The Onion @theonion.com ⋅ 4h
David M Willis! @damnyouwillis.bsky.social ⋅ 16h
The Emotion Engine @emotion-engine.bsky.social ⋅ 9d
The Emotion Engine @emotion-engine.bsky.social ⋅ 13d
Vangelus @vangelus.bsky.social ⋅ 2d
FactPost @factpostnews.bsky.social ⋅ 1d
Loading ...
| TEAM FOSSILS
Rainbow Friends
Missed it by a week
I like the sitcom misunderstandings in the style of “One Dialogue, Two Conversations.”
Always my favorite trope.
Especially if it flows so well that neither actually figures it out. And you only get the context on a re-watch.
Usagi can defeat Goku though, so she doesn’t need glasses
But so can Superman
And Bugs Bunny.
And Squirrel Girl
(as long as it’s off-camera)
+1 for remembering the existence of Squirrel Girl.
She’s not especially obscure, anymore.
Everybody wants to have sex with her now that they’ve seen her Marvel Rivals design.
I loved the Ryan North series of Squirrel Girl comics.
yeah thats the only reason i know about her
Sailor Moon can definitely defeat Goku, who is just excited to find someone so strong and wants to train and try fighting her again.
Meanwhile, in entirely unrelated circumstances, he develops a beef with normal teenager Usagi Tsukino when they both end up patronizing the same all you can eat restaurant at the same time.
Well Carla, you’re in the right comic for that.
Or you are sometimes, it’s a coinflip between that and high-stakes emotional drama.
Carla’s mostly landed on the wacky hijinks side of that coin though.
So has Charlie’s, but here we are x.x;
Mostly.
https://www.dumbingofage.com/funny/
“in which Carla experiences being wrong for the first time”
she’s not wrong, her parent/s are, Carla would have businessed in such a way that Ruttech would never have been involved in the war, probably made pranks or something. ~<3
I still maintain that Clark Kenting has been shown to work irl (by virtue of how many celebrities do it successfully) and makes perfect sense. I dated a dude that was a 1:1 doppelgänger of Elijah Wood. I also never saw them in the same place. Never once would I have naturally assumed he was secretly Elijah Wood lol.
And if Elijah Wood had super powers and could theoretically live in any state in the country, if not any spot in the world, I doubly especially would never have assumed the random dude I knew was him lol.
I wonder how many people’s mental image of Elijah Wood is so informed by the Lord of the Rings movies that they just subconsciously expect him to be super short.
“That guy kinda looks like…nah, too tall.”
I mean, he’s 5’6″ so on the short side for dudes.
At the risk of sounding short: 5’6″ is average height!
Depends where you live actually. In the US (where Elijah Wood is from) the average height for men is 5’9″ so he’s on the short side. At least going by the info I found before I made this comment because I knew someone would disagree.
5’9″ is kind of short.
Again, I was using info I found. Not sure why everyone is nitpicking this lmao.
yeah that tracks for a lot of the world
it’s just that US folk tend to be freakishly tall XD
No, the Dutch are freakishly tall with the average for men being 6 feet and women being 5’6.5″.
Global average height for men is about 5’7.5″, so globally he’d still be on the shorter side. Some places, though, he’d be above average.
Well, in this analogy it would be like if you were living in Hollywood and dating someone who looked just like a famous actor. (Your point stands, though.)
When I lived in Georgia, my friends claimed I was secretly George R.R. Martin, which was why I was always away on so many trips.
(Yes, I am also a fat old guy with beard, but I *never* wear caps.)
So what you’re saying is that you are really SANTA CLAUS!
ahhh so it was santa that they went to the crossroads, it as a typo all along
You got me. Any good ideas on what to do with all these souls of dyslexic diabolists?
You dated Daniel Radcliffe?
Glad to see someone else also thought of that xD
The best example was during the filing of Superman itself, where Christopher Reeve walked through the cafeteria and had every woman in the place ogling him; then put on the glasses and made the other subtle changes that turned him into Clark and walked through the same cafeteria completely ignored
Henry Cavill also told a story where he walked through Times Square in glasses wearing a Superman t-shirt with Man of Steel ads all around and not a single person recognized him.
I do love that clip where he’s deciding whether to reveal his secret identity to Lois and you can see his posture and mannerisms changing back and forth
In one of the Christopher Reeve Superman movies you can watch it happen on screen as a simple shift in posture and the removal of his glasses make Clark Kent and Superman look like completely different people.
But you’ve got to add in the posture change.
In the prelude to the comic arc “Blackest Night”, two characters are discussing secret IDd.
“Clark slouches, wears clothes that are two sizes too big, and raises his voice an octave.”
Time to post this again:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BIaF0QKtY0c
One bit of reasoning i thought of was the idea of Sonic the Hedgehog’s secret identity.
Sonic is a powerful creature that spends his days openly fighting oppressors and those who would harm the innocent. He has a group of friends that also have powers and abilities that are also used to protect the innocent, but he may occasionally get into fights with them. He has a genius nemesis who uses non-super powers to build devices and launch projects and plans for his own petty gains.
When talking to the public, be it those he saved or those he’s come to know, he is open and inspiring around them. The public find him easy to like and know to call to him for help.
No one even begins to consider the possibility that Sonic has a secret identity. No one even thinks that there may be a mild-mannered Harry Hedgehog, who never seems to be around when there’s danger,shooting off to don his magic shoes that turn his fur blue and enable him to run at super speeds to go fight evil.
No one, even real life fans, thinks for a moment that Sonic has a secret identity. Why would they? He doesn’t wear a mask. He speaks to his fans. He answers interview questions. He’s saved the world countless times.
Why would it be any different for Superman?
When the Stones were on their last tour here in the us Mick Jagger went around in a baseball cap and hoodie and just walked around places like a tourist. No one recognized him until he posted the pictures afterward, and then there were people who were like “holy crap i met you we chatted about…”
One of my friends is a dead ringer for Emily Deschanel except younger. Like, if she told me that she was the result of a secret cloning project based on Emily Deschanel’s DNA, I would believe her.
I know that doesn’t really apply to the Clark Kent effect. It’s just neat.
I once did it to my old pathfinder group, we had been meeting twice a week for two years at that point, Tuesdays at the game store, and Fridays at the Taco Bell, so they were very familiar with me.
I normally dress in a VERY distinctive style, there’s a hat that I’ve worn nearly every day since high school.
One time at the game store we were arguing about the Clark Kent thing, they didn’t believe me that it was plausible that not even Lois Lane, who knew the both of them personally, might be fooled. So I went to Taco Bell with a game plan, I showed up like normal with my normal style of dress, but under my usual outfit I had a muscle shirt (I would never wear one of those normally) and a different style of shorts than I normally wear (I think I had worn this pair exactly once previously and only owned them because they were a gift). In my jacket I had a cheap athletic bag from IU (definitely not my usual style) that had a pair of cheap flip flops I got at a gas station for this and a ball cap in it (again, neither of those items are things I’d normally wear).
At one point during our game I excused myself to the restroom, quickly stripped out of my outer layer to the not-me clothes I had on underneath, took out the flip flops and ball cap, stuffed my usual stuff into the bag along with my glasses, put the ball cap on in reverse (something they knew I’d never do because just a couple weeks prior I had mentioned finding that look obnoxious), stood up straighter, began walking with a different gait, and strode back out and approached my friends.
Now, it was pretty common for people to walk up and ask about our game at the Taco Bell, so I did exactly that, I spoke in a more nasal voice, with a higher pitch, and a slower cadence than normal. I introduced myself as John and chatted with them for a few minutes. After a bit one of them remarked that I was taking a long time in the restroom, so I immediately dropped back into my usual, slouching posture, and spoke in my normal voice saying “what do you mean? I’m right here”.
Suffice it to say, my friends changed their minds on how plausible it is that the likes of Lois Lane and Jimmy Olson, who canonically have relationships with both Clark and Superman, might not realize the two are the same person.
Maybe if she denounces her parents’ company, she’ll be appointed CEO, like Anh Dang just was over in Questionable Content.
I legit had not checked QC until I saw your comment and now I have questions and concerns that don’t belong here lol.
I feel for Carla though. There really is no right answer for her.
The fact that my two fav Webcomics would have “Heiress finds out her company is moral garbage” plot lines happening within a week of eachother is amazing. Lets hope that Carla actually does fully strike out against her dad’s company, finally actually being correct.
I feel bad for Anh though… her dad is total garbage, I hope she gets the help of our fav ex-cop and maybe even Yay, to completely ruin him.
Based on all the set-up, I’m actually assuming this is coming down on Hannelore? She’s the one who has first-hand experience rhetorically facing down abusive executives, and it also feeds into Anh’s arc of wonderment at how Hannelore could possibly be so much cooler and better a heiress then she is.
funnily enough this might actually be the one thing that gets anh to have a connection with hannelore, with both of them having toxic power-hungry corporate parents
This is how I noticed that that QC RSS feed had not updated in almost 2 weeks.
Jeph mentioned on Bluesky that he was unable to update the QC RSS while he was in France. You’ve missed out on some fun!
I’m surprised actually that nobody had tried to confront Carla before the protest under the assumption that she both knows about and agrees with the company’s direction, I definitely know people who would act like that. I reckon nobody had the nerve, though, given Carla’s… Carla-ness.
At least she gets to find out while with Charlie
In fairness, Carla is incredibly boisterous and has on at least one occasion constructed a full Rube Goldberg machine to humiliate her enemies. She’s not someone a lot of people would dare to confront.
I believe that her family is also famous for taking large-scale legal action on behalf of their daughter. Which, if I recall correctly, was all justified, and not general rich people nonsense! But, my point stands that a lot of people are probably scared to mess with Carla directly.
There’s also the fact Carla has nothing to do with Ruttech’s business ventures and going after her does nothing to help their cause and everything to hurt it
You’re not wrong, but also, have you met college kids? That kind of thing would be absolutely on brand for many of them, and I don’t say that from a place of judgment. They’re all still figuring a lot of shit out and that’s exactly the kind of mistake one makes during that process.
Who would, though? Most of the dorm is either too nice or doesn’t care for drama (see Sarah). Ruth seems to genuinely be nice to Carla so she wouldn’t. That leaves Rachel, Jennifer, Roz and Mary. The last one already got pied, Jennifer likely doesn’t care, Rachel and Roz… I dunno.
Booster warned you that your parents’ company would make things awkward, Carla.
Guess Carla about to have her Drama Arc
yay Sailor Moon reference ^^
these college freshmen make far too few anime references, really XD
Usagi was found out by various people, either by proxy or by transforming in front of them. The most tragic scene, I feel, would be with Fish Eye
I really have to rewatch that show don’t I
I find it deeply amusing that Clark’s identity-concealing glasses are considered implausible by people who live in a universe where Amazi-Girl and her identity-concealing bandana exist.
This storyline is making me really want Carla’s parents to show up in the comic at some point. In a comic filled with terrible parents, characters who are good parents but deeply morally compromised people could be an interesting change of pace.
oooh. i like this too.
I’d love to see that.
God, I’ve been so eager to see this, YES
I want to meet the Ruttens, have them be wonderful, loving parents who understand completely why Carla’s upset, and her objections, but gently tell her there’s really nothing they can do, sweetie (a lie, though it would be very difficult for them to do something that really divests Ruttech from miltech)
There is this clip with Christopher Reeve “Superman Disguise”, you can see in real time how he transforms his whole persona from Clark Kent to Superman, that’s some awesome acting.
On Youtube I mean
Aren’t there some Superman stories where it’s implied he subtly vibrates his face to keep people from figuring it out
Or am I thinking of The Flash?
I don’t know, but good for Lois Lane if true
[NSFW joke about that being the real reason LL prefers CK to Supe omitted.]
Lex Luthor x Clark Kent?
yes
I think so, yeah, but I think that is a stupider explanation than “people don’t expect a random look-a-like is a famous person”. Honestly, part of what Superman’s secret identity work to be is because he clearly doesn’t try to conceal his face. So there is no one that is even looking for a secret identity because he clearly doesn’t have one. If there was even a hint that Superman was trying to hide something I would expect more people to actively try to look into it.
Nobody was better than Christopher Reeve at convincing an audience that Clark and Superman were two different people.
I saw him on Broadway in Deathtrap. Very legit stage actor (which he was before he put on the cape also).
I mean, everyone knows Superman’s real name. It’s Kal-El. His hideout is the Fortress of Solitude, somewhere in the Arctic. Sure, he bears a slight resemblance to that one reporter, but Kent is such a dweeb!
I am one of those people who identifies people by personality and movement, not by the static properties of their face. For example, don’t ask me what their hair colour is for most of my friends and family, because I have no idea.
Another example, I recently didn’t recognize my brother’s best friend when he was his support during my brother’s dissertation defence (it was some weird ritual where an outsider could be there for support). You know I didn’t recognize him? Because he looked serious and I hadn’t seem him look serious before.
I love we are seeing this side of Charlie. She appears so little and is so quiet and vacant that is hard to have a solid grasp on her character beyond a caricature. So having her start a serious conversation here is meaningful.
She is Booster’s sister and I think it does make so much sense she’s more politically aware than she looks, srsly. This is really interesting
Why would Superman need a secret identity? That’s the real reason nobody suspects Clark Kent. The public sees a demigod who can throw buildings and fly. The idea that some newspaper reporter who looks like him might be the same guy is ludicrous.
Even if that reporter has several exposes on the danger of lead pipes.
Superman doesn’t have a secret Identity. Clark Kent has a secret identity under which he fights crime and saves people that people call Superman.
No.
The Amazing Spider-Man is Peter Parker in a suit.
The goddamned Batman is Bruce Wayne in a suit.
Clark Kent is Superman in a suit.
No, Kammon is right.
Clark Kent is the real person and Superman is the façade that allows Clark Kent to do good and still live his life.
Conversely, Bruce Wayne is the identity the Batman wears because he needs SOME way to maintain his wealth, because that’s what allows him to do the things Batman does.
You can tell who’s the REAL person and who’s the façade by asking yourself “if there was no more outside need for this identity to exist, would the person drop it?”.
Bill was a self-described murdering bastard. He was wrong about Superman and Clark Kent because, as a murdering bastard, he didn’t empathize with Clark’s reason for being Superman and doing the things Superman does.
This is actually something that the recent movie gets right than most other depictions of Superman get wrong. He was born as Kal-El, the last son of Krypton. But he was raised as Clark Kent, and that is who he was when he first put on the suit and saved people as Superman.
Bill sees Clark Kent as weak and cowardly because the murdering bastard liked having the power of life and death over others and couldn’t understand the motivations of someone that wouldn’t even use his tremendous powers to kill the villains. Bill’s speech about Superman reveals who Bill is, not who Superman is.
I’m making the assumption that you’re referencing Kill Bill vol. 2 there, given they way you put it.
“Diana of Themyscira, daughter of Queen Hippolyta.”
“Clark Kent. Kal-El.”
“Batman.”
According to at least Batman Beyond Bruce Wayne is an identity Batman wears.
It’s a bit more complicated, because Batman as the world sees him is also a mask.
The version I like is the one where the real Bruce is the one sitting around in the Batcave with the mask off with Alfred and a couple of Robins.
I think that was the reason why Lex wouldn’t believe it when one of his employees created some computer or algorithm which figured out who Superman is. Lex couldn’t believe that such a godlike being would “lower” himself to pretend to be a normal human.
In Season one of Sailor Moon, they mention that the Scouts/Senshi look different to each other when transformed. Yadda yadda magic. Good enough.
And as far as Clark Kenting goes, I will simply note that Charlie Chaplin once entered a Charlie Chaplin lookalike constest… And finished third.
wasn’t charlie going to get a hat after the dina adventure or was that dropped
Dina took back the hat
https://www.dumbingofage.com/2024/comic/book-15/01-love-dares-you-to-change/disengage-2/
Yeah but initially there was a plan for Charlie to get one of her own not just one borrowed from Dina.
NGL, “THAT has captured your longerm attention span” is a pretty ugly thing to say
What are you looking at us for, Carla?
I didn’t recognize a roommate of my friends’ when she was outside and had her hair up.
I buy that the public can’t recognize Clark.
Or I’m mildly face blind. One of the two.
It’s the hypno glasses
Or thinking Amazi Girl is Sal?
I know it’s off-topic, but you got me wondering:
https://www.dumbingofage.com/tag/jennifer+amazi-girl+sal/ shows that only one strip contains Jennifer, Amazi-Girl and Sal in the same place — https://www.dumbingofage.com/2021/comic/book-11/05-as-long-as-its-free/laps/ — and AG’s passing as Amber there.
Side note: Carla gets some great reaction poses
Re: hovertext Usagi doesn’t wear glasses, but Sailor Moon wears a tiara. Since Usagi doesn’t wear a tiara she can’t be Sailor Moon, obviously.
And that Sailor Moon isn’t a whiny crybaby.
It is tough for Carla. How do you reconcile people who are your parents and have been so good to you in ways that unfortunately a lot of parents are not, also having bad or uncaring views? Coming to see your parents as multidimensional people is part of growing up but it is often not a fun experience.
I suspect they are also going to claim plausible deniability! They have likely handed off all their business ventures to other hands; they’ve got people for everything. Humans are really, really good at one thing: cognitive dissonance. We don’t like feeling hypocritical so we try to find ways to reconcile two conflicting pieces of information. “I’m a good person” is usually the thing we’re trying to reconcile… ESPECIALLY the ultra-rich. I’d bet they’ll go for “honey, we don’t support the war, but these deals are important for progress and freedom, and this one supported your transition! And we also donate SO much money to charities, so our karma books are totally balanced!”
If they say anything remotely like “this deal in particular supported your transition” I’m going to consider them irredeemable right there, because that is both bullshit and also emotional blackmail. They are fucking billionaires, there is no one singular deal that they couldn’t have supported Carla’s transition without, and even if it were remotely some shade of true that’s still not something you put on your child.
Now maybe they can say these are powerful people with a lot of connections who helped build the business way back when they were getting started and it’s not that easy to just cut off those ties, they have a board to answer to, fiduciary duty to investors, etc, etc… And all of that is still excuses, but at least they’re excuses you can come back from as a human being.
I feel the same. I just have a bad feeling that might be where they go if Carla gets insistent about it – they may try to make her complicit.
But then again, I have a parent who sometimes employed emotional blackmail when I was a kid, so you know… I might not be the best judge.
So now that Carla knows this information, I wonder what she’s gonna do about it. How much influence does she have with her parents and how they run their company?
Plausibly, one Anh amount. Implausibly, one Dang amount
I wonder if Ruttech provides weapons only to Bulmeria or if it’s also doing for the Ukraine equivalent. Arms trafficking isn’t something any company can get involved in if they want to remain good but it’s two very different conflicts that are happening at the same time. Do Carla’s parents support where their weapons are sent, have any influence on it, or not care?
A good point. Selling/discounting/gifting weapons to ‘Krainuria’ (since I’m guessing Willis won’t use real names) would further add to the moral complexity. Is it okay to sell the Bulmerian bad guys for full price if you’re also providing weapons to Kranurians to defend themselves for cost/a loss?
There’s also the fact they’re selling to the US who decides who goes where and has been supporting both. Obviously, the Tony Stark answer is, “yes, you will end up funding terrorists/evil governments because how greed rules these markets.” However, you can understand how people think it wouldn’t be that way.
One man’s terrorist is another’s freedom fighter. Who is going to determine who deserves to have weapons? From the perspective of Russia and China American arms dealing is what forces them to respond in kind
Fuck Russian perspective.
This is actually a huge problem with Western perspective. Westerners constantly bring up how NATO “betrayed” Russia by accepting new countries. Like NATO strong-armed them into membership like Soviets did after WW2.
WE joined NATO BECAUSE we were afraid of Russia and wanted to escape its sphere of influence. Giving ANY credibility to Russian complaining is robbing us of our agency and freedom to choose where we want to go and what we want to do.
At some point, people forgot NATO was there to protect nations AGAINST Russian/Soviet imperialism.
Or they were bought off.
Germany in particular thought if they entwined their markets that the Russian government would give up the dreams of empire. They misjudged its leader.
But you cannot deny NATO is just as much a tool of American imperialism, just with better marketing
And a counter to Russian Imperialism. You have a very black&white perspective on things where there can be only good guys and bad guys. In reality it’s a complex web of various entities competing for supremacy on local and global scale.
US has been fucking things up in South America, in the Middle East but it has also helped various nations break free from under the Soviet boot. I’m no fan of US Imperialism but I recognize that, up until recently, it was my country’s best bet at staying free and independent. Trump is fucking it all up though.
Life just ain’t that easy unfortunately.
I mean, people join NATO to avoid being invaded by Russia in Eastern Europe. They know exactly what NATO is and voluntarily prefer the Devil they don’t know versus the one they have for centuries.
The history of NATO does not bear that out.
It does, however, reflect Ukraine and Poland’s take on the subject as well as other nations who absolutely are terrified of Russian invasion.
NATO would not have extended as far as it has if Russia was not constantantly invading or threatening to invade its neighbors
Astariel – NATO / NATO member countries followed the US into its wars in Afghanistan and Iraq as well as its airstrikes against Libya, Syria and what have you. Now of course this is merely in addition to also being a cage around Russian Imperialism so perhaps it is a fair price to pay to keep the US on side, I can see that calculus.
Mind you, even during the cold war people in Europe protested against NATO and US military presence, so I don’t doubt they sincerely believed it was FINE that the Soviet Union existed and they didn’t need the Americans hanging around NATO with their military power.
The big question is who those people were. Because you’d definitely find a lot Soviet sympathizers and former Nazis salty that Germany is being kept down.
https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1985-04-08-mn-18506-story.html
@Da Boy – well, granted, it’s reasonable to not want your country turned into a nuclear wasteland – but if you truly think the Soviet Union was a genuine threat – NATO war planning until the very end assumed nuclear weapons would be needed to prevent the Soviets going all the way to the Rhine. It wasn’t until the very end of the 80’s that NATO conventional superiority outpaced USSR enough to make that not a certainty. Bear i mind that prior to gulf war I even the americans did not think they would be so successful in steamrolling the USSR equiped Iraqi military
Yeah that’s a fair one, at the same time it Was the nukes that prevented the Cold War from turning Hot.
My country would be screwed either way as both sides had plans that in case of other side invading they’d nuke us to create an impassable nuclear wasteland so… that’s fun.
Lol you tell me “fuck Russian perspective” and I am the one with the black and white mentality?
Yup.
I’m not trying to be moral about this thing. Russia has been the enemy of my country for centuries, two of which we spent as being Russia’s colony. If it’s Fuck them or go back under their boot I say Fuck Em.
Lemme elborate on that.
The “Russian Perspective” in this is their imperial dogma. Their perspective tells you that the countries surrounding them cannot have autonomy or the right to act against Russian interest. By accepting and pushing Russian Perspective you are forwarding their Imperialistic interest while robbing their neighbours of agency and right to exist.
Even Russia itself is robbed of that agency. How do you think Russia got this big? Why through Jiha… ah sorry, wrong meme. Through imperialistic colonization and subjugating of the people who lived in the lands they conquered. Keep in mind that “Russia” started off as that big chunk of territory around Moscow and Saint Petersburg.
Everything else? Imperial Conquest. By pushing Russian Perspective you also rob ALL those ethnic groups and former nations of their right to agency and self-predestination.
I mean, are we meant to take seriously annexation as a viable perspective?
The Confederacy had a perspective and it was bullshit. – Me as a Southerner.
How about the PRC perspective that the United States is meddling in its regional affairs by supplying the ROC with weapons they could otherwise never have?
But yes, of course, the ROC by virtue of being a democracy that does not want to be pressured by the PRC deserves to be able to buy/be given at a discount these weapons by the USA’s defense contractors.
But yeah, look, I agree that Ukraine and ROC and any other country that also buys/benefits from American arms sales have the right to acquire weapons to defend themsevles from threats, and that therefore it follows the problem is not arms dealing in of itself, but the uses that those arms are put to. I don’t personally think that development of weapons is inherently wrong, you simply cannot guarantee your own sovereignty without such things.
Russia invaded a sovereign nation unprovoked (no, talking about voluntarily joining a defensive alliance is not a provocation)
Fuck the Russian perspective
I mean, Crimea’s invasion was during Obama.
This was a long time coming.
The Tony Stark answer is also “I will just build weapons for myself and be unaccountable to anyone for how I use them.” Which is at least as questionable as selling to a democracy.
Alas this is not a satisfactory real world answer to the conundrum of the existence of arms development
Weirdly, it’s actually addressed in the Ironheart and Wakanda Forever show.
Riri builds stuff for herself and the government immediately copies and weaponizes it because she’s not Tony Stark and can’t keep it under her control.
To be fair in the original comics/show I think there was the Armor Wars arc I think? Where government did exactly that and Tony went to war with them, destroying their suits in retaliation for stealing his stuff.
The point is more that some rich genius keeping all the super-weapons for themselves isn’t actually a better solution than the government overseeing the weapons industry. For all the very real problems of the military/industrial/Congressional complex.
I mean, if you sincerely believe war and weapons manufacturing are bad, does it really make sense to make an exemption for selling to Ukraine?
This question sounds like some “But don’t we have to tolerate the intolerant?” nonsense.
There is a huge difference between waging war as the aggressor or even when both sides are equally culpable, versus resisting an unprovoked invasion.
And who’s going to be the judge of that? *Does* Ruttech selling it’s weapons to both the “Ukraine” and Bulmeria actually make them morally neutral? If Ruttech only sold weapons to “Ukraine” does that make them good and not worth divesting?
Me. I personally am going to be the judge of that. And so are you. And so is everyone else who participates in the political process and/or marketplace.
I mean, “Who is the judge of that?” Obviously everyone has to make a judgement and particularly the people actually selling the weapons.
But yes, I don’t see it as a contradictory position that, “Selling arms to commit genocide/invasion is different from selling arms to people who defend against genocide/invasion.”
Which is a good comparison to free speech. “If you ban hate speech and violent incitement you are not against free speech.”
One thing we can agree on is that either way, it’s the same weapons, made by the same arms manufacturers.
If you sincerely believe that to the level that you think all war and weapon manufacturing should be stopped, you’re probably the citizen of a superpower that holds that status because of military dominance and you don’t even consider the ramifications of that. Because of that military dominance, you’ve never had to be concerned about foreign invasion.
Unilateral disarmament does not lead to peace.
Which is not of course to excuse the crimes of US military/industrial complex
You make an interesting point about military dominance – the argument can be made that it is lack of dominance that let’s wars drag on since neither side can actually decisively win.
WW1 being a prime example.
The most terrible thing about WW1 is that at the end, even then some people recognized that what they’d done with the peace terms was ensure that in 25 years or so there would be a another one.
Yeah it was such a stupid and pointless war. Gotta give credit to Americans, I think the then US President was trying to broker a “peace with no losers” but French pushed for punishing Germany and… well, we know how That ended.
Or in some cases, perceived weakness that lets wars start.
Though a thing that major powers need to learn is that the initial defeat of a smaller nation’s conventional forces is the easy part. Attempting to suppress resistance once you theoretically control the territory is much harder. The US keeps learning this, then ignoring it: See Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan (The USSR also learned this there). Or see Gaza.
I’m sure the same would have applied to Ukraine, if Russia hadn’t failed even the easy part. Or would apply to Taiwan, should China be able to invade.
To put it bluntly, we only know of 2 examples where it worked* – Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan – and look at the absolute ruin those two countries were at the end of 1945.
*obligatory caveat that part of what drove West Germany’s rapid rebuilding was american money and the desire to contain the USSR, and many ex-Nazi’s were put back into power. As for Japan, same deal, with the Korean War doing much to pump the economy back up and again with american money pouring in to rebuild Japan to contain the PRC and USSR
I could be wrong, but I suspect that most companies that make and sell weapons to the US government don’t really care what the US does with those weapons after they’ve gotten their money for them.
To add to that, American arms companies can only sell weapons to foreign customers with approval from the US government for that particular sale.
In the WAR DOGS movie, the producer pointed out also how absurd the laws are. The protagonists bought a bunch of AK-47 rounds from a Slavic country that bought them from China to give to the soldiers in Afghanistan against the Taliban. They got into trouble because buying from China is illegal but they pointed out they had a middle man so it wasn’t illegal.
I was under the impression that they sold weapons, (or rather, computer chips for weapons), to the American government. If that’s the case, they aren’t going to have any say in what the government does with them afterwards, including giving or selling them to other countries.
If they “only” sold to the USG, and the USG decides who they resell too, then why make divesting about them? To pressure Ruttech to
a) stop making weapons altogether? (oh then what about “ukraine”?)
b) stop selling to the US government/military? (for all intents and purposes this is the same as (a)
I’d say is more likely they sell to Bulmeria with US government approval.
Same, Carla.
It could be worse, Carla
Umamusume: Pretty Derby could have captured her long term attention span
Or people not recognising who Sal is
I mean, who else would be Amazi-Girl except for the wall climbing anti-authoritarian ass kicker?
so EVERYONE’S in relationship crisis this arc. Got it.
Becky and Dina seem fine.
Wait until becky finds out that Joyce is decidedly not straight and she could have had an actual chance with her.
Because despite her (genuine) love for dina… she is so not over joyce.
This has been a recurring theme in comments about the Joyce/Dot pairing, but I’m not so sure. I think Becky already noticed Joyce’s feelings for Dot, and she may end up being less surprised than folks are expecting.
I hope you’re right, but there have been a bunch of preview images where Dina does not look happy, and the name of the fourth storyline in the next book suggests the same.
Oh no, I missed that
But Becky couldn’t have had an “actual chance” with Joyce. She had the chance she had, and Joyce wasn’t into her like that.
What evidence is there that Becky could have had a chance with her?
If she’s told herself that the reason she didn’t have a chance was because Joyce was straight, it won’t matter much that she still didn’t have a chance because Joyce just wasn’t into her.
She’ll get over it, but there may be angst and drama.
I don’t like the fact that we don’t know what’s happening to Joyce and Dorothy yet.
but I recognize it would be an artistically powerful choice to end the storyline and do another timeskip without telling us.
It sure is useful. Narratively, I mean.
I will die on the hill that clark Kent is far more plausible a secret identity than most
There was this post on Tumblr which showed Christopher Reeve as Superman and pointed out how it’s not just glasses but the posture, the body language, it’s a whole persona with Clark Kent.
Also everyone knows superman’s name.. “Kal-el”. He acts like thats just who he is, and he’s said people see him without his glasses all the time they just say “wow you look just like superman!”
Celebrities have lost lookalike contests for themselves and their characters. It’s super believable
There was a really sweet video with Adele in a look-a-like competition and she’s playing up that she’s super nervous backstage so when she comes out all the other women are like “omg poor girl she’s so nervous” and then she starts singing and you can watch the paradigm shift happening in their heads.
Squinting, whispering, smiling suddenly as they realize they had no idea it was her. Women who have looked at her closely enough to model their hair, makeup, body language, and outfits after her.
I fully buy that Clark Kent doesn’t trip any suspicions.
As an aside, considering most of carla has been in the similiar vein of “kinda of an asshole for bo reason like mike” having her have a genuine conflict of morals towards her parents company contributing to this is a nice change of pace.
Like Mike her hijinks was usually just played for laughs, (especially when directed to super nazi mary) so it felt like she didn’t really get much actual development over the years, but its something that imo is long overdue considering how often she pops into the story, and while I doubt she’s gonna magically stop acting the way she does, but it’s something.
I think she is way different tgat Mike in quite a few ways. Mike was really, really mean, and often personal about it, sometimes with the “intention” of making people confront their own flaws. Carla is honestly pretty tane in comparison her thing is mostly being annoying and boisterous and self aggrandizing in a way i find entertaining unlike Mike. And I argue that she had moments showing her more caring side even if she tried to deny it (Making the jug shoes for Joyce, and forcing Jennifer and Ruth confrontation).
Patching up Amber’s head injury – and not asking questions.
Forgot about that but yeah that too!
Fandom consensus is that Usagi has magical identity protection. It’s a fully consistent with all of canon, but it’s consistent with more of canon than “that’s just Usagi in a slightly different school uniform and nobody notices.”
And then there’s the live action show, where she only gets the weird anime hair in her superhero persona.
It’s not* fully consistent
I mean it’s not ALL bad. That tech could be used for good as well [glances at Ukraine]
Mind you, we don’t know if Carlaparents are selling to defend…East Transylvania from the West Transylvanians.
We DO know they’re selling to the government that is genociding Bulmeria.
So this is an invented ambiguity at this point.
Yeah that’s fair but most weapon systems go to all kinds of buyers. If US is selling them then you’ll find them in the inventories of all kinds of countries both aggressive and those who just want to defend themselves.
Carla says they sell computer systems to THE government, presumably meaning the US government, in which case, (assuming Carla has full information), they probably aren’t selling directly to Bulmeria or any foreign government.
Reference: https://www.dumbingofage.com/2025/comic/book-15/04-the-only-exception/true/
Depending on how we interpret the “computer systems” it might be something as simple as electronics for the missiles or as complicated as various systems on ships, tanks, radars, planes etc. So they are more like a sub-contractor providing parts for bigger pieces of gear someone else puts together.
This is what my mother would call a “Come to Jesus Moment” and it is long overdue. Here’s hoping Carla takes this opportunity to grow as a person beyond the “mild narcissist who thinks being a perpetual troll to everyone is hilarious.”
The whole scenario where she pranked Mary for her transphobia? Totally called for, without question.
Other times though? Carla has, on occasion, struck me as needlessly antagonistic and kinda conceited (even if it’s just a bit, which I sometimes suspect it may be. I could easily see someone with self-esteem issues overcompensate by putting on a facsimile of OVER-confidence. Like forcing yourself to smile supposedly will help you feel better.)
This could be a really positive growth moment for her. I’m here for it.
If you think that’s bad, Carla, then you should have Charlie take a look at how much the workers are paid in the factories where the chips and tech that your parents make is produced, and how many hours per week those employees are expected to work, and what the age range is of the workers.
But I expect you don’t need to, because that’s a given for any tech company. If you are dealing in consumer electronics and microchips, you are dealing with overworking and abusing workers, not to mention child labor.
And I expect Carla to know that. She’s smart, after all. Brilliant. It’s not possible that it’s escaped her attention. This is her life. It seems possible that she wasn’t aware of her parents’ military involvement; it seems utterly impossible that she wasn’t aware of any other human rights violations.
What seems possible to me, is that now for the first time, she’s with someone outside of her immediate family whose good opinion she desperately wants. So that comment here, about plausible deniability… is telling.
I mean, how else do you get a personal policy about liking plausible deniability, and are actively ignoring certain things in your life, if you’re not already aware that there’s things going on here that shouldn’t?
It makes me think that when she replied to Charlie before, saying that *maybe* her parents weren’t involved in it… that might have been a lie. In that there was no ‘maybe’ about it, but Charlie didn’t know that yet, so she wanted to lean on that plausible deniability. She knew, but she didn’t want Charlie to know that she knew, because to know would mean that she must either act or be complicit.
But that’s all a wild guess, because it is plausible that she didn’t know about the military aspect of her parents’ work. It is, however, implausible that she’s not aware that Ruttech’s hands aren’t clean. And Carla likes both plausible and implausible deniability.
OK to legit question
Is the issue that Ruttech makes military/military adjacent technology at all, or that they sell directly or indirectly to a country that uses its military for genocide/war crimes? If the later did not happen, would it still be an issue that Ruttech is a defense contractor?
I feel that they’re making weapons used in a genocide for profit is the big issue.
I’m sure it’s the genocide issue.
On the other hand, we’re never told exactly to what degree Ruttech, or the campus, are complicit in the genocide itself. According to Jocylene, the campus invests in military contractors [like Ruttech], who fuel a genocide in Bulmeria. “Simple cut-and-dry stuff, you’d think” she says.
Except, well, a LOT of companies have defense contracts. Like, Microsoft, IBM, Honeywell, Hewlet Packard, iRobot (they make Roomba), to name a few. Campuses invest in major businesses, and those businesses offer jobs to some of the top grads each year.
It doesn’t mean that the campus is actively advocating for genocide. Or that the company is activey advocating for genocide. When you provide tech for the military, you don’t typically have a say in what it is used on.
So how many degrees of separation does one have to have from the atrocity, to still be complicit?
College gives money to company – company develops weapons for military – military commits war crimes – is the college complicit?
If you buy an XBox from Microsoft, and Microsoft develops software that is used to remotely control drones just like Microsoft Flight Simulator, and Trump orders a drone strike on the Gaza Strip that kills hundreds of innocent civilians, are you complicit in those murders?
Unsure. It’s hard to tell. Maybe, maybe, maybe.
Whereas, IMO, if you own a company, and you’ve moved the manufacturing to a country with almost no workers’ protections, and actively look the other way while adults and children are worked for sixty to eighty hours a week and paid less than what McDonalds pays a new hire, you 100% are complicit, because you did it.
I would personally argue that for the United States specifically, Trump & Congress hold the most accountability – while I agree companies in the MIC and the Pentagon have a vested interest in profiting from military actions and certainly benefit from government contracts relating to military expenditure, ultimately it is your civilian government making the call.
And again, the VERY SAME infrastruture and industry is what provides the means for Ukraine to fight back.
It is ALSO the very same motivation for Russia and the PRC to themselves fuel THEIR defense industry because the PRC sure as hell does not want to be pushed around for lack of ability to stand up to the USA and say you cannot and will not bully us militarily.
fuck “defense” contractors all my homies hate the murder industry
So you would agree that no one should be selling weapons to anyone, even “ukraine”?
*Of course Russia should also stop making and selling weapons and starting wars. How to persuade them to stop is an exercise for a different problem.
As the child of wealthy (but not ultra rich) parents, plausible deniability is something you’re raised with. It’s baked into your being. Even the small amount of ridiculous privilege I was raised with screwed up my moral compass in a major way; I don’t really have one on a personal level. Because you can’t hold the people you love to the same standards as other people, because there is nobody with wealth who is bloodless. They make you actively complicit in crimes, often from an age so young that you can’t even refuse to participate. You’re raised to not be loyal to a moral compass which will always malign your family and you with it by default, you’re raised to be loyal only to the family no matter the cost. It’s like being born into a cult where escaping makes you a pariah to literally everyone.
Like, I can’t go into detail about what white collar misbehavior I was forced to do, but my family is NOT what would be considered rich by modern standards. We were always just upper middle class. Multiple houses, yearly vacations, the ability to hire lawyers for anything, but we’d never bat in the same league as actual rich people. It’s a poisonous tree that gets worse the higher up you go, Carla has almost certainly had to excuse some absolutely abhorrent stuff in her life just to keep loving her parents who have seemed to love her very much. She definitely knew but chose not to “know.” It’s the only way to survive and still be a human being, because if you know and choose to know then you either forfeit everything you’ve ever known, or you embrace it and become the problem.
(The decision I made was to live very far away from all of them and let them have their drama and money, I live with my husband who I love very much who is very much not rich. My mom and her favorite husband vocally are of the opinion that they should spend all their money and leave none of it to the kids, so yeah.)
I will be using “implausible deniability” as soon as possible, thank you.
Fun Fact: In the Sailor Moon manga, they aren’t disguised at all. There’s a scene where Motoki (the guy who works at the arcade) recognizes Mercury and Jupiter immediately. Also, the villains of the final arc can just sense the heroes.
The secret identities are only in the anime, where they need the deniability due to running around in public so much more and hanging out with everyone else who is supposed to be keeping their identity secret.
To the average person in the DCU, Superman just doesn’t have a secret identity. Everyone knows who he is, he’s Kal-el of Krypton, he lives at the north pole in the Fortress of Solitude. Why would that guy be masquerading as some random schlub working a 9-5? In that universe he’s probably the best known dude in the world.
Absolutely this lol. Clark Kent has a whole life on Earth. He has parents, a childhood, a credit history, that is just not consistent with Superman unless you (as the reader) know his full story. For everyone else, homeboy popped up as an adult alien telling people that their yummy yellow sun made his muscles big an’ strong.
At most, people think Clark the “Brucie” in the Kermit/Miss Piggy/Wayne Thruple.
I never thought I would see a Sailor Moon reference in this comic.
Me neither, it’s surprisingly sparse for a college webcomic
heck, all bruse wayne has to do is not talk in a growl ……
Also, why do the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles wear masks?
Because it make them look cool!
It would get really confusing if we wouldn’t be able to tell them apart XD
Yea and with masks we can tell who is who across series at a glance.
Yeah, it’s mostly a joke, but that’s more an out-of-universe explanation. For in-universe, guess I gotta go with Nadamás.
https://www.tumblr.com/itswalky/789435763608682496/was-rereading-the-old-its-walky-archives-and-found?source=share
Not as relevant at the moment but i thought it was interesting to share this
Carla looks great in green and pink.
*figure steps out of the shadows*
Bystander: GASP! It’s that cold-hearted villain, The Weapons Contractor!!
*figure puts on glasses*
Bystander: Oh, wait! My bad, everybody! That’s just our lovable tech giant, Ruttech! What was I thinking?