A historical romance with a touch magic and a dash of astronomy. It chronicles the romantic adventures of Sulvain, a sweet tempered necromancer and Raziol, a passionate 17th century astronomer.
Angel's Orchard
Harry Bogosian
After the events in Demon's Mirror, Gerda has accepted her role as a Demon Hunter, and Cezar has traveled back to the Demon City. Demons have existed alongside humans for millennia, so things begin to return to normal. But an impossibly powerful Relic has been taken by one of the Demon Masters, and a silent war enters its final stages.
Barbarous
Ananth Hirsh, Yuko Ota
A crummy wizard and an anxious monster have to get over themselves and bring order to an apartment building full of misfits.
ARISE, YE SKELETON KING
Brian Clevinger, Escher Cattle, Lee Black
A troupe of wandering "adventurers" down to their last silver "acquire" a map only to find the real treasure was the fiend they dug up along the way.
Nigh Heaven & Hell
Scotty
Heather Vodihn is on a simple mission: find her father. However she becomes entangled with two strangers with mysterious powers being stalked by a group with bizarre demands. Heather must learn to trust her new traveling companions, even if she is untrustworthy herself.
Dumbing of Age
David M Willis
Joyce has been homeschooled her entire life until now, when she's suddenly a freshman in college! Things don't go well.
The Weave
Rennie Kingsley
A young woman pursued by bad luck is witness to the murder of the Fairy Queen of Summer. Can she get to the bottom of this mystery?
Sister Claire
Yamino
In the troubled aftermath of a great war between Witches and her fellow Nuns, novice Sister Claire just wants a purpose.
Sleepless Domain
Mary Cagle (Cube Watermelon)
In a world where magical girls and their battles are commonplace, loss has become all too common as well.
Not Drunk Enough
Tess Stone
Logan Ibarra is possibly the unluckiest repairman in the world. A late night job should not have landed him in the middle of a mad scientist's squabble, but he soon finds himself surrounded by monsters and further madness with little tools to get out.
Freakshow
Scotty
A festival of broken people, blood flows in the center ring. Come one and come all, to the greatest show in all of Paris.
Sakana
Mad Rupert
Our heroes must navigate a hazardous dating scene, overcome personal anxieties, and wrangle unruly seafood in order to find love, peace of mind, and a paycheck.
The Golden Boar
Magnolia Porter Siddell
A young woman joins a group of summoners who call forth Guardian Beasts to protect their isolated magical island. Unfortunately, her Guardian Beast is nothing like she'd imagined, and he's about to change her life, and everything she thought she knew about herself...
Blindsprings
Kadi Fedoruk
Tamaura, wrested into a world 300 years in the future, must find a way to save the magic fading from her country.
Nerf Now!!
Josué Pereira
A cute webcomic about fanservice, video games, and... love. Mostly video games, though.
Little Tiny Things
Clover
What are the little things that move us? The simple joys that warm our bodies and hearts? The micro life of insects that influence our world more than we think? The tiny steps we make everyday to have a happier tomorrow?
Edison Rex
Chris Roberson
The adventures of the world’s greatest villain who, after defeating his superheroic nemesis, decides that he’s the only one left to defend the world.
Namesake
Isa, Meg
There's ghosts at your heels and fairy tale worlds ahead. What do you do? Jump down the rabbit hole!
Empowered
Adam Warren
A sexy superhero comedy (except when it isn't) about the never-ending struggles of a plucky but very unlucky young superheroine.
Saint for Rent
Ru Xu
Saint Halliday runs an inn for Time Travelers. Unfortunately, he seems to attract other supernatural "guests," too.
Darkling Bright
Chris Hazelton
Kieran Bright is a college student home for the summer and roped into an online reunion with his old neighborhood friends in the most recent update of their favorite childhood MMORPG.
At least, he was, and that was the idea...
Join Kieran and his friends as they are pulled into another reality that may or may not be real and are forced to confront their own identities, the nature of simulated universes and reality itself.
Peritale
Mari Costa
A fairy godmother with no magic tries her best to successfully fulfill a Fairytale and win the respect of her peers.
Heroes of Thantopolis
Izzy Strontium Hall
A living boy fights to save the City of the Dead.
Lies Within
Lacey
Lysander's aimless and carefree life is turned upside down when he accidentally discovers that the cute boy next door, Simon, is a literal monster
Three Panel Soul
Matt Boyd, Ian McConville
It's a pretty rigid format but we keep the content loose, you know?
Guilded Age
T Campbell, John Waltrip, Florence Machina
Welcome to the saga of the working-class adventurer! Enjoy the complete story with new annotations daily!
Monster's Garden
Ash G.
Champion pit fighter Kilo Monster was content to spend the rest of his days tending to his quiet garden alone... until he met a curious robot girl and her human family.
The Messenger
indui
In a ruin-abound town cursed with bad luck, Kai and Kalla--a young boy and a fledgling dragonbird spirit--take on a quest in hopes the reward will solve all of their problems.
Stand Still, Stay Silent
Minna Sundberg
A few generations after the end of the world, a small, poorly financed research crew is sent out to rediscover whatever is left of the forbidden old world in the south.
Cyanide & Happiness
Explosm
Satire, dark humor and surreal humor.
Augustine
Winter Jay Kiakas, Windy
August and her ragtag group are just like everyone else, simply surviving in the treacherous Crater... When they stumble into what may be an artifact of the ancient past, their lives are thrown into a much bigger loop as they trifle with bounty hunters, monsters and gods.
Ozzie the Vampire
Eric Lide
Ozzie and her best friend Kimmy are your average everyday normal art students – except one is an immortal vampire with superpowers and the other possesses a magic talking grimoire. Also they have to save their town from a demonic invasion.
BOOKMARK Click "Tag Page" to bookmark a page. When you return to the site, click "Goto Tag" to continue where you left off.
BUFFER WATCH
Comics are currently drawn and uploaded through:
Sorta… at least it verified (via her sister’s comment about facing re-election every 2 years) that she was legally elected to the House of Representatives.
I’m pro-choice — the fetus has the right to choose to hang itself with its umbilical cord if it decides the family it will be born into is full of idiots. 8~)
I would imagine Roz has been rehearsing that speech for years. Deep-seated resentment of a relative will do that to you. Probably isn’t the only scripted outburst she’s been stewing over for longer than is healthy.
Her having this speech ready makes perfect sense to me. She’s probably been holding this in for a while, with lots of thinking about what she would say if it was time for an argument. Now that it is, she’s gonna let Robin have it.
All I can say is that parents can tear up your whole speech into stutters and “All I’m saying is…” fragments. No video used, so it’ll be harder to push your point through.
Parents sure. Tried to use an elaborate speech on mine once. All I managed to get out was a couple poorly chosen curse words that weren’t as shocking as they could have been if my voice wasn’t quivering so.
i am amazing at pulling horribly hurtful speeches out of my as when someone pisses me of, i have a gift for find the most painful thing i can say to someone
It’s looking like Roz made that video in the first place because she knew it would stir things up. She’s had this in mind all along, so yes, it’s incredibly plausible that she’s been planning and rehearsing this speech for some time. It would be more surprising if she DIDN’T have a speech, after arranging to be heard.
I’m not sure if Dorothy is going ‘Man, I really mis-judged her’ or ‘Man, this was an *awesome* story and I messed it up’…I’m kind of thinking it’s the second one…
I’m pretty sure she feels guilty about her judgement and agrees with Roz’s intention even if not her methods now that Roz explained it.
She seems like someone who would be progressive and liberal. So she is in a gender equality class, the most appropriate class for feeling guilty about this, and finds out the whole thing was about roz demanding her own independence and sexual freedom in her own way.
Agree with her methods or not I’d be amazed if dotty judged anyone but herself after that.
That is an attitude to sleep with who you want, how you want, and why you want. It’s an attitude that says you do not get judged or shamed into doing something you don’t want to do because society deems it perverse (like, say, being attracted to a gender that they tell you you shouldn’t like). It’s the freedom to say no, you don’t want to do this certain act with that certain person *and have that answer respected.*
It might not necessarily be ABOVE ALL ELSE to me but I’m not gonna judge someone else for doing so.
Not a good attitude? Really? “I have the right and the ability to do what I want with myself so long as I hurt nobody else, without feeling ashamed and without having to put up with anyone else’s hateful judgmental preening.” I call that a damned sensible attitude. Slut-shaming is one of the worst things you can do to a girl, and it’s far better to fight back against that then to meekly lay down and take it.
I don’t see the problem. It’s pretty basic freedom and people will try to make it very limited in a political family that runs in a conservative area where anything can become a scandal.
I’m not sure what you’re saying here. If you mean that Roz should let some things take precedence over sex, I agree, although I interpret that line as including the freedom to not have sex (say, with her husband at his command, which some religions say is a wife’s duty).
If you’re just saying sexual freedom is bad, you’re the one with the bad attitude. Sex is only bad if it’s forced, used to manipulate, or entered into because of manipulation (including if protection isn’t used because one or both partners has lied about being incapable of having children or having an STD). Roz is clean, vehemently pro-protection, and in no way manipulative or deceitful (OK, maybe using Joe to make a political point was a little deceitful, but let’s face it- she probably chose him for her video because she knew he wouldn’t care about the attention or disagree with the message).
This is the point I thought Roz was trying to make, and I’m glad she finally made it after kind of dancing around the point in her ragings.
I happen to support her viewpoint: her actions didn’t hurt anybody. Will they bite her in the ass sometime in the future? Assuredly. Should they? Probably not.
Actually, it is entirely possible they will hurt Robin. “You’ve got an election every two year for the rest of your life” is only LIKELY if Robin maintains her position. People hate to bet on a loser.
I mean, at least if she had actually made progress for her own side she would have SOME ground to stand on but no.
Nobody will remember this even happened as soon as election cycle is over. All this does is leave people who are PROBABLY on her side worse off than they were before.
And Roz (presumably)Knew that at the time and accepted the consequences. She’s trying to change the world whereas your treating her as if she just blundered into this situation. I don’t think she went about achieving her goal in the best way but she knew the risks going in. Also I imagine getting her sister out of office(whom she obviously opposes) would be a win for her.
Except she accepted consequences to OTHER PEOPLE.
THAT IS NOT HER CALL.
And Re: opposing politics. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indiana%27s_9th_congressional_district
The district actually flipflops back and forth. Given what we know of Robin, she’s more likely to be a democrat who caters towards social conservatism to stay in office.
Look you want to paint Roz as an idiot for her thesis but her thesis is sound.
“Sex is not harmful to anyone if done safely” That is true. Roz feels that all the shame and judgement applied to people who have sex outside of marriage(or a committed relationship) are unfair and someones statues as a “slut” shouldn’t hurt your life and you know what? She’s right about that.
She had a bad plan. Mock her, if you wish, for her plan but her belief that sex isn’t harmful is true.
Consequences include more than just direct consequences. Roz not only knew about these indirect consequences, but was counting on them, which is evident because without those consequences she would not be holding any of the attention she wants to USE to make a statement. These indirect consequences carry a very real chance of damaging Robin’s next election. That is harm done. That is what we are saying.
That’s not true at all.
Anyone who videotapes themselves having sex, and then purposefully releases it online WITH THE FULL INTENT OF IT BEING ATTACHED TO THEIR REGULAR IDENTITY is a self destructive hussy. There is plenty of amateur porn online that will never hurt anyone ever.
How is it misogynistic? The statement applies to both men and women. Releasing a sex-tape purposely online is a self-destructive and slutty act. Whether it be for a rush of adrenaline or excitement from knowing that strangers have seen you bang, or for some strange political statement, purposely releasing a sex tape of yourself to the general public is both a self-destructive act of someone who is sexually loose.
^ First of all, congratulations on adding ‘pedantic’ to ‘judgemental’ and ‘slut-shaming’ to the descriptors that define you with this post you just made, Eric.
Did she release it under her real name? She’s the sister of a congresswoman, she’s not exactly the most easily recognizable person out there. All the hubub was around finding Joe, so it seems more like she released it with her name on it or she released it on a local site where her college peers or local area folk could see it.
How is that not self-destructive behavior? For anything above basic retail, people are going to look her up online before hiring and see a video of her fucking a stranger, and they are probably not going to hire her. Is it wrong to assume prospective employers aren’t going to hire people who release online fuck videos under their real names?
And that’s not even close to what I was talking about. Where did I ever mention the self-destructive part? AND you’re not even replying to the post where I said those things. But sure, let’s act like both these things are true.
Should Roz care? If anything she’s less likely to WANT to be hired by the kind of judgemental fuck who would look at anything in her private life instead of her merits and ability to perform the designated task.
P.S. when I refer to ‘judgemental fuck’s I’m talking about people like you.
I don’t think having sex with strangers is particularly something that is morally wrong or even “slutty”. I do think that video taping yourself having sex and posting it on the internet under your real name is an act of sexual looseness that most people would describe as slutty. I can’t think of a single instance in reality where this kind of behavior wouldn’t qualify as being a whore. And that’s not a misogynistic statement, as I’m also including sex tapes from male celebrities in my thinking as well. Maybe I am being judgmental there, as most of those sex tapes were stolen and posted online, so it’s not quite the same ballpark in terms of whorish behavior.
But, looking at it from her perspective, in this situation, as a statement against society, it seems a bit circular. The only sexual freedom at stake here is the sexual freedom of being allowed to post videos of yourself fucking on the internet without being judged. It’s an act of escalation that overshadows the main point. She’s acting like a slut in defense of her right to act like a slut because it doesn’t hurt anyone and society needs to accept that. Although the judgmental nature of society makes the entire incident damaging to herself, Joe, and her sister. Of course, given that she’s willing to martyr herself in that matter, more power to her.
And yes, I guess I am a judgmental fuck for saying that given multiple qualified candidates for any normal job that pays above minimum wage, people are going to hire the candidate that doesn’t have an online fuck video posted under their real name. And given the fact that she’s the relative of someone famous, that shit is permanent. On the internet, the first thing people are going to see if they research her is her fucking someone. So, I’m going to assume her statement that her sexual freedom is more important to her above all else is true, as that’s now the most defining statement of her existence to the outside world.
You should really look up slut-shaming and apply that logic to some of your statements. THAT is why you are a judgemental fuck, not because you rightly pointed out that most employers are going to also be judgemental fucks.
Also, for someone who insists that this is all about equality between men and women for being sluts, you are sure focussing on Roz’s problems and not Joe’s. Who, if you missed it before, was completely consenting to this.
I’m focusing on Roz because she’s the one who took the time to video tape the entire thing and put it online. I’m going to assume Joe thought he wouldn’t be identified, and probably went with it due to the voyeuristic sexual thrill of having a fuck video of himself floating around online. Also, because as he stated, the kind of chick who wants to post an online fuck video must be crazy awesome in the sack. Which makes him more of a slut than Roz I suppose, if we are to take her reasons for posting an online fuck video at face value. Of course, it’s clear from the comics that Joe is a massive whore, but that’s an established fact, not something that anyone is disputing.
And I don’t see anything about what slut-shaming has to do with online videos. Roz isn’t a slut because she fucks random strangers. She’s a fully grown adult, and it’s her right to bang other consenting adults. She’s a slut because she posted a fuck video on the internet, on purpose. If she’s not doing this to get a voyeuristic sexual thrill, then we have to take her reasoning at face value once again, which is convoluted and appears to just be the ability to put fuck videos online without it hurting her or being judged. Of course, she seems aware that it will hurt her and she will be judged, but her argument is that it shouldn’t. Maybe she’s right. I think her point is undercut by the fact that an online fuck video is floating around and that it will be her defining characteristic to the outside world for pretty much forever, unless society progresses to the point where public fuck videos are so common-place and non-taboo that nobody cares about them. Regardless, posting online fuck videos is looked down upon by almost everyone as something whores do.
QUOTED FROM ERIC:
“And I don’t see anything about what slut-shaming has to do with online videos.”
“[Roz]’s a slut because she posted a fuck video on the internet, on purpose.”
“Anyone who videotapes themselves having sex, and then purposefully releases it online is a self-destructive hussy.”
MMMM-HM.
“If she’s not doing this to get a voyeuristic sexual thrill”
Who’s to say that she’s not? You seem to know a lot about what Roz and Joe are going to be doing, as well as their prospective employers
“posting online fuck videos is looked down upon by almost everyone as something whores do.”
Projecting much? Besides, what’s your point?
I have to say, i don’t have anything against Roz posting a sex video IN AND OF ITSELF. I don’t even have a problem with the fact that she used her real name. Is it “self destructive”? Sure. Should it be? I’d say no. But it is. And Roz knew that she WOULD be judged poorly for it. Still, she was trying to make a point, and those are her consequences, so it’s her business. It IS fair though to say that it is going to hurt her down the road. Saying it SHOULD would be wrong, but it’s REALISTIC to point out that it WILL. It’s also fair to be upset with her for making her point at someone else’s expense, EVEN IF they don’t agree with that person. If the stakes were higher than “being looked down on” then i doubt anyone would really disagree with this. Regardless of what SHOULD happen, she did know full well that she would be hurting others by trying to make her point. It may or may not be forgivable depending on the person, but it is reasonable to not like that she did it the way she did.
1. Joe is not hurt. Didn’t you hear? Joe is making out like a bandit in this deal.
With his penis.
2. I don’t think she agrees with the politics of her sister anyway. So she is pushing a political message she believes in and getting publicity while lowering the pull of a politician that is against her political beliefs.
So neither of the victims are going to count for this one because one isn’t a victim at all and the other is possibly intended for multiple purposes.
Hey, all of you people trying to slut-shame Roz here? Go fuck yourselves, the lot of you. She’s not allowed to indulge in her sexual freedom because it might inconvenience someone else who wasn’t even involved? Again, go fuck yourselves, the lot of you.
This will “most assuredly” hurt her down the road? That load of shit only makes sense if you start from the dumbass idea that sex is somehow harmful in and of itself. And throwing Joe *and* the school in there, as if throwing Robin in wasn’t already bad enough? Shit’s getting smellier.
And sneering at Roz because she had the audacity to actually put on a graphic protest demonstration to point out all of this? That not only paints you as stupid prudish slut-shamers, but also shows that you missed the point by at least a mile. “Oh, how dare she make her point while knowing what her point was?”
Mine too. And let’s not forget that every “consequence” they talked about is a result of society’s perception of sex and thus going to be a total non-issue if Roz succeeds, so they can’t even call it bad judgment if they pretend not to care about sex per se.
If girls posting amateur sex videos online actually changed society’s view on sexuality, then America would have been the free utopia of sex times about five years after the internet was created.
Just saying. I’m fine with her sleeping around, and honestly don’t care if she posts stuff online. But it’s not going to change anything. Right now, she’s just kind of attention whoring. She has a well-known older sister and has always been in the shadow. For all we know, she could just be acting out and trying to get attention. She claims it’s for some “sexual revolution” but unless she suddenly gains alien powers that lets her control the masses through online sex videos (which I’d fully support), all she did was join the classy ranks of Paris Hilton, Pamela Anderson, and others who have sex videos floating around. And we see they changed society’s idea of sex, didn’t they.
Fine with her message, but I can’t really defend her plan. It wasn’t well thought out, and stinks more of self-serving attention than actual change.
There is a difference between being allowed to do something and not being shamed or ridiculed by anybody for it. People seem to conflate the two a lot.
Also, I’m rather confused as to why “prude” is supposed to be a bad thing.
Which would be a greater point if there were any shortage of self-righteousness on either side, or if anyone would have had to have actually watched the video in order to be launched into this campus-wide debate about sexual mores and the rightness of promiscuity. (Or… should you not read newspaper articles about sex tapes, either?)
(This without getting into the fact that it seems mighty strange for the side who says you shouldn’t judge people for any sort of sexual behavior they may engage in… would use prude as an insult.)
I searched this article and as of just before I typed this post the word ‘prude’ came up 4 times. Twice by you, once by me in response to you and one sarcastically calling Joe a prude. Where are you getting this from?
It occurs to me that no one would really care about Roz’s sex video if it wasn’t for Robin anyway. So if Roz’s actions end Robin’s career Roz’s message will probably end up getting lost. I wonder if she thought of that?
Her “point” is definitely piggybacking on her sister’s fame.
Her method hinges on the fact that people care about the sex life of famous people and their immediate family.
So in a way she is exploiting her sister to make a point.
But we are all supposed to overlook it and focus on the sexual liberation. Fine, lets do that. She demonstrates she is free to have sex. Shocking revelations for the 23rd century.
In the meantime her sister’s political position is gutpunched (Or not, because by deus ex machina this stunt will suddenly loss importance or actually help her sister’s campaign) because the general public have the freedom to choose a different candidate that more closely represents their morals, however outdated they may seem to others.
So hey, in reality this stunt would end with her screwing her sister and just rehashing the fact that different people have different opinions about sex. In the words of a different girl whose sexual exploits became famous only because of who she is related to: “That’s hot!”
“She demonstrates she is free to have sex. Shocking revelations for the 23rd century.”
Tell that to Joyce, and everyone in her pre-college years who sheltered her and all feed each other the same BS about petals.
THEN tell that to all the other Joyces in the world.
What, it’s ‘just a comic’? Should I ‘not look too far into it’? Heaven forbid that there is a message to learn from here, or that the comments I disagree with aren’t made by people who would also judge people in the real world?
Do you honestly believe that culture exists in a fucking vacuum?
You have no idea what culture is. Ive been around the world kid. From Germany to Russia to Egypt to Korea, Iraq Afghanistan, China, it would take me forever to name them all. Hell Ive been to more countries than I have been to states in my own country. Hell, Ive been to more countries than America HAS states. Ive seen more cultures than the large majority of people will in their entire life. This has nothing to do with culture, this has to do with a little college kid with his head shoved up his ass.
No, no one in the real world act like the devils you have imagined. Except people like you of course. What I find hilarious is no matter how many of ‘you’ I run into, in every country and speaking every language, not one of you can ever identify how you are all a different flavor of the exact same thing.
Oh you have different beliefs, that’s for sure. but you are the exact same thing as those bible thumping kooks who say kids have committed a mortal sin and are going to hell for kissing.
Because any one, of any degree of opposition or free thinking that disagrees with you becomes the ‘devil’. Or in your termage the ‘slut smasher’.
Religion kooks tell them they are going to hell and refuse to look at or take into consideration anything they say, twist their words, usually poorly, to fit the image of the ‘devil’ enemy they are so ‘valiantly’ fighting against in order to devalue them and their ideas as a person.
You say ‘Fuck you’ to them and refuse to listen to or value anything they say, twist their words, usually poorly, in order to fit the image of the ‘slut-shamer’.
Slut shamers, disvalue any ideas, thoughts or expressions, and the very value of being a person from those deemed sluts.
The only one doing any shaming here is you.
You are incredibly aggressive and almost appear to be a serial bully, harrassing anybody who expresses any beliefs that differ from your own, and twisting and painting everything they say into being slut-shaming, when it is clearly, not.
Identifying someone correctly as being ‘sexually-loose’ and calling them by the slang use of the term ‘slut’ is not slut smashing. Slut smashing requires more than identification of the ‘slut’, it requires ‘smashing’ them.
Identifying percieved poor choices, pointing out mistakes, and disagreement is NOT slut smashing, pointing out someones actions are perceived to be self destructive is NOT slut smashing.
Being overly hostile, rude, telling people to fuck themselves for their thoughts and choices, harrassing them for expressing themselves and disvaluing their thoughts feelings and expressions without even attempting to understand them, BECAUSE of something they’ve been labeled as, which may or may not even be true…
Is most definitely smashing. the pretext that comes before it is irrelevent.
Slut smashing, gay smashing, Christian smashing, Muslim smashing….
Intolerance is intolerance. Doesnt matter what colour or flavour you try to give it. It still stinks.
Why should Roz take someone else into consideration, like her sister, when that might have some manner of impact on her personal freedoms?
Its not called not being a slut, it has nothing to do with anything slut related, its called not being a self centered asshole. Also known as being a responsible adult.
Knowing how much you should bend for someone else, and when its too much and its time to put a foot down is also part of being a responsible adult. Its not a one way road, its not dog eat dog. There is more to it than trample on others or meekly lay down and be trampled on. Just because someone disagrees with you on this particular subject does not automatically turn them into the slut shaming satan mold you have created for everyone who disagrees with you.
Kids don’t see that. Because kids are dumb. They lack the experience but have no lack of passion.
This is why ten years from now a real world wpuld look back at herself and laugh about what a moron she was. And NO, it wont have anything to do with having sex with multiple partners. And you will too. Though, before you get your mind in a tizzy no, it wont have anything to do with this here, thats not what I’m implying. That would be ridiculous.
Unless, of course, you are really just throwing a fit because you are a fat chick and thus emotionally devastated at the thought of being deprived of a good Joeing from me to prove your sexual freedom.
Relax I was joking. Im no fat shamer. Fat chicks can be sexually freed by me too. As long as you fall within the proper parameters.
Just go online and fill out DA form 69, include a picture proving you are an appropriately ‘cute’ fat chick, your dimensions fitting the proper proportions showing that even though you are fat you still have, you know, curves, and aren’t beach ball in shape…. Not because I’m shallow of course, they just…. tend to roll, ever tried to spear a doughnut rolling down a hill? Not easy. Eyes get poked…. Not pretty.
Email it to the address on the top of the form and you will get a response on where to meet me for the filming.
Oh, and if you could put on a whale costume that would be great, I’m sorta doing a save the whales gig, and I figured since you were kind of an activist too you wouldn’t mind helping killing two birds with one stone.
Theres a button inside the flipper, just push it at your climax, and it will activate the blowhole in the costume for the finale.
So tell me, None, when is Roz allowed to expect that she has the same rights as everyone else? Or, as she herself put it in today’s strip, how long does she have to wait? Your long screed sounds like nothing but an excuse to pretend that you’re not really just slut-shaming her.
Believe me, I would not try to slut-shame a fictional character. For obvious reasons.
She obviously has the rights to sleep with whoever she wants. I do not find her actions controversial in that aspect.
My whole issue is with her methods.
There are literally at least thousands of other amateur porn pictures and videos out there. WHY was her video special in this case? Because of her sister. Her method of activism exploits her sister’s political position more than “Billy Beer” ever did.
She is campaigning for a cause that everybody but the “hicks” she hates so much already tacitly tollerates or completely approves. With a method no more advanced than something Paris Hilton would come up with.
You would think that if this is her cause she would be more thoughtful and done something more meaningful and arranged it in a way that didn’t hinge on her sister’s fame or that ended with the fallout landing on her sister’s lap.
She may as well have released a spy video of her sister getting a facial.
So hey, good job for her.
invisiblemoose, Joyce’s parents may not have prepared her daughter for the conflicts of the outside world, but they had the religious freedom to fill her head with ideals about petals. Freedom doesn’t just go both ways, it goes in all ways.
I know they do, None. The point is that not EVERYONE thinks that people are free to have sex. Hence why Roz feels she needs to make a statement the way she did.
Not everyone HAS to think that people are free to have sex. Not as long as the governmental system holds in place to allow for sexual freedom regardless of the opinions of people who disapprove of it.
The Scarlet Letter is no longer an issue unless you want to closely associate with “hicks”. And these hicks have their own freedom to BE hicks.
And the only way Roz is associated with them is through her sister.
None, you’re acting like freedom of opinion exists in a vacuum. Yes, people have a right to disagree with other people being given rights like sexual freedom, but government can’t stop them from punishing others for exercising their rights without interfering with other rights, and democratic governments are always at risk of being controlled and altered by people who oppose certain rights. Roz is pushing for social change, not because she opposes freedom of opinion but because she opposes a particular opinion and its consequences for people who don’t share it, and she wants to create a world where it is powerless.
In modern american society there is recourse if you want to carry out a legal activity even if others disapprove of it.
But her intentions do not concern me. She is free to call those that disagree with her sexual practices hicks just like they are free to call her a slut. And both sides of the argument are free to attempt to change the other side’s opinion.
The issue here is that Roz used her sister to promote her agenda. Without her sibling her video would just be one more amateur porn video.
Her stunt showed thoughtless as her sister is the one who will truly face the controversial fallout of her actions.
If she truly cared about the cause and her sister she should have found an alternative that didn’t exploit her sister and that had her cause as the focus of the attention. But she didn’t.
I don’t remember, has it been stated that this is Robin’s first term in congress? She could easily be in her mid thirties, if she’s been re-elected a few times – or if she didn’t win her first bid for office. Her aide only says she ran when she was 25, not that she was elected when she was 25.
SIGH. You don’t change the system like that. That’s extremist behavior.
It’d be like if I wanted to prove America’s medical system is crappy, so I cause a widespread pandemic that causes all the hospitals to be overtaxed with patients. It’s idiotic and the message just gets lost in the controversy and screaming.
It’s not a perfect metaphor, but the point stands. She can have her ‘sexual freedom’ without resorting to these antics, especially when these antics devolve into ‘she posted it up because she’s an attention whore/slut’ where the general populace is concerned, and her actual message is lost in he controversy.
Of course, most people are inclined to agree with her because the strip depicts her as heroic, what with Dorothy’s ashamed look and all. I just see someone who’s resorting to absurdly problematic behavior to present her case in a flawed manner.
Where’s the problematic behavior? Because people think she’s a slut, Roz is in the moral wrong? Is an act not moral until everyone is ok with it?
As far as “extreme action” goes, do you disagree with the actions of the American revolutionaries? Or any revolutionaries, for that matter? All revolutionaries are “heavily” invested in a social system, after all. But did they choose to be invested? No. They were born that way.
What’s dangerous about your logic is it is very general, very broad. Anything too passionate, illegal, or “extreme” should never ever be committed. A fine way to let tyranny reign.
That’s not what I said. Whether she is considered by many to be immoral is irrelevant.
You seem to be missing my point. I think she can express her views without doing harm to those around her. It shouldn’t impact others, only herself. By doing this she has caused problems for the school, for Robin, and potentially for Joe (even though he agreed to it, I would almost say he was manipulated into it, because… well, Joe being Joe and all). There are ALWAYS methods of getting your message across while not causing problems for people associated with you.
What’s dangerous about YOUR logic is that anytime someone disagrees with the majority, or indeed, with anyone else, they are allowed to commit extreme acts to ‘prove their point.’ A fine way to let anarchy reign. See, I can play this strawman game myself. It’s an empty argument and I expect better.
“(even though he agreed to it, I would almost say he was manipulated into it, because… well, Joe being Joe and all)”
Yeah, it’s like the time I was manipulated into eating pizza, by being offered pizza. I strongly suspect the person who offered it to me knew I liked pizza, and offered it to me on purpose.
That’s not what I said. Whether she is considered by many to be immoral is irrelevant.
Perception of immorality is incredibly relevant, my dear disembodied internet phantom.
Your argument is that Roz is acting incorrectly as she is hurting those around her, yes? And how is she hurting people around her? In engaging in something that people consider immoral (uploading the sex video), it may socially harm Joe and Robin by affecting peoples’ perception of him, correct? This is especially harmful to Robin’s career because her constituency would perceive Roz’s actions as reflective of Robin’s inability to keep her family on the moral path.
So, in effect you are arguing Roz should not act as she does since it offends people too much (which is where all of this “harm” comes from). Is there any other way that Roz is hurting people other than moral outrage of the sexual act and Roz’s ardent (and completely verbal) defense of it?
You seem to be missing my point. I think she can express her views without doing harm to those around her. It shouldn’t impact others, only herself. By doing this she has caused problems for the school, for Robin, and potentially for Joe (even though he agreed to it, I would almost say he was manipulated into it, because… well, Joe being Joe and all).
What if any expression of these views, even if solely verbal, caused this same sort of upheaval for Robin? Would it then be wrong for Roz to express her views at all?
In addition, you have failed to address my thought on revolutionaries. A revolution greatly impacts other peoples’ lives (especially when they *end* them!)
Are all revolutions against government wrong, as they cause a great upheaval against a social system one is invested in?
And again, was it anybody’s choice to be so invested in the system to begin with? Where, then, is the moral prerogative to act in accord with it?
There are ALWAYS methods of getting your message across while not causing problems for people associated with you.
When one acts, it always affects other people. If people do not like the way you act, it can indirectly “hurt” other people in one way or another. And there’s the most dangerous part of your argument – the use of the word “always.” You’re applying a generalized idea (“don’t cause problems for other people associated with you no matter what”) to all situations. Ever. That’s what “always” means.
What’s dangerous about YOUR logic is that anytime someone disagrees with the majority, or indeed, with anyone else, they are allowed to commit extreme acts to ‘prove their point.’ A fine way to let anarchy reign. See, I can play this strawman game myself. It’s an empty argument and I expect better.
Yes, you’re very good at the strawman, I’m sure you’re quite proud. But the strawman game is one I’m avoiding. If you feel I have misinterpreted your argument, by all means, correct me with clear and concise language and examples.
As for me? I did not use the word “always” or anything like unto it to “extreme” social behavior. I do not believe that extreme social behavior is acceptable (or best course of action) in all cases, and I dare you to find where I said that. If I did, then let this here be the correction, for that is not the intent of my argument. But I will say this: sometimes more “extreme” action may be necessary.
As for you? Given your pandemic metaphor, I think you’re lucky anyone responded with the ability to form sentences.
When one acts, it always affects other people. If people do not like the way you act, it can indirectly “hurt” other people in one way or another. And there’s the most dangerous part of your argument – the use of the word “always.” You’re applying a generalized idea (“don’t cause problems for other people associated with you no matter what”) to all situations. Ever. That’s what “always” means.
I dunno. Sounds like that could actually have a pretty good shot of creating an environment where people are receptive to reevaluating the healthcare system.
No, it wouldn’t. I work in health care, they’re too entrenched in the system to change dramatically like that. The last time something similar happened (the AIDS pandemic of the 9180s) they had to literally drag their feet in regards to the new blood testing, and only did so with orders from the government. Doing something like that now would just get you branded a terrorist and locked up, with nobody caring about your message.
The point is when people are so invested in a particular societal system, you don’t go about changing it with dramatic actions. You have to do so gradually, otherwise it just invites chaos.
Gradually is definitely preferable. Not arguing that.
But I wouldn’t think it would be the health care workers to change the healthcare system. I would assume that would be a matter more a matter of the voters and the politicians they elect.
Not endorsing the behavior but I’m pretty sure radical behavior has successfully altered a governmental system before. If the entire country’s riled up about a cause generally politicians wanna be the guy who’ll take care of that. You know, if they’re working in a democracy. If their rule isn’t contingent on votes then extremism is probably the only way you’re gonna change anything anyway.
Of course either way Roz is still being a bit of a moron here. Sympathetic plight, but if you wanna get the people to listen to your cause with an open mind then kicking and screaming isn’t the way to do it. She didn’t change anything here or in any way alter the environment in which the problem was viewed as acceptable. She just kind of made a scene.
Agreed. There are a lot of things I disagree with in today’s society, but I make it a point not to kick and scream about it. Roz could’ve gotten a much better result if she’d written editorials and books instead.
My point stands. Attacking my metaphor does not change anything. If anything it just makes you look bad because you haven’t the ability to argue my actual point and instead try to argue semantics.
Its not that I CAN”T argue against your point. Its that I’m NOT. There are better way to go about improving society but you made the same mistake as Roz.
I know from experience that one of the best ways to lose an arguement is to assume (not investigate) that the arguement is worth having in the first place.
I’d say that ‘extremist actions will not bring meaningful or positive change to society’ is worth arguing. You may disagree, but from what I’ve seen stuff like this only causes things to get worse.
Roz will pay for her decision, possibly in ways she cannot yet imagine. Robin may have to pay as well, but that is not because Roz was unfair to her. I am reminded of Sir Francis Bacon’s warning about family serving as hostages to fortune, “for they are impediments to great enterprises, either of virtue or mischief.”
If Roz is in the right, attempting to bring her into line by holding her sister hostage is wrong. If Roz is in the wrong, attempting to bring her into line by holding her sister hostage…is still wrong.
Roz had sex where everyone could see it…but only if they pay her a visit. (Such behaviour is less distracting than that of a vocally enthusiastic neighbour.) She isn’t projecting it on giant screens at every street corner. She’s simply being open about sex, taking the view that secrecy only implies something shameful.
If she was an activist for urban gardening, who’d call Roz irresponsible for getting permission to create more green space on campus, then posting her work online? That would probably be more disruptive to campus life than what she did. (Roz is not responsible for media response.) I’m sure some commenter would even call her a hoe.
It’s similar to an artist using a privately owned building as a canvas.
Yeah, it makes a statement, which I can respect, but it gets lost in the shuffle when your actions call into question your competency and your compassion for others. This isn’t ‘holding someone hostage.’ This is sociopathy. There are many ways to get your message out there while not bringing harm or damage to those associated with you.
The only way to please the salt of the earth folks Robin is trying to appease would, likely, be for Roz to keep her mouth shut and pretend to be a good chaste young woman.
“Robin may have to pay as well, but that is not because Roz was unfair to her.”
Exactly. Roz allegedly wasn’t doing this to get at her sister – and if we agree with Robin’s point that Roz should hold off until it’s political convenient for her, then when can Roz do anything? She can’t even do something less extreme because that’d also go back to Robin. Any moderate activism or openly having sex would stil,, at some point, get linked back to Robin.
Isn’t she a freshman in college? If she is, then she only recently turned 17/18/19. I’m going to assume 18 since I doubt this comic would have those technically under the age of consent in most states (some from the south excluded) doing the do. So if she were the average high schooler she’d have just turned 18, or if she were a late starter she’d have been 19. I don’t…know….how long has she honestly had to wait? Unless she was ready to go at 14, she’s maybe only been holding out legally for a few months.
I’m just saying, it’s not like she’s had to wait for years, but we aren’t given any context so I dunno, maybe she had a lot of boyfriends in high school.
Most states actually have ages of consent less than 18; it’s only something like ten states, plus Puerto Rico. It’s just that one of those states is California, so media in the USA disproportionately assumes 18 as the legal age.
Oh? Trying to bring about social change through extreme methods that will only cloud your purpose?
Seems apropos to me. People haven’t said where it is wrong. If you want to say that the two situations aren’t the same, well, of course they aren’t. No metaphor would work by that argument.
As an addendum, what you’re doing is basically another version of the grammar/spelling nazi argument. Whether or not my metaphor is bad isn’t the issue; it got across my point, and you chose to ignore said point in favor of semantic arguments. I expect this kind of tripe from GameFAQs trolls, but perhaps I overestimated the people reading Willis’ strips.
Nnnnno, because grammar/spelling is nothing to do with an actual argument, the metaphor was put there in support of your actual argument. Your post pretty much goes: [Statement goes here] [Flawed analogy which you believe is irrelevant to the argument goes here]. If we are to disregard the analogy all we have is an unsupported statement. You put that forward without evidence, I’ll dismiss it without evidence. Feel free to argue the point some more. Or even just go “Okay sorry guys, that was a bad way to argue my point” instead of getting butthurt at other people for daring to attack your argument.
You’re equating all so called “extremes” here in a false dichotomy. Cussing someone out out of no where would be a form of “extreme” behavior, yes? But is that anywhere near the same as stabbing someone? No. Not all “extremes,” as you call them, are the same.
while I agree with Roz’s point, I REALLY disagree with the way she went about it. That kind of in-your-face, accept-me-or-else kind of campaigning might win some people over, but it puts FAR MORE people on the defensive. It’s why Pride Parades will never convince right-wing America to accept homosexuality, and it’s why screaming about Jesus at said parades will never convert people. That’s pretty much the first rule of winning favor – don’t offend the people you’re trying to persuade.
Additionally, a sex tape reads more like an idiotic undergrad art project than a legit political statement. And if she didn’t explain this, then all people are going to see is a slutty co-ed.
I agree with you. While it may perfectly illustrate what’s still wrong with society in terms of sexual freedom and equality, it is not going to change any minds and people will who disagree with her point are going to be less open to listening to someone they’ve labeled as a slut.
Yes, but people who are think they should be ashamed are likely to oppose the concept of galvanizing, and in reaction might take measures to decrease acceptance.
While it does sound hilarious when you phrase it like that, it is an important point to consider. Especially when you are a member of a group that isn’t (fully) protected from discrimination.
That is completely true. I am glad that the people who weren’t at the greatest risk took action that others could not (and still can’t in many places).
Frankly I’ve lost my train of thought, but it has something to do with the fact that Pride Parades will not win allies, but they will encourage current allies both in the closet and out. They will also offend opponents, and I am minful of the risk that force some to stay in the closet and not offend bigots. It can be tough to be a secret supporter of more public people.
Related to my long forgotten point: Chaz Bono is on Dancing With The Stars. Hooray Tolerance!
I was going to post something like this, but you beat me to it. Yeah, men and women should be able to have sexual freedom and do with their bodies what they feel like when they become an adult, but was making a sex tape with some random guy really the best way to go about it? If I met a girl who did that, I’d think she’d be a slut too (and if I were christian, I’d probably think she’s hellbound as well).
I wouldn’t say that it’s wrong, it’s just not very smart. Sleeping around with random people can fuck up a girl’s reputation, relationships and health. Or in this case, her sister’s reputation.
Judgemental asshats fuck up a girl’s reputation. Not being honest or unfaithful with people can fuck up relationships. Not using safe practices can fuck up health. Sleeping around, in and of itself? Just means sex with a lot of people.
P.S. I’m pretty sure all the above applies to guys too, in case you were wondering.
There’s a difference between sleeping around and being a slut. Just about every slut I’ve ever met were all, for lack of a better word, morons. Both women AND men. I’m not disagreeing with what you said, but that doesn’t disprove that what I said can still happen. If I started dating a girl and found out that she was a slut who slept with a lot of people before we went out, I’d be a little concerned.
Pride parades do work, though. They have. By being open and confrontational, they’ve kept homophobes from silencing gay and gay-friendly viewpoints.
Pride parades aren’t about convincing bigots to stop being bigoted, they’re about forcing the bigots into the public dialogue. At least in part because of the parades, the bigots are losing.
Actually I’m pretty sure one of the historically proven best ways of getting your point across is extreme violence because then the less violence people who basically agree with you seem like moderates instead of extremist and people tend to go with them.
It’s works countless times.
I would prefer Roz not go murdering lots of people for sexual freedom I’m just saying extremism is important and she honestly isn’t extreme at all.
I think MLK said something like “people listen to me because the alternative is Malcolm” [X]
Though Overton might be shifted just by extreme positions. What violence adds is the knowledge that someone takes this very seriously in a way you can’t ignore, because violent. Also things like general strikes and other civil disobedience.
Charlie Wilson (technically still a democrat) had a massive socially conservative base. And yet every time abortion came up in the legislature, he voted in favor of abortion rights, because his sister worked for… I believe it was planned parenthood. And yet, he kept getting elected. Plus, I REALLY don’t see Robin being anything further right than a blue dog democrat.
Good point. It would have been far easier to leverage her sister’s power to influence the public. Then again, she isn’t trying to change public opinion: she is trying to shame people for attempting to shame her.
Which doesn’t really work, as these two groups of people talk PAST each other rather than WITH each other. If Roz was an actual person I’d have such a large headache.
Presumably she didn’t force anyone to download that video, so she wasn’t really getting in everyone’s face until they got in hers and started judging her.
What?! But, but, Joyce is always right and Roz is always wrong! Joyce’s opinions are just a bit naive but Roz is being harmful and disrespectful! How can this be!?!!!?!
Argh. Roz is getting more and more infuriating. Her actions haven’t bitten her or Joe (who, again, wasn’t asked prior to the video being posted) in the ass just as yet since it’s only been a couple of days. She might well start singing a different tune when one or both have trouble finding jobs and paying bills in the future. And christ, fighting for your beliefs doesn’t mean doing something that will almost certainly massively damage your sister’s career! You want to be an activist for sexual freedom? Fine. Do you actually have to do it by posting amateur porn online? And using footage involving someone not like-minded?
Joe probably doesn’t realize it, but being in that sex video has completely buggered his chances of getting a job, and probably cut his Joeing pool by half. Lots of women don’t want to sleep with the town manslut.
Believing sexuality should be completely private and promiscuity aren’t mutually exclusive. I’m sure their are plenty of people who go around quietly banging all of the dudes and/or ladies, and not out of shame, but out of it’s nobody else’s business who they are sticking it in or is sticking it in them.
You missed my point. Joe is neither nor conservative nor prudish, but Roz clearly gave no regard to his rights or his privacy. Her actions pretty clearly show that she values her freedom more than the rights of others.
Yes Joe WAS asked, however, I doubt she clued him in to the context. That context being “no this won’t just be something people are masturbating to on the internet, this will actually be a big deal.” Truth, but not the whole truth.
All other points I totally agree with. Well, except “I hate this girl.” You can change that to “I hate people acting like her actions were in any way reasonable.”
Does everything need a page of damn context? She said can I put a sex tape up and he said yes. She could of given him a 40 page form with a signature line for putting it on the internet and he’d still say yes. What do you expect from her?
I really don’t think either of them will be applying for jobs that oppose hiring porn stars. I particularly envision Roz staying in academia, where this scandal would be good to have on her resume.
I agree wholeheartedly. If one’s going to do it in private, no one can stop you. Do it in public, it’s going to really come back and bite you back. Consequences are consequences
Hey, did Roz clue Joe in on the context? I’ve been making arguments based on hypotheticals there, and I’d love to be able to switch that to certainty and/or stop making those arguments because they’re based on false premises.
The next time someone asks if they can put a tape of me on the internet and I say “hells yeah” should I ride them later about not giving me a fucking hundred page contact to sign for every context there could be for it?
Details details, Paris might not be a good role model in life *cough*understatement*cough*, it is hard to deny that she has made more of a name for herself than the Hilton hotel chain can claim these days.
My theory is that like Paris, Roz is taking advantage of the fact that she is related to someone important.
Paris early claim to fame was that she was the heiress to the Hilton Hotel chain which gave her media attention due to her partying, when she did her sex video, she exploited the fact that the media wanted her to becoming the media icon she is today.
I believe (for now) that Roz hopes that this media coverage over her sex video will lead to greater fame for herself and exposure for her pet cause.
Hurt no one? Hmm. Potentially hurt yourself, Joe, your sister, the University… That’s just off the top of my head.
“Sexual Freedom above all else” eh? I can support sexual freedom, the problem here is the rampant immaturity and callousness she shows to other people in her attempt to prove her position. She didn’t ask Joe’s permission on the tape, and while he doesn’t seem to care now this could impact him. He should have had a say in it, as an individual involved.
It’s like she doesn’t view other people as things of consequence or worth. She says she’s in it for the ideal, but her language hints to me that the real reason is her own narcissism. Again, it really looks to me like she’s throwing a temper tantrum and either doesn’t care or doesn’t see who gets hurt by it.
Sam here has more knowledge about Joe’s character than Roz does. He has enough information to be able to judge that. Roz MAY have had enough information to judge that, but you haven’t given us enough information to be able to judge whether she could judge that, so we’re all basically assuming whatever better fits our side of the argument.
Hey, it probably wouldn’t. Joe’s Joe, as we all know. But the fact of the matter was Joe didn’t know everything involved with the tape when Roz got his permission, which is pretty important if you’re going to view people as people and not tools.
True, he likely wouldn’t. But he never had the opportunity to express that, from what I can see. So it doesn’t seem like Roz thought his input on actions that could affect him mattered, so long as she could use him as a tool for her agenda. Which is one of the things I’m not too keen about with her here.
That is true. Adhering to a cause above yourself can be noble. However, it’s when you adhere to a cause to the point where you don’t care or don’t see the potential harm to other people that things get scary.
Gangler has the right of it. Life isn’t without limits. A good example, though far more extreme than anything that’s happened in this comic, is when Pastor Terry Jones decided to hold the Koran on trial and then film it when he burned the book. And then a number of people died as a consequence. Were these people wrong and crazy to kill people in response to some old man burning a book? Yes. It doesn’t mean it wasn’t an immature and stupid thing for Terry Jones to do, though.
Again, this is much more extreme than anything in the comic. I really just brought this up to say that taking into consideration someone else will decide to make others hurt for things you do isn’t really a bad thing by itself.
I’m actually undecided on Robin. I’ll need to see more of this version of her to make any calls one way or the other. After all, just because people don’t agree with Roz doesn’t mean they agree with Robin.
“My sexual freedom is important to me above all else, and I will never compromise it.”
Tzun Tzi wrote something very wise on the importance of yielding. “It is said that a reed that is not rigid and bends will not break and in so doing endure.”
Do you really wanna take advice from someone who spent all his time talking about “the art of war” and yet died anyway? That’d be like listen to Mike if he told you a mother’s love was free.
Well seeing as it’s probably that the art of war is an amalgamation of several treatises on military strategy, the biography of a man who may or may not have existed really don’t concern me. I just thought it was a better quote than Know when to Hold ’em, know when to Fold ’em.
I still believe part of why Roz is doing this is to get back at Robin, even if only to expose her hypocrisy, but Roz may just be my new favorite DoA character.
Granted, posting the video without Joe’s permission was not cool, but he is certainly enjoying the publicity.
Wow, I remembered the interview between Dorothy and Joe, but the only thing that I remembered from that comic was Joe saying that he and Roz were hooking up again that night.
I blame Joe, for saying “And I get to touch boobies, so we’re even”, and causing me to not remember.
I forgot about that comic, but I generally assumed that since Joe was cool with the taping part, and there are only so many reasons to tape it with a webcam, that he would’ve at least figured out the reason. Joe being Joe, he probably didn’t care.
Well, it’s actually grammatically ambiguous when you answer two questions in one with a single “yeah” whether they’re actually answering both, or just whichever one stuck in their head more. God only knows I’ve done that exact thing before. However, from your comments it IS apparent that she got permission for it to go on the internet. NOT apparent from your comments is whether she gave context, and I would really appreciate it if you cleared that up?
It’s not ambiguous at all. Joe says “When a chick asked you to make a sex video, you totally jump that NO MATTER WHAT.” There is absolutely no reason to say “no matter what” unless he’s addressing the putting up online-ness.
It’s ambiguous enough that all i interpreted that as on the first read through was embellishment on how awesome sextape is.
Also. WHY U NO RESPOND TO THE QUESTION I ACTUALLY WANT ANSWERED
If you’re talking about the political context, the fact that he read the Wednesday(?) morning newspaper and didn’t realize the “idiot” who banged the congressperson’s sister was himself, probably indicates he wasn’t aware of Roz’s political angle.
Well this is turning into some serious forbidden fruit shit. Every time he doesn’t answer, it just makes me want the answer more. I will probably ask in person months from now at Emerald City Comicon.
it’s joe. all he cares about is sex. it’s irrelevant whether or not roz told him why it’s going online. she had him at “sextape”. if you really think he paid any attention to her after that word, you either haven’t grasped what his character is all about or you never met one of these people in real life.
honestly, even if roz did tell him what her motives were and he was listening to her the entire time, i doubt he would care. because, hey, free sex.
The last panel makes it clear that Joe is fine with it being a political and not-masturbatory move as well, whether or not it was explained when she got permission. So it’s really a moot point.
Man, if I were in Robin’s shoes, at this point I would be thinking:
“OK, sister or not, my forgiveness is now on hold. You are not the only person in the universe with a cause, and I didn’t go through all the trouble and headaches of raising money, canvassing voters, and getting elected so that I would *actually have* some of the power to effect my causes just to let my bratty little sister destroy it all in some ill-thought out scheme. You think it’s fine to not care about the troubles you’re causing me? Fine, I won’t care about the troubles I’m going to cause you.”
Robin needs to slap Roz down, and hard. The only reason Roz’s video actually got notice was because her sister was a Congressman, and she knows it. If Robin doesn’t do something to dissuade her from trying such a stunt again, Roz *will* burn her again in the future, because it’s her best play for publicity. Given that Robin tried to amicably settle things with Roz (“I will forgive you, you will at least pretend to accept it”) and she threw it back in her face… well, politically speaking, Robin has to toss her to the wolves, and use Roz’s selfish actions here as a prop for WHY she thinks family values are important.
And if Roz doesn’t like that? Well, she shouldn’t have picked a fight with a *sitting Congresswoman*. Robin has to be thinking of Roz as her own personal Fredo right now.
As it stood, Robin was apparently planning to make-nice in front of the cameras and try to let the whole thing blow over – between a public display of forgiveness and a (sure to be well covered) speech/campaign rally, she could attempt to head off the media and maybe regain some actual control over the flow of events. Or do you think Robin had her campaign rally planned ahead of time at her little sister’s college and it just coincidentally ended up occurring after Roz released her sex tape? I don’t believe that – either Robin arranged this on short notice to try to ameliorate the shitstorm, or Roz purposefully went out of her way to maximize trouble for Robin.
But that hardly matters; Roz is determined to fight. That means Robin, whether she wants to be or not, is going to have to take some kind of public stand against Roz. Robin has much better media access and the ability to frame things for the ‘hicks’ Roz detests. Beyond Robin herself, Roz has probably created a minor distraction for Robin’s party as a whole. It is a very stupid fight for her to have gotten into – even if she goes into academia, where her actions would often be overlooked or even admired to some degree, ‘a personal enemy of assorted politicians who may impact our funding’ is not a line you want on your resume.
Do you actually get how condescending and offensive being told you’re ‘forgiven’ is when you did nothing wrong? If Robin didn’t want this she should’ve spoken with Roz privately rather than making a scene and assuming it’d all go her way.
And as I said, Roz is doing fine. She seems to know what she’s getting herself in for, and if Robin starts influencing things directly all she’s doing is painting a target on HER head.
If you don’t want to occasionally apologize or accept forgiveness when you’ve done nothing wrong, perhaps you shouldn’t randomly inject yourself into politics.
Robin speaking privately with Roz wouldn’t have had any effect on the greater issues, and she knows her sister better than we do, so she probably has a pretty good idea of what Roz would say (no). Making the approach in public puts more pressure on Roz to play along with Robin.
As far as targets… Robin did not release a sex tape of herself (in this universe). She has a target on her head only until she ‘does something’ about the situation. She met Roz informally but in public, showed she tries to patch things up civilly even with a sister who grossly undermined her campaign, and had it thrown back in her face. She did it in a timely manner. She’s done all the socially conservative voters she was concerned about are really going to ask of her. Robin has stepped smartly to remove herself being a target. At this point, she can forward all media flak to Roz. “It’s unfortunate that my sister has made these choices”, or something similar.
“If you don’t want to occasionally apologize or accept forgiveness when you’ve done nothing wrong, perhaps you shouldn’t randomly inject yourself into politics”
This is, like, a ground floor issue for Roz. We’re not talking semantics or a gray area here. The idea that you can be wavering on every single issue is as unrealistic as it is impractical.
“She did it in a timely manner. She’s done all the socially conservative voters she was concerned about are really going to ask of her. ”
If what you are saying is true, then that is exactly what Roz would want: to have her actions reflect her own self and not have to change what she is for someone else.
Ahh, I was a bit unclear, I suppose. Robin has secured her voters with her actions. But Roz is still in fighting form, and is still going to be taking activist stances that are a distraction (by all appearances). In essence, she has nominated herself as a political enemy, and one whose leverage derives entirely from Robin’s standing. Robin is going to have to deal with her not because Roz reflects personally badly on Robin, but because she is now ‘the bad guy’ to a large group of voters.
It’s always kinda neat coming on during a page like this and seeing the comments section blow up. Reading these little debates is fun.
I can certainly sympathize with Roz after these last few pages. Being a sexually active and explorative girl when you’re also the immediate family of a politician with a conservatively valued platform has got to be frustrating. That said, her methods of fighting for her cause seem more like a child throwing a tantrum rather than actually making a statement.
As long as she keeps herself tested for STDs pretty frequently and doesn’t lead any of her guy partners on, she’s pretty much right with her “doesn’t hurt anybody,” spiel at least. Of course, SP Roz doesn’t take the feelings of her partners into account, so she can go right to hell.
Another way of looking at the difference between Robin and Roz is how they want to change the society they live in.
Robin represents The Man, The Establishment, The System and the idea that change occurs when you change the laws, which is achieved by convincing people to vote for her and support her ideas.
Roz represents Anti-establishment, counter-culture and rebellion. These types tend to believe that The System can be subverted and changed to their liking by ‘fun’ methods such as listening to ‘subversive’ music, donning ‘subversive’ wears, living ‘subversive’ lifestyles and protesting.
While I love Roz as a character, Robin has the better chance of changing things for the better than Roz ever will.
Ok, seriously? Protesting and wearing clothes your parents hate are to different things. Protesting HAS achieved things. Gandi freed India, the equal-Rights movement, ect. It happens.
Counterculture and anti-establishmentism, on the other hand, has accomplished very little. 66% is still a passing grade.
Or at least it is where I live.
I’m NOT saying that protesting doesn’t work, I AM saying that protesting is primarily a counter-culture tool.
Counter/sub-cultures are an important force in our society as a means of stimulating new fashions/markets and providing a way to ‘rebel’ in the process.
Alright, think about what you just said. You just equated order and Robin. THINK ABOUT THAT. Robin is more like chaos that has been forged in the fires of mount doom into The Sword Of Competency, whereas Roz is just unrefined chaos. Hell, she might even just be chaos OXIDE.
I’m gonna keep on thinking that Robin is the Suzaku to Roz’s Lelouch. The Flynn Scifo to her Yuri Lowell. The Knuckles to her Sonic. You can’t argue with something that awesome.
I know, I know, the very idea that ROBIN represents ORDER is very mindscrewy, especially if you are familiar with Shortpacked! but unless Willis reveals otherwise, ROBIN IS ORDER.
“While I love Roz as a character, Robin has the better chance of changing things for the better than Roz ever will.”
She’s got the better potential to change things, but having a better chance would imply she’s actually trying to change things for the better. We don’t know if she is yet. She might be doing something at the higher levels, or she could be playing it safe and/or voting against change in order to keep her seat. It could go either way, since so far she’s been utterly focused on being a hypocrit to keep a seat but “actually I was doing X and you’ve made that harder to do, Roz” is a possible punchline…
The problem here is that Roz is trying to “prove to society” something. She feels the need to validate herself and her actions to every anonymous person that notices her. If she’s truly secure with herself she shouldn’t seek the validation of others. Her actions just scream to me that she wants to be noticed, she wants to be self-righteously offended by the people that will judge her, and that she doesn’t care who else she brings into the mess to do it. 18 years old is barely an adult, and Roz feels to me even less so, emotionally.
Actually 18 is a little *young* to be taking stands against perceived societal ills. You’ll note that colleges, not high schools, have been the traditional stomping grounds of placard-waving young adults.
There was huge amounts of debate about what Joe reallllly kneeeeeeeew being made, to, you know, the guy who made the fucking comic. Also there was multiple people who needed this clapped out to them, not just Sam.
the main problem with roz’s stance is that there are probably at most 5 people on the entire planet who would see her sex tape and think “gee, theres a girl whos body is her own and who values her sexual freedom”, and any protest that needs to explained to everybody that sees it is not going to be an effective protest
I can’t decide which of the numerous threads discussing how Roz is wrong because people will respond badly this should go under, so I’ll just stick these here (emphases mine):
On some positions, Cowardice asks the question, “Is it safe?” Expediency asks the question, “Is it politic?” And Vanity comes along and asks the question, “Is it popular?” But Conscience asks the question “Is it right?” And there comes a time when one must take a position that is neither safe, nor politic, nor popular, but he must do it because Conscience tells him it is right. I believe today that there is a need for all people of good will to come together with a massive act of conscience and say in the words of the old Negro spiritual, “We ain’t goin’ study war no more.” This is the challenge facing modern man.
— Martin Luther King Jr., “Remaining Awake Through a Great Revolution”
In your statement you assert that our actions, even though peaceful, must be condemned because they precipitate violence. But is this a logical assertion? Isn’t this like condemning a robbed man because his possession of money precipitated the evil act of robbery? Isn’t this like condemning Socrates because his unswerving commitment to truth and his philosophical inquiries precipitated the act by the misguided populace in which they made him drink hemlock? Isn’t this like condemning Jesus because his unique God-consciousness and never-ceasing devotion to God’s will precipitated the evil act of crucifixion? We must come to see that, as the federal courts have consistently affirmed, it is wrong to urge an individual to cease his efforts to gain his basic constitutional rights because the quest may precipitate violence. Society must protect the robbed and punish the robber.
— Martin Luther King Jr., “Letter from a Birmingham Jail”
Dr. King also had a realistic plan for accomplishing his dreams. Even assuming, for the sake of argument, that Roz’s cause is 100% good, her plan is a pointless act that is self-undermining and guarantees that her control of the narrative is nil, because the media will utterly ignore her views as long as they can use this to hound Robin.
Roz is Gavrilo Princip with boobs, essentially. She has unleashed forces beyond her ability to control. This was an entirely predictable outcome to a rational observer. In other words, Roz is an idiot.
Right. So, I’ve been reading the comments and this only reenforces what I said before. It’s pretty clear that we are supposed to agree with Roz and cheer her on but the fact that there are more holes in her argument than Swiss cheese in a refrigerator gang fight makes it hard.
Maybe I’m wrong. Maybe a character in tomorrow’s comic will offer a decent counterargument and we, the audience, will be allowed to take sides. I certainly hope so. But from where I’m standing it seems like the strip, not Roz, has taken a stand, and that’s rarely a good thing in fiction. Even Doonesbury works in spite of, not because of, it’s biases. (I personally read it for more soapish reasons.)
I personally agree with the basic stance even if Roz’s whole argument falls apart because, as Robin pointed out, Roz’s actions do hurt people, namely Robin and her campaign, and really no one’s going to see a sex tape as a political stance, and I could go on but I think the other 200-something comments have me covered. Whether or not I agree isn’t the point.
It’s not Roz’s action that hurts other people. It’s other peoples’ reactions to her actions that could hurt other people.
This is an important distinction. Considering how successful and motivated Robin is, losing an election is not going to be the end of the world to her, or for her state.
What kind of goddamn boring fiction do you read? Opinions and thoughts make things interesting, even if you disagree with them. It’s good to actually reflect on things and opinions. Besides, the “message” of the strip is not dictated by what Roz has said for the last few strips.
Conflicting opinions and thoughts are fine and make for wonderful fiction. But that’s not what we have here. Maybe tomorrow my opinion will change, but right now it looks like Roz will be unambiguously winning this little debate and we’re supposed to be cheering her on for calling her sister out regardless of the argument itself.
Again, the point isn’t that I disagree. It’s that the author wants us to agree and–by all appearances–won’t be leaving much room for counterpoint.
Willis, if you’re reading this, I’m sorry. Maybe tomorrow all the holes and flaws pointed out in these comments will be represented or someone will have other counterarguments we haven’t thought of. But from my insomnia-riddled perspective, the fan reaction you were aiming for with this moment comes off less as “Roz making some legit points even if her methods or sub-arguments are wrong” and more as “woo! Go Roz! Awesome!”
In short–unless theft, rape, or murder are involved, I generally don’t like fiction lacking moral ambiguity.
But would you shake a poisonous snake and throw it on someone else and claim that “It was the snake’s reaction to my actions, not me who harmed this person”? Whether or not one may feel that shake-snaking (hurr hurr appropriate and entirely accidental euphemisms) is a completely normal and acceptable activity that shouldn’t hurt people doesn’t change the fact that it can and will hurt someone else at this point in society. By that logic, wouldn’t it be better to shake your snake on your own time without throwing it into someone else’s faaaaaaaaaaace?
Wait, wait, wait. So directly harming someone by agitating a non-intelligent dangerous animal and throwing it on them is now the same as people who weren’t involved in your act suddenly deciding to throw their puritan, bigoted two cents worth into the discussion?
No, putting a video on the internet where a conservative can choose to view it and be mortified is exactly the same as throwing an agitated poisonous snake at them.
You both misunderstand. My comment was in response to the person who said that it is not Roz’s actions that hurt people, but people’s reactions to her actions. For example, Robin’s career is endangered due to the reactions toward Roz’s video. I’m stating that Roz is not absolved of guilt for the danger she’s caused Robin’s career, because, right or wrong, she shook the snake and THEN threw it out to the public, knowing full-well what would happen.
Again, no. Because the video didn’t attack the public.
If you want to state that Roz was wrong to do what she did, then do so (and I will disagree with you), but stop comparing Roz’s act of expression to unleashing a deadly animal on public.
That’s not how I write, and I don’t think it’s how David writes. It shouldn’t be as simple as figuring out which character the writer is using as a sock puppet.
Dorothy and Joyce realize they misjudged and underestimated Roz, sure, okay. That means they realize the world’s more complex than they thought, and it won’t be the last time.
However, over in Shortpacked, Roz has pretty much the exact same set of ideals, and her actions have directly harmed Jacob, despite what she believes. She can’t be blamed for all his relapse, but he might not have had one without her.
Roz is more like Joyce than either would like to think. Both have firm sexual ideologies, both do their best to live their ideals, and both assume that any negative consequences of this come from other people’s backward attitudes. Their solution to this is to live correctly and thereby lead by example. Put it like that and it sounds pretty great. But a life without compromise is often a blind one.
Okay, I think I see where I went wrong. I took the speech at face value, disregarding how anyone but Robin might react. And the Joyce comparison totally flew over my head. This isn’t just between Roz and Robin. Even if Robin loses this little debate it doesn’t mean Roz won. Hell, given Robin’s scatterbrainness in Shortpacked it’d be flat-out unreasonable of me to view Robin losing an argument as a tipping point into the deep dark pits of sockpuppetting.
Looking at Willis’s general body of work, you’re right. He’s usually better than my opinion of this one strip made him out to be. Maybe that’s why I got ticked off.
This is why I always look forward to your posts. They’re generally more well thought out than mine tend to be. Generally my posts are just verbose gut reactions. Probably a byproduct of lack of sleep, but it occurs to me that I use that excuse a lot when my opinion shifts around these parts. So I was wrong. Yeah.
You too. It’s clear that you put a lot of thought into your responses and I admire that in an online commenter. Shame so few do it, myself included. Must remember to follow your example in the future.
I agree with your love of T’s posts. His eye for subtle stuff like the depth of the Robin/Joyce parallels and his general quality of writing mean that they’ll always be among the best in a discussion.
Incidentally, having seen the parallel, I realized- Anti-Joyce forced Joyce to confront and ultimately overcome the fears Anti-Joyce embodied. I was thinking Dorothy or another more level-headed student would bring Joyce around slowly (and they’ll definitely still have a part to play), but now I’d put money on Roz starting that process.
I think there’s at least one important difference with Roz’s ideals in SP! and DoA.
I love DoA-Roz for what she’s doing now. I hate SP!-Roz for what she did to Jacob. Maybe it is possible that the same person could do both these things using Roz’s ideals. But I can’t quite compare “I want to demonstrate that people have no business judging me, that I and every one else have a fundamental right to enjoy our sexuality as freely as we choose, with whomever gives their consent!” with “I’m gonna take advantage of a man in a vulnerable state and knowingly ruin months/years or recovery just because I want to get laid tonight.”
With Joe, Roz was keen to get his consent. With Jacob, she didn’t care. I mean, sure, Jacob ultimately did it with her, but as far as we know he probably WANTED to say no, but couldn’t because of his addiction. Roz knew that, and went along anyway. That’s why I think DoA-Roz respects other people’s well-being in a way that SP!-Roz doesn’t.
One could argue–I do not–that just as “the hicks” have themselves to blame for taking offense, Jacob has himself to blame for being a sex addict. Still, the consequences for Jacob were more dire than for the hicks.
Yes. Because logical, rational characters are always the most relatable, sympathetic, and compelling. That’s why everyone cheers for spock and not that headstrong Kirk.
besides which, her actions potentially cause harm to herself, unless she’s paying for all that fancy stuff and her college degree by herself, robin could easily just cut roz off. and then her little public temper tantrum would just get her removed from college.
Indeed, clearly Roz must have known she would be confronted on this eventually. This is where a rational being fighting for a cause she believed in would smile and kindly explain her reasons to the public and hope those who are sympathetic to her ideas might feel emboldened, while those who disagree or on the edge might have their perspectives widened.
She did not do this. She got up and threw a fit at her sister in front of everyone and lost control of her emotions. Wasn’t this exactly the publicity she needed to make her case? Is she using this opportunity wisely? I think not. Does it detract from her character as perceived from an outside view thus lessening the strength of her cause? I think so.
People don’t hear you if you don’t talk loud. And she’s still calm enough to make her points. If she made this particular argument in a calm and soothing voice with a placid smile on her face, I’d immediately conclude that she was a pod person and flee for my life.
I fail to see how she is mishandling the responsibility for her actions. I mean, I’m pretty sure she used protection. What other responsibilities do you suppose she has? Supporting her sister’s slightly skeevy campaign to cater to the whims of the rednecks?
To me this is the old freedom of speech argument. I’d like to see if Roz would believe the same thing in panel two if a person was shunned because they made a public comment in favor of pro life, or were ridiculed because they made an insensitive remark on tv about a minority group. Those opinions aren’t technically hurting anyone either, but there would still be consequences.
Exactly. No one is hurt by sexist or racist opinions because we put an end to gender- and race-based discrimination in this country a long time ago. Totally.
Okay maybe the discrimination remark isn’t a good comparison. How about someone who’s pro life and is ridiculed, or a person on the street preaching their faith being mocked? I would again ask if she’d feel the same way about that. As the old saying goes, freedom doesn’t come free.
I’m not sure what you think Roz is trying to do here. She’s expressing herself and her opinion is that this doesn’t harm anyone. What does this have to do with someone being mocked on a street for religion?
Maybe I need to be more clear, I’m asking if Roz saw someone on the street preaching, and there were a group of people mocking that person, would she be just as upset as she is about those who disapprove of her posting a sex video on the internet? I seriously doubt it, even though that person is expressing their opinions with no harm coming to anyone.
It would really depend on what was being preached. I’ve heard what a few people have to say when they stand on a street in the name of religion and some of it is VERY harmful.
What makes you think what Roz is doing isn’t very harmful? She’s proposing a set of rules that have far-reaching consequences for society if widely adopted. It is not at all clear that these are in the aggregate beneficial for other people – or, to put it another way, the consequences to an act between consenting parties may not be limited to those parties. At the very least, every additional Roz or Joyce changes society’s expectations at the margin, resulting in pain to their counterparts – unwanted sexual advances and loss of trust for Joyces, and limits on sexual expressiveness for the Rozzes of the world. By the nature of things, this is a trade-off; there is no universal solution. But to say there is no harm done at all is fatuous.
Would you consider this harm bad? As an analogue: What if Roz, instead, was expressing opinions promoting racial equality. Robin’s constituency was upset and thus Robin’s career harmed.
That’s what I’m trying to say. if people who spoke out about pro life were mocked or ostracized like Roz is for this, would she feel like they are expressing themselves and be as angry as she is in panel 2? It’s easy to say it’s their right when it fits what you believe.
How are they being mocked? Is it based on the protester’s appearance? That they believe a controversial viewpoint? And who says Roz is ostracized? She’s shown happily interacting with people on campus after the news broke.
You’re putting forward a vague hypothetical situation in support of your theory – that Roz is being hypocritical in relation to freedom of speech/expression – where no evidence has been put forward either way about. The closest we get is that she yells at someone when they are talking about petals.
This is why I didn’t do well in political science. I was never very good at debate. I think this piece has ran it’s course with me looking like an idiot. I’ll shut up now.
If Roz were gay, coming out of the closet might “hurt Robin” too. Would that create an obligation to stay in the closet? Or if she participated in a public debate defending atheism, or evolution…
She hasn’t been in the closet about any of her behavior that would reflect poorly on Robin. Asking her to not hold a press conference telling every single Indiana voter about her sexuality simultaneously isn’t the same as asking her to stay in the closet.
Or is it? I’ll be the first to admit I have very little understanding of the homosexual experience. It could very well be that a homosexual Roz would be in the closet if not every single Indiana resident knew that she was homosexual. It just seems to me that there’s a certain leap between keeping your sexual orientation secret and not creating a viral video that announces it to every single person on the planet. There are a lot of things that I’m not secretive about, but that I also have not stood before the Canadian people and proclaimed to be so.
I’m a gamer. Everyone who knows me knows I’m a gamer. Strangers could plausibly guess that I’m a gamer due to my tendency to be playing videogames in the public view with such frequency. The general Canadian citizenry is probably unaware. I’m not in the closet. I simply haven’t taped myself playing Tales of Symphonia on hard mode and released it in a manner that is accessible to everyone,
You act like Robins asking the moon of her when she’s just asking her sister to not go out of her way to do things that will negatively impact her career,
Where Robin comes to be in the wrong is this whole forgiveness schpeal she’s doing. Now she’s in essence asking Roz to publicly act in a way that is not true to herself, and that’s a really shitty thing to do. Doesn’t change the fact that expecting her sister to not publicly release any sex videos in ways that bring it back to the family was entirely reasonable.
As near as I can tell this is a pretty basic dispute between siblings we’re seeing here. It happens to touch on some sociopolitical matters, but ultimately we’ve got sister A and sister B.
Sister B was shafted by sister A’s actions. Sister A’s response is “I didn’t do anything wrong” to which sister B replies “Yeah, but you still shafted me”.
Sister A is doing her own thing one day when Sister B comes storming in unannounced, throwing a scene and asking unreasonable things of Sister A. Sister A says “You’re being totally unreasonable here.”, Sister B replies “Dude, I really need you to do this.”
We can talk about politics until the cows come home but ultimately this is two siblings doing what they do best. Driving eachother crazy.
In this situation you propose that Roz is gay, you are expecting her to not post a photo on a dating website. Never ask someone out. To lie if the subject of sexuality genuinely comes up. To not be seen in public. On a date, holding hands. Giving a beloved person a kiss, hell, given a random person you just met a kiss if you wanted to. It could mean she cannot be seen at certain clubs or events. Never allowed to marry or adopt. Not allowed to stand up and protest publically.
If she did any of these things, she’s essentially ‘creating’ a viral video/image/story by making it easy for people to spot her and report on it. The only way she can counter that is t
None of these things are creating a press conference. But then, since when is uploading a video a press conference either?
Don’t be ridiculous. There’s a clear and definable difference between any of your examples and her publicity stunt.
I even specifically laid out a situation where it wasn’t secret at all and everything she’d want to do in order to live her lifestyle is being done. Everyone in her social circle is aware. Strangers know because of the frequency with which she publicly engages in homosexual activity. There just isn’t a video flying around with the intent of making her homosexual status a news item.
As I’ve pointed out repeatedly Roz doesn’t hide anything about her that could negatively impact Robin’s career. There are at least sixteen photo opportunities she presents a day that could be used against Robin.
The difference between living your life as you please, and feeling the need to proclaim to the entire world that you’re living this way is not small.
drs laid out a scenario where Roz would be in the closet, but in order for that to be an equatable scenario Roz would have to be secretive about her desire for an active sex life, not go around preaching the values of safe sex or wearing a condom hat, keep her opinions about God’s gender hidden, etc etc.
Roz has never been in the closet and Robin hasn’t objected to Roz living her life in the open as she chooses. The point of contention is a singular sex video.
And since when isn’t uploading a video holding a press conference? Just cuts out some of the middle men.
Wiki
“A news conference or press conference is a media event in which newsmakers invite journalists to hear them speak and, most often, ask questions”
Let’s see. It’s a media event. Roz put it together so that society could hear her speak and with the expectation that they would ask questions. Sure sounds like a press conference to me.
And once again I do profess that having little knowledge of the homosexual experience it could very well be that even at this point Robin’s expectations would be unreasonable and hurtful. I don’t know. I just don’t think that “In the closet’ is a proper descriptor for Roz’s situation at all.
You are of course drawing conclusions about what has happened behind the scenes. Assuming that Robin hasn’t contacted Roz about it in the past. If Roz was gay (and she might not necessarly be straight, but she’s definitely into dudes) a request made out of love to ‘be a little less gay’ can result in backlash in the form of gay pride parade appearances. The same way a request to be ‘not so slutty’ would respond with, say, a video getting put online as the same kind of reaction to being told to be who you are.
I agree that ‘in the closet’ doesn’t describe Roz’s situation, but I can imagine a concerned-for-the-blue-collar-vote Robin trying to stuff her into one.
“A news conference or press conference is a media event in which newsmakers invite journalists to hear them speak and, most often, ask questions” Where, when and how were jounalists invited? How were they invited to ask Roz questions? The rationale you give would make every single cat video be a press conference as well.
I seriously am not condoning Robin’s behavior or condemning Roz’s. Just saying that we’ve only seen Robin object to one act of Roz’s, and it was not an objection to the degree of “Could you please stay in the closet and keep your lifestyle a secret”. It sounds like we’re in agreement there.
As far as the press conference thing goes, the journalists are here aren’t they? They didn’t just swing by in a completely unpredictable and unprovoked manner. Roz created the video with the intent that they would come. Whether a formal invitation was offered is semantics.
Roz’s video was effectively a neon sign proclaiming “Journalism Party at the Desanto residence!” This wasn’t an unpredictable outcome. Like tossing blood into shark infested waters.
You show me a cat video that’s been engineered to have that effect on the journalistic community and I will indeed rule it a press conference.
Seriously though, I do maintain that this is ultimately just a sibling dispute with political garnishings. They’re hardly the first pair of siblings who’s incompatible lifestyles have had a tendency to keep them at eachother’s throats.
I strongly suspect they both hold highly unrealistic expectations of eachother as well as more than a fair portion of mutually unreasoned feelings. In short, they’re both being dicks to eachother. Nothing downright villainous. No one’s actively trying to set back any cause or anything. Just a couple sisters getting eachother’s fur all ruffled up.
Oi, vey. Every new panel with Roz speaking makes me just want to slap her more…harder…and longer.
You own your body. You do with it what you want, who you want, and when you want. Hoo-rah!
Why feel the need to demonstrate this ownership, this sexual freedom, by spreading it out all over & for the world to see too? Not to mention, sharing it with everyone you meet just to PROVE said ownership & freedom?
Being a slut just for the sake of having the freedom to do so is pointless, immature, and…I think…signs of having incredibly low self-esteem.
I find it curious that people still are claiming that the only reason she sleeps with people is to spite other. Is it that hard to imagine that there are people who simply enjoy casual sex?
And no, the fact that she was politically motivated to film it doesn’t mean that political motivations were required to get her in the sack.
Well it is certainly that female chauvinism that Ariel Levy talks about – feeling empowerment and “fighting” through the objectification of one’s self and participating in raunch culture. I would argue that Roz is using this approach, actually. She is trying to deliver a message in a way that objectifies her rather than a way that empowers and frees her as a sexual entity, however. But maybe the trappings of an object are where she finds freedom since her sexuality is important to her above all else. Conversely, perhaps she is trying to strip away the confinement of objectification by declaring it null – she said so herself that this is “how far we need to go” as a society.
She may feel empowered and she may be fighting against the idea of objectification and the idea that moral judgments belong in other people’s sex lives (which obviously they don’t), but in the end she is merely posing as the object. Even if she were to clarify herself in a later article I think it would be difficult to avoid that. Boobs and butts scream louder than words.
So the point of this post is that there is justification for slapping people if they are sluts. And that there are ~special criteria~ for being a slut, lest ye be judged, but you don’t actually need to have this criteria because people will jump to that point straight away anyway.
No, I don’t want to slap her for being a slut. I have no right to do that sort of thing because of the way she lives her life.
I want to slap her for her childish attitude & immature reasoning for WHY she’s doing what she does! She KNOWS she’s hurting her sister…for one reason or another…but she doesn’t CARE. Also, her sexual freedom is more important to her than ANYTHING else? That speaks greatly about her self-worth…and it’s pathetic.
If her sexual freedom is more important than her intelligence, her pride, love, honor, etc. you’re going to tell me that’s NOT pathetic? She says sexual freedom is above ALL else. That’s pathetic AND sad.
Expressing yourself can be done calmly & quietly, withoiut insults and yelling. The latter gains you attention, but rarely respect.
You could have made that point in a much less visible and political way.
Be honest with yourself. You filmed yourself having sex with a guy you barely even knew (if at all), not to express your sexual freedom, not to make a political statement, but to hurt your sister.
OK, Roz, you have rights. Noone’s teeling you you don’t have the right to sex. But you did something (well within your rights) that would hurt your family. That would hurt someone you (presumably) love.
You chose to make a political statement, even though it would hurt your family (sister). She wasn’t doing something GOOD or something BAD, in and of itself, but it had consequences for Robin, as much as you wish it didn’t. It SHOULDN’T, but it did.
A second point. You made pornography. Leaving my personal opinions out of it entirely, you had to know that a sizable chunk of the population would judge you, and dislike you for it.
No judgement of the act itself by me, I’m judging you doing something that would hurt your sister.
Robin is asking where her Sister, a very young adult, and I use that phrase by its definition, as these, and all college students are still children…. Got her activist leanings.
Well, Robin ran a political campaign when she was 25. Thats a very…. Active thing to do at such a young age, depending on your educational needs or how much time you spent after high school before going to college, many people are still pursuing their supposed educational calling or one of the other various wild goose chases of their youth. So its a little silly when Robin asks that question, as her sister is following in her footsteps. Albeit in a different… Sexy, sweaty… Sticky kind of way.
Of course Robin doesnt have anything on me. I was very active when I was 25.
In bed.
With your mom.
For a nickel.
Moms. Paying my college education one nickel at a time.
The author posted this on his Tumblr. Specifically to shut up Absofflab and Sam. Why? They both apologised, on the internet even!
An AGENDA, you say?????
Roz: Let’s fuck while I video tape us.
Joe: Sweet!
Roz: I’m gonna put it on the Internet, too. Is that okay with you?
Joe: That’s even sweeter!
Roz: Now, I have to warn you, this video furthers my personal agenda.
Joe: An agenda? Oh no! Now I won’t have sex with you on video! This changes everything! I hate agendas even more than I hate not having sex with hot chicks on video that people can watch and verify that I had sex with a hot chick! Phew! Thank god you told me about there being an agenda! I almost made a costly mistake! Now let’s put our pants back on and read the Bible.
(OK, there may have been others in the 300 comments above, but they used the word “Agenda”, so you probably responded to them)
I’m sorry if I’ve pissed people off, and I’m especially sorry if I pissed you off, David. That was never my intention. I really do enjoy reading your work, and I guess I got so vocal about this because of that. Have I beaten the horse into mulch on this issue? Yeah, I’m pretty sure I have. My views on the matter haven’t changed, but I’ll not harangue on it. I’ll just keep reading and see where it goes, adding my input now and again.
You’re a good writer, and I’m sure whatever you have in store will be interesting and thought provoking. You’ve done an excellent job with that so far.
I didn’t really write that to shut up anybody. If I wanted to shut up anybody, I would have posted that here, rather than somewhere else. Posting on my Tumblr was for my own benefit.
Frankly, I’d rather let my comics speak for themselves. I try not to put Word of God stuff into the comments, when I can avoid it, because that can often end discussion. And I like discussion.
From what I can gather, their posts were about how Joe knew that it would be online, but that he may or may not have known about Roz’s agenda, judging from that strip you pointed out.
You didn’t put in a strip where Joe mentions that Roz told him about her agenda, for good reason. It would have telegraphed this storyline here a bit too clearly, or maybe it wasn’t important to you. They read it differently.
They weren’t asserting Joe would care, which is what you parodied on your Tumblr, but that he was unwittingly used as a political chesspiece.
We all agree (now) that Joe was told about her agenda, and didn’t care, and doesn’t care now (He’s proud of himself, even! ) Problem solved?
That’s literally the only name he’s ever had. He was there when Robin first awoke from her Cadbury cereal fugue state and told her she was a congresswoman now.
I wish I could agree with Roz, I really do, but I can’t sympathize with someone who put a sex tape in the internet without the other person’s permission. Yeah, I get it, Joe is okay with it. But if she was so sure he wouldn’t mind, how difficult would it have been for her to go ‘hey btw I’m posting this in redtube, you okay with that?’.
Hey neuroteaser. I realize you’re probably a troll, but since everyone else just got annoyed by your comment:
Roz DID ask Joe’s permission. Joe told Dorothy (and I’m paraphrasing): “Yeah, she asked me first and I’m totally cool with the idea” back when Dorothy interviewed him for the newspaper. Willis even JUST PUBLISHED A BLOG ENTRY POINTING THIS OUT.
Why is it that lately whenever two people do anything remotely unconventional sexually in a webcomic, someone feels a need to cry rape or sexual abuse/harrassment? Roz’s statement was brilliant and I’m smacking myself for not seeing her point earlier.
I don’t agree with the people who say that Roz is going to wrong way for spreading her ideas about sexual freedom.
The way I see it, she posted a sex tape and the maybe she told three people about it. Even if she planned on it going viral, she is still not going on people faces and yelling at them “GO WATCH MY VIDEO!!!1!!one!”
She posted the video, she shut up about it and just watched the reaction to it unfold around her. How is that in any way shoving her opinion on people’s faces?
It’s not until NOW, when her sister comes to press her about that she shouts.
The way I see it, Roz has been really nonchalant about the whole affair until Robin came in to shove in her face (I don’t think the argument before Robin walked in was that terrible).
As for the rest, I still completely agree with Roz on this issue. As long as it’s consensual, it DOES NOT MATTER with whom she has sex with!
You go, Roz! FIGHT THE POWER WITH YOUR NETHER REGIONS.
I can totally see why she’d be bitter and making dramatic gestures at this point. Sure, maybe it’s not super fair to leave Robin to have to deal with it, but it isn’t fair for Roz to be used as a scapegoat to appease conservative voters, either! I was always a little mixed on Roz in SP! (I’d imagine we were supposed to be) but I honestly feel like she’s been nothing but likable so far in DoA, while remaining totally in-character.
It’s funny that this topic is in today’s comic – my husband and I were having a related conversation yesterday! Well… an argument, not a conversation. Not that this adds to the discussion going on here… umm… o.o
Yeah! How dare a woman exercise her ability to make choices about her own body and life without consulting her family on whether it’s okay to make said choices. That bongo!
Besides, all that would happen according to that doctrine, would be an investigation being launched, which would quickly discover that Joe, being a freshman in college of at least 18 years of age, was of Legal age.
See, the code in question (18 USC 2257 — the Child Protection and Obscenity Enforcement Act) is not about whether or not Joe would be of legal age. It is about whether or not Roz previously determined and documented if Joe was of legal age. It’s not enough that Joe be legal — Roz needs to have proof on file he was legal.
This is the difference between the spirit of the law and the letter, mind. The spirit is ‘preventing underage porn.’ The practice is ‘legal means to shut down an otherwise legal porn studio and send people to jail as a political ploy.’
Which, you know, is exactly what could happen to Roz if she posted a sex video without documenting it.
Yup — and further requires anyone who distributes or produces said pornography have documented proof that they did due diligence about it. If Roz doesn’t have proper proof that she checked and recorded Joe’s age before the video was shot and posted (say, by having Joe show his ID to the camera before they started the sex in the rough cut, or else having a notarized copy of the ID or the like in her files, which would include a date), she could be subject to criminal penalties. Like up to five years in prison, fines, or both.
Remember, adults! No posting of the amateur porn without keeping records, or else the government will get you!
I think Roz is going to make herself the “extremist” to force Robin to either lead a sexual liberation movement or watch her political career crash and burn. MLK Jr. and Gandhi are the most famous protestors of our time, and both of them succeeded in part due to a contrast- King vs. Malcolm X and Black Power and Gandhi’s peacefulness vs. British violence. Roz is the Malcolm to what she hopes will be Robin’s MLK Jr., and if the backlash over her tape escalates too far she can give her sister a whole “death threats vs. legitimate political campaign” theme too. It’s not exactly an agreement, but it’s pretty close- Roz knows her sister well enough to plan this, just like she read Joe well enough to know how he’d feel about their sex tape being more than another entry in some porn site’s “amateur” section.
That’s actually one of my biggest issues with Roz as shown so far. It’s manipulating people and treating them like tools instead of thinking agents. Does Joe care about his being used as a tool for a political statement? Of course not, he’s Joe. He probably wouldn’t have cared even if Roz had made it clear the video wasn’t just for wank material. But he never had the choice to say “Yeah, that’s cool. I don’t mind at all. Let’s get to the sexing.” And if we go with the idea of her doing this to manipulate Robin, then that’s in the same category. Treating people like tools instead of agents.
Maybe she feels just talking with her sister won’t accomplish anything and that she was forced to take this kind of extreme measure. I know I’m probably sounding harsh for this, but I really don’t have a lot of sympathy for that. There are other avenues available to get your point across without treating people like tools.
I guess it’s just the idea of “It’s better to ask for forgiveness, than to ask for permission” annoys me. Granted, Roz isn’t asking for forgiveness here so the saying doesn’t quite match up. It just seems like she believes it will all work out after the fact and that makes whatever she does now okay. Which, quite frankly, is childish and arrogant. And also kind of terrifying.
What I was getting at was the fact that Roz never seemed to have told him the video was for a political statement instead of just wank material. Joe wasn’t given all the information involved into what he agreed to. Does he care after the fact? No. We’ve seen that. Would he have cared if he actually had been given all the relevant information involved? Probably still not. My issue was that Joe, as far as I’ve seen, never had the option to exercise his judgement and say “Yeah, I don’t mind. Let’s get to it.” Joe was dealt with as a tool instead of a thinking agent. That he’s shown he doesn’t care after the fact is irrelevant.
Yes, he wouldn’t have cared if he had known Roz was going to use the tape for a political agenda. I’ve never said he wouldn’t. But as far as I’ve seen in the comics, he was only given “sex tape put on the Internet” and not what she was going to be using that tape to do. The fact that he doesn’t care after the fact doesn’t change that he was never given the option to say he didn’t care before the sexing started. It’s a little like signing a contract when someone has cleverly hidden something in there so you don’t notice everything you’re agreeing to.
I’m sorry if I’ve been confusing, but I really can’t be any clearer than this. I don’t mean to be a bother, but I’m seeing I have been. I don’t like causing conflict or causing people grief, so I’ll just stay off the comments until more comics are put up. I apologize for frustrating you.
You are frustrating because I just linked you something written by the writer that explicitly sets up Joe as knowing this was more than wank fodder. He was proactively warned that this was for an agenda and he said (via sarcasm) that HE DID NOT CARE. This was not before the fact, this was after it. If he had’ve said “Wait, what agenda was this?” and Roz was dishonest with him, THEN you’ve got a leg to stand on with this. As it is…. yeah.
The Tumblr chat I posted isn’t canon. It didn’t really happen. I only wrote it to underline how I feel it’s absurd that “having an agenda” is something that apparently matters.
Ooooh, that nasty Roz, she’s trying to ACCOMPLISH something! Did JOE know that she’s trying to ACCOMPLISH something? I bet if he did, he totally wouldn’t have helped make that sex video!
No, that’s ridiculous.
It’s dumb that “agenda” is a dirty word, as if being proactive is a sin. Hey, you know what? If you do something on tape that’s against your political beliefs? I think that’s on you, not the person who “had a political agenda.”
Invisiblemoose, Sam is making his opinion known, and while you may not agree with it, the fact is he is making a fair point that isn’t stating that Joe wasn’t A) Asked permission to post it, and B) Told what it would be used for. Sam is pointing out that Roz appears to be treating people as tools, not people.
I’m not asking you to agree with this point, I’m asking you to not be disrespectful to Sam’s posts since he is making a legitimate point that hasn’t been covered in the comic YET.
I apologize in advance if I have:
Offended you, invisiblemoose. It was not my intention.
Misrepresented your point, Sam; although, I am fairly certain I haven’t.
And if I have over stepped any boundaries, Mr. Willis, since it is not my job to tell people what to do. I just hate seeing people getting raged at when they are making a legitimate point.
The only boundaries you stepped over was perpetuating the annoying lie that Roz didn’t ask Joe permission to post the video online. Please read the front page.
I have read the front page. I know Roz asked Joe permission. I knew that before you had to post that as news, which I agree you shouldn’t have had to do. I obviously didn’t state myself correctly if you thought I was trying to say Roz didn’t ask permission. I’m sorry for that. You are easily one of my favourite webcomic writers/artists and I would never go out to intentionally cause a problem.
If that is what Sam is trying to say then he’s not putting that through.
But to answer the point you have just put forward? Sure, Roz used Joe. But guess what, he used her back. And both consented to being used. It’d be different if Roz was being deceitful, but as it stands I’m not of the opinion that using someone is a problem at all.
Fair enough point. You are absolutely right, Joe did use her too. I didn’t think of that right away. My apologies. You make a valid arguement, and I bow down to you on this matter. Thank you for clarifying that for me.
I’d actually say that since Joe dealt with Roz as a thinking agent toward the goal of having sex with her, then there really wasn’t any “using” on his part as I’m defining it here. I’ve been using it defined as coercive in some manner. Since I have not been getting that across, I’m again sorry that I haven’t been explaining myself well.
I also have no issue with Roz having an agenda. David is absolutely right in that being proactive is not some kind of sin. That was never a concern of mine. My concern was that Joe was apparently given “let’s tape this and put it on the Internet! That’ll be hot!” instead of the real reason Roz wanted it on the Internet, which appears so far to be toward making a political point.
Does Joe care after the fact about it? No. We’ve seen that. Would Joe have cared if Roz told him before the sexing started? Still no. But he never had the chance to say he didn’t care about the tape’s real purpose. He was not dealt with as a thinking agent, but as a tool.
People should not be dealt with as tools, but always thinking agents that one must come to terms with. This may be something we’ll just have to agree to disagree on. I just wanted to make myself perfectly clear since I was causing confusion.
Dammit. So much for laying off the comments. I’ll be signing out now. If I’m still confusing, I’m sorry and will address anything that was unclear. If not, laters.
both. And if she wanted re-election then she is hurt by the loss so the quotation marks are inappropriate.
Overall I think they’re both being self-absorbed obnoxious twits. I prefer my self-absorbed obnoxious twits to be of the practical variety rather than principled. The practical ones can actually accomplish something, the principled ones are basically “I’m a special snowflake unique in the world, and so is everyone else. But I’m the most unique and special!”
If the only reason voters decide to NOT to vote for Robin IS because her little sister is a camwhore, then those people get the govenment they deserve.
To paraphrase Ben Franklin, “He who would see others’ freedoms taken because they offended him deserves to one day be offended by the loss of his own”.
it’s a phrase to describe a general attitude. She does say her sexual freedom is important to her above all else. Right in this strip. Considering the way the world is I hope that attitude is hyperbole.
And I don’t know anything about Robin’s politics. I know losing would hurt her.
But it isn’t THE MOST serious thing in the world. There are plenty of things that are far more serious. I’d even let it pass if the issue was about a more extreme case of “Sexual freedom” , but valuing “the right to not be looked down on for my sexual tendencies” above ALL ELSE is at least a bit extreme. Thus the claim by jason that they hope it is Hyperbole. It probably is. That doesn’t make the hope any less valid.
It’s also no more right for her to cause “harm” to someone else for the sake of her freedoms than it is for people to think that those freedoms are “wrong”. It isn’t her decision to make when the risk applies to someone else, any more than it should be society’s decision how much she is “allowed” to have sex. It’s hypocritical to try to make a point that she should be allowed to make her own decisions without being shamed for it by knowingly making a decision that has significantly negative consequences for someone else, even if it SHOULDN’t have that effect.
Society is to blame for her having to make the decision to begin with. She’s to blame for the choice she made. It’s hardly an unforgivable choice, but as far as I’m concerned, it was still a bad one.
There was only one claim being staked in that video, and it wasn’t by Roz. It was by Joe. Joe was staking the claim that he is willing to Joe anyone… with his penis.
How dare she pretend she enjoys sex if it damages her sisters career. She should be in the kitchen reading the bible and baking a cake at the same time, for Jesus.
It’s as bad as the women who think they can enjoy sex for reasons other then babies. By the way they can’t. The female orgasm is a myth made by women to get men the off them when they thinks they are baby ready or are accomplish their evil plans. (evil plans are the only non-baby reason women have sex)
Next thing you know, she’ll come out as bi and that certainly would damage her sisters career. Cause we all hate them gays with how they spend all day plotting against our society.
I thought I’d just join in where I no feel the majority of the commenters are after I read all the replies.
I’d like to think most of the comments about Roz’s actions are more directed toward the balance between individuality and responsibility toward other people, and whether or not a line was crossed somewhere on it, rather than shots against women’s equality.
One guy called her a whore. “Eric”. And he said it was for posting the video under her real name was sexually loose behaviour. Don’t call us out for shit we HAVEN’T done,.
Hmm, well apparently you haven’t been posting (at least, not under the name gaspacho). But there are more than a few post who are judging her for posting the video.
Good lord, this comic officially has more comments in it than this entire webcomic has pages. Then again so do most of the others, From what I know, your average is about 250 :3
I finally figured out what bugs me most about Roz. It’s the waste of her “activist” talents. She could have brought forth so much more serious social matters like poverty, domestic abuse, the environment, things like that. I’m not saying sexual freedom isn’t a problem, but It’s not exactly at the top of the list of societal problems we face in the world today.
Quick! What are you doing here arguing on a webcomic discussion thread when you could also personally be addressing these concerning societal problems!
…or perhaps it’s possible to multi-task the various issues out there in the world. If not then I couldn’t complain about the phone call I have at work making me miss lunch because my neighbour broke his leg. He couldn’t complain because around the corner someone is in traction after being run down by a car. That person couldn’t complain because at least they didn’t get left in a vegetative state like the person in their ward in the hospital, etc etc etc.
Besides that, sexual freedom is a pretty fucking important thing and much more far-reaching than ‘I can put up a sex video if I want to’.
I think it’s more than that. Roz is basically saying ‘I don’t want to be forced to look pretty for the camera every moment of every day. I want to live my life how I choose, and what you say shouldn’t change that.’ In a way she’s also disconnecting her actions from her sister in that statement, but her opponents would still link them regardless.
Personally, I am in favor of Roz. Slandering based on relatives is like saying [Removed for the sake of not appearing racist/sexist/religionist/whatever], the person shouldn’t be blamed, but the PEOPLE often reflect on the person regardless because of a (sometimes extremely flimsy) connection.
Sorry for the DP, but… If I were gay or a woman, Mike would officially be on my ‘Crush List’ and that happens to be an extremely short list as is (even with the sexual innuendos and such that most webcomics and such leave all over.)
We all love Mike. Probably because he makes absolutely no apologies for his behaviour, and subverts every notion of the “Jerk with a heart of gold”. And he’s awesome.
There is nothing special about being an individualist, pretty much everyone is these days, I mean, when was the last time ANYONE ever claimed to be a conformist?
A great number of populist conservative political viewpoints claim just that: they are “representing the will of the people” and that they’re “fighting the liberal progressive agenda” of their opponents. In other words, they’re proud to be conformist.
This isn’t about how you should ONLY be nonconformist or else you’re just a sheep in the flock or wahtever. Jason just wanted to judge Roz for “putting herself on a camera for a period most would choose not to be” and I was calling BS on that.
and why can’t I? I can judge anyone I want anyway I want. It only affects the way I look at them, it’s not as though I could punish them. And anyone else has the ability to judge me.
Never said you couldn’t, sunshine. Just like I get to call BS on it if you post them in a forum. Stop crying freedom of speech on YOUR opinions when I’m doing the exact same thing.
Sexual freedom is a good litmus test for the other issues because it’s so fundamentally opposed to most conservatives’ worldview. Domestic violence can be opposed in theory by people who will bias the court system in favor of male attackers, thus supporting it in practice. Poverty aid can be unequally distributed if the folks in charge of it are biased against single moms, unwed couples, pre-marital sex, etc. The environment isn’t a cause Roz can do something like this for, and I bet she privately supports it as much as she can.
Not that she thought about any of this, of course, but since the debate started with a post about things she didn’t think about I don’t consider that an issue.
Every Roz comic thus far in DOA has been amazing and inspiring. I didn’t like her much in Shortpacked! and wasn’t sure what role she would play here, but ever since her Planned Parenthood scene I’ve loved her character here. She fights for what she believes in and doesn’t take shit for it. Whether you believe in what she preaches or not, that’s inspirational in my book.
I don’t believe there will be a need for that, I doubt there will be all that many new comments from this time on as the newest comic will show up in under 6 hours from when I post this comment.
If Robin’s election gets screwed, sure I’ll be upset. I like Robin as a state rep. Roz also has a point, but she did say something stupid, mainly the sexual freedom above all else line. That’s just a priority check. Yes, sexual freedom is important and I respect her conviction, but that’s a bit overkill. She’s a well-intentioned extremist. If this does nosedive Robin’s career, it would be exactly what she’s fighting against, and I think Roz would actually step forward in Robin’s defense at that point. Can’t say for sure; not my comic. That’s just my understanding of events and characters as they are.
You’re right. Sorry Aizat. I was just meaning to comment on that “Glitch in the allspark = gay” comic on Shortpacked!, and I didn’t think about how I wrote it, which was insensitive. Sorry Aizat.
Whoa. I read this comic friday night, checked out the <150 comments, was amused/annoyed by the debate, and got on with my weekend. Popped back Sunday – yikes! We webcomic nerds sure love to argue
My tuppeny's worth: Roz's point is that society shouldn't punish Robin for her sister's actions. Roz didn't 'hurt' Robin with her actions – the voters might hurt Robin with their actions, and that’s wrong. Simple.
Also: ladies are allowed to like having sex. Just throwing that out there.
If it’s not, it should be. o.O This is a touch ridiculous. I’m all for spirited debate… but seriously? Did Milholland write this storyline or something?
My only problem with Roz’s argument is the way she’s making it.. not the tape, I’m fine with that (even if she didn’t have Joe’s permission JUST FOR YOU, WILLIS). No, my problem is that she had an eloquent reason behind it, but it appears that the video was posted without context; without something tagged on to the end of it to say ‘this is me being free. You can’t take this away from me. Ever.’ the only way to have known this was for her agenda (boy, that does sound like a dirty word…) is to have been in this particular class, as the newspaper article actually detailing her side hasn’t happened.
I’m just waiting for the classic ‘did no one watch the video to the end?’ porn joke, really.
Here's an entertaining cite at the bottom of the first page
Josh Gerstein@joshgerstein.bsky.social ⋅ 17h
JUST IN: Milwaukee Judge Hannah Dugan moves to dismiss federal criminal case against her for allegedly helping immigrant hide from ICE. Her lawyers say she's protected by official acts & judicial immunity and 10th Amendment. Doc: storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.us...
Where did Hollywood go so wrong? I thought movies were supposed to be an escape from reality, a chance to put your worries aside and not have to think about any underlying ideas or concepts. Well, not anymore.
theonion.com/you-can...
It's not a new argument, of course, but Chesterton dismissed it effectively in 1908.
"You will hear everlastingly... this argument that the rich man cannot be bribed. The fact is, of course, that the rich man is bribed; he has been bribed already. That is why he is a rich man."
Aaron Rupar@atrupar.com ⋅ 1d
Hawley dismisses Trump lining his pockets with his memecoin: "Listen, I think nobody believes that Donald Trump can be bought. I mean, what does Donald Trump need more money for?"
wilbur, savvy enough to know he's in a comic strip but still not a great actor, awkwardly lifts a muffin up into frame so that we, the audience, understand that he has a muffin right now, which is very important narratively, but he's not really selling it well as an organic, human action
confirming that the reason there's been no Galaxy Version female characters in Blokees until now is that they felt they needed to make Round Lady Thighs For Ladies
It's #webcomicday? We have a special day???
Well, my name is Pat McHoarney and I draw 69 Mouse-Ear Blvd, a multigenerational story about women who all have sexy legs and probably other features. There was a grandmother, but she wasn't hot and so she died off-panel.
Elizabeth Holmes is in prison for defrauding investors through her blood-testing company, Theranos. Her partner, Billy Evans, is now trying to raise money for a company that describes itself as “the future of diagnostics.” nyti.ms/3FbtZm9
Josh Gerstein @joshgerstein.bsky.social ⋅ 17h
Aaron Rupar @atrupar.com ⋅ 1d
Pavel
@spavel.bsky.social ⋅ 10d
The New York Times @nytimes.com ⋅ 5d
preternia @preternia.com ⋅ 3d
Loading ...
UH OH AGE-DROPPING
Next we’ll be hearing how old Joyce is.
the answer is “not old enough”.
mentally. or psychologically, if you prefer.
Sorta… at least it verified (via her sister’s comment about facing re-election every 2 years) that she was legally elected to the House of Representatives.
VOTE DeSANTO!
She’s legal!
I could totally see Robin using that campaign slogan.
That speech is inspiring.
Yeah! I’m really liking Roz here! I hope we see more of her she’s fun!
Looks like someone pulled the drama tag here too.
On a side note, you became an activist using only a webcam and your nethers?
That’s gotta be a magic trick!
“Lets change society with our reproductive organs!”
“You’re only a rebel from the waist down.”
That is the best kind of rebel.
Rebel femurs!
Really? It comes off as more bratty to me.
Yeah, no kidding.
Roz is destined to be the next Abe Lincoln, rallying us all to free our sex lifes from the tyranny of the missionary position.
In her own twisted way, Roz has just made the ultimate point.
A point that some people might not take very well.
Oh well, life is like that sometimes.
Namely, the pro-life side
I am both pro-fetus and pro-eugenics.
I’m pro-choice — the fetus has the right to choose to hang itself with its umbilical cord if it decides the family it will be born into is full of idiots. 8~)
As someone who was in that situation prior to birth, I must tell you to go cram something in someplace uncomfortable for you.
As someone who was in a similar situation, I say preach it brother/sister.
It’s not like you can remember having one around your neck to be traumatized.
Is it actually any worse than every other dead baby joke just because you were almost the dead baby?
I’m not entirely sure whether I’m being sarcastic or not right now.
But I love dead baby jokes!
Wow. That is… dark.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuchal_cord
don’t worry, with more experience it becomes easier and easier to take these kinds of points.
With my penis.
Activism runs in the family, I guess.
Competency, it would appear, has a greater degree of variance.
Vote Desanto!
Damn your activism!
Vote Desanto!
Our scandels are FAR MORE INTERESTING to read about.
Vote Desanto!
She’ll make you wait! (she’s such a (expletive)in’ lady!)
Vote Desanto!
She’s hotter than Palin!
That actually may get her elected though.
Okay. I gotta say this is a hell of an update. I got pulled right into her speech and then found myself suddenly laughing at the punchline.
Voters never think about the canidates families as human beings or realize how stress they go through every election cycle.
Neither do a lot of politicians, as far as I can tell.
I agree with Roz wholeheartedly. Having said that, it always kind of bugs me in comics when the strip itself is so clearly leaning in one direction.
And that fictional characters always seem to have inspirational speeches ready at a moment’s notice. How long has Roz been rehearsing, exactly?
I do, however, quite like Congressional Aide. Poor guy needs a name, though.
I called him Frank.
Isn’t that Hooper? Looks a lot like him, you know from the Joyce and Walky saga
It’s not.
You mean that zombie guy?
Yah, he looks a lot like him. Can’t see why he isn’t Hooper
Because I’ve said he isn’t like 30 times.
Oh, well, guess that settles it then, haha.
Well, maybe I’ll nickname him Hooper then, lol!
That might cause confusion. Call him Drooper instead.
His name is Nopper. Not-Hooper Nothooper Nooper.
His name is Nooper
How about Pooper Scooper, since it is his job to deal with political shit.
Maybe if you gave him a name people would stop asking if he was Hooper.
His name is Congressional Aide.
His mother calls him Congie.
His friends called him Tim.
@begbert: It’s like he was born for the career he’s in
Is Hooper gay in this continuity?
Did he want to be frank with you? (Sorry, couldn’t resist.)
We should all get aides!
I would imagine Roz has been rehearsing that speech for years. Deep-seated resentment of a relative will do that to you. Probably isn’t the only scripted outburst she’s been stewing over for longer than is healthy.
It was less of a speech and more of a rant when it comes right down to it.
Her having this speech ready makes perfect sense to me. She’s probably been holding this in for a while, with lots of thinking about what she would say if it was time for an argument. Now that it is, she’s gonna let Robin have it.
Well, considering she made the video to get that point across, I think she must have been rehearsing it for a while.
What? Have you never rehearsed a speech about something before? Or is that just me?
No, it’s not just you.
All I can say is that parents can tear up your whole speech into stutters and “All I’m saying is…” fragments. No video used, so it’ll be harder to push your point through.
Parents sure. Tried to use an elaborate speech on mine once. All I managed to get out was a couple poorly chosen curse words that weren’t as shocking as they could have been if my voice wasn’t quivering so.
Siblings though. All the anger, none of the fear.
I regularly give internal speeches about things that annoy me and kind of hope someone will give me a chance to spew them.
LOL! Same here!
Actually, Roz does seem to be the type of person who would practice that sort of thing a lot.
Must not be a fan of Grey’s Anatomy I bet. Those people spew “inspirational” speeches at the end of just about every scene!
i am amazing at pulling horribly hurtful speeches out of my as when someone pisses me of, i have a gift for find the most painful thing i can say to someone
… are you my wife?
It’s looking like Roz made that video in the first place because she knew it would stir things up. She’s had this in mind all along, so yes, it’s incredibly plausible that she’s been planning and rehearsing this speech for some time. It would be more surprising if she DIDN’T have a speech, after arranging to be heard.
Why so sad, Dotty?
She found out she’s wrong to judge Roz?
I’m not sure if Dorothy is going ‘Man, I really mis-judged her’ or ‘Man, this was an *awesome* story and I messed it up’…I’m kind of thinking it’s the second one…
“Man, I really need to stop being so vulnerable to guilt-trips.”
I’m pretty sure she feels guilty about her judgement and agrees with Roz’s intention even if not her methods now that Roz explained it.
She seems like someone who would be progressive and liberal. So she is in a gender equality class, the most appropriate class for feeling guilty about this, and finds out the whole thing was about roz demanding her own independence and sexual freedom in her own way.
Agree with her methods or not I’d be amazed if dotty judged anyone but herself after that.
I hope Dorothy doesn’t change THAT quickly
bam i’m right she rethought he judgement on the issue and judged her own reaction over it.
I really hope she hasn’t suddenly changed her mind about Roz because of this speech. That would be reeealy ‘Easy Evangelism’
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/EasyEvangelism
Age 25 is the peak of DATASS politics.
That depends on the politician, of course.
“Sexual freedom above all else”?
That’s not a good attitude.
Roz loses points on that part of the speech as far as I am concerned, but panel 3 gains way more points to make up for it.
That was my first thought. That’s the most important thing in your life? That’s really kind of pathetic.
That is an attitude to sleep with who you want, how you want, and why you want. It’s an attitude that says you do not get judged or shamed into doing something you don’t want to do because society deems it perverse (like, say, being attracted to a gender that they tell you you shouldn’t like). It’s the freedom to say no, you don’t want to do this certain act with that certain person *and have that answer respected.*
It might not necessarily be ABOVE ALL ELSE to me but I’m not gonna judge someone else for doing so.
Not a good attitude? Really? “I have the right and the ability to do what I want with myself so long as I hurt nobody else, without feeling ashamed and without having to put up with anyone else’s hateful judgmental preening.” I call that a damned sensible attitude. Slut-shaming is one of the worst things you can do to a girl, and it’s far better to fight back against that then to meekly lay down and take it.
…slut shaming is one of the worst things you can do to a girl.
Like, worse than a trash compactor? What?
I don’t see the problem. It’s pretty basic freedom and people will try to make it very limited in a political family that runs in a conservative area where anything can become a scandal.
I’m not sure what you’re saying here. If you mean that Roz should let some things take precedence over sex, I agree, although I interpret that line as including the freedom to not have sex (say, with her husband at his command, which some religions say is a wife’s duty).
If you’re just saying sexual freedom is bad, you’re the one with the bad attitude. Sex is only bad if it’s forced, used to manipulate, or entered into because of manipulation (including if protection isn’t used because one or both partners has lied about being incapable of having children or having an STD). Roz is clean, vehemently pro-protection, and in no way manipulative or deceitful (OK, maybe using Joe to make a political point was a little deceitful, but let’s face it- she probably chose him for her video because she knew he wouldn’t care about the attention or disagree with the message).
No, no, the “above all else” was part of the quote. This one’s good.
If the point was supposed to be sexual freedom is bad, then “above all else” wouldn’t have mattered.
I agree, too. Roz’ priorities need work.
This is the point I thought Roz was trying to make, and I’m glad she finally made it after kind of dancing around the point in her ragings.
I happen to support her viewpoint: her actions didn’t hurt anybody. Will they bite her in the ass sometime in the future? Assuredly. Should they? Probably not.
Actually, it is entirely possible they will hurt Robin. “You’ve got an election every two year for the rest of your life” is only LIKELY if Robin maintains her position. People hate to bet on a loser.
Exactly. Her actions directly hurt Robin, and possibly the school and Joe as well. I’d be so on her side if her side wasn’t blatantly wrong.
I mean, at least if she had actually made progress for her own side she would have SOME ground to stand on but no.
Nobody will remember this even happened as soon as election cycle is over. All this does is leave people who are PROBABLY on her side worse off than they were before.
But they shouldn’t effect Robin, or her. That’s Roz’s point.
That’s true, they shouldn’t. But tough shit, because they do.
And Roz (presumably)Knew that at the time and accepted the consequences. She’s trying to change the world whereas your treating her as if she just blundered into this situation. I don’t think she went about achieving her goal in the best way but she knew the risks going in. Also I imagine getting her sister out of office(whom she obviously opposes) would be a win for her.
Except she accepted consequences to OTHER PEOPLE.
THAT IS NOT HER CALL.
And Re: opposing politics.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indiana%27s_9th_congressional_district
The district actually flipflops back and forth. Given what we know of Robin, she’s more likely to be a democrat who caters towards social conservatism to stay in office.
Yes and that is why I’m not defending what she did. I said I didn’t support what she did IN THE POST YOU RESPONDED TOO.
However her statement that “sex hurts no one is true” People will be hurt by her actions however.
But is it Robin’s call what her little sister is allowed to do with her own body?
She isn’t claiming her actions SHOULDN’T hurt anyone, she is claiming they DON’T and thus she is wrong.
No, the judgments people have about her behavior may hurt her. there is a pretty big difference there.
No your honor, I didn’t kill him, the bullet did after I filed it from my gun.
God this place is just full of bad metaphors.
Look you want to paint Roz as an idiot for her thesis but her thesis is sound.
“Sex is not harmful to anyone if done safely” That is true. Roz feels that all the shame and judgement applied to people who have sex outside of marriage(or a committed relationship) are unfair and someones statues as a “slut” shouldn’t hurt your life and you know what? She’s right about that.
She had a bad plan. Mock her, if you wish, for her plan but her belief that sex isn’t harmful is true.
Consequences include more than just direct consequences. Roz not only knew about these indirect consequences, but was counting on them, which is evident because without those consequences she would not be holding any of the attention she wants to USE to make a statement. These indirect consequences carry a very real chance of damaging Robin’s next election. That is harm done. That is what we are saying.
Anyone who videotapes themselves having sex, and then purposefully releases it online is a self-destructive hussy.
That’s not true at all.
Anyone who videotapes themselves having sex, and then purposefully releases it online WITH THE FULL INTENT OF IT BEING ATTACHED TO THEIR REGULAR IDENTITY is a self destructive hussy. There is plenty of amateur porn online that will never hurt anyone ever.
Wow. That’s a disturbingly misogynistic observation.
How is it misogynistic? The statement applies to both men and women. Releasing a sex-tape purposely online is a self-destructive and slutty act. Whether it be for a rush of adrenaline or excitement from knowing that strangers have seen you bang, or for some strange political statement, purposely releasing a sex tape of yourself to the general public is both a self-destructive act of someone who is sexually loose.
^ First of all, congratulations on adding ‘pedantic’ to ‘judgemental’ and ‘slut-shaming’ to the descriptors that define you with this post you just made, Eric.
Secondly, Fuck you.
Did she release it under her real name? She’s the sister of a congresswoman, she’s not exactly the most easily recognizable person out there. All the hubub was around finding Joe, so it seems more like she released it with her name on it or she released it on a local site where her college peers or local area folk could see it.
And?
How is that not self-destructive behavior? For anything above basic retail, people are going to look her up online before hiring and see a video of her fucking a stranger, and they are probably not going to hire her. Is it wrong to assume prospective employers aren’t going to hire people who release online fuck videos under their real names?
Also, fuck you too.
And that’s not even close to what I was talking about. Where did I ever mention the self-destructive part? AND you’re not even replying to the post where I said those things. But sure, let’s act like both these things are true.
Should Roz care? If anything she’s less likely to WANT to be hired by the kind of judgemental fuck who would look at anything in her private life instead of her merits and ability to perform the designated task.
P.S. when I refer to ‘judgemental fuck’s I’m talking about people like you.
I don’t think having sex with strangers is particularly something that is morally wrong or even “slutty”. I do think that video taping yourself having sex and posting it on the internet under your real name is an act of sexual looseness that most people would describe as slutty. I can’t think of a single instance in reality where this kind of behavior wouldn’t qualify as being a whore. And that’s not a misogynistic statement, as I’m also including sex tapes from male celebrities in my thinking as well. Maybe I am being judgmental there, as most of those sex tapes were stolen and posted online, so it’s not quite the same ballpark in terms of whorish behavior.
But, looking at it from her perspective, in this situation, as a statement against society, it seems a bit circular. The only sexual freedom at stake here is the sexual freedom of being allowed to post videos of yourself fucking on the internet without being judged. It’s an act of escalation that overshadows the main point. She’s acting like a slut in defense of her right to act like a slut because it doesn’t hurt anyone and society needs to accept that. Although the judgmental nature of society makes the entire incident damaging to herself, Joe, and her sister. Of course, given that she’s willing to martyr herself in that matter, more power to her.
And yes, I guess I am a judgmental fuck for saying that given multiple qualified candidates for any normal job that pays above minimum wage, people are going to hire the candidate that doesn’t have an online fuck video posted under their real name. And given the fact that she’s the relative of someone famous, that shit is permanent. On the internet, the first thing people are going to see if they research her is her fucking someone. So, I’m going to assume her statement that her sexual freedom is more important to her above all else is true, as that’s now the most defining statement of her existence to the outside world.
You should really look up slut-shaming and apply that logic to some of your statements. THAT is why you are a judgemental fuck, not because you rightly pointed out that most employers are going to also be judgemental fucks.
Also, for someone who insists that this is all about equality between men and women for being sluts, you are sure focussing on Roz’s problems and not Joe’s. Who, if you missed it before, was completely consenting to this.
I’m focusing on Roz because she’s the one who took the time to video tape the entire thing and put it online. I’m going to assume Joe thought he wouldn’t be identified, and probably went with it due to the voyeuristic sexual thrill of having a fuck video of himself floating around online. Also, because as he stated, the kind of chick who wants to post an online fuck video must be crazy awesome in the sack. Which makes him more of a slut than Roz I suppose, if we are to take her reasons for posting an online fuck video at face value. Of course, it’s clear from the comics that Joe is a massive whore, but that’s an established fact, not something that anyone is disputing.
And I don’t see anything about what slut-shaming has to do with online videos. Roz isn’t a slut because she fucks random strangers. She’s a fully grown adult, and it’s her right to bang other consenting adults. She’s a slut because she posted a fuck video on the internet, on purpose. If she’s not doing this to get a voyeuristic sexual thrill, then we have to take her reasoning at face value once again, which is convoluted and appears to just be the ability to put fuck videos online without it hurting her or being judged. Of course, she seems aware that it will hurt her and she will be judged, but her argument is that it shouldn’t. Maybe she’s right. I think her point is undercut by the fact that an online fuck video is floating around and that it will be her defining characteristic to the outside world for pretty much forever, unless society progresses to the point where public fuck videos are so common-place and non-taboo that nobody cares about them. Regardless, posting online fuck videos is looked down upon by almost everyone as something whores do.
If you’re calling a woman a whore, and she’s not taking money for sex… then, yeah, you’re pretty much a misogynist.
QUOTED FROM ERIC:
“And I don’t see anything about what slut-shaming has to do with online videos.”
“[Roz]’s a slut because she posted a fuck video on the internet, on purpose.”
“Anyone who videotapes themselves having sex, and then purposefully releases it online is a self-destructive hussy.”
MMMM-HM.
“If she’s not doing this to get a voyeuristic sexual thrill”
Who’s to say that she’s not? You seem to know a lot about what Roz and Joe are going to be doing, as well as their prospective employers
“posting online fuck videos is looked down upon by almost everyone as something whores do.”
Projecting much? Besides, what’s your point?
I have to say, i don’t have anything against Roz posting a sex video IN AND OF ITSELF. I don’t even have a problem with the fact that she used her real name. Is it “self destructive”? Sure. Should it be? I’d say no. But it is. And Roz knew that she WOULD be judged poorly for it. Still, she was trying to make a point, and those are her consequences, so it’s her business. It IS fair though to say that it is going to hurt her down the road. Saying it SHOULD would be wrong, but it’s REALISTIC to point out that it WILL. It’s also fair to be upset with her for making her point at someone else’s expense, EVEN IF they don’t agree with that person. If the stakes were higher than “being looked down on” then i doubt anyone would really disagree with this. Regardless of what SHOULD happen, she did know full well that she would be hurting others by trying to make her point. It may or may not be forgivable depending on the person, but it is reasonable to not like that she did it the way she did.
1. Joe is not hurt. Didn’t you hear? Joe is making out like a bandit in this deal.
With his penis.
2. I don’t think she agrees with the politics of her sister anyway. So she is pushing a political message she believes in and getting publicity while lowering the pull of a politician that is against her political beliefs.
So neither of the victims are going to count for this one because one isn’t a victim at all and the other is possibly intended for multiple purposes.
Hey, all of you people trying to slut-shame Roz here? Go fuck yourselves, the lot of you. She’s not allowed to indulge in her sexual freedom because it might inconvenience someone else who wasn’t even involved? Again, go fuck yourselves, the lot of you.
This will “most assuredly” hurt her down the road? That load of shit only makes sense if you start from the dumbass idea that sex is somehow harmful in and of itself. And throwing Joe *and* the school in there, as if throwing Robin in wasn’t already bad enough? Shit’s getting smellier.
And sneering at Roz because she had the audacity to actually put on a graphic protest demonstration to point out all of this? That not only paints you as stupid prudish slut-shamers, but also shows that you missed the point by at least a mile. “Oh, how dare she make her point while knowing what her point was?”
You might be my new hero.
Mine too. And let’s not forget that every “consequence” they talked about is a result of society’s perception of sex and thus going to be a total non-issue if Roz succeeds, so they can’t even call it bad judgment if they pretend not to care about sex per se.
If girls posting amateur sex videos online actually changed society’s view on sexuality, then America would have been the free utopia of sex times about five years after the internet was created.
Just saying. I’m fine with her sleeping around, and honestly don’t care if she posts stuff online. But it’s not going to change anything. Right now, she’s just kind of attention whoring. She has a well-known older sister and has always been in the shadow. For all we know, she could just be acting out and trying to get attention. She claims it’s for some “sexual revolution” but unless she suddenly gains alien powers that lets her control the masses through online sex videos (which I’d fully support), all she did was join the classy ranks of Paris Hilton, Pamela Anderson, and others who have sex videos floating around. And we see they changed society’s idea of sex, didn’t they.
Fine with her message, but I can’t really defend her plan. It wasn’t well thought out, and stinks more of self-serving attention than actual change.
There is a difference between being allowed to do something and not being shamed or ridiculed by anybody for it. People seem to conflate the two a lot.
Also, I’m rather confused as to why “prude” is supposed to be a bad thing.
It’s the ‘self-righteous’ part at the start that all too often shows up people take exception to. If you object to sex videos, don’t watch them.
Which would be a greater point if there were any shortage of self-righteousness on either side, or if anyone would have had to have actually watched the video in order to be launched into this campus-wide debate about sexual mores and the rightness of promiscuity. (Or… should you not read newspaper articles about sex tapes, either?)
Let’s try this again.
I’m not telling you that you’re a bad person for being prudish (if that’s what you are) even though I personally do not wish to be a prude.
If you can avoid telling others whose acts you personally do not approve of that they are bad people? Then I have no problem with you.
Sexual freedom means you are free to do what you want, and that includes nothing.
(This without getting into the fact that it seems mighty strange for the side who says you shouldn’t judge people for any sort of sexual behavior they may engage in… would use prude as an insult.)
I searched this article and as of just before I typed this post the word ‘prude’ came up 4 times. Twice by you, once by me in response to you and one sarcastically calling Joe a prude. Where are you getting this from?
Okay, never thought I’d say this, but I officially love Roz now.
It occurs to me that no one would really care about Roz’s sex video if it wasn’t for Robin anyway. So if Roz’s actions end Robin’s career Roz’s message will probably end up getting lost. I wonder if she thought of that?
The road of good intentions often paved by negative perception.
Her “point” is definitely piggybacking on her sister’s fame.
Her method hinges on the fact that people care about the sex life of famous people and their immediate family.
So in a way she is exploiting her sister to make a point.
But we are all supposed to overlook it and focus on the sexual liberation. Fine, lets do that. She demonstrates she is free to have sex. Shocking revelations for the 23rd century.
In the meantime her sister’s political position is gutpunched (Or not, because by deus ex machina this stunt will suddenly loss importance or actually help her sister’s campaign) because the general public have the freedom to choose a different candidate that more closely represents their morals, however outdated they may seem to others.
So hey, in reality this stunt would end with her screwing her sister and just rehashing the fact that different people have different opinions about sex. In the words of a different girl whose sexual exploits became famous only because of who she is related to: “That’s hot!”
“She demonstrates she is free to have sex. Shocking revelations for the 23rd century.”
Tell that to Joyce, and everyone in her pre-college years who sheltered her and all feed each other the same BS about petals.
THEN tell that to all the other Joyces in the world.
Quit non-slut shaming.
I seriously cannot tell if you are being serious.
That’s probably because you are taking this WAY to seriously.
What, it’s ‘just a comic’? Should I ‘not look too far into it’? Heaven forbid that there is a message to learn from here, or that the comments I disagree with aren’t made by people who would also judge people in the real world?
Do you honestly believe that culture exists in a fucking vacuum?
You have no idea what culture is. Ive been around the world kid. From Germany to Russia to Egypt to Korea, Iraq Afghanistan, China, it would take me forever to name them all. Hell Ive been to more countries than I have been to states in my own country. Hell, Ive been to more countries than America HAS states. Ive seen more cultures than the large majority of people will in their entire life. This has nothing to do with culture, this has to do with a little college kid with his head shoved up his ass.
No, no one in the real world act like the devils you have imagined. Except people like you of course. What I find hilarious is no matter how many of ‘you’ I run into, in every country and speaking every language, not one of you can ever identify how you are all a different flavor of the exact same thing.
Oh you have different beliefs, that’s for sure. but you are the exact same thing as those bible thumping kooks who say kids have committed a mortal sin and are going to hell for kissing.
Because any one, of any degree of opposition or free thinking that disagrees with you becomes the ‘devil’. Or in your termage the ‘slut smasher’.
Religion kooks tell them they are going to hell and refuse to look at or take into consideration anything they say, twist their words, usually poorly, to fit the image of the ‘devil’ enemy they are so ‘valiantly’ fighting against in order to devalue them and their ideas as a person.
You say ‘Fuck you’ to them and refuse to listen to or value anything they say, twist their words, usually poorly, in order to fit the image of the ‘slut-shamer’.
Slut shamers, disvalue any ideas, thoughts or expressions, and the very value of being a person from those deemed sluts.
The only one doing any shaming here is you.
You are incredibly aggressive and almost appear to be a serial bully, harrassing anybody who expresses any beliefs that differ from your own, and twisting and painting everything they say into being slut-shaming, when it is clearly, not.
Identifying someone correctly as being ‘sexually-loose’ and calling them by the slang use of the term ‘slut’ is not slut smashing. Slut smashing requires more than identification of the ‘slut’, it requires ‘smashing’ them.
Identifying percieved poor choices, pointing out mistakes, and disagreement is NOT slut smashing, pointing out someones actions are perceived to be self destructive is NOT slut smashing.
Being overly hostile, rude, telling people to fuck themselves for their thoughts and choices, harrassing them for expressing themselves and disvaluing their thoughts feelings and expressions without even attempting to understand them, BECAUSE of something they’ve been labeled as, which may or may not even be true…
Is most definitely smashing. the pretext that comes before it is irrelevent.
Slut smashing, gay smashing, Christian smashing, Muslim smashing….
Intolerance is intolerance. Doesnt matter what colour or flavour you try to give it. It still stinks.
Why should Roz take someone else into consideration, like her sister, when that might have some manner of impact on her personal freedoms?
Its not called not being a slut, it has nothing to do with anything slut related, its called not being a self centered asshole. Also known as being a responsible adult.
Knowing how much you should bend for someone else, and when its too much and its time to put a foot down is also part of being a responsible adult. Its not a one way road, its not dog eat dog. There is more to it than trample on others or meekly lay down and be trampled on. Just because someone disagrees with you on this particular subject does not automatically turn them into the slut shaming satan mold you have created for everyone who disagrees with you.
Kids don’t see that. Because kids are dumb. They lack the experience but have no lack of passion.
This is why ten years from now a real world wpuld look back at herself and laugh about what a moron she was. And NO, it wont have anything to do with having sex with multiple partners. And you will too. Though, before you get your mind in a tizzy no, it wont have anything to do with this here, thats not what I’m implying. That would be ridiculous.
Unless, of course, you are really just throwing a fit because you are a fat chick and thus emotionally devastated at the thought of being deprived of a good Joeing from me to prove your sexual freedom.
Relax I was joking. Im no fat shamer. Fat chicks can be sexually freed by me too. As long as you fall within the proper parameters.
Just go online and fill out DA form 69, include a picture proving you are an appropriately ‘cute’ fat chick, your dimensions fitting the proper proportions showing that even though you are fat you still have, you know, curves, and aren’t beach ball in shape…. Not because I’m shallow of course, they just…. tend to roll, ever tried to spear a doughnut rolling down a hill? Not easy. Eyes get poked…. Not pretty.
Email it to the address on the top of the form and you will get a response on where to meet me for the filming.
Oh, and if you could put on a whale costume that would be great, I’m sorta doing a save the whales gig, and I figured since you were kind of an activist too you wouldn’t mind helping killing two birds with one stone.
Theres a button inside the flipper, just push it at your climax, and it will activate the blowhole in the costume for the finale.
Ooh, and try to make whale noises too.
hahaohwow.jpg
Wow, I was actually going to respond to this condescending attack addressing the points you brought up right up until the last few paragraphs.
So tell me, None, when is Roz allowed to expect that she has the same rights as everyone else? Or, as she herself put it in today’s strip, how long does she have to wait? Your long screed sounds like nothing but an excuse to pretend that you’re not really just slut-shaming her.
Believe me, I would not try to slut-shame a fictional character. For obvious reasons.
She obviously has the rights to sleep with whoever she wants. I do not find her actions controversial in that aspect.
My whole issue is with her methods.
There are literally at least thousands of other amateur porn pictures and videos out there. WHY was her video special in this case? Because of her sister. Her method of activism exploits her sister’s political position more than “Billy Beer” ever did.
She is campaigning for a cause that everybody but the “hicks” she hates so much already tacitly tollerates or completely approves. With a method no more advanced than something Paris Hilton would come up with.
You would think that if this is her cause she would be more thoughtful and done something more meaningful and arranged it in a way that didn’t hinge on her sister’s fame or that ended with the fallout landing on her sister’s lap.
She may as well have released a spy video of her sister getting a facial.
So hey, good job for her.
invisiblemoose, Joyce’s parents may not have prepared her daughter for the conflicts of the outside world, but they had the religious freedom to fill her head with ideals about petals. Freedom doesn’t just go both ways, it goes in all ways.
I know they do, None. The point is that not EVERYONE thinks that people are free to have sex. Hence why Roz feels she needs to make a statement the way she did.
Not everyone HAS to think that people are free to have sex. Not as long as the governmental system holds in place to allow for sexual freedom regardless of the opinions of people who disapprove of it.
The Scarlet Letter is no longer an issue unless you want to closely associate with “hicks”. And these hicks have their own freedom to BE hicks.
And the only way Roz is associated with them is through her sister.
None, you’re acting like freedom of opinion exists in a vacuum. Yes, people have a right to disagree with other people being given rights like sexual freedom, but government can’t stop them from punishing others for exercising their rights without interfering with other rights, and democratic governments are always at risk of being controlled and altered by people who oppose certain rights. Roz is pushing for social change, not because she opposes freedom of opinion but because she opposes a particular opinion and its consequences for people who don’t share it, and she wants to create a world where it is powerless.
In modern american society there is recourse if you want to carry out a legal activity even if others disapprove of it.
But her intentions do not concern me. She is free to call those that disagree with her sexual practices hicks just like they are free to call her a slut. And both sides of the argument are free to attempt to change the other side’s opinion.
The issue here is that Roz used her sister to promote her agenda. Without her sibling her video would just be one more amateur porn video.
Her stunt showed thoughtless as her sister is the one who will truly face the controversial fallout of her actions.
If she truly cared about the cause and her sister she should have found an alternative that didn’t exploit her sister and that had her cause as the focus of the attention. But she didn’t.
She’s….25? wow!
I mean 27, sorry
25,27 what’s the difference? She’s pushing 30 anyway.
As someone who is 27, I have a vague dislike of this comment.
Eh, 27’s still young though. So is 30. I’m 22 and even I realize that.
Sorry about that. I should really watch what I say.
27 huh? You’re practically jailbait compared to me.
I don’t remember, has it been stated that this is Robin’s first term in congress? She could easily be in her mid thirties, if she’s been re-elected a few times – or if she didn’t win her first bid for office. Her aide only says she ran when she was 25, not that she was elected when she was 25.
as far as im concerned, aide guy is known as scotty
SIGH. You don’t change the system like that. That’s extremist behavior.
It’d be like if I wanted to prove America’s medical system is crappy, so I cause a widespread pandemic that causes all the hospitals to be overtaxed with patients. It’s idiotic and the message just gets lost in the controversy and screaming.
Well, no it’s not, because your pandemic would be making other people sick and not just Morally Outraged.
It’s not a perfect metaphor, but the point stands. She can have her ‘sexual freedom’ without resorting to these antics, especially when these antics devolve into ‘she posted it up because she’s an attention whore/slut’ where the general populace is concerned, and her actual message is lost in he controversy.
Of course, most people are inclined to agree with her because the strip depicts her as heroic, what with Dorothy’s ashamed look and all. I just see someone who’s resorting to absurdly problematic behavior to present her case in a flawed manner.
Where’s the problematic behavior? Because people think she’s a slut, Roz is in the moral wrong? Is an act not moral until everyone is ok with it?
As far as “extreme action” goes, do you disagree with the actions of the American revolutionaries? Or any revolutionaries, for that matter? All revolutionaries are “heavily” invested in a social system, after all. But did they choose to be invested? No. They were born that way.
What’s dangerous about your logic is it is very general, very broad. Anything too passionate, illegal, or “extreme” should never ever be committed. A fine way to let tyranny reign.
That’s not what I said. Whether she is considered by many to be immoral is irrelevant.
You seem to be missing my point. I think she can express her views without doing harm to those around her. It shouldn’t impact others, only herself. By doing this she has caused problems for the school, for Robin, and potentially for Joe (even though he agreed to it, I would almost say he was manipulated into it, because… well, Joe being Joe and all). There are ALWAYS methods of getting your message across while not causing problems for people associated with you.
What’s dangerous about YOUR logic is that anytime someone disagrees with the majority, or indeed, with anyone else, they are allowed to commit extreme acts to ‘prove their point.’ A fine way to let anarchy reign. See, I can play this strawman game myself. It’s an empty argument and I expect better.
“I expect a better caliber of argument on the internet”
We need a new name for a burn that bad.
“(even though he agreed to it, I would almost say he was manipulated into it, because… well, Joe being Joe and all)”
Yeah, it’s like the time I was manipulated into eating pizza, by being offered pizza. I strongly suspect the person who offered it to me knew I liked pizza, and offered it to me on purpose.
That’s not what I said. Whether she is considered by many to be immoral is irrelevant.
Perception of immorality is incredibly relevant, my dear disembodied internet phantom.
Your argument is that Roz is acting incorrectly as she is hurting those around her, yes? And how is she hurting people around her? In engaging in something that people consider immoral (uploading the sex video), it may socially harm Joe and Robin by affecting peoples’ perception of him, correct? This is especially harmful to Robin’s career because her constituency would perceive Roz’s actions as reflective of Robin’s inability to keep her family on the moral path.
So, in effect you are arguing Roz should not act as she does since it offends people too much (which is where all of this “harm” comes from). Is there any other way that Roz is hurting people other than moral outrage of the sexual act and Roz’s ardent (and completely verbal) defense of it?
You seem to be missing my point. I think she can express her views without doing harm to those around her. It shouldn’t impact others, only herself. By doing this she has caused problems for the school, for Robin, and potentially for Joe (even though he agreed to it, I would almost say he was manipulated into it, because… well, Joe being Joe and all).
What if any expression of these views, even if solely verbal, caused this same sort of upheaval for Robin? Would it then be wrong for Roz to express her views at all?
In addition, you have failed to address my thought on revolutionaries. A revolution greatly impacts other peoples’ lives (especially when they *end* them!)
Are all revolutions against government wrong, as they cause a great upheaval against a social system one is invested in?
And again, was it anybody’s choice to be so invested in the system to begin with? Where, then, is the moral prerogative to act in accord with it?
There are ALWAYS methods of getting your message across while not causing problems for people associated with you.
When one acts, it always affects other people. If people do not like the way you act, it can indirectly “hurt” other people in one way or another. And there’s the most dangerous part of your argument – the use of the word “always.” You’re applying a generalized idea (“don’t cause problems for other people associated with you no matter what”) to all situations. Ever. That’s what “always” means.
What’s dangerous about YOUR logic is that anytime someone disagrees with the majority, or indeed, with anyone else, they are allowed to commit extreme acts to ‘prove their point.’ A fine way to let anarchy reign. See, I can play this strawman game myself. It’s an empty argument and I expect better.
Yes, you’re very good at the strawman, I’m sure you’re quite proud. But the strawman game is one I’m avoiding. If you feel I have misinterpreted your argument, by all means, correct me with clear and concise language and examples.
As for me? I did not use the word “always” or anything like unto it to “extreme” social behavior. I do not believe that extreme social behavior is acceptable (or best course of action) in all cases, and I dare you to find where I said that. If I did, then let this here be the correction, for that is not the intent of my argument. But I will say this: sometimes more “extreme” action may be necessary.
As for you? Given your pandemic metaphor, I think you’re lucky anyone responded with the ability to form sentences.
Whoops, messed up the italics. Oh well, should still be readable.
This paragraph should not be italicized:
When one acts, it always affects other people. If people do not like the way you act, it can indirectly “hurt” other people in one way or another. And there’s the most dangerous part of your argument – the use of the word “always.” You’re applying a generalized idea (“don’t cause problems for other people associated with you no matter what”) to all situations. Ever. That’s what “always” means.
I dunno. Sounds like that could actually have a pretty good shot of creating an environment where people are receptive to reevaluating the healthcare system.
No, it wouldn’t. I work in health care, they’re too entrenched in the system to change dramatically like that. The last time something similar happened (the AIDS pandemic of the 9180s) they had to literally drag their feet in regards to the new blood testing, and only did so with orders from the government. Doing something like that now would just get you branded a terrorist and locked up, with nobody caring about your message.
The point is when people are so invested in a particular societal system, you don’t go about changing it with dramatic actions. You have to do so gradually, otherwise it just invites chaos.
Gradually is definitely preferable. Not arguing that.
But I wouldn’t think it would be the health care workers to change the healthcare system. I would assume that would be a matter more a matter of the voters and the politicians they elect.
Not endorsing the behavior but I’m pretty sure radical behavior has successfully altered a governmental system before. If the entire country’s riled up about a cause generally politicians wanna be the guy who’ll take care of that. You know, if they’re working in a democracy. If their rule isn’t contingent on votes then extremism is probably the only way you’re gonna change anything anyway.
Of course either way Roz is still being a bit of a moron here. Sympathetic plight, but if you wanna get the people to listen to your cause with an open mind then kicking and screaming isn’t the way to do it. She didn’t change anything here or in any way alter the environment in which the problem was viewed as acceptable. She just kind of made a scene.
Agreed. There are a lot of things I disagree with in today’s society, but I make it a point not to kick and scream about it. Roz could’ve gotten a much better result if she’d written editorials and books instead.
Why can’t she do both?
But would anyone read her books if she hadn’t made a scene?
Really now. How is recording a sex video anything like an induced pandemic? Nakedness gonna cause people to die of heart attacks?
Unless it’s naked screaming zombie old people, no it’s not going to cause heart attacks.
Depends on the naked person.
It’s a metaphor. You don’t take it literally.
Its a bad metaphor
My point stands. Attacking my metaphor does not change anything. If anything it just makes you look bad because you haven’t the ability to argue my actual point and instead try to argue semantics.
Its not that I CAN”T argue against your point. Its that I’m NOT. There are better way to go about improving society but you made the same mistake as Roz.
I sincerely doubt anyone is claiming that Roz is successfully changing the world and/or the way people think here.
How so? I’m a proponent of gradual change through peaceful and moderate activism. The only mistake I’ve made is making a bad metaphor, at worst.
You two should make out. Now. (Damn, I wish I had a Joe avatar!)
You two should make out. Now. SHAWIIING
I know from experience that one of the best ways to lose an arguement is to assume (not investigate) that the arguement is worth having in the first place.
I’d say that ‘extremist actions will not bring meaningful or positive change to society’ is worth arguing. You may disagree, but from what I’ve seen stuff like this only causes things to get worse.
That depends on how you define extremism, which can be anywhere on a scale from Mandela to the collapse of the Egypt’s government.
Roz will pay for her decision, possibly in ways she cannot yet imagine. Robin may have to pay as well, but that is not because Roz was unfair to her. I am reminded of Sir Francis Bacon’s warning about family serving as hostages to fortune, “for they are impediments to great enterprises, either of virtue or mischief.”
If Roz is in the right, attempting to bring her into line by holding her sister hostage is wrong. If Roz is in the wrong, attempting to bring her into line by holding her sister hostage…is still wrong.
Roz had sex where everyone could see it…but only if they pay her a visit. (Such behaviour is less distracting than that of a vocally enthusiastic neighbour.) She isn’t projecting it on giant screens at every street corner. She’s simply being open about sex, taking the view that secrecy only implies something shameful.
If she was an activist for urban gardening, who’d call Roz irresponsible for getting permission to create more green space on campus, then posting her work online? That would probably be more disruptive to campus life than what she did. (Roz is not responsible for media response.) I’m sure some commenter would even call her a hoe.
It’s similar to an artist using a privately owned building as a canvas.
Yeah, it makes a statement, which I can respect, but it gets lost in the shuffle when your actions call into question your competency and your compassion for others. This isn’t ‘holding someone hostage.’ This is sociopathy. There are many ways to get your message out there while not bringing harm or damage to those associated with you.
The only way to please the salt of the earth folks Robin is trying to appease would, likely, be for Roz to keep her mouth shut and pretend to be a good chaste young woman.
“Robin may have to pay as well, but that is not because Roz was unfair to her.”
Exactly. Roz allegedly wasn’t doing this to get at her sister – and if we agree with Robin’s point that Roz should hold off until it’s political convenient for her, then when can Roz do anything? She can’t even do something less extreme because that’d also go back to Robin. Any moderate activism or openly having sex would stil,, at some point, get linked back to Robin.
As she says, when’s she supposed to wait until?
Maybe when she has the maturity not to cause problems for everyone else with her grandstanding.
Isn’t she a freshman in college? If she is, then she only recently turned 17/18/19. I’m going to assume 18 since I doubt this comic would have those technically under the age of consent in most states (some from the south excluded) doing the do. So if she were the average high schooler she’d have just turned 18, or if she were a late starter she’d have been 19. I don’t…know….how long has she honestly had to wait? Unless she was ready to go at 14, she’s maybe only been holding out legally for a few months.
I’m just saying, it’s not like she’s had to wait for years, but we aren’t given any context so I dunno, maybe she had a lot of boyfriends in high school.
Most states actually have ages of consent less than 18; it’s only something like ten states, plus Puerto Rico. It’s just that one of those states is California, so media in the USA disproportionately assumes 18 as the legal age.
That only works if it’s a good analogy. There is nothing analogous in your so-called “metaphor.”
Oh? Trying to bring about social change through extreme methods that will only cloud your purpose?
Seems apropos to me. People haven’t said where it is wrong. If you want to say that the two situations aren’t the same, well, of course they aren’t. No metaphor would work by that argument.
As an addendum, what you’re doing is basically another version of the grammar/spelling nazi argument. Whether or not my metaphor is bad isn’t the issue; it got across my point, and you chose to ignore said point in favor of semantic arguments. I expect this kind of tripe from GameFAQs trolls, but perhaps I overestimated the people reading Willis’ strips.
Nnnnno, because grammar/spelling is nothing to do with an actual argument, the metaphor was put there in support of your actual argument. Your post pretty much goes: [Statement goes here] [Flawed analogy which you believe is irrelevant to the argument goes here]. If we are to disregard the analogy all we have is an unsupported statement. You put that forward without evidence, I’ll dismiss it without evidence. Feel free to argue the point some more. Or even just go “Okay sorry guys, that was a bad way to argue my point” instead of getting butthurt at other people for daring to attack your argument.
You’re equating all so called “extremes” here in a false dichotomy. Cussing someone out out of no where would be a form of “extreme” behavior, yes? But is that anywhere near the same as stabbing someone? No. Not all “extremes,” as you call them, are the same.
The analogy is like a stuffed teddy bear.
Are you seriously comparing making a sex tape to creating a pandemic that overtaxes hospitals and possibly causes many deaths from that?
A comparison that has been repeatedly defended.
So the next strip is Leslie dismissing Roz from class because she has already aced it, right?
while I agree with Roz’s point, I REALLY disagree with the way she went about it. That kind of in-your-face, accept-me-or-else kind of campaigning might win some people over, but it puts FAR MORE people on the defensive. It’s why Pride Parades will never convince right-wing America to accept homosexuality, and it’s why screaming about Jesus at said parades will never convert people. That’s pretty much the first rule of winning favor – don’t offend the people you’re trying to persuade.
Additionally, a sex tape reads more like an idiotic undergrad art project than a legit political statement. And if she didn’t explain this, then all people are going to see is a slutty co-ed.
Great idea, terrible execution.
… wow, could I have a worse (or better?) icon for the above statement
I agree with you. While it may perfectly illustrate what’s still wrong with society in terms of sexual freedom and equality, it is not going to change any minds and people will who disagree with her point are going to be less open to listening to someone they’ve labeled as a slut.
“So, what do you think of the Slutwalk movement?” he asked with the expectation of hilarity to come.
Arn’t Gay pride parade more about galvanizing a group of people as well as show other gays that they don’t have to be ashamed?
Yes, they are. Just as sunday morning sermons are generally meant to uplift already-practicing believers and galvanize THEM to a particular creed.
The point is, if someone doesn’t agree, being up in their face about it ain’t gonna earn them any friends.
Maybe it’s not about getting them to agree, then.
Yes, but people who are think they should be ashamed are likely to oppose the concept of galvanizing, and in reaction might take measures to decrease acceptance.
Oh no! What will the BIGOTS think?
I… I think this might be my favorite reaction to anything ever.
While it does sound hilarious when you phrase it like that, it is an important point to consider. Especially when you are a member of a group that isn’t (fully) protected from discrimination.
But if LGBTs had held back on actions because of that, they’d never have done anything in public.
That is completely true. I am glad that the people who weren’t at the greatest risk took action that others could not (and still can’t in many places).
Frankly I’ve lost my train of thought, but it has something to do with the fact that Pride Parades will not win allies, but they will encourage current allies both in the closet and out. They will also offend opponents, and I am minful of the risk that force some to stay in the closet and not offend bigots. It can be tough to be a secret supporter of more public people.
Related to my long forgotten point: Chaz Bono is on Dancing With The Stars. Hooray Tolerance!
Pride Parades were never for the people who don’t accept homosexuality. Taking them away won’t change their minds either.
I was going to post something like this, but you beat me to it. Yeah, men and women should be able to have sexual freedom and do with their bodies what they feel like when they become an adult, but was making a sex tape with some random guy really the best way to go about it? If I met a girl who did that, I’d think she’d be a slut too (and if I were christian, I’d probably think she’s hellbound as well).
So the question then becomes ‘why is it wrong to be a slut?’
I wouldn’t say that it’s wrong, it’s just not very smart. Sleeping around with random people can fuck up a girl’s reputation, relationships and health. Or in this case, her sister’s reputation.
Judgemental asshats fuck up a girl’s reputation. Not being honest or unfaithful with people can fuck up relationships. Not using safe practices can fuck up health. Sleeping around, in and of itself? Just means sex with a lot of people.
P.S. I’m pretty sure all the above applies to guys too, in case you were wondering.
There’s a difference between sleeping around and being a slut. Just about every slut I’ve ever met were all, for lack of a better word, morons. Both women AND men. I’m not disagreeing with what you said, but that doesn’t disprove that what I said can still happen. If I started dating a girl and found out that she was a slut who slept with a lot of people before we went out, I’d be a little concerned.
Pride parades do work, though. They have. By being open and confrontational, they’ve kept homophobes from silencing gay and gay-friendly viewpoints.
Pride parades aren’t about convincing bigots to stop being bigoted, they’re about forcing the bigots into the public dialogue. At least in part because of the parades, the bigots are losing.
Actually I’m pretty sure one of the historically proven best ways of getting your point across is extreme violence because then the less violence people who basically agree with you seem like moderates instead of extremist and people tend to go with them.
It’s works countless times.
I would prefer Roz not go murdering lots of people for sexual freedom I’m just saying extremism is important and she honestly isn’t extreme at all.
Shifting the Overton window.
I think MLK said something like “people listen to me because the alternative is Malcolm” [X]
Though Overton might be shifted just by extreme positions. What violence adds is the knowledge that someone takes this very seriously in a way you can’t ignore, because violent. Also things like general strikes and other civil disobedience.
“When will it be okay to fight for what I believe in?”
Howabout… when it won’t damage someone who’s in more of a position to effect change than you are. That seems like a PRACTICAL standard to me.
But that is assuming they are on the same side politically, I might be wrong but I believe that Robin is Republican and Roz is Democrat.
Charlie Wilson (technically still a democrat) had a massive socially conservative base. And yet every time abortion came up in the legislature, he voted in favor of abortion rights, because his sister worked for… I believe it was planned parenthood. And yet, he kept getting elected. Plus, I REALLY don’t see Robin being anything further right than a blue dog democrat.
Good point. It would have been far easier to leverage her sister’s power to influence the public. Then again, she isn’t trying to change public opinion: she is trying to shame people for attempting to shame her.
Which doesn’t really work, as these two groups of people talk PAST each other rather than WITH each other. If Roz was an actual person I’d have such a large headache.
Hey Roz, you have always had your sexual freedom.
Unfortunately for you, everyone else has the freedom to judge you for it. Especially when you decide to get in everyone’s face with it.
Presumably she didn’t force anyone to download that video, so she wasn’t really getting in everyone’s face until they got in hers and started judging her.
That sums it up fairly well. I’m more concerned with how easily Robin seems to be playing Roz’s temper right now.
Uh-oh! Joyce has a thoughtful look on her face! Looks almost like she’s being swayed just a little by Roz’s outburst.
I would say less thoughtful and more judgmental. Joyce IS one of the conservative fundies Roz just insulted.
What?! But, but, Joyce is always right and Roz is always wrong! Joyce’s opinions are just a bit naive but Roz is being harmful and disrespectful! How can this be!?!!!?!
Argh. Roz is getting more and more infuriating. Her actions haven’t bitten her or Joe (who, again, wasn’t asked prior to the video being posted) in the ass just as yet since it’s only been a couple of days. She might well start singing a different tune when one or both have trouble finding jobs and paying bills in the future. And christ, fighting for your beliefs doesn’t mean doing something that will almost certainly massively damage your sister’s career! You want to be an activist for sexual freedom? Fine. Do you actually have to do it by posting amateur porn online? And using footage involving someone not like-minded?
God I hate this girl
Yeah, she shouldn’t have involved a conservative prude like Joe. He believes sexuality should be kept completely private!
Joe probably doesn’t realize it, but being in that sex video has completely buggered his chances of getting a job, and probably cut his Joeing pool by half. Lots of women don’t want to sleep with the town manslut.
either way, Roz should have asked.
Joe has already confimed he has more Joeing options now that his skills are on display.
Yah, unless Joe has the brains to be able to invent something lie Ultra-Car in this universe, he’s done for.
Believing sexuality should be completely private and promiscuity aren’t mutually exclusive. I’m sure their are plenty of people who go around quietly banging all of the dudes and/or ladies, and not out of shame, but out of it’s nobody else’s business who they are sticking it in or is sticking it in them.
Joe is not one of those people. Have you been reading this comic? The man is almost a man-whore stereotype.
Almost? *raises eyebrow*
You missed my point. Joe is neither nor conservative nor prudish, but Roz clearly gave no regard to his rights or his privacy. Her actions pretty clearly show that she values her freedom more than the rights of others.
She asked him if he was okay with her filming them and putting it online, and he said yes. Did she need to get him to sign a contract in blood?
Yes Joe WAS asked, however, I doubt she clued him in to the context. That context being “no this won’t just be something people are masturbating to on the internet, this will actually be a big deal.” Truth, but not the whole truth.
All other points I totally agree with. Well, except “I hate this girl.” You can change that to “I hate people acting like her actions were in any way reasonable.”
Does everything need a page of damn context? She said can I put a sex tape up and he said yes. She could of given him a 40 page form with a signature line for putting it on the internet and he’d still say yes. What do you expect from her?
I really don’t think either of them will be applying for jobs that oppose hiring porn stars. I particularly envision Roz staying in academia, where this scandal would be good to have on her resume.
I agree wholeheartedly. If one’s going to do it in private, no one can stop you. Do it in public, it’s going to really come back and bite you back. Consequences are consequences
This is the third time you’ve claimed Roz didn’t ask Joe’s permission to put the sex video online. This is also the third time I’ve posted this comic in response: http://www.dumbingofage.com/2011/comic/book-1/05-media-rumble/interview-2/
Please read the comic.
Please.
Hey, did Roz clue Joe in on the context? I’ve been making arguments based on hypotheticals there, and I’d love to be able to switch that to certainty and/or stop making those arguments because they’re based on false premises.
Joe knew exactly what was going on when she taped them. You’re grasping at straws with your assumptions.
The next time someone asks if they can put a tape of me on the internet and I say “hells yeah” should I ride them later about not giving me a fucking hundred page contact to sign for every context there could be for it?
Oh come on, as if ANYONE reads the contracts they sign before filming a sex tape, am I right, guys?
I have to read the whole thing or how will I know lower mr chiatroll will get all the credit he deserves.
Whoops. My apologies. I have honestly never seen that comic before now, nor did I see your responses.
When did activism become a dirt word?
About the same time as “agitator” I assume.
When activists started blowing stuff up.
When activism became linked with stuff like ELF and terrorists rather than people like MLK, Jr. and Ghandi.
When activists started using their supposedly noble causes to justify acting like total jerkasses.
Ah, round about November 27th, 1095, then.
Nice! Historical High Five!
Theory: Roz is hoping to become famous so she can become a celeb like Paris but with additional cause-plugging mixed in.
Paris Hilton famous? More like infamous to me.
Details details, Paris might not be a good role model in life *cough*understatement*cough*, it is hard to deny that she has made more of a name for herself than the Hilton hotel chain can claim these days.
She’s far too socially-concious to want a career made out of being a useless piece of fluff like Paris Hilton’s has.
My theory is that like Paris, Roz is taking advantage of the fact that she is related to someone important.
Paris early claim to fame was that she was the heiress to the Hilton Hotel chain which gave her media attention due to her partying, when she did her sex video, she exploited the fact that the media wanted her to becoming the media icon she is today.
I believe (for now) that Roz hopes that this media coverage over her sex video will lead to greater fame for herself and exposure for her pet cause.
Hmm, possibly…
In the end, its a theory, Willis might have plans for her that blow this theory out of the water but maybe JUST maybe, I could be right…
Hurt no one? Hmm. Potentially hurt yourself, Joe, your sister, the University… That’s just off the top of my head.
“Sexual Freedom above all else” eh? I can support sexual freedom, the problem here is the rampant immaturity and callousness she shows to other people in her attempt to prove her position. She didn’t ask Joe’s permission on the tape, and while he doesn’t seem to care now this could impact him. He should have had a say in it, as an individual involved.
It’s like she doesn’t view other people as things of consequence or worth. She says she’s in it for the ideal, but her language hints to me that the real reason is her own narcissism. Again, it really looks to me like she’s throwing a temper tantrum and either doesn’t care or doesn’t see who gets hurt by it.
http://www.dumbingofage.com/2011/comic/book-1/05-media-rumble/interview-2/
SHE GOT JOE’S GODDAMN PERMISSION GODDAMN
Yes, I realized that after I posted.
Well, she did ask his permission to film, not about how she was going to use him to send a message.
Not sure why you think that’d change Joe’s answer.
Sam here has more knowledge about Joe’s character than Roz does. He has enough information to be able to judge that. Roz MAY have had enough information to judge that, but you haven’t given us enough information to be able to judge whether she could judge that, so we’re all basically assuming whatever better fits our side of the argument.
Hey, it probably wouldn’t. Joe’s Joe, as we all know. But the fact of the matter was Joe didn’t know everything involved with the tape when Roz got his permission, which is pretty important if you’re going to view people as people and not tools.
Hmm, you’ve got a point. Still, I doubt Joe would even care.
True, he likely wouldn’t. But he never had the opportunity to express that, from what I can see. So it doesn’t seem like Roz thought his input on actions that could affect him mattered, so long as she could use him as a tool for her agenda. Which is one of the things I’m not too keen about with her here.
Joe did know about the video and he was all for it.
Yeah, realized that after I posted. I’m sorry for beating a dead horse there.
She still gave him no context though, which means she’s still used him as a tool for her agenda without his input on the matter.
Sexual freedom does seem pretty important to her. Don’t forget, one of her first appearances in this comic was when she was giving out condoms.
That is true. Adhering to a cause above yourself can be noble. However, it’s when you adhere to a cause to the point where you don’t care or don’t see the potential harm to other people that things get scary.
Why would this harm other people? Why should this result in harm to other people?
The answers really come down to, “Because someone else decides to make it hurt others.”
That’s a rather limiting way to make decisions in life.
It’s a rather accurate way to make decisions in life. Denying the limitations do not cause them to cease to be.
Gangler has the right of it. Life isn’t without limits. A good example, though far more extreme than anything that’s happened in this comic, is when Pastor Terry Jones decided to hold the Koran on trial and then film it when he burned the book. And then a number of people died as a consequence. Were these people wrong and crazy to kill people in response to some old man burning a book? Yes. It doesn’t mean it wasn’t an immature and stupid thing for Terry Jones to do, though.
Again, this is much more extreme than anything in the comic. I really just brought this up to say that taking into consideration someone else will decide to make others hurt for things you do isn’t really a bad thing by itself.
Who died, exactly?
UN staffers and relief workers, mostly. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dove_World_Quran-burning_controversy#Reactions_2
I do hope someone is taping THIS.
It’s a college classroom. We’ve got thirty camera angles going right now.
Boy, lotta DeSanto voters in here.
hahahaha
I’m actually undecided on Robin. I’ll need to see more of this version of her to make any calls one way or the other. After all, just because people don’t agree with Roz doesn’t mean they agree with Robin.
And there goes the mirth again. Thanks for that.
Sorry about that.
“My sexual freedom is important to me above all else, and I will never compromise it.”
Tzun Tzi wrote something very wise on the importance of yielding. “It is said that a reed that is not rigid and bends will not break and in so doing endure.”
Do you really wanna take advice from someone who spent all his time talking about “the art of war” and yet died anyway? That’d be like listen to Mike if he told you a mother’s love was free.
He wasn’t writing “the art of never dying, ever.”
Now that would be a book worth reading.
Well seeing as it’s probably that the art of war is an amalgamation of several treatises on military strategy, the biography of a man who may or may not have existed really don’t concern me. I just thought it was a better quote than Know when to Hold ’em, know when to Fold ’em.
Let’s say a friend of Mike paid a mom two of his nickels and one was given for Mike. Would that qualify as free for Mike?
Actually, I don’t think Walkyverse Mike has actual friends. Maybe Jason is a friend, but I don’t see him paying a mom.
Everyone at McAwesome’s I should think. Amber too.
I think my point still stands.
Not quite free, nickels are involved.
So you are saying people should bend on EVERYTHING?
Maybe it’s ok to hold on to some rules, liberties, and standards.
I still believe part of why Roz is doing this is to get back at Robin, even if only to expose her hypocrisy, but Roz may just be my new favorite DoA character.
Granted, posting the video without Joe’s permission was not cool, but he is certainly enjoying the publicity.
For the love of, SHE HAD HIS EXPRESS PERMISSION!
People really need to read ALL of the comic before they start commenting.
I’m starting to wonder if there’s just something inherently skippable about the comic where Joe says Roz asked permission to put the video online.
We do it specifically to annoy and frustrate you. Every hair from your head pulled out in rage is a little victory.
Nah, just kidding.
“DAMN YOU COMMENTERS!” doesn’t have the same ring to it, does it?
Nah, not quite.
Wow, I remembered the interview between Dorothy and Joe, but the only thing that I remembered from that comic was Joe saying that he and Roz were hooking up again that night.
I blame Joe, for saying “And I get to touch boobies, so we’re even”, and causing me to not remember.
I forgot about that comic, but I generally assumed that since Joe was cool with the taping part, and there are only so many reasons to tape it with a webcam, that he would’ve at least figured out the reason. Joe being Joe, he probably didn’t care.
Permission to film the video, not permission to post the video on the internet.
READ THIS COMIC http://www.dumbingofage.com/2011/comic/book-1/05-media-rumble/interview-2/
Especially the first two panels
PLEASE READ: http://www.dumbingofage.com/2011/comic/book-1/05-media-rumble/interview-2/
Perhaps you’ve been skipping ahead to the punchline?
Well, it’s actually grammatically ambiguous when you answer two questions in one with a single “yeah” whether they’re actually answering both, or just whichever one stuck in their head more. God only knows I’ve done that exact thing before. However, from your comments it IS apparent that she got permission for it to go on the internet. NOT apparent from your comments is whether she gave context, and I would really appreciate it if you cleared that up?
It’s not ambiguous at all. Joe says “When a chick asked you to make a sex video, you totally jump that NO MATTER WHAT.” There is absolutely no reason to say “no matter what” unless he’s addressing the putting up online-ness.
It’s ambiguous enough that all i interpreted that as on the first read through was embellishment on how awesome sextape is.
Also. WHY U NO RESPOND TO THE QUESTION I ACTUALLY WANT ANSWERED
Because that would ruin the punch line for a comic that will be posted 7 weeks from today?
If you’re talking about the political context, the fact that he read the Wednesday(?) morning newspaper and didn’t realize the “idiot” who banged the congressperson’s sister was himself, probably indicates he wasn’t aware of Roz’s political angle.
Well this is turning into some serious forbidden fruit shit. Every time he doesn’t answer, it just makes me want the answer more. I will probably ask in person months from now at Emerald City Comicon.
here’s your answer:
it’s joe. all he cares about is sex. it’s irrelevant whether or not roz told him why it’s going online. she had him at “sextape”. if you really think he paid any attention to her after that word, you either haven’t grasped what his character is all about or you never met one of these people in real life.
honestly, even if roz did tell him what her motives were and he was listening to her the entire time, i doubt he would care. because, hey, free sex.
The last panel makes it clear that Joe is fine with it being a political and not-masturbatory move as well, whether or not it was explained when she got permission. So it’s really a moot point.
Man, if I were in Robin’s shoes, at this point I would be thinking:
“OK, sister or not, my forgiveness is now on hold. You are not the only person in the universe with a cause, and I didn’t go through all the trouble and headaches of raising money, canvassing voters, and getting elected so that I would *actually have* some of the power to effect my causes just to let my bratty little sister destroy it all in some ill-thought out scheme. You think it’s fine to not care about the troubles you’re causing me? Fine, I won’t care about the troubles I’m going to cause you.”
Robin needs to slap Roz down, and hard. The only reason Roz’s video actually got notice was because her sister was a Congressman, and she knows it. If Robin doesn’t do something to dissuade her from trying such a stunt again, Roz *will* burn her again in the future, because it’s her best play for publicity. Given that Robin tried to amicably settle things with Roz (“I will forgive you, you will at least pretend to accept it”) and she threw it back in her face… well, politically speaking, Robin has to toss her to the wolves, and use Roz’s selfish actions here as a prop for WHY she thinks family values are important.
And if Roz doesn’t like that? Well, she shouldn’t have picked a fight with a *sitting Congresswoman*. Robin has to be thinking of Roz as her own personal Fredo right now.
How is she going to be thrown to the wolves any more than has already happened? What is the actions of her own sister going to do to ‘shield’ her?
Either way, she seems to be doing fine.
As it stood, Robin was apparently planning to make-nice in front of the cameras and try to let the whole thing blow over – between a public display of forgiveness and a (sure to be well covered) speech/campaign rally, she could attempt to head off the media and maybe regain some actual control over the flow of events. Or do you think Robin had her campaign rally planned ahead of time at her little sister’s college and it just coincidentally ended up occurring after Roz released her sex tape? I don’t believe that – either Robin arranged this on short notice to try to ameliorate the shitstorm, or Roz purposefully went out of her way to maximize trouble for Robin.
But that hardly matters; Roz is determined to fight. That means Robin, whether she wants to be or not, is going to have to take some kind of public stand against Roz. Robin has much better media access and the ability to frame things for the ‘hicks’ Roz detests. Beyond Robin herself, Roz has probably created a minor distraction for Robin’s party as a whole. It is a very stupid fight for her to have gotten into – even if she goes into academia, where her actions would often be overlooked or even admired to some degree, ‘a personal enemy of assorted politicians who may impact our funding’ is not a line you want on your resume.
Do you actually get how condescending and offensive being told you’re ‘forgiven’ is when you did nothing wrong? If Robin didn’t want this she should’ve spoken with Roz privately rather than making a scene and assuming it’d all go her way.
And as I said, Roz is doing fine. She seems to know what she’s getting herself in for, and if Robin starts influencing things directly all she’s doing is painting a target on HER head.
If you don’t want to occasionally apologize or accept forgiveness when you’ve done nothing wrong, perhaps you shouldn’t randomly inject yourself into politics.
Robin speaking privately with Roz wouldn’t have had any effect on the greater issues, and she knows her sister better than we do, so she probably has a pretty good idea of what Roz would say (no). Making the approach in public puts more pressure on Roz to play along with Robin.
As far as targets… Robin did not release a sex tape of herself (in this universe). She has a target on her head only until she ‘does something’ about the situation. She met Roz informally but in public, showed she tries to patch things up civilly even with a sister who grossly undermined her campaign, and had it thrown back in her face. She did it in a timely manner. She’s done all the socially conservative voters she was concerned about are really going to ask of her. Robin has stepped smartly to remove herself being a target. At this point, she can forward all media flak to Roz. “It’s unfortunate that my sister has made these choices”, or something similar.
“If you don’t want to occasionally apologize or accept forgiveness when you’ve done nothing wrong, perhaps you shouldn’t randomly inject yourself into politics”
This is, like, a ground floor issue for Roz. We’re not talking semantics or a gray area here. The idea that you can be wavering on every single issue is as unrealistic as it is impractical.
“She did it in a timely manner. She’s done all the socially conservative voters she was concerned about are really going to ask of her. ”
If what you are saying is true, then that is exactly what Roz would want: to have her actions reflect her own self and not have to change what she is for someone else.
Ahh, I was a bit unclear, I suppose. Robin has secured her voters with her actions. But Roz is still in fighting form, and is still going to be taking activist stances that are a distraction (by all appearances). In essence, she has nominated herself as a political enemy, and one whose leverage derives entirely from Robin’s standing. Robin is going to have to deal with her not because Roz reflects personally badly on Robin, but because she is now ‘the bad guy’ to a large group of voters.
I agree with this
It’s always kinda neat coming on during a page like this and seeing the comments section blow up. Reading these little debates is fun.
I can certainly sympathize with Roz after these last few pages. Being a sexually active and explorative girl when you’re also the immediate family of a politician with a conservatively valued platform has got to be frustrating. That said, her methods of fighting for her cause seem more like a child throwing a tantrum rather than actually making a statement.
Well she is like 20. I’m still there and I can think of half a dozen things I did for all the right reasons that were still dumb as hell.
True, that makes her actions more understandable, but still not outright excusable.
20? I wouldn’t be surprised if she were 17 considering she started college less than a month ago.
She said a comic or two ago that she was 18.
As long as she keeps herself tested for STDs pretty frequently and doesn’t lead any of her guy partners on, she’s pretty much right with her “doesn’t hurt anybody,” spiel at least. Of course, SP Roz doesn’t take the feelings of her partners into account, so she can go right to hell.
Another way of looking at the difference between Robin and Roz is how they want to change the society they live in.
Robin represents The Man, The Establishment, The System and the idea that change occurs when you change the laws, which is achieved by convincing people to vote for her and support her ideas.
Roz represents Anti-establishment, counter-culture and rebellion. These types tend to believe that The System can be subverted and changed to their liking by ‘fun’ methods such as listening to ‘subversive’ music, donning ‘subversive’ wears, living ‘subversive’ lifestyles and protesting.
While I love Roz as a character, Robin has the better chance of changing things for the better than Roz ever will.
Ok, seriously? Protesting and wearing clothes your parents hate are to different things. Protesting HAS achieved things. Gandi freed India, the equal-Rights movement, ect. It happens.
Tell Roz that.
Counterculture and anti-establishmentism, on the other hand, has accomplished very little. 66% is still a passing grade.
Or at least it is where I live.
I’m NOT saying that protesting doesn’t work, I AM saying that protesting is primarily a counter-culture tool.
Counter/sub-cultures are an important force in our society as a means of stimulating new fashions/markets and providing a way to ‘rebel’ in the process.
Holy Crap! It’s a battle between Order and Chaos! This just got 20% percent cooler.
It’s a little sad that the first thing I thought when reading your post was “Wait, ponies are involved now?”
Alright, think about what you just said. You just equated order and Robin. THINK ABOUT THAT. Robin is more like chaos that has been forged in the fires of mount doom into The Sword Of Competency, whereas Roz is just unrefined chaos. Hell, she might even just be chaos OXIDE.
I’m gonna keep on thinking that Robin is the Suzaku to Roz’s Lelouch. The Flynn Scifo to her Yuri Lowell. The Knuckles to her Sonic. You can’t argue with something that awesome.
You’re giving Roz too much credit, methinks.
I know, I know, the very idea that ROBIN represents ORDER is very mindscrewy, especially if you are familiar with Shortpacked! but unless Willis reveals otherwise, ROBIN IS ORDER.
If Robin is order, what is Batman?
The night. Same as always.
“While I love Roz as a character, Robin has the better chance of changing things for the better than Roz ever will.”
She’s got the better potential to change things, but having a better chance would imply she’s actually trying to change things for the better. We don’t know if she is yet. She might be doing something at the higher levels, or she could be playing it safe and/or voting against change in order to keep her seat. It could go either way, since so far she’s been utterly focused on being a hypocrit to keep a seat but “actually I was doing X and you’ve made that harder to do, Roz” is a possible punchline…
I said that she COULD change things, whenever she WILL change things or not is another matter.
You see evidence that Robin wants to change something about society? Where?
Are you fucking kidding me? Did you actually read the speech balloons in the last few comics?
…Wow. sorry about that. I must have read you as saying Roz instead of Robin. Please disregard the above snark.
I’m pretty sure those guys just make the laws they are paid to make unless there is enough noise going on to sway them so they can keep their jobs.
Oh my. Joe got USED.
(For a nickel.)
I’m sure, deep down, he’s a affronted as hell.
Like. Really deep down.
Like, deep, cavernous recesses of the soul.
He doesn’t have a soul. He traded it away for his Wingman Abilities.
That’s why being called “worst wingman ever” hurt so much — a worthless sacrifice. ;~) #yeahnotcanon
The problem here is that Roz is trying to “prove to society” something. She feels the need to validate herself and her actions to every anonymous person that notices her. If she’s truly secure with herself she shouldn’t seek the validation of others. Her actions just scream to me that she wants to be noticed, she wants to be self-righteously offended by the people that will judge her, and that she doesn’t care who else she brings into the mess to do it. 18 years old is barely an adult, and Roz feels to me even less so, emotionally.
Actually 18 is a little *young* to be taking stands against perceived societal ills. You’ll note that colleges, not high schools, have been the traditional stomping grounds of placard-waving young adults.
http://itswalky.tumblr.com/post/9696386248/an-agenda-you-say
Point made.
I lol’d
Har har!
That was kinda, strongly worded. Especially considering Sam DID apologize.
(Sam was the only one to use the word agenda, so it’s fair to assume that’s who is being responded to)
There was huge amounts of debate about what Joe reallllly kneeeeeeeew being made, to, you know, the guy who made the fucking comic. Also there was multiple people who needed this clapped out to them, not just Sam.
the main problem with roz’s stance is that there are probably at most 5 people on the entire planet who would see her sex tape and think “gee, theres a girl whos body is her own and who values her sexual freedom”, and any protest that needs to explained to everybody that sees it is not going to be an effective protest
I can’t decide which of the numerous threads discussing how Roz is wrong because people will respond badly this should go under, so I’ll just stick these here (emphases mine):
King puts it so eloquently and succinctly. Great post.
Dr. King also had a realistic plan for accomplishing his dreams. Even assuming, for the sake of argument, that Roz’s cause is 100% good, her plan is a pointless act that is self-undermining and guarantees that her control of the narrative is nil, because the media will utterly ignore her views as long as they can use this to hound Robin.
Roz is Gavrilo Princip with boobs, essentially. She has unleashed forces beyond her ability to control. This was an entirely predictable outcome to a rational observer. In other words, Roz is an idiot.
Comparing a peaceful demonstrator (Roz) to the assassin who set off World War I is intellectually dishonest.
There simply must be a more appropriate example of someone unleashing forces beyond their ability to control.
I mean hell, I’m surprised this doesn’t have its’ own trope.
Right. So, I’ve been reading the comments and this only reenforces what I said before. It’s pretty clear that we are supposed to agree with Roz and cheer her on but the fact that there are more holes in her argument than Swiss cheese in a refrigerator gang fight makes it hard.
Maybe I’m wrong. Maybe a character in tomorrow’s comic will offer a decent counterargument and we, the audience, will be allowed to take sides. I certainly hope so. But from where I’m standing it seems like the strip, not Roz, has taken a stand, and that’s rarely a good thing in fiction. Even Doonesbury works in spite of, not because of, it’s biases. (I personally read it for more soapish reasons.)
I personally agree with the basic stance even if Roz’s whole argument falls apart because, as Robin pointed out, Roz’s actions do hurt people, namely Robin and her campaign, and really no one’s going to see a sex tape as a political stance, and I could go on but I think the other 200-something comments have me covered. Whether or not I agree isn’t the point.
It’s not Roz’s action that hurts other people. It’s other peoples’ reactions to her actions that could hurt other people.
This is an important distinction. Considering how successful and motivated Robin is, losing an election is not going to be the end of the world to her, or for her state.
What kind of goddamn boring fiction do you read? Opinions and thoughts make things interesting, even if you disagree with them. It’s good to actually reflect on things and opinions. Besides, the “message” of the strip is not dictated by what Roz has said for the last few strips.
Conflicting opinions and thoughts are fine and make for wonderful fiction. But that’s not what we have here. Maybe tomorrow my opinion will change, but right now it looks like Roz will be unambiguously winning this little debate and we’re supposed to be cheering her on for calling her sister out regardless of the argument itself.
Again, the point isn’t that I disagree. It’s that the author wants us to agree and–by all appearances–won’t be leaving much room for counterpoint.
Willis, if you’re reading this, I’m sorry. Maybe tomorrow all the holes and flaws pointed out in these comments will be represented or someone will have other counterarguments we haven’t thought of. But from my insomnia-riddled perspective, the fan reaction you were aiming for with this moment comes off less as “Roz making some legit points even if her methods or sub-arguments are wrong” and more as “woo! Go Roz! Awesome!”
In short–unless theft, rape, or murder are involved, I generally don’t like fiction lacking moral ambiguity.
But would you shake a poisonous snake and throw it on someone else and claim that “It was the snake’s reaction to my actions, not me who harmed this person”? Whether or not one may feel that shake-snaking (hurr hurr appropriate and entirely accidental euphemisms) is a completely normal and acceptable activity that shouldn’t hurt people doesn’t change the fact that it can and will hurt someone else at this point in society. By that logic, wouldn’t it be better to shake your snake on your own time without throwing it into someone else’s faaaaaaaaaaace?
Wait, wait, wait. So directly harming someone by agitating a non-intelligent dangerous animal and throwing it on them is now the same as people who weren’t involved in your act suddenly deciding to throw their puritan, bigoted two cents worth into the discussion?
Uh huh.
So wait… conservatives are the same as startled poisonous snakes thrown at people?
No, putting a video on the internet where a conservative can choose to view it and be mortified is exactly the same as throwing an agitated poisonous snake at them.
I mean, come on.
I have learnt something today. It is wrong to put things on the internet that may offend people of different sensibilities.
Thank you kind sir or madam for enlightening me.
*shooting star and rainbow*
And knowing is half the battle.
(Also, it’s ‘sir’.)
You both misunderstand. My comment was in response to the person who said that it is not Roz’s actions that hurt people, but people’s reactions to her actions. For example, Robin’s career is endangered due to the reactions toward Roz’s video. I’m stating that Roz is not absolved of guilt for the danger she’s caused Robin’s career, because, right or wrong, she shook the snake and THEN threw it out to the public, knowing full-well what would happen.
Again, no. Because the video didn’t attack the public.
If you want to state that Roz was wrong to do what she did, then do so (and I will disagree with you), but stop comparing Roz’s act of expression to unleashing a deadly animal on public.
Dude, the public is the snake. She didn’t attack the public, she attacked Robin remember? She attacked Robin using the public.
Assuming the victim of the poisonous snake in this metaphor is Robin, then the snake itself is the public and Roz is the one who threw it at her.
What about this is so hard to get?
…right. My bad.
this is the 24 hour news cycle. These days no one would have to go looking for it.
I don’t even know what you’re trying to say here.
That’s not how I write, and I don’t think it’s how David writes. It shouldn’t be as simple as figuring out which character the writer is using as a sock puppet.
Dorothy and Joyce realize they misjudged and underestimated Roz, sure, okay. That means they realize the world’s more complex than they thought, and it won’t be the last time.
However, over in Shortpacked, Roz has pretty much the exact same set of ideals, and her actions have directly harmed Jacob, despite what she believes. She can’t be blamed for all his relapse, but he might not have had one without her.
Roz is more like Joyce than either would like to think. Both have firm sexual ideologies, both do their best to live their ideals, and both assume that any negative consequences of this come from other people’s backward attitudes. Their solution to this is to live correctly and thereby lead by example. Put it like that and it sounds pretty great. But a life without compromise is often a blind one.
Okay, I think I see where I went wrong. I took the speech at face value, disregarding how anyone but Robin might react. And the Joyce comparison totally flew over my head. This isn’t just between Roz and Robin. Even if Robin loses this little debate it doesn’t mean Roz won. Hell, given Robin’s scatterbrainness in Shortpacked it’d be flat-out unreasonable of me to view Robin losing an argument as a tipping point into the deep dark pits of sockpuppetting.
Looking at Willis’s general body of work, you’re right. He’s usually better than my opinion of this one strip made him out to be. Maybe that’s why I got ticked off.
This is why I always look forward to your posts. They’re generally more well thought out than mine tend to be. Generally my posts are just verbose gut reactions. Probably a byproduct of lack of sleep, but it occurs to me that I use that excuse a lot when my opinion shifts around these parts. So I was wrong. Yeah.
Hey, an actual concession in online discussion? An actual “I was wrong?” You give me hope for the future, new friend.
You too. It’s clear that you put a lot of thought into your responses and I admire that in an online commenter. Shame so few do it, myself included. Must remember to follow your example in the future.
I agree with your love of T’s posts. His eye for subtle stuff like the depth of the Robin/Joyce parallels and his general quality of writing mean that they’ll always be among the best in a discussion.
Incidentally, having seen the parallel, I realized- Anti-Joyce forced Joyce to confront and ultimately overcome the fears Anti-Joyce embodied. I was thinking Dorothy or another more level-headed student would bring Joyce around slowly (and they’ll definitely still have a part to play), but now I’d put money on Roz starting that process.
I think there’s at least one important difference with Roz’s ideals in SP! and DoA.
I love DoA-Roz for what she’s doing now. I hate SP!-Roz for what she did to Jacob. Maybe it is possible that the same person could do both these things using Roz’s ideals. But I can’t quite compare “I want to demonstrate that people have no business judging me, that I and every one else have a fundamental right to enjoy our sexuality as freely as we choose, with whomever gives their consent!” with “I’m gonna take advantage of a man in a vulnerable state and knowingly ruin months/years or recovery just because I want to get laid tonight.”
With Joe, Roz was keen to get his consent. With Jacob, she didn’t care. I mean, sure, Jacob ultimately did it with her, but as far as we know he probably WANTED to say no, but couldn’t because of his addiction. Roz knew that, and went along anyway. That’s why I think DoA-Roz respects other people’s well-being in a way that SP!-Roz doesn’t.
One could argue–I do not–that just as “the hicks” have themselves to blame for taking offense, Jacob has himself to blame for being a sex addict. Still, the consequences for Jacob were more dire than for the hicks.
Co-signed.
Yes. Because logical, rational characters are always the most relatable, sympathetic, and compelling. That’s why everyone cheers for spock and not that headstrong Kirk.
besides which, her actions potentially cause harm to herself, unless she’s paying for all that fancy stuff and her college degree by herself, robin could easily just cut roz off. and then her little public temper tantrum would just get her removed from college.
Is there a reason to think that Robin is paying for Roz’s tuition, rather than parents/loans?
When you are capable of handling the responsibility for the consequences of your actions. Clearly, you are not, yet.
Indeed, clearly Roz must have known she would be confronted on this eventually. This is where a rational being fighting for a cause she believed in would smile and kindly explain her reasons to the public and hope those who are sympathetic to her ideas might feel emboldened, while those who disagree or on the edge might have their perspectives widened.
She did not do this. She got up and threw a fit at her sister in front of everyone and lost control of her emotions. Wasn’t this exactly the publicity she needed to make her case? Is she using this opportunity wisely? I think not. Does it detract from her character as perceived from an outside view thus lessening the strength of her cause? I think so.
People don’t hear you if you don’t talk loud. And she’s still calm enough to make her points. If she made this particular argument in a calm and soothing voice with a placid smile on her face, I’d immediately conclude that she was a pod person and flee for my life.
I fail to see how she is mishandling the responsibility for her actions. I mean, I’m pretty sure she used protection. What other responsibilities do you suppose she has? Supporting her sister’s slightly skeevy campaign to cater to the whims of the rednecks?
Sex is the Right of all Sentient Beings.
That’s what Capt. Kirk said.
and he practiced that right very regularly.
To me this is the old freedom of speech argument. I’d like to see if Roz would believe the same thing in panel two if a person was shunned because they made a public comment in favor of pro life, or were ridiculed because they made an insensitive remark on tv about a minority group. Those opinions aren’t technically hurting anyone either, but there would still be consequences.
Exactly. No one is hurt by sexist or racist opinions because we put an end to gender- and race-based discrimination in this country a long time ago. Totally.
Okay maybe the discrimination remark isn’t a good comparison. How about someone who’s pro life and is ridiculed, or a person on the street preaching their faith being mocked? I would again ask if she’d feel the same way about that. As the old saying goes, freedom doesn’t come free.
I’m not sure what you think Roz is trying to do here. She’s expressing herself and her opinion is that this doesn’t harm anyone. What does this have to do with someone being mocked on a street for religion?
Maybe I need to be more clear, I’m asking if Roz saw someone on the street preaching, and there were a group of people mocking that person, would she be just as upset as she is about those who disapprove of her posting a sex video on the internet? I seriously doubt it, even though that person is expressing their opinions with no harm coming to anyone.
It would really depend on what was being preached. I’ve heard what a few people have to say when they stand on a street in the name of religion and some of it is VERY harmful.
What makes you think what Roz is doing isn’t very harmful? She’s proposing a set of rules that have far-reaching consequences for society if widely adopted. It is not at all clear that these are in the aggregate beneficial for other people – or, to put it another way, the consequences to an act between consenting parties may not be limited to those parties. At the very least, every additional Roz or Joyce changes society’s expectations at the margin, resulting in pain to their counterparts – unwanted sexual advances and loss of trust for Joyces, and limits on sexual expressiveness for the Rozzes of the world. By the nature of things, this is a trade-off; there is no universal solution. But to say there is no harm done at all is fatuous.
That makes a lot of sense, actually.
Would you consider this harm bad? As an analogue: What if Roz, instead, was expressing opinions promoting racial equality. Robin’s constituency was upset and thus Robin’s career harmed.
Uh, talking about pro-life is in the polar fucking opposite camp of the ‘my body is my own’ idealogy.
That’s what I’m trying to say. if people who spoke out about pro life were mocked or ostracized like Roz is for this, would she feel like they are expressing themselves and be as angry as she is in panel 2? It’s easy to say it’s their right when it fits what you believe.
How are they being mocked? Is it based on the protester’s appearance? That they believe a controversial viewpoint? And who says Roz is ostracized? She’s shown happily interacting with people on campus after the news broke.
You’re putting forward a vague hypothetical situation in support of your theory – that Roz is being hypocritical in relation to freedom of speech/expression – where no evidence has been put forward either way about. The closest we get is that she yells at someone when they are talking about petals.
This is why I didn’t do well in political science. I was never very good at debate.
I think this piece has ran it’s course with me looking like an idiot. I’ll shut up now.
If Roz were gay, coming out of the closet might “hurt Robin” too. Would that create an obligation to stay in the closet? Or if she participated in a public debate defending atheism, or evolution…
She hasn’t been in the closet about any of her behavior that would reflect poorly on Robin. Asking her to not hold a press conference telling every single Indiana voter about her sexuality simultaneously isn’t the same as asking her to stay in the closet.
Or is it? I’ll be the first to admit I have very little understanding of the homosexual experience. It could very well be that a homosexual Roz would be in the closet if not every single Indiana resident knew that she was homosexual. It just seems to me that there’s a certain leap between keeping your sexual orientation secret and not creating a viral video that announces it to every single person on the planet. There are a lot of things that I’m not secretive about, but that I also have not stood before the Canadian people and proclaimed to be so.
I’m a gamer. Everyone who knows me knows I’m a gamer. Strangers could plausibly guess that I’m a gamer due to my tendency to be playing videogames in the public view with such frequency. The general Canadian citizenry is probably unaware. I’m not in the closet. I simply haven’t taped myself playing Tales of Symphonia on hard mode and released it in a manner that is accessible to everyone,
You act like Robins asking the moon of her when she’s just asking her sister to not go out of her way to do things that will negatively impact her career,
Where Robin comes to be in the wrong is this whole forgiveness schpeal she’s doing. Now she’s in essence asking Roz to publicly act in a way that is not true to herself, and that’s a really shitty thing to do. Doesn’t change the fact that expecting her sister to not publicly release any sex videos in ways that bring it back to the family was entirely reasonable.
As near as I can tell this is a pretty basic dispute between siblings we’re seeing here. It happens to touch on some sociopolitical matters, but ultimately we’ve got sister A and sister B.
Sister B was shafted by sister A’s actions. Sister A’s response is “I didn’t do anything wrong” to which sister B replies “Yeah, but you still shafted me”.
Sister A is doing her own thing one day when Sister B comes storming in unannounced, throwing a scene and asking unreasonable things of Sister A. Sister A says “You’re being totally unreasonable here.”, Sister B replies “Dude, I really need you to do this.”
We can talk about politics until the cows come home but ultimately this is two siblings doing what they do best. Driving eachother crazy.
In this situation you propose that Roz is gay, you are expecting her to not post a photo on a dating website. Never ask someone out. To lie if the subject of sexuality genuinely comes up. To not be seen in public. On a date, holding hands. Giving a beloved person a kiss, hell, given a random person you just met a kiss if you wanted to. It could mean she cannot be seen at certain clubs or events. Never allowed to marry or adopt. Not allowed to stand up and protest publically.
If she did any of these things, she’s essentially ‘creating’ a viral video/image/story by making it easy for people to spot her and report on it. The only way she can counter that is t
None of these things are creating a press conference. But then, since when is uploading a video a press conference either?
Don’t be ridiculous. There’s a clear and definable difference between any of your examples and her publicity stunt.
I even specifically laid out a situation where it wasn’t secret at all and everything she’d want to do in order to live her lifestyle is being done. Everyone in her social circle is aware. Strangers know because of the frequency with which she publicly engages in homosexual activity. There just isn’t a video flying around with the intent of making her homosexual status a news item.
As I’ve pointed out repeatedly Roz doesn’t hide anything about her that could negatively impact Robin’s career. There are at least sixteen photo opportunities she presents a day that could be used against Robin.
The difference between living your life as you please, and feeling the need to proclaim to the entire world that you’re living this way is not small.
drs laid out a scenario where Roz would be in the closet, but in order for that to be an equatable scenario Roz would have to be secretive about her desire for an active sex life, not go around preaching the values of safe sex or wearing a condom hat, keep her opinions about God’s gender hidden, etc etc.
Roz has never been in the closet and Robin hasn’t objected to Roz living her life in the open as she chooses. The point of contention is a singular sex video.
And since when isn’t uploading a video holding a press conference? Just cuts out some of the middle men.
Wiki
“A news conference or press conference is a media event in which newsmakers invite journalists to hear them speak and, most often, ask questions”
Let’s see. It’s a media event. Roz put it together so that society could hear her speak and with the expectation that they would ask questions. Sure sounds like a press conference to me.
And once again I do profess that having little knowledge of the homosexual experience it could very well be that even at this point Robin’s expectations would be unreasonable and hurtful. I don’t know. I just don’t think that “In the closet’ is a proper descriptor for Roz’s situation at all.
You are of course drawing conclusions about what has happened behind the scenes. Assuming that Robin hasn’t contacted Roz about it in the past. If Roz was gay (and she might not necessarly be straight, but she’s definitely into dudes) a request made out of love to ‘be a little less gay’ can result in backlash in the form of gay pride parade appearances. The same way a request to be ‘not so slutty’ would respond with, say, a video getting put online as the same kind of reaction to being told to be who you are.
I agree that ‘in the closet’ doesn’t describe Roz’s situation, but I can imagine a concerned-for-the-blue-collar-vote Robin trying to stuff her into one.
“A news conference or press conference is a media event in which newsmakers invite journalists to hear them speak and, most often, ask questions” Where, when and how were jounalists invited? How were they invited to ask Roz questions? The rationale you give would make every single cat video be a press conference as well.
I seriously am not condoning Robin’s behavior or condemning Roz’s. Just saying that we’ve only seen Robin object to one act of Roz’s, and it was not an objection to the degree of “Could you please stay in the closet and keep your lifestyle a secret”. It sounds like we’re in agreement there.
As far as the press conference thing goes, the journalists are here aren’t they? They didn’t just swing by in a completely unpredictable and unprovoked manner. Roz created the video with the intent that they would come. Whether a formal invitation was offered is semantics.
Roz’s video was effectively a neon sign proclaiming “Journalism Party at the Desanto residence!” This wasn’t an unpredictable outcome. Like tossing blood into shark infested waters.
You show me a cat video that’s been engineered to have that effect on the journalistic community and I will indeed rule it a press conference.
Seriously though, I do maintain that this is ultimately just a sibling dispute with political garnishings. They’re hardly the first pair of siblings who’s incompatible lifestyles have had a tendency to keep them at eachother’s throats.
I strongly suspect they both hold highly unrealistic expectations of eachother as well as more than a fair portion of mutually unreasoned feelings. In short, they’re both being dicks to eachother. Nothing downright villainous. No one’s actively trying to set back any cause or anything. Just a couple sisters getting eachother’s fur all ruffled up.
Oi, vey. Every new panel with Roz speaking makes me just want to slap her more…harder…and longer.
You own your body. You do with it what you want, who you want, and when you want. Hoo-rah!
Why feel the need to demonstrate this ownership, this sexual freedom, by spreading it out all over & for the world to see too? Not to mention, sharing it with everyone you meet just to PROVE said ownership & freedom?
Being a slut just for the sake of having the freedom to do so is pointless, immature, and…I think…signs of having incredibly low self-esteem.
“Every new panel with Roz speaking makes me just want to slap her more…harder…and longer.”
but that’s okay, because she’s into that sort of thing.
[insert “With your penis” joke here]
Damn, you beat me to it.
“Why feel the need to demonstrate this ownership, this sexual freedom, by spreading it out all over & for the world to see too?”
Well it certainly helps her _have_ more sex! (See also Joe)
I find it curious that people still are claiming that the only reason she sleeps with people is to spite other. Is it that hard to imagine that there are people who simply enjoy casual sex?
And no, the fact that she was politically motivated to film it doesn’t mean that political motivations were required to get her in the sack.
but women can’t enjoy sex. They only like being in the kitchen and the bible.
Most women feel sex is terrible but they are forced into it by their powerful must have baby urges since sex is only good if it makes babies.
Men on the other hand all enjoy sex, meat, guns, and riding horses.
It doesn’t even mean that there was NOTHING BUT political motivations for filming it. She could have just, you know, liked the idea of filming sex.
SP! Roz, on the other hand, has entire thumb drives FULL of political motivations.
Well it is certainly that female chauvinism that Ariel Levy talks about – feeling empowerment and “fighting” through the objectification of one’s self and participating in raunch culture. I would argue that Roz is using this approach, actually. She is trying to deliver a message in a way that objectifies her rather than a way that empowers and frees her as a sexual entity, however. But maybe the trappings of an object are where she finds freedom since her sexuality is important to her above all else. Conversely, perhaps she is trying to strip away the confinement of objectification by declaring it null – she said so herself that this is “how far we need to go” as a society.
She may feel empowered and she may be fighting against the idea of objectification and the idea that moral judgments belong in other people’s sex lives (which obviously they don’t), but in the end she is merely posing as the object. Even if she were to clarify herself in a later article I think it would be difficult to avoid that. Boobs and butts scream louder than words.
So the point of this post is that there is justification for slapping people if they are sluts. And that there are ~special criteria~ for being a slut, lest ye be judged, but you don’t actually need to have this criteria because people will jump to that point straight away anyway.
Gotcha.
No, I don’t want to slap her for being a slut. I have no right to do that sort of thing because of the way she lives her life.
I want to slap her for her childish attitude & immature reasoning for WHY she’s doing what she does! She KNOWS she’s hurting her sister…for one reason or another…but she doesn’t CARE. Also, her sexual freedom is more important to her than ANYTHING else? That speaks greatly about her self-worth…and it’s pathetic.
What does that speak about her self worth? How is that pathetic?
Roz expresses herself verbally and visually – peacefully. And you want to slap her for it. What does that say about yourself?
If her sexual freedom is more important than her intelligence, her pride, love, honor, etc. you’re going to tell me that’s NOT pathetic? She says sexual freedom is above ALL else. That’s pathetic AND sad.
Expressing yourself can be done calmly & quietly, withoiut insults and yelling. The latter gains you attention, but rarely respect.
Wow. That’s a lot of arguing over completely worthless matters.
Roz is absolutely right.
All women should be sexually free. Now fight for what you believe in.
Fight in your classes, fight in your workplaces, fight on the internet, and fight in the streets.
With sex.
With me.
Well show them. Well show them ALL.
….
………
……
No fat chicks.
Shouldn’t read this stuff at work people probably think I’m crazy for laughing out loud!
“We will fight them on the beaches”
Most out of place Churchill quote? Maybe… maybe.
*We shall fight on the beaches
Silly me
Thanks for mixing in a little fat shaming to go with all the slut shaming, that totally helps things.
If you were going for a serious tone with that comment, having Walky with his thumbs up underminded it.
Yeah I think I have to go for whimsical sarcasm in my posts. I miss having Roz when I get ranty here.
Also, ‘undermined’.
I ususally check a word if I am not certain if I spelt it correctly or not but sometimes brainfarts happen.
It’s all good, I was just in the mood to be pedantic.
And I’m shallow.
You complete me.
I dunno, Roz.
You could have made that point in a much less visible and political way.
Be honest with yourself. You filmed yourself having sex with a guy you barely even knew (if at all), not to express your sexual freedom, not to make a political statement, but to hurt your sister.
Is she just rationalizing her “attack” on her sister with her politics? Maybe, but she IS dedicated enough to wear the condom hat
Condom hats are the new fezzes.
“Condom hats are cool” *adjusts coat*
Okay Roz has skyrocketed up to my favorite.
We gonna break 300 comments?
OK, Roz, you have rights. Noone’s teeling you you don’t have the right to sex. But you did something (well within your rights) that would hurt your family. That would hurt someone you (presumably) love.
You chose to make a political statement, even though it would hurt your family (sister). She wasn’t doing something GOOD or something BAD, in and of itself, but it had consequences for Robin, as much as you wish it didn’t. It SHOULDN’T, but it did.
A second point. You made pornography. Leaving my personal opinions out of it entirely, you had to know that a sizable chunk of the population would judge you, and dislike you for it.
No judgement of the act itself by me, I’m judging you doing something that would hurt your sister.
You refraining from giving me all your money hurts me. I would be undeniably better off if I had your money.
Give me your money – or you should be criticized for not doing so. For hurting me. Stop hurting me how.
(Stop hurting me now. Dammit.)
The question is now: will we break 400 comments?
Being there, done that, now the new target is 500.
433 and still going strong!
463 comments in counting. At this rate, it will reach 500 in no time.
Going for 600!
So… is running for congress at 25… bad? How old is she now?
Its not a matter of being bad.
Robin is asking where her Sister, a very young adult, and I use that phrase by its definition, as these, and all college students are still children…. Got her activist leanings.
Well, Robin ran a political campaign when she was 25. Thats a very…. Active thing to do at such a young age, depending on your educational needs or how much time you spent after high school before going to college, many people are still pursuing their supposed educational calling or one of the other various wild goose chases of their youth. So its a little silly when Robin asks that question, as her sister is following in her footsteps. Albeit in a different… Sexy, sweaty… Sticky kind of way.
Of course Robin doesnt have anything on me. I was very active when I was 25.
In bed.
With your mom.
For a nickel.
Moms. Paying my college education one nickel at a time.
Seriously dude, stop winning the thread. That’s enough already
The author posted this on his Tumblr. Specifically to shut up Absofflab and Sam. Why? They both apologised, on the internet even!
An AGENDA, you say?????
Roz: Let’s fuck while I video tape us.
Joe: Sweet!
Roz: I’m gonna put it on the Internet, too. Is that okay with you?
Joe: That’s even sweeter!
Roz: Now, I have to warn you, this video furthers my personal agenda.
Joe: An agenda? Oh no! Now I won’t have sex with you on video! This changes everything! I hate agendas even more than I hate not having sex with hot chicks on video that people can watch and verify that I had sex with a hot chick! Phew! Thank god you told me about there being an agenda! I almost made a costly mistake! Now let’s put our pants back on and read the Bible.
(OK, there may have been others in the 300 comments above, but they used the word “Agenda”, so you probably responded to them)
I’m sorry if I’ve pissed people off, and I’m especially sorry if I pissed you off, David. That was never my intention. I really do enjoy reading your work, and I guess I got so vocal about this because of that. Have I beaten the horse into mulch on this issue? Yeah, I’m pretty sure I have. My views on the matter haven’t changed, but I’ll not harangue on it. I’ll just keep reading and see where it goes, adding my input now and again.
You’re a good writer, and I’m sure whatever you have in store will be interesting and thought provoking. You’ve done an excellent job with that so far.
Holy Shit. A sincere apology on the internet. Wonders will never cease, eh?
You’ve got my respect at least, Sam.
I didn’t really write that to shut up anybody. If I wanted to shut up anybody, I would have posted that here, rather than somewhere else. Posting on my Tumblr was for my own benefit.
Frankly, I’d rather let my comics speak for themselves. I try not to put Word of God stuff into the comments, when I can avoid it, because that can often end discussion. And I like discussion.
From what I can gather, their posts were about how Joe knew that it would be online, but that he may or may not have known about Roz’s agenda, judging from that strip you pointed out.
You didn’t put in a strip where Joe mentions that Roz told him about her agenda, for good reason. It would have telegraphed this storyline here a bit too clearly, or maybe it wasn’t important to you. They read it differently.
They weren’t asserting Joe would care, which is what you parodied on your Tumblr, but that he was unwittingly used as a political chesspiece.
We all agree (now) that Joe was told about her agenda, and didn’t care, and doesn’t care now (He’s proud of himself, even!
) Problem solved?
I’m getting the sneaking suspicion that Joyce is going to respond with an equally valid argument, somehow. Just from the symmetry
Here: http://www.dumbingofage.com/2011/comic/book-1/06-yesterday-was-thursday/continue/
and first panel here: http://www.dumbingofage.com/2011/comic/book-1/06-yesterday-was-thursday/guest/
Or she could just pass out the Chick Tracts.
Who is “Congressional Aide”? You said he was someone from the Walkyverse, but who?
Any reason you didn’t tag him like everyone else?
That’s literally the only name he’s ever had. He was there when Robin first awoke from her Cadbury cereal fugue state and told her she was a congresswoman now.
I wish I could agree with Roz, I really do, but I can’t sympathize with someone who put a sex tape in the internet without the other person’s permission. Yeah, I get it, Joe is okay with it. But if she was so sure he wouldn’t mind, how difficult would it have been for her to go ‘hey btw I’m posting this in redtube, you okay with that?’.
For the love of Christ.
Drama!
Is Ethan gay?
Is this a meme now? God, I hope so
Oh, believe me, my delete button will keep that from happening.
I just hope that this wont lead you to Author Disillusionment.
I love you.
NOOOOO! At least let us get to 500 comments first?
The way this thread is going, it seems fairly likely to reach that number.
Were nearing 600! I’ll get us there myself if I have to;)
Hey neuroteaser. I realize you’re probably a troll, but since everyone else just got annoyed by your comment:
Roz DID ask Joe’s permission. Joe told Dorothy (and I’m paraphrasing): “Yeah, she asked me first and I’m totally cool with the idea” back when Dorothy interviewed him for the newspaper. Willis even JUST PUBLISHED A BLOG ENTRY POINTING THIS OUT.
so, y’know, do your research
Why is it that lately whenever two people do anything remotely unconventional sexually in a webcomic, someone feels a need to cry rape or sexual abuse/harrassment? Roz’s statement was brilliant and I’m smacking myself for not seeing her point earlier.
Oh hey, we passed 300 comments. Yay controversy?
CONTROVERSY… FCUK YEAH!
What does a clothing line have to do with this?
I don’t agree with the people who say that Roz is going to wrong way for spreading her ideas about sexual freedom.
The way I see it, she posted a sex tape and the maybe she told three people about it. Even if she planned on it going viral, she is still not going on people faces and yelling at them “GO WATCH MY VIDEO!!!1!!one!”
She posted the video, she shut up about it and just watched the reaction to it unfold around her. How is that in any way shoving her opinion on people’s faces?
It’s not until NOW, when her sister comes to press her about that she shouts.
The way I see it, Roz has been really nonchalant about the whole affair until Robin came in to shove in her face (I don’t think the argument before Robin walked in was that terrible).
As for the rest, I still completely agree with Roz on this issue. As long as it’s consensual, it DOES NOT MATTER with whom she has sex with!
More specifically, she spoke out when she was ‘forgiven’, as if she had done something wrong.
the act pretty much shows her opinion
You go, Roz! FIGHT THE POWER WITH YOUR NETHER REGIONS.
I can totally see why she’d be bitter and making dramatic gestures at this point. Sure, maybe it’s not super fair to leave Robin to have to deal with it, but it isn’t fair for Roz to be used as a scapegoat to appease conservative voters, either! I was always a little mixed on Roz in SP! (I’d imagine we were supposed to be) but I honestly feel like she’s been nothing but likable so far in DoA, while remaining totally in-character.
It’s funny that this topic is in today’s comic – my husband and I were having a related conversation yesterday! Well… an argument, not a conversation. Not that this adds to the discussion going on here… umm… o.o
Her actions have hurt her sister, no?
Next thing you know she’ll be a prostitute and that’ll really show ’em who controls what right?
I agree totally. Roz shamed her entire family and the only proper response is an honor killing.
Yeah! How dare a woman exercise her ability to make choices about her own body and life without consulting her family on whether it’s okay to make said choices. That bongo!
Joyce in panel 2 is looking at Roz in panel 1…
Without getting into the arguments, because sweet merciful clusters of cusswords:
Did Roz get a record of Joe’s ID, then archive it? If not, Robin may have a weapon.
A weapon in what? Her forgiveness cannon?
Besides, all that would happen according to that doctrine, would be an investigation being launched, which would quickly discover that Joe, being a freshman in college of at least 18 years of age, was of Legal age.
Heh, forgiveness cannon.
I forgive you.
KABLAMMO!!!!!!!!!!!!
Well, that’s where you’re wrong.
See, the code in question (18 USC 2257 — the Child Protection and Obscenity Enforcement Act) is not about whether or not Joe would be of legal age. It is about whether or not Roz previously determined and documented if Joe was of legal age. It’s not enough that Joe be legal — Roz needs to have proof on file he was legal.
This is the difference between the spirit of the law and the letter, mind. The spirit is ‘preventing underage porn.’ The practice is ‘legal means to shut down an otherwise legal porn studio and send people to jail as a political ploy.’
Which, you know, is exactly what could happen to Roz if she posted a sex video without documenting it.
If I remember correctly, they’re in the state of Indiana. In Indiana, the age of consent is 16. Joe is definitely older than that.
Yeah, but I think pornography has an 18 minimum under federal law, even when the age of the sex itself is younger.
Personaly, I find the very idea that Joe might be jailbait deliciously ironic.
Yup — and further requires anyone who distributes or produces said pornography have documented proof that they did due diligence about it. If Roz doesn’t have proper proof that she checked and recorded Joe’s age before the video was shot and posted (say, by having Joe show his ID to the camera before they started the sex in the rough cut, or else having a notarized copy of the ID or the like in her files, which would include a date), she could be subject to criminal penalties. Like up to five years in prison, fines, or both.
Remember, adults! No posting of the amateur porn without keeping records, or else the government will get you!
You know, I just had a weird and unlikely thought. What if Roz and Robin planned this whole thing out together for some scheme as yet unknown?
Like I said, unlikely. Still, that’d be a bit of a curveball, eh?
I think Roz is going to make herself the “extremist” to force Robin to either lead a sexual liberation movement or watch her political career crash and burn. MLK Jr. and Gandhi are the most famous protestors of our time, and both of them succeeded in part due to a contrast- King vs. Malcolm X and Black Power and Gandhi’s peacefulness vs. British violence. Roz is the Malcolm to what she hopes will be Robin’s MLK Jr., and if the backlash over her tape escalates too far she can give her sister a whole “death threats vs. legitimate political campaign” theme too. It’s not exactly an agreement, but it’s pretty close- Roz knows her sister well enough to plan this, just like she read Joe well enough to know how he’d feel about their sex tape being more than another entry in some porn site’s “amateur” section.
That’s actually one of my biggest issues with Roz as shown so far. It’s manipulating people and treating them like tools instead of thinking agents. Does Joe care about his being used as a tool for a political statement? Of course not, he’s Joe. He probably wouldn’t have cared even if Roz had made it clear the video wasn’t just for wank material. But he never had the choice to say “Yeah, that’s cool. I don’t mind at all. Let’s get to the sexing.” And if we go with the idea of her doing this to manipulate Robin, then that’s in the same category. Treating people like tools instead of agents.
Maybe she feels just talking with her sister won’t accomplish anything and that she was forced to take this kind of extreme measure. I know I’m probably sounding harsh for this, but I really don’t have a lot of sympathy for that. There are other avenues available to get your point across without treating people like tools.
I guess it’s just the idea of “It’s better to ask for forgiveness, than to ask for permission” annoys me. Granted, Roz isn’t asking for forgiveness here so the saying doesn’t quite match up. It just seems like she believes it will all work out after the fact and that makes whatever she does now okay. Which, quite frankly, is childish and arrogant. And also kind of terrifying.
“Of course not, he’s Joe. He probably wouldn’t have cared even if Roz had made it clear the video wasn’t just for wank material.”
Jesus fucking CHRIST are you honestly still not getting what happened despite it being linked DIRECTLY TO YOU.
I think we’re having a misunderstanding, and I apologize if I was being unclear. I know about the fact Joe was asked for permission about the filming. I’ve read comic: http://www.dumbingofage.com/2011/comic/book-1/05-media-rumble/interview-2/
What I was getting at was the fact that Roz never seemed to have told him the video was for a political statement instead of just wank material. Joe wasn’t given all the information involved into what he agreed to. Does he care after the fact? No. We’ve seen that. Would he have cared if he actually had been given all the relevant information involved? Probably still not. My issue was that Joe, as far as I’ve seen, never had the option to exercise his judgement and say “Yeah, I don’t mind. Let’s get to it.” Joe was dealt with as a tool instead of a thinking agent. That he’s shown he doesn’t care after the fact is irrelevant.
Again, I apologize for any confusion. I hope I didn’t offend.
http://itswalky.tumblr.com/post/9696386248/an-agenda-you-say
Sigh.
Yes, he wouldn’t have cared if he had known Roz was going to use the tape for a political agenda. I’ve never said he wouldn’t. But as far as I’ve seen in the comics, he was only given “sex tape put on the Internet” and not what she was going to be using that tape to do. The fact that he doesn’t care after the fact doesn’t change that he was never given the option to say he didn’t care before the sexing started. It’s a little like signing a contract when someone has cleverly hidden something in there so you don’t notice everything you’re agreeing to.
I’m sorry if I’ve been confusing, but I really can’t be any clearer than this. I don’t mean to be a bother, but I’m seeing I have been. I don’t like causing conflict or causing people grief, so I’ll just stay off the comments until more comics are put up. I apologize for frustrating you.
You are frustrating because I just linked you something written by the writer that explicitly sets up Joe as knowing this was more than wank fodder. He was proactively warned that this was for an agenda and he said (via sarcasm) that HE DID NOT CARE. This was not before the fact, this was after it. If he had’ve said “Wait, what agenda was this?” and Roz was dishonest with him, THEN you’ve got a leg to stand on with this. As it is…. yeah.
The Tumblr chat I posted isn’t canon. It didn’t really happen. I only wrote it to underline how I feel it’s absurd that “having an agenda” is something that apparently matters.
Ooooh, that nasty Roz, she’s trying to ACCOMPLISH something! Did JOE know that she’s trying to ACCOMPLISH something? I bet if he did, he totally wouldn’t have helped make that sex video!
No, that’s ridiculous.
It’s dumb that “agenda” is a dirty word, as if being proactive is a sin. Hey, you know what? If you do something on tape that’s against your political beliefs? I think that’s on you, not the person who “had a political agenda.”
Hmm, well, my apologies on misrepresenting that as ‘official’.
Invisiblemoose, Sam is making his opinion known, and while you may not agree with it, the fact is he is making a fair point that isn’t stating that Joe wasn’t A) Asked permission to post it, and B) Told what it would be used for. Sam is pointing out that Roz appears to be treating people as tools, not people.
I’m not asking you to agree with this point, I’m asking you to not be disrespectful to Sam’s posts since he is making a legitimate point that hasn’t been covered in the comic YET.
I apologize in advance if I have:
Offended you, invisiblemoose. It was not my intention.
Misrepresented your point, Sam; although, I am fairly certain I haven’t.
And if I have over stepped any boundaries, Mr. Willis, since it is not my job to tell people what to do. I just hate seeing people getting raged at when they are making a legitimate point.
The only boundaries you stepped over was perpetuating the annoying lie that Roz didn’t ask Joe permission to post the video online. Please read the front page.
I have read the front page. I know Roz asked Joe permission. I knew that before you had to post that as news, which I agree you shouldn’t have had to do. I obviously didn’t state myself correctly if you thought I was trying to say Roz didn’t ask permission. I’m sorry for that. You are easily one of my favourite webcomic writers/artists and I would never go out to intentionally cause a problem.
I fail at reading. Let’s be friends.
If that is what Sam is trying to say then he’s not putting that through.
But to answer the point you have just put forward? Sure, Roz used Joe. But guess what, he used her back. And both consented to being used. It’d be different if Roz was being deceitful, but as it stands I’m not of the opinion that using someone is a problem at all.
Fair enough point. You are absolutely right, Joe did use her too. I didn’t think of that right away. My apologies. You make a valid arguement, and I bow down to you on this matter. Thank you for clarifying that for me.
Then my apologies again. I was being unclear.
I’d actually say that since Joe dealt with Roz as a thinking agent toward the goal of having sex with her, then there really wasn’t any “using” on his part as I’m defining it here. I’ve been using it defined as coercive in some manner. Since I have not been getting that across, I’m again sorry that I haven’t been explaining myself well.
I also have no issue with Roz having an agenda. David is absolutely right in that being proactive is not some kind of sin. That was never a concern of mine. My concern was that Joe was apparently given “let’s tape this and put it on the Internet! That’ll be hot!” instead of the real reason Roz wanted it on the Internet, which appears so far to be toward making a political point.
Does Joe care after the fact about it? No. We’ve seen that. Would Joe have cared if Roz told him before the sexing started? Still no. But he never had the chance to say he didn’t care about the tape’s real purpose. He was not dealt with as a thinking agent, but as a tool.
People should not be dealt with as tools, but always thinking agents that one must come to terms with. This may be something we’ll just have to agree to disagree on. I just wanted to make myself perfectly clear since I was causing confusion.
Dammit. So much for laying off the comments. I’ll be signing out now. If I’m still confusing, I’m sorry and will address anything that was unclear. If not, laters.
to @David 2:16
I think you misread @G.S.Mercs. He/she wrote
“he is making a fair point that isn’t stating that Joe wasn’t A) Asked permission to post it, and B) Told what it would be used for”
which can be summarized as
“He… isn’t stating that joe wasn’t asked permission”
The double negative is kinda confusing, yeah, but G.S.Mercs isn’t claiming joe was uninformed, or that Sam said that. So… he isn’t perpetuating a lie.
P.S. Your comics are awesome
Here’s a thought for Roz. If Robin’s voters vote against her because of Roz’s actions then they actually did hurt someone else.
Is Roz to blame or is society? Is Robin being “hurt” in the scenario even a bad thing?
both. And if she wanted re-election then she is hurt by the loss so the quotation marks are inappropriate.
Overall I think they’re both being self-absorbed obnoxious twits. I prefer my self-absorbed obnoxious twits to be of the practical variety rather than principled. The practical ones can actually accomplish something, the principled ones are basically “I’m a special snowflake unique in the world, and so is everyone else. But I’m the most unique and special!”
If the only reason voters decide to NOT to vote for Robin IS because her little sister is a camwhore, then those people get the govenment they deserve.
Agreed!
To paraphrase Ben Franklin, “He who would see others’ freedoms taken because they offended him deserves to one day be offended by the loss of his own”.
but people are free to feel how they feel as long it doesn’t hurt anyone. Roz wants to deny people’s rights to be offended by her actions
Where are you getting this from?
Do my “quotation marks” upset “you?”
Where has Roz claimed she believes she is the most unique and special?
And again, do you think Robin’s political campaign getting hurt a bad thing?
it’s a phrase to describe a general attitude. She does say her sexual freedom is important to her above all else. Right in this strip. Considering the way the world is I hope that attitude is hyperbole.
And I don’t know anything about Robin’s politics. I know losing would hurt her.
As stated before, sexual freedom is a pretty fucking serious thing.
But it isn’t THE MOST serious thing in the world. There are plenty of things that are far more serious. I’d even let it pass if the issue was about a more extreme case of “Sexual freedom” , but valuing “the right to not be looked down on for my sexual tendencies” above ALL ELSE is at least a bit extreme. Thus the claim by jason that they hope it is Hyperbole. It probably is. That doesn’t make the hope any less valid.
It’s also no more right for her to cause “harm” to someone else for the sake of her freedoms than it is for people to think that those freedoms are “wrong”. It isn’t her decision to make when the risk applies to someone else, any more than it should be society’s decision how much she is “allowed” to have sex. It’s hypocritical to try to make a point that she should be allowed to make her own decisions without being shamed for it by knowingly making a decision that has significantly negative consequences for someone else, even if it SHOULDN’t have that effect.
Society is to blame for her having to make the decision to begin with. She’s to blame for the choice she made. It’s hardly an unforgivable choice, but as far as I’m concerned, it was still a bad one.
There was only one claim being staked in that video, and it wasn’t by Roz. It was by Joe. Joe was staking the claim that he is willing to Joe anyone… with his penis.
Also he is forgiven by a Congresswoman and most likely end up being known as the Dickmonster.
Joe’s life seem to be going well right now…
I want that as my last name.
Richard Monster, DDS, glad to meet you!
400 comments and counting. We have a new record!
Given that it’s the weekend, we may go beyond 500! Who knows, we may yet make the lofty 600 mark.
600 approaching fast!
401…
And a nickel.
456…
I think these posts where we count the number is kinda cheap.
…coindicentally, 461.
It totally is cheap now we are over the 500 mark.
Hypocrisy FTW
Hypocrisy’s given us 574 so far!
How dare she pretend she enjoys sex if it damages her sisters career. She should be in the kitchen reading the bible and baking a cake at the same time, for Jesus.
It’s as bad as the women who think they can enjoy sex for reasons other then babies. By the way they can’t. The female orgasm is a myth made by women to get men the off them when they thinks they are baby ready or are accomplish their evil plans. (evil plans are the only non-baby reason women have sex)
Next thing you know, she’ll come out as bi and that certainly would damage her sisters career. Cause we all hate them gays with how they spend all day plotting against our society.
I thought I’d just join in where I no feel the majority of the commenters are after I read all the replies.
god. 5 edits before I post and nowhere near enough proof reading. Seriously annoyed at the way a lot of you feel about women’s equality though.
I’d like to think most of the comments about Roz’s actions are more directed toward the balance between individuality and responsibility toward other people, and whether or not a line was crossed somewhere on it, rather than shots against women’s equality.
But I could be wrong, goodness knows I have been quite often, and that’s the way it’s coming off as.
There are also quite a few that are convinced she’s a whore as well. It’d be too depressing to work out their proportion.
One guy called her a whore. “Eric”. And he said it was for posting the video under her real name was sexually loose behaviour. Don’t call us out for shit we HAVEN’T done,.
What do you think it says that I didn’t give any specific examples in that post and you think I was talking about you?
Hmm, well apparently you haven’t been posting (at least, not under the name gaspacho). But there are more than a few post who are judging her for posting the video.
You said quite a few were convinced she was a whore. at the the time of posting, only one guy, “eric” used the word “whore” or “Whor” or “hor”.
leaving my opinions out of it, you were stating quite a few of us think that way, when only one of us does. Were nicer than that, buddy
Fair enough. there has been a lot of judgement but only that one guy called her a whore. So my bad there.
Good lord, this comic officially has more comments in it than this entire webcomic has pages. Then again so do most of the others, From what I know, your average is about 250 :3
I finally figured out what bugs me most about Roz. It’s the waste of her “activist” talents. She could have brought forth so much more serious social matters like poverty, domestic abuse, the environment, things like that. I’m not saying sexual freedom isn’t a problem, but It’s not exactly at the top of the list of societal problems we face in the world today.
Quick! What are you doing here arguing on a webcomic discussion thread when you could also personally be addressing these concerning societal problems!
…or perhaps it’s possible to multi-task the various issues out there in the world. If not then I couldn’t complain about the phone call I have at work making me miss lunch because my neighbour broke his leg. He couldn’t complain because around the corner someone is in traction after being run down by a car. That person couldn’t complain because at least they didn’t get left in a vegetative state like the person in their ward in the hospital, etc etc etc.
Besides that, sexual freedom is a pretty fucking important thing and much more far-reaching than ‘I can put up a sex video if I want to’.
I think it’s more than that. Roz is basically saying ‘I don’t want to be forced to look pretty for the camera every moment of every day. I want to live my life how I choose, and what you say shouldn’t change that.’ In a way she’s also disconnecting her actions from her sister in that statement, but her opponents would still link them regardless.
Personally, I am in favor of Roz. Slandering based on relatives is like saying [Removed for the sake of not appearing racist/sexist/religionist/whatever], the person shouldn’t be blamed, but the PEOPLE often reflect on the person regardless because of a (sometimes extremely flimsy) connection.
Sorry for the DP, but… If I were gay or a woman, Mike would officially be on my ‘Crush List’ and that happens to be an extremely short list as is (even with the sexual innuendos and such that most webcomics and such leave all over.)
We all love Mike. Probably because he makes absolutely no apologies for his behaviour, and subverts every notion of the “Jerk with a heart of gold”. And he’s awesome.
and she does that by putting herself on a camera for a period most would choose not to be.
So people should only make claims for individuality by conforming to the stuff that everyone else says is acceptable.
Right.
saying no one gets to judge me and then doing things that will get you judged is just going to get you pissed off.
There is nothing in one person’s power to keep another person from judging them if they want to.
How about “You get to judge me if you want but you STILL don’t get to tell me what to do with my life”?
There is nothing special about being an individualist, pretty much everyone is these days, I mean, when was the last time ANYONE ever claimed to be a conformist?
A great number of populist conservative political viewpoints claim just that: they are “representing the will of the people” and that they’re “fighting the liberal progressive agenda” of their opponents. In other words, they’re proud to be conformist.
Lots of people claim to represent the masses, but how many people say they just follow the crowd?
This isn’t about how you should ONLY be nonconformist or else you’re just a sheep in the flock or wahtever. Jason just wanted to judge Roz for “putting herself on a camera for a period most would choose not to be” and I was calling BS on that.
and why can’t I? I can judge anyone I want anyway I want. It only affects the way I look at them, it’s not as though I could punish them. And anyone else has the ability to judge me.
Never said you couldn’t, sunshine. Just like I get to call BS on it if you post them in a forum. Stop crying freedom of speech on YOUR opinions when I’m doing the exact same thing.
Sexual freedom is a good litmus test for the other issues because it’s so fundamentally opposed to most conservatives’ worldview. Domestic violence can be opposed in theory by people who will bias the court system in favor of male attackers, thus supporting it in practice. Poverty aid can be unequally distributed if the folks in charge of it are biased against single moms, unwed couples, pre-marital sex, etc. The environment isn’t a cause Roz can do something like this for, and I bet she privately supports it as much as she can.
Not that she thought about any of this, of course, but since the debate started with a post about things she didn’t think about I don’t consider that an issue.
Holy shiznit it takes like 4 entire seconds of holding down the space-bar to reach the bottom of this page.
Right so my opinion is yeah, freedom, whatever. Freedom and gaining votes from hicks.
BOTH
AT THE SAME TIME
AMERRRRICA
Remember to use the “end” button next time
Wait, wait… hold on. Ethan’s gay?
(sarcasm/ He was gay in Shortpacked. It hasn’t been confirmed one way or the other for DoA!
/sarcasm
*ignores the sarcasm* And here’s the comic that all of you need to know about. http://www.dumbingofage.com/2011/comic/book-1/04-the-bechdel-test/awkward/ Ah, such a perfect moment for Mike.
464 comments in counting. C’mon 500.
You haven’t got money riding on this do you?
No. Just wanted to round it off.
C’mon, 600
It might make it yet but the hours before the next comic tend to be the deadest.
Every Roz comic thus far in DOA has been amazing and inspiring. I didn’t like her much in Shortpacked! and wasn’t sure what role she would play here, but ever since her Planned Parenthood scene I’ve loved her character here. She fights for what she believes in and doesn’t take shit for it. Whether you believe in what she preaches or not, that’s inspirational in my book.
You were inspired by the CONDOM HAT?
*taking you too literally* *being sarcastic*
It is pas t 500 now. This is probably a new record for David Willis.
It is by far, the previousa record was 368 comments in regard to Joyce believing that Billie was Mexican.
DoA comic MIXED
Wow, this is more controversial than “What is/is not racism?” ? that’s kinda sad, actually. Even though 27 of these comments are mine.
This has officially passed Shortpacked! ‘s comic “Glitch” http://www.shortpacked.com/2011/comic/book-13/02-the-new-girl/glitch/
as the most commented comic.
(although glitch might be more, if a lot of troll comments were removed)
Plus it got locked in the end, so that’s something to consider too.
Though that actually makes it even cooler in a way. Most comments ever while maintaining a relatively degree of civility.
Civil? What comment thread are you reading?
Relative. As in relative to the other thread.
This thread has not been so incredibly overun by hatespeech that the commenting feature has been disabled. Confirm or deny?
Confirm.
We’ll be locked eventually. maybe at 599 comments if he’s feeling particuluarly cruel
I don’t believe there will be a need for that, I doubt there will be all that many new comments from this time on as the newest comic will show up in under 6 hours from when I post this comment.
If Robin’s election gets screwed, sure I’ll be upset. I like Robin as a state rep. Roz also has a point, but she did say something stupid, mainly the sexual freedom above all else line. That’s just a priority check. Yes, sexual freedom is important and I respect her conviction, but that’s a bit overkill. She’s a well-intentioned extremist. If this does nosedive Robin’s career, it would be exactly what she’s fighting against, and I think Roz would actually step forward in Robin’s defense at that point. Can’t say for sure; not my comic. That’s just my understanding of events and characters as they are.
Dumbing of Age: Over 500 comments served.
This is the most comments I have ever seen on one strip.
This is more than that time you said you hated gay people, evne
*even. silly typos
I don’t think digging up the past – on something they already apologized for – is a cool move.
You’re right. Sorry Aizat. I was just meaning to comment on that “Glitch in the allspark = gay” comic on Shortpacked!, and I didn’t think about how I wrote it, which was insensitive. Sorry Aizat.
That’s all right. I know the feeling.
Reading all these angry disagreements is really awkward.
Just like the hotel room after prom.
I don’t think I’ve ever anticipated monday’s comic this much. If it cuts away to something like Billy and Sal eating lunch, I think my brain will boil
I would be quite happy if it cuts away to Billy and Sal eating lunch.
Sexy, sexy lunch.
…nom nom nom
I know we already have Monday’s comic, but that would’ve been really funny. XD
Sal: *noming on a sandwich*
Billie: *takes a bite and looks around*
Sal: ?
Billie: I just feel like thousands of nerds just screamed out in frustration, and it’s somehow my fault.
*a bite of her own sandwich
Whoa. I read this comic friday night, checked out the <150 comments, was amused/annoyed by the debate, and got on with my weekend. Popped back Sunday – yikes! We webcomic nerds sure love to argue
My tuppeny's worth: Roz's point is that society shouldn't punish Robin for her sister's actions. Roz didn't 'hurt' Robin with her actions – the voters might hurt Robin with their actions, and that’s wrong. Simple.
Also: ladies are allowed to like having sex. Just throwing that out there.
If we didn’t argue on the internet, all we would have left is porn and lolcats.
…and porn and lolcats is all you need.
I forgot fanfiction and wikis.
I think 600 comments is a record for this comic.
If it’s not, it should be. o.O This is a touch ridiculous. I’m all for spirited debate… but seriously? Did Milholland write this storyline or something?
600 comments.
…the fuck did I do with my weekend when I could’ve spent it here?
My only problem with Roz’s argument is the way she’s making it.. not the tape, I’m fine with that (even if she didn’t have Joe’s permission JUST FOR YOU, WILLIS). No, my problem is that she had an eloquent reason behind it, but it appears that the video was posted without context; without something tagged on to the end of it to say ‘this is me being free. You can’t take this away from me. Ever.’ the only way to have known this was for her agenda (boy, that does sound like a dirty word…) is to have been in this particular class, as the newspaper article actually detailing her side hasn’t happened.
I’m just waiting for the classic ‘did no one watch the video to the end?’ porn joke, really.
Her sexual freedom is what’s most important to her? That’s a shame, there are so many more important things…like Transformers.