didn’t forsee her calling it a blessing though. I had totally forgotten that she was having nightmares about wanting sex…
which she now knows her boyfriend doesn’t want…
so now she doesn’t have to worry about … getting what she wants…
thats some silver lining.
She has outright stated that she has lusts and fears the lusts because the lusts she has show that she’s got evil in her because lust is an evil tempting her to do evil. But more that fearing the lusts she fears acting on the lusts because acting on the lusts in much more evil than merely lusting about the acts. So having a boy who will not act on lusts or lust to do the act and will act to prevent her acting on her lusts to an active degree frees her from concern about acting on her lusts. Which is what she wants.
So no, not paranoid at all, as I trust the above made perfectly clear.
She’s outright said she’s keeeping you as a boyfriend because being gay means she doesn’t have to worry about sex and telling you to resist being gay because it’s horrible STOP LOOKING HAPPY, ETHAN!
But science takes too much time to become interesting.
If you want to make bombs and blow things up into oblivion for fun, I’m afraid you have to learn… Maths (Along with a whole bunch of other stuff, like Chemistry).
Coincidence? Nah, he is my fav character in both KotOR games.
Reason I decided to modify the initials of my name to look like an unit from the series of the best robot on the SW universe.
Nope, actually, it isn’t. If she wants to ignore the fact that she’s gay, and he doesn’t mind being with her, and they make each other happy, who’s to say their relationship is bad? Everyone’s idea of love is different.
She doesn’t just want to ignore that he’s gay. She wants to “guide” him. And in the meantime, she wants to avoid coming to terms with her own sexuality and what happened at the party. There are certainly worse relationships out there, but overall, this is not a good thing.
I can agree that it may not be ideal… But what makes a couple happy is their own business. As long as it’s not hurting anyone, I don’t see the issue in it.
Because this will more than likely result in them hurting each other. There is a lot of denial on both sides here, and when that fades and other, more honest emotions come to light, it can only end badly. What happens when Joyce becomes comfortable with her sexuality and want’s to be with Ethan, or vica versa with Ethan and he wants to be with someone else?
Well then they’ll realize that they made a stupid- albeit happy mistake- grow all the wiser for it, and make better decisions next time. I never said it might not work out- I just said it’s worth the benefit of the doubt.
I agree. They obviously know that this isn’t their ideal relationship. But if it works for both of them, and they aren’t vindictive, I don’t see an issue.
Well, to be fair, that’s kind of what you have to do. Mull over what you did wrong and pick yourself back up. If you spend too long regretting something, you won’t learn as much from it. I have personal experience in that department; things are always much clearer if you don’t spend time beating yourself up for your mistakes.
There are some circumstances you can’t anticipate, and there are some you can. Now that Joyce knows that Ethan is gay, she SHOULD try to find a straight boyfriend. Trying to “help” him will not end with the desired result, and either frustrate them both or end in them being miserable and wasting time they could have spend finding proper partners.
This isn’t buying the wrong salad dressing or forgetting to set the alarm. Their relationship is a bad idea. Doesn’t mean we can’t enjoy watching it, but supporting it is not a wise idea.
I can feel a large amount of “Joyce can ‘fix’ Ethan’s heathen ways with her love and make a perfect husband out of him because he won’t try to defile her pristine body in any way” coming from this…it’s cute in some ways and FRUSTRATING in others. Stock character Joyce is so hard to root for here. I miss Anti-Joyce at moments like this.
“They obviously know that this isn’t their ideal relationship.”
Joyce thinks he’s perfect. He’s somebody for her to change any way she likes, and she can use him like a non-sexual blow-up doll to kiss and hug and caress and whatever she wants to do at her own pace.
Clearly this is all a good thing, and a prefect premise to base a relationship on.
Nah…. Joyce would be vindictive and judgmental in either case and both cases would push her deeper into that fear of sex, and both cases will probably break Ethan’s heart the moment he realizes that all that “acceptance” she was giving him, was just misguided hate for herself and his sexuality, hidden under oceans of denial and her good Christian ideal of “helping” sinners.
All in all, it’s a wildly bad, unhelpful idea. Ethan is looking for acceptance, and he’s getting it now, he’s convinced there is no acceptance in being gay and doing gay things, and he’s realized that there is no acceptance in lying about who he is, but he has not realized that there is no acceptance for those who don’t accept themselves. And the moment that Joyce shows her true colors, he will come to the incorrect conclusion that there is NO ACCEPTANCE FOR HIM ANYWHERE IN THE WORLD.
Be prepared for an “Ethan attempts Suicide” arc in the future Everybody.
But it is hurting them. Both of them have issues with their sexuality that they need to deal with, and this is giving them both an excuse to stuff their problems away and pretend they don’t exist.
To be fair, that’s not hurting them, but it’s not letting them prosper or grow as people. It’s… escapism, I guess? It’s not harmful, but it is destructive, if that makes any sense.
I would think this escape will:
-be temporary (in the end all things are)
–hurt at it’s ending
–stall for time until:
–> the two of them are mature enough to notice the problem
—?if they don’t ever notice the problem, they Will Not Grow nor see the need to from this.
— When they notice they will hopefully grown enough to live and learn
—> It Will still~ Hurt.
As non sociopaths it is our busyness to warn those close to us that they are hurting themselves and descurage people from hurting others. It is not my right to make you do anything. It IS my right to express my opinion.
yeahh, in real life i would buy that, but from the standpoint of someone reading a piece of fiction, we can tell that this will almost definitely end poorly. not to speak on behalf of Willis’ work, but this entire relationship is pretty clearly being set up to make a point about religion & sexuality (& to make jokes).
It is going to hurt them. He’s now in a relationship where he’s got “temptations” to “resist” instead of learning to deal with, and she’s got a fake boyfriend she dates so she doesn’t have to worry about sex or excessive making-out. It’s such a bad romance that Lady Gaga is retroactively going to name that song Ethan-Joyce.
Jamie and Erin are honest with each other and have parameters in their relationship that allow them to both have their needs met.
Joyce wants to change everything Ethan is and Ethan just wants to live the lie. Besides, the root of Joyce’s problem is that she does in fact want sex. And Ethan… well she’s not the one he wants for that. Inevitably, the present situation would devolve from that alone.
Erin and Jamie’s relationship isn’t just a horse of a different color. It’s a zebra.
Erin is asexual. Jamie is not. They fulfill each other’s emotional needs, and have an open relationship so that Jamie’s sexual needs, that Erin is unable to fulfill, can be met. They communicate their desires and understand and respect each other’s sexuality. It’s unorthodox by society’s (ludicrous) standards, but it’s completely healthy.
Ethan is gay. Joyce is straight. They are both unwilling to accept their sexualities and are actively denying them. Even worse, they are using each other to suppress their sexual desires. They have a relationship that is now about Joyce encouraging Ethan to actively suppress his homosexuality, and Joyce feeling safe because she knows Ethan will never want to have sex with her. It’s a relationship based in suppressing something they fear. It’s as far away from healthy as you can get, without involving actual intended abuse.
Dude, its not love, its a combination of delusion and denial. Shes terrified of sex, and he’s a self loathing gay guy, the relationship is abouit them not having to deal with their issues, not love.
Nope, actually, it isn’t. If she wants to ignore the fact that he’s gay, and he doesn’t mind being with her, and they make each other happy, who’s to say their relationship is bad? Everyone’s idea of love is different.
I don’t think Willis has it in him to plumb the depths the Funkyverse trolls on a regular basis. Or perhaps I simply desperately hope that’s true. One Funky Winkerbean is too much as-is, and yet, we also have Crankshaft.
Yes, but the author comes from a childhood background of extreme judgmentalism, where one takes their own view of the world as the one true one and anyone who acts in opposition to it is obviously in the wrong. That world view may of changed, but the overall habit doesn’t show any signs of waning.
Yes well, the author also refuses to draw more fanart of my OTP, DannyxSoda Bottle, so I in turn refuse to acknowledge his opinions. Because David obviously doesn’t know what true romance is. It’s dye, carbonated water, and high fructose cornsyrup packed into a plastic bottle.
Two things. First, Joyce is going to want to have sex with him eventually, we’ve seen that with the dream sequence, and Ethan will not be able to satisfy that. We basically saw how this potentially ends up in the Heyo!verse in Shortpacked with Ethan and Amber. “Threesome?” “Yes, please.” They do both desire sex, so ultimately there’s gonna be some tension there.
Second, they may be friends, but they’re not in this just for love. Ethan started this so he could essentially get back in the closet. Joyce is happy about this because it means he won’t try to rape her. They’re basically using this relationship as a way to avoid issues they don’t want to deal with. Joyce is going to need to confront the fact that she DOES want to have sex despite thinking it’s immoral, and that she HAS gone through some trauma recently that may not get better until she talks to someone about it. Ethan is going to need to confront the fact that yes, he is gay, and he can’t change that. And as long as he stays with Joyce, it’s going to keep them both from finding relationships that they find fully fulfilling.
Just a question but…what if they DID confront those issues and end up deciding they still just don’t want to have sex despite desiring it? Is it really that wrong to choose not to let your physical desires control you?
Desiring something is what your base instincts tell you. Wanting something is what your conscious mind decides. (at least as far as KKoro seems to be defining them) It’s in part the crux of the Catholic faith.
From what I’ve heard, they will both be miserable in the long term if they continue to deny their basic urges for too long. To a degree, it might not be wrong to deny some baser instincts, but in this case, I think they’ll both just torture themselves for no real gain.
But wanting to be with people of the correct gender (for your orientation) is not actually a “base desire” and should not have to be resisted. That you think being openly gay is the same thing as “letting your physical desires control you” also smacks of the over sexualization of gay people.
E.g., a little boy can be straight and no one will assume that means he has sexual desires. He can just be a boy with a crush. A little boy CANNOT by the same token be gay; he can’t have a harmless six-year-old crush on another boy, it MUST be sexual, and therefore teaching kids that gay folks exist MUST be telling them all the details of anal sex.
Joyce does want to have sex with Ethan, and I’m sure she knows it, somewhere deep inside that odd little brain of hers. That doesn’t necessarily mean she can’t resist the urges. In fact, it might even make her happier to resist the urges and not have sex with him, and then, once again, who can chastise her for that? This works out for Ethan, because, like you said, he doesn’t want her that way.
But I have to disagree with you on the point that he’s doing this just to “get back into the closet”. Who’s to say this isn’t a Leslie/Robin situation? Ethan could be entirely gay- with an exception. Besides, he’s not doing this entirely to get back in the closet- he genuinely likes Joyce, and wants to see her happy. That’s why he made the decision to hide his sexuality in the first place.
Joyce likes him for more reasons other than the fact that he’s guaranteed to not rape her- He puts up with her overly-religious self, to list the biggest reason. Which, in my opinion, would be very hard to come by in any person in the first place.
Thus, this means their relationship isn’t solely to avoid troublesome issues at all- it’s to try and make each other happy and to make it work.
Joyce doesn’t need to confront diddly-squat about her sexual desires if she doesn’t consciously want to have sex anyways. On the same point, I agree that she should talk to someone about the whole party scenario- but that’s not exactly necessary either. People can move on from things by themselves, it’s not impossible.
Ethan has already confronted his sexuality; in front of a whole town, apparently. I don’t think he’s trying to change himself to be straight, though- it’s more like he’s trying to ignore it to make someone he cares about happy. Or, like I said earlier, it could very well be a Leslie/Robin scenario, all over again. Granted, that didn’t exactly end well… But it was happy while it lasted. And that’s what I’d expect out of this.
As long as he stays with Joyce, they’ll both have to work decently hard to keep the relationship where they want it. It’ll be rough, and it has a high chance of not working out… But it also has a slight chance of being exactly what they both need. And I think that’s enough chance to let it run its course without booing it every time it appears on-screen.
Besides, he’s not doing this entirely to get back in the closet- he genuinely likes Joyce, and wants to see her happy. That’s why he made the decision to hide his sexuality in the first place.
Uh…no, he wants to hide his sexuality because it’s making him unhappy. He made this point pretty clearly for several strips before Joyce wandered by and provided him with an opportunity. And you notice how his explanation to Amber did not feature Joyce at all. I’m not saying he doesn’t like her, he clearly does, but he wants to be straight for his sake, not hers.
I also think that when the author goes to the trouble of putting up a news post to emphasize that a character is really-truly-yes-I-mean-it gay, the odds of that character being attracted to a member of the opposite sex are exactly zero.
My argument for “he hid his sexuality from Joyce because he likes her rather than because it was making him unhappy” comes from this strip. http://www.dumbingofage.com/2012/comic/book-2/06-strange-beerfellows/choice-2/
Ethan made the choice to stay with Joyce, and if Amber hadn’t forced him to come out, he probably never would have said anything.
We all agree that Ethan probably wouldn’t have told Joyce he was gay if not for Amber’s intervention, but that really, really, REALLY doesn’t in any way make him less obviously unhappy with his sexuality.
In the very strip you are linking to, Joyce says “Choices can be forever, but desires are transient,” and Ethan says, “I sure hope so.”
He isn’t talking about wanting to be with Joyce forever, he’s talking about how much he wants his gay feelings to go away and leave him alone.
Let’s look at some more strips, reverse-chronological order:
Yeah, I just don’t know where anyone is getting this idea that Ethan is upset about his sexuality and wants to stop being gay from. Totally out of left field, clearly.
We all agree that Ethan probably wouldn’t have told Joyce he was gay if not for Amber’s intervention, but that really, really, REALLY doesn’t in any way make him less obviously unhappy with his sexuality.
In the very strip you are linking to, Joyce says “Choices can be forever, but desires are transient,” and Ethan says, “I sure hope so.”
He isn’t talking about wanting to be with Joyce forever, he’s talking about how much he wants his gay feelings to go away and leave him alone.
Let’s look at some more strips, reverse-chronological order:
Yeah, I just don’t know where anyone is getting this idea that Ethan is upset about his sexuality and wants to stop being gay from. Totally out of left field, clearly.
I want to dispute your arguments, I really do, but I don’t have the patience to read this entire thing this late at night, and a quick read doesn’t cause anything to jump out. Plus, I’ve seen others try to explain why this is bad both yesterday and today, with no luck. So, I’m just going to say that you’re wrong, but I can’t explain why right now.
Ah, forgive me, I haven’t been keeping up with Shortpacked. My laptop bust down one summer, and I couldn’t read it… Care to explain what else is weird?
Points that other people have already addressed, but once my comment up above shows up, you will have ten different links to the comics where Ethan has made reference to his unhappiness with being gay. Hopefully they will prove more enlightening than the arguments everyone else is having with you.
But it isn’t love. It’s joint lying. She’s helping Ethan lie to everyone on campus even though he struggled to deal with his sexuality at home, and Ethan’s helping her lie to herself and make her believe that she’s loving him as God would and guiding him to a better, not-gay Ethan.
Honestly, I think Joyce is being selfish. Instead of learning how to draw the line in a mature relationship, she’s staying with Ethan SOLELY because she feels safe.
Nobody on campus needs to know that Ethan’s gay. It’s not exactly vital information… Also, you can’t say for sure yet that Ethan doesn’t actually love Joyce. Like I’ve said before, it has every chance of being a Leslie/Robin situation.
Also,she never said she was going to guide him away from his sexuality; she said she was going to guide him away from his temptations, and she’s doing the same to herself. It may sound like almost the same thing, but the difference is that she’s “doing unto him as she would have done unto herself”. Golden rule.
Besides, safety isn’t her sole reasoning. She actually likes the guy.
If you have a medical problem, you have two options. Ignore it and hope it goes away, or treat it, one way or another. Psychological problems are, it is increasingly apparent, a type of medical problem. They can be treated chemically, or with therapy, but treating is better than ignoring, in any case. If they both had open wounds, and they both decided it’d be better to just leave them as is and hope they heal on their own, and that makes them happy (now) who’s to say it’s not a good idea? I am. I’m here to say it’s a bad idea. An astonishingly bad idea.
That’s kind of a false analogy… Open wounds are pretty different from psychological problems, even in a metaphorical sense. But I see your point. I just want to see if anyone agrees that their relationship is worth a little hope of working out in the end, as small of a chance as it might have of that outcome.
FWIW, I know a married couple in which the husband is gay and the wife is straight. They have three daughters and are actually quite happy in their relationship. Yeah, they have challenges, but they genuinely love one another, although in a different way that a straight-straight couple may. Their decision to get married was based in large part on the fact that a) they did have a love for one another and b) they both wanted to marry and have children through natural childbirth. You can read their story on his blog here.
So yeah, I can see Ethan and Joyce ending up in a happy, healthy relationship that works for them and who the heck cares what other people think?
As far as I have known, agnostic meant that you weren’t totally sure about if God even exists or not, if you were sure you would be a theist or an atheist instead.
agnosticism is primarily used as a coward’s out. they say ‘oh i’m not sure!’ in response to any decisions because they’re afraid of the reaction in a mixed crowd, presumably of being mocked by one faction or the other.
stop that. it’s not becoming of a human being. pull on the big kid pants and own your beliefs.
jiynx, that might be true if the person in question is afraid of other people’s opinions on the subject but I’m both too old to care that much anymore. If for instance I was born in Japan, I most likely would have grown up to believe that Christianity was some strange gaijin religion with an obsession for crosses and vampire hunting nuns.
Um, no. When I became agnostic, my husband was a fundamentalist and my mom was in seminary (both have “loosened up” a bit since then.) If I just wanted to avoid conflict I’d have continued saying I was Christian, instead of apparently going around with a big sign that said “Convince me before I go to hell!”
And it’s not “in response to any decisions.” It’s in response to not knowing. TBH, it seems absurd and kind of arrogant to me to say we should “decide”; God is there, or not, regardless of whether I “decide” he/she/it/they are. I just can’t be sure, so I say that, rather than claiming knowledge I don’t have. I suppose it’s really a complete lack of faith, since even atheists have faith (without proof, since you can’t prove a negative) that there isn’t a god.
Lack of proof is proof that something doesn’t exist.
If I tell you that Jupiter’s moon Io has it’s own moon, an orbiting copper teakettle, that has been there for over a billion years, and no one knows how or why it’s there, because no one has ever seen it, would you say that “OH It must exist, no one’s gone to Io to look closely for any orbiting teakettles, so it’s obviously there.” It’s a logical fallacy to say that lack of proof is not proof of absence.
In fact, it honestly makes LOADS more sense to say, “I feel in my thoughts, that God exists, in my heart, and in what I believe is my soul, but I’ve never seen him, so I will never profess that his existence needs to be disproved, because it is proven to me.”
I’m such a hard core athiest, that I don’t even believe in String “theory”.
I keep seeing this out of atheists, and it really just isn’t the same thing.
The idea that there would be a naturally-occurring teapot in space somewhere goes against everything we know about the way planets in space are formed. It’s not absurd because we can’t go and see it, it’s absurd because it contradicts things we can prove (or at least have evidence for.)
Now, I will agree that many religious beliefs fall into that category. Creationism, for instance. However, insisting that there is definitely no god of any kind, not even a particularly standoffish one who sort of set things in motion and then went away, is more like saying there’s definitely nothing at all orbiting Io, not even the tiniest bit of debris. If lack of proof alone really did prove that something wasn’t there, then Io itself must not have existed before 1610, since before then we had no indication it was there.
Ah yes, the Dawkins Theory of Agnosticism: because it is cowardice to refuse to draw conclusions about something you don’t have feel you have adequate information to make conjectures about. Of course!
The principle behind agnosticism is to demonstrate humility when evaluating one’s understanding of the universe. I do not claim to know how the universe functions. It is more reasonable for me to say that I don’t know than to claim I do. I’m not saying that it’s impossible to have an understanding of the universe complete enough to know that there is or is not any sort of deity, but it’s beyond what we know now. This was the position of Thomas Huxley and Bertrand Russell.
My being agnostic isn’t me “taking the coward’s way out,” and I kind of resent anyone using that terminology for someone’s personal beliefs? It’s not a title I picked arbitrarily, and I HAVE been given grief for admitting I’m agnostic in mixed company before.
Believe it or not, not taking a side tends to make some people as upset as stating a clear belief one way or another! Much like it seems to be bothering you!
I admit to a lack of belief while simultaneously choosing to have the qualifier that I don’t feel I can personally say I am 100% correct in what I personally believe. I’m secure in leaving any feelings on spirituality at that. It doesn’t make me a bad or noncommittal person. It just makes me another person who decided their feelings on the matter and left it at that a long time ago.
Meh. For me it’s more of a “I give no shits, will never be able to come up with an answer except by dying and finding out by meeting, not meeting, or not finding out, I have better things to do than worry about this stuff. I… Guess the label on the tin says agnostic then? I dunno. Don’t give shits about that either, really…”
The terms gnostic and agnostic are about knowledge, while the terms theist and atheist are about belief in gods. The terms are not mutually exclusive.
So “gnostic” and “agnostic” are statements about whether the subject claims to know or thinks you can can know if gods exist. If you claim to know that a god, goddess, or gods exist or that you can know this, then you’re gnostic on the subject, in any other case you are agnostic.
The terms “theist” and “atheist” are statements about whether the subject believes that a god, goddess, or gods exist. If you have a belief that a god, goddess, or gods exist, then you’re a theist, in any other case you’re an atheist.
It’s a common mistake to think that atheism means that you deny the existence of gods. That is not a requirement of atheism.
So, if you’re agnostic about the existence of gods, and you don’t have a definite belief that gods exist, then you’re an agnostic atheist.
This is why you can’t only be agnostic. Even if you somehow “don’t know” whether you believe gods exist, that still means that you don’t have a belief that gods exist, which by definition means that you’re an atheist.
If we’re using words based on their definitions, then these are the appropriate labels here. You can’t label yourself whatever you want, regardless of whether it matches the definition or not, if you expect people to know what you mean when you use that label.
So, it doesn’t matter what you call yourself, it’s the definitions of those labels that determine if they’re appropriate or not.
: a person who holds the view that any ultimate reality (as God) is unknown and probably unknowable; broadly : one who is not committed to believing in either the existence or the nonexistence of God or a god
from Merriam-Webster.
Agnosticism is the view that the existence or non-existence of any deity is unknown and possibly unknowable. More specifically, agnosticism is the view that the truth values of certain claims—especially claims about the existence or non-existence of any deity, as well as other religious and metaphysical claims—are unknown and (so far as can be judged) unknowable. […] In the popular sense, an agnostic is someone who neither believes nor disbelieves in the existence of a deity or deities, whereas a theist and an atheist believe and disbelieve, respectively. In the strict sense, however, agnosticism is the view that humanity does not currently possess the requisite knowledge and/or reason to provide sufficient rational grounds to justify the belief that deities either do or do not exist.
So, uh. What were you trying to tell us about “using words based on their definitions”?
Dictionaries don’t even agree with you, honey. Please stop trying to tell other people they are labeling their beliefs incorrectly.
You can be an agnostic atheist, an agnostic theist, OR just an agnostic.
Perhaps you might want to try actually reading those chunks of text you quoted. You’ll find that they didn’t disagree with me at all.
Me: “So “gnostic” and “agnostic” are statements about whether the subject claims to know or thinks you can can know if gods exist.”
Merriam-Webster: “a person who holds the view that any ultimate reality (as God) is unknown and probably unknowable”
Wikipedia: “Agnosticism is the view that the existence or non-existence of any deity is unknown and possibly unknowable.”
See? All of us agree.
So, rather than just quoting swaths of text that supposedly don’t agree with me, “honey”, perhaps you could try using your own words to explain where the disagreement supposedly is?
So, if you’re agnostic about the existence of gods, and you don’t have a definite belief that gods exist, then you’re an agnostic atheist.
This is why you can’t only be agnostic. Even if you somehow “don’t know” whether you believe gods exist, that still means that you don’t have a belief that gods exist, which by definition means that you’re an atheist.
Nowhere in either definition does it say you can’t just not know whether you believe gods exist — in fact, not knowing is kind of the hallmark of both definitions! — and you must realize that your “somehow” and your quotes around “don’t know” are kind of really super condescending.
But hey, let’s turn it around a little. Are you allowed to be simply an atheist? Or do you have to forever call yourself a “gnostic atheist” (if you think you have knowledge about it) or an “agnostic atheist” (if you don’t think so)? Surely the term “atheist” is incomplete without that information!
(Btw, basing all your language arguments on a strict assessment of their roots is gonna get you into trouble one of these days. I’m afraid “homophobe” does not mean “fear of sameness”. 😉 )
Annnnd last but not least, I personally vacillate a lot! Sometimes I’d consider myself an agnostic atheist, most of the time more of an agnostic theist, and almost all the time I’m thinking, “Well, if there IS any kind of god-like entity out there, it probably isn’t all that concerned with human events. We are, after all, only one tiny planet in the infinite cosmos.”
I could pretend to be an agnostic atheist or an agnostic theist, but neither of those terms are correct for me overall. Agnostic is. Sorry it’s not “precise” enough for you.
Playing devil’s advocate here, but calling yourself agnostic doesn’t have to communicate anything useful about yourself, except that you don’t align with a major religion.
On a slightly different but related topic, I call myself “agnostic” even though I don’t really consider myself such simply because my beliefs don’t line up with any one religion. I have a distinct belief, but I don’t want to bore anyone with them here and now. If someone has a better suggestion for what I should label myself, feel free to e-mail me at the hotmail address of the same name.
I think it comes from the whole notion that God “created man in His image,” and THEN created woman. At this point though it’s probably just common usage among Christians that most people don’t think about that hard.
Blame English language for not having a definite gender-neutral term for a third person pronoun anymore these days. ‘He’ is often used as a universal term in that sense.
Yeah, but let’s face it, it’s also just plain ole sexism, like the idea that Eve came second, even though biologically we now know that female is the default.
Plasma Mongoose, the agnostic in your example is apparently also an atheist.
Let me ask you, does the atheist you described have a belief that gods probably exist?
If the answer is “no”, as it appears to be, then that puts them in the category of “atheist”. Anyone who does not have a belief that a god/goddess/gods exist is an atheist.
The atheist you described in your example is one kind of atheist, but it is not an accurate depiction of all atheists, such as your “agnostic” at the end. Similarly, anyone who doesn’t even have a concept of gods is also an atheist because they can’t have a belief in gods.
Atheism is a much broader term than most people understand it to be.
The agnostic he described has a belief that gods might exist. He literally said, I have no idea.
Your definition of atheism is not grounded in the popular understanding of the word, babe.
Dictionary.com: a person who denies or disbelieves the existence of a supreme being or beings.
Merriam-Webster: one who believes that there is no deity
What’s that, you say? The dictionaries are wrong because that’s not what atheism means for you?
Guess what? If dictionaries don’t get to tell you what atheism means, you don’t get to tell anyone else what agnosticism means.
Seriously, you are being borderline offensive right now. Just… stop.
Funny how you only used only one of the two definitions from the Dictionary.com site, and left out the one that agreed with John and I.
Dictionary.com: Definition #2- “disbelief in the existence of a supreme being or beings.”
Kind of dishonest to leave that out when it perfectly matches what we’ve been saying, wouldn’t you say?
Wikipedia: “Atheism is, in a broad sense, the rejection of belief in the existence of deities. In a narrower sense, atheism is specifically the position that there are no deities. Most inclusively, atheism is simply the absence of belief that any deities exist.”
So that bolded part totally matches what I’ve been saying.
Setting dictionaries aside, I’m also using the definition of the word that comes from the root word. If you are “a-theist” then you are “not-theist”, so if “theist” means you have a belief in a god or gods, then “theist” means everyone else who isn’t a theist. The same is true for “gnostic” and “agnostic”. It’s a straightforward X vs. not-X definition that we’re using.
So, at best, some parts of some dictionaries disagree with us, while other parts of those dictionaries which have been corrected/updated to match the root meaning and modern usage completely agree with what we’ve been saying. (Heck, just a few hundred years ago “atheist” was pretty much just a generic insult, as there were few or no actual atheists back then. Definitions change over time.)
What we’re telling you is the definition that most atheists actually mean when we use the word “atheist” for ourselves. This is why it’s extremely frustrating to see people insist that the term means something else, and thus totally misconstrue our position.
It’s not even remotely dishonest. You’re the one trying to make absolute statements about what a word means; I’m saying, our understanding of those words is also valid.
What we’re telling you is the definition that most atheists actually mean when we use the word “atheist” for ourselves. This is why it’s extremely frustrating to see people insist that the term means something else, and thus totally misconstrue our position.
…Funny, how you’ve put us all in that same position you resent! I mean, do you really not see the hypocrisy here?
You have been told, this is the definition agnostics prefer for themselves, and your response is “NO, your definition DOESN’T EXIST!”
One more comment, because I just want to make my position on this completely clear:
I’ve always used “strong” and “weak” agnosticism / atheism to make a similar distinction to what you are making. I totally think that “atheistic agnosticism” (you aren’t sure / don’t have proof / don’t believe we can have proof, but you don’t think there is a god or gods) and “theistic agnostic” (you aren’t sure / don’t have proof / don’t believe we can have proof / don’t think any of the available religions have it right, but you think there is a god or gods) are things.
I also think that agnostic atheists and and gnostic atheists are things, and that the atheist tent is big enough to encompass both atheists who believe there is no god or gods and atheists who just don’t believe there is a god or gods.
And I absolutely don’t think an atheist is a bad thing. I don’t fear the label or go “ack, get it away from me” or anything like that. My reluctance to label myself as an agnostic atheist is because I genuinely don’t feel it fits, not because I think it is a bad thing, and since I’m very sure you’ve encountered plenty of people who think agnosticism is just “a conversion waiting to happen :D” but that atheism means “you are a bad person who probably worships the devil :|||” (bullshit, and also traditional Satanism or Luciferianism is more humanist anyway, to bundle two things that don’t really belong together).
Again: I use agnostic because I think it’s more honest, and because for me the primary thing is that don’t attribute to myself the ability to know the divine. If it exists, I tend to think I could still never understand it. This uncertainty is the hallmark, and so I just very strongly identify with “agnostic” as a label.
“No people can’t just be agnostic.” What are you basing this claim on? I’m genuinely curious… I have never heard this definition before.
And no, you don’t get to decide what people call themselves, that is correct. When I say “I am x” and you say “no you’re not” you’re challenging someone’s identity. Not that this is always wrong, but it will always make you look like an ass.
Why not? Do you really think no one can be that undecided / apathetic / prone to flip-flopping? What about people who are agnostics that grew up with religions that don’t have gods (e.g. some forms of Buddhism, Jainism, etc.)?
I was simply correcting the misuse of the word. I know a lot of people get it wrong, but the intent of the idea of Agnosticism is meant to go hand-in-hand with either Atheism or Theism.
No… agnostic atheism and agnostic theism are just two types of agnosticism. There’s pragmatic agnosticism and strong or weak agnosticism, to name several. You don’t need to base your stance in either belief or disbelief in a God or gods. The core of your beliefs can be “I don’t know” (weak agnosticism), “I can’t know” (strong agnosticism), or even “I don’t care” (pragmatic agnosticism). None of these make a judgment about belief or disbelief in god, and in these ways, agnosticism need not go hand-in-hand with theism or atheism.
I believe one thing with utter certainty: you, sir, are a jerk.
I’d also be willing to bet on “white” and “male”, because it takes a lot of privilege to feel like your definitions are better than everyone else’s when you don’t even have the questionable authority of a dictionary definition to stand on.
2.) You are wrong. Your definitions aren’t even supported by the dictionary, and you have zero authority to label other people’s spiritual beliefs either way.
I asked you to back up your assertion with a logical explanation, not just simply double down on arrogance. So let me try this again:
a) Why can’t someone simply be so undecided that they have no starting position on theism or atheism to drift “away” from?
b) What about people who are uncertain about religious beliefs that ill fit the binary label of “theist” or “atheist?” (i.e. Those with strong belief in the supernatural but none in gods or similar classes or entities.)
.e. Those with strong belief in the supernatural but none in gods or similar classes or entities.)
That would be a definition of … Brazilians :))
Serously, there is a smogarsboard of religious traditions here. The end result is that everyone believes in something, even if it is a colection of incongruent ideas. It is not uncommom a Brazilian Catholic who believes in reincarnation. :))
Language is a living thing, John. Even if your defintiion was correct, it doesn’t matter anymore, as nowadays enough people understand agnoticism as the other definition.
It just irks me when people use a term incorrectly, even if it’s a popular incorrect use of said term, and then when they’re called on it someone just claims “living language” as if that’s an all encompassing out for when you use a term incorrectly. It’s crap.
If you’re agnostic about god the way you’re agnostic about there being a Rustles Teapot in the asteroid belt, I don’t see how one can be undecided. Most of the “we just can’t know”s have been solved so they really bother me. I know people who have seen ghosts. My grandpa says death is the end of it but says he is a little psychic. I can respect faith. I can’t respect not looking at the sorce of ethics and deciding if your own make sence to you.
Theology has non-trivial consequences.
Like D.O.M.A. and a war that Bush said God told him to start.
All I know is that if I died right now and for the sake of argument assume that not only does God exist, but the SDAs were right, then I will come alive in the 2nd resurrection along with billions of other humans and fallen angels as we attempt to take over New Jerusalem before being hit with God’s version of the Penance Stare and die painfully as the Earth turns into a sea of molten rock with Satan being the last being to die.
Now you can understand why I am at the very least agnostic.
So, what, I’m supposed to claim to know something I don’t as some sort of protest against people doing bad/stupid things in the name of religion? How is that supposed to help, exactly?
That is called strong agnosticism, assuming the core of your decision is based on the belief that no one can possibly know whether or not there is a God. If it’s based instead in the idea that it doesn’t matter if there is a God because evidence shows that it doesn’t care about us even if there is one and we don’t know, that’s pragmatic or apathetic agnosticism.
Words have multiple definitions, all of which change over time as the word propagates into common usage. The original intent of how the word is used doesn’t really matter in the long run. The word agnostic if you break it down actually just means “without knowledge.” One of the dictionary definitions is “a person who does not take on side or the other of an argument.” So yes, one can be, in many definitions of the word, agnostic without being atheistic or theistic. Words that also have multiple meanings. A common definition of atheism is to strongly believe there is no god, whereas another is just having an absence of belief in a god. Both are correct, because that’s just how language works. It’s understandable that you want your narrow definition to be the one that everyone fits into, because then you’ll feel like you’re not alone in your delusional little “this is what things mean” bubble, but i’m afraid you ARE alone in that bubble. ALL ALONE. In a bubble. By yourself. (cause you’re wrong{about how language works})
Looks like it’s time to play everyone’s favorite game, Taboo™!
Everybody, describe your stance without using the words:
1. Agnostic(ism)
2. (A)Theis(t/m)
Bonus!
For a more challenging and deeper showcase of your beliefs, also remove these words from your description:
1. God
2. Faith
I believe that there is no higher power, however if I were proven wrong I wouldn’t be surprised at all.
I would be surprised however if any of the major religions were right though, it’s statistically almost impossible if you think how many religions have come and gone in the few measly millennia that humans have been around.
Can I just say ditto? Except I would be a little surprised.
Further, if the higher power that I do not think exists were to exist, and to be anywhere on the omniscient/omnipresent scale, I would be disappointed in him/her/it and in creation. If it were to exist and to be a distant creator, a mad scientist even, then my perceptions of the world would be unshaken.
I don’t believe in any froo-froo ridiculous improbable and/or impossible stuff, be it unicorns, perpetual motion machines, magic crystals, guaranteed ways of legally winning the lottery, massive but perfectly secret conspiracies, or even anybody’s favorite physics-defying and possibly self-contradictory mythological figure(s).
However, for the silly things that aren’t actually impossible, I do retain a nugget of willingness to believe that they’re true, if actual evidence appeared that did a reasonable job of supporting the claim. For ridiculously unlikely claims the evidence had better be pretty good, of course.
But regarding my above willingness to entertain ludicrous theories, that’s a willingness, not an actual belief in it. And unless and until such evidence rears its head, I will hold the solid belief that the silly things aren’t real. While simultaneously allowing for the possibility that I might, maybe, be wrong. But probably not.
If there’s no share-able, record-able proof. Then it doesn’t exist. And even if you decide that it could or does exist, independently of me, there is no valuable discussion I can glean from a conversation to try and convince me otherwise. With the exception of the absolution that any improbable event, no matter how unlikely, will occur again within our universe.
Fun thing is, that system of thinking let’s me believe in ghosts and aliens (And fucking Cthulhu, though that’s just the stuff that haunts me at night) while disbelieving in String “theory” and any Deity, Judeo-Christian God or otherwise. XD XD XD
If there’s no share-able, record-able proof. Then it doesn’t exist. And even if you decide that it could or does exist, independently of me, there is no valuable discussion I can glean from a conversation to try and convince me otherwise. With the exception of the absolution that any improbable event, no matter how unlikely, will occur again within our universe.
Fun thing is, that system of thinking let’s me believe in ghosts and aliens (And fucking Cthulhu, though that’s just the stuff that haunts me at night) while disbelieving in String “theory” and any Deity, Judeo-Christian God or otherwise. XD XD XD
Bravo on crafting something that very much feels like it’s out of reality – namely, people making choices that aren’t necessarily the wisest in the long run but that are convenient for the time being.
This is definitely not going to end well, and the worst part of it all is that both of them are enabling each other, so it’ll probably go on for longer than it should.
(On the other hand, if Ethan or Joyce get interested in politics, it’s a plus in this day and age in the sliding timescale.)
I think that Joyce’s religious sexual views compounded with her untreated trauma from near date rape would explode in a way that wouldn’t be very funny. Plus, DoA!Mike’s mean streak seems more focused on helping people in sneaky & underhanded ways, and that would not help her at all.
Asexual seems to be what she’s hoping for, though. She doesn’t want him to still be attracted to men, but she doesn’t really want him to be straight either, because then he wouldn’t be “safe” anymore. If he were asexual heteroromantic, that would be ideal, as far as she’s concerned. (Not saying there’s any chance whatsoever that it’ll happen, just that it’s what Joyce would want to happen.)
Pretty much. A close friend of my mother’s has genuinely made the argument that in the eyes of God it’s perfectly okay to BE gay so long as you never ever actually have sex with someone of the same gender, ever. I think this is basically where Joyce’s thoughts are.
i admit, willis did a great job of making a character that, were i to meet them in real life, i would shake them the way one of those terrible nannies would shake a baby.
Joyce is meeting Ethan on the terms he set for her. I think we can pretty much assume that pre-Ethan all she knew about homosexuals is that they were sinning against God. Now she finally meets one in person and everything he tells her about his sexuality reaffirms what she’s been taught to believe. It’s not like Joyce dragged Ethan out of a GLBTA meeting threatening hellfire.
I don’t really get why the entire reaction to the Ethan-Joyce relationship seems to boil down to “Oh Joyce is so evil!” If Joyce thinks she can fix Ethan, that’s probably because Ethan is basically screaming “Somebody fix me!”
Can’t really put all the blame on her. She’s just going along with what Ethan wanted to do from the beginning and putting her own spin on it from her own personal beliefs. Is it a really dumb idea on both of their parts? Yes, but it takes two to tango.
I think that is a very mean thing to say. While trying to “fix” a gay man is wrong, and doomed to fail, it’s mostly wrong if it’s unwanted or unbidden. Ethan has expressed displeasure with being gay, so she thinks she’s doing the right thing. At least she’s coming at it from the right angle, even if the premise is flawed from the beginning.
No, it’s wrong no matter what. Because even when it is wanted, it doesn’t actually work, so all you are doing is encouraging painful repression and laying groundwork for even more toxic self-hatred (now not only are they still gay, they are also a FAILURE because you encouraged them to believe they could change!) down the road.
I can understand why Joyce is doing this, and don’t blame her for it, much also believe in objective morality. What Joyce is doing is STILL wrong, despite her good intentions and Ethan’s encouragement.
Man, Joyce got very nearly raped a week ago. Seven days. That excuses her for a lot of poor relationship decisions based on fear and trauma, in my book. For God’s sake, all she wants is to date a guy who won’t terrify her sexually, who she doesn’t need to have any more nightmares about. I can’t think of anything much more sympathetic (or horribly sad) than that.
I think that’s probably the best and most positive description for this scenario yet! I wish I could up-vote this so it could be the first thing people see in relation to this comic, so that there will be less arguments over this.
GOSH DARNIT JOYCE I WANTED TO GIVE YOU THE BENIFIT OF THE DOUBT THAT YOU WERE BEING ACTUALLY ACCEPTING AND YOU COMPLETELY FAILED ME! Now I am just dissapointed and sad…
…and hungry but that’s irrelevant to this situation.
Okay, ya, I overreacted. Joyce is being suprisingly accepting about it, and she didn’t go “eliminate the gayness” more like, “We can ignore sexaulity, TOGETHER”, at least, as I am reading it right now, and she can’t really fail me, as she is not catering to me.
But I am still hungry. And tired. I should go to bed now.
Don’t worry, Aaron. 23-yr-olds are stupid, too. Which I can say from experience looking back, ’cause I’m almost five years older than that… although I have a very strong suspicion that future-me will think present-me is stupid, too, in exciting new ways that I can’t currently imagine!
It’s a magical cycle of finding out you were a fool, every few years until you die. Hooray for wisdom!
In shortpacked Leslie told robin that she knew she was gay at 8 after seeing princess Lea in Return of the Jedi. http://www.shortpacked.com/2009/comic/book-9/01-fired/chastityballs/
I think there is another shortpacked comic that I cannot find right now where it says she came out to her husband 3 months into her marriage.
The comic itself was about the worst times to come out of the closet, one of the other panels had DOA Ethan on the phone with his mother.
She didn’t say she realised it then, she said that was her first gay attraction. They become much more obvious once you realise you’re gay and look back.
While this is a perfectly valid question to ask, I am highly tempted to ask seemingly already answered questions along the lines of “Is Ethan gay in this universe?” in response. Such as, “Is Joyce Christian in this universe?” It’s mean-spirited and unwarranted, but I hear that confession is good for the soul. So I’m just putting this out there.
Totally different things. Those are qualities either intrinsic to the person or central to the character. We’ve seen, though, that characters’ backstories can vary wildly. Ethan’s still tall, dark, gay, and a toy nerd; he’s not a failed stand-up comedian. Joyce is still blonde, blue-eyed, and a sheltered yet boy-obsessed fundamentalist Christian; she’s not a superpowered alien abductee.
I’m assuming Leslie’s still gay, just like she’s still blonde. I’m assuming Leslie’s still nineteen kinds of awesome and too nice and forgiving for her own good, because those are the things that make Leslie Leslie. Whether this universe’s Leslie has an ill-advised marriage to a man in her backstory… I have no idea, and I’m kind of curious.
We do know she never dated Malaya in this universe, because teaching Gender Studies in Indiana is the price she had to pay for that retcon.
It’s not going to last, but does it have to? If they enjoy each other’s company, and they understand what each other wants/needs, then what’s wrong with it?
And lo! Joyce turned out to be one of those super-literal teen-aged Christians, consideringeth only P within V to be Sex, and didst so present that which she hath in common with men to Ethan. And behold! Ethan closedeth his eyes and thought of England.
It’s like watching a Rube Goldberg machine of bad decisions in slow motion.
Tomorrow, the camera pans over a couple feet to the right and we see Amber about to explode.
You know, you don’t really have to ship this? I know you’re being sarcastic(I hope) but it’s not like there’s a guy pointing a gun at the back of your head and forcing you to do so.
Un;ess reading them like this has caused ridtom to actually like the relationship between them. Then shipping is out of his/her hands as it will happen regardless of logic.
After last the last strip I was still holding out hope. Now, the only thing that can save this is a last minute about face by Ethan. They’ve got ~2 strips before their misfortunes are sealed.
nah, mike’s gonna sleep with ethan.
we’re going to expect joyce to break up with ethan for cheating on her.
she forgives him, and asks him to repent for his sexual encounter.
…
1 or more comics later ethan breaks up with her cause mike makes him realize its a dumb relationship.
Ethan just told Amber that he was dating Joyce because he wanted to be in the closet and because he was very uncomfortable with his friends knowing he was gay. Does this sound like the actions of someone who’s comfortable with and accepting of their own sexuality?
Back when this originally started, Ethan was saying that he wanted to pretend to be heterosexual for the rest of his life. Joyce has just told him that she’s okay with being the girl he pretends to be heterosexual with. She didn’t even put it in condemnatory terms. Of course Ethan thinks this is awesome.
huh as an openly gay woman who has once been in a long term romantic relationship with a straight man im kind of insulted by the reality pill people. people can love each other without being sexual attracted to each other.
I’m all for love like that, because that’s the type of love Robin has for Leslie in Shortpacked!, but here, Joyce is basically saying she doesn’t want to accept a part of Ethan’s identity, which is probably unhealthy in a relationship (I’ve never been in one, but that is what media tells me).
Well, that and the relationship is also based on Ethan not wanting to accept a part of Ethan’s identity. A relationship based on mutual fear of other relationships isn’t a good starting point.
Actually Robin in Shortpacked! is sexually attracted Leslie; Robin in general is not attracted women but for her Leslie is her exception.
But yeah, I do agree with the rest of your comment. Joyce accepted the fact that Ethan is sexually attracted males but in the manner that she views it as a sinful temptation that she can cure eventually. Which also seems to be a goal she is willing to have a long term dedication to if her line “I have the patience to guide you” is indicative of anything. That I agree is probably an unhealthy relationship.
However, one thing I am still slightly unclear on is, does Ethan fully comprehend what Joyce plans to do with their relationship in the long run? (and is he actually okay with that?) or does he still not understand her intentions completely and is thus ignorant (perhaps willfully) of Joyce’s long term goals?
Except for the part about being a gay woman. I’m a straight man. But I get what you’re saying.
Also, is anyone else here in favor of just giving Joyce the benefit of the doubt? Yeah, there is definitely an element of “I’m going to fix you” in what she’s saying, but it lacks the air of moral superiority that usually accompanies it. And all things considered, she’s being fairly accepting of him (Yes, I’m aware that acceptance and fixing are contradictory. People in general are contradictory by nature.)
Do I think this is the best situation possible? Not really. At the same time, at least from my perspective, Joyce seems well-intentioned. The sentence that seems to define her mind-set isn’t the patience to guide thing. It’s “I will never give up on you.” She’s doing her best with the upbringing and tools she has to work with.
And Ethan…? Well… He’s not lying anymore… So good on him.
Oh no I totally get “This is going to end horribly.” It’s just that I keep reading comments like “Welp! There’s Joyce just being terrible again! Isn’t she a horrendous human being?”
One of the things that makes Joyce a complex character (and there’s a phrase I never thought I’d write back in the Roomies! days) is that she does sometimes do terrible things (or bad things, anyway… “terrible” is probably a bit strong for anything this Joyce has done, though Walkyverse Joyce had a couple moments that might qualify), but she’s not a horrendous human being. She’s a genuinely nice person doing her best to do right by the people around her, with a social toolbox and worldview that are woefully inadequate for the task.
I think Willis said it best himself. Joyce genuinely wants to be a kind person, but if kindness is a soup, she’s been given a fork.
And what makes this moment work is that she’s almost there. She isn’t rejecting him as a human (for the most part) or being hurtful. She still has the fork but Gaht-dangit, she is shoveling every last drop of soup that clings to that fork into his mouth.
What she’s saying is she’s onboard with his plan of stupidity. We’ve gone from Ethan secretly using Joyce to not be gay anymore so life ill seem easier to Joyce agreeing to help Ethan not appear gay anymore so life will seem easier. Their individual stupidity have merged together to create a greater stupidity. And they did it without supervision so there’s nobody around to halty the momentum and keep it from growing further.
It’s like… I’m certain this is going to end badly, but at the same time, it’s cute, or something? I don’t know, it’s making me feel like 15 billion different things at once. Which is making me confused.
Also, I’ve been very sympathetic towards Joyce since the beginning. It’s actually her flippant “except, like cancer, I guess” that makes me hate her for the very first time.
Everything else I can chalk up to a very problematic culture. But that last bit? What the hell, Joyce?
Willis strip rules #39- Punchline syndrome. Sometimes characters have to say horrible things for the sake of having the strip end in a joke. 9 times out of 10, you can’t really hold this against them.
Can I ask what you find bothersome about that? I mean, it was flippant, but people *do* tell people with cancer “God doesn’t give us anything we can’t handle.” It’s nice to know Joyce wouldn’t be one of those people.
(Plus as a narrative device it points out that no, God/the universe does give us things we can’t handle, sort of poking a hole in Joyce’s argument without her really thinking about it.)
How is that wrong? Better than the unfortunately common type of Christian, who will tell people undergoing things they legitimately cannot cope with (often cancer, but also the death of a child, etc.) that “God doesn’t give us anything we can’t handle.” That just invalidates people’s suffering by implying they could “deal with it” if they believed harder.
Joyce saying that actually made me like her MORE. She’s ridiculing an insensitive cliche often said by other religious people to “help” the dying or grieving.
Bad way to go. Joyce apparently does not accept him as he is,gay.
But, I’ve known a couple of fundamentalist and they stated that being gay was by choice…if you want not to be gay, just think about it and you won’t be. I did not attempt to argue with them, a total waste of time. I just know that there are really people out there who feel like Joyce does, that if she ‘guides’ him he will see the error of his ways.
But what if her daydream had a half a chance to come true, would she then have to fear him as being like all the rest of men, who try to ‘twist her’.
I don’t think Ethan is all right with this, I think he just isn’t picking up on ‘I’ll be here to guide you’. I think he thinks she is offering to be his beard.
Then again, if they both do know what the other is saying, accept it, and want to try to be happy together, go for it. Sure hope it don’t hurt to much.
Presumably, if her fantasy happened, they would have bonded on a level that would not allow him to ‘twist her’. Because actually deep relationship with a non-sexual basis.
A Fundie Christian girl…
A Gay Jewish boy…
One would think they have nothing in common
But that’s ok. They’ll force it until they work!
This summer.
Kate hudginson as Joyce
and Vince Vaun as Ethan
Featuring Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson as Joe.
“The Really Bad Idea”
coming soon April, 34th, 2008.
I’m puzzled by all the hate for this pairing. Yes, it’s obviously doomed from the start, but most relationships are. I mean, every previous relationship all of us have had have ended, and usually badly. over half of all marriages end in divorce.
Relationship are fragile and transient things, like soap bubbles on the wind. If they come out of this relationship with more good times than bad and wiser then when they started, then I will be considering this relationship a success, doomed though it might be.
Except that it’s patently obvious that this relationship WON’T do that. She wants a success story she can brag to all her fundie friends back home about, he wants to be straight despite knowing that he isn’t. How could anyone NOT hate this?
Because sometimes it’s more important to learn to not lie to yourself and others than it is to avoid a relationship that will go tits up sooner than later. Sometimes you have to get your feelings hurt to truly understand them.
Am I the only one still caught on Ethan’s, “I understand if you want to leave me now”? Between that and his wanting to shut his sexuality away, it looks like he wants to try this relationship as a relationship, as though denial will fix everything. I’m taking Joyce’s “guide you” as less “forcibly fix you” and more “guide you on this path you’ve already chosen which is similar to a path I’d like to choose for myself.”
I’m not saying any of this is a *good* thing, but it’s definitely a highly sympathetic thing. Empathetic, even, on Ethan’s side for me, as I can remember trying to date people I didn’t actually want in college simply because I wanted to want them, wanted to be viewed as and actually be “normal.”
I guess I am not really understanding all the Joyce hate here. They are both making terrible decisions, but they are both trying their best with what they’re given and where they are. My hope is that they’ll use the safety of this relationship in order to come to terms with themselves, their sexualities, and their experiences, and go on to remain good friends while seeing other people. Is this likely? Probably not. (Okay, definitely not.) But there’s a reason this is called “Dumbing of Age” instead of “Everyone is Already a Mature Adult who Makes Good Decisions” besides, y’know, the second title being absurdly clunky.
Yeah, I feel really sad for both of them. I think they’re both ‘at fault’ here, if either of them are. Both of them are crushed under the weight of societal pressures, just trying to deal with them in ways that make sense to them, and both of them are very likely to hurt the other in the process.
I think the Joyce hate is unreasonable. He is clearly understanding her suggestion, and accepting it with open arms. They are both making unhealthy emotional decisions.
I simply think most people can sympathize with Ethan’s more than they can with Joyce’s.
This is the worst possible decision either of these two characters can make, and a very real part of me wants to tell you to please not write this story. But you know what? That very impulse is what makes this a story worth telling.
Ethan: willing to sacrifice sexual relationship (but not an emotional/romantic one) in favor of social conformism. I don’t agree with it, but as a non-flamboyant gay man myself I can see why he’d choose that road.
Joyce: wants a man who will not ever pressure her for sex, ergo a gay man. At this point I think she doesn’t know sexual satisfaction long-term will be an issue, so she gets a pass for now.
For the amount of experience Joyce and Ethan have, and their motivations thus far, I think they are both making the best decision they know how to make. I don’t think the relationship itself stands a snowball’s chance, and I hope it ends before they get married so they can both end up having emotionally -and- sexually fulfilling relations, but I’m impressed how well set-up all of this was.
This seems to be the quickest way for them to deal with their issues. They aren’t go through the arduous process of figuring out where they actually stand on all things involving love and/or sex until the inevitable trainwreck forces them to.
It’s hard to confront your demons if you don’t let yourself get anywhere near them. This relationship is the Express Train to Demonville, so they are on the right path.
“a man who will not ever pressure her for sex, ergo a gay man”
Yes, because all straight men are ruled by their penis with an iron fist, just as all women are 70% tear-ducts, 20% sandwich-makers, and 10% pure PMS 😛
I think “pressure” here is being used in the most benign, innocent way. I dont think he meant to say that any straight man would consistently, actively pressure her to have sex. Rather that sexual tension in any long term, romantic relationship between two people attracted to each other is probably going to happen eventually….
This comic is really helping me understand how and why situations arise where a homosexual person is in a relationship with a person of the opposite sex while being aware of their own sexuality. I don’t think it’s a healthy course of action, but this is allowing me to see the mindset that might lead someone there. Good job.
That is one of the most depressing things I’ve ever read, no less so for the way they both keep insisting they are SUPER happy like that 😀
What’s the worst part?
That they’ve been together since they were sixteen, and therefore have no other sex to compare with their sex lives of amazing emotional fulfillment
That they both think this is the only way their god will ever love or accept him
That he “pretends” to call a woman’s adopted children counterfeit but REALLY DOES think he could never have been happy without children that were the product of heterosexual sex
I mostly just feel intense pity for them both. They think their marriage is perfect but it is literally true that they could have ALL THE SAME THINGS and also be with someone who was sexually attracted to/sexually attractive for them. I didn’t want to judge, going into that, and romance without sex is perfectly possible! But there is no part of what they describe that doesn’t sound hollow and dead inside.
This is a right relationship for all the wrong reasons.
Joyce wants to feel safe after her attempted rape, so Ethan’s a great choice in that regard (Plus he is generally a all around nice guy, so that’s a nice boon).
Ethan’s on a journey of self-discovery and wants to “start fresh”. Unfortunately, he’s doing it wrong.
It’s a sad thing that this is going to end so horribly, but I can’t fault either of them for their choices at the moment.
All true. I can’t see this ending in anything but a torrent of tears, possibly even spiteful tears, after grave mistakes are made several years down the line, but all the same… This may be exactly what both of them need right now. Somewhere to feel safe. Somewhere to give themselves time to sort through their emotions and come to terms with who they are.
I just hope that both of them come through with their innate good heart intact.
Oh goodie, they have decided to enter a relationship based on delusions, deniaal and refusal to deaal with your issues. This isnt healthy, this is super bad. Which its obviously meant to be seen as, but since some people in the comments actually SUPPORT it…
Having read these comments it seems that a lot of the anger about this come down to Joyce’s word choice.
On its own “I will never give up on you” would mean that she will still be his friend. Yet coupled with her “guiding” him to “resist” his “overwhelming temptations” it takes a different tone.
Also a people seem to have forgotten that just yesterday Ethan said “I wish I could ignore the stuff going on in my pants … Just shut it up and lock it away forever.”
In the end all Joyce is doing is supporting Ethan’s desire to be straight. It’s not the healthiest thing nor “the right” thing to do but it seems that this is what they both need right now.
She needs someone to feel safe around in regards to the party. He needs someone to be his friend who might be able to see that he is more than gay.
I hope that whatever develops between them helps them to grow and become more comfortable with themselves, and when/if Amber finds out she will understand his motivations.
This. While it might be the best the choice, it might be just what they need right now. Joyce definitely needs some cool-down time after her assault but she’s so driven on finding Mr. Right that I don’t think she has taken the time to sort through all her feelings in regards to that situation. I hope that this…. arrangement with Ethan will give her a chance to sort through her feelings since she won’t feel the pressure of looking for her future husband or worrying about what this boy wants from her.
As for Ethan, I don’t really feel like it’s a good situation for him at all. All he’s really getting out of it is escapism, and eventually I think he’s going to find that this isn’t making him happy. Hopefully he’ll be able to overcome his own demons before it gets to the point that Joyce breaks up with him because she’s overcome hers and isn’t happy in their arrangement any more, because if he isn’t I fear it might mess him up more because he’s trying to hard to make the straight path work for him and keeps “messing it up”.
If that’s what they were actually looking for, maybe. But it’s not. Ethan is not looking for recognition as more than gay, hell, both Amber and Mike obviously do that Mike treats him exactly the same as everyone else and Amber still nerds out with him on occasion according to their previous conversations. What he’s looking for is someone who will turn him straight, or at least not gay, and Joyce is looking for a MRS degree.
The ‘I’m safe with you’ is totally reasonable conclusion based on her issues. however the ‘overwhelming temptations that we both have to learn to resist’ is back down you need fixing route.
You know, if they both had therapy and came to grips with their neurosis, fears, and discomfort with their sexuality, then I might be okay with this relationship. It is not one I would choose for myself, as I value personal expression over conformity to societal norms. However, I know that that is a choice that people can make for themselves.
However, both of them are going into this relationship from a place of deep rooted insecurity and fear about themselves and the world, and that is not healthy. It wouldn’t be if they were compatible sexually.
Yes, together we can shove our personal problems down SO deep that we won’t even recognize them anymore! Nothing will be a problem so long as our surface has a smile!
Why did Ethan even come out in highschool in the first place? If he had wanted to live a heterosexual life, he could have just used Amber. He didn’t need to come out and cause all the drama with his parents. He could have just acted like he didn’t want to have sex with her because he “wasn’t ready” or something like that.I thought he’d actually want to get a boyfriend and have satisfying sex. This relationship is not going to be good.
y’all know joyce is being a piece of shit hetero scum right now? like this isn’t cute and this isn’t a “complex relationship.” she is being oppressive and this actually actually actually is abusive of her.
Man, the commentary on this is kind of funny. It just proves that moralizing condescension isn’t restricted to Christians.
Do I think their relationship is horrifying on a number of levels? Absolutely. Am I willing to be begrudgingly sympathetic while questioning their motivation? Probably. We’re only marginally more accepting, aren’t we?
I bet this will probably end poorly, but I’m interested to see where the comic goes with this – in particular, I’m curious to see if it somehow ends in an okay way and if so how.
I very well may die from laughter if that happens. It’ll be like that movie. was it called Saved? “I had sex with him to turn him away from sin.” lawlz!
1. Joyce is NOT being accepting. She’s accepting that she can change him, and make him what she wants him to be. That isn’t acceptance, and I’m saying this as a Catholic.
2. Really? We have to keep seeing these two together? This is a horrible relationship, and just when we get to the point where both can grow and move on, we just stall that out. I REALLY don’t want to see this relationship continue, because all it will mean is needless, unfunny drama as every single person around Ethan and Joyce react to the fact that this is a horrible idea that will hurt them both terribly.
3. This is not a good story-arc. Think about it for a moment, where does this go: We keep watching everyone who isn’t a complete and utter moron point out that Ethan is not attracted to Joyce, and that Joyce is actually purposely manipulating him. Sorry, but no, this does not, and will not work. I cannot imagine the scenario where Ethan’s parents would be okay with this situation.
4. As for the “as long as they’re happy”. Stoned people are happy, but we get in the way of that to stop them from ODing, yeah? As well, they very much AREN’T happy, they’re scared and running away from problems they don’t want to have to deal with. That’s not any definition of happy.
Disagree on 2 – it need not go that way, and it need not be unfunny. Sure, all the things they actually *want* to do are unfunny, but whose to say how that will play out? Given that Ethan is G-A-Y gay and has been stated as such by Word of God to be a multiversal constant, Joyce will not actually succeed in bringing about the horror of turning him straight. Instead she’s going to fail, and be frustrated, and try to overcompensate, and make a fool of herself, until she snaps and takes on the killer Joyce persona that she’s broken out a few times already and attempts to rip him one – at which point Amazi-Girl can suddenly appear and flatten her. And all during this time Ethan is watching the ‘relationship’ with detached aloofness, unable to feel anything more than gradually increasing pity and annoyance at Joyce’s ways and actions, until he decided to shave the beard and politely drops her like a bad habit, at which point she tries to kill him and we’re back to plot route one, if that hasn’t happened first. Or Mike does something that destroys them both with hilarious brilliance in one tenth the time. And all the while we’re cutting back and forth to other characters and plots giving us fun and fanservice and cutting away before anything actually R-rated. Yay!
Disagree on 3 – see 2. Anything can happen. Except Joyce succeeding in her narsty little plan to change him.
Agree on 4. But we’re not here to watch people be happy, now are we?
Anything I can think of to say about Ethan will probably sound judgmental. In this day and age, homosexuality isn’t broadly considered to be wrong or unusual, but the human brain likes to simplify things, so identifying people based on a trait they have that is the most distinctive is totally a thing that happens. So yeah, a totally openly gay Ethan would be known as the “gay guy”. Mostly in a non-judgmental way, but a lot of things sound judgmental even when not meant as such.
I think Ethan, both here and in Shortpacked!, has a lot of identity issues that extend a lot deeper than his sexual orientation. This thing with Joyce, well, isn’t likely to help him but I suspect it won’t make things any worse either.
Joyce on the other hand, well honestly her heart’s in the right place but she can’t help but run towards extremes. There’s nothing wrong with wanting relationships yet waiting until marriage for having sex. That so many have abandoned that, well, to each their own I guess but the pressures it puts on the remaining old fashioned folks is a thing that exists. What Joyce really wants is a boyfriend that won’t pressure her for sex right now, but will totally want to make babies with her in the future after the wedding. Ethan may be the former but he’s certainly not the latter, so she’s setting herself up for disappointment, though she’s clinging to the outdated and incorrect belief that gays can be “fixed”. On the other hand, plenty of college relationships are short lived anyway, so it may never get that far. What Joyce really needs right now is experience socializing with non-sheltered people her own age, and Ethan is probably a good facilitator for that.
So even though this whole set-up screams “train wreck”, it actually may work out to be a good idea. Or a train wreck, because it’s fiction and train wrecks are an easy way to generate lots of drama.
I was fearing/hoping for this. Fearing because I don’t think its a good idea as a person, hoping because it makes drama and bullshit which is great for stories. So she is going to try to change him eh? This reminded me of a queer anarchist I talked to at a Occupy event, shirt said “Gay away the pray”. I lol’d
Okay, I understand that it’s the character’s opinion, not necessarily the writer’s, but Joyce’s argument pisses me right off.
Homosexuals don’t need “guidance to the right path” because homosexuality is a fact, not a choice.
Then again, I’m arguing over a comic, so I suppose I should really just let it go.
I’m just worried that this storyline is going to devaluate non-sexual romantic relationships.
Everyone seems to be saying that it’s not natural, unhealthy and wrong to be in one.
I agree that both Joyce and Ethan should come to terms with their inherant sexuality, but if they want to pursue a romantic relationship with each other, that’s not wrong either.
Sex doesn’t have to be the basis for a relationship.
I think the comments have proved Ethan’s point, “the gay” overwhelms everything else…always. Last I heard college was good for something besides getting laid/married. Ethan wants to enjoy being “the guy who likes robots” or whatever instead of letting his biology run his social life. Joyce wants to feel safe and take her time while she comes to terms with the whole raging hormones thing too. He gives her safety and she gives him support in his choice. I expected a “bash-Joyce” moment, but instead it seems these two gyroscopes spinning out of control might actually spin stabilize each other. It’s sweet in a totally non-sexual way.
I’m really kind of disturbed by the number of comments from people who seem to think that sexuality is the primary defining trait of a person or somehow unhealthy to learn to control. Lust isn’t hunger, a warning sign of you lacking something you need to live and grow. I figure lust is more like anger, to make constructive use of it you must first prevent it from using you. This situation has a lot of potential to show the characters off as more than just the stereotypes “gay man” and “rigid Christian”. That’s a good thing.
This is kind of sweet, though, in its awkward misguided way. She can feel safe with him, and he can be loved by her. Eventually they’ll grow up and realize what they really need.
I will be the one who speaks out for those with cancer, as I lost a friend to it two years ago and still haven’t gotten over it.
That wasn’t even remotely funny.
If I hadn’t of spent my hour of crying and all my tears a while ago, I’d do it. and rip your throat out in the process.
The only was to prevent this is to write more comics.
Loading ...
Yeah, figured.
But still, goddammit.
Agreed.
didn’t forsee her calling it a blessing though. I had totally forgotten that she was having nightmares about wanting sex…
which she now knows her boyfriend doesn’t want…
so now she doesn’t have to worry about … getting what she wants…
thats some silver lining.
She wants sex but she doesnt?… Paranoid much?…
She has outright stated that she has lusts and fears the lusts because the lusts she has show that she’s got evil in her because lust is an evil tempting her to do evil. But more that fearing the lusts she fears acting on the lusts because acting on the lusts in much more evil than merely lusting about the acts. So having a boy who will not act on lusts or lust to do the act and will act to prevent her acting on her lusts to an active degree frees her from concern about acting on her lusts. Which is what she wants.
So no, not paranoid at all, as I trust the above made perfectly clear.
I…I think I actually followed all that. I’m now concerned for my sanity, but boy howdy do I feel smarter!
Smarter then a squirrel on a Farris Wheel!!
It’s really sweet… but misguided.
I was thinking right around exactly the same thing. I had an “Aww, that’s sweet” coupled with “I don’t actually agree with this idea.”
Yeahhhhhhhhhhh.
She’s outright said she’s keeeping you as a boyfriend because being gay means she doesn’t have to worry about sex and telling you to resist being gay because it’s horrible STOP LOOKING HAPPY, ETHAN!
So, bets on whether a hot guy pulls Ethan away first or a straight dude pulls Joyce away first? Or maybe it will disintegrate on its own?
I’m thinking either Amber pulls Ethan out or Sarah pulls Joyce out.
Just so long as someone pulls out, or else it’d get awfully awkward after awhile.
…and messy.
I vote for them waking up one morning with Mike between them.
Seconded.
Tertiated.
Quadrangled.
They will break up their friendship when they both crush on the same guy. But this being Willis, that guy will be bi, and go out with both of them.
…Oh boy. This… wow. Roomies looms larger than I thought.
Joyce, it’s time to take you reality pills!
Sorry but she already overdosed on the blue pills.
I guess we’re passed a reality check up, then? Straight to the Emergency Room with her!
This girl needs 20 cc’s of reality, stat?
Is that why she’s having uncomfortable tingly feelings that she wishes she could stop?
No, that’s because she just had a stroke.
[Insert masturbation joke here]
Perscribing two reality pills and half a history textbook for the headache.
But reality is boring!
Madness and crazy ideas are way more interesting than that dull reality.
Science (and hedonism) say otherwise.
No, they’re still more interesting. Doesn’t mean she’ll be happier, though.
No way, man. Science is SO much more interesting.
But science takes too much time to become interesting.
If you want to make bombs and blow things up into oblivion for fun, I’m afraid you have to learn… Maths (Along with a whole bunch of other stuff, like Chemistry).
This is why I prefer madness: Is INSTANT!
Bah, who cares about bombs.
I spent every single day in my Astronomy 101 and 102 classes on the edge of my seat, gripped by the intense majesty of the universe.
(is that an HK-47 reference, or just a coincidence) (I haven’t played The Old Republic, just the two KotORs)
Coincidence? Nah, he is my fav character in both KotOR games.
Reason I decided to modify the initials of my name to look like an unit from the series of the best robot on the SW universe.
Aw yeah. <3
Eh, she’d probably just hid ’em under her tongue until the nurses looked away.
… this will end in tears, I just know it.
All the best things do.
On the plus side, since this isn’t the SEMME-verse, at least it will ONLY end in tears and not a swathe of destruction through the downtown area.
See? It’s not such a bad relationship to support.
I am assuming that’s sarcasm.
Nope, actually, it isn’t. If she wants to ignore the fact that she’s gay, and he doesn’t mind being with her, and they make each other happy, who’s to say their relationship is bad? Everyone’s idea of love is different.
She doesn’t just want to ignore that he’s gay. She wants to “guide” him. And in the meantime, she wants to avoid coming to terms with her own sexuality and what happened at the party. There are certainly worse relationships out there, but overall, this is not a good thing.
I can agree that it may not be ideal… But what makes a couple happy is their own business. As long as it’s not hurting anyone, I don’t see the issue in it.
Because this will more than likely result in them hurting each other. There is a lot of denial on both sides here, and when that fades and other, more honest emotions come to light, it can only end badly. What happens when Joyce becomes comfortable with her sexuality and want’s to be with Ethan, or vica versa with Ethan and he wants to be with someone else?
Well then they’ll realize that they made a stupid- albeit happy mistake- grow all the wiser for it, and make better decisions next time. I never said it might not work out- I just said it’s worth the benefit of the doubt.
I agree. They obviously know that this isn’t their ideal relationship. But if it works for both of them, and they aren’t vindictive, I don’t see an issue.
Wow, you make it sound too easy like someone can just say, “Oh well, I should have made a better decision, too bad. I will just take the next train.”
Well, to be fair, that’s kind of what you have to do. Mull over what you did wrong and pick yourself back up. If you spend too long regretting something, you won’t learn as much from it. I have personal experience in that department; things are always much clearer if you don’t spend time beating yourself up for your mistakes.
There are some circumstances you can’t anticipate, and there are some you can. Now that Joyce knows that Ethan is gay, she SHOULD try to find a straight boyfriend. Trying to “help” him will not end with the desired result, and either frustrate them both or end in them being miserable and wasting time they could have spend finding proper partners.
This isn’t buying the wrong salad dressing or forgetting to set the alarm. Their relationship is a bad idea. Doesn’t mean we can’t enjoy watching it, but supporting it is not a wise idea.
I can feel a large amount of “Joyce can ‘fix’ Ethan’s heathen ways with her love and make a perfect husband out of him because he won’t try to defile her pristine body in any way” coming from this…it’s cute in some ways and FRUSTRATING in others. Stock character Joyce is so hard to root for here. I miss Anti-Joyce at moments like this.
“They obviously know that this isn’t their ideal relationship.”
Joyce thinks he’s perfect. He’s somebody for her to change any way she likes, and she can use him like a non-sexual blow-up doll to kiss and hug and caress and whatever she wants to do at her own pace.
Clearly this is all a good thing, and a prefect premise to base a relationship on.
Nah…. Joyce would be vindictive and judgmental in either case and both cases would push her deeper into that fear of sex, and both cases will probably break Ethan’s heart the moment he realizes that all that “acceptance” she was giving him, was just misguided hate for herself and his sexuality, hidden under oceans of denial and her good Christian ideal of “helping” sinners.
All in all, it’s a wildly bad, unhelpful idea. Ethan is looking for acceptance, and he’s getting it now, he’s convinced there is no acceptance in being gay and doing gay things, and he’s realized that there is no acceptance in lying about who he is, but he has not realized that there is no acceptance for those who don’t accept themselves. And the moment that Joyce shows her true colors, he will come to the incorrect conclusion that there is NO ACCEPTANCE FOR HIM ANYWHERE IN THE WORLD.
Be prepared for an “Ethan attempts Suicide” arc in the future Everybody.
But it is hurting them. Both of them have issues with their sexuality that they need to deal with, and this is giving them both an excuse to stuff their problems away and pretend they don’t exist.
To be fair, that’s not hurting them, but it’s not letting them prosper or grow as people. It’s… escapism, I guess? It’s not harmful, but it is destructive, if that makes any sense.
I would think this escape will:
-be temporary (in the end all things are)
–hurt at it’s ending
–stall for time until:
–> the two of them are mature enough to notice the problem
—?if they don’t ever notice the problem, they Will Not Grow nor see the need to from this.
— When they notice they will hopefully grown enough to live and learn
—> It Will still~ Hurt.
As non sociopaths it is our busyness to warn those close to us that they are hurting themselves and descurage people from hurting others. It is not my right to make you do anything. It IS my right to express my opinion.
yeahh, in real life i would buy that, but from the standpoint of someone reading a piece of fiction, we can tell that this will almost definitely end poorly. not to speak on behalf of Willis’ work, but this entire relationship is pretty clearly being set up to make a point about religion & sexuality (& to make jokes).
Nope, wouldn’t buy that in real life. If I considered myself a friend to either of them; I’d be (tactfully) screaming warnings at this point.
Denial + more denial does not lead anywhere happy, in fiction or in life.
It is going to hurt them. He’s now in a relationship where he’s got “temptations” to “resist” instead of learning to deal with, and she’s got a fake boyfriend she dates so she doesn’t have to worry about sex or excessive making-out. It’s such a bad romance that Lady Gaga is retroactively going to name that song Ethan-Joyce.
GA GA OH LA LA
ROMA OH LA LA
GA GA OH LA LA
ETHAN JOYCE MESS
Take all of my brain cancer.
This COULD successfully morph into a Jamie/Erin situation (see Girls with Slingshots), where the two love and are in love despite total lack of sex.
But then again, this is Willis we’re talking about, and he shows no mercy to relationships.
Jamie and Erin are honest with each other and have parameters in their relationship that allow them to both have their needs met.
Joyce wants to change everything Ethan is and Ethan just wants to live the lie. Besides, the root of Joyce’s problem is that she does in fact want sex. And Ethan… well she’s not the one he wants for that. Inevitably, the present situation would devolve from that alone.
Erin and Jamie’s relationship isn’t just a horse of a different color. It’s a zebra.
Erin is asexual. Jamie is not. They fulfill each other’s emotional needs, and have an open relationship so that Jamie’s sexual needs, that Erin is unable to fulfill, can be met. They communicate their desires and understand and respect each other’s sexuality. It’s unorthodox by society’s (ludicrous) standards, but it’s completely healthy.
Ethan is gay. Joyce is straight. They are both unwilling to accept their sexualities and are actively denying them. Even worse, they are using each other to suppress their sexual desires. They have a relationship that is now about Joyce encouraging Ethan to actively suppress his homosexuality, and Joyce feeling safe because she knows Ethan will never want to have sex with her. It’s a relationship based in suppressing something they fear. It’s as far away from healthy as you can get, without involving actual intended abuse.
Dude, its not love, its a combination of delusion and denial. Shes terrified of sex, and he’s a self loathing gay guy, the relationship is abouit them not having to deal with their issues, not love.
Nope, actually, it isn’t. If she wants to ignore the fact that he’s gay, and he doesn’t mind being with her, and they make each other happy, who’s to say their relationship is bad? Everyone’s idea of love is different.
Judging by today’s mouseover text, the author.
What makes you say it doesn’t just mean they will all get cancer.
I think Funky Winkerbean does that enough for every other comic, ever.
I don’t think Willis has it in him to plumb the depths the Funkyverse trolls on a regular basis. Or perhaps I simply desperately hope that’s true. One Funky Winkerbean is too much as-is, and yet, we also have Crankshaft.
THESE COMICS HAVE MOUSEOVER TEXT?!
don’t worry, it’s a fairly recent development.
I didn’t know that either! I had to backtrack for the bonus jokes! It’s well worth it! 😀
Yes, but the author comes from a childhood background of extreme judgmentalism, where one takes their own view of the world as the one true one and anyone who acts in opposition to it is obviously in the wrong. That world view may of changed, but the overall habit doesn’t show any signs of waning.
And that is why we have Death of the Author theory! 8D
/finds the whole pair too cute to nix offhand.
Yes well, the author also refuses to draw more fanart of my OTP, DannyxSoda Bottle, so I in turn refuse to acknowledge his opinions. Because David obviously doesn’t know what true romance is. It’s dye, carbonated water, and high fructose cornsyrup packed into a plastic bottle.
That doesn’t sound like the impression I’ve gotten of Willis from his comics.
This is the most sensible thing you’ve said in this thread so far.
By orders of Magnitude.
Two things. First, Joyce is going to want to have sex with him eventually, we’ve seen that with the dream sequence, and Ethan will not be able to satisfy that. We basically saw how this potentially ends up in the Heyo!verse in Shortpacked with Ethan and Amber. “Threesome?” “Yes, please.” They do both desire sex, so ultimately there’s gonna be some tension there.
Second, they may be friends, but they’re not in this just for love. Ethan started this so he could essentially get back in the closet. Joyce is happy about this because it means he won’t try to rape her. They’re basically using this relationship as a way to avoid issues they don’t want to deal with. Joyce is going to need to confront the fact that she DOES want to have sex despite thinking it’s immoral, and that she HAS gone through some trauma recently that may not get better until she talks to someone about it. Ethan is going to need to confront the fact that yes, he is gay, and he can’t change that. And as long as he stays with Joyce, it’s going to keep them both from finding relationships that they find fully fulfilling.
Just a question but…what if they DID confront those issues and end up deciding they still just don’t want to have sex despite desiring it? Is it really that wrong to choose not to let your physical desires control you?
Surely desiring something is the same as wanting it?
What’s the difference?
Desiring something is what your base instincts tell you. Wanting something is what your conscious mind decides. (at least as far as KKoro seems to be defining them) It’s in part the crux of the Catholic faith.
From what I’ve heard, they will both be miserable in the long term if they continue to deny their basic urges for too long. To a degree, it might not be wrong to deny some baser instincts, but in this case, I think they’ll both just torture themselves for no real gain.
But wanting to be with people of the correct gender (for your orientation) is not actually a “base desire” and should not have to be resisted. That you think being openly gay is the same thing as “letting your physical desires control you” also smacks of the over sexualization of gay people.
E.g., a little boy can be straight and no one will assume that means he has sexual desires. He can just be a boy with a crush. A little boy CANNOT by the same token be gay; he can’t have a harmless six-year-old crush on another boy, it MUST be sexual, and therefore teaching kids that gay folks exist MUST be telling them all the details of anal sex.
Joyce does want to have sex with Ethan, and I’m sure she knows it, somewhere deep inside that odd little brain of hers. That doesn’t necessarily mean she can’t resist the urges. In fact, it might even make her happier to resist the urges and not have sex with him, and then, once again, who can chastise her for that? This works out for Ethan, because, like you said, he doesn’t want her that way.
But I have to disagree with you on the point that he’s doing this just to “get back into the closet”. Who’s to say this isn’t a Leslie/Robin situation? Ethan could be entirely gay- with an exception. Besides, he’s not doing this entirely to get back in the closet- he genuinely likes Joyce, and wants to see her happy. That’s why he made the decision to hide his sexuality in the first place.
Joyce likes him for more reasons other than the fact that he’s guaranteed to not rape her- He puts up with her overly-religious self, to list the biggest reason. Which, in my opinion, would be very hard to come by in any person in the first place.
Thus, this means their relationship isn’t solely to avoid troublesome issues at all- it’s to try and make each other happy and to make it work.
Joyce doesn’t need to confront diddly-squat about her sexual desires if she doesn’t consciously want to have sex anyways. On the same point, I agree that she should talk to someone about the whole party scenario- but that’s not exactly necessary either. People can move on from things by themselves, it’s not impossible.
Ethan has already confronted his sexuality; in front of a whole town, apparently. I don’t think he’s trying to change himself to be straight, though- it’s more like he’s trying to ignore it to make someone he cares about happy. Or, like I said earlier, it could very well be a Leslie/Robin scenario, all over again. Granted, that didn’t exactly end well… But it was happy while it lasted. And that’s what I’d expect out of this.
As long as he stays with Joyce, they’ll both have to work decently hard to keep the relationship where they want it. It’ll be rough, and it has a high chance of not working out… But it also has a slight chance of being exactly what they both need. And I think that’s enough chance to let it run its course without booing it every time it appears on-screen.
Besides, he’s not doing this entirely to get back in the closet- he genuinely likes Joyce, and wants to see her happy. That’s why he made the decision to hide his sexuality in the first place.
Uh…no, he wants to hide his sexuality because it’s making him unhappy. He made this point pretty clearly for several strips before Joyce wandered by and provided him with an opportunity. And you notice how his explanation to Amber did not feature Joyce at all. I’m not saying he doesn’t like her, he clearly does, but he wants to be straight for his sake, not hers.
I also think that when the author goes to the trouble of putting up a news post to emphasize that a character is really-truly-yes-I-mean-it gay, the odds of that character being attracted to a member of the opposite sex are exactly zero.
“Uh…no, he wants to hide his sexuality because it’s making him unhappy.”
Exactly. He made that clear, and Joyce is going to help him. He’s going backwards
My argument for “he hid his sexuality from Joyce because he likes her rather than because it was making him unhappy” comes from this strip.
http://www.dumbingofage.com/2012/comic/book-2/06-strange-beerfellows/choice-2/
Ethan made the choice to stay with Joyce, and if Amber hadn’t forced him to come out, he probably never would have said anything.
We all agree that Ethan probably wouldn’t have told Joyce he was gay if not for Amber’s intervention, but that really, really, REALLY doesn’t in any way make him less obviously unhappy with his sexuality.
In the very strip you are linking to, Joyce says “Choices can be forever, but desires are transient,” and Ethan says, “I sure hope so.”
He isn’t talking about wanting to be with Joyce forever, he’s talking about how much he wants his gay feelings to go away and leave him alone.
Let’s look at some more strips, reverse-chronological order:
1. “I wish I could just ignore the stuff going on in my pants, shut it up and lock it away forever.”
2. “You, my best friend, stopped hanging out with me because my being gay had exhausted you.”
3. “We’ve all got worries, right?” (The strained look on his face is because he’s talking about himself and his sexuality, in code. He does this a lot. I think he misses a lot of the things Joyce is saying because he’s so busy thinking about himself. Good way to be in a relationship, btw.) (Also thinking about his sexuality here.)
4. “I wish I had [your confidence], especially with the year I’ve been having.”
5. “It hasn’t really come up yet. Look, if there’s a manual, please direct me to it.”
6. “Y-yeah, I’m not afraid of dying alone and unloved either.” (Extra relevant, so bold!)
7. “I guess when you really think about it, history is full of gay men pretending they’re straight, and otherwise leading very important lives! You’re right, if only I had to do it all over again, I’d just keep my frigging mouth shut.” (Notice that he decides to go out with Joyce immediately after this. It is patently obvious that he made the decision to be in the closet first, and THEN picked her to go out with, not the other way around.)
8. “I guess I am a little depressed, Mike. It’s just slowly hitting me that finding another Jewish nerd like myself was already hard enough… but now I have to find a gay Jewish nerd to spend my life with. The circumstances of my brain are marginalizing me out of easy happiness.”
9. Just from being gay, I’ve lost so many things, like my girlfriend and the esteem of my parents and the likelihood of getting married and having children, and you know what? I’m not losing this friggin chicken sandwich, too.”
10. Again, Amber, I’m sorry I ruined our prom night by being gay.”
Yeah, I just don’t know where anyone is getting this idea that Ethan is upset about his sexuality and wants to stop being gay from. Totally out of left field, clearly.
We all agree that Ethan probably wouldn’t have told Joyce he was gay if not for Amber’s intervention, but that really, really, REALLY doesn’t in any way make him less obviously unhappy with his sexuality.
In the very strip you are linking to, Joyce says “Choices can be forever, but desires are transient,” and Ethan says, “I sure hope so.”
He isn’t talking about wanting to be with Joyce forever, he’s talking about how much he wants his gay feelings to go away and leave him alone.
Let’s look at some more strips, reverse-chronological order:
1. “I wish I could just ignore the stuff going on in my pants, shut it up and lock it away forever.”
2. “You, my best friend, stopped hanging out with me because my being gay had exhausted you.”
3. “We’ve all got worries, right?” (The strained look on his face is because he’s talking about himself and his sexuality, in code. He does this a lot. I think he misses a lot of the things Joyce is saying because he’s so busy thinking about himself. Good way to be in a relationship, btw.) (Also thinking about his sexuality here.)
4. “I wish I had [your confidence], especially with the year I’ve been having.”
5. “It hasn’t really come up yet. Look, if there’s a manual, please direct me to it.”
6. “Y-yeah, I’m not afraid of dying alone and unloved either.” (Extra relevant, so bold!)
7. “I guess when you really think about it, history is full of gay men pretending they’re straight, and otherwise leading very important lives! You’re right, if only I had to do it all over again, I’d just keep my frigging mouth shut.” (Notice that he decides to go out with Joyce immediately after this. It is patently obvious that he made the decision to be in the closet first, and THEN picked her to go out with, not the other way around.)
8. “I guess I am a little depressed, Mike. It’s just slowly hitting me that finding another Jewish nerd like myself was already hard enough… but now I have to find a gay Jewish nerd to spend my life with. The circumstances of my brain are marginalizing me out of easy happiness.”
9. Just from being gay, I’ve lost so many things, like my girlfriend and the esteem of my parents and the likelihood of getting married and having children, and you know what? I’m not losing this friggin chicken sandwich, too.”
10. Again, Amber, I’m sorry I ruined our prom night by being gay.”
Yeah, I just don’t know where anyone is getting this idea that Ethan is upset about his sexuality and wants to stop being gay from. Totally out of left field, clearly.
(The second one of those has working links for ALL the comments! Willis, could you please delete the first one? Thanks!)
I want to dispute your arguments, I really do, but I don’t have the patience to read this entire thing this late at night, and a quick read doesn’t cause anything to jump out. Plus, I’ve seen others try to explain why this is bad both yesterday and today, with no luck. So, I’m just going to say that you’re wrong, but I can’t explain why right now.
I guess I’d be perfectly willing to hear your opinion when you’re more awake?
Kind of weird that you think Leslie/Robin “didn’t end well”. They had a rough breakup, but they’re back together now.
Then again, much of the rest of this is also weird, for the reasons others have already pointed out.
Ah, forgive me, I haven’t been keeping up with Shortpacked. My laptop bust down one summer, and I couldn’t read it… Care to explain what else is weird?
Points that other people have already addressed, but once my comment up above shows up, you will have ten different links to the comics where Ethan has made reference to his unhappiness with being gay. Hopefully they will prove more enlightening than the arguments everyone else is having with you.
But it isn’t love. It’s joint lying. She’s helping Ethan lie to everyone on campus even though he struggled to deal with his sexuality at home, and Ethan’s helping her lie to herself and make her believe that she’s loving him as God would and guiding him to a better, not-gay Ethan.
Honestly, I think Joyce is being selfish. Instead of learning how to draw the line in a mature relationship, she’s staying with Ethan SOLELY because she feels safe.
Nobody on campus needs to know that Ethan’s gay. It’s not exactly vital information… Also, you can’t say for sure yet that Ethan doesn’t actually love Joyce. Like I’ve said before, it has every chance of being a Leslie/Robin situation.
Also,she never said she was going to guide him away from his sexuality; she said she was going to guide him away from his temptations, and she’s doing the same to herself. It may sound like almost the same thing, but the difference is that she’s “doing unto him as she would have done unto herself”. Golden rule.
Besides, safety isn’t her sole reasoning. She actually likes the guy.
“going to guide him away from his temptations” means “cure teh gay”. Period.
It’s not going to be a Leslie/Robin situation. Otherwise Willis wouldn’t have said “Ethan is gay, gay, gay gay gay gay gay,” like he has.
You’ll notice that he never made that statement for Robin.
(And for the record, Leslie is NOT Robin’s one and only exception. We know for a fact that she was at least sexually attracted to Amber, too.)
*that statement for Robin = “Robin is straight.”
And he’s staying with her solely so no one will know he’s gay.
They’re both being selfish here.
If you have a medical problem, you have two options. Ignore it and hope it goes away, or treat it, one way or another. Psychological problems are, it is increasingly apparent, a type of medical problem. They can be treated chemically, or with therapy, but treating is better than ignoring, in any case. If they both had open wounds, and they both decided it’d be better to just leave them as is and hope they heal on their own, and that makes them happy (now) who’s to say it’s not a good idea? I am. I’m here to say it’s a bad idea. An astonishingly bad idea.
That’s kind of a false analogy… Open wounds are pretty different from psychological problems, even in a metaphorical sense. But I see your point. I just want to see if anyone agrees that their relationship is worth a little hope of working out in the end, as small of a chance as it might have of that outcome.
FWIW, I know a married couple in which the husband is gay and the wife is straight. They have three daughters and are actually quite happy in their relationship. Yeah, they have challenges, but they genuinely love one another, although in a different way that a straight-straight couple may. Their decision to get married was based in large part on the fact that a) they did have a love for one another and b) they both wanted to marry and have children through natural childbirth. You can read their story on his blog here.
So yeah, I can see Ethan and Joyce ending up in a happy, healthy relationship that works for them and who the heck cares what other people think?
That is not love, that is friendship.
They aren’t a “couple”. They are friends pretending to have more romantic feelings to each other, at best.
Not necessarily, Romance =/= Sexual. Ethan could be Bi-romantic.
This will go wonderfully…up until Mike suggests a threesome.
I agree with the hovertext
Seconded.
i’m just amused that so far it’s living up to my prediction.
Those aren’t predictions, you knew it was going to happen because you’ve already seen it!
I’m sure you are a future person, that came from the future.
Please, none of that science fiction mumbo-jumbo. Jiynx is obviously psychic, able to see the future and then report back as a “prediction”.
Quick, tell us what happens in tomorrow’s comic! Stop hogging it all for yourself!
Joyce logic – It’s our incompatibility that makes us compatible Ethan!
Opposites attract, Ethan! Every Romantic movie has told me this so it must be true!!!
Thank God I’m agnostic.
Agnostic what? Agnostic Atheist, or Agnostic Theist?
Agnostic is used as a qualifier for either of those things, one can’t simply just be Agnostic.
As far as I have known, agnostic meant that you weren’t totally sure about if God even exists or not, if you were sure you would be a theist or an atheist instead.
agnosticism is primarily used as a coward’s out. they say ‘oh i’m not sure!’ in response to any decisions because they’re afraid of the reaction in a mixed crowd, presumably of being mocked by one faction or the other.
stop that. it’s not becoming of a human being. pull on the big kid pants and own your beliefs.
Or it could just be a simple statement of “At least there’s one thing that I’m not an obnoxious know-it-all about.”
Word.
… or simply “I don’t care!”
That’s an apatheist.
Or, you know, we don’t have solid beliefs to state. Some of us also don’t care enough about the subject to bother labeling ourselves either.
I’m not sure how I feel about this.
jiynx, that might be true if the person in question is afraid of other people’s opinions on the subject but I’m both too old to care that much anymore. If for instance I was born in Japan, I most likely would have grown up to believe that Christianity was some strange gaijin religion with an obsession for crosses and vampire hunting nuns.
“I-it’s not l-like I believe in you or something, baka!”
Um, no. When I became agnostic, my husband was a fundamentalist and my mom was in seminary (both have “loosened up” a bit since then.) If I just wanted to avoid conflict I’d have continued saying I was Christian, instead of apparently going around with a big sign that said “Convince me before I go to hell!”
And it’s not “in response to any decisions.” It’s in response to not knowing. TBH, it seems absurd and kind of arrogant to me to say we should “decide”; God is there, or not, regardless of whether I “decide” he/she/it/they are. I just can’t be sure, so I say that, rather than claiming knowledge I don’t have. I suppose it’s really a complete lack of faith, since even atheists have faith (without proof, since you can’t prove a negative) that there isn’t a god.
Exactly. Despite labeling myself atheist for most of my life, I’m really annoyed by the notion that agnosticism is some form of cowardice.
Lack of proof is proof that something doesn’t exist.
If I tell you that Jupiter’s moon Io has it’s own moon, an orbiting copper teakettle, that has been there for over a billion years, and no one knows how or why it’s there, because no one has ever seen it, would you say that “OH It must exist, no one’s gone to Io to look closely for any orbiting teakettles, so it’s obviously there.” It’s a logical fallacy to say that lack of proof is not proof of absence.
In fact, it honestly makes LOADS more sense to say, “I feel in my thoughts, that God exists, in my heart, and in what I believe is my soul, but I’ve never seen him, so I will never profess that his existence needs to be disproved, because it is proven to me.”
I’m such a hard core athiest, that I don’t even believe in String “theory”.
I keep seeing this out of atheists, and it really just isn’t the same thing.
The idea that there would be a naturally-occurring teapot in space somewhere goes against everything we know about the way planets in space are formed. It’s not absurd because we can’t go and see it, it’s absurd because it contradicts things we can prove (or at least have evidence for.)
Now, I will agree that many religious beliefs fall into that category. Creationism, for instance. However, insisting that there is definitely no god of any kind, not even a particularly standoffish one who sort of set things in motion and then went away, is more like saying there’s definitely nothing at all orbiting Io, not even the tiniest bit of debris. If lack of proof alone really did prove that something wasn’t there, then Io itself must not have existed before 1610, since before then we had no indication it was there.
Ah yes, the Dawkins Theory of Agnosticism: because it is cowardice to refuse to draw conclusions about something you don’t have feel you have adequate information to make conjectures about. Of course!
The principle behind agnosticism is to demonstrate humility when evaluating one’s understanding of the universe. I do not claim to know how the universe functions. It is more reasonable for me to say that I don’t know than to claim I do. I’m not saying that it’s impossible to have an understanding of the universe complete enough to know that there is or is not any sort of deity, but it’s beyond what we know now. This was the position of Thomas Huxley and Bertrand Russell.
“I’m not sure” is cowardly?
People hate not being sure and lie about it often. Saying it, when it is true, is good.
Fully agreed.
Sometimes, “I don’t know” is the most honest statement / self-assessment possible.
My being agnostic isn’t me “taking the coward’s way out,” and I kind of resent anyone using that terminology for someone’s personal beliefs? It’s not a title I picked arbitrarily, and I HAVE been given grief for admitting I’m agnostic in mixed company before.
Believe it or not, not taking a side tends to make some people as upset as stating a clear belief one way or another! Much like it seems to be bothering you!
I admit to a lack of belief while simultaneously choosing to have the qualifier that I don’t feel I can personally say I am 100% correct in what I personally believe. I’m secure in leaving any feelings on spirituality at that. It doesn’t make me a bad or noncommittal person. It just makes me another person who decided their feelings on the matter and left it at that a long time ago.
Meh. For me it’s more of a “I give no shits, will never be able to come up with an answer except by dying and finding out by meeting, not meeting, or not finding out, I have better things to do than worry about this stuff. I… Guess the label on the tin says agnostic then? I dunno. Don’t give shits about that either, really…”
Agnostic means that you admit to not knowing for sure whether or not there is a god.
But one can be Theist and still have this mindset, and one can be Atheist and have this mindset as well.
It’s one or the other. I know a lot of people get it wrong, but this is how it’s supposed to be.
It CAN be one or the other. But it doesn’t have to be.
The terms gnostic and agnostic are about knowledge, while the terms theist and atheist are about belief in gods. The terms are not mutually exclusive.
So “gnostic” and “agnostic” are statements about whether the subject claims to know or thinks you can can know if gods exist. If you claim to know that a god, goddess, or gods exist or that you can know this, then you’re gnostic on the subject, in any other case you are agnostic.
The terms “theist” and “atheist” are statements about whether the subject believes that a god, goddess, or gods exist. If you have a belief that a god, goddess, or gods exist, then you’re a theist, in any other case you’re an atheist.
It’s a common mistake to think that atheism means that you deny the existence of gods. That is not a requirement of atheism.
So, if you’re agnostic about the existence of gods, and you don’t have a definite belief that gods exist, then you’re an agnostic atheist.
This is why you can’t only be agnostic. Even if you somehow “don’t know” whether you believe gods exist, that still means that you don’t have a belief that gods exist, which by definition means that you’re an atheist.
If we’re using words based on their definitions, then these are the appropriate labels here. You can’t label yourself whatever you want, regardless of whether it matches the definition or not, if you expect people to know what you mean when you use that label.
So, it doesn’t matter what you call yourself, it’s the definitions of those labels that determine if they’re appropriate or not.
: a person who holds the view that any ultimate reality (as God) is unknown and probably unknowable; broadly : one who is not committed to believing in either the existence or the nonexistence of God or a god
from Merriam-Webster.
Agnosticism is the view that the existence or non-existence of any deity is unknown and possibly unknowable. More specifically, agnosticism is the view that the truth values of certain claims—especially claims about the existence or non-existence of any deity, as well as other religious and metaphysical claims—are unknown and (so far as can be judged) unknowable. […] In the popular sense, an agnostic is someone who neither believes nor disbelieves in the existence of a deity or deities, whereas a theist and an atheist believe and disbelieve, respectively. In the strict sense, however, agnosticism is the view that humanity does not currently possess the requisite knowledge and/or reason to provide sufficient rational grounds to justify the belief that deities either do or do not exist.
So, uh. What were you trying to tell us about “using words based on their definitions”?
Dictionaries don’t even agree with you, honey. Please stop trying to tell other people they are labeling their beliefs incorrectly.
You can be an agnostic atheist, an agnostic theist, OR just an agnostic.
The second big ole swath is from Wikipedia.
Perhaps you might want to try actually reading those chunks of text you quoted. You’ll find that they didn’t disagree with me at all.
Me: “So “gnostic” and “agnostic” are statements about whether the subject claims to know or thinks you can can know if gods exist.”
Merriam-Webster: “a person who holds the view that any ultimate reality (as God) is unknown and probably unknowable”
Wikipedia: “Agnosticism is the view that the existence or non-existence of any deity is unknown and possibly unknowable.”
See? All of us agree.
So, rather than just quoting swaths of text that supposedly don’t agree with me, “honey”, perhaps you could try using your own words to explain where the disagreement supposedly is?
This is the part where you’re wrong:
So, if you’re agnostic about the existence of gods, and you don’t have a definite belief that gods exist, then you’re an agnostic atheist.
This is why you can’t only be agnostic. Even if you somehow “don’t know” whether you believe gods exist, that still means that you don’t have a belief that gods exist, which by definition means that you’re an atheist.
Nowhere in either definition does it say you can’t just not know whether you believe gods exist — in fact, not knowing is kind of the hallmark of both definitions! — and you must realize that your “somehow” and your quotes around “don’t know” are kind of really super condescending.
But hey, let’s turn it around a little. Are you allowed to be simply an atheist? Or do you have to forever call yourself a “gnostic atheist” (if you think you have knowledge about it) or an “agnostic atheist” (if you don’t think so)? Surely the term “atheist” is incomplete without that information!
(Btw, basing all your language arguments on a strict assessment of their roots is gonna get you into trouble one of these days. I’m afraid “homophobe” does not mean “fear of sameness”. 😉 )
*homophobia
*homophobe being a person who has said phobia
*yeah sometimes typing is hard shh
Annnnd last but not least, I personally vacillate a lot! Sometimes I’d consider myself an agnostic atheist, most of the time more of an agnostic theist, and almost all the time I’m thinking, “Well, if there IS any kind of god-like entity out there, it probably isn’t all that concerned with human events. We are, after all, only one tiny planet in the infinite cosmos.”
I could pretend to be an agnostic atheist or an agnostic theist, but neither of those terms are correct for me overall. Agnostic is. Sorry it’s not “precise” enough for you.
One most certainly can be simply agnostic. You don’t get to decide what labels people apply to themselves.
The only way I can see someone being either Agnostic Atheist or Agnostic Theist is if they lean strongly towards one way or another.
Well, I get what you’re saying and appreciate the intent of it, taken literally it is a bit silly.
I mean, I could call myself ‘plaid’, but that doesn’t mean I’m clearly communicating anything about myself with that label.
..Except maybe an indication of my sanity level.
Or it could have some meaning to you that is a mystery to other people. Whether or not you choose to explain it is up to you.
ColdFury, you’re just racist against us, the plaid people. *sniffle*
Playing devil’s advocate here, but calling yourself agnostic doesn’t have to communicate anything useful about yourself, except that you don’t align with a major religion.
On a slightly different but related topic, I call myself “agnostic” even though I don’t really consider myself such simply because my beliefs don’t line up with any one religion. I have a distinct belief, but I don’t want to bore anyone with them here and now. If someone has a better suggestion for what I should label myself, feel free to e-mail me at the hotmail address of the same name.
Atheist: “God? I dion’t believe in fairy tales”
Theist: “God does indeed exist and I worship Him”
Nay Theist: “God might exist but he doesn’t deserve my worship”
Agnostic: “Does God exist? I have no idea”
Nice. Also, *he, she, it, etc
The idea that any monotheistic God would be limited by gender is pretty funny to me.
I think it comes from the whole notion that God “created man in His image,” and THEN created woman. At this point though it’s probably just common usage among Christians that most people don’t think about that hard.
Blame English language for not having a definite gender-neutral term for a third person pronoun anymore these days. ‘He’ is often used as a universal term in that sense.
Yeah, but let’s face it, it’s also just plain ole sexism, like the idea that Eve came second, even though biologically we now know that female is the default.
Plasma Mongoose, the agnostic in your example is apparently also an atheist.
Let me ask you, does the atheist you described have a belief that gods probably exist?
If the answer is “no”, as it appears to be, then that puts them in the category of “atheist”. Anyone who does not have a belief that a god/goddess/gods exist is an atheist.
The atheist you described in your example is one kind of atheist, but it is not an accurate depiction of all atheists, such as your “agnostic” at the end. Similarly, anyone who doesn’t even have a concept of gods is also an atheist because they can’t have a belief in gods.
Atheism is a much broader term than most people understand it to be.
Grrr… wrong word. That one sentence should be:
“Let me ask you, does the agnostic you described have a belief that gods probably exist?”
The agnostic he described has a belief that gods might exist. He literally said, I have no idea.
Your definition of atheism is not grounded in the popular understanding of the word, babe.
Dictionary.com: a person who denies or disbelieves the existence of a supreme being or beings.
Merriam-Webster: one who believes that there is no deity
What’s that, you say? The dictionaries are wrong because that’s not what atheism means for you?
Guess what? If dictionaries don’t get to tell you what atheism means, you don’t get to tell anyone else what agnosticism means.
Seriously, you are being borderline offensive right now. Just… stop.
You’re not as bad as John Harmon, though, and my irritation with him is spilling over a little, so apologies for my tone.
My point still stands, though. Dictionaries don’t agree with you guys on this.
Funny how you only used only one of the two definitions from the Dictionary.com site, and left out the one that agreed with John and I.
Dictionary.com: Definition #2- “disbelief in the existence of a supreme being or beings.”
Kind of dishonest to leave that out when it perfectly matches what we’ve been saying, wouldn’t you say?
Wikipedia: “Atheism is, in a broad sense, the rejection of belief in the existence of deities. In a narrower sense, atheism is specifically the position that there are no deities. Most inclusively, atheism is simply the absence of belief that any deities exist.”
So that bolded part totally matches what I’ve been saying.
I also note that most of the user comments on the Merriam-Webster atheist definition page disagree with the definition given there.
Setting dictionaries aside, I’m also using the definition of the word that comes from the root word. If you are “a-theist” then you are “not-theist”, so if “theist” means you have a belief in a god or gods, then “theist” means everyone else who isn’t a theist. The same is true for “gnostic” and “agnostic”. It’s a straightforward X vs. not-X definition that we’re using.
So, at best, some parts of some dictionaries disagree with us, while other parts of those dictionaries which have been corrected/updated to match the root meaning and modern usage completely agree with what we’ve been saying. (Heck, just a few hundred years ago “atheist” was pretty much just a generic insult, as there were few or no actual atheists back then. Definitions change over time.)
What we’re telling you is the definition that most atheists actually mean when we use the word “atheist” for ourselves. This is why it’s extremely frustrating to see people insist that the term means something else, and thus totally misconstrue our position.
It’s not even remotely dishonest. You’re the one trying to make absolute statements about what a word means; I’m saying, our understanding of those words is also valid.
What we’re telling you is the definition that most atheists actually mean when we use the word “atheist” for ourselves. This is why it’s extremely frustrating to see people insist that the term means something else, and thus totally misconstrue our position.
…Funny, how you’ve put us all in that same position you resent! I mean, do you really not see the hypocrisy here?
You have been told, this is the definition agnostics prefer for themselves, and your response is “NO, your definition DOESN’T EXIST!”
One more comment, because I just want to make my position on this completely clear:
I’ve always used “strong” and “weak” agnosticism / atheism to make a similar distinction to what you are making. I totally think that “atheistic agnosticism” (you aren’t sure / don’t have proof / don’t believe we can have proof, but you don’t think there is a god or gods) and “theistic agnostic” (you aren’t sure / don’t have proof / don’t believe we can have proof / don’t think any of the available religions have it right, but you think there is a god or gods) are things.
I also think that agnostic atheists and and gnostic atheists are things, and that the atheist tent is big enough to encompass both atheists who believe there is no god or gods and atheists who just don’t believe there is a god or gods.
And I absolutely don’t think an atheist is a bad thing. I don’t fear the label or go “ack, get it away from me” or anything like that. My reluctance to label myself as an agnostic atheist is because I genuinely don’t feel it fits, not because I think it is a bad thing, and since I’m very sure you’ve encountered plenty of people who think agnosticism is just “a conversion waiting to happen :D” but that atheism means “you are a bad person who probably worships the devil :|||” (bullshit, and also traditional Satanism or Luciferianism is more humanist anyway, to bundle two things that don’t really belong together).
Again: I use agnostic because I think it’s more honest, and because for me the primary thing is that don’t attribute to myself the ability to know the divine. If it exists, I tend to think I could still never understand it. This uncertainty is the hallmark, and so I just very strongly identify with “agnostic” as a label.
“One most certainly can be simply agnostic. You don’t get to decide what labels people apply to themselves.”
Two things:
1. No people can’t just be agnostic.
2. Don’t do that. I was just correcting their use of a term.
“No people can’t just be agnostic.” What are you basing this claim on? I’m genuinely curious… I have never heard this definition before.
And no, you don’t get to decide what people call themselves, that is correct. When I say “I am x” and you say “no you’re not” you’re challenging someone’s identity. Not that this is always wrong, but it will always make you look like an ass.
Why not? Do you really think no one can be that undecided / apathetic / prone to flip-flopping? What about people who are agnostics that grew up with religions that don’t have gods (e.g. some forms of Buddhism, Jainism, etc.)?
I was simply correcting the misuse of the word. I know a lot of people get it wrong, but the intent of the idea of Agnosticism is meant to go hand-in-hand with either Atheism or Theism.
No… agnostic atheism and agnostic theism are just two types of agnosticism. There’s pragmatic agnosticism and strong or weak agnosticism, to name several. You don’t need to base your stance in either belief or disbelief in a God or gods. The core of your beliefs can be “I don’t know” (weak agnosticism), “I can’t know” (strong agnosticism), or even “I don’t care” (pragmatic agnosticism). None of these make a judgment about belief or disbelief in god, and in these ways, agnosticism need not go hand-in-hand with theism or atheism.
Thank you for being both correct and more diplomatic than I was planning on being.
Also militant agnosticism – “I can’t know and you can’t either.”
I wish we had thumbs up and down buttons for posts like these.
I believe one thing with utter certainty: you, sir, are a jerk.
I’d also be willing to bet on “white” and “male”, because it takes a lot of privilege to feel like your definitions are better than everyone else’s when you don’t even have the questionable authority of a dictionary definition to stand on.
Oh, don’t go saying I’m “privileged”. That’s crap. I am going by the textbook definition.
1.) I’ll take that as a yes!
2.) You are wrong. Your definitions aren’t even supported by the dictionary, and you have zero authority to label other people’s spiritual beliefs either way.
I asked you to back up your assertion with a logical explanation, not just simply double down on arrogance. So let me try this again:
a) Why can’t someone simply be so undecided that they have no starting position on theism or atheism to drift “away” from?
b) What about people who are uncertain about religious beliefs that ill fit the binary label of “theist” or “atheist?” (i.e. Those with strong belief in the supernatural but none in gods or similar classes or entities.)
.e. Those with strong belief in the supernatural but none in gods or similar classes or entities.)
That would be a definition of … Brazilians :))
Serously, there is a smogarsboard of religious traditions here. The end result is that everyone believes in something, even if it is a colection of incongruent ideas. It is not uncommom a Brazilian Catholic who believes in reincarnation. :))
Language is a living thing, John. Even if your defintiion was correct, it doesn’t matter anymore, as nowadays enough people understand agnoticism as the other definition.
If by that you mean the WRONG definition, then sure.
It just irks me when people use a term incorrectly, even if it’s a popular incorrect use of said term, and then when they’re called on it someone just claims “living language” as if that’s an all encompassing out for when you use a term incorrectly. It’s crap.
I’m an “I’m not gonna make a decision about something I can’t possibly know” Agnostic. What kind is that?
If you’re agnostic about god the way you’re agnostic about there being a Rustles Teapot in the asteroid belt, I don’t see how one can be undecided. Most of the “we just can’t know”s have been solved so they really bother me. I know people who have seen ghosts. My grandpa says death is the end of it but says he is a little psychic. I can respect faith. I can’t respect not looking at the sorce of ethics and deciding if your own make sence to you.
Theology has non-trivial consequences.
Like D.O.M.A. and a war that Bush said God told him to start.
You can make decisions about personal ethics independently of theological concerns.
All I know is that if I died right now and for the sake of argument assume that not only does God exist, but the SDAs were right, then I will come alive in the 2nd resurrection along with billions of other humans and fallen angels as we attempt to take over New Jerusalem before being hit with God’s version of the Penance Stare and die painfully as the Earth turns into a sea of molten rock with Satan being the last being to die.
Now you can understand why I am at the very least agnostic.
So, what, I’m supposed to claim to know something I don’t as some sort of protest against people doing bad/stupid things in the name of religion? How is that supposed to help, exactly?
That is called strong agnosticism, assuming the core of your decision is based on the belief that no one can possibly know whether or not there is a God. If it’s based instead in the idea that it doesn’t matter if there is a God because evidence shows that it doesn’t care about us even if there is one and we don’t know, that’s pragmatic or apathetic agnosticism.
Hey, I learned something… in a comments section! (Cue *The More You Know* logo)
Words have multiple definitions, all of which change over time as the word propagates into common usage. The original intent of how the word is used doesn’t really matter in the long run. The word agnostic if you break it down actually just means “without knowledge.” One of the dictionary definitions is “a person who does not take on side or the other of an argument.” So yes, one can be, in many definitions of the word, agnostic without being atheistic or theistic. Words that also have multiple meanings. A common definition of atheism is to strongly believe there is no god, whereas another is just having an absence of belief in a god. Both are correct, because that’s just how language works. It’s understandable that you want your narrow definition to be the one that everyone fits into, because then you’ll feel like you’re not alone in your delusional little “this is what things mean” bubble, but i’m afraid you ARE alone in that bubble. ALL ALONE. In a bubble. By yourself. (cause you’re wrong{about how language works})
Thank God I’m obnoxious. No, wait…
Looks like it’s time to play everyone’s favorite game, Taboo™!
Everybody, describe your stance without using the words:
1. Agnostic(ism)
2. (A)Theis(t/m)
Bonus!
For a more challenging and deeper showcase of your beliefs, also remove these words from your description:
1. God
2. Faith
I believe that there is no higher power, however if I were proven wrong I wouldn’t be surprised at all.
I would be surprised however if any of the major religions were right though, it’s statistically almost impossible if you think how many religions have come and gone in the few measly millennia that humans have been around.
Can I just say ditto? Except I would be a little surprised.
Further, if the higher power that I do not think exists were to exist, and to be anywhere on the omniscient/omnipresent scale, I would be disappointed in him/her/it and in creation. If it were to exist and to be a distant creator, a mad scientist even, then my perceptions of the world would be unshaken.
I use the term higher power very loosely. What you just described it the message I was trying to convey.
I don’t believe in any froo-froo ridiculous improbable and/or impossible stuff, be it unicorns, perpetual motion machines, magic crystals, guaranteed ways of legally winning the lottery, massive but perfectly secret conspiracies, or even anybody’s favorite physics-defying and possibly self-contradictory mythological figure(s).
However, for the silly things that aren’t actually impossible, I do retain a nugget of willingness to believe that they’re true, if actual evidence appeared that did a reasonable job of supporting the claim. For ridiculously unlikely claims the evidence had better be pretty good, of course.
But regarding my above willingness to entertain ludicrous theories, that’s a willingness, not an actual belief in it. And unless and until such evidence rears its head, I will hold the solid belief that the silly things aren’t real. While simultaneously allowing for the possibility that I might, maybe, be wrong. But probably not.
If there’s no share-able, record-able proof. Then it doesn’t exist. And even if you decide that it could or does exist, independently of me, there is no valuable discussion I can glean from a conversation to try and convince me otherwise. With the exception of the absolution that any improbable event, no matter how unlikely, will occur again within our universe.
Fun thing is, that system of thinking let’s me believe in ghosts and aliens (And fucking Cthulhu, though that’s just the stuff that haunts me at night) while disbelieving in String “theory” and any Deity, Judeo-Christian God or otherwise. XD XD XD
If there’s no share-able, record-able proof. Then it doesn’t exist. And even if you decide that it could or does exist, independently of me, there is no valuable discussion I can glean from a conversation to try and convince me otherwise. With the exception of the absolution that any improbable event, no matter how unlikely, will occur again within our universe.
Fun thing is, that system of thinking let’s me believe in ghosts and aliens (And fucking Cthulhu, though that’s just the stuff that haunts me at night) while disbelieving in String “theory” and any Deity, Judeo-Christian God or otherwise. XD XD XD
Well crap. There is no way this is going to end well, but it’s gonna be a slow, painful train wreck.
The train is just, slowly driving underwater.
While leaking oil.
And the oil is on fire.
I love me some underwater fire!
especially when it reaches the surface and becomes an inferno.
Damn it, I really didn’t think I was going to be wrong about this. I see this failing as soon as anyone else learns of it.
ETHAN! YOU ARE IN LESS CONTROL NOW!
Oh Joyce no.
Not merely no, but NOOOOO!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xi_3v-FpKFg
let the hate fill you
Not merely no, but DO NOT WANT!
Bravo on crafting something that very much feels like it’s out of reality – namely, people making choices that aren’t necessarily the wisest in the long run but that are convenient for the time being.
This is definitely not going to end well, and the worst part of it all is that both of them are enabling each other, so it’ll probably go on for longer than it should.
(On the other hand, if Ethan or Joyce get interested in politics, it’s a plus in this day and age in the sliding timescale.)
Countdown to one or both of them waking up in Mike’s bed in 5, 4, 3…
With your mom.
for a nickle
Smart money’s on Joyce. Ethan’s already done that once in each reality, Joyce is completely unprepared for handling Mike.
I think that Joyce’s religious sexual views compounded with her untreated trauma from near date rape would explode in a way that wouldn’t be very funny. Plus, DoA!Mike’s mean streak seems more focused on helping people in sneaky & underhanded ways, and that would not help her at all.
You forgot to mention that while he is helpful in a cruel way, he still tries to find the most cruel way to do it first.
Like sleeping with ethan to make Joyce realize how bad this relationship is…
So, Joyce is trying to “fix” him and convert him out of being gay.
And any remaining sympathy for her goes riiiiiight out the window.
Out of being gay and into, I guess, being asexual?
Nope, ’cause he’ll still have romantic and sexual feelings for men. He’ll be forced into frustrated celibacy.
Asexual seems to be what she’s hoping for, though. She doesn’t want him to still be attracted to men, but she doesn’t really want him to be straight either, because then he wouldn’t be “safe” anymore. If he were asexual heteroromantic, that would be ideal, as far as she’s concerned. (Not saying there’s any chance whatsoever that it’ll happen, just that it’s what Joyce would want to happen.)
That’s assuming, of course, that she knows what “asexual heteroromantic” means.
Pretty much. A close friend of my mother’s has genuinely made the argument that in the eyes of God it’s perfectly okay to BE gay so long as you never ever actually have sex with someone of the same gender, ever. I think this is basically where Joyce’s thoughts are.
i admit, willis did a great job of making a character that, were i to meet them in real life, i would shake them the way one of those terrible nannies would shake a baby.
Joyce is meeting Ethan on the terms he set for her. I think we can pretty much assume that pre-Ethan all she knew about homosexuals is that they were sinning against God. Now she finally meets one in person and everything he tells her about his sexuality reaffirms what she’s been taught to believe. It’s not like Joyce dragged Ethan out of a GLBTA meeting threatening hellfire.
I don’t really get why the entire reaction to the Ethan-Joyce relationship seems to boil down to “Oh Joyce is so evil!” If Joyce thinks she can fix Ethan, that’s probably because Ethan is basically screaming “Somebody fix me!”
I wasn’t one of the ones thinking “Joyce is evil” but your last paragraph is a really good point that I hadn’t really considered.
Can’t really put all the blame on her. She’s just going along with what Ethan wanted to do from the beginning and putting her own spin on it from her own personal beliefs. Is it a really dumb idea on both of their parts? Yes, but it takes two to tango.
I think that is a very mean thing to say. While trying to “fix” a gay man is wrong, and doomed to fail, it’s mostly wrong if it’s unwanted or unbidden. Ethan has expressed displeasure with being gay, so she thinks she’s doing the right thing. At least she’s coming at it from the right angle, even if the premise is flawed from the beginning.
No, it’s wrong no matter what. Because even when it is wanted, it doesn’t actually work, so all you are doing is encouraging painful repression and laying groundwork for even more toxic self-hatred (now not only are they still gay, they are also a FAILURE because you encouraged them to believe they could change!) down the road.
I can understand why Joyce is doing this, and don’t blame her for it, much also believe in objective morality. What Joyce is doing is STILL wrong, despite her good intentions and Ethan’s encouragement.
Man, Joyce got very nearly raped a week ago. Seven days. That excuses her for a lot of poor relationship decisions based on fear and trauma, in my book. For God’s sake, all she wants is to date a guy who won’t terrify her sexually, who she doesn’t need to have any more nightmares about. I can’t think of anything much more sympathetic (or horribly sad) than that.
NOOOOOOOOOOOO
Ethan no, the whole ex-gay thing will damage you so much. noooo
(sigh) Well, at least now it’s mutually informed and consensual self-delusion.
What a descriptive cluster of four consonate words.
I think that’s probably the best and most positive description for this scenario yet! I wish I could up-vote this so it could be the first thing people see in relation to this comic, so that there will be less arguments over this.
Perfectly put. Still don’t like it, but it’s a different icky feeling from when it was deception all around.
So she’ll be with a gay man, so there’s no chance of him trying to rape her.
I know it’s a fictional character, but she should really talk to someone about that experience.
She needs to go down to Roz’s coven.
This may be one of the most terrifying things to come to the DoA universe. The Head Alien’s arrival would be less frightening than this.
GOSH DARNIT JOYCE I WANTED TO GIVE YOU THE BENIFIT OF THE DOUBT THAT YOU WERE BEING ACTUALLY ACCEPTING AND YOU COMPLETELY FAILED ME! Now I am just dissapointed and sad…
…and hungry but that’s irrelevant to this situation.
Well, she’s being understanding in the best way she knows how.
Okay, ya, I overreacted. Joyce is being suprisingly accepting about it, and she didn’t go “eliminate the gayness” more like, “We can ignore sexaulity, TOGETHER”, at least, as I am reading it right now, and she can’t really fail me, as she is not catering to me.
But I am still hungry. And tired. I should go to bed now.
I’m hungry too. Who wants pizza?
I do!
I feel like I should stop reading at this point, but I know that’s not going to happen.
*puts on conductor’s cap* Time to see this trainwreck through. WOO WOOOOOOO!
The Dumbing don’t stop, Ragnal. It just keeps on dumbing.
Ain’t no dumbing like a Willis Dumbing?
All aboard!
Oh…oh, God. There is no POSSIBLE WAY this will end well.
Most likely true but will it end soon or after a few years of marriage?
I for one actually want to see this going well…for both of them.
Oh right, I keep forgetting they’re 18.
And that 18-year olds are stupid. (Speaking from experience, of course, looking back 5 years after)
Don’t worry, Aaron. 23-yr-olds are stupid, too. Which I can say from experience looking back, ’cause I’m almost five years older than that… although I have a very strong suspicion that future-me will think present-me is stupid, too, in exciting new ways that I can’t currently imagine!
It’s a magical cycle of finding out you were a fool, every few years until you die. Hooray for wisdom!
Cheer up, it won’t always be like that. After all, we have dementia to look forward to at some point!
Pretty much. Best you can hope for is to make different mistakes.
but the ones I’m making now are so much fun!
If Joyce won’t handle Ethan’s thing, he’ll have to take it into his own hand.
Pretty sure he already does. He-yo!
Joyce will never give Ethan up or let him down.
I’m going to reach through the internet and slap you silly for that.
…never gone turn around, or hurt him?
Never gonna make him cry, never gonna say goodbye?
Never going to tell a lie and hurt him?
Never gona’ give
Never gona’ give
Never gona’ give
We know each other for so long….
She knows the rules, and so does he.
Rickroll’d!
No, no, I can’t punch you in the face. The Internet is in the way.
I wonder if Leslie and her former husband started this way.
Judging from the comics we’ve seen, it looks like she figured out she was gay on their wedding night.
Youch.
In shortpacked Leslie told robin that she knew she was gay at 8 after seeing princess Lea in Return of the Jedi.
http://www.shortpacked.com/2009/comic/book-9/01-fired/chastityballs/
I think there is another shortpacked comic that I cannot find right now where it says she came out to her husband 3 months into her marriage.
The comic itself was about the worst times to come out of the closet, one of the other panels had DOA Ethan on the phone with his mother.
She didn’t say she realised it then, she said that was her first gay attraction. They become much more obvious once you realise you’re gay and look back.
I wonder if Leslie’s been married in this universe.
While this is a perfectly valid question to ask, I am highly tempted to ask seemingly already answered questions along the lines of “Is Ethan gay in this universe?” in response. Such as, “Is Joyce Christian in this universe?” It’s mean-spirited and unwarranted, but I hear that confession is good for the soul. So I’m just putting this out there.
I’ll take that as a fun way to say yes.
Totally different things. Those are qualities either intrinsic to the person or central to the character. We’ve seen, though, that characters’ backstories can vary wildly. Ethan’s still tall, dark, gay, and a toy nerd; he’s not a failed stand-up comedian. Joyce is still blonde, blue-eyed, and a sheltered yet boy-obsessed fundamentalist Christian; she’s not a superpowered alien abductee.
I’m assuming Leslie’s still gay, just like she’s still blonde. I’m assuming Leslie’s still nineteen kinds of awesome and too nice and forgiving for her own good, because those are the things that make Leslie Leslie. Whether this universe’s Leslie has an ill-advised marriage to a man in her backstory… I have no idea, and I’m kind of curious.
We do know she never dated Malaya in this universe, because teaching Gender Studies in Indiana is the price she had to pay for that retcon.
I also wonder… people keep asking if Ethan is still gay. Does anyone ask if Leslie is still a lesbian?
And then Amazi-Girl swoops in and cracks their heads together.
My mind is full of fuck.
Maybe you should date Joyce so she can fix that for you.
Which suits your avatar nicely, I must say.
Of course, since we’ve SEEN the inside of Joyce’s head, it’s not an entirely inaccurate statement.
So is your cap. 😛
My mind is full of shit.
My shit is full of mind.
It’s currently biding its time, but one day…
Nope. Bad idea, bad idea.
It’s not going to last, but does it have to? If they enjoy each other’s company, and they understand what each other wants/needs, then what’s wrong with it?
“I have the patience to guide you” sound a lot less like understanding his wants/needs and a lot more like a resolution to change him.
That, plus I don’t think Joyce really wants to acknowledge her own needs.
A girl wanting to change the guy she is dating? What maddness is this you speak of? 😛
From what I understand, it’s generally more subtle.
This is more subtle, at least by Joyce standards.
Ha! Cute.
And lo! Joyce turned out to be one of those super-literal teen-aged Christians, consideringeth only P within V to be Sex, and didst so present that which she hath in common with men to Ethan. And behold! Ethan closedeth his eyes and thought of England.
It’s like watching a Rube Goldberg machine of bad decisions in slow motion.
Tomorrow, the camera pans over a couple feet to the right and we see Amber about to explode.
This is “Guess Who’s Coming to Galasso’s,” aka “The One Where Joyce Willingly Becomes a Beard”.
No..no, no, no, no, no WILLIS WHAT HAVE YOU DONE?! NOW I HAVE TO SHIP THIS, GOSH DARNIT!
This is one ship that needs a response from some U-boats.
I don’t think we even need to call the U-boats. This ship was pre-built with a hole that’s never getting plugged.
A *couple* of holes that are never getting plugged. Heyo!
That made me laugh more than I feel liike it should have.
See? See what that joke did to my typing?!
I thought shipping was about putting anyone you want together, regardless of what the canonical pairings are. How does this get in the way?
You know, you don’t really have to ship this? I know you’re being sarcastic(I hope) but it’s not like there’s a guy pointing a gun at the back of your head and forcing you to do so.
Un;ess reading them like this has caused ridtom to actually like the relationship between them. Then shipping is out of his/her hands as it will happen regardless of logic.
After last the last strip I was still holding out hope. Now, the only thing that can save this is a last minute about face by Ethan. They’ve got ~2 strips before their misfortunes are sealed.
nah, mike’s gonna sleep with ethan.
we’re going to expect joyce to break up with ethan for cheating on her.
she forgives him, and asks him to repent for his sexual encounter.
…
1 or more comics later ethan breaks up with her cause mike makes him realize its a dumb relationship.
Joyce wanting to “fix” Ethan makes sense in-character. Ethan being ok with this does NOT.
I don’t think he’s picking up on that aspect of things. In his mind things just went miraculously right, and he ain’t seeing nothing but that.
I dunno, being stupid is kind of all he’s done in DoA so far. That and be whiney.
Exactly. He’s been a friggin idiot throughout this whole shebang. I’m a little hesitant on the whiny, but stupid? Oh yeah.
Except that he also doesn’t want to be gay, so that explains it somewhat.
Ethan just told Amber that he was dating Joyce because he wanted to be in the closet and because he was very uncomfortable with his friends knowing he was gay. Does this sound like the actions of someone who’s comfortable with and accepting of their own sexuality?
Back when this originally started, Ethan was saying that he wanted to pretend to be heterosexual for the rest of his life. Joyce has just told him that she’s okay with being the girl he pretends to be heterosexual with. She didn’t even put it in condemnatory terms. Of course Ethan thinks this is awesome.
Not sure if this is complete denial is or trainwreck soon waiting to happen.
Yes?
Yes.
One, by way of the other.
This will not end well…but oh boy, am I intrigued. Well played, Willis.
huh as an openly gay woman who has once been in a long term romantic relationship with a straight man im kind of insulted by the reality pill people. people can love each other without being sexual attracted to each other.
I’m all for love like that, because that’s the type of love Robin has for Leslie in Shortpacked!, but here, Joyce is basically saying she doesn’t want to accept a part of Ethan’s identity, which is probably unhealthy in a relationship (I’ve never been in one, but that is what media tells me).
Well, that and the relationship is also based on Ethan not wanting to accept a part of Ethan’s identity. A relationship based on mutual fear of other relationships isn’t a good starting point.
Actually Robin in Shortpacked! is sexually attracted Leslie; Robin in general is not attracted women but for her Leslie is her exception.
But yeah, I do agree with the rest of your comment. Joyce accepted the fact that Ethan is sexually attracted males but in the manner that she views it as a sinful temptation that she can cure eventually. Which also seems to be a goal she is willing to have a long term dedication to if her line “I have the patience to guide you” is indicative of anything. That I agree is probably an unhealthy relationship.
However, one thing I am still slightly unclear on is, does Ethan fully comprehend what Joyce plans to do with their relationship in the long run? (and is he actually okay with that?) or does he still not understand her intentions completely and is thus ignorant (perhaps willfully) of Joyce’s long term goals?
This^
Except for the part about being a gay woman. I’m a straight man. But I get what you’re saying.
Also, is anyone else here in favor of just giving Joyce the benefit of the doubt? Yeah, there is definitely an element of “I’m going to fix you” in what she’s saying, but it lacks the air of moral superiority that usually accompanies it. And all things considered, she’s being fairly accepting of him (Yes, I’m aware that acceptance and fixing are contradictory. People in general are contradictory by nature.)
Do I think this is the best situation possible? Not really. At the same time, at least from my perspective, Joyce seems well-intentioned. The sentence that seems to define her mind-set isn’t the patience to guide thing. It’s “I will never give up on you.” She’s doing her best with the upbringing and tools she has to work with.
And Ethan…? Well… He’s not lying anymore… So good on him.
I don’t think most people are questioning they have good intentions. It’s just we know where those usually lead.
Oh no I totally get “This is going to end horribly.” It’s just that I keep reading comments like “Welp! There’s Joyce just being terrible again! Isn’t she a horrendous human being?”
One of the things that makes Joyce a complex character (and there’s a phrase I never thought I’d write back in the Roomies! days) is that she does sometimes do terrible things (or bad things, anyway… “terrible” is probably a bit strong for anything this Joyce has done, though Walkyverse Joyce had a couple moments that might qualify), but she’s not a horrendous human being. She’s a genuinely nice person doing her best to do right by the people around her, with a social toolbox and worldview that are woefully inadequate for the task.
I think Willis said it best himself. Joyce genuinely wants to be a kind person, but if kindness is a soup, she’s been given a fork.
And what makes this moment work is that she’s almost there. She isn’t rejecting him as a human (for the most part) or being hurtful. She still has the fork but Gaht-dangit, she is shoveling every last drop of soup that clings to that fork into his mouth.
And only accidentally stabbing him in the mouth a little bit.
Or maybe you’re attracted to both.
I’m sure she considered that at one point. Do I need to go get the Kinsey scale?
You could be panromantic-homosexual… Able to find romance with someone of any gender, but only sexually interested in women.
There’s a lot more to sexuality than just gay/bi/straight.
Yeah, but Ethan probably isn’t bi-romantic. Amber said Ethan didn’t love her the way she wanted him to. I don’t think she meant with his penis.
Oh dear god this is just a typhoon of misery and misunderstanding waiting to happen but I still feel so much sympathy for both of them.
Ethan’s really okay with Joyce trying to “cure” him? Does he not understand what she’s saying?
He’s lonely and desperate and VERY DEPRESSED. I’ve seen people stick with incompatible relationships for less.
What she’s saying is she’s onboard with his plan of stupidity. We’ve gone from Ethan secretly using Joyce to not be gay anymore so life ill seem easier to Joyce agreeing to help Ethan not appear gay anymore so life will seem easier. Their individual stupidity have merged together to create a greater stupidity. And they did it without supervision so there’s nobody around to halty the momentum and keep it from growing further.
OK, so this sounds more like Joyce.
It’s like… I’m certain this is going to end badly, but at the same time, it’s cute, or something? I don’t know, it’s making me feel like 15 billion different things at once. Which is making me confused.
I don’t even know what I’m talking about.
This would be funnier if it wasn’t also so damn sad.
Oh god, going from Shortpacked to here was a hell of a mood swing. From dumb giggling to “Oh noooooooooooo.”
Temptation to…feel attracted to the same sex? I guess guys are sinning ever time they get an erection then. =/
I’m not really getting what you mean here? Maybe I’m just being dense but I don’t follow your logic.
I think he means *gays? But I’m not sure.
This strip made me really sad. Damn you, Willis.
Also, I’ve been very sympathetic towards Joyce since the beginning. It’s actually her flippant “except, like cancer, I guess” that makes me hate her for the very first time.
Everything else I can chalk up to a very problematic culture. But that last bit? What the hell, Joyce?
Willis strip rules #39- Punchline syndrome. Sometimes characters have to say horrible things for the sake of having the strip end in a joke. 9 times out of 10, you can’t really hold this against them.
Can I ask what you find bothersome about that? I mean, it was flippant, but people *do* tell people with cancer “God doesn’t give us anything we can’t handle.” It’s nice to know Joyce wouldn’t be one of those people.
(Plus as a narrative device it points out that no, God/the universe does give us things we can’t handle, sort of poking a hole in Joyce’s argument without her really thinking about it.)
How is that wrong? Better than the unfortunately common type of Christian, who will tell people undergoing things they legitimately cannot cope with (often cancer, but also the death of a child, etc.) that “God doesn’t give us anything we can’t handle.” That just invalidates people’s suffering by implying they could “deal with it” if they believed harder.
Joyce saying that actually made me like her MORE. She’s ridiculing an insensitive cliche often said by other religious people to “help” the dying or grieving.
Oh. Thanks for the explanations, guys. I wasn’t aware of the insensitive line being hella common, for one thing. That helps a lot.
Bad way to go. Joyce apparently does not accept him as he is,gay.
But, I’ve known a couple of fundamentalist and they stated that being gay was by choice…if you want not to be gay, just think about it and you won’t be. I did not attempt to argue with them, a total waste of time. I just know that there are really people out there who feel like Joyce does, that if she ‘guides’ him he will see the error of his ways.
But what if her daydream had a half a chance to come true, would she then have to fear him as being like all the rest of men, who try to ‘twist her’.
I don’t think Ethan is all right with this, I think he just isn’t picking up on ‘I’ll be here to guide you’. I think he thinks she is offering to be his beard.
Then again, if they both do know what the other is saying, accept it, and want to try to be happy together, go for it. Sure hope it don’t hurt to much.
Presumably, if her fantasy happened, they would have bonded on a level that would not allow him to ‘twist her’. Because actually deep relationship with a non-sexual basis.
A Fundie Christian girl…
A Gay Jewish boy…
One would think they have nothing in common
But that’s ok. They’ll force it until they work!
This summer.
Kate hudginson as Joyce
and Vince Vaun as Ethan
Featuring Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson as Joe.
“The Really Bad Idea”
coming soon April, 34th, 2008.
… I might actually pay to watch this.
Maybe. Perhaps.
The most honest RomCom ever.
Pray the gay away!
[Sigh]
So Joyce is going to become Michelle Bachmann?
I’ll take unhealthy relationship that can and will only end badly for $1000 Alex.
Oh look! The daily double!
It’s like a train wreck in slow motion… I need popcorn and a better seat.
I’m speechless…..I really am.
Wish I could say I didn’t know people in this situation.
I’m puzzled by all the hate for this pairing. Yes, it’s obviously doomed from the start, but most relationships are. I mean, every previous relationship all of us have had have ended, and usually badly. over half of all marriages end in divorce.
Relationship are fragile and transient things, like soap bubbles on the wind. If they come out of this relationship with more good times than bad and wiser then when they started, then I will be considering this relationship a success, doomed though it might be.
Except that it’s patently obvious that this relationship WON’T do that. She wants a success story she can brag to all her fundie friends back home about, he wants to be straight despite knowing that he isn’t. How could anyone NOT hate this?
Because sometimes it’s more important to learn to not lie to yourself and others than it is to avoid a relationship that will go tits up sooner than later. Sometimes you have to get your feelings hurt to truly understand them.
Goddamnit.
Am I the only one still caught on Ethan’s, “I understand if you want to leave me now”? Between that and his wanting to shut his sexuality away, it looks like he wants to try this relationship as a relationship, as though denial will fix everything. I’m taking Joyce’s “guide you” as less “forcibly fix you” and more “guide you on this path you’ve already chosen which is similar to a path I’d like to choose for myself.”
I’m not saying any of this is a *good* thing, but it’s definitely a highly sympathetic thing. Empathetic, even, on Ethan’s side for me, as I can remember trying to date people I didn’t actually want in college simply because I wanted to want them, wanted to be viewed as and actually be “normal.”
I guess I am not really understanding all the Joyce hate here. They are both making terrible decisions, but they are both trying their best with what they’re given and where they are. My hope is that they’ll use the safety of this relationship in order to come to terms with themselves, their sexualities, and their experiences, and go on to remain good friends while seeing other people. Is this likely? Probably not. (Okay, definitely not.) But there’s a reason this is called “Dumbing of Age” instead of “Everyone is Already a Mature Adult who Makes Good Decisions” besides, y’know, the second title being absurdly clunky.
Yeah, I feel really sad for both of them. I think they’re both ‘at fault’ here, if either of them are. Both of them are crushed under the weight of societal pressures, just trying to deal with them in ways that make sense to them, and both of them are very likely to hurt the other in the process.
This.
I think the Joyce hate is unreasonable. He is clearly understanding her suggestion, and accepting it with open arms. They are both making unhealthy emotional decisions.
I simply think most people can sympathize with Ethan’s more than they can with Joyce’s.
It’s not Joyce hate (for me) so much as Joyce eye-rolling. Like “oh god, there it is again”. Ethan should fucking know better though.
This is the worst possible decision either of these two characters can make, and a very real part of me wants to tell you to please not write this story. But you know what? That very impulse is what makes this a story worth telling.
It’ll still be a healthier relationship than Joyce ah, PURSUING Danny back in the original ‘verse.
This is like watching a train wreck that collides with a primary school.
Then skating over an old folks home and the rescue for adorable fuzzy animals.
I don’t know how, but I think it’s going to end worse than I did when this relationship started.
How bad did you end when this relationship started?
This seems bad.
Oh God, is this going to become a “Saved!” kind of deal?
Ethan: willing to sacrifice sexual relationship (but not an emotional/romantic one) in favor of social conformism. I don’t agree with it, but as a non-flamboyant gay man myself I can see why he’d choose that road.
Joyce: wants a man who will not ever pressure her for sex, ergo a gay man. At this point I think she doesn’t know sexual satisfaction long-term will be an issue, so she gets a pass for now.
For the amount of experience Joyce and Ethan have, and their motivations thus far, I think they are both making the best decision they know how to make. I don’t think the relationship itself stands a snowball’s chance, and I hope it ends before they get married so they can both end up having emotionally -and- sexually fulfilling relations, but I’m impressed how well set-up all of this was.
I tip my hat to you, Willis.
Yeah, god forbid theyd actually deal with their issues rather than sink into denial
This seems to be the quickest way for them to deal with their issues. They aren’t go through the arduous process of figuring out where they actually stand on all things involving love and/or sex until the inevitable trainwreck forces them to.
It’s hard to confront your demons if you don’t let yourself get anywhere near them. This relationship is the Express Train to Demonville, so they are on the right path.
“a man who will not ever pressure her for sex, ergo a gay man”
Yes, because all straight men are ruled by their penis with an iron fist, just as all women are 70% tear-ducts, 20% sandwich-makers, and 10% pure PMS 😛
I think “pressure” here is being used in the most benign, innocent way. I dont think he meant to say that any straight man would consistently, actively pressure her to have sex. Rather that sexual tension in any long term, romantic relationship between two people attracted to each other is probably going to happen eventually….
Right about the safety, but for just about everything else:
THAT’S WRONG! >_<
This comic is really helping me understand how and why situations arise where a homosexual person is in a relationship with a person of the opposite sex while being aware of their own sexuality. I don’t think it’s a healthy course of action, but this is allowing me to see the mindset that might lead someone there. Good job.
So did Joyce just come out or what
I guess I’ll wait and see if she kisses Billie
I’m dying to see Sarah’s reaction to all this.
Says Sarah.
Aaaaand, there’s the other shoe…
This cannot end well.
Ethan. Honey. You’re smarter than this and you know better.
Joyce, honey… you’re, um… near several people who are smarter than this and know better.
Suddenly I can hear Dr. Cox in my head going “WRONG, wrong, WRONG, wrong…”
I’m hearing Beelzeboss going “FUCK! FUCK! FUUUUUUUCK…”
…damn. I tried to be hopeful.
Aaaaand just when I thought Joyce might finally be becoming tolerable, this happens. When can we get back to the Ruth/Billie makeouts?
My answer to Joyce would be:
“but He didin’t give you ethan to handle.”
New hashtag, #willisyoubastard
😀
Today Shortpacked and DOA compete for “most disturbing and cringeworthy character pairing”. And I think it’s a tie.
Actually I think Ultra-Car x Mayala is a really cute platonic pairing.
I’m actually really touched. This is going to end in flames, as a certainty, but this moment is actually really very beautiful.
God dammit Joyce. I’m glad you’re not going down the pray the gay away route, but this is pulling a close second.
Ethan. http://media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m96wptb62D1qfc0m4.gif
I just hope you stop it before they become this, Willis:
http://www.joshweed.com/2012/06/club-unicorn-in-which-i-come-out-of.html
That is one of the most depressing things I’ve ever read, no less so for the way they both keep insisting they are SUPER happy like that 😀
What’s the worst part?
That they’ve been together since they were sixteen, and therefore have no other sex to compare with their sex lives of amazing emotional fulfillment
That they both think this is the only way their god will ever love or accept him
That he “pretends” to call a woman’s adopted children counterfeit but REALLY DOES think he could never have been happy without children that were the product of heterosexual sex
I mostly just feel intense pity for them both. They think their marriage is perfect but it is literally true that they could have ALL THE SAME THINGS and also be with someone who was sexually attracted to/sexually attractive for them. I didn’t want to judge, going into that, and romance without sex is perfectly possible! But there is no part of what they describe that doesn’t sound hollow and dead inside.
I want to play the gay boyfriend song now that I saw this. :p
This is a right relationship for all the wrong reasons.
Joyce wants to feel safe after her attempted rape, so Ethan’s a great choice in that regard (Plus he is generally a all around nice guy, so that’s a nice boon).
Ethan’s on a journey of self-discovery and wants to “start fresh”. Unfortunately, he’s doing it wrong.
It’s a sad thing that this is going to end so horribly, but I can’t fault either of them for their choices at the moment.
All true. I can’t see this ending in anything but a torrent of tears, possibly even spiteful tears, after grave mistakes are made several years down the line, but all the same… This may be exactly what both of them need right now. Somewhere to feel safe. Somewhere to give themselves time to sort through their emotions and come to terms with who they are.
I just hope that both of them come through with their innate good heart intact.
For me the most horrifying thing about this storyline is how plausible I find it to be.
P.S. I finally got around to buying the Joyce and Walky strips last night. A quick thanks to David for getting them out so fast.
“You’re safe” is NOT a compliment a person with minimal issues wants to hear. How is that good in this situation, Ethan?
Oh great, now she can “save him” while he tries to figure out who he is. I think she’s just gonna make stuff way more confusing for him.
Oh goodie, they have decided to enter a relationship based on delusions, deniaal and refusal to deaal with your issues. This isnt healthy, this is super bad. Which its obviously meant to be seen as, but since some people in the comments actually SUPPORT it…
Having read these comments it seems that a lot of the anger about this come down to Joyce’s word choice.
On its own “I will never give up on you” would mean that she will still be his friend. Yet coupled with her “guiding” him to “resist” his “overwhelming temptations” it takes a different tone.
Also a people seem to have forgotten that just yesterday Ethan said “I wish I could ignore the stuff going on in my pants … Just shut it up and lock it away forever.”
In the end all Joyce is doing is supporting Ethan’s desire to be straight. It’s not the healthiest thing nor “the right” thing to do but it seems that this is what they both need right now.
She needs someone to feel safe around in regards to the party. He needs someone to be his friend who might be able to see that he is more than gay.
I hope that whatever develops between them helps them to grow and become more comfortable with themselves, and when/if Amber finds out she will understand his motivations.
This. While it might be the best the choice, it might be just what they need right now. Joyce definitely needs some cool-down time after her assault but she’s so driven on finding Mr. Right that I don’t think she has taken the time to sort through all her feelings in regards to that situation. I hope that this…. arrangement with Ethan will give her a chance to sort through her feelings since she won’t feel the pressure of looking for her future husband or worrying about what this boy wants from her.
As for Ethan, I don’t really feel like it’s a good situation for him at all. All he’s really getting out of it is escapism, and eventually I think he’s going to find that this isn’t making him happy. Hopefully he’ll be able to overcome his own demons before it gets to the point that Joyce breaks up with him because she’s overcome hers and isn’t happy in their arrangement any more, because if he isn’t I fear it might mess him up more because he’s trying to hard to make the straight path work for him and keeps “messing it up”.
If that’s what they were actually looking for, maybe. But it’s not. Ethan is not looking for recognition as more than gay, hell, both Amber and Mike obviously do that Mike treats him exactly the same as everyone else and Amber still nerds out with him on occasion according to their previous conversations. What he’s looking for is someone who will turn him straight, or at least not gay, and Joyce is looking for a MRS degree.
So glad this went the “I’m safe with you” as opposed to the “I can fix you” route.
I got the implication that it means both. She is going to try to change him but she will take her time because she’s safe around him.
The ‘I’m safe with you’ is totally reasonable conclusion based on her issues. however the ‘overwhelming temptations that we both have to learn to resist’ is back down you need fixing route.
And that’s how Michele met Marcus.
You know, if they both had therapy and came to grips with their neurosis, fears, and discomfort with their sexuality, then I might be okay with this relationship. It is not one I would choose for myself, as I value personal expression over conformity to societal norms. However, I know that that is a choice that people can make for themselves.
However, both of them are going into this relationship from a place of deep rooted insecurity and fear about themselves and the world, and that is not healthy. It wouldn’t be if they were compatible sexually.
If Ethan came to grips with his issues, he wouldn’t be doing this shit.
And neither would Joyce.
Therefore there isn’t a way this could ever work.
Joyce makes an excellent mustache.
I’m just imaging the looks on Joyce’s parents’ faces when their daughter brings home the studly GAY JEW that she wants to marry.
O_o … o_O … O_O … >_< … O_O WUT?!?!
Unfortunately, this probably won't last until the holidays…
Yes, together we can shove our personal problems down SO deep that we won’t even recognize them anymore! Nothing will be a problem so long as our surface has a smile!
Wow….. Willis, you are a very well thought out writer. This is very much wrong, and yet I could see people make this mistake. Very believable!
This should make for a good story-arc.
Hm. Hm.
Eeentiresting.
Why did Ethan even come out in highschool in the first place? If he had wanted to live a heterosexual life, he could have just used Amber. He didn’t need to come out and cause all the drama with his parents. He could have just acted like he didn’t want to have sex with her because he “wasn’t ready” or something like that.I thought he’d actually want to get a boyfriend and have satisfying sex. This relationship is not going to be good.
Yeah, this isn’t going to blow up at some point…
Oh, but the joy we’ll have until then!
Be serious, Willis would never do anything like that.
It would be a genuinely more interesting storyline if it did. Plenty of opportunity for character development…
I only say this because you can’t have roses and butterflies all the time. Without conflict, there’s really no room for story development.
Remember, they’re both freshmen. A lot of college relationships are driven by jumping in too deeply too fast without thinking.
y’all know joyce is being a piece of shit hetero scum right now? like this isn’t cute and this isn’t a “complex relationship.” she is being oppressive and this actually actually actually is abusive of her.
Ethan if you had even the slightest bit of sense…
…
…
Well… you don’t I guess. Carry on.
Man, the commentary on this is kind of funny. It just proves that moralizing condescension isn’t restricted to Christians.
Do I think their relationship is horrifying on a number of levels? Absolutely. Am I willing to be begrudgingly sympathetic while questioning their motivation? Probably. We’re only marginally more accepting, aren’t we?
So you see only a marginal difference between shaming someone for being gay and shaming someone for trying to rewrite someone else’s sexuality?
God has a plan for all of us
…
Death
And taxes.
Please don’t forget the taxes. 😀
Hmm. Interesting.
I bet this will probably end poorly, but I’m interested to see where the comic goes with this – in particular, I’m curious to see if it somehow ends in an okay way and if so how.
Why do I have this overwhelming feeling that Joyce will find herself very embarrassingly pregnant by the end of the semester?
My god that would be amazing. xD
I very well may die from laughter if that happens. It’ll be like that movie. was it called Saved? “I had sex with him to turn him away from sin.” lawlz!
Whatever happens, it’s not going to end well.
Okay a few points:
1. Joyce is NOT being accepting. She’s accepting that she can change him, and make him what she wants him to be. That isn’t acceptance, and I’m saying this as a Catholic.
2. Really? We have to keep seeing these two together? This is a horrible relationship, and just when we get to the point where both can grow and move on, we just stall that out. I REALLY don’t want to see this relationship continue, because all it will mean is needless, unfunny drama as every single person around Ethan and Joyce react to the fact that this is a horrible idea that will hurt them both terribly.
3. This is not a good story-arc. Think about it for a moment, where does this go: We keep watching everyone who isn’t a complete and utter moron point out that Ethan is not attracted to Joyce, and that Joyce is actually purposely manipulating him. Sorry, but no, this does not, and will not work. I cannot imagine the scenario where Ethan’s parents would be okay with this situation.
4. As for the “as long as they’re happy”. Stoned people are happy, but we get in the way of that to stop them from ODing, yeah? As well, they very much AREN’T happy, they’re scared and running away from problems they don’t want to have to deal with. That’s not any definition of happy.
I offer you this piece of wisdom from Richard O’Brien- The sun never sets on those that ride into it. 😉
Agreed on 1.
Disagree on 2 – it need not go that way, and it need not be unfunny. Sure, all the things they actually *want* to do are unfunny, but whose to say how that will play out? Given that Ethan is G-A-Y gay and has been stated as such by Word of God to be a multiversal constant, Joyce will not actually succeed in bringing about the horror of turning him straight. Instead she’s going to fail, and be frustrated, and try to overcompensate, and make a fool of herself, until she snaps and takes on the killer Joyce persona that she’s broken out a few times already and attempts to rip him one – at which point Amazi-Girl can suddenly appear and flatten her. And all during this time Ethan is watching the ‘relationship’ with detached aloofness, unable to feel anything more than gradually increasing pity and annoyance at Joyce’s ways and actions, until he decided to shave the beard and politely drops her like a bad habit, at which point she tries to kill him and we’re back to plot route one, if that hasn’t happened first. Or Mike does something that destroys them both with hilarious brilliance in one tenth the time. And all the while we’re cutting back and forth to other characters and plots giving us fun and fanservice and cutting away before anything actually R-rated. Yay!
Disagree on 3 – see 2. Anything can happen. Except Joyce succeeding in her narsty little plan to change him.
Agree on 4. But we’re not here to watch people be happy, now are we?
Anything I can think of to say about Ethan will probably sound judgmental. In this day and age, homosexuality isn’t broadly considered to be wrong or unusual, but the human brain likes to simplify things, so identifying people based on a trait they have that is the most distinctive is totally a thing that happens. So yeah, a totally openly gay Ethan would be known as the “gay guy”. Mostly in a non-judgmental way, but a lot of things sound judgmental even when not meant as such.
I think Ethan, both here and in Shortpacked!, has a lot of identity issues that extend a lot deeper than his sexual orientation. This thing with Joyce, well, isn’t likely to help him but I suspect it won’t make things any worse either.
Joyce on the other hand, well honestly her heart’s in the right place but she can’t help but run towards extremes. There’s nothing wrong with wanting relationships yet waiting until marriage for having sex. That so many have abandoned that, well, to each their own I guess but the pressures it puts on the remaining old fashioned folks is a thing that exists. What Joyce really wants is a boyfriend that won’t pressure her for sex right now, but will totally want to make babies with her in the future after the wedding. Ethan may be the former but he’s certainly not the latter, so she’s setting herself up for disappointment, though she’s clinging to the outdated and incorrect belief that gays can be “fixed”. On the other hand, plenty of college relationships are short lived anyway, so it may never get that far. What Joyce really needs right now is experience socializing with non-sheltered people her own age, and Ethan is probably a good facilitator for that.
So even though this whole set-up screams “train wreck”, it actually may work out to be a good idea. Or a train wreck, because it’s fiction and train wrecks are an easy way to generate lots of drama.
this CANNOT go well
I was fearing/hoping for this. Fearing because I don’t think its a good idea as a person, hoping because it makes drama and bullshit which is great for stories. So she is going to try to change him eh? This reminded me of a queer anarchist I talked to at a Occupy event, shirt said “Gay away the pray”. I lol’d
Da Faq just happen?!
I’m still kinda annoyed at Ethan for what seems like spitting on Amber’s efforts helping him come out in the first place.
gg
http://www.dumbingofage.com/2012/comic/book-2/04-time-keeps-on-slippin/revulsion/ Well, Sarah certainly called that one.
Okay, I understand that it’s the character’s opinion, not necessarily the writer’s, but Joyce’s argument pisses me right off.
Homosexuals don’t need “guidance to the right path” because homosexuality is a fact, not a choice.
Then again, I’m arguing over a comic, so I suppose I should really just let it go.
I’m just worried that this storyline is going to devaluate non-sexual romantic relationships.
Everyone seems to be saying that it’s not natural, unhealthy and wrong to be in one.
I agree that both Joyce and Ethan should come to terms with their inherant sexuality, but if they want to pursue a romantic relationship with each other, that’s not wrong either.
Sex doesn’t have to be the basis for a relationship.
Agreed.
I think the comments have proved Ethan’s point, “the gay” overwhelms everything else…always. Last I heard college was good for something besides getting laid/married. Ethan wants to enjoy being “the guy who likes robots” or whatever instead of letting his biology run his social life. Joyce wants to feel safe and take her time while she comes to terms with the whole raging hormones thing too. He gives her safety and she gives him support in his choice. I expected a “bash-Joyce” moment, but instead it seems these two gyroscopes spinning out of control might actually spin stabilize each other. It’s sweet in a totally non-sexual way.
I’m really kind of disturbed by the number of comments from people who seem to think that sexuality is the primary defining trait of a person or somehow unhealthy to learn to control. Lust isn’t hunger, a warning sign of you lacking something you need to live and grow. I figure lust is more like anger, to make constructive use of it you must first prevent it from using you. This situation has a lot of potential to show the characters off as more than just the stereotypes “gay man” and “rigid Christian”. That’s a good thing.
This is kind of sweet, though, in its awkward misguided way. She can feel safe with him, and he can be loved by her. Eventually they’ll grow up and realize what they really need.
THIS CAN ONLY END POSITIVELY.
WHOA WHOA WAIT A MINUTE.
Willis… did you date a lesbian girl?
I will be the one who speaks out for those with cancer, as I lost a friend to it two years ago and still haven’t gotten over it.
That wasn’t even remotely funny.
If I hadn’t of spent my hour of crying and all my tears a while ago, I’d do it. and rip your throat out in the process.
The only was to prevent this is to write more comics.
Turn it off / like a light switch!
Or maybe, y’know, being run over by a car…