I actually assumed Guns would have been the expelled roommate since Willis has said on his tumblr he hates her, so that’d give him a reason to not have to include her.
Willis hates Guns so much, he’s decided that she’s not “college material” so we will never be seeing her anywhere near the campus.
Maybe under an overpass though.
Guns will be shown in a pan shot of the school hanging from the flagpole by her underwear.
who is Guns again? I have a horrible memory
Short girl from Squad 48, music snob, smooshed by Beef in the last act.
It seemed like the best word for “midsection turned to goo between the floorboards and a fist the size of her torso.”
… Yeah smooshed probably is the best word for that… eviscerated is too cut-y
If she was a music snob she cant be that bad, so she was into Bach or Beethoven?
IIRC, she was a total hipster who complained about Walmart holding an album she wanted, because it means anyone can buy the album now.
I have to use that line.
You can’t use your world-destroyer here!
Oh right , we’re in public
Oh right, we’re in the universe
I have to remember that one too.
Quadritto, quintitto, sexdritto, septdritto and octdritto!!!
That is not how ordinals work! It should be “septritto” and “octritto”, at least by your already established pattern.
On a completely separate note, “ditto” has nothing to with the number two (that I’m aware of). It actually came from the original copy machine, of Ditto brand. It’s the same reason some people will say they are “Xeroxing it”.
Phew! I’ve fulfilled by pedantic quota for the week. And just in tie, too!
Finally, someone who is more of a nerd than me!
actually “ditto” comes from the italian “detto” which is a past participle meaning “said” as in “already said” as in “repeated.” the copy machine company named their product after the already existing phrase, which has been used in english since the 1600s. but you’re right that it has nothing to do with the “di” prefix meaning “two.”
I bow to your superior extraneous knowledge.
Kind of like Wolverine in the X-Men movie.
Rogue:”What am I supposed to do?”
Wolverine:”I don’t know.”
Rogue:”Don’t know or don’t care?”
If your friends say the set-up often enough for that to matter, you might need new friends.
Char has a bright future in store for her… on Fox News.
Although honestly, any future involving Fox news is a flickering dim light at best.
Is that a scary Osaka in your Gravatar?
YUP it has being a while since I last used her as my grav.
I love me some slice-of-life animes.
I love a slice of life in my sandwich.
It’s not hard to get a slice of live in a ssandwich. A pig’s life. A turkey’s, a chickens. Not hard.
so is tomato, lettuce, and pickles.
In fact, the only part of a sandwich that is arguably not life would probably be cheese.
Cheese traditionally comes from bacterial cultures, which are very much alive.
May I please recommend a Trigun Grav?
She’s not racist enough to be a republican. she’s hanging out with a black person without actively punching her in the face.
I hate myself for laughing at the imagery of nonstop Char-on-Chan violence…
Republican = Racist?
Where is that coming from?
It is amusing how Republicans & Conservatives are labeled racists when two of the biggest racist presidents where Democrats.
It’s hilarious that people think airplanes are a viable method of travel when the Wright Flyer was only able to go a few hundred feet.
It’s amusing that folks think that the Republican/Democratic Parties of the Civil War era have anything to do with what they stand for today. They are just labels, and the parties which they describe have changed drastically over time. Considering the Republican Party of today is big on states rights, lost the black vote some time during the Civil Rights era, and has a lockhold on the Southern states in elections… (okay, so the last two are related) it is not exactly the Republican Party as it existed for Lincoln. In fact, I think it’s kind of what he was up against. “Republican” and “Democrat” don’t mean shit when we’re talking about the long term.
That said, Jesus Christ, people, don’t say that all Republicans are racist. That is demonstrably not true. You guys should know better.
No one is winning if you say one entire group is racist. All you’re doing is feeding stereotypes, which actually is something people use to justify racist feelings. So I agree, that we all should know better. Stop the stereotyping NOW!!!!
“All generalization is wrong”
I see what you did there.
But can I generalize that all KKK members are racist? C’mon you gotta leave me something.
Jusr as long as you don’t say something like all KKK members are Republicans, or something. because, you know, also demonstrably untrue.
I’m sure some KKK members are libertarian.
Some KKK members are likely Democrats!
‘The entire group of racists is racist.’
I’m not trying to be a smartass when I say this, but…
The correct term is ‘colorist’, for judging someone on the color
of their skin.
‘Racism’ was started by Europeans who thought Africans were only half-
Again, I’m sorry if i sounded like a snotty nerd.
Fair enough, but you can’t then say that all colorists are racists. BNecause they’re not the same. To achieve axiomatic certainty, you must retain axiomatic terminology.
I KNOW they’re not the same. That’s the point I’m trying to make.
By saying someone is ‘racist’, you’re saying that someone isn’t
completely human, therefore making them inferior. usually people
will admit that they are ‘racist’ because they don’t like someone of a
different race because they are better than them.
‘Racism’ is just power-hungry jealousy.
Plus I’m only 12 years old, so I had to look up some
of those words there, and I know a LOT of words
Well, okay, to be fair, a lot of Republicans just blindly vote for racists.
Racism is a dinamic thing, in fact people are nor racist anymore since the concept is “negative” It cant sustain any ideology. People who are “racist” derive that point of view from another ideology. In other words nowday “racism” is a symptom of something else.
Can you back up anything you say with examples, or other facts?
Or are you just a big troll?
Are you suggesting that Republicans never just blindly vote for the Republican candidate, or that no Republican politician is racist? ‘Cause I’m pretty sure that both of those positions are utterly indefinsible and asking me to prove otherwise is stupid.
Are you suggesting that Democrats never just blindly vote for the Democratic candidate, or that no Democratic politician is racist? ‘Cause I’m pretty sure that both of those positions are utterly indefensible and asking me to prove otherwise is stupid.
Hell, look to some of Nancy Pelosi’s recent antisemitic remarks for a example.
Now, do you care to note any real examples, or are you just going to keep trolling vaguely?
Andrusi’s being way too overeager and I probably should have deleted this thread of shallow political sniping to begin with, but the simple truth that spawned this is that many platforms of the current Republican Party are byproduct of institutionalized racism. Many folks in favor of these platforms may not be aware of it, or they may be in favor of these platforms in spite of it, but to compare a stupid racist thing said by one Democratic person with the Republicans’ Southern Strategy, an intentional, concerted push to attract racist white voters at the expense of black voters… is not entirely intellectually honest. They are not equal things.
It is something the Republican Party definitely did, and it’s something its perpetrators later admitted to. And it’s something that still survives in chunks to this day in the form of voter registration laws, as a result of blacks having swung from Republicans to Democrats in the 1960s because of the Southern Strategy. And it is a very big reason why some folks today conflate “Republicans” with “racism.”
Being Republican doesn’t make you racist. Being a Democrat doesn’t mean you’re not. But history is history, and this particular history is recent enough that it’s still causing wounds. We should acknowledge these wounds and learn from them, rather than downplay them to win arguments on the Internet for “our team.”
And some day maybe the Democrats will do the same on a similarly large scale, who knows.
(And that’s it on this outta everybody. No more.)
Not to burst your bubble, but I know a lot of Republicans who are (gasp) friends with black people or even (double gasp!) black themselves.
That’s some messed up shit. Tell them to stop that.
haha, And there a lot of right wings gays! And the fervor of Ron Paul stick first in Republican “minorities”
Racist ? I thought they were sexist these days? Are they able to multi-task? O_O
I’m me-ist. That is, I discriminate against people on the basis of whether or not they are me.
But I’m me! Does that mean I am being descriminated aganist by you, or are we both considered me?
Yea she’s too “ethnic” for Fox meaning she’s to racially spesific looking and has an odd name
@David mebers of the KKK are rarely registered voters since they believe that “The JEEWS” control the govamint* *(spelled that way intentionally)
Dana? Dina? do I .. sense something here?
Also, Raidah seems pretty on the ball about things.
She can be on everyone’s balls if you catch my pitch.
You don’t need to hit me in the face with it to catch your meaning.
You mean your FAAACE?
I hope not. That sounds MOST uncomfortable.
Yep! They’re both on drugs! (At least Dina seems to be…)
I don’t think that’s the case…Dina is kinda autistic or some other form of mental effect that makes her socially awkward but incredibly nice in the process. She’s not good around crowds and has an intense interest in science and has a child-like innocence but a very high intellect. That kinda implies that she’s smarter than she lets on and is just on the socially awkward side.
Dana however was an addict and Sarah was trying to help her by getting out of the collage and wtih her family again to help her get clean.
Raidah just became a little less of a piece of shit.
She’s more like dog shit now. Still gross but still not as bad as a human’s.
dried shit >> fresh sloppu shit
Due to being called out as a “bully” by the likes of Sarah, causing her to take a little uncomfortable look in the mirror, figuratively speaking? If so, agreed.
No, I think it’s because she’s not a complete monster. She realizes that calling someone “retarded”, even if they are mentally damaged, is insensitive and crude and outdated. She’s got some standards when she cat-calls and berates her enemies. I don’t think she’ll be looking in a mirror because of this incident alone.
Yes. That is what I was going for. I still think she’s a piece of shit, but just a little bit less of one than I did before.
At least we know that they are a Politically Correct trio of jerks.
Well duo at least since you shouldn’t include Char as one of the PC crowd.
Plus, Chan said “Who else would willingly hang out with Sarah?” yesterday.
Aside from being condescending, Raidah may be the most politically correct of the group. As Lime said though, still a jerk.
A politically correct jerk is still a jerk.
Why aren’t there no like buttons on here?
Old Walkyverse Dana: http://www.itswalky.com/d/19971027.html. She doesn’t appear to have been too memorable.
Dana was my favorite character. I have like 3 posters of her in my room.
You bought three of this one, didn’t you.
…did Dana even make that thing?
She’s in there somewhere. Maybe.
There is no Dana, only Zuul.
Woah, I didn’t realize that Sarah and Joyce were originally roomies. I didn’t even remember that Sarah was a character before this.
Of course, I read those strips probably in 1998. :O
…I cannot believe I never made that connection.
Good to see Sarah’s ex-friends aren’t just evil caricatures.
Assuming they weren’t just Dana’s friends…
As for the plot here, I… guess it’s nice that Raidah has a line she won’t cross in her seemingly relentless “straight-shaming” of Sarah. But not aiming slurs at a (possibly) developmentally disabled kid is a pretty low bar to set for “decent behavior.” She may be good at smacking down her scuzzy friends, but she also makes the choice to hang out with them regularly, which doesn’t exactly argue for Dana’s merits.
Then again, Sarah and Ruth seemed pretty much like wastes of flesh to me when they were first introduced, so I’ll give Raidah just a little more time to demonstrate her finer qualities, at which point Dana will probably take her place as the most hatable.
This is straight-shaming? When has that even come up in the conversation? Are there secret half-strips visible only to polarized lenses?
I think he means “straight” as in “not a druggie”.
Ah, that makes much more sense. Needless to say, I usually hear the term in a different context.
probably the reason for the quotes.
Prooobably was a better word to use there.
But I like Hippie Johnny…
Like “straight-edge”, I think was what they were getting at.
Okay, so who are you thinking of, Raidah? That’s what I want to know.
The fact that Sarah exposed your friend to the legal ramifications of her actions is apparently very offensive to you.
You seem to feel that over the course of pursuing her own interests Sarah has displayed an improper degree of selfishness.
You claim to believe that this is a harmful degree of selfishness to the point of marking Sarah as a danger to those around her.
Well okay. I can follow this thought process. I don’t necessarily agree with it, but I can follow it. These last months you’ve spent continually harassing Sarah though, who do you believe this to be in service to? In your mind when you initially approached Sarah was it already out of concern for the poor soul who had found herself within Sarah’s presence? What about the rest of these months. Do you view yourself as some kind of crusader, alerting everybody to the dangerous narc? Is this a service you provide for the entire community?
It’s an interesting mentality she seems to have here. Looking forward to seeing more of this.
in raidahs defense, kind of, we still don’t know the actual happenings that led to this falling out.
we all assume that sarah was in the right on a combo of sarah being an mc, and that, while rude, sarah doesn’t seem to be the malicious type, but we still don’t know the whole truth
P.S. I dunno when the gravatars changes, haven’t posted for a while, but this new one makes me feel oddly uncomfortable
The gravatar changes whenever Willis adds a new one to the pool. The most recent addition seems to be Radiah.
Your current gravatar means that Joe is joeing you on a regular basis (in the Walkyverse). 😀
…or rather, *used* to be joeing her on a regular basis.
From what little we know from Sarah’s bio, apparently the only reason there’s so much backlash from narcing on her roommate is because said roommate was popular. And judging from Dana’s description in the bio as a ‘crazy stoner’ she was doing something while high to hinder Sarah’s studying.
More likely, Sarah was afraid that if Dana was caught, they would BOTH be expelled.
Funnily enough, Raidah her self is being a bit of narc, you know what with telling on Sarah to everyone around her.
Two narcs don’t make a right.
Two bongs don’t make a Friday night.
Dunno why you’d need more than one
In case you break one of cause.
But two narcs *can* make an arrest.
If they’re actual narcs, that is. Not just college busy-bodies.
Who I guess can also make an arrest, just a citizen’s one. Assuming they’re citizens. Dream Act, AMIRITE?
Pardon me, I seem to have something stuck in my brain.
Citizens arrests don’t work like that. More likely than not a citizen’s arrest will be viewed as unlawful restraint(i.e. kidnapping) or false imprisonment. Citizens arrests REALLY only come into play for bounty hunters and situations where a felony has been committed.
A citizen’s arrest is perfectly legal (in the US) assuming that an actual crime has been committed. It does not have to be a felony, but it really helps to have good rock-solid proof that a crime has been committed. For example, video evidence. And thus shoplifters are regularly dragged back into the store and held until they’ve been sufficiently sweated or the cops arrive – even if it’s not a felony-level theft.
Average people not being in possession of video evidence, they should consider it highly inadvisable to make citizen’s arrests. It’s quite risky from both a physical and legal safety standpoint.
Hmm. Pretend there’s a ‘close bold’ after the word ‘actual’.
It’s a good thing it didn’t make the entire rest of the comments section bold
But two wrongs can make a wight, assuming the two wrongs in question are murder and necromancy.
It takes more than two wrongs to make a Wright.
What if the wrongs are kidnapping and rape, and the child is named “Wright?”
That would be wrong.
I agree with everything you say here, but I can totally see Radiah being motivated by a much simpler thought:
“I don’t like you so I’m going to make your life miserable.”
I’m beginning to think Sarah’s ex-roomie wasn’t just doing pot, she was also supplying it. Which would help explain the oversensitivity of her friends.
It would also explain why Raidah is giving Sarah as much shit as possible. Without her supplier, she has no pot to smoke; without smoking, she now has tons of free time. basically, she’s bored and needed a hobby.
Or worse… Granted Dana was their “friend” me thinks that there are probably more then one pot dealer in college and/or Dana was doing something higher on the narcotics classifications which could be detrimental to Sarah’s college experience.
Sarah has said illegal drugs and hinted at antics serious enough to put her scholarships in danger. I’m thinking more than just pot was involved.
I think it depends on the nature of the school’s policies. I dunno what IU Bloomington’s drug use policy is (heck, I don’t even know what my school’s drug policy was), but I can see it as being possible that both people get punished if one roommate is caught with drugs. After all, it wouldn’t be hard to just stick the bag or whatever into your roomie’s drawer.
And again, we only have Sarah’s word for it that her scholarship was in danger. She kinda does seem like a bit of a killjoy (have we ever seen her relaxing or having fun outside of this little arc here?), and she could be exaggerating or paranoid.
On the other hand, the fact that her ex-roomie got expelled means that she was either up to no good more than she should’ve been, or that the school’s policies really are that harsh.
If she got expelled I’m going to guess age was either a dealer or got caught with enough stuff that the authorities believed she was a dealer. And maybe that’s the source of the Sarah hating, maybe if Sarah had stuck up for her roomie she wouldn’t have been expelled.
Those three people are really terrible human beings. This has nothing to do with the fact that they are female, and I am not suggesting that they conform to negative woman stereotypes. They are simply unpleasant human beings, and qould be equally unpleasant if they were male.
You might have being better off not mentioning your disclaimer after your first sentence, now people might wonder if you needed a reason to say that disclaimer now.
I’ve been going on about how they are terrible women this whole plot, and in retrospect, that’s really uncomfortable. I should not feel the need to call attention to that fact, as awkward as it is that they seem to be portraying such a terrible stereotype.
…I find it a little unnerving that you feel the need to justify your dislike of them in spite of the fact that they’re female. I don’t really think anyone would have assumed that’s why they’re terrible unless something led us to believe you have sexist tendencies.
I disagree. I read it more as “I’m not just calling them bongoes, I’m gonna go a step further than that.”
He specifically points out being female though and even makes a comparison with males, implying it’s not just a personality issue…he legitimately thinks being female is reason to dislike them.
He’s making the statement that he’s not disliking them because of their behavior as females. He’s apparently said they’re are unlikable women in previous chapters, thus he wanted to make a point to let people know that he didn’t have dislike of them “because” they are women, but because of their actions as human beings.
I think it’s safe to describe this as a ‘qualification fail’.
About 70% of this cast is female, if not more, and that seems very intentional on Willis’s part. If you make the majority of your cast female, and you have antagonists, some of them are going to be jerks. That’s just how it goes.
And excluding mike all the mean, jerkass characters are female. And mike hardly counts since he has some serious style.
Date-Rapist dude. There was always date-rapist dude. And I think there were some guys who were bullying Danny to trigger the first Amazi-Girl run-in. And Bukkits of Blood guy, whose jerkishness can kinda be assumed. Still, I think it’s tilted in favor of female characters, since, well, that’s how the cast lines go down.
Char is going to wait till she gets home to post about it on her hate-filled blog.
You know Char doesn’t seem very gallant…
Nope, she’s totally channeling Goofus.
Oh my word. Highlights? How do I still recognize this reference.
Three times as much of a jerk.
Char got burned one too many times in the past…
Even evil has standards. Which makes sense I guess, they think they’re the good guys.
I prefer to think of myself as a bad guy; it makes wearing the cape in public easier to justify.
Myself, I prefer to think of myself as the Xanatos.
But if you tell us that, you’ve outed yourself. A very un-Xanatos move.
Every move that you see as un-xanatos is actually a xanatos move in disguise. You just can’t see that many moves ahead.
Or I could just actually be acting un-Xanatos, because hat’s what you’d least expect. Which in itself would be a gambit. Bahaha!
Hey, heroes can wear capes, too! We just don’t want to get them caught in jet turbines.
Or revolving doors.
It also makes it much easier to rationalize every bad or stupid thing I do:
“Well, somebody has to make the rest of humanity look better by comparison.”
Good, bad, don’t matter. Everyone thinks they’re righteous.
I would just love it if the famous Ex Roomate shows up and she is like, completly chill and like “no man Sarah turned my life around” and everyone feels like a ass.
I like that idea.
It’s one thing to hate Sarah for narcing on a roommate if said roommate was discreet about their drug habit, but if she was so careless that she risked getting her in trouble I can’t blame her. Moreover, someone who’s sloppy with drug use could get busted without help and could’ve taken Raidah and her friends down with her. Wonder if that ever occurred to her.
Apparently the Red Comet is an insensitive prick.
At least Raidah is sensitive enough to know when enough is enough…
and smart enough to realize that it’s not okay to shout things like that. ever.
Definitely. Personally, I’m a pretty tolerent person, but not at all when it comes to that.
Sarah just won that argument WITHOUT HAVING TO BE THERE
So this is actually the first walkyverse comic I’ve been exposed to, so maybe I’m misunderstanding the characters pretty badly, but it just seems to me that raidah, like many others in the comic, hasn’t quite realized she and her friends are effectively adults and thus her and their actions have serious ramifications for not only the person doing stupid shit but everyone around them. And at some point you have to drop that childhood rule about not tattling. And let’s get real, Raidah’s just mad because Sarah tattled on one of her friends.
I don’t think people truly realize they’re adults until either they have a shock situation that forces them to grow up fast (unplanned parenthood, parental death) or they reach about 35. And that second one’s a guess.
Yeah, that sounds about right.
I kinda wish Sarah brought the bat with her.
But she did, remember?
I wonder where she put it, then… And I hope she washes it afterwards.
You know, I actually think Radiah is not that bad of a person.
Firstly lets assume maybe there is more to the story, and that possibly Radiah has a right to be mad at Sarah, and it is not as cut-and-dry as it seems.
If we go by that idea then Radiah is rightfully angry, or she thinks she has good reason to be.
She is also being quite a good person, she doesnt let Char be mean to Dina, who she could actually be a bit worried about based on what Radiah thinks Sarah is like. She doesnt let Char be a complete asshole.
Really there is more to this than it seems. I dont think the complete hate-radiah-train is needed right now.
tl;dr Willis, stop making such interesting characters.
I think it’s “we’ve got a few edges of the story, and people are filling in some awfully large gaps.” There are all sorts of ways this could play out.
I don’t know what more we need to know. She had a druggie roommate who would regularly come back around 4 am, stoned out of her gourd, and got up to other antics. If Sarah hadn’t turned her in, she would have been expelled, or at the very least lost her scholarship, effectively torpedoing her future. The cool kids apparently take exception to Sarah caring more about her own future than about protecting her worthless stoner roommate. Pretty cut-and-dried.
We know her side of things. Given problem roommate situations there are ways to solve it other than expulsion. The bullies clearly think she went beyond what was necessary, did she? That’s the large gap people are filling; the nature of the antics and what Sarah did in response.
Unless Dana’s side of this is that Sarah planted the drugs I really don’t think it’s an issue.
Never know. For all we know, Sarah could’ve been less serious about studying at first or something. Unlikely, though, considering what Sarah was like even in the Walkyverse (where she was, like, maybe a tertiary character. At best. And I was honestly half-looking for her on that read-through.)
And what part of that do you feel that would change? Would it place Sarah as the wrongful party during the freshman year or would it justify Raidah’s actions today?
We’ve got Raidah being a jerk right in front of us. We’re not drawing on vast unknowns to say that Raidah is being a jerk to Sarah. I don’t think that’s something that needs to be treated like it’s up in the air because we don’t know the whole story.
By “less-serious” I’m thinking Sarah may have hung out with them beforehand. She probably wasn’t doing drugs, but I could /almost/ see her hanging out with the group and sort-of disapproving but doing nothing about the drugs until her grades started failing, at which point she went into no-bullshit mode. There it could at least be seen as a legitimate betrayal of trust by the others, who thought she was more cool with it than she really was. Depends on how long Sarah knew about things before she told and whether they knew her as anything other than “Dana’s roommate”.
That said, unless Sarah was actually doing drugs as well (possible, but REALLY unlikely), she’s still probably in the right here.
Also possible? They’re just angry she got their friend kicked out of school, and possibly in legal trouble.
Er, to answer the actual question: Mostly make
Raidah’s actions more understandable, maybe a bit
of grey in just how in the right Sarah was,
but probably not. And yeah, Raidah’s being pretty
awful by any stretch.
Fair enough. I do suspect I’ll find cause to like Raidah as a person by the end of all this. What with her persistent plot relevance and how little we know about her there’s probably a lot more to her than we’re seeing. The fact that she’s a little bit classier than the company she keeps is probably building up to something. I just don’t really think there’ll come a point when I’m sympathetic towards these actions performed months after the offense. Comes a time when you’ve gotta just let go and let them not be a part of your life anymore.
If it was mutual and Sarah was egging them on somehow that would be one thing, but so far it seems like Sarah’s pretty content to keep to herself and Raidah’s the one who keeps initiating these altercations.
Agreed. I don’t like her, either, but the fact that there was a post on Tumblr a couple days ago where Willis said we were leading into a flashback arc means there probably is more to this than it seems.
But this is well beyond a simple problem roommate situation, isn’t it? She wasn’t just refusing to bathe or playing her music too loud, she was on drugs, and drugs equal expulsion.
Depends on the college. Mine had a “it’s not a problem unless you make it a problem, and if someone gets hurt we’re more concerned with helping than punishing” policy. That leaves a lot of room between “doing drugs” and “expulsion.” Sarah may have blamed typical roommate conflicts on the drugs, and thus exacerbated the situation.
Of course, I’m filling in the gaps just like everyone else is. I was that uptight anti-drugs guy, and it took a few mistakes before I learned that just because I didn’t want to have anything to do with drugs or alcohol didn’t mean everyone else had to in order to be a decent person (and vice-versa). The “sorry I was a complete jerk about my interactions with you” is never an easy apology to make. Sometimes the drugs are the problem, but I’d say that usually the problems exist regardless unless we’re talking about a severe addiction/abuse situation.
Your college openly harbored illegal activity?
I’m sure there’s a better way of putting it, but basically, yup. Certainly didn’t encourage it, but worked on the idea that if you’re going to experiment with something it’s better to tell friends who feel safe in getting help if something goes wrong than to do it in secret and wind up in trouble. The relationship with local cops has been friendly if occasionally strained (they mainly care about sellers, who the college wasn’t as lenient about), and back when I was there the FBI made some threatening noises that never went anywhere (our end-of-year graduation party had a “welcome undercover Feds” theme that year), but it was mostly quite good. It’s like when parents say “we’ll treat you like an adult as long as you act like one.”
That’s remarkably interesting. Not outlandish I suppose. Places where marijuana laws are on the books but not really enforced aren’t unheard of. Surprises me to hear about a school with a full-blown “Drugs are okay” blanket rule though.
Then again I suppose in the right hands that attitude would manage itself. Not a problem unless you make it a problem means you’re probably gonna do fine with pot but it’s a lot harder to be involved in heavier drugs without making any problems.
Sounds like a really interesting system.
Just doing drugs at college will usually land you in an anti-drug class and probation before they expel you. Unless it’s a religious school, most colleges actually try to help the students rather than just kick them out.
If Sarah’s roommate was DEALING drugs, that’s a whole other thing. It’s unethical to be a weed dealer in a dorm because you put your roommate at risk. It’s perfectly fine if you’re living alone because you assume all the risk.
Hmm? Why doesn’t the third girl get a tag?
I guess Chan is just too background-y to get one. Or it’s only for speaking people. Or perhaps he just forgot.
Because We’re Star Trekking Across The Universe!!!!!!!
I keep staring at Chan’s lipstick and bleached hair. Or is that a super spray tan?
If only Willis was around to tell up if Chan’s is either the result of her race or just a tan.
Chanise is black.
Err Thanks Willis, not sure why the facepalm, did Chan’s race get mentioned in the comments before or something?
I guess it cause you can’t get a spray tan that thick without looking like an oompa loompa.
Also is her name Chanise like Jackie Chan + eece or the more french like Shjan+eece. Given that shes Black, I’m almost certain is the second as the French immigrants moving into the South, especially Southern Louisiana has some interestingly wide impact on our names it seems.
Well, this was anti-climactic. Not sure whether this is a better strategy than conflict in the long run, but it’s adult of her I guess.
It’s ALWAYS a better strategy than conflict. What would conflict change here?
Somebody’s face, most likely.
You know, at first I was kind of confused at why Raidah was telling Char to stop being mean. At first I thought it was just because of what Char was saying (which, I’ll be honest, was pretty impolite), but it’s not just that. Raidah actually thinks that Dina is mentally handicapped, and it’s not because Raidah is a mean person, but it’s because she has such a severe hatred for Sarah that she can’t believe that anyone in their right mind would be friends with her.
For someone who can be nice to other people to hate Sarah so much tells me one of these two things: either Sarah wasn’t exactly nice about tattling on her ex-roommate (for all we know, Sarah could have tattled on her ex-roomie for her stoner ways just so Sarah would have the dorm to herself for a little bit. Unless I missed a strip somewhere, we don’t really know much about how that went down). OR Sarah is that chick that nobody hangs out with (either because she hates everyone and won’t branch out or no one will include her in anything because of her bongoy tendencies). Hell it could be both. Either way, I kind of want the ex-roommate to make an appearance into the comic so we can get the full disclosure of what happened with her and Sarah.
You’ll also have to take into account that Raidah is the kind of person whose entire self-obsessed worldview means that they always have to be ‘in the right’ and see themselves as the better person. If it were saying ‘retarded’ was not frowned upon in intelligent company, she’d toss it around willy-nilly. She only tells Char not to use it to make herself look better.
I agree. Raidah seems the kind of person who will insult you, but knows the fine
line between being mean and being a downright bongo.
Do you think so? I’d say her expression in those panels suggests the language actually bothered her. It’s possible she’s actually quite a decent person and just hates Sarah.
Dragged out. Not kicked out. Subtle, Willis. Subtle.
Just found this comic two days ago, made it this far before looking at any of the comments…
I think I’m going to have to start at the beginning again.
I like how they’re still decent, if mistaken
NAME — Get a Gravatar
NOTE - You can use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>
Is the new dialogue typeface an improvement?
©2010-2015 Dumbing of Age | Powered by WordPress with ComicPress
| Subscribe: RSS
| Back to Top ↑