Discussion (98) ¬
[ Comments RSS ]
David M Willis! @damnyouwillis.bsky.social ⋅ 9d
Alejandra Caraballo @esqueer.net ⋅ 12h
David M Willis! @damnyouwillis.bsky.social ⋅ 9d
David M Willis! @damnyouwillis.bsky.social ⋅ 9d
Phil Lewis @phillewis.bsky.social ⋅ 1dDavid M Willis! @damnyouwillis.bsky.social ⋅ 9d
David M Willis! @damnyouwillis.bsky.social ⋅ 9d
Rabbi Danya Ruttenberg @theradr.bsky.social ⋅ 22d
Loading ...
Why not see if Joe has shoes he can borrow? He probably would have some so he looks nice for the ladies.
IIRC, Joe doesn’t do laundry, ever, so he’s actually bound to have some slightly-used shoes…
That’s Walkyverse!Joe, and only because Willis had to write him as a slob rather than a sex fiend for newspapers when doing Redux. I wouldn’t doubt DOA!Joe’s only got a couple pairs. (Plus, who launders shoes?)
Also, Joe’s fairly massive compared to Walky. His shoes’ll probably be too big.
That’s what she said.
Joe’s shoes are gigantic, and all which that implies.
Everything about Joe are gigantic.
AWWWWW YEEEEEEEEEAAAAAAH!
He’s a clown.
I think that comes out somewhere around size 50 or so doesn’t it?
I can tell you right now that big feet ≠ big willy otherwise my Size 13 feet would be a good thing.
Anecdotal evidence is the best kind for figuring out whether or not something is true.
If the theory claims that if A is This then B must be That, then any evidence that contradicts the theory threatens the validity of said theory.
In my case, the theory that bigger the foot size, bigger the penis size doesn’t gel out…unfortunately.
Thanks for sharing, Plasma…
My understanding is that they actually did a study, and found that large feet do tend to correspond to larger… other bits–slightly. Thing is, guys with larger feet generally are larger overall, and so all their bits are proportionately larger, when you sample a large group.
Within that group, though, there’s as much variation as there is within any other random group, so it only shows up as a slight statistical blip.
So there’s kiiiind of some truth to it? But only incidentally, and it’s not a constant.
@Kryss LaBryn: In that case, I’m one of those statistical abnormalities.
Don’t worry Plasma I’m a whole boat load of statistical anomalies.
OR, alternately, “and all that implies” is not actually IF X, THEN Y MUST BE TRUE. It is a much fuzzier winkwink nudgenudge correlation comment, and does not have to subject itself to that kind of extremely rigid test.
Just sayin’.
Rigid tests are better than flaccid ones . . .
They smell?
They get in the way when dancing?
He has good balance, yet paradoxically always manages to stub his toeas?
Enormous feet?
*Sigh*
This is rather low, Dorothy. “Dumbing of Age” indeed.
I dunno, not really, seem reasonable enough. Danny got mad at her last time she showed up at his room.
She’s asking her ex, who she broke up with quite recently, to do a favor for her current boytoy. It’s kind of low.
uhhhh, she’s not actually. she’s having walky ask joe to ask danny. This removes any emotional pain from the situation. stop trying to make her into the villain here. also ‘boytoy’ huh? not that there’s anything wrong with that but i detect a hint of judgement in your use of it.
Well, it is a Mary avatar.
I’m not calling her a villain, just insanely insensitive and kind of a user. She’s using the ex she just very recently dumped in order to help out the guy whose pants she quickly jumped into. When really she COULD have just retrieved the original shoes, instead she decides to use her ex. Again.
It doesn’t matter if she does it through a trail of go-to people, if anything that makes it even more obvious she’s just using him because she herself knows that what she’s doing is pretty jerkish.
If she’s a user, she should get knee-pads and USE correctly!!
Am I mistaken or is your grav the magical jizz from Oglaf?
That is.
I am shocked, shocked, I tell you, at Dotty being… her miserable self.
Oh, well, I guess Mike needs a purpose. Beyond collecting nickles.
I think she’s just using Walky, too, based on how she’s treated him so far, so at least she’s consistent.
Of course, she *does* want to be a politician, so using people is probably par for the course, and is certainly not something she would want to get out of the habit of doing.
“Insanely insensitive” and “kind of a user” and “whose pants she quickly jumped into” are all also judgmental phrases.
“When really she COULD have just retrieved the original shoes,”
Actually, we covered this: no, she can’t just retrieve the original shoes. They are gone. Ruth probably took them and will not be giving them back. Whether or not you agree with the logic of those events, they are what has taken place, as per character dialogue and Willis’s comments in the discussion.
“It doesn’t matter if she does it through a trail of go-to people”
Again, Dorothy is probably trying to spare them BOTH the awkwardness. She knows it will be awkward and hard on Danny if he knows the full context. But come on: Walky is BORROWING A PAIR OF SHOES, for probably no more than a few hours. It’s not like Dorothy is demanding a kidney from Danny, or even asking him for money. She’s also not forcing him to spend time around her and Walky. As favors go, borrowing a pair of shoes for part of the day is pretty minor.
Also, “whose pants she quickly jumped into?”
They’ve not even had sex, so that ones just flat out wrong…
Not to mention what the hell is wrong if she had ‘jumped quickly into his pants’? This is the judgement I’m talking about. It makes it seem like you’ve got some weird resentment about a girl getting laid.
Yeah, being asked to lend someone shoes is not the same as ‘being used’. The only thing that could be bad about this is hurting Danny’s feelings if he saw Dorothy with a new guy. Which she’s avoiding by having Joe ask.
True, bro. Too true. Why does every storyline have to be clouded by one group labelling a character a heinous villain at the drop of a hat? Seriously, it keeps happening, as if people are just looking for someone to hate.
No matter how many times I read it, it’s not them asking Danny to lend them shoes. It’s them asking Joe to go back in and steal a pair of shoes for them to “borrow”, hopefully without Danny being aware of their absence until they are done with them and return them.
Now, Dorothy’s choices of words have been misleading before, so I await tomorrow proving me wrong and them asking Joe to go in and ask Danny to lend him some shoes to lend to his ex’s new boyfriend. Maybe that’ll happen; we have only Dorothy’s own words to suggest otherwise.
The fact that she feels it’s necessary to hide the interaction between two layers of intermediary person shows that even she thinks she’s doing something wrong there. She’s asking Walky to ask Joe to ask Danny something that she would not be comfortable asking Danny to do. That just reeks of manipulative behavior.
As for boytoy, I’m not judging. It just seems the most appropriate title, since she’s been taking charge in the relationship and they don’t seem to be particularly serious about their involvement as yet.
No it doesn’t. She could just be embarrassed that this even happened.
I’ve seen legally blonde. Harvard is fresh with silly escapades.
Well, in movies, every place is fresh with silly escapades.
Then I have been watching Civil War Documentaries wrong.
Absolutely! Sherman’s Zombie Pub Crawl to the Sea and the Flashmob of Gettysburg are the stuff of hijinks legend.
Depending on which version you’re watching, it’s also full of impromptu musical numbers.
Knock knock.
Who’s there?
Walky
Walky who?
Walky this joke has no punchline.
Walky Walkerton. I just realized how stupid that sounds.
Knock knock knock
Walky
Knock knock knock
Walky
Knock knock knock
Walky
I don’t think Danny’s going to kill you for dating his ex, Walky.
You’re right… he’ll eat you THEN kill you!
Which is a shame, because I imagine them having the sissiest slapfight ever witnessed. I like to picture Ruth and Billie watching in shock at the fact that their own fight was so much manlier.
I’ve seen worse.
He might want to, sure, but he has neither the muscles nor the nads to.
Fun Fact: Fighting with your nads is NOT a smart course of action.
Yeah, using your weak spot as an implement of fighting is not a good idea.
I know a couple of minibosses who might disagree.
Cock-fighting is just wrong.
Because real men resort to physical violence when displeased. The way to a woman’s heart is obviously to fight her new boyfriend. None of that being a rational human being and dealing with the situation without your fists. *The tone of this post has been dry sarcasm*
Real men (even non-stereotypical ones) *can* assert their manliness by sending the new boyfriend away without having lent him any shoes, however.
I find it interesting that Dorothy’s choice of words is “grab a pair of his shoes for us”. That doesn’t sound like asking permission to me.
Or you could not make it about “masculinity” in the first place.
I got nothing… how embarrassing.
Wow, this is so embarrassing that even the best has nothing to say.
What are you talking about? I have plenty to say!
I love that modesty of yours Yoto.
Along with my devilish handsomeness and unmatched brilliance, I’d say it’s my best feature.
You stole my +5 modesty sweatband! Give it back!
What’s on Walky’s pajama pants? Butt-tacos? Pac-men? Pokeballs? All of the above?
Dexter, the Head Alien’s FAAAAAAAAAAAACE.
I prefer butt-tacos, pac-men, and pokeballs. But I guess Dexter the Head Alien’s FAAAAAAAAAAAACE can hang out too.
I should’ve known that would become an avatar.
I actually LOL whenever I see that face. How could I not?
I know it is head alien, but I would vote for poke’balls if he has more than one pair (unlikely due to the current shoe deficiency).
Hey now, pants and shoes are different. Real men have *three* pairs of pants, and wash them whenever they get visibly dirty.
It’s clearly a bunch of clocks that are either showing Noon or Midnight.
Those are some Dalíed-up clocks.
They could have just apologized for almost hitting her with the sneaker and avoided all this.
Apologize to the Ruthweiler? But they need their femurs to live.
Ruthweilers like to chew sneakers anyway.
It’s Ruth! She’s an endlessly efficient plot device!
Does Dorothy’s looking out through the 4th wall at us indicate that this might have actually happened, Mr Willis?
I can’t see one panel where I feel she’s made eye contact with the “camera”.
The last? Plus her comment about writing the story elsewhere made me think that this might have been some shenanigans from Mr WIllis’ past.
She’s talking about HIDING elsewhere, silly.
oh
Cue Mission Impossible theme.
Maybe they should just ask Mike for some shoes.
He’ll only agree to give you his shoes if he can plant them squarely in your ass.
Mike’s only spare pair of shoes is filled with live scorpions.
Not asking Mike for shoes is the only thing right about this plan.
This is a flawless plan and there is no way it will turn out wrong.
I dunno, it’s relatively straightforward: I accidentally let my shoes into your room, can I have them back? Please?
“I love this plan! I’m excited to be a part of it! Lets do it!”
Wouldn’t it just be a whole lot simpler to go buy a pay of sneakers?
Yes, except he has class in two hours, and the nearest shoe store is probably too far.
Also, that would cost money.
pair of…dang no edit
I hope she sends it to Penthouse Forum!
“I never thought smelly feet would happen to me…”
Doesn’t anybody wonder why Dorothy now is in the boys wing in her underwear?
She likes to live dangerously.
That fellow in the red shirt (who due to process of elimination is confirmed to be Mike in disguise) doesn’t seem to care much. Aside from this being a dorm, are we sure that those are actually underwear? Perhaps they’re just quite short pajama shorts.
What. No watercooler disguise?