevant character didn't seem in anyone best interests. Specially during Christmas Holidays.

If you think the points made by me and, by extension, by Ruck, are minor offenses for a character for it to be judged negatively, that's fine, it's your opinion. Just say that and we will agree to disagree.
But I ask you to don't hide behind rephrasing what other people say, specially in a way so blatant that makes clear you haven't done that by mistake.
And I ask you to don't hide behind silliness like "develop some self-awareness". If you have a point, make it, else avoid the generic accusations.

[Roland St. Jude]

Sheriff: This thread has gotten political and flaming.