Joe’s a pig. Maybe he’d be happier as Kermit; he’d be dating his own kind. Not to mention Miss Piggy has a temper and a mean karate chop. That’d keep him in his place.
Really? O_o Not that I think that not knowing is wrong or I don’t believe you or anything; it’s just that everyone I know used to catch frogs/toads as kids and we never saw any tackle, so… Plus there’s the whole frog section in biology in elementary school with the boy frog sitting on top of the girl frog and fertilizing the eggs as she lays them. External fertilization = no need for penetrative sexual organs.
Damn. I can’t think of an applicable trope. I feel as though I’ve failed you somehow. 🙂
I liked dissections.
I’ve done sheep brains, cow hearts, fetal pigs, a cat, frogs, worms, and a sheep kidney.
That being said, I GOT TONS OF DISSECTION STORIES!
Including my teacher saying that I was good at cutting things apart.
Actually, the Tailed Frogs (Ascaphidae) do have a penis-like appendage, because internal fertilization is more effective in the turbulent running water they inhabit.
Yeah, because when someone doesn’t want to talk about their near-sexual assault, the best thing to do is to bring it up constantly in public in front of strangers against their objections. That would be really awesome.
It may not be the best decision but it is a VALID choice. The choice is in character for Joyce, and there are a lot of ramifications that are just as worthy of exploring as the ramifications of Joyce choosing to report the assault or even mention it to people that weren’t there.
What did Roz do, again? She invited people to a party, which they showed up to willingly, and let them to their own devices? On TOP of that, it sounds like, while the Joyce situation was happening, she was dealing with a multi person, people-going-over-couches brawlfest going on in the living room.
Yeah, how DARE she not follow around every single person at her party.
To be fair, it may be a good idea to let Roz know that a rape nearly happened at a party she was hosting (at what was presumably her home, I forget). You don’t necessarily have to name names as far as who the victim of the attempted rape was, or have Joyce involved in the discussion in any way, and I would certainly advise against having this discussion in a public space like a classroom, but I do think that someone ought to let her know.
Knowing that one of the guests at her party was an attempted rapist would totally be relevant. Even if Joyce doesn’t want to go to the police, you can at least guarantee that the would-be rapist gets invited to fewer parties. To one degree or another, Roz, as the host, had a degree of responsibility for the safety of her guests while they were in her home. And frankly, if someone tried to rape someone else in my home, I would damned well want to know about it.
Re-reading my comment, “Roz, as the host, had a degree of responsibility for the safety of her guests while they were in her home” sounds as if I’m placing the blame at Roz’s feet, which was not my intention. As artemi noted, Roz seemed to have her hands full at the time, but I still think that Dorothy should let Roz in on this. Again, I don’t think Joyce needs to be present for the conversation, nor do I think that Dorothy even has to tell Roz who was nearly raped, but I do think that she should tell Roz that the incident took place. She has a right to know.
I agree that she should tell Roz. But it doesn’t have to be in the middle of class, around strangers.
The reason this comic avoids being didactic with a storyline such as this is that every character’s action is in character- as ChaoticRambler said, they might not necessarily make the “right” choice, but they make the one which Joyce is more comfortable with.
For a writer occasionally accused of using strawmen to score points, DoA is remarkably free of those types of characters. (not intended as a backhanded compliment, I mean it in the most positive sense.)
It seems likely at this point that Roz will quietly ask Dorothy after class, “Hey, so what happened to Joyce at the party?”, and that Dorothy will quietly tell her, on condition that she not bother Joyce about it.
I do think Roz has a right to know what happened so she can avoid stepping wrong again (and know what kind of guy whatsisface the creep is, so she can avoid him/help other girls not fall victim to him), but Joyce also has a right to have the story not be the talk of the school, so if/when Roz is informed, she should be told quietly (preferably without the accusey stuff like it’s her fault).
Yeah, Kermit went around asking ALL the muppets to drop their careers and come back to the Muppet theater. He didn’t treat ANY of the muppets differently. Gonzo had just as successful a career.
The relationship might have played part of the role in Kermit’s reluctance, and might have been part of what convinced Miss Piggy to go back, but claiming it is worse than what he asked any of the other Muppets to do is bulls***.
I agree. Fozzie seemed to be one of the only ones who didn’t succeed from what I remember.
Also the first thing she says upon her return is she did it for everyone, not just Kermit. All her friends were going to lose something important, and she came to help out. As the movie went on her love with Kermie was rekindled but it wasn’t as if he was her only reason for returning.
And the film ends with the Muppets being back together and having a successful show. It’s not as if at the end after their remarriage Kermit was still unemployed. He now ran his once successful show that Piggy was a star on. Something she seemed to enjoy doing more.
Also she didn’t agree at first for this very reason. She had a successful career and he didn’t.
Dunno just seems like grasping on Leslie and Dorothy’s part to some degree.
On a side note. Couldn’t Piggy, Sam, and Gonzo have payed the money between themselves? Gonzo had a huge business, Piggy was rich, and Sam was a big time news caster. Surely between the three of them they had the money. I guess that kind of ruins the film though…
Well I thought that Piggy and Gonzo could both pay to save the theater, but knowing the muppets, it probably states explicitly in the contract that it has to be done in the telethon fundraising way.
What you should do is charge those who continually ask about the year that the comic is in, or its relationship to the real time line, and the price of the charge shall be…. ……………………. ……………………. ………………….. wait for it…………..
While the story may not take place in a specific year, it does take place in *a* year, am I correct? In the DOA universe, they do divide time into 365.25 day increments, am I correct?
exactly. So moving away would probably not change much. But there is ONE specific place that’s known for eating frogs. Would you want to take someone there, simply out of knowing how it feels personally?
This is a liiiiittle bit close to repackaging a fairly recent Shortpacked joke, but Dorothy’s reasoning is different enough that it works.
I like the wealth of character detail in panel 2, as Dorothy is reminded that Walky likes what she likes, and Joe studiously pretends not to have seen a movie that he speaks about very familiarly three panels later.
Interestingly, Danny chose to go to a college not of his choosing to be with Dorothy, but he had a choice and he chose to be with the girl he was in love with so why should it be any different if Piggy chose to give up her successful career in Paris to be with Kermit? The Piggy who was prone to violence using karate chops would never do anything she didn’t want to do herself.
Kermit is middle-aged, he’s already lived his dream, and it’s already petered out, resulting in him living alone in a mansion for years. Asking him to follow Miss Piggy is not exactly the same as Danny, the high schooler, who never considered his own dreams outside of perpetuating his high school relationship.
I recall Danny being upset that he chose a school with a substandard computer science department, but that was after the breakup so he had time to think it over, but even if he had when Dorothy and him were together he’d still choose her over his career interest. Maybe not if she broke up with him in high school, but it didn’t go down that way. It’s not quite the same, but then again most analogies are never exact. What I’m saying is that she doesn’t have the sturdiest ground to stand on considering her ex chose to be with her instead of pursuing actual or potential success.
But Danny’s choice isn’t favored by the narrative or portrayed as the “right” thing to do necessarily. In fact, Dorothy repeatedly questions his decision. I haven’t seen the Muppet movie, but the impression I’m getting is that Piggy’s decision wasn’t interrogated, but was rather accepted as the narratively correct option.
Sometimes, movies can use assumed narrative intention to trick people. I remember Shopgirl really alienated me at first because something just seemed off and slightly creepy about the direction the movie was going. Then it turned out that that feeling was being evoked very intentionally, and that was sort of the point of the movie.
Leslie should have been more specific. I watch the Muppet Show often because I have the DVD, but I haven’t seen any of the movies in ages. I would have said “yes” to her initial question, but I would not have been able to answer her second one since I don’t remember that happening at all.
I cannot decide if Miss Peggy is a paragon of feminism (because she chases after Kermit on her own terms, not his) or quite the opposite (seems she rejects anything non-feminine as wrong).
No your right miss piggy is a hilarious pig puppet, and cultural icon, bit i suppose one could use her as metaphor or symbol, or allegory for feminism. but the most important thing is:
“reject anything non-feminine as wrong”?? She can karate chop people through walls. That’s not rejecting her masculine side, that’s freaking embracing it.
In certain episodes she flat-out refuses to do certain tasks because they are too “manly”, especially when it’s a Pigs in Space setting or when she’s a nurse to Dr. Rowlf.
Maybe she thinks her karate chops are an extension of those slaps women are allowed to give men?
Personally choosing things deemed “feminine” is not un-feminist, although I disagree that Piggy does so exclusively.
Saying that other people should also conform to gender roles is un-feminist, and Piggy never does that, that I remember. Her male friends are all rather un-masculine, and she’s cool with that. Her ideal man is *Kermit*, who is hardly a paragon of stereotypical manliness.
i’ll admit first that i haven’t seen the movie, but nothing’s wrong with asking. the decision is still piggy’s to make, and if she agreed, why criticize it? plus the fact that it was in the script and all.
Taking the question seriously for just a second, no, Kermit should have had to do no such thing. For one thing, neither character HAS to do anything. We aren’t talking about trying to hold a relationship together that’s potentially being pulled apart by differing ambitions – we’re talking about a relationship that already fell apart because Kermit lacked the balls to ask Miss Piggy to marry him. There’s no reason to expect anything from either party, as far as what they HAVE to do. Second of all, Miss Piggy left precisely because of the fact that Kermit was weak and pathetic. Having him come and ask to move in does nothing to make him more desirable, and actually makes him even more pathetic. 3rd of all, he asked her to do what he did, eventually, because he wanted to do something he knew she loved. If he ever believed that she really preferred her life in France, he never would have asked (as demonstrated by the first 3/4 of the movie).
I’d argue against Dorothy that it is Miss Piggy’s choice. I’ve only seen the most recent one and in that Miss Piggy didn’t agree right away, but Kermit didn’t seem to emotionally blackmail her or anything like that from what I can recall
So as such, finding something wrong with it just because Miss Piggy left the position seems more sexist than the action in the movie itself (assuming she made the decision with a clear head. However, she did base it on feelings she still had, and you also have to take into account what the director and producer wanted, what values they put in, etc.. I paid no where near enough attention nor did anywhere near enough research on the people behind the film to be able to be able to answer this question properly)
Having to spend each day the color of the leaves
When I think it could be nicer being red, or yellow or gold
Or something much more colorful like that
It’s not easy being green
It seems you blend in with so many other ordinary things
And people tend to pass you over ’cause you’re
Not standing out like flashy sparkles in the water
Or stars in the sky
But green’s the color of Spring
And green can be cool and friendly-like
And green can be big like an ocean, or important
Like a mountain, or tall like a tree
When green is all there is to be
It could make you wonder why, but why wonder why
Wonder, I am green and it’ll do fine, it’s beautiful
And I think it’s what I want to be.
I love the Muppets even though yeah if Kermit was inconsiderate in the last one.
Less inconsiderate; more stupid. He should have gone around asking for money, if he hadn’t let that teenage protomuppet get the crazy ‘let’s do a fundraiser show’ idea lodged in his head.
So this brings up a a question that i have had rolling around in my brain for awhile. what year DoA is set in? the actual comic was stated in 2010 but the Muppet movie came out in November of 2011 so can we assume that DoA is set September in the year 2012?
Yeah i Know this isn’t that important but it would satisfy my curiosity.
Also i am aware that there are a lot Muppet movies but Dorothy with the reference to Kermit and Miss piggy in Paris is the plot of the 2011 movie
I see Leslie’s point but honestly that is over analyzing a bit. I really doubt the makers of the movie thought about this in the same terms they would have with a more realistic relationship. This probably just seemed to be something miss piggy would do because it’s funny that way.
On the other hoof, perhaps this being an unconscious decision suggests that there is a far more insidious problem within the minds of the writers.
Maybe the class discussion can rise some more helpful points like with the bechdel strips.
I think Leslie is being provocative for the purposes of starting a dialogue. The point is to get the students talking about what they think. She is a Gender Studies Professor after all.
Yea. You know what? If we’re going to bring real world logic into that franchise, lets start with something that has more evidence.
I see what she’s doing to Kermit’s as an abusive partner manipulating their ex back into a relationship.
If we’re talking real world logic, let’s talk about the fact Piggy was just using giving up her position so that she could lord it over Kermit later, further contributing to her emotional and physical abuse of her longtime boyfriend/stalkee. There’s a reason he was afraid to go ask her to come back. She was fucking abusive and the other Muppet’s didn’t’ understand that because unlike him, most of them thrive on that kind of insanity, whereas he tends to play the strait man. He stood up to her properly by standing her up, and now he’s crawling back because his friends think they need her to save the theater.
Effectively, in order to try to save something of his friend’s legacy together, he went back to an abusive ex, and she used the situation to manipulate him into an even weaker footing and a renewed relationship. He’s got battered spouse syndrome, and she’s using a relatively avoidable and alleged career setback to gain power over him in the relationship.
Basically. Honestly, the fact we get stuff like the above but not stuff covering the fact Piggy is an abusive stalker type kinda bugs me. Still, partly my fault for not having a webcomic up.
Kermit ain’t so hot, either. He flat-out tells her that her behavior’s at fault for causing him to do things that hurt her. “If only you didn’t do these things, I wouldn’t have to lash out at you.” That’s kind of scary. They are not a good relationship, and Piggy’s only half of it. To this movie’s credit, it finally admits that both of them are at fault, instead of painting Miss Piggy as oh-so-crazy-emotional-female and Kermit as reasonable. They are each other’s crack, and not the good kind.
Fair point, but again from a real world perspective it looks more like a battered spouse to me.
Kermit’s comments come off as closer to the spousal
“It’s my fault they’re angry! I should’ve just let them keep abusing me and not asked them to stop!” than a legitimately dangerous half of a relationship in any way other than not having the brains to get out of it..
And even then, it’s more that he didn’t have the brains to “stay” out of it after she started screwing with his head. He did have the good sense to run out on the wedding.
Exactly. Miss Piggy was so glad to drop everything and move back with Kermit, which doesn’t strike as particularly unusual. She’s just “one of those women who’s just not happy without her man.”
Now, honestly, people are people, make good decisions and bad, rational and irrational, but the fact that that type crops up so much in media illustrates a particular trend being highlighted. I doubt it’s The Muppets in particular being picked on as particularly bad, it’s just a prominent example.
Hooray! What’dja think of the bonus features? I’d have liked more of the rumored tidbits of the plot (i.e. why they broke up, Piggy actually buying the mansion for Kermit, etc.) but I do love that they had the full Tex Richman song.
It’s not like Kermit was asking this for personal interest, or even trying to force Peggy into it. And she do not outright agree in the first place. It wasn’t even about getting back together, but about saving the theater, a place that clearly couldn’t be moved to Paris. Moving to Paris was never a possible option. The fact that Kermit asked Peggy back, not for herself, but to save the theater was actually what irked her and made her reluctant. What she wanted was Kermit, to for once, not just think of the other, but about himself and if having Peggy back was something he really wanted himself.
The real reason he asked Miss Piggy back was because without her, he knew he was gonna wake up one morning either missing his legs or on his way to a high school biology lab. 😀
Do you know what they do to pigs in France? Or America?
If it was really a question of “OMG IMBBQ LOL” both Piggy and Kermit would be living someplace that they are both off the menu. Israel, perhaps. I believe that neither pigs or frogs are kosher.
2) By the end of the movie, Kermit has successfully gotten the band back together to break back into show business. The main place of business for show business is Hollywood, not Paris.
3) Miss Piggy happens to care as much for the show as she does for Kermit.
4) Miss Piggy and Kermit have a bit of a strange dynamic in that Kermit, despite having nothing but faithfulness and eyes for Piggy, *could* if he wanted to, “do better.” It is not Piggy’s looks, but her personality. Kermit *IS* in love with Piggy, and has accepted or overlooked Piggy’s personality flaws. However, the same thing cannot be said the other way around. Kermit is a smart, sensitive, funny muppet who has become a success at doing what he’s passionate at. Perhaps this is in itself is a matter of debate – but Piggy was created in the 1970s not as Kermit’s girlfriend but as someone who had an unrequited love for Kermit. To understand the dynamic, you must understand the characters.
5) Speaking of which, Piggy is a comedic character, and as such, has an inherent, humorous, absurd contrast. Piggy wishes her demeanor to be that of the doting, submissive “perfect woman as a man sees it,” but her assertive strength of personality comes up often, and it is that rapid contrast between the two that creates humor. In fact, the fact that Piggy *is* unstable in this way creates tension that heightens the gag that is usually punctuated with a “Heeeee-yAAAA!” karate chop.
This was often my problem with Womens Studies courses when I was going to college; they often overlooked the source material – the evidence that’s there, in order to push the idea that certain things were inherently sexist and presented a male-dominated view.
Yes, the character was created by men in the 1970s and may not have had the best idea. But certainly, Henson and co were by no means misogynists, the assertive Red (Female Fraggle) was an equal to Gobo in ability (Male Fraggle). Additionally, the main Doozer character was Cotterpin (a female Doozer) when it could have easily have been a male. If nothing else, any conversation between Red or Mokey passes the Bechdel test. And, after all, this was the same team behind Sesame Street, as progressive an endeavor as possible.
Anyway, this brings me back to the main point. At the end of the movie, the Muppets had reunited and were restarting their careers. It was not a matter of “Should Kermit move to Paris with Piggy?” it was “Should Kermit, and 30 other key Muppets move to Paris, or should Piggy, the only Muppet based not in the United States, come to Hollywood?
Finally, you overlook the fact that even after moving in with Kermit, Piggy may *not* have given up her Parisian career. After all, Hollywood to Paris is an easy commute, if you “travel by map!”
Okay, lemme see if I can get this straight in my head with the number of rum & cokes I’ve got in me.
That scene did bother me, but with my undying Muppet love, it took me awhile to figure out why. Yes, on the surface, it’s the whole Miss Piggy leaving her successful career for her man thing. But it’s really a deeper issue than that, and a much more insidious one.
Let’s look at Gonzo…he also had a successful career that he ditched at a moment’s notice because Kermit asked him to. I know, of course, that’s he’s not romantically linked with Kermit (at least in the minds of most people…KxG shippers, you keep on keepin’ on!) but here’s the crux of the matter…
The whole ‘getting the gang back’ segment is, in terms of the greater story, throwaway material. You go into it for the lulz and to set up some plot points for later segments. Fozzie and the Moopets, Piggy and Kermit, for example. So, here’s the thing that bothers me…in terms of a stupid gag part of the movie, Piggy has to be defined by the dude she likes, and a lot of people will go away from the movie thinking that this is a more compelling piece of characterization than, say, waking Rowlf out of his nap in the hammock (hilarious, btw) when it isn’t!
Let me go brony here for a moment…this is what bothered me during the whole Derpy debacle…girl characters can’t be retarded on their own. That’s right, I said it. If Derpy’s character was defined solely by her fixation on a male character there wouldn’t have been a problem…but just make her a stupid character that’s perfectly in line with the Stimpies and Philip J. Fries of the animation world, and everyone loses their shit.
I’m more drunk than usual, so I really don’t know if any of this is getting across, so let me try to sum up. It seems to me that in terms of lazy writing, people tie female characters up into romantic/sexual relations, instead of the the stupid/off the wall crap that lazily written male characters get. And it’s right there, where people just DO things, instead of putting any effort in, THAT is where sexism lives. WOW, that was long. Sorry!
Um…I think the Derpy problem was that she wasn’t (at least the fandom version of her) wasn’t comically stupid, but actually mentally disabled. If Homer Simpson was actually, in the universe of the show, actually functionally retarded and used for slapstick, I expect just as many people would be up in arms.
Given a couple of seconds worth of reflection, isn’t the issue less the specific details of this particular characters choice (given that it is her choice, right or wrong, and people have different priorities), but rather the overrepresentation of this particular choice in the media?
Given a hundred different people presented with this dillema, doubtless you’d find a significant portion of them would make the same choice… But if you sample a hundred different movies featuring this dillema, you’d find a good 80 of them choosing the man over the career.
Now, there are plenty of reasons for that: jobs are rarely valued as much as “true love” is, which makes love the easier choice for audiences to empathize with (particularly given the fact that characters rarely have jobs that the audience would be remotely related to); sacrifice is considered romantic; nobody likes to see heartbreak; we never have to see the ramifications of the choice; etc. It doesn’t imply anything like a secret anti-feminist agenda, not that I expect anyone would think I was claiming such.
However, this theme, repeated often enough and without alternative viewpoints, can imply that a desire for a successful career can in some way be illegitimate. It implies that a desire for a successful career and independent existence is in some way rare and abnormal.
Of course, that doesn’t necessarily mean that it has a significant impact; movies rarely reflect realistic situations or achievable standards of happiness. It still impacts what we “should” look to as our fantasies, but how much impact does that necessarily have?
I couldn’t really say, honestly. I’d prefer a media that represented a broader spectrum of themes (something that I’m certain everyone could agree with), but until then, there’s not really an objective way that I’m aware of to answer that question. Well, no humane and objective ways, at least.
So I think Dorothy is kind of missing the point, but that’s been covered far more eloquently and thoughtfully by commenters before me.
That being said, there is one line in the movie that struck a nerve with me: when Kermit and Piggy are walking through Paris and talking about their relationship, and Kermit criticizes Piggy for being smothering and says it makes him “do things that hurt you.”
That line really rubbed me the wrong way, largely because it seemed really out of character for Kermit, but also because it’s, you know, horrible.
The other thing to consider is the fact that the Piggy/Kermit relationship is based, like all things Muppets, on vaudeville and slapstick, like Bringing Up Baby or His Girl Friday. The relationship dynamic is never what you’d call “healthy,” but it is funny.
Kermits goal was to save the muppet theatre. How could he do that by moving to paris and mooching off a pig. What bother’s me more is that Gonzo had apparently struck it rich. Couldn’t he have sold his business and paid a portion of the theatres expensives instead of blowing it up? Kermit probably could have sold him mansion for another couple million, and Piggy must ben able to fork over a good share as well.
Well, they were on a deadline; selling businesses or houses would probably take too long. However one would expect Gonzo to have at least some liquidity to bring to the table…
My thoughts exactly. France is not safe for Frogs. Hell remember what happened in the first Muppet Movie! Last thing Kermit needs is an entire country like that.
Piggy, in and of herself, doesn’t bother me, least of all in The Muppets. She wasn’t asked to make any more of a commitment than Gonzo (successful business owner) or Sam the Eagle (host of his own TV show) or Bunsen and Beaker (working on the fucking Large Hadron Collider!). Plus, she’s always wanted stardom. I have a hard time believing she’d turn down another shot at showbiz, even if she and Kermit parted with some hard feelings.
What does bother me is that Piggy is the only major female character, and was played by Frank Oz and then Eric Jacobson. The Muppets is a bit of a boy’s club, isn’t it?
Don’t you understand? Once a man enters the picture, all other motivations disappear. Every feminist knows this. the long list of other reasons Piggy stays are all irrelevant compared to a man.
While I’m here, looking at this post about how many male puppeteers there are in the franchise, I should probably mention that Louise Gold is coming back as Annie Sue for The Muppets…Again, so that’s pretty cool.
To be fair, it was less “leave your career behind and come back with me because I’m the MAN” and more “the group we once were was a special thing and we’re trying to recapture that and would you maybe like to be a part of it?” Plus, they really did address within the movie that nostalgia and love aside Piggy would be stupid to leave her success and go back to Hollywood on a fool’s errand.
Besides, the Big Bad was a greedy oil developer, so that has to count for something, right?
You know, I never saw it as “Piggy, come back with me forever.” It was more like, “Piggy, we’re trying to save the theater. Can you come back with us for now so you can help us put on this show?”
Also, something you can say about “The Muppets” is that everyone sees Piggy as a real asset in their group. They do show her respect even if she’s a bit of a diva.
Right, after a full-time Muppet reunion becomes more of a reality and less of a pipe dream.
The subtext throughout the entire movie was that they’re reuniting for good, and not just the one show. Everyone picks up on it, which is why Gonzo blows up his factory and Fozzie looks like he’s been thrown a lifeline.
I guess I didn’t have as much of a problem with it because by that point it was clear that the show and the group meant a lot to all of them, not just to Miss Piggy and when she’s staying, it didn’t feel like it was just for Kermit. You definitely have a point, but as someone who usually picks up on tricky things like this in movies it didn’t bother me as much.
Also, she could always do her work online … it’s certainly not impossible to at least do part-time work for the magazine. And while I’m thinking of it, isn’t kind of great that she’s not only a plus-size woman in the fashion industry, but one who has made a career promoting plus-size women?
Loading ...
Would Joe be happier if Kermit was a turtle?
How about a duck?
Joe’s a pig. Maybe he’d be happier as Kermit; he’d be dating his own kind. Not to mention Miss Piggy has a temper and a mean karate chop. That’d keep him in his place.
Wow, what’d Joe do to you?
He Joe’d her. In the FAAAACE.
H A R S H
That would work better. I’m pretty sure a pig and a frog would be like bestiality or something.
Also, isn’t that where cockatrices come from?
It’s good to know Joe has his priorities in order.
I didn’t know that frogs lacked willies until today, so today’s comic has been very educational.
Really? O_o Not that I think that not knowing is wrong or I don’t believe you or anything; it’s just that everyone I know used to catch frogs/toads as kids and we never saw any tackle, so… Plus there’s the whole frog section in biology in elementary school with the boy frog sitting on top of the girl frog and fertilizing the eggs as she lays them. External fertilization = no need for penetrative sexual organs.
Damn. I can’t think of an applicable trope. I feel as though I’ve failed you somehow. 🙂
As strange as it sounds, I never did the pleasure of disecting any animals in science class back when I used to go to school.
I was a conscientious objector when animal dissection came round.
I liked dissections.
I’ve done sheep brains, cow hearts, fetal pigs, a cat, frogs, worms, and a sheep kidney.
That being said, I GOT TONS OF DISSECTION STORIES!
Including my teacher saying that I was good at cutting things apart.
Fuu Hououji is your Gravatar today, right Plasma?
Yes it is, I felt like going back to the 90s for a change.
Actually, the Tailed Frogs (Ascaphidae) do have a penis-like appendage, because internal fertilization is more effective in the turbulent running water they inhabit.
DAMN IT Joe!
So Erm, they’re just going to leave the whole almost raped thing alone instead of actually pestering it again, ok, lol.
Well… Yeah. Joyce told Dorothy to shut up. Kinda rude if she didn’t respect that, don’cha think?
Yeah, because when someone doesn’t want to talk about their near-sexual assault, the best thing to do is to bring it up constantly in public in front of strangers against their objections. That would be really awesome.
Every once in a while, David, I wish I could handle certain comments like you do.
This world needs its Willises, and it needs its Campbells. XD
But as Plasma says… Frogs don’t have no Willies!
Starring Bruce Willis and Bruce Campbell. Summer 2013.
I’d watch it.
Of course, Willis would play Campbell, and Campbell would play Willis.
Groovy
Holy sarcasm Batman!
It may not be the best decision but it is a VALID choice. The choice is in character for Joyce, and there are a lot of ramifications that are just as worthy of exploring as the ramifications of Joyce choosing to report the assault or even mention it to people that weren’t there.
So are they going to just leave Roz not knowing what she did wrong? What’s the right thing to do here?
What did Roz do, again? She invited people to a party, which they showed up to willingly, and let them to their own devices? On TOP of that, it sounds like, while the Joyce situation was happening, she was dealing with a multi person, people-going-over-couches brawlfest going on in the living room.
Yeah, how DARE she not follow around every single person at her party.
To be fair, it may be a good idea to let Roz know that a rape nearly happened at a party she was hosting (at what was presumably her home, I forget). You don’t necessarily have to name names as far as who the victim of the attempted rape was, or have Joyce involved in the discussion in any way, and I would certainly advise against having this discussion in a public space like a classroom, but I do think that someone ought to let her know.
Knowing that one of the guests at her party was an attempted rapist would totally be relevant. Even if Joyce doesn’t want to go to the police, you can at least guarantee that the would-be rapist gets invited to fewer parties. To one degree or another, Roz, as the host, had a degree of responsibility for the safety of her guests while they were in her home. And frankly, if someone tried to rape someone else in my home, I would damned well want to know about it.
Re-reading my comment, “Roz, as the host, had a degree of responsibility for the safety of her guests while they were in her home” sounds as if I’m placing the blame at Roz’s feet, which was not my intention. As artemi noted, Roz seemed to have her hands full at the time, but I still think that Dorothy should let Roz in on this. Again, I don’t think Joyce needs to be present for the conversation, nor do I think that Dorothy even has to tell Roz who was nearly raped, but I do think that she should tell Roz that the incident took place. She has a right to know.
I agree that she should tell Roz. But it doesn’t have to be in the middle of class, around strangers.
The reason this comic avoids being didactic with a storyline such as this is that every character’s action is in character- as ChaoticRambler said, they might not necessarily make the “right” choice, but they make the one which Joyce is more comfortable with.
For a writer occasionally accused of using strawmen to score points, DoA is remarkably free of those types of characters. (not intended as a backhanded compliment, I mean it in the most positive sense.)
It seems likely at this point that Roz will quietly ask Dorothy after class, “Hey, so what happened to Joyce at the party?”, and that Dorothy will quietly tell her, on condition that she not bother Joyce about it.
Roz wasn’t the host. She just invited some people to an open event hosted by someone else.
Roz was not the host.
Whoops, my mistake. For some reason I thought she was,
Yay Roz vindication. *laugh*
Roz (accidentally, unknowingly) dismissed Joyce’s near-sexual-assault.
I do think Roz has a right to know what happened so she can avoid stepping wrong again (and know what kind of guy whatsisface the creep is, so she can avoid him/help other girls not fall victim to him), but Joyce also has a right to have the story not be the talk of the school, so if/when Roz is informed, she should be told quietly (preferably without the accusey stuff like it’s her fault).
It was really a dick move on Kermit’s part.
Yeah, Kermit went around asking ALL the muppets to drop their careers and come back to the Muppet theater. He didn’t treat ANY of the muppets differently. Gonzo had just as successful a career.
The relationship might have played part of the role in Kermit’s reluctance, and might have been part of what convinced Miss Piggy to go back, but claiming it is worse than what he asked any of the other Muppets to do is bulls***.
I agree. Fozzie seemed to be one of the only ones who didn’t succeed from what I remember.
Also the first thing she says upon her return is she did it for everyone, not just Kermit. All her friends were going to lose something important, and she came to help out. As the movie went on her love with Kermie was rekindled but it wasn’t as if he was her only reason for returning.
And the film ends with the Muppets being back together and having a successful show. It’s not as if at the end after their remarriage Kermit was still unemployed. He now ran his once successful show that Piggy was a star on. Something she seemed to enjoy doing more.
Also she didn’t agree at first for this very reason. She had a successful career and he didn’t.
Dunno just seems like grasping on Leslie and Dorothy’s part to some degree.
On a side note. Couldn’t Piggy, Sam, and Gonzo have payed the money between themselves? Gonzo had a huge business, Piggy was rich, and Sam was a big time news caster. Surely between the three of them they had the money. I guess that kind of ruins the film though…
Well I thought that Piggy and Gonzo could both pay to save the theater, but knowing the muppets, it probably states explicitly in the contract that it has to be done in the telethon fundraising way.
Apparently there’s a scene on the cutting room floor, where Gonzo thinks of this, and then remembers all his money is in the factory he just blew up.
i guess Kermit doesn’t like France cause of the whole eating frog’s legs thing.
Dear Joe, Kermit + Miss Piggy = the green pigs from Angry Birds.
Ah, Joe… Ever the philosopher and gentleman of breeding.
(pun intended.)
And Joe used a double negative.
If they could ask Gonzo, they could ask Piggy.
The gesticulation really helped emphasized Joe’s point.
Didn’t you already incite this comment shitstorm in Shortpacked six months ago?
Dorothy in the second panel seems to want to know why the fuck Leslie is asking her about the muppets.
Because its the Muppets thats why.
And doesn’t this take place before the movie came out by a year?
Perhaps Leslie was referring to “The Muppets” franchise as a whole?
They live outside of time. Time is SO relative to what you want to do with the plot I imagine.
I don’t know. I have never seen or heard much about the Muppets.
You seem to be unaware of the Quantum Willis effect and its ability to warp the normal course of events.
Man, if I had a nickel for every time I have to explain that this webcomic does not take place in any specific year.
Wibbly wobbly timey whimey.
As they say in anime, it takes place in the year 20XX.
Now I want to see what sort of “if I had a nickel for every time” joke Mike would make
If I had a nickel for every time I fucked your mom for a nickel…well, I’d have the same nickel, but it would’ve changed hands A LOT OF TIMES.
“If I had a nickel for every time I fucked your mother, I’d have a net loss of zero. Also, she’s dead now.”
If your Mom would let me bang her, I would gladly pay her a nickel on TUESDAY…
What you should do is charge those who continually ask about the year that the comic is in, or its relationship to the real time line, and the price of the charge shall be…. ……………………. ……………………. ………………….. wait for it…………..
a
nickel!
While the story may not take place in a specific year, it does take place in *a* year, am I correct? In the DOA universe, they do divide time into 365.25 day increments, am I correct?
So far, it’s taken place in about a week. We’ll have to wait another 51 I’d them to see if we’ve got years in this dimension.
*”of”, not “I’d”. Stupid iPhone autocorrect.
OOOOOOHHHHHHHHHH, okay that clears up everthing.
Thank you kindly Mr. Willis. 🙂
True, Joe, but frogs known for their tongues. Piggy doesn’t seem to have any complaints.
I love this comment.
If I could figure out how to insert that animated slow clapping gif from Citizen Kane in this comment box, I would be doing so *very hard* right now.
This is the most important comment. Also, it makes Joe seem maybe not so good at pleasuring women
Rex Hondo, you beat me to it.
THIS! Pick up your prize internet on the way out the door.
And once again it seems Joe is destined for engineering.
Well to be honest, perhaps kermit couldn’t move to france cuz they like…eat frogs there? Ever consider his feelings Dorothy?
yeah i just thought of that, he’d be constantly on the run, arms flailing all the way.
So…it would have been the first movie again.
Don’t they eat pigs almost everywhere?
exactly. So moving away would probably not change much. But there is ONE specific place that’s known for eating frogs. Would you want to take someone there, simply out of knowing how it feels personally?
Ruined childhoods.
Ruined childhoods in the comic. Ruined childhoods in the comments. Ruined childhoods EVERYWHERE.
Good old internet!
No this revelation does not ruin my childhood what ruined my childhood was when I turned 13-14 or so.
Testosterone and estrogen suck.
It is puberty’s job to finish off your childhood and the internet’s job to violate your memories.
What’s long and green and smells like Miss Piggy? Kermit the Frog’s finger.
Dunno about you, but I heard that one as a kid. Kids have been ruining their own childhoods for generations. XD This comic is nothing.
This is a liiiiittle bit close to repackaging a fairly recent Shortpacked joke, but Dorothy’s reasoning is different enough that it works.
I like the wealth of character detail in panel 2, as Dorothy is reminded that Walky likes what she likes, and Joe studiously pretends not to have seen a movie that he speaks about very familiarly three panels later.
Yay subtle character work!
Biggest childhood ruiner of all time…SMURFS! Agg.
Interesting…Leslie indicated that the only two people in class who saw the movie (or are willing to admit it) just happen to be Walky and Dorothy.
Possible foreshadowing here, given Dorothy’s answer. Then again, Walky has yet to give his own answer to the question.
I Think Joe may have seen the movie, but doesn’t seem get the point Leslie was trying to make.
I like to imagine that Joe’s statement in the last panel is ALL he thought about throughout the entire feature length film
it’s probably all he thought about ever since learning about the franchise.
Interestingly, Danny chose to go to a college not of his choosing to be with Dorothy, but he had a choice and he chose to be with the girl he was in love with so why should it be any different if Piggy chose to give up her successful career in Paris to be with Kermit? The Piggy who was prone to violence using karate chops would never do anything she didn’t want to do herself.
^^^ I agree wholeheartedly
Kermit is middle-aged, he’s already lived his dream, and it’s already petered out, resulting in him living alone in a mansion for years. Asking him to follow Miss Piggy is not exactly the same as Danny, the high schooler, who never considered his own dreams outside of perpetuating his high school relationship.
I don’t think “middle aged” quite applies to Muppets. I mean, he’s been exactly the same age in terms of behavior since the mid-1950s.
And we will eventually say the same of these characters.
See? It all works out!
I recall Danny being upset that he chose a school with a substandard computer science department, but that was after the breakup so he had time to think it over, but even if he had when Dorothy and him were together he’d still choose her over his career interest. Maybe not if she broke up with him in high school, but it didn’t go down that way. It’s not quite the same, but then again most analogies are never exact. What I’m saying is that she doesn’t have the sturdiest ground to stand on considering her ex chose to be with her instead of pursuing actual or potential success.
She didn’t ask Danny to go to the same school as her though.
But Danny’s choice isn’t favored by the narrative or portrayed as the “right” thing to do necessarily. In fact, Dorothy repeatedly questions his decision. I haven’t seen the Muppet movie, but the impression I’m getting is that Piggy’s decision wasn’t interrogated, but was rather accepted as the narratively correct option.
Sometimes, movies can use assumed narrative intention to trick people. I remember Shopgirl really alienated me at first because something just seemed off and slightly creepy about the direction the movie was going. Then it turned out that that feeling was being evoked very intentionally, and that was sort of the point of the movie.
Leslie should have been more specific. I watch the Muppet Show often because I have the DVD, but I haven’t seen any of the movies in ages. I would have said “yes” to her initial question, but I would not have been able to answer her second one since I don’t remember that happening at all.
I cannot decide if Miss Peggy is a paragon of feminism (because she chases after Kermit on her own terms, not his) or quite the opposite (seems she rejects anything non-feminine as wrong).
Is she a lipstick feminist?
I’m pretty sure she’s a hilarious pig puppet. but that’s just me.
No your right miss piggy is a hilarious pig puppet, and cultural icon, bit i suppose one could use her as metaphor or symbol, or allegory for feminism. but the most important thing is:
PIGS!
IN!
SPACCCEE!
“reject anything non-feminine as wrong”?? She can karate chop people through walls. That’s not rejecting her masculine side, that’s freaking embracing it.
In certain episodes she flat-out refuses to do certain tasks because they are too “manly”, especially when it’s a Pigs in Space setting or when she’s a nurse to Dr. Rowlf.
Maybe she thinks her karate chops are an extension of those slaps women are allowed to give men?
In both those cases, though (Vet’s Hospital and Pigs in Space) she’s playing a character.
Piggy’s a diva, but she’s not afraid of masculinity.
Personally choosing things deemed “feminine” is not un-feminist, although I disagree that Piggy does so exclusively.
Saying that other people should also conform to gender roles is un-feminist, and Piggy never does that, that I remember. Her male friends are all rather un-masculine, and she’s cool with that. Her ideal man is *Kermit*, who is hardly a paragon of stereotypical manliness.
Here’s a different perspective
http://bgsd.wordpress.com/2010/02/24/on-miss-piggy-and-feminism/
The fact that Piggy is the only important girl is important.
I don’t think it changes whether Piggy *herself* is a feminist, though.
Remind me: DoA has a floating timeline and doesn’t take place in any particular year, right?
No, dude, it takes place in 1994.
Actually it takes place in 1812. There may be a few anachronisms here and there, mind.
You’re right. I forgot to carry the three.
…Wait, are we talking A.D. or B.C.?
Didn’t she originally say no and then decide on her to come back not for Kermit but for the sake of the rest of the Muppets?
Yeah, but only long enough to do the fundraiser, then it was back to Paris. Kermit had to ask her to stay indefinitely.
Joe clearly never saw the original Crazy Frog animation.
joe is onto something there
i’ll admit first that i haven’t seen the movie, but nothing’s wrong with asking. the decision is still piggy’s to make, and if she agreed, why criticize it? plus the fact that it was in the script and all.
Taking the question seriously for just a second, no, Kermit should have had to do no such thing. For one thing, neither character HAS to do anything. We aren’t talking about trying to hold a relationship together that’s potentially being pulled apart by differing ambitions – we’re talking about a relationship that already fell apart because Kermit lacked the balls to ask Miss Piggy to marry him. There’s no reason to expect anything from either party, as far as what they HAVE to do. Second of all, Miss Piggy left precisely because of the fact that Kermit was weak and pathetic. Having him come and ask to move in does nothing to make him more desirable, and actually makes him even more pathetic. 3rd of all, he asked her to do what he did, eventually, because he wanted to do something he knew she loved. If he ever believed that she really preferred her life in France, he never would have asked (as demonstrated by the first 3/4 of the movie).
“…we’re talking about a relationship that already fell apart because Kermit lacked the balls to ask Miss Piggy to marry him.”
Now, see, *that* strikes me as crazy un-feminist.
I’d argue against Dorothy that it is Miss Piggy’s choice. I’ve only seen the most recent one and in that Miss Piggy didn’t agree right away, but Kermit didn’t seem to emotionally blackmail her or anything like that from what I can recall
So as such, finding something wrong with it just because Miss Piggy left the position seems more sexist than the action in the movie itself (assuming she made the decision with a clear head. However, she did base it on feelings she still had, and you also have to take into account what the director and producer wanted, what values they put in, etc.. I paid no where near enough attention nor did anywhere near enough research on the people behind the film to be able to be able to answer this question properly)
…What?
That’s what bothers Joe about Kermit? What bothers me is that how does Kermit lives his life because, you know, it’s not easy being green.
Having to spend each day the color of the leaves
When I think it could be nicer being red, or yellow or gold
Or something much more colorful like that
It’s not easy being green
It seems you blend in with so many other ordinary things
And people tend to pass you over ’cause you’re
Not standing out like flashy sparkles in the water
Or stars in the sky
But green’s the color of Spring
And green can be cool and friendly-like
And green can be big like an ocean, or important
Like a mountain, or tall like a tree
When green is all there is to be
It could make you wonder why, but why wonder why
Wonder, I am green and it’ll do fine, it’s beautiful
And I think it’s what I want to be.
I love the Muppets even though yeah if Kermit was inconsiderate in the last one.
Less inconsiderate; more stupid. He should have gone around asking for money, if he hadn’t let that teenage protomuppet get the crazy ‘let’s do a fundraiser show’ idea lodged in his head.
So this brings up a a question that i have had rolling around in my brain for awhile. what year DoA is set in? the actual comic was stated in 2010 but the Muppet movie came out in November of 2011 so can we assume that DoA is set September in the year 2012?
Yeah i Know this isn’t that important but it would satisfy my curiosity.
Also i am aware that there are a lot Muppet movies but Dorothy with the reference to Kermit and Miss piggy in Paris is the plot of the 2011 movie
Another nickel for me.
Do you take visa?
I click that link, and I keep returning to an earlier time!!!
I see Leslie’s point but honestly that is over analyzing a bit. I really doubt the makers of the movie thought about this in the same terms they would have with a more realistic relationship. This probably just seemed to be something miss piggy would do because it’s funny that way.
On the other hoof, perhaps this being an unconscious decision suggests that there is a far more insidious problem within the minds of the writers.
Maybe the class discussion can rise some more helpful points like with the bechdel strips.
I think Leslie is being provocative for the purposes of starting a dialogue. The point is to get the students talking about what they think. She is a Gender Studies Professor after all.
Leslie has not yet made a point.
woot I’m the key demographic
Joe continues to talk about the important issues
Wow. You really can’t let this go, can you?
Wow, gonna club this pony corpse again, are we?
Just outta curiosity Mr. Willis, did this scene actually bother you?
Watch a few comics more and see Leslie (or someone else) blow Dorothy’s argument here out of the water.
I think Joe is confusing Kermit with Justin Bieber.
Oh, snap.
Yea. You know what? If we’re going to bring real world logic into that franchise, lets start with something that has more evidence.
I see what she’s doing to Kermit’s as an abusive partner manipulating their ex back into a relationship.
If we’re talking real world logic, let’s talk about the fact Piggy was just using giving up her position so that she could lord it over Kermit later, further contributing to her emotional and physical abuse of her longtime boyfriend/stalkee. There’s a reason he was afraid to go ask her to come back. She was fucking abusive and the other Muppet’s didn’t’ understand that because unlike him, most of them thrive on that kind of insanity, whereas he tends to play the strait man. He stood up to her properly by standing her up, and now he’s crawling back because his friends think they need her to save the theater.
Effectively, in order to try to save something of his friend’s legacy together, he went back to an abusive ex, and she used the situation to manipulate him into an even weaker footing and a renewed relationship. He’s got battered spouse syndrome, and she’s using a relatively avoidable and alleged career setback to gain power over him in the relationship.
Frogs Don’t Tell
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0107553/
Basically. Honestly, the fact we get stuff like the above but not stuff covering the fact Piggy is an abusive stalker type kinda bugs me. Still, partly my fault for not having a webcomic up.
Kermit ain’t so hot, either. He flat-out tells her that her behavior’s at fault for causing him to do things that hurt her. “If only you didn’t do these things, I wouldn’t have to lash out at you.” That’s kind of scary. They are not a good relationship, and Piggy’s only half of it. To this movie’s credit, it finally admits that both of them are at fault, instead of painting Miss Piggy as oh-so-crazy-emotional-female and Kermit as reasonable. They are each other’s crack, and not the good kind.
Fair point, but again from a real world perspective it looks more like a battered spouse to me.
Kermit’s comments come off as closer to the spousal
“It’s my fault they’re angry! I should’ve just let them keep abusing me and not asked them to stop!” than a legitimately dangerous half of a relationship in any way other than not having the brains to get out of it..
And even then, it’s more that he didn’t have the brains to “stay” out of it after she started screwing with his head. He did have the good sense to run out on the wedding.
Exactly. Miss Piggy was so glad to drop everything and move back with Kermit, which doesn’t strike as particularly unusual. She’s just “one of those women who’s just not happy without her man.”
Now, honestly, people are people, make good decisions and bad, rational and irrational, but the fact that that type crops up so much in media illustrates a particular trend being highlighted. I doubt it’s The Muppets in particular being picked on as particularly bad, it’s just a prominent example.
But it wasn’t a man in general, it was a specific person.
That seems to me like a very significant difference, but I haven’t seen this movie.
I’m curious, between this and the Shortpacked comic about the movie, did you like or dislike The Muppets movie?
I like it a lot. I own it on Blu-Ray and had separately bought the soundtrack.
Hooray! What’dja think of the bonus features? I’d have liked more of the rumored tidbits of the plot (i.e. why they broke up, Piggy actually buying the mansion for Kermit, etc.) but I do love that they had the full Tex Richman song.
I’m impressed Joe knew that frogs don’t have penises.
And he knew that Persepolis is a city! He’s full of hidden knowledge.
I can easily imagine Joe going out of his way to learn penis trivia.
Blonde on Blonde.
It’s not like Kermit was asking this for personal interest, or even trying to force Peggy into it. And she do not outright agree in the first place. It wasn’t even about getting back together, but about saving the theater, a place that clearly couldn’t be moved to Paris. Moving to Paris was never a possible option. The fact that Kermit asked Peggy back, not for herself, but to save the theater was actually what irked her and made her reluctant. What she wanted was Kermit, to for once, not just think of the other, but about himself and if having Peggy back was something he really wanted himself.
“Peggy”???
Also, isn’t Kermit doing the exact same thing with Gonzo? What is the difference between Kermit asking Gonzo and Kermit asking Peggy?
He asked everyone to perform for one night so that they could keep the studio, not for everyone to come move in with him in his mansion forever.
Or DID he…?
Did he ask that? I thought all he asked her was for her to return to make the Muppet Show.
Yeah! It’s not like she specifically was asked to come back permanently while everyone else was just on break.
There’s a reason they call it BESTiality, amiright?
As Clerks would say, “Inter-species Erotica”.
Dude… that wasn’t an issue of feminism! Do you know what they do to frogs in France!?
Do you know what we do tho ’em in AMERICA?
The real reason he asked Miss Piggy back was because without her, he knew he was gonna wake up one morning either missing his legs or on his way to a high school biology lab. 😀
Kermit is smart enough to realize that, if given the choice, the butcher would rather have a big boned pig girl over a skinny frog guy.
Do you know what they do to pigs in France? Or America?
If it was really a question of “OMG IMBBQ LOL” both Piggy and Kermit would be living someplace that they are both off the menu. Israel, perhaps. I believe that neither pigs or frogs are kosher.
You’re not thinking it through enough, Joe. True, frogs have no penises, BUT… They also have insanely LONG and FLEXIBLE tongues.
*waits for the mental image to sink in and the “you have ruined my childhood” expression to form*
There are a couple of flaws with this analysis.
1) Kermit the Frog is retired, not unemployed.
2) By the end of the movie, Kermit has successfully gotten the band back together to break back into show business. The main place of business for show business is Hollywood, not Paris.
3) Miss Piggy happens to care as much for the show as she does for Kermit.
4) Miss Piggy and Kermit have a bit of a strange dynamic in that Kermit, despite having nothing but faithfulness and eyes for Piggy, *could* if he wanted to, “do better.” It is not Piggy’s looks, but her personality. Kermit *IS* in love with Piggy, and has accepted or overlooked Piggy’s personality flaws. However, the same thing cannot be said the other way around. Kermit is a smart, sensitive, funny muppet who has become a success at doing what he’s passionate at. Perhaps this is in itself is a matter of debate – but Piggy was created in the 1970s not as Kermit’s girlfriend but as someone who had an unrequited love for Kermit. To understand the dynamic, you must understand the characters.
5) Speaking of which, Piggy is a comedic character, and as such, has an inherent, humorous, absurd contrast. Piggy wishes her demeanor to be that of the doting, submissive “perfect woman as a man sees it,” but her assertive strength of personality comes up often, and it is that rapid contrast between the two that creates humor. In fact, the fact that Piggy *is* unstable in this way creates tension that heightens the gag that is usually punctuated with a “Heeeee-yAAAA!” karate chop.
This was often my problem with Womens Studies courses when I was going to college; they often overlooked the source material – the evidence that’s there, in order to push the idea that certain things were inherently sexist and presented a male-dominated view.
Yes, the character was created by men in the 1970s and may not have had the best idea. But certainly, Henson and co were by no means misogynists, the assertive Red (Female Fraggle) was an equal to Gobo in ability (Male Fraggle). Additionally, the main Doozer character was Cotterpin (a female Doozer) when it could have easily have been a male. If nothing else, any conversation between Red or Mokey passes the Bechdel test. And, after all, this was the same team behind Sesame Street, as progressive an endeavor as possible.
Anyway, this brings me back to the main point. At the end of the movie, the Muppets had reunited and were restarting their careers. It was not a matter of “Should Kermit move to Paris with Piggy?” it was “Should Kermit, and 30 other key Muppets move to Paris, or should Piggy, the only Muppet based not in the United States, come to Hollywood?
Finally, you overlook the fact that even after moving in with Kermit, Piggy may *not* have given up her Parisian career. After all, Hollywood to Paris is an easy commute, if you “travel by map!”
Okay, lemme see if I can get this straight in my head with the number of rum & cokes I’ve got in me.
That scene did bother me, but with my undying Muppet love, it took me awhile to figure out why. Yes, on the surface, it’s the whole Miss Piggy leaving her successful career for her man thing. But it’s really a deeper issue than that, and a much more insidious one.
Let’s look at Gonzo…he also had a successful career that he ditched at a moment’s notice because Kermit asked him to. I know, of course, that’s he’s not romantically linked with Kermit (at least in the minds of most people…KxG shippers, you keep on keepin’ on!) but here’s the crux of the matter…
The whole ‘getting the gang back’ segment is, in terms of the greater story, throwaway material. You go into it for the lulz and to set up some plot points for later segments. Fozzie and the Moopets, Piggy and Kermit, for example. So, here’s the thing that bothers me…in terms of a stupid gag part of the movie, Piggy has to be defined by the dude she likes, and a lot of people will go away from the movie thinking that this is a more compelling piece of characterization than, say, waking Rowlf out of his nap in the hammock (hilarious, btw) when it isn’t!
Let me go brony here for a moment…this is what bothered me during the whole Derpy debacle…girl characters can’t be retarded on their own. That’s right, I said it. If Derpy’s character was defined solely by her fixation on a male character there wouldn’t have been a problem…but just make her a stupid character that’s perfectly in line with the Stimpies and Philip J. Fries of the animation world, and everyone loses their shit.
I’m more drunk than usual, so I really don’t know if any of this is getting across, so let me try to sum up. It seems to me that in terms of lazy writing, people tie female characters up into romantic/sexual relations, instead of the the stupid/off the wall crap that lazily written male characters get. And it’s right there, where people just DO things, instead of putting any effort in, THAT is where sexism lives. WOW, that was long. Sorry!
Um…I think the Derpy problem was that she wasn’t (at least the fandom version of her) wasn’t comically stupid, but actually mentally disabled. If Homer Simpson was actually, in the universe of the show, actually functionally retarded and used for slapstick, I expect just as many people would be up in arms.
What article was I just reading on Wikipedia? The Jim Henson Company. Wow, creepy.
Stay classy, Joe.
Stay classy.
Given a couple of seconds worth of reflection, isn’t the issue less the specific details of this particular characters choice (given that it is her choice, right or wrong, and people have different priorities), but rather the overrepresentation of this particular choice in the media?
Given a hundred different people presented with this dillema, doubtless you’d find a significant portion of them would make the same choice… But if you sample a hundred different movies featuring this dillema, you’d find a good 80 of them choosing the man over the career.
Now, there are plenty of reasons for that: jobs are rarely valued as much as “true love” is, which makes love the easier choice for audiences to empathize with (particularly given the fact that characters rarely have jobs that the audience would be remotely related to); sacrifice is considered romantic; nobody likes to see heartbreak; we never have to see the ramifications of the choice; etc. It doesn’t imply anything like a secret anti-feminist agenda, not that I expect anyone would think I was claiming such.
However, this theme, repeated often enough and without alternative viewpoints, can imply that a desire for a successful career can in some way be illegitimate. It implies that a desire for a successful career and independent existence is in some way rare and abnormal.
Of course, that doesn’t necessarily mean that it has a significant impact; movies rarely reflect realistic situations or achievable standards of happiness. It still impacts what we “should” look to as our fantasies, but how much impact does that necessarily have?
I couldn’t really say, honestly. I’d prefer a media that represented a broader spectrum of themes (something that I’m certain everyone could agree with), but until then, there’s not really an objective way that I’m aware of to answer that question. Well, no humane and objective ways, at least.
What’s strange to me isn’t that frogs don’t have them, but that so many invertebrates do have them. Many of which are downright horrifying.
“If the penis isn’t horrifying, why was it designed by H.R. Giger?
You stay classy Joe.
Aw, really? Joe didn’t recall the time-honored (ancient) Kermit/Piggy joke??
(What’s green and smells like pork? Kermit’s finger.)
Hmm. But isn’t Dorothy now essentially saying Danny was in the right to follow her to her choice of University?
No. She really isn’t.
So I think Dorothy is kind of missing the point, but that’s been covered far more eloquently and thoughtfully by commenters before me.
That being said, there is one line in the movie that struck a nerve with me: when Kermit and Piggy are walking through Paris and talking about their relationship, and Kermit criticizes Piggy for being smothering and says it makes him “do things that hurt you.”
That line really rubbed me the wrong way, largely because it seemed really out of character for Kermit, but also because it’s, you know, horrible.
The other thing to consider is the fact that the Piggy/Kermit relationship is based, like all things Muppets, on vaudeville and slapstick, like Bringing Up Baby or His Girl Friday. The relationship dynamic is never what you’d call “healthy,” but it is funny.
Kermits goal was to save the muppet theatre. How could he do that by moving to paris and mooching off a pig. What bother’s me more is that Gonzo had apparently struck it rich. Couldn’t he have sold his business and paid a portion of the theatres expensives instead of blowing it up? Kermit probably could have sold him mansion for another couple million, and Piggy must ben able to fork over a good share as well.
Well, they were on a deadline; selling businesses or houses would probably take too long. However one would expect Gonzo to have at least some liquidity to bring to the table…
Ahhhh stay classy, Joe.
On the other hand, Kermit is a frog. If he moved to France he would have been eaten.
My thoughts exactly. France is not safe for Frogs. Hell remember what happened in the first Muppet Movie! Last thing Kermit needs is an entire country like that.
Kermit’s dick… Sometimes I get the feeling Joe is the reason rule 34 exists…
Except that the home they bought to live in together was in the U.S. That should have some bearing on the situation.
Piggy, in and of herself, doesn’t bother me, least of all in The Muppets. She wasn’t asked to make any more of a commitment than Gonzo (successful business owner) or Sam the Eagle (host of his own TV show) or Bunsen and Beaker (working on the fucking Large Hadron Collider!). Plus, she’s always wanted stardom. I have a hard time believing she’d turn down another shot at showbiz, even if she and Kermit parted with some hard feelings.
What does bother me is that Piggy is the only major female character, and was played by Frank Oz and then Eric Jacobson. The Muppets is a bit of a boy’s club, isn’t it?
Don’t you understand? Once a man enters the picture, all other motivations disappear. Every feminist knows this. the long list of other reasons Piggy stays are all irrelevant compared to a man.
While I’m here, looking at this post about how many male puppeteers there are in the franchise, I should probably mention that Louise Gold is coming back as Annie Sue for The Muppets…Again, so that’s pretty cool.
To be fair, it was less “leave your career behind and come back with me because I’m the MAN” and more “the group we once were was a special thing and we’re trying to recapture that and would you maybe like to be a part of it?” Plus, they really did address within the movie that nostalgia and love aside Piggy would be stupid to leave her success and go back to Hollywood on a fool’s errand.
Besides, the Big Bad was a greedy oil developer, so that has to count for something, right?
The movie was also a comedy about puppets.
Has anyone else noticed that if Dotty took off her glasses and trimmed the back of her hair, she would look the same as Leslie?
Leslie is dorothy from the future to tell her to get off men while she still can.
You know, I never saw it as “Piggy, come back with me forever.” It was more like, “Piggy, we’re trying to save the theater. Can you come back with us for now so you can help us put on this show?”
Also, something you can say about “The Muppets” is that everyone sees Piggy as a real asset in their group. They do show her respect even if she’s a bit of a diva.
He asks her that earlier. Later, after seeing her return flight ticket, he asks her to stay.
Right, after a full-time Muppet reunion becomes more of a reality and less of a pipe dream.
The subtext throughout the entire movie was that they’re reuniting for good, and not just the one show. Everyone picks up on it, which is why Gonzo blows up his factory and Fozzie looks like he’s been thrown a lifeline.
I guess I didn’t have as much of a problem with it because by that point it was clear that the show and the group meant a lot to all of them, not just to Miss Piggy and when she’s staying, it didn’t feel like it was just for Kermit. You definitely have a point, but as someone who usually picks up on tricky things like this in movies it didn’t bother me as much.
Also, she could always do her work online … it’s certainly not impossible to at least do part-time work for the magazine. And while I’m thinking of it, isn’t kind of great that she’s not only a plus-size woman in the fashion industry, but one who has made a career promoting plus-size women?
Joe DOES kind of have a point, though…
this teacher really reminds me of Ellen DeGeneres… dunno why
Joe as always cuts straight to the heart of the matter.
I think you mean “Joe cuts to the meat of the matter.” …
Cloaca jokes again, Willis?
Recent events make this so much funnier