In French, it is “l’esprit de l’escalier,” which translates as “staircase wit.” Not as meaningful a metaphor in any culture where people do not typically walk down staircases after leaving a party.
Fridge logic is the tiny, inconsistent details of media (movies, books, etc.) that you don’t notice until after you’ve finished the work and randomly occur to you at odd times, such as opening the fridge (the eponymous situation). It doesn’t have much to do with wit, though I suppose “fridge wit” could become a related term
I’m beginning to think the point being established is that Mike actually likes a lot of people and is actually good, but pushes people away and alienates them to try to keep them safe? But his desire to do good and habit of manipulate people leads to him harassing people in subtly constructive ways to encourage them to actually make choices that are good for them?
It’s a fucking baffling character arc but I haven’t seen anything quite like it before and I’m very interested.
Ah yeah, concocting an elaborate scheme to trick Walky into thinking his favorite show was cancelled, then secretly filming him crying in his sleep over it, then showing the video of it to Walky’s classmates under the pretense that it was of Walky crying over his breakup with Dorothy, was just “encouraging [Walky] to actually make choices that are good” for him.
Not quite how I would put it, but it is not entirely implausible. The first scheme could be construed as an attempt to get Walky to recognize how dependent his continued happiness is on a TV show and that perhaps that dependence is not a good thing.
The second is simply Mike’s way of proving to Joyce that Dorothy and Walky really did break-up, even if the video does not have any connection to the break-up. Looking for a positive motive there yields a subtle warning to Joyce that perhaps Dorothy does not reciprocate Joyce’s friendship as strongly as Joyce.
How many coincidences does it take to prove it? If every seemingly negative action taken by a character has a positive, if subtle, effect or intended effect, then can that character be said to be helpful, even indirectly?
Anyway, I’ve yet to see any definitive evidence about Mike to prove whether he is nice person who can’t or won’t help via direct routes or just likes tormenting others via means which may have some positive benefits for the victims.
Faking the cancellation of the show wasn’t the main objective, it was to elicit an emotional reaction from Walky which he would record. Any potential “positive” effect is unintended. Besides, where has Walky’s happiness been linked to the show? He loves it, yes, and is a hardcore fan, but there’s been no indication that his happiness is tied to it.
For the second bit, why would he need to prove it? Even if Joyce didn’t believe it, the idea would’ve been planted in her head , and sooner or later she would’ve asked. Plus, it had the added side effect of possibly making Dorothy seem colder and more detached, since Walky was shown ugly crying but Dorothy appeared relatively unbothered.
Most of the time Mike’s a ginormous asshole who harasses those around him just because he can, and while sometimes he does point out character faults, he does it in the most brutal way possible that’ll probably make his victim go back into denial. Any “helpful” effect he may have is kinda negated by everything else.
Okay, you could make an argument for short-term happiness, but its not unreasonable of him to have an emotional response when he finds out its cancelled. (perhaps on how intense it was, but otherwise not). Anyways, unless he’s so attached to it that his CONTINUED happiness drops just because it’s cancelled, it doesn’t matter how much he’s attached to it, and s we haven’t seen any effect on his behaviour from learning that it was cancelled (I assume it’d take a while for him to find out because of how easily he fell for Mike’s hoax).
I’ve been anti-Mike for the entire run of this comic. The character has been purely repulsive with no alternative explanation for any of his actions ever presented.
Suddenly, Willis is going out of his way to present tons of alternative explanations for every facet of Mike’s character.
Of course I’m now suddenly convinced there’s something about him to defend. Willis is going out of his fucking way, out of nowhere, to show that there’s something complex about Mike beyond him just being a psychopathically evil chaos goblin.
Thing is…what you do is what you are. So Mike could have started out as some sort of jerk with the best intentions, but the more he acts cruel to people the more used to being cruel he gets. Until his persona of self-protective edgelord is who he actually is, and one day, he realises that he can’t take it off and show the ‘real’ him beneath anymore.
I meant that there are things in between good and bad. And that I kind of doubt the point here is to make Mike out to be the hero who saves the day. Maybe I should have made that more clear.
Yeah, most people are generally pretty morally grey but Mike isn’t. Mike fucking sucks. Mike goes out of his way to hurt people. Mike does bad things to people on a regular basis for no justifiable reason. He’s a bad person.
Mike’s bad things are minor with very short-term effects. I can’t recall anything truly horrendous he’s done in the run of this comic.
On top of that, Mike is someone who has the ability to do much, much worse to people, yet settles for low level pranks or manipulating people to showcase their own flaws. He doesn’t even retaliate in any way when Joyce physically attacks him.
Walkyverse Mike was ultimately someone who liked it when the people he bit bit back. And at one point, he sacrificed his life to save someone else’s.
He’s certainly a bully and certainly takes some amusement out of fucking with people, but there’s been more to him than that for a long time in the other continuity, and it looks like that’s the case here too.
Well that’s naive and wrong. Someone who willfully spreads pain and unhappiness to people who’ve done nothing to deserve it is a bad person. Serial killers are bad people. Bullies are bad people. White supremacists are bad people. It’s a judgement of their moral standing based on their actions and values.
I think the point of this arc isn’t that Mike is a good person, but rather that there is enough good in him that he could become a good person if he wanted to and found a reason to work for it. He’s not a totally irredeemable. Just, like… mostly.
Head’s up because many people don’t know that–the “g” term you used there is a racial slur tied to the longstanding oppression of the Romani people (and was a part of the racism that made them targets of the Holocaust. The Romani Holocaust Remembrance Day is actually August 1.
That’s not how I read it. I think it’s more that Ethan thinks he has Mike figured out. That the Mike everyone gets to see on the surface is all there is of Mike. But Mike isn’t comfortable revealing his personal feelings, internal thoughts. Possibly he’s worried that it would reveal a vulnerability, something that would open him up to mockery because of the facade he’s kept up for so long.
I mean, it’s not like he doesn’t enjoy being That Asshole Mike, but I don’t think anyone realizes yet that he might not want that to be the entirety of his identity. So Ethan here is just making a subtle jab at TAM, not realizing that there might be more to him. And Mike is realizing that being honest won’t be taken seriously.
This is the vibe I’m getting. It reminds me of his reaction to Ethan saying he was only 50-60% sure Mike was really his friend, which seemed slightly more complicated than usual. Granted it was just an extra angry set of eyebrows and then a declaration of trying to sexually manipulate either Ethan or Danny….
Hmm. Now I have to wonder whether Mike really is still/was originally intending for this to be one of his cruel plots, or if that’s just how he has to frame and rationalize all his actions now, even sincere emotions. Not sure.
His original goal seemed to be to mildly-to-moderately torture Ethan by messing around with Danny to make him jealous, in the service of making him actually take action to confront that he is a very gay boy, but Ethan made him swear to leave Danny alone because he didn’t want Mike mind-fucking a nice boy to make some point that Ethan is convinced he doesn’t need. So Mike figured, “okay, whatever, pivot, I’ll just lead Ethan on directly” but hadn’t honestly considered that Ethan is A) one of his closest and most trusted friends, whether he thought of him that way or not, and B) someone he might actually have genuine feelings for.
Mike tried to do a nice thing for Ethan in his classically manipulative, dickish way, but didn’t foresee the one potential bad outcome that he was blind to, and ended up getting himself in trouble. Which would mean that his current flashback arc and his current present arc actually share a common theme…
His motivation isn’t to get Ethan to realize he’s a gay boy, it’s to turn Danny into a whimpering, jealous mess. If he was trying to get Ethan to become secure in his gayness, and decided to seduce him instead of Dannyto achieve that, he wouldn’t have to add the “turn the other into a jealous, whimpering mess” bit when telling us his motivations.
The thing is, it seems to me that Willis is trying really, really hard to imply that Mike is not quite as straightforward as he seems without just blatantly hanging a lampshade on it, and part of that could very well be that Mike is not necessarily honest with himself. That, and his stated reason for doing something doesn’t necessarily – or perhaps even typically – indicate his end goal, just the means to whatever his actual, unstated end happens to be. Does he want one or the other to be a whimpering, jealous mess just because? Or is it for a particular reason that isn’t clear to us as readers? Or is it not even fully clear to Mike?
I struggled for a long time to get what was so amusing about Mike when he was portrayed as so flatly…almost inhuman, up until recently. I was definitely a Mike hater. But, like I said, it seems like he’s not meant to be that simple, and I don’t feel like so much time and effort would be dedicated to complicating such a simple character if we are meant to eventually arrive back at, “naw, he’s just a big fat dick trolling people for teh lulz.”
The phrasing of the last speech bubble seems to imply that turning Danny into a jealous whimpering mess IS the end goal, rather than the means to some other thing.
I do agree that Mike has been recently portrayed as a smidge more complex, and it might be that Willis decides to make him be a more sympathetic and helpful character, but based on what we have, he’s still pretty much a perceptive ass who more or less does things just because.
For any other interpretation of his character, you have to start hand-waving things away or look really hard and squint sideways to see it, but the straightforward interpretation, where’s he’s an ass who does thing for kicks, makes more sense considering everything he’s done, so I’m inclined to believe that until its proven otherwise.
Personally, I think others are assigning him too much complexity and looking too much into what he does.
I like the twist that he is an ass who does things for kicks but demonstrates emotional affection here and there because even asses aren’t immune to the internal satisfaction of the occasional altruistic behavior. Mike as True Neutral.
Flip fucking
Ethan could be riding him (like a cowboy)
They could have finished with a double handy
They could have changed positions to make out in the afterglow.
Indeed.
Besides, unless it is specifically part of someone’s kink, that “top/bottom” stuff is a really outdated stereotype – like one of the lesbians being the “man” in the relationship. Bleck.
(Note: The bleck is to the use of that stereotype, not to the kink that evolved from it. I support all kinks, even ones based on regressive stereotypes (I have a few of the later myself). Might as well reclaim some pleasure from it, right?)
Top/bottom (and butch/femme for that matter) isn’t really an outdated stereotype, it IS part of many gay people’s sex lives. It’s normal. The way some people discuss fictional characters being tops or bottoms (especially in manga fandoms) DOES often rely on outdated stereotypes, though
It actually makes a lot of sense to me from a psychological perspective. Speaking as an experienced control freak (which I’d argue Mike is) intimate acts are one of the few places a control freak might prefer not to be in control.
It’s kind of hard to explain, but I feel like Mike puts on a front with his attitude and this is kind of a metaphor for the fact that he might be more vulnerable than he lets on.
Orrrr probably it just worked better for the dialogue to draw them that way but who knows. XD
Huh, that final face actually has me confused, and since Ethan’s eyes were closed it clearly wasn’t for any show. Mike what are you doing? Also, why do I feel like Blaine is going to somehow rear his ugly head again soon?
Also, I think that “Hmph” may have been Mike slightly annoyed that he was hoisted by his own petard with Ethan asking if he’d rather have pillow talk instead of just nap. Which is frankly adorable if that is the case, I’d like to believe it is.
A little pet peeve here, but the original quote was, “hoist with his own petard”, without the “-ed” at the end of the first word (a petard was a primitive Renaissance-era breaching charge, so to be “hoist with your own petard” would mean that you set up the fuse incorrectly in some way, so that it blew you up as well).
Fair enough, I knew vaguely that it was an explosive and meant something about blowing up in your face/coming back to bite you but I don’t know the actual source. “Hoisted by my own petard” is a phrase that has been used around me commonly enough that it just ended up in my vocabulary without actually thinking about it.
Vaguely interesting petard trivia:
1. Shakespeare actually spelled it “petar”; only later did the spelling and pronunciation stabilize at “petard”.
2. It comes from the French word for “fart”.
No, it comes from the French word for firecracker (pétard), which comes from a Medieval word for tobacco (and by extension the little cigarettes of the time).
The more you know (about farts): Le Petomane is also referenced in Blazing Saddles, a 1974 satirical Western comedy film directed by Mel Brooks. Brooks appears in multiple supporting roles, including the dim-witted Governor William J. Le Petomane, whose name suggests he is full of hot air. The actual Le Petomane is even weirder. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Le_P%C3%A9tomane
I keep trying to push this altenartive etymology: that “petard” is a corruption of “pet aardvark”, and the phrase recalls the bizarre, scandalous death of the 34th Earl of Scongahorpe.
I don’t think it’s that simple, Mike is whatever he wants to be, or needs to be in order to manipulate people. I don’t know if he actually has a preference, though I would be curious since his sadism does make it less likely.
That shut him up!
I feel vindicated for that “35” crack.
Also, and I am just stereotyping here, as I know very well from experience that the position that One starts out in ain’t necessarily where One will be when the lovin’ ends, but, is Mike a bottom?!
A pleasant surprise to say the least, but, then, I also know from experience that some of the most aggressive (and/or just plain bongoy) people in the streets tend to bottom in the sheets.
Still… “Verrrrry interrrrestingk!”
(Who among ye got THAT reference?!)
Mike knew. He has super nice parents. Ethan’s mom is homophobic.
Mike fucked with Blane to protect Amber, but he had to act like he cared about no one. It would take so little for Blane to fuck with Ethan. He had to do it for him.
He’s been a posturing asshole because otherwise Blane would see fucking right THROUGH Mike. Mike’s been holding that in for YEARS because Blane could easily target, and has targeted, the two he’s fucking cared about.
The only thing worse than someone like Mike using you for sex, is someone like Mike falling for you in the process. Mike and Ambers relationship in the other comic wasn’t exactly…healthy (Amber was fairly toxic as well…but still) even if they were still my guilty pleasure OTP.
Ethan is a pure babygay and must be saved at all costs
I mean Ethan’s pretty inexperienced and Mike is certainly bad for him, but I don’t think it’s really enough to infantilize Ethan like that.
Ethan really did need this, and he really did need to hear the stuff Mike said to him. And as Amber said, he can survive someone who’s bad for him. Even if it’s tumultuous, Ethan can make it through a rocky hook-up/relationship and come out better for it. He’ll have opened up, he’ll be familiar with the sexy stuff that he’s wanted but been avoiding out of uncertainty, and he and Mike will probably confront each other about some stuff that they’ve been holding back. Even if this hurts their friendship (it probably will) this will force them both into a dialogue where they confront the stuff they haven’t dealt with; Ethan calling out Mike on his shit and Mike opening up about how Ethan’s emotional distance and lack of trust has been eating him up are both things they need to talk about.
It’ll suck, but I think that after all this Mike will have learned that he reaps what he sows, and Ethan will be in a better position to start pursuing adult relationships now that he’s in a position to get them. They’re adults now; maturely dealing with growth is what’s on the menu.
MIKE IS LIKE BOY RUTH. Not like, family wise. But. Like. How they are dealing with abusers in their spheres of contact and the. “Questionable?” Way they deal with them.
Mike was the DEFINITIVE asshole. Does this makes what he does okay? No. But man. I just. Man I don’t know If I can stand on a high horse and Judge him cause holy fucking fuck.
Cuuuute face in the last panel there. This is all gonna end in tears but that doesn’t mean we can’t enjoy the ride.
Also, remarkable number of people being surprised Mike might have ‘caught’ instead of ‘pitched’, but like statistically there’s more guys who prefer the sensation of bottoming (and would advertise themselves as bottoms) than guys who prefer the sensation of topping. The bottom is frequently also more in control, cuz he sets the pace.
Plus, topping is easier for first-timers, so Mike trying to make things as smooth as possible for Ethan’s first time… well, it makes sense on a lot of different levels, and is certainly also consistent with what we’ve seen of Mike with Amber.
Actually, Ethan, if I’m reading panel 5 right, yes Mike would rather you two talked.
I’ve got a feeling that my prediction for the ‘Mike seduces Ethan’ arc may be coming true with a few variations. Mike hasn’t fallen in love with his mark. Rather, he had never consciously released his feelings for Ethan before until they were given physical expression and now he’s struggling to keep the objectivity he needs to pull off his scheme.
Break Ethan’s heart to prove to him that all relationships inevitably lead to betrayal and sadness. Suddenly, he isn’t sure that he wants that to happen to either of them.
I was reading his scheme as “Seduce Ethan (because he’d been banned from seducing Danny) to make Danny jealous and make them admit they’re actually into each other and do something about it.”
If that WAS his scheme then boy did he mess up, seducing the guy he’s clearly in denial HIMSELF about having real feelings for.
I’m just so sick of reading 7 different variations on “Abusive and manipulative behaviour is okay if you’re doing it for their own good” in every comment section it’s so incredibly gross.
FWIW, I haven’t seen anyone saying that it is ‘okay’, only that this is what Mike does and that nothing about him makes sense if you don’t acknowledge that weird moral knot he’s tied in his mind.
Not directly, but through implication. People argue that Mike is helpful because of the “positive” effect his actions have on his victims, completely ignoring his way of doing it and neglecting to factor in his behaviour into how “helpful” he is, thereby implying that his behaviour isn’t part of the problem and fine in this context.
I’m sorry, but “implying” is a but of a slippery slope, as misunderstandings can happen very easily via online conversation. “You are implying this by saying that” is often not fair, either. Did you ask, and did they state they did actually think Mike’s goals (whichever they are) excuse his behaviour?
No, not through implication at all. Even when someone in my life has caused me direct, frequent harm, I still try to look for explanations for their behavior. It doesn’t mean I’m trying to, even subconsciously, excuse their behavior. I’m just trying to understand where it’s coming from because I’m not satisfied not knowing the motivations behind people’s behavior. In fact, it’s LESS distressing to me if I can say, “Okay, this person always does this because of X,” rather than, “This person is awful to me and I don’t know why.” It makes it easier to move on and not let the behavior have such a negative hold over my life.
In any case, like Jago said, it’s a major slippery slope arguing that anyone trying to explain Mike’s motivates is excusing his behavior as acceptable. That’s quite a leap of logic and the very people who are trying to explain his behavior are here telling you, no, that’s not what we’re doing at all. We don’t think that makes his behavior okay. We’re just trying to figure out why he does what he does.
I have literally not seen anyone say it is okay. People are arguing the character has layers, not defending the behavior in the context of real life.
I swear this happens every time a Mike storyline comes up. The occasional person acting like people who like Mike as a character are awful people who are condoning abusive behavior.
I also like Loki, and Spike from Buffy, and Baltar from BSG and understand their motives for what they do. Does this mean I don’t recognize their behavior is awful? No. It means I recognize they’re FICTIONAL CHARACTERS and can enjoy things in fiction that I might not in real life.
I am fairly sure everyone here who enjoys Mike storylines would readily admit they’d want nothing to do with a real actual person like Mike. But sometimes these kinda of characters are fun in fiction and can evoke emotions in ways a real person wouldn’t.
Also for the record I’m not saying you can’t be uncomfortable with his behavior. You don’t like Mike storylines, that’s cool. That’s fine. Some of us do. Different people like different things.
There are fictional characters other people love that I can’t stand because they remind me too much of real-life issues I’ve dealt with or people who have caused me harm. Ultimately as long as we’re all recognizing this is fiction and different people can like different things, and you can tune out for a bit if a storyline is upsetting you, then there shouldn’t be an issue.
(unrelated but man how did I get this gravatar…I miss Dina)
I’m fine with Mike as a character. I’m not at all happy with Mike the asshole Sage who’s just there to help people grow by showing them painful truths, whose “Mike things” always turn out to help their targets despite the initial pain.
And if you think that’s a strawman – well, maybe just a little, but only in that I’m phrasing it a bit more strongly and summarizing multiple opinions, possibly losing some nuance.
This. If Mike is going to be a more complex character and have emotions and not act like a jackass all the time, awesome, bring it on. But I’m not here for saying he’s a good person or trying to do a good thing by being a complete prick (I can ALMOST get the idea of him trying to push them away instead of leaving them more vulnerable since he cares about them, but in that scenario, the right thing to do is cut them off and stop talking to them not be a total douche). In the meantime, I like him as a character but as a ‘person’ I don’t.
I mean I can’t speak for every Mike fan, but yeah my take is definitely NOT that he’s the asshole sage who is really just trying to help people. Sometime his actions have positive results but I obviously don’t think the ends justify the means.
I view him as an arrogant, deeply flawed character who has developed this prickliness as a way of dealing with the world for some reason (possibly as we’re seeing now, to make it seem like he doesn’t care). That’s an explanation for his behavior, but not an excuse. I don’t like real people who act like this. But I do love fictional characters who act like this, for whatever reason.
the day before that there’s Rachel Kelly claiming ” Mike isn’t just mean for mean’s sake, he just shines light on, usually, self deceitful behavior.” http://www.dumbingofage.com/2018/comic/book-8/04-of-mike-and-men/casual-2/#comment-1340183
and just below that, Mydnyt says “I believe that at least 75% of the time when Mike is screwing with someone it is for their own good in some way.”
I obviously can’t speak for everyone else. I don’t know what they’re thinking, but it sure doesn’t look like any of them are saying they condone this behavior in real life. It looks like they’re discussing him in the context of the comic, a fiction, where I think it’s okay to have a different standard for behavior when judging a character because that character is not real. As I said above, it’s the same reason so many people can like Spike from Buffy in the context of fiction even though he’s basically evil and would be an appealing person in real life.
I mean Ishaan literally says: “In real life, yes, Mike would be horrible,” so it’s pretty clear they’re separating what they condone in real life from fiction there.
Basically this. Mike fans and Mike haters are speaking at cross purposes in these situations, because the latter keep insisting that the former analyzing and even defending a fictional character’s potential motivations is the same thing as condoning similar behavior in real life.
I know lots of folks are saying top/bottom stuff here, but frottage is also a possibility. Also I hope Mike has real feels and I ship it and maybe I’m going to get a Slipshine membership soon?
So is the implication here that Mike does have feelings for Ethan, and has been attempting to protect both Ethan and Amber from Blaine all this time by treating them terribly so they won’t be targeted?
Because if that’s it, it’s kind of touching but also Mike, there’s being protectively cold and then there’s telling Amber that she’s destined to become like her father. I don’t think you’re good at this if you’ve been trying to be protective.
And before anyone starts, no, I’m not saying this makes Mike some sort of perfect unsung hero who always has the best intentions at heart. Just because this would explain it, that doesn’t mean it justifies it.
So much talk about Mike’s psychological state here, and I just wanna know who was top and who was bottom. Wait, there’s a Slipshine for that, isn’t there?
@Willis: Hey. I’m not sure how the USPS works, so I don’t know if this is normal, but according to the tracker, my ordered books spent the last week being sent from and arriving at the, and I quote, “Chicago IL International Distribution Center” over and over (I count 5 arrivals) . Is this working as intended?
Ok, it most certainly ISN’T working as intended, because that’s just one of the packages. The other one has already arrived in Portugal yesterday, so it seems someone went postal over the other package.
a) If you’re not in the US, the automated sorting machinery there can’t parse your address well enough to send it on, or, less likely
b) said machinery has unsealed or damaged the package and it has to be repaired, possibly after someone reads the books.
Odds are they’ll be sent to you, or returned to Willis for a better address or additional postage, in a few days. If b) you might even find someone else’s lost valuables in the package. Been there, done that, read some good books that way.
Probably. You wouldn’t want the postal clerk reading them to have to start in media res, would you?
Seriously, once a package has been delayed NOBODY has any incentive to speed up its eventual delivery. Doubly so for foreign mail. So the second package (or its remains) will be sent to you, or returned to Willis, by the slowest mode possible.
Probably didn’t snark explicitly enough: I bought all 6 books, and they’re coming in two packages. ONE of the packages seems to be heading this way alright, and I bet that one has the later books, meaning I’ll need to wait for the OTHER package to arrive to binge through them.
Oh,you were explicit enough: I was just making a joke that the USPS clerk currently reading your books would probably want to start with Book One rather than Book Four. Not a good joke, apparently.
I hope you get them both with the least delay and trouble.
… Considering yesterday’s comic? I’m wondering if the reason Mike turned into the negative pit of actively pushing everyone’s buttons is because Blaine threatened Ethan in some way.
Wait… Is Mike looking vulnerable!?!? Well now… That IS interesting.
It is so hard to get a read on Mike most of the time since he’s usually playing up his sociopathic asshole persona, but here he seems genuine. He seems to actually like Ethan and seems to be trying to reach out and connect emotionally in a fashion.
Loading ...
*five years after yesterday’s comic* “…NOT IF I FUCK THEM UP FIRST!!”
what’s that word for when you come up with the best retort long after the moment has passed
[actually Mike’s just uncomfortable about having to lay on the wet spot]
In French, it is “l’esprit de l’escalier,” which translates as “staircase wit.” Not as meaningful a metaphor in any culture where people do not typically walk down staircases after leaving a party.
Am French. Have never heard this in real life. Have seen it plenty on the English-speaking Internet.
In German, I hear it’s called “Hintertreppengedanke” – back stair thought. So ir may be a European thing…
In Danish it’s called ‘bagklogskab’, which just means ‘hindsmarts/backsmarts’
Or, you know, hindsight. That thing that is almost always 20/20.
Though hindsight pretty much universally and with few exceptions, lacks depth perception.
I’ve seen sexual relationships self-immolate for less!
The term you’re looking for is “Taxicab wit”
Nah, that’s different – the one you’re thinking of is Comeback Tomorrow.
Fridge logic is the tv trope name
Fridge logic is the tiny, inconsistent details of media (movies, books, etc.) that you don’t notice until after you’ve finished the work and randomly occur to you at odd times, such as opening the fridge (the eponymous situation). It doesn’t have much to do with wit, though I suppose “fridge wit” could become a related term
Whoops, meant to reply to this one – the one you’re thinking of is “Comeback Tomorrow”.
According to Raising Arizona, it’s a Way Homer.
*inner Mike*: (a little.)
If they talk about Dinobot, Ethan will instantly be ready to go again.
Mike never should have told Ethan not to talk about Dinobot to him. That now gives Ethan an upper hand.
Mike actually likes him!
From a commercial for Eef cereal:
“Let’s get Mikey. He hates everything.”
A little bit later….
“Mikey likes it!”
I’m beginning to think the point being established is that Mike actually likes a lot of people and is actually good, but pushes people away and alienates them to try to keep them safe? But his desire to do good and habit of manipulate people leads to him harassing people in subtly constructive ways to encourage them to actually make choices that are good for them?
It’s a fucking baffling character arc but I haven’t seen anything quite like it before and I’m very interested.
Ah yeah, concocting an elaborate scheme to trick Walky into thinking his favorite show was cancelled, then secretly filming him crying in his sleep over it, then showing the video of it to Walky’s classmates under the pretense that it was of Walky crying over his breakup with Dorothy, was just “encouraging [Walky] to actually make choices that are good” for him.
/s
And that’s just one of many examples where his actions are plain harmful
Not quite how I would put it, but it is not entirely implausible. The first scheme could be construed as an attempt to get Walky to recognize how dependent his continued happiness is on a TV show and that perhaps that dependence is not a good thing.
The second is simply Mike’s way of proving to Joyce that Dorothy and Walky really did break-up, even if the video does not have any connection to the break-up. Looking for a positive motive there yields a subtle warning to Joyce that perhaps Dorothy does not reciprocate Joyce’s friendship as strongly as Joyce.
How many coincidences does it take to prove it? If every seemingly negative action taken by a character has a positive, if subtle, effect or intended effect, then can that character be said to be helpful, even indirectly?
Anyway, I’ve yet to see any definitive evidence about Mike to prove whether he is nice person who can’t or won’t help via direct routes or just likes tormenting others via means which may have some positive benefits for the victims.
Faking the cancellation of the show wasn’t the main objective, it was to elicit an emotional reaction from Walky which he would record. Any potential “positive” effect is unintended. Besides, where has Walky’s happiness been linked to the show? He loves it, yes, and is a hardcore fan, but there’s been no indication that his happiness is tied to it.
For the second bit, why would he need to prove it? Even if Joyce didn’t believe it, the idea would’ve been planted in her head , and sooner or later she would’ve asked. Plus, it had the added side effect of possibly making Dorothy seem colder and more detached, since Walky was shown ugly crying but Dorothy appeared relatively unbothered.
Most of the time Mike’s a ginormous asshole who harasses those around him just because he can, and while sometimes he does point out character faults, he does it in the most brutal way possible that’ll probably make his victim go back into denial. Any “helpful” effect he may have is kinda negated by everything else.
< He loves it, yes, and is a hardcore fan, but there’s been no indication that his happiness is tied to it.
Except for the part where he cried so hard it was reasonable to tell people he had lost someone he loved rather than a show?
Okay, you could make an argument for short-term happiness, but its not unreasonable of him to have an emotional response when he finds out its cancelled. (perhaps on how intense it was, but otherwise not). Anyways, unless he’s so attached to it that his CONTINUED happiness drops just because it’s cancelled, it doesn’t matter how much he’s attached to it, and s we haven’t seen any effect on his behaviour from learning that it was cancelled (I assume it’d take a while for him to find out because of how easily he fell for Mike’s hoax).
The mental gymnastics people will go to to defend Mike are reaching the Olympic level.
It’s a training scheme!
The digging-in other people will go to to hang onto their hatred has long past achieved World War I trench level.
All I had to do was hop into the massive hole Mike dug himself with his own behaviour towards the people around him.
I’ve been anti-Mike for the entire run of this comic. The character has been purely repulsive with no alternative explanation for any of his actions ever presented.
Suddenly, Willis is going out of his way to present tons of alternative explanations for every facet of Mike’s character.
Of course I’m now suddenly convinced there’s something about him to defend. Willis is going out of his fucking way, out of nowhere, to show that there’s something complex about Mike beyond him just being a psychopathically evil chaos goblin.
^^ This.
Thing is…what you do is what you are. So Mike could have started out as some sort of jerk with the best intentions, but the more he acts cruel to people the more used to being cruel he gets. Until his persona of self-protective edgelord is who he actually is, and one day, he realises that he can’t take it off and show the ‘real’ him beneath anymore.
Hm. That has often been his MO in the Dumbverse. I like your analysis and hope you are right/close.
If Willis’ endgame here is to try to tell me he thinks Mike is a good person I’m never reading this comic again because that’s just utterly fucked.
There aren’t just good and bad people. That’s not how people work.
That’s… completely missing the point.
I meant that there are things in between good and bad. And that I kind of doubt the point here is to make Mike out to be the hero who saves the day. Maybe I should have made that more clear.
Yeah, most people are generally pretty morally grey but Mike isn’t. Mike fucking sucks. Mike goes out of his way to hurt people. Mike does bad things to people on a regular basis for no justifiable reason. He’s a bad person.
Mike’s bad things are minor with very short-term effects. I can’t recall anything truly horrendous he’s done in the run of this comic.
On top of that, Mike is someone who has the ability to do much, much worse to people, yet settles for low level pranks or manipulating people to showcase their own flaws. He doesn’t even retaliate in any way when Joyce physically attacks him.
Walkyverse Mike was ultimately someone who liked it when the people he bit bit back. And at one point, he sacrificed his life to save someone else’s.
He’s certainly a bully and certainly takes some amusement out of fucking with people, but there’s been more to him than that for a long time in the other continuity, and it looks like that’s the case here too.
Well that’s naive and wrong. Someone who willfully spreads pain and unhappiness to people who’ve done nothing to deserve it is a bad person. Serial killers are bad people. Bullies are bad people. White supremacists are bad people. It’s a judgement of their moral standing based on their actions and values.
I think you missed my point.
But after that opener I honestly don’t care to have a conversation.
I think the point of this arc isn’t that Mike is a good person, but rather that there is enough good in him that he could become a good person if he wanted to and found a reason to work for it. He’s not a totally irredeemable. Just, like… mostly.
This ship officially weighed anchor with canons.
If Mike is involved, probably with cannons as well.
…. technically.
But everyone knows that Joe/Jacob are where the big guns are REALLY at.
*flees for dear punning life*
Now’s when Mike pulls out a picture of the troll face and holds it up and goes “Problem?”
Ethan didn’t go all these years without learning some things about Mike!
And, I seem to vaguely recall hearing about a Slipshine planned for August-ish?
>.>
I-I mean, you -have- plausible deniability, I can’t even remember where I read that anyway!
… this is how I die, isn’t it? Talking about Slipshine.
First rule of slipstream……
Of even slipshine. Sigh I hate you auto correct
Batman’s wurst enemy!
Nah this was mentioned in the blog or somewhere out in public. You’re safe.
….for now
Just like the old Gypsy woman said!
That’s right… but… wait. How did you know that!?
Head’s up because many people don’t know that–the “g” term you used there is a racial slur tied to the longstanding oppression of the Romani people (and was a part of the racism that made them targets of the Holocaust. The Romani Holocaust Remembrance Day is actually August 1.
Even fewer people would recognize the Archer (or other places) reference without that word, but you are correct.
I did not know either of these things. I’m learning!
Man, Ethan worked up a sweat. He’s a shiny boi.
Slipshiny boi
Slipshine when
GOD DAMN IT WILLIS
the greatest butt in DoA and you left it just off-panel how COULD you
Gotta get people to shell out for Slipshine somehow.
Ethan or Mike? Have we seen either of their butts? I can’t remember.
Does nekkid Ethan dream butt count?
… Yeah, wow, that cropping must be like torture to you, huh butts?
ethan is my everest
… this comment thread, and particularly this final line, made me laugh so hard I peed a little. Bravo.
Do you mean your everass?
https://imgur.com/lEFEgzC
Hope this helps
That was everything I had hoped it would be. Thank you
You did what I was not nearly brave enough to do, Ainara. *tips hat*
crap now he has to feel emotions, thanks a lot Ethan. 😛
This does suggest that Mike wants more than casual sex. And that Ethan knows it.
Emotional leverage over someone like Mike is a powerful tool in the right (or wrong) hands (and other extremities!)
That’s not how I read it. I think it’s more that Ethan thinks he has Mike figured out. That the Mike everyone gets to see on the surface is all there is of Mike. But Mike isn’t comfortable revealing his personal feelings, internal thoughts. Possibly he’s worried that it would reveal a vulnerability, something that would open him up to mockery because of the facade he’s kept up for so long.
I mean, it’s not like he doesn’t enjoy being That Asshole Mike, but I don’t think anyone realizes yet that he might not want that to be the entirety of his identity. So Ethan here is just making a subtle jab at TAM, not realizing that there might be more to him. And Mike is realizing that being honest won’t be taken seriously.
This is the vibe I’m getting. It reminds me of his reaction to Ethan saying he was only 50-60% sure Mike was really his friend, which seemed slightly more complicated than usual. Granted it was just an extra angry set of eyebrows and then a declaration of trying to sexually manipulate either Ethan or Danny….
Mike is an asshole, but a complicated one imo.
Hmm. Now I have to wonder whether Mike really is still/was originally intending for this to be one of his cruel plots, or if that’s just how he has to frame and rationalize all his actions now, even sincere emotions. Not sure.
He hinted before that it was a choice between Danny and Ethan, so… really, who knows at this point.
His original goal seemed to be to mildly-to-moderately torture Ethan by messing around with Danny to make him jealous, in the service of making him actually take action to confront that he is a very gay boy, but Ethan made him swear to leave Danny alone because he didn’t want Mike mind-fucking a nice boy to make some point that Ethan is convinced he doesn’t need. So Mike figured, “okay, whatever, pivot, I’ll just lead Ethan on directly” but hadn’t honestly considered that Ethan is A) one of his closest and most trusted friends, whether he thought of him that way or not, and B) someone he might actually have genuine feelings for.
Mike tried to do a nice thing for Ethan in his classically manipulative, dickish way, but didn’t foresee the one potential bad outcome that he was blind to, and ended up getting himself in trouble. Which would mean that his current flashback arc and his current present arc actually share a common theme…
wow that’s way more italics than i wanted can’t edit it now rip my dignity
Again, I really like this analysis. Even with the italics fail.
His motivation isn’t to get Ethan to realize he’s a gay boy, it’s to turn Danny into a whimpering, jealous mess. If he was trying to get Ethan to become secure in his gayness, and decided to seduce him instead of Dannyto achieve that, he wouldn’t have to add the “turn the other into a jealous, whimpering mess” bit when telling us his motivations.
The thing is, it seems to me that Willis is trying really, really hard to imply that Mike is not quite as straightforward as he seems without just blatantly hanging a lampshade on it, and part of that could very well be that Mike is not necessarily honest with himself. That, and his stated reason for doing something doesn’t necessarily – or perhaps even typically – indicate his end goal, just the means to whatever his actual, unstated end happens to be. Does he want one or the other to be a whimpering, jealous mess just because? Or is it for a particular reason that isn’t clear to us as readers? Or is it not even fully clear to Mike?
I struggled for a long time to get what was so amusing about Mike when he was portrayed as so flatly…almost inhuman, up until recently. I was definitely a Mike hater. But, like I said, it seems like he’s not meant to be that simple, and I don’t feel like so much time and effort would be dedicated to complicating such a simple character if we are meant to eventually arrive back at, “naw, he’s just a big fat dick trolling people for teh lulz.”
http://www.dumbingofage.com/2016/comic/book-6/04-it-all-returns/percent/
The phrasing of the last speech bubble seems to imply that turning Danny into a jealous whimpering mess IS the end goal, rather than the means to some other thing.
I do agree that Mike has been recently portrayed as a smidge more complex, and it might be that Willis decides to make him be a more sympathetic and helpful character, but based on what we have, he’s still pretty much a perceptive ass who more or less does things just because.
For any other interpretation of his character, you have to start hand-waving things away or look really hard and squint sideways to see it, but the straightforward interpretation, where’s he’s an ass who does thing for kicks, makes more sense considering everything he’s done, so I’m inclined to believe that until its proven otherwise.
Personally, I think others are assigning him too much complexity and looking too much into what he does.
I like the twist that he is an ass who does things for kicks but demonstrates emotional affection here and there because even asses aren’t immune to the internal satisfaction of the occasional altruistic behavior. Mike as True Neutral.
Thank you for explaining Mike for use all.
He now stands exposed in 3 great ways!
I had a though just now…you think Mike was/is on some level jealous of Danny for having Ethan’s attention/attraction?
I think this yes.
For some reason, I wasn’t expecting Mike to… bottom?
He can manipulate from any position.
HAHAHAHAHAH! I know, right? I was surprised, too.
Flip fucking
Ethan could be riding him (like a cowboy)
They could have finished with a double handy
They could have changed positions to make out in the afterglow.
We need that slipshine to know for sure!
Indeed.
Besides, unless it is specifically part of someone’s kink, that “top/bottom” stuff is a really outdated stereotype – like one of the lesbians being the “man” in the relationship. Bleck.
(Note: The bleck is to the use of that stereotype, not to the kink that evolved from it. I support all kinks, even ones based on regressive stereotypes (I have a few of the later myself). Might as well reclaim some pleasure from it, right?)
Top/bottom (and butch/femme for that matter) isn’t really an outdated stereotype, it IS part of many gay people’s sex lives. It’s normal. The way some people discuss fictional characters being tops or bottoms (especially in manga fandoms) DOES often rely on outdated stereotypes, though
I’m way more surprised that Ethan volunteered to top.
Gay sex does not necessarily involve insertions. I should know, I’m part of that demographic.
Tbh maybe its because of his slipshine with amber but I always pictured him a bottom. Besides I have a feeling Ethan isn’t ready to receive anal
He seems like someone who likes sex to be where hes not in charge.
They might have taken turns.
It actually makes a lot of sense to me from a psychological perspective. Speaking as an experienced control freak (which I’d argue Mike is) intimate acts are one of the few places a control freak might prefer not to be in control.
It’s kind of hard to explain, but I feel like Mike puts on a front with his attitude and this is kind of a metaphor for the fact that he might be more vulnerable than he lets on.
Orrrr probably it just worked better for the dialogue to draw them that way but who knows. XD
Take a look at his interaction with Amazi-Girl. He’s clearly turned on by being dominated.
maybe, or maybe he was just acting that way to creep her out and make her stop. then again, why not both?
Looks like Mike is starting to second-guess his plan in that last panel. Either/or he has actual feelings for Ethan.
Today’s strip is brought to you by GetTV, now showing Walker: Texas Ranger in ridiculously frequent binge blocks.
And/or the ‘LaFF’ network which does the same for That 70s Show.
Same with COZI and Frasier, History and American Pickers, GSN and Family Feud, and Weather Channel and EVERYTHING BUT THE LOCAL WEATHER, DAMMIT.
I see we all have the same crappy basic cable package.
It’s Walkerton: Texas Ranger
Huh, that final face actually has me confused, and since Ethan’s eyes were closed it clearly wasn’t for any show. Mike what are you doing? Also, why do I feel like Blaine is going to somehow rear his ugly head again soon?
Also, I think that “Hmph” may have been Mike slightly annoyed that he was hoisted by his own petard with Ethan asking if he’d rather have pillow talk instead of just nap. Which is frankly adorable if that is the case, I’d like to believe it is.
A little pet peeve here, but the original quote was, “hoist with his own petard”, without the “-ed” at the end of the first word (a petard was a primitive Renaissance-era breaching charge, so to be “hoist with your own petard” would mean that you set up the fuse incorrectly in some way, so that it blew you up as well).
Fair enough, I knew vaguely that it was an explosive and meant something about blowing up in your face/coming back to bite you but I don’t know the actual source. “Hoisted by my own petard” is a phrase that has been used around me commonly enough that it just ended up in my vocabulary without actually thinking about it.
Vaguely interesting petard trivia:
1. Shakespeare actually spelled it “petar”; only later did the spelling and pronunciation stabilize at “petard”.
2. It comes from the French word for “fart”.
Captain Jean-Luc Petard, USS Flatuprise.
No, it comes from the French word for firecracker (pétard), which comes from a Medieval word for tobacco (and by extension the little cigarettes of the time).
A mediaeval word for tobacco? I thought tobacco was part of the Columbian Exchange, not known in Europe until after the end of the Mediaeval period.
The more you know (about farts): Le Petomane is also referenced in Blazing Saddles, a 1974 satirical Western comedy film directed by Mel Brooks. Brooks appears in multiple supporting roles, including the dim-witted Governor William J. Le Petomane, whose name suggests he is full of hot air. The actual Le Petomane is even weirder.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Le_P%C3%A9tomane
I keep trying to push this altenartive etymology: that “petard” is a corruption of “pet aardvark”, and the phrase recalls the bizarre, scandalous death of the 34th Earl of Scongahorpe.
Blaine Rears His Ugly Head Again: A Dumbing of Age Pornograquie
nooope nope nope nope nope.
Not enough no in the world.
I’m gonna need some brain bleach for that.
If it’s possible to revoke a slipshine subscription retroactively I think that would do it.
Isn’t it Erotic: Lick Blaine on your Wedding Day
A Dumbing of Age human rights violation
Look at today’s comic in the context of yesterday’s.
I think we just learned something about Mike.
The difference in their facial expressions is just… really worrying. I worry about Ethan’s heart.
So Mike’s a Bottom? Huh, I would never had guessed.
I don’t think it’s that simple, Mike is whatever he wants to be, or needs to be in order to manipulate people. I don’t know if he actually has a preference, though I would be curious since his sadism does make it less likely.
We know he’d be pretty in to being tied up, and even has rope on hand just in case, so… http://www.dumbingofage.com/2014/comic/book-4/04-the-whiteboard-dong-bandit/confession/
He’s always asking to be tied up, and his personality… the tsundere is ALWAYS the bottom in yaoi. It’s why Bara is better!
1.) You mean geicomi, bara is decidedly not the preferred term in Japan.
2.) You haven’t read enough BL or geicomi, because you are incorrect on both counts.
Omg, I didn’t ship it before this strip, but now I completely ship it.
Saaaame
That shut him up!
I feel vindicated for that “35” crack.
Also, and I am just stereotyping here, as I know very well from experience that the position that One starts out in ain’t necessarily where One will be when the lovin’ ends, but, is Mike a bottom?!
A pleasant surprise to say the least, but, then, I also know from experience that some of the most aggressive (and/or just plain bongoy) people in the streets tend to bottom in the sheets.
Still… “Verrrrry interrrrestingk!”
(Who among ye got THAT reference?!)
“But shtupid!”
Sock it to me, baby!
Congratulations, you’re an honorary Farkle!
That’s a fine family you got there, Frank.
Wait, did he decide to not care about anyone out of spite? … fuck
Or worse, actually defending someone hee oooooooh no it’s Ethan.
We’ve been so so wrong about Mike. Holy shit.
Mike knew. He has super nice parents. Ethan’s mom is homophobic.
Mike fucked with Blane to protect Amber, but he had to act like he cared about no one. It would take so little for Blane to fuck with Ethan. He had to do it for him.
He’s been a posturing asshole because otherwise Blane would see fucking right THROUGH Mike. Mike’s been holding that in for YEARS because Blane could easily target, and has targeted, the two he’s fucking cared about.
Mike won’t just fuck guys out of spite. Two of his friends he’s loved forever have big fucking targets on them.
I mean if you think about it (walkyverse spoilers) he’s MARRIED the other one.
Jesus, Mike.
He won’t just fuck guys out of spite?
Wonder what he was doing with Erik then.
OH MY GOD
I gasped
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
That’s all I’ve got.
Also: hot damn, if this becomes a slipshine I will have to renew.
PLEASE GOD IF YOU EXIST GIVE THIS TO US
the bois, they glisten
Ain’t it grand?!
The only thing worse than someone like Mike using you for sex, is someone like Mike falling for you in the process. Mike and Ambers relationship in the other comic wasn’t exactly…healthy (Amber was fairly toxic as well…but still) even if they were still my guilty pleasure OTP.
Ethan is a pure babygay and must be saved at all costs
I mean Ethan’s pretty inexperienced and Mike is certainly bad for him, but I don’t think it’s really enough to infantilize Ethan like that.
Ethan really did need this, and he really did need to hear the stuff Mike said to him. And as Amber said, he can survive someone who’s bad for him. Even if it’s tumultuous, Ethan can make it through a rocky hook-up/relationship and come out better for it. He’ll have opened up, he’ll be familiar with the sexy stuff that he’s wanted but been avoiding out of uncertainty, and he and Mike will probably confront each other about some stuff that they’ve been holding back. Even if this hurts their friendship (it probably will) this will force them both into a dialogue where they confront the stuff they haven’t dealt with; Ethan calling out Mike on his shit and Mike opening up about how Ethan’s emotional distance and lack of trust has been eating him up are both things they need to talk about.
It’ll suck, but I think that after all this Mike will have learned that he reaps what he sows, and Ethan will be in a better position to start pursuing adult relationships now that he’s in a position to get them. They’re adults now; maturely dealing with growth is what’s on the menu.
WILLS WHAT THE HELL THIS IS CRUEL EVEN FOR YOU, DUDE.
The sexy times is great. That’s not the part.
MIKE IS LIKE BOY RUTH. Not like, family wise. But. Like. How they are dealing with abusers in their spheres of contact and the. “Questionable?” Way they deal with them.
Yeesh. Yikes.
Mike was the DEFINITIVE asshole. Does this makes what he does okay? No. But man. I just. Man I don’t know If I can stand on a high horse and Judge him cause holy fucking fuck.
Break
damn u willis im at work
Yesssssss, catch those feels
The petard-hoisting has begun
No petards, but there certainly was some hoisting here.
I dunno, Ethan certainly looks like he at least had a blast.
Oh, if only I can upvote. Meh, +1.
In consideration for the comments section, I will simply say:
External Screaming.
Aw come on Ethan, roll off the guy before you fall asleep!
Gay!
Post coitus Ethan is surprisingly confident.
I wonder how long it will take Mike to crush him
It looks rather like Ethan is crushing Mike.
God bless you for walking through the door I left open 🙂
*fan emoji* Wow.
Mike just wants Ethan to roll off of him so he can then go bang Amber while Ethan’s still asleep.
And then bang Danny for good measure. Plenty of stamina, our Mikey.
But where will he keep all the nickels?
He needs to find someone who’s good at managing money.
and then bang them too
I thought nickels were only earned for mom bangs
All of them are secretly moms
Why Mike, is that remorse I see?
Cuuuute face in the last panel there. This is all gonna end in tears but that doesn’t mean we can’t enjoy the ride.
Also, remarkable number of people being surprised Mike might have ‘caught’ instead of ‘pitched’, but like statistically there’s more guys who prefer the sensation of bottoming (and would advertise themselves as bottoms) than guys who prefer the sensation of topping. The bottom is frequently also more in control, cuz he sets the pace.
Plus, topping is easier for first-timers, so Mike trying to make things as smooth as possible for Ethan’s first time… well, it makes sense on a lot of different levels, and is certainly also consistent with what we’ve seen of Mike with Amber.
No Arbor Day banner? No booty dance? No one keeps the old traditions any more.
Actually, Ethan, if I’m reading panel 5 right, yes Mike would rather you two talked.
I’ve got a feeling that my prediction for the ‘Mike seduces Ethan’ arc may be coming true with a few variations. Mike hasn’t fallen in love with his mark. Rather, he had never consciously released his feelings for Ethan before until they were given physical expression and now he’s struggling to keep the objectivity he needs to pull off his scheme.
what scheme
Break Ethan’s heart to prove to him that all relationships inevitably lead to betrayal and sadness. Suddenly, he isn’t sure that he wants that to happen to either of them.
I was reading his scheme as “Seduce Ethan (because he’d been banned from seducing Danny) to make Danny jealous and make them admit they’re actually into each other and do something about it.”
If that WAS his scheme then boy did he mess up, seducing the guy he’s clearly in denial HIMSELF about having real feelings for.
“blaine threatened me”
In which Ethan has a smug.
i might finally have to shell out for slipshine, if/when
….
……
…….
HOOOOOOOT!
I like this side of Mike…. and Ethan 😛
(also, was Ethan a virgin before this?)
I believe so – Ethan never got that far with Amber in the hotel room after prom, if I recall correctly.
Wait what?
Mike really wants to talk to Ethan. I’m wondering how many strips of rambling it would take for him to get to ‘I’ve loved you since I first met you’?
Yeah that’s what made ge go ‘wait what’.
Ethan only has one pillow talk topic and it’s, you guessed it, Transformers
Specifically (in this context) Blackarachnia/Silverbolt shipping.
..damn now I ship Mike/Ethan if you put it that way
…Crap. Now I do too.
but who are Tigatron and Airazor in this hypotheticalProbably Danny and Sal.
Wouldn’t that technically be a threesome?
…Huh this says something when this is the first Slipshine I’d seriously consider getting
same
Can this arc be over now?
I doubt it; I’ve got a feeling that Willis intends to run and run with this.
I’m just so sick of reading 7 different variations on “Abusive and manipulative behaviour is okay if you’re doing it for their own good” in every comment section it’s so incredibly gross.
FWIW, I haven’t seen anyone saying that it is ‘okay’, only that this is what Mike does and that nothing about him makes sense if you don’t acknowledge that weird moral knot he’s tied in his mind.
Don’t read the comment section then.
Also haven’t seen anyone say it’s “okay”, though. People looks for explanations or reasons. Explanations aren’t excuses.
Not directly, but through implication. People argue that Mike is helpful because of the “positive” effect his actions have on his victims, completely ignoring his way of doing it and neglecting to factor in his behaviour into how “helpful” he is, thereby implying that his behaviour isn’t part of the problem and fine in this context.
I’m sorry, but “implying” is a but of a slippery slope, as misunderstandings can happen very easily via online conversation. “You are implying this by saying that” is often not fair, either. Did you ask, and did they state they did actually think Mike’s goals (whichever they are) excuse his behaviour?
No, not through implication at all. Even when someone in my life has caused me direct, frequent harm, I still try to look for explanations for their behavior. It doesn’t mean I’m trying to, even subconsciously, excuse their behavior. I’m just trying to understand where it’s coming from because I’m not satisfied not knowing the motivations behind people’s behavior. In fact, it’s LESS distressing to me if I can say, “Okay, this person always does this because of X,” rather than, “This person is awful to me and I don’t know why.” It makes it easier to move on and not let the behavior have such a negative hold over my life.
In any case, like Jago said, it’s a major slippery slope arguing that anyone trying to explain Mike’s motivates is excusing his behavior as acceptable. That’s quite a leap of logic and the very people who are trying to explain his behavior are here telling you, no, that’s not what we’re doing at all. We don’t think that makes his behavior okay. We’re just trying to figure out why he does what he does.
I have literally not seen anyone say it is okay. People are arguing the character has layers, not defending the behavior in the context of real life.
I swear this happens every time a Mike storyline comes up. The occasional person acting like people who like Mike as a character are awful people who are condoning abusive behavior.
I also like Loki, and Spike from Buffy, and Baltar from BSG and understand their motives for what they do. Does this mean I don’t recognize their behavior is awful? No. It means I recognize they’re FICTIONAL CHARACTERS and can enjoy things in fiction that I might not in real life.
I am fairly sure everyone here who enjoys Mike storylines would readily admit they’d want nothing to do with a real actual person like Mike. But sometimes these kinda of characters are fun in fiction and can evoke emotions in ways a real person wouldn’t.
Also for the record I’m not saying you can’t be uncomfortable with his behavior. You don’t like Mike storylines, that’s cool. That’s fine. Some of us do. Different people like different things.
There are fictional characters other people love that I can’t stand because they remind me too much of real-life issues I’ve dealt with or people who have caused me harm. Ultimately as long as we’re all recognizing this is fiction and different people can like different things, and you can tune out for a bit if a storyline is upsetting you, then there shouldn’t be an issue.
(unrelated but man how did I get this gravatar…I miss Dina)
I’m fine with Mike as a character. I’m not at all happy with Mike the asshole Sage who’s just there to help people grow by showing them painful truths, whose “Mike things” always turn out to help their targets despite the initial pain.
And if you think that’s a strawman – well, maybe just a little, but only in that I’m phrasing it a bit more strongly and summarizing multiple opinions, possibly losing some nuance.
This. If Mike is going to be a more complex character and have emotions and not act like a jackass all the time, awesome, bring it on. But I’m not here for saying he’s a good person or trying to do a good thing by being a complete prick (I can ALMOST get the idea of him trying to push them away instead of leaving them more vulnerable since he cares about them, but in that scenario, the right thing to do is cut them off and stop talking to them not be a total douche). In the meantime, I like him as a character but as a ‘person’ I don’t.
I mean I can’t speak for every Mike fan, but yeah my take is definitely NOT that he’s the asshole sage who is really just trying to help people. Sometime his actions have positive results but I obviously don’t think the ends justify the means.
I view him as an arrogant, deeply flawed character who has developed this prickliness as a way of dealing with the world for some reason (possibly as we’re seeing now, to make it seem like he doesn’t care). That’s an explanation for his behavior, but not an excuse. I don’t like real people who act like this. But I do love fictional characters who act like this, for whatever reason.
Aww man I tried to change my avatar and got MARY this is even worse…
let’s see… SeanR seems to think it’s okay. http://www.dumbingofage.com/2018/comic/book-8/04-of-mike-and-men/reward/#comment-1340651
Dibullba calls him “chaotic good” just below that.
…oh right, only one link per comment or I’ll wake the spambot. more to follow!
Further down, Ishaan claims that “the *end result* of his schemes always, always has been something positive”. (he at least qualifies it with “In real life, yes, Mike would be horrible,” but that rings pretty hollow to me after paragraphs of mike-praise) http://www.dumbingofage.com/2018/comic/book-8/04-of-mike-and-men/reward/#comment-1340639
the day before that there’s Rachel Kelly claiming ” Mike isn’t just mean for mean’s sake, he just shines light on, usually, self deceitful behavior.” http://www.dumbingofage.com/2018/comic/book-8/04-of-mike-and-men/casual-2/#comment-1340183
and just below that, Mydnyt says “I believe that at least 75% of the time when Mike is screwing with someone it is for their own good in some way.”
de Combys thinks “I’m not so sure that he’s an asshole” and ” he actually seems to me like he’s a very good guy who deals with trauma.” http://www.dumbingofage.com/2018/comic/book-8/04-of-mike-and-men/brace/#comment-1340033
in that thread there are more people going ‘I like mike AND he’s an asshole’, but the people who appear to think his behaviour is okay do exist too.
I obviously can’t speak for everyone else. I don’t know what they’re thinking, but it sure doesn’t look like any of them are saying they condone this behavior in real life. It looks like they’re discussing him in the context of the comic, a fiction, where I think it’s okay to have a different standard for behavior when judging a character because that character is not real. As I said above, it’s the same reason so many people can like Spike from Buffy in the context of fiction even though he’s basically evil and would be an appealing person in real life.
I mean Ishaan literally says: “In real life, yes, Mike would be horrible,” so it’s pretty clear they’re separating what they condone in real life from fiction there.
*he would be an APPALLING person in real life, not appealing. Thanks autocorrect.
+1
Basically this. Mike fans and Mike haters are speaking at cross purposes in these situations, because the latter keep insisting that the former analyzing and even defending a fictional character’s potential motivations is the same thing as condoning similar behavior in real life.
I know lots of folks are saying top/bottom stuff here, but frottage is also a possibility. Also I hope Mike has real feels and I ship it and maybe I’m going to get a Slipshine membership soon?
That is a possibility, but with how tired and sweaty Ethan is I’m pretty sure they did something with a lot of moving and activity.
Not getting into motivations or what an asshole he is…this is all about “uh, yeah. I did want to talk and cuddle. That’s the one thing I really want.”
Thank you Willis!!!!! THANK YOU
Wait, WAIT! I wasn’t mentally prepared for this yet! Like I knew it was coming but still… XD
I was hoping for a continuation of the flashback where Mike spit in Blaine’s face, but this is good.
Maybe if Mike realizes he cares about people after all, he’ll stop being as much of a dick.
So is the implication here that Mike does have feelings for Ethan, and has been attempting to protect both Ethan and Amber from Blaine all this time by treating them terribly so they won’t be targeted?
Because if that’s it, it’s kind of touching but also Mike, there’s being protectively cold and then there’s telling Amber that she’s destined to become like her father. I don’t think you’re good at this if you’ve been trying to be protective.
And before anyone starts, no, I’m not saying this makes Mike some sort of perfect unsung hero who always has the best intentions at heart. Just because this would explain it, that doesn’t mean it justifies it.
So much talk about Mike’s psychological state here, and I just wanna know who was top and who was bottom. Wait, there’s a Slipshine for that, isn’t there?
This is now a House MD slashfic.
HOLY FUCK I … didn’t call it but I feel like I suspected?
Panel 4 and 5… I spy some feelings there.
Never thought Mike’d be the bottom
a power bottom, but a bottom nonetheless.
I am 35 and this is rude 😛
Mike is giving me conflicting feelings. Does he care, or he is just an hedonistic mess?
He’s not just a hedonistic mess. He might care, or he might just be an asshole, which is how I still lean.
Protecting from Blaine is why superheroes are jerks to the people around them.
@Willis: Hey. I’m not sure how the USPS works, so I don’t know if this is normal, but according to the tracker, my ordered books spent the last week being sent from and arriving at the, and I quote, “Chicago IL International Distribution Center” over and over (I count 5 arrivals) . Is this working as intended?
Ok, it most certainly ISN’T working as intended, because that’s just one of the packages. The other one has already arrived in Portugal yesterday, so it seems someone went postal over the other package.
Fuck. Now I have to finally succumb to slipshine. Damn you, Willis.
Last time I subbed to slipshine was for the Mike/Amber comic. Now I might have to resub >.>
Plot twist prediction: Ethan is going to handle this WAY better than Mike.
I believe in Ethan.
a) If you’re not in the US, the automated sorting machinery there can’t parse your address well enough to send it on, or, less likely
b) said machinery has unsealed or damaged the package and it has to be repaired, possibly after someone reads the books.
Odds are they’ll be sent to you, or returned to Willis for a better address or additional postage, in a few days. If b) you might even find someone else’s lost valuables in the package. Been there, done that, read some good books that way.
One of the packages apparently made it through, so it doesn’t seem to be a case of a).
Thanks.
With my luck, the package that arrives first will be the one with the LATTER books. >_>
Probably. You wouldn’t want the postal clerk reading them to have to start in media res, would you?
Seriously, once a package has been delayed NOBODY has any incentive to speed up its eventual delivery. Doubly so for foreign mail. So the second package (or its remains) will be sent to you, or returned to Willis, by the slowest mode possible.
Probably didn’t snark explicitly enough: I bought all 6 books, and they’re coming in two packages. ONE of the packages seems to be heading this way alright, and I bet that one has the later books, meaning I’ll need to wait for the OTHER package to arrive to binge through them.
Oh,you were explicit enough: I was just making a joke that the USPS clerk currently reading your books would probably want to start with Book One rather than Book Four. Not a good joke, apparently.
I hope you get them both with the least delay and trouble.
Wouldn’t he keep both packages, then? I mean, he’s just gonna stop reading midway through? That’s just criminal.
woah.. is Mike actually showing genuine emotion?
Ethan: “Would you rather we just talk?”
Mike: (internal monologue) Um yes, actually?
… Considering yesterday’s comic? I’m wondering if the reason Mike turned into the negative pit of actively pushing everyone’s buttons is because Blaine threatened Ethan in some way.
I’m loving this. Mikes expressions? Adorable. 11/10. I am blessed.
Wait… Is Mike looking vulnerable!?!? Well now… That IS interesting.
It is so hard to get a read on Mike most of the time since he’s usually playing up his sociopathic asshole persona, but here he seems genuine. He seems to actually like Ethan and seems to be trying to reach out and connect emotionally in a fashion.
I super want to see the Slipshine, but I’m still team Danny.
Wait a sec…..did Mike take Ethan’s vcard?
I’ve been assuming so.