Because the passage concerns Roman/Greek culture at the time instead of anything that applies to modern society and most Pastors are aware of that. and/or you’ve clearly never been to a strict Mennonite service have you?
I live in Pennsylvania. We have tons of Amish and Mennonite groups around here. But you do have a good point that at least a few groups follow that part of the Bible.
On the other hand, I don’t see the part where the Bible says that restriction only applies to that time period and/or location. This just seems to be more of the typical “Bible Buffet” mentality, where you invent excuses so you can pick and choose what Biblical morals you’d like to apply or ignore. 😛
Sarah isn’t trying to do anything. She’s just there being a giant windmill of logic Joyce can’t help but take a tilt at Don Quixote style. If that makes any sense.
Nahhhhhh, I don’t think she’s that specifically. She’s nowhere NEAR as bad as that. Those guys think you’re just wrong for having fun with something they want you to take seriously. Sarah doesn’t really care about what people do but, at the same time, she seems to think everything not related to studies is stupid. So she’ll just poke holes or whatever into what someone else is doing if it happens to come up. She doesn’t mean it maliciously and probably doesn’t even mean to do it. It’s just that she can’t help but comment.
The thing is that a lot of stuff we do is stupid or at least viewed as unimportant to at least one person in the world, so holes can be poked into anything if you looked hard enough and cared to comment. She just can’t keep her mouth shut about it.
I don’t think Sarah (who, full disclosure, is my favorite character) is a killjoy. I think she values intellectual rigor, both in herself and in others. And when she encounters someone who could be more rigorous, she wants to help them out. That’s a far cry from someone intentionally out to make people unhappy.
Right, but in her “helping the out” it just kills their joy. Like above. I don’t think she intentionally means to do what she does either. For as smart as she thinks she is or as much as she derides people engaging in stupid drama, she’s incredibly socially inept in her own way. She just doesn’t realize that people like stupid things and wants to indulge in them and is bad at vocalizing her views on it in a way that doesn’t get people to look at her with arched eyebrows.
I think my favorite strip of hers was when she was angry that Joyce doubted her liking Sarah when she had previously saved Joyce from the date-rapist. Joyce pointed out that, while it’s nice to be shown appreciation in big ways like that, smaller and more consistent gestures are also very much appreciated and desired. Sarah got a look on her like she saw merit in what Joyce said and realized she needed to be better about that sort of thing.
Sarah’s got the big picture down pretty well, but it’s the little things that’d improve her flow that she’s missing. More strips like the one I just mentioned will help with that.
Sarah has alarming codependency issues. Along with chronic victim mentality behavior and self-martyrdom, people like Sarah tend push their defeatist reasoning on others. Danny simply drives people away, but with Sarah, especially since she’s still to involved with the likes of Raidah…..Outlook not so good.
How does she have codependency issues exactly? Victim mentality and self-martyrdom I could potentially see, but that doesn’t really support “codependency”. She’s a very independent person; the only time she does anything social is when someone else bugs her to do so. She doesn’t seem to need someone else’s compliments or validations to go on. I think you need to choose a different word than codependency?
Okay Joyce, while you’re burning your graven images, collect up all your crosses, crucifixes, and pictures of Jesus! They violate that commandment too.
^_^
Oh, that’ll go over well. Joyce would be horrified at the thought of burning her crosses, crucifixes, and whatnot on the day her parents are arriving for a visit. They may drag her to an exorcism!
On the other hand, according to a few Born-Agains that I know, the cross and depictions of Jesus aren’t in violation of the first (or in their minds second*) commandment, as they aren’t – in their minds – false idols.
It’s Islam that’s “no idols whatsoever!”.
* according to Roman Catholics, Anglicans, and Lutherans, the first reads “You shall have no god before me, nor shall you worship false idols”, splitting the coveting clauses of “Don’t covet your neighbor’s possessions” and “don’t cover your neighbor’s wife” into the ninth and tenth. Baptists, Methodists, and other “reformed” or “born again” Protestant sects split the false idols into the second and mash the coveting clauses together.
Actually, how do Protestants view that kind of thing? I know they they don’t like statues and the like, but are things like paintings, crosses, and crucifixes okay?
From my experience as an ex-evangelical, I know they see crosses and paintings as fine, but crucifixes are a no-no because they’re “Catholic”. Their thinking is that a crucifix represents the dead Jesus, whilst a bare cross represents the resurrected Jesus. Thus, they say that Catholics don’t believe in the power of the resurrection by having crucifixes.
Don’t recall they went into that in-depth analysis in Sunday School, but that sounds right to me, and my original Lutheran upbringing.
We had a big shiny silvery cross hanging from the ceiling at the front of the church, but no bleeding corpse to terrify small children with.
On the other hand, other denominations were never mentioned or discussed, much less anything comparative or competitive; Until I was fully an adult, we were all one big happy Christian family for all I’d been taught.
“They” never said anything about Catholics in any sermon or service I attended, good or bad. I can see that argument coming up in a debate of “why do we do this in this way and not the other” but wouldn’t presume to say what Catholics believed or don’t.
I can sort of appreciate the idea though. Is it better to worship the Teacher and pass on his lessons, or sing praises to a mutilated, miserable-looking body dangling from the ceiling (that we tell confused and frightened children is going to come back from the dead and walk the earth any moment now)?
For some reason I keep thinking W.W.J.D… if he came back, walked into what’s supposedly “His house” and saw a nearly-nude depiction of the most painful and humiliating moment of his previous existence enshrined in life-sized realism while a couple hundred people all praise this image of torture.
WWJD? Probably turn beet red, scowl, and storm out of the church, shouting “you people are SICK!” over his shoulder. “I told you guys to pray to my Father, not… not THIS!”
Heh… but back to the subject of not worshiping golden/false idols, whichever commandment you consider that. Even a simple cross is a symbol, and icon, an idol; a representation of someone other than God. Pretty sure it counts the same as a golden calf.
Iconoclasm was really only a Byzantine thing though?
Like, in the Byzantine Empire they were worried that commoners were worshiping the paintings and junk (their only way to understand the teachings in the Bible since most of them couldn’t read and priests only gave sermons in poor Latin which no one spoke (there are a lot of texts in latin written by priests that prove that with the exception of the Pope and Bishops, by the point people cared about religious icons maybe being idolatry, priests did not actually know latin and they mostly bullshitted it).
I mean most denominations only care if the icon or whatever is nonChristian (a la The Golden Calf in the film Dogma). Worship of a brand like Dexter & Monkey Master counts, but unless you’re Eastern Orthodox or a really really conservative protestant denomination, things like paintings, crosses, etc, are generally seen to help facilitate worship, a connection to god.
Tl;dr – unless you are literally worshiping the object and not the deity it represents, chances are no one is gonna give a shit. (“Holy shit man my crucifix is going to change the world!” – no one ever)
As a DJ myself I can tell you that when we get hired for private events we essentially have to play these “theme” songs or else said client gets very pissy. I don’t enjoy it and I apologize for all the auditory torture.
DoomMoose: I have vowed that if ever I marry, there will be three songs absolutely forbidden at the reception: the Hokey Pokey, the Chicken Dance, and the Electric Slide (okay, I guess both versions means it’s four songs forbidden). Few things make an awkward reception where everyone refuses to dance (until, for some reason, I start dancing) even more awkward are these musical atrocities.
I’m assuming Wensleydale means the combined disco steps from the entire run of this reply string, not just the time warp bit, in which case i say video or it never happened 😛
You are, Inkwell. He confessed his gayness to Joyce after he was basically forced to, because Amber discovered the charade. Then both he and Joyce decided they’d try to make it work anyway because this is DUMBing of Age.
Joyce is a terrible Christian. Mainly because she didn’t snap back with a line about how she’s not WORSHIPING them. Not like she made a gold statue of them and pray to them every night.
On a side note, I have to attend to something in Joyce’s closet as a personal favour to her. Good day.
It depends on your definition of “worship.” Cladding yourself head to toe in the regalia of a cartoon show could easily fall within those margins, depending on who you ask.
I definitely worried about liking Transformers too much as a teenager, for that very reason. Anything you like too much in place of God could be considered “worshiping,” and these were some very hardcore Christians I hung around who shared that view.
The key is in place of. Like, you know, not praying to God, but praying to Optimus. Besides, up until these modern times, how would you be able to dress yourself in clothing that shows your love for God?
Wear humble simple cheap clothes. Don’t buy too many of them and don’t spend time on your appearance.
My favorite part of this message is the part where we were not supposed to have churches, because the best place to pray is outside, in God’s church, but if you MUST have churches they are supposed to be small and humble with nothing expensive in their construction and no steps leading up to them. Church was supposed to be the opposite of the intimidating grandiose place it is, and no one seems to notice it.
We’re all basically the idiot at the end of Indiana and the Last Crusade, picking out the gold and jewel-encrusted challace because we think we know better than God what venerates him, and no matter how often both God and Jesus tell us that
money is worthless
money is evil
rich people will NEVER get into Heaven
you should give away all your possessions
we still think we are worshiping God gloriously with our stained glass palaces and our gold crosses etc etc.
If anything in the Bible is true, no one is going to more Hell than the folks calling themselves Christian.
Minor correction: Rich people can still be good people, it’s just VERY HARD, because they tend to get really attached to all that money such that it becomes their false idol. A rich person is still good if he does good things with the money instead of hoarding it, and keeps the perspective that “it’s not MY money, it’s just something God has entrusted me to do good with” (see the parable of the three servants). If he isn’t willing to give it all away should God call him to, he’s lost that perspective.
No, rich people can’t. “It is easier for a camel to fit through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter Heaven.”
People have tried to twist that shit around because “oh there’s a gate into Jerusalem called ‘Eye of the Needle’ and people can bring camels through it if they go down on their knees so it’s hard but not impossible! You just need humility!”
Bullshit, that is a metaphor and it was mistranslated. The original was to get rope or cable through the eye of a needle. In other words, something physically impossible.
Yeah, Jesus preached mostly to the poor, and when he came across folks with money who were interested in him, he’d ask them to give it all away. Some did (Matthew) and some didn’t (a guy who sadly walked away). Jesus expected you to own basically nothing.
Yeah but he didn’t really mean any of that! The most important part if being Christian is hating gay people and making sure to ban abortion. (Fun fact: the Bible actually contains what is essentially a recipe for an old timey version of the morning after pill.)
D’aww thanks! I like talking to you for the record 🙂 Your comments are among the ones that always make me smile. And you’re a very talented artist too.
My tumblr is rainfelt.tumblr.com, and I do teeeechnically have a Skype but I never use it. 🙂 AIM is suicidalchime (which I always feel compelled to explain is a Silent Hill reference, “Suicidal Clock Chime” was too long).
Mike Ehrmantraut is fine with half-measures. He was the one pushing the team to switch to a pseudo cook when they didn’t have enough methylamine to cook the High Quality Product that Walt was used to.
Walt is the dangerous one here, he’s definitely not a fan of half-measures.
I do love the fact that I got to see a Breaking Bad reference on here though, so thanks for that <3
“Well you are gresat and all, but I think we should make this an open marriage mkay? Well from my side at least. You stay faithful to me or I strike you down with a lightning.” – The greatest Boyfriend ever.
FOR I AM THE LORD THY GOD, THOU SHALT HAVE NO OTHER GOD BEFORE ME.
First commandment, meaning the moral rule that God cares about more than any other*, is that God HAS to be the most important thing in your life. Joyce was focused on something else for like 3 seconds, so clearly she’s a horrible person and needs to fix that immediately.
Poor Joyce, her parents really did a number on her.
*Note how this isn’t about rape or murder or being a decent person, just about God being insecure, but that’s a different discussion.
God is kind of protrayed as an attention whore.Granted I guess we owe him something for the whole…making us exist thing. But it’s basically like your mom getting mad because you have a new girlfriend.
God is pretty murder-happy, actually. After the Golden Calf debacle, He said that He was going to leave the Israelites for a bit because He literally didn’t trust himself not to kill them all they piss Him off so much.
Also that fun part about sicking bears on children for insulting one of his priests. And the children didn’t get away just with a scratch or life-long trauma… nah, that just wouldn’t do.
Also that time he punk’d Abraham into nearly killing his own son.
At least he was consistently a dick in the Old Testament.
You knew what to expect and when to properly piss yourself in fear. New Testament version seems to have gotten consistently laid and suddenly decided he woves everyone lots. He promptly dropped the ‘His people’ routine and decided he was everyone’s skydaddy/pimp/abusiveboyfriend now. Complete with mandatory roofies made from… HIMSELF (or child/Clark Kent persona).
If it they wouldn’t be so horrifying, those books would be comedy GOLD.
Sarah is not ‘trying to ruin Joyce’s fun’ I don’t think. She is not overly religious herself and may just be asking a serious question. (Like I asked last night). She’s giving her opinion, and I agree: this obsession is a wee better than the ‘Jesus Thing’, at least she’s not preaching.
Track back on Joyce, she really doesn’t do anything by half, and she doesn’t stop doing what she wants to do either, I.E. Ethan.
When she wants something bad enough, no body can convince her otherwise-she wants the cartoon show, so she gives up the hat. And this is doing what, exactly? She still has that hideous shirt.
I don’t think she’s all that easily manipulated, I think she’s a drama queen.
Go back and look at yesterday’s strip. The PANTS are clearly the most hideous part of Joyce’s ensemble. The shirt is #2, but the pants are most certainly the worst.
What would Joyce do with the ashes of the hat? Put them in a baggy, carry them around like some sort of good luck charm, use it to ward off evil spirits and hunt demons?
Sarah cares about Joyce. She may be sarcastic and sardonic as shit, but she’s shown many times that she’s a good friend when it comes to the important stuff.
Sarah is somewhat unlikable for me. It seems like she sees exuberance and enthusiasm of any kind as irksome, and I don’t find her very witty. As a result, she isn’t too entertaining. Could provide good plot developments, though.
Insert usual joke here about Historical Jesus showing up and being horrified that everyone’s wearing little replicas of the apparatus he spent the last hours of his mortal life being tortured to death on.
Joyce wouldn’t have a crucifix 😕 As a general rule of thumb, and with some exceptions, crucifixes are Catholic – crosses are Protestant (the difference is whether Jesus is being crucified in the image – in which case it’s a crucifix). Protestants (like Joyce) argue that crucifixes are idols and crosses are icons; Catholics argue that the crucifix is also an icon, and one that has more meaning.
But Protestants and Catholics will argue to hell and back about the damn things, so…
Catholic, certain Orthodox factions, Coptic, Lutheran, various other protestants. Catholics are the big crucifix fans, but they are far from the only ones.
I don’t think people think she’s Catholic so much as Catholic imagery is the most readily available mental data for most people, so a lot of stuff that is specifically Catholic comes up as just vanilla Christian for them.
That’s true for me. I didn’t even know crusifixes were a catholic thing. I mean, is a crusifix different from a cross? I know plenty of non-catholics who wear crosses.
Crucifix shows Jesus nailed to it. Cross is just the cross itself.
Also, crucifixes tend to have more detail on the cross itself. Like it looks more like the actual crucifixion tool. Vanilla crosses are more just symbols of Christianity in general, so they tend to be just two intersecting lines or blocks.
Yeah, See when I hear Crucifix, I just think cross, So I can’t be sure the OP intended for the little Jesus to be nailed to it. This is a problem when you have a religion that branches off into so many little subsections. Like calling someone black when they’re actually Brazillian. Without asking it’d be difficult to know but it’s probably a touchy subject for them. I know people assume I’m jamaican sometimes because of my hair.
Specifically Catholic things that most protestant groups don’t do (As with all things, there are exceptions):
Crucifix
Transubstantiative Eucharist.
Fancy robes on the priest.
On that note: Priest Collars (Did meet a Lutheran Priest that had one once)
(Hell, a lot of Protestant groups don’t use the word “Priest” at all, in favor of minister or reverend or some such thing)
The Sacrament of Reconciliation.
To a lesser degree, the Sacraments in General (Though most groups still have a Baptismal and Marital Rite, as well as some variation on the Anointing of the Sick.)
Rosary.
Saints.
Pope.
Always a little sad how many people make jokes about stuff like ripping off a girl’s shirt without her consent without even thinking about what they’re saying.
Maybe that was some deleted post I didn’t see? I’ve only seen posts suggesting that she should (willingly) rip off her *own* shirt, thereby to initiate the burnage. And there’s a *huge* difference between that and a lack of consent.
There was also something about lighting her shirt on fire instead of the hat. It was unclear if the shirt would still be on her or not, but that’s a whole other jar of worms.
Yeah, only not really? Street harassment is in the same vein (“show me your boobs” is technically also a suggestion that you remove your own shirt). (And yes men have said that to me on the street. Starting when I was twelve, because lucky me I “bloomed” early.)
Basically Joyce would never willingly remove her own shirt, and lately my skin has been worn kind of thin by the objectifying in comments here and at ShortPacked. It’s sad that this is a progressive space, and I STILL can’t escape comment sections dominated by discussion of female characters’ bodies even when they are doing nothing remotely sexy.
(Sal posing during the beach post or being hot on her motorcycle: fair game. Appreciating Ethan’s new haircut or Jacob’s shirtlessness: fair game. Saying Joyce should strip and show us the goods just because she took off a silly hat: depressing. The number of people who thought Howard’s gross staring at Billie was justified: depressing.)
(Seriously he is SIXTEEN. That is way too old to pretend he can’t have been taught about basic human boundaries. I don’t care how much of a nerd he is, unless he has genuine developmental problems he should have been discouraged harshly. Instead everyone thinks it’s fine.)
(And yeah they were joking, but a lot of jokes we make reflect the things we really think but don’t feel able to say without our shields up. Humor is not an iron-clad defense.)
Sorry to get all srs bzns. Like I said, worn thin. Straws and camel’s backs and all that jazz. It’s been a rough like year for ladies. Can’t even get a damn Wonder Woman movie, ugh.
Even I, who openly draws pretty hot and heavy stuff was a bit perturbed. I love dirty jokes. I was raised on them. But after a bit it stops bein’ funny and starts feelin’ creepy. I guess I can’t really defend the Howard thing without coming off creepy either. I dunno, I’ve always felt teenagers are horomone driven. I can vouch that most of my high school life was spent staring at boobs. I liked boobs, what can I say. Granted standing a few inches from aforementioned boobs in a daze may be creepy, but I can’t in all good concience act like it’s not something I would have done. I guess all I can see wrong is him being way close and sh.it and not trying to hide it. But I thought the joke was that it caught him off guard. I dunno. maybe I’m no better than anyone else. I just like boobs and lookin’ at ’em at a safe distance.
It’s fine to like boobs. I like them too. 😉 And for what it’s worth i have no problems with sex or sexiness or your art! But we have a real problem in our culture with dissociating “boobs” from “person they are attached to”, and that person has the right to not be stared at. You know?
This is especially true because being looked at sexually is very unsafe for women in this country. It literally scares me to be ogled because that sometimes leads to being followed and sometimes to being groped, and because not responding positively to being ogled gets you labeled a bongo really, really fast.
It’s super uncomfortable to know that the guy who calls out “Where you going, gorgeous?” is almost always one step away from “Stupid rude bongo, I paid you a COMPLIMENT, how dare you ignore me?”
I know this is hard to wrap your head around because dudes just don’t live in this world. The closest you can get is to imagine really big buff gay guys, but even then the odds that you’ve ever been cat called on the street by someone you found physically imposing are low, whereas I guarantee you that it’s something every woman has experienced millions of times since puberty.
But trust me when I say that being ogled by strangers is uncomfortable at best.
I’m not saying that Howard or any other teen should be ashamed of his hormones — but I am saying that he and every straight guy should be encouraged to exercise a little more self-control in public and reminded that women are in fact people with feelings to be respected, not just mannequins with body parts for his perusal. The height of heterosexual masculinity should be recognized as giving a woman fully consensual pleasure as a good partner, rather than tricking as many as possible into “giving it up”.
(I specify straight rather than “straight and bi” because this isn’t actually a DUDE thing, it’s a straight dude thing and especially a straight white dude thing; other flavors of dude are more cautious with expressions of their sexuality, largely because of fear. Straight white dudes can literally get away with murder compared to the rest of us. Privilege in yet another form.) (But gay dudes are not always great at recognizing women as valuable human beings either, for the further depressing record.)
Niether are Black dudes. As one myself I am constantly disturbed by the portrayal of women by many african americans. I find it kinda gross, tbh. Like I like sexy things a bunch. Granted I never really act on it at least socially cuz I’m kinda shy and afraid to to talk and communicate with people I find attractive (WAAAAAAAAY TOO MANY BAD EXPERIENCES). I just hate when women are generalized into bongoes and hoes. I wish there were more men generalized as boy-candy and man-hoes. It just feels uncomfortable to be on the opressive side of the discrimination (granted I guess the constant knowledge that I too am discrimated against is not any better). I don’t like making a woman just boobs and butts when I see them which is why I don’t like to write my characters like that. They’re just people who happen to have rockin’ bods. (also gay guys never cat call me. Clearly I need to work out some. At least it might boost my self esteem a bit….or lower it assuming they think I’m gay. Not that there’s anything wr- I’m rambling)
Heh, I’m talking more in terms of interacting with women. I find that the non white boy version of cat calling is much more “make eye contact, smile, say some variation of ‘how’s it going?’ ” and less demanding attention from women who aren’t looking at them.
A lot of attention gets paid to for example misogyny in rap lyrics, though, so they do get called out on it; meanwhile misogyny in country songs or boy band lyrics or anything where the artists we know are predominantly white gets a big ole pass. (Disclaimer: it might also be subtler when it’s in the top ten on the radio, less name calling more celebrating the Nice Guy Friendzone fairy tale, but we don’t hear about it at ALL.)
So again not saying misogyny in rap music isn’t a problem but I think it gets a disproportional amount of attention due partly to racism.
Meanwhile gay dudes have a tendency to invade female personal space and touch us because, according to self-reflection from gay guys, they aren’t attracted to us so it’s okay. This includes what is essentially groping but also unsolicited fashion advice etc.
I don’t know where you live, but I can say, Non-white boy catcalling tends to be dirty and sometimes agressive. No offence to my people, but I see a lot of us dissrespecting women cuz we can.
I’ve been busy all weekend and have been itching to respond to this the first chance I got. Hopefully not everyone has moved on to the next thread.
“[…] reminded that women are in fact people with feelings to be respected, not just mannequins with body parts for his perusal. The height of heterosexual masculinity should be recognized as giving a woman fully consensual pleasure as a good partner, rather than tricking as many as possible into ‘giving it up.'”
I really think I need to start a blog about what romantic/sexual pursuits should be for heterosexual males. This part of your post is something that TOO MANY GODDAMN SO-CALLED “MEN” FORGET OR DON’T KNOW IN THE FIRST PLACE. Whether it’s shallow players or the fucking little boys afflicted with the “nice guy” syndrome, too many guys forget that the target of their pursuits are people as well.
I agree the the height of heterosexual masculinity is giving *consensual* pleasure as a good partner. To add to that, I think also about providing a sense of safety to the point where a woman isn’t afraid of you, your intentions, or what you might do if you’re blown off. Successfully getting across that you’re genuinely non-threatening is one of the most important aspects when interacting with a woman in romantic contexts. I love talking to women. Each woman (and person, honestly, but I have much more interest in women than men) is fascinating to get to know. Even though I’m settled down now I can’t stop talking to women. It’s no longer with romantic hopes, but it’s still a rush to me to have a woman lower her guard and just be herself with me and–most importantly–to know that their trust in me is not and never will be misplaced because I will respect them at all times.
But if they didn’t want to be bothered by me? I take it in stride. Don’t throw a goddamn hissy fit about it. It makes you come off creepy as hell and dangerous. And I never approached one if it looked like she was busy. Protip: if a woman is reading a book or has headphones on in a public place, they probably don’t want to talk to you. Doesn’t matter how nice or interesting you think you are or how much you think she would be interested in hearing what you want to say if only she’d give you a chance.
Don’t be surprised if they rebuff you and go back to what they were doing–how would you like it if you were interrupted? I get irritated as hell if I’m interrupted playing my 3DS while waiting for an oil change or when eating a meal because I’m much more interested in what I’m doing than talking to people. Rearranging my house in Animal Crossing takes effort, dammit. I wouldn’t want to interrupt anyone else’s groove.
OK, there are rare times when I did interrupt a woman. The *only* time I did that was when I saw a woman reading alone at a Chili’s in an airport and I was alone and reading a book too. I took a look at what she was reading, it was familiar (I can’t remember what it was right now, though, since it was a long time ago), prompted her that I was familiar with the book and hoped she was enjoying it. She said that she was, appreciated that someone else knew it and liked it, then went back to her book and meal–I did the same. I would’ve picked up the conversation if she wanted to keep going, but she immediately went back to her food. Body language here was important. I knew I was interrupting her, so I made sure she knew I was just as interested in returning to my book/meal as she was. I didn’t put the book down like I was expecting a talk. I kept it mostly up to send the message that I wasn’t going to try and engage her beyond my initial statement/question–we both had things we were doing. It was to let her know “Here is a statement. Do with it what you like, but this is just as much a show of solidarity in a shared interest as anything else.”
She did nothing with it and that was the end of it. I hoped my body language conveyed what I wanted to convey. If it did, great. If not and she thought I was a creep? I can’t really help that. Why?
“It’s super uncomfortable to know that the guy who calls out ‘Where you going, gorgeous?’ is almost always one step away from ‘Stupid rude bongo, I paid you a COMPLIMENT, how dare you ignore me?'”
It happens. It’s happened to my girlfriend. It’s happened to my other girlfriends, my flings, my friends, my friends with benefits, etc. Just because I am not vile does not mean that other men are not vile. Before I was slightly miffed that women would automatically assume that of that me even though I wouldn’t ever do any of the things they feared of me in a worst-case scenario. But, again, I don’t live in their world. The sorts of things that happen to them do not happen to me. I never have to worry about such things. They do.
Which is why, in my mind, providing a genuine, safe atmosphere is one of the best things a man can provide for any woman he comes across. Part of that is taking “no” as an answer, big or small. THAT is the height of heterosexual masculinity to me.
This was a beautiful comment and I want to thank you for adding it but also for what you are doing. Agreed 100%.
I think the airport woman, though she probably looked cool on the outside, was a little nervous as she turned back to her book — but I also think that you letting the matter drop probably made her day. Specifically made it just a little bit less scary to be talked to be a strange dude.
In addition to everything else, we have also been socialized to feel like we are being horribly rude if we actually indicate that we don’t want to talk and afraid of being rude; I once read a great codifying quote that went something like, “There’s this fantasy in America that a real lady should be able to deftly maneuver her way through any social situation without resorting to rudeness, that we should be able to reject a man’s advances so masterfully that he never even knows he was rejected but still moves on peaceably. These masterful manipulators can escape any situation without ever raising their voices or letting their smiles falter. And a woman who can’t, well, she was never a real lady, and so does not deserve to be treated as one.” Naturally this last part means you deserve to be harassed/verbally abused/sexually assaulted, which is what makes this expectation so excruciatingly nasty.
And women all feel that pressure, all the time, so those of us who have not forcefully rejected it and those of us who don’t feel we can try desperately to ignore cat calls because pretending not to hear it is the politest thing we can do.
We have also been taught to take harassment in silence because “boys will be boys”; from a very very early age, we are all taught that it doesn’t matter who “started something” and that the person who defends themselves is just as bad as the aggressor. From a young age girls are also taught to be careful how they dress and not allowed to go topless in public even as small children; there are awful anecdotes from all over the country about sexist dress codes that don’t let girls wear skirts or shorts in the summer and otherwise pull them aside and try to make them feel responsible for their male peers’ inability to concentrate, and — worse still — for distracting their male teachers. The onus is always on us to watch what we wear, lest a guy with no self-control be affected by it, and it fills you with so much shame and depression and fear.
So — again: thank you for your words and your daily effort. I guarantee you that every woman’s life around you is made a tiny bit better by your work, even if they don’t consciously notice it, and that is no small thing.
Just seeing what you’ve added to FAQ Willis and I have to ask… why does Joyce not being Catholic have to do with believing in saints? Or do catholics place more emphasis on them and I’m not aware of this?
Catholics are the ones that have saints (and saint days and saint names and all of that). Protestants don’t believe in saints, in the sense of people-the-pope-declared-to-be-holier-than-human. Some Protestants (Church of God in Christ, is one group) call all the church members “saints,” but that’s a totally different thing.
Us non-religious tend to get confused about the differences between Protestantism, Catholicism, and Orthodoxy, but basically saints uniquely belong to the latter two. Protestants (the vast majority of them, at least) consider the very idea of saints to be idolatry. I think the idea is that they believe praying to something is the same as worshiping something, and so Protestants see saints as being akin to polytheism and ancestor worship.
I am Protestant so I think I’d know this. Maybe it’s different in america? I’ve celebrated St. George’s day as part of the Church of England plenty of times. I’ve never encountered anyone at church who considers the saints as some form of worship to other idols. So I’m guessing it’s just different in America then.
St George is a National Saint, so celebrating him in church is prolly something that started when the country was all Catholic then we held on to it ‘cos it was a good excuse for a party/celebration and Henry VIII is known for liking his food.
This is just a theory, but it sounds somewhat logical to me.
The CofE (and the Anglican Communion in general) is a lot closer to the Roman Catholic Church in most things than most Protestant denominations – to the point that it’s a bit of an internal argument whether Anglicanism is Protestant or something different from both Catholic and Protestant. There are even some who argue that it’s actually a Catholic church that’s gone through some reforms. (The fact that they didn’t really break away due to any doctrinal differences, but rather Henry VIII disagreeing with the Pope on whether certain exceptions applied to him, certainly argues for the ‘not Protestant’ interpretations.)
Loading ...
Just the hat. The wrist cuffs can stay.
Also the shirt.
I LOVE that shirt. The shirt is awesome.
No matter where I go, her boobs keep staring at me…
HEY! MY EYES ARE…down here?
I always feel like her boobs are watching me~
Sorry, I’ll show myself out.
You know what? Might as well lose the shirt… BECAUSE OF THE EYES! YEAH, THE EYES!!
The hat covers the head in an ungodly way. D: 😀
If she’s praying or prophesying, then no, not according to 1 Corinthians 11:5-6.
According to that passage, women who pray with their heads uncovered should have their heads shaved.
Hmmm… I wonder why you never hear a sermon about that in church? 😉
Because the passage concerns Roman/Greek culture at the time instead of anything that applies to modern society and most Pastors are aware of that. and/or you’ve clearly never been to a strict Mennonite service have you?
I live in Pennsylvania. We have tons of Amish and Mennonite groups around here. But you do have a good point that at least a few groups follow that part of the Bible.
On the other hand, I don’t see the part where the Bible says that restriction only applies to that time period and/or location. This just seems to be more of the typical “Bible Buffet” mentality, where you invent excuses so you can pick and choose what Biblical morals you’d like to apply or ignore. 😛
Wait until she idolizes her first dong, and then starts buying synthetic in multi-size/function!?! What’s the book say about THAT?!?
Burn the clothes, too, just to be sure.
Well back to bibliolatry then.
Wow, that was….quick.
See, now I’m not sure if Sarah is just being mean or slightly nudging Joyce along.
She can be doing both.
Sarah isn’t trying to do anything. She’s just there being a giant windmill of logic Joyce can’t help but take a tilt at Don Quixote style. If that makes any sense.
My initial thought was “Jeez, Sarah, you can’t just let anybody enjoy anything or just be, can you?”
I’d say this is why she’s never invited to parties, but she wouldn’t care. 😛
So, she’s a Stop Having Fun Gal?
Nahhhhhh, I don’t think she’s that specifically. She’s nowhere NEAR as bad as that. Those guys think you’re just wrong for having fun with something they want you to take seriously. Sarah doesn’t really care about what people do but, at the same time, she seems to think everything not related to studies is stupid. So she’ll just poke holes or whatever into what someone else is doing if it happens to come up. She doesn’t mean it maliciously and probably doesn’t even mean to do it. It’s just that she can’t help but comment.
The thing is that a lot of stuff we do is stupid or at least viewed as unimportant to at least one person in the world, so holes can be poked into anything if you looked hard enough and cared to comment. She just can’t keep her mouth shut about it.
So she’s the straight man (comedy term) to everybody?
Guess so.
Well that’s a shame. I have no use for a straight man!
Wait, you said that was a comedy term… nevermind.
If she’s the straight man, then who’s the Leader (comedy term as well), and the Minion? (Pokemon #132)
I’m sure she’d like to see her maudlin horse-hockey as such. Can’t say I agree, though…
I don’t think Sarah (who, full disclosure, is my favorite character) is a killjoy. I think she values intellectual rigor, both in herself and in others. And when she encounters someone who could be more rigorous, she wants to help them out. That’s a far cry from someone intentionally out to make people unhappy.
Right, but in her “helping the out” it just kills their joy. Like above. I don’t think she intentionally means to do what she does either. For as smart as she thinks she is or as much as she derides people engaging in stupid drama, she’s incredibly socially inept in her own way. She just doesn’t realize that people like stupid things and wants to indulge in them and is bad at vocalizing her views on it in a way that doesn’t get people to look at her with arched eyebrows.
I think my favorite strip of hers was when she was angry that Joyce doubted her liking Sarah when she had previously saved Joyce from the date-rapist. Joyce pointed out that, while it’s nice to be shown appreciation in big ways like that, smaller and more consistent gestures are also very much appreciated and desired. Sarah got a look on her like she saw merit in what Joyce said and realized she needed to be better about that sort of thing.
Sarah’s got the big picture down pretty well, but it’s the little things that’d improve her flow that she’s missing. More strips like the one I just mentioned will help with that.
Interesting. I wonder if I like Sarah because I see a lot of her in myself.
Well, I wouldn’t be surprised! We generally like characters we see ourselves in! Makes it fun! 😀
Sarah has alarming codependency issues. Along with chronic victim mentality behavior and self-martyrdom, people like Sarah tend push their defeatist reasoning on others. Danny simply drives people away, but with Sarah, especially since she’s still to involved with the likes of Raidah…..Outlook not so good.
How does she have codependency issues exactly? Victim mentality and self-martyrdom I could potentially see, but that doesn’t really support “codependency”. She’s a very independent person; the only time she does anything social is when someone else bugs her to do so. She doesn’t seem to need someone else’s compliments or validations to go on. I think you need to choose a different word than codependency?
Okay Joyce, while you’re burning your graven images, collect up all your crosses, crucifixes, and pictures of Jesus! They violate that commandment too.
^_^
Oh, that’ll go over well. Joyce would be horrified at the thought of burning her crosses, crucifixes, and whatnot on the day her parents are arriving for a visit. They may drag her to an exorcism!
On the other hand, according to a few Born-Agains that I know, the cross and depictions of Jesus aren’t in violation of the first (or in their minds second*) commandment, as they aren’t – in their minds – false idols.
It’s Islam that’s “no idols whatsoever!”.
* according to Roman Catholics, Anglicans, and Lutherans, the first reads “You shall have no god before me, nor shall you worship false idols”, splitting the coveting clauses of “Don’t covet your neighbor’s possessions” and “don’t cover your neighbor’s wife” into the ninth and tenth. Baptists, Methodists, and other “reformed” or “born again” Protestant sects split the false idols into the second and mash the coveting clauses together.
Actually, how do Protestants view that kind of thing? I know they they don’t like statues and the like, but are things like paintings, crosses, and crucifixes okay?
From my experience as an ex-evangelical, I know they see crosses and paintings as fine, but crucifixes are a no-no because they’re “Catholic”. Their thinking is that a crucifix represents the dead Jesus, whilst a bare cross represents the resurrected Jesus. Thus, they say that Catholics don’t believe in the power of the resurrection by having crucifixes.
Don’t recall they went into that in-depth analysis in Sunday School, but that sounds right to me, and my original Lutheran upbringing.
We had a big shiny silvery cross hanging from the ceiling at the front of the church, but no bleeding corpse to terrify small children with.
On the other hand, other denominations were never mentioned or discussed, much less anything comparative or competitive; Until I was fully an adult, we were all one big happy Christian family for all I’d been taught.
“They” never said anything about Catholics in any sermon or service I attended, good or bad. I can see that argument coming up in a debate of “why do we do this in this way and not the other” but wouldn’t presume to say what Catholics believed or don’t.
I can sort of appreciate the idea though. Is it better to worship the Teacher and pass on his lessons, or sing praises to a mutilated, miserable-looking body dangling from the ceiling (that we tell confused and frightened children is going to come back from the dead and walk the earth any moment now)?
For some reason I keep thinking W.W.J.D… if he came back, walked into what’s supposedly “His house” and saw a nearly-nude depiction of the most painful and humiliating moment of his previous existence enshrined in life-sized realism while a couple hundred people all praise this image of torture.
WWJD? Probably turn beet red, scowl, and storm out of the church, shouting “you people are SICK!” over his shoulder. “I told you guys to pray to my Father, not… not THIS!”
Heh… but back to the subject of not worshiping golden/false idols, whichever commandment you consider that. Even a simple cross is a symbol, and icon, an idol; a representation of someone other than God. Pretty sure it counts the same as a golden calf.
I need to put “Joyce isn’t Catholic” into the FAQ, apparently.
Iconoclasm was really only a Byzantine thing though?
Like, in the Byzantine Empire they were worried that commoners were worshiping the paintings and junk (their only way to understand the teachings in the Bible since most of them couldn’t read and priests only gave sermons in poor Latin which no one spoke (there are a lot of texts in latin written by priests that prove that with the exception of the Pope and Bishops, by the point people cared about religious icons maybe being idolatry, priests did not actually know latin and they mostly bullshitted it).
I mean most denominations only care if the icon or whatever is nonChristian (a la The Golden Calf in the film Dogma). Worship of a brand like Dexter & Monkey Master counts, but unless you’re Eastern Orthodox or a really really conservative protestant denomination, things like paintings, crosses, etc, are generally seen to help facilitate worship, a connection to god.
Tl;dr – unless you are literally worshiping the object and not the deity it represents, chances are no one is gonna give a shit. (“Holy shit man my crucifix is going to change the world!” – no one ever)
And Joyce is really easy to manipulate.
One step forward two steps back.
One step left and two steps right.
One jump up and two jumps down.
It’s just a jump to the left and a step to the right.
up up down down left right left right B A start
Cha cha now y’all. Cha cha again. Go to work.
It’s electric!
you put your left foot in and you shake it all around
Now spin around and feel the groove!
Do the hustle!
Every goddamn HS dance… and every event I’ve been to with a live DJ… Ugh.
As a DJ myself I can tell you that when we get hired for private events we essentially have to play these “theme” songs or else said client gets very pissy. I don’t enjoy it and I apologize for all the auditory torture.
DoomMoose: I have vowed that if ever I marry, there will be three songs absolutely forbidden at the reception: the Hokey Pokey, the Chicken Dance, and the Electric Slide (okay, I guess both versions means it’s four songs forbidden). Few things make an awkward reception where everyone refuses to dance (until, for some reason, I start dancing) even more awkward are these musical atrocities.
*even more awkward than
It’s late. Somewhere, anyway.
With your hands on your hips/And bring your knees in ti-i-ight!
But it’s the pelvic thrust that really drives you insane.
I have done this collection of dance instructions. I am convinced this is the new dance sensation that will sweep the nation.
I think “The Walky” is a good name for it.
But it has a name already…
Let’s do the time warp again!
I’m assuming Wensleydale means the combined disco steps from the entire run of this reply string, not just the time warp bit, in which case i say video or it never happened 😛
Also: Is Joyce now gonna take off all her clothes? *winkwink*
This isn’t about allegiances. It’s about sending a message. Everything burns.
And some people have flame throwers and wish to use them.
Some people just want to watch the hats burn.
I love the smell of napalm in the morning.
Shame on you Sarah, manipulating Joyce, poorly, through her religion.
It wouldn’t be the first time someone has manipulated her.
…oh damn, ow.
Wait, trying to recall….
At the party… Remember??
Let me guess, it involves a party.
Y’all assume I meant the worst, but I didn’t particurally mean that particular event.
OK, if it’s not that, I’m guessing it involves a hug?
Moreso it involved a beard.
Are you talking about His beard? Because I’m pretty sure that was her driving the situation.
Ethan kinda didn’t tell her he was gay and strung her along for at least a week if not longer.
*is still stringing her along.
Unless I missed something.
You are, Inkwell. He confessed his gayness to Joyce after he was basically forced to, because Amber discovered the charade. Then both he and Joyce decided they’d try to make it work anyway because this is DUMBing of Age.
Now that you mention it…that kinda makes it even worse.
Joyce is a terrible Christian. Mainly because she didn’t snap back with a line about how she’s not WORSHIPING them. Not like she made a gold statue of them and pray to them every night.
On a side note, I have to attend to something in Joyce’s closet as a personal favour to her. Good day.
It depends on your definition of “worship.” Cladding yourself head to toe in the regalia of a cartoon show could easily fall within those margins, depending on who you ask.
I definitely worried about liking Transformers too much as a teenager, for that very reason. Anything you like too much in place of God could be considered “worshiping,” and these were some very hardcore Christians I hung around who shared that view.
Well, Optimus Prime did have that whole Jesus vibe going for him.
I dunno. He was no Aslan.
Yeah but Prime died for your sins….or was it because of someone cheating in a video game?
IDK about you, but Dinobot dies for *my* sins.
I thought Dinobot died for HIS sins. And so we could have a stick with a rock in it.
Megatron is the Antichrist.
If I recall correctly, I think Optimus also committed suicide. Twice. Reasoning was unfortunate at best and downright idiotic at worst.
PS: So this means every cosplayer ever is hardcore into the first sin. Did these people ever SEE a convention?
He died for your sins!
The key is in place of. Like, you know, not praying to God, but praying to Optimus. Besides, up until these modern times, how would you be able to dress yourself in clothing that shows your love for God?
Actually, it’d be easy to dress that way.
Wear humble simple cheap clothes. Don’t buy too many of them and don’t spend time on your appearance.
My favorite part of this message is the part where we were not supposed to have churches, because the best place to pray is outside, in God’s church, but if you MUST have churches they are supposed to be small and humble with nothing expensive in their construction and no steps leading up to them. Church was supposed to be the opposite of the intimidating grandiose place it is, and no one seems to notice it.
We’re all basically the idiot at the end of Indiana and the Last Crusade, picking out the gold and jewel-encrusted challace because we think we know better than God what venerates him, and no matter how often both God and Jesus tell us that
money is worthless
money is evil
rich people will NEVER get into Heaven
you should give away all your possessions
we still think we are worshiping God gloriously with our stained glass palaces and our gold crosses etc etc.
If anything in the Bible is true, no one is going to more Hell than the folks calling themselves Christian.
Minor correction: Rich people can still be good people, it’s just VERY HARD, because they tend to get really attached to all that money such that it becomes their false idol. A rich person is still good if he does good things with the money instead of hoarding it, and keeps the perspective that “it’s not MY money, it’s just something God has entrusted me to do good with” (see the parable of the three servants). If he isn’t willing to give it all away should God call him to, he’s lost that perspective.
No, rich people can’t. “It is easier for a camel to fit through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter Heaven.”
People have tried to twist that shit around because “oh there’s a gate into Jerusalem called ‘Eye of the Needle’ and people can bring camels through it if they go down on their knees so it’s hard but not impossible! You just need humility!”
Bullshit, that is a metaphor and it was mistranslated. The original was to get rope or cable through the eye of a needle. In other words, something physically impossible.
Yeah, Jesus preached mostly to the poor, and when he came across folks with money who were interested in him, he’d ask them to give it all away. Some did (Matthew) and some didn’t (a guy who sadly walked away). Jesus expected you to own basically nothing.
Yeah but he didn’t really mean any of that! The most important part if being Christian is hating gay people and making sure to ban abortion. (Fun fact: the Bible actually contains what is essentially a recipe for an old timey version of the morning after pill.)
*of
*phone typos are the universe’s way for punishing me for getting too smug in my sarcasm 🙁
Unrelated, but everytime I see you post on his comics I want to have a conversation with you. You sound edumacated and smart and such.
D’aww thanks! I like talking to you for the record 🙂 Your comments are among the ones that always make me smile. And you’re a very talented artist too.
Do you have a skype or a tumblr or some such way to just chat about junk?
My tumblr is rainfelt.tumblr.com, and I do teeeechnically have a Skype but I never use it. 🙂 AIM is suicidalchime (which I always feel compelled to explain is a Silent Hill reference, “Suicidal Clock Chime” was too long).
Well someone’s going to feel really awkward now no matter what happens.
Nah, he message’d me. S’all good.
I think that’s what Sarah expected her to say. But it seems Joyce is about as fond of half-measures as Mike Ehrmantraut.
Mike Ehrmantraut is fine with half-measures. He was the one pushing the team to switch to a pseudo cook when they didn’t have enough methylamine to cook the High Quality Product that Walt was used to.
Walt is the dangerous one here, he’s definitely not a fan of half-measures.
I do love the fact that I got to see a Breaking Bad reference on here though, so thanks for that <3
It’s like Joyce’s hair was born with that shape in preparation for a hat. As the scrolls foretold.
The universe was anticipating her wearing that hat.
If she ever gets her mitts on Dina’s hat, she will be unstoppable!
DinaxJoyce again? It could work…
I would have burnt the shirt instead of the hat and any resulting fanservice counts as a bonus.
Hmmm…Is Sarah ruining it, or saving us all? It is good to see Joyce less religious-y, but that outfit is all sorts of ridiculous.
Yeah, it makes that cardboard Gundam costume looked less ridiculous by comparison.
Tell that to FLEXO-bot we had up here in Canada about 12 years back.
Yeah, see, I’ve never really gotten that logic. Wearing clothes proclaiming you as a fan of something are bad?
Yes, since God wants ALL your love. It’s perfectly okay that he loves everyone, but he wants the relationship to me exclusive on our side.
God did say he’s a jealous god. At least he’s honest.
“Well you are gresat and all, but I think we should make this an open marriage mkay? Well from my side at least. You stay faithful to me or I strike you down with a lightning.” – The greatest Boyfriend ever.
He’s also invisible and gets mad if you touch yourself at night.
Also he’s doing your mom with your dad’s penis. CLASSY.
FOR I AM THE LORD THY GOD, THOU SHALT HAVE NO OTHER GOD BEFORE ME.
First commandment, meaning the moral rule that God cares about more than any other*, is that God HAS to be the most important thing in your life. Joyce was focused on something else for like 3 seconds, so clearly she’s a horrible person and needs to fix that immediately.
Poor Joyce, her parents really did a number on her.
*Note how this isn’t about rape or murder or being a decent person, just about God being insecure, but that’s a different discussion.
God is kind of protrayed as an attention whore.Granted I guess we owe him something for the whole…making us exist thing. But it’s basically like your mom getting mad because you have a new girlfriend.
Well, you don’t have the same kind of relationship (hopefully).
No, not getting mad, MURDERING YOU. FOREVER.
God’s like Joyce – he’s not into the doing-things-by-halves thing.
God is pretty murder-happy, actually. After the Golden Calf debacle, He said that He was going to leave the Israelites for a bit because He literally didn’t trust himself not to kill them all they piss Him off so much.
And that was with His chosen people.
Imagine what he does with the people he doesn’t like!
Oh wait, we have, like, half a book about that, never mind.
Also that fun part about sicking bears on children for insulting one of his priests. And the children didn’t get away just with a scratch or life-long trauma… nah, that just wouldn’t do.
Also that time he punk’d Abraham into nearly killing his own son.
At least he was consistently a dick in the Old Testament.
You knew what to expect and when to properly piss yourself in fear. New Testament version seems to have gotten consistently laid and suddenly decided he woves everyone lots. He promptly dropped the ‘His people’ routine and decided he was everyone’s skydaddy/pimp/abusiveboyfriend now. Complete with mandatory roofies made from… HIMSELF (or child/Clark Kent persona).
If it they wouldn’t be so horrifying, those books would be comedy GOLD.
Given the choice between D&MM obsessed Joyce and Jesus obsessed Joyce, I’d probably still rather see the sweater vest than that gaudy outfit.
Jealous and vengeful, ‘specially in the Old Testament.
He’s done a lot of growin’ up. Sendin’ your kid off into the world will do that to ya.
Every shirt should have boobrows….
…no…. JUST NO!
And the sad thing is, someone’s going to make it.
I would but I’m pretty lazy.
I don’t need more hair on my chest, thank you very much.
well… but there they are. AND HOORAY!
Sarah is not ‘trying to ruin Joyce’s fun’ I don’t think. She is not overly religious herself and may just be asking a serious question. (Like I asked last night). She’s giving her opinion, and I agree: this obsession is a wee better than the ‘Jesus Thing’, at least she’s not preaching.
Track back on Joyce, she really doesn’t do anything by half, and she doesn’t stop doing what she wants to do either, I.E. Ethan.
When she wants something bad enough, no body can convince her otherwise-she wants the cartoon show, so she gives up the hat. And this is doing what, exactly? She still has that hideous shirt.
I don’t think she’s all that easily manipulated, I think she’s a drama queen.
Joyce should ditch the shirt and keep the hat. The hat’s kind of cute; the shirt’s just pure, unadulterated nightmare fuel.
The boob-eyes are kind of funny though.
Go back and look at yesterday’s strip. The PANTS are clearly the most hideous part of Joyce’s ensemble. The shirt is #2, but the pants are most certainly the worst.
Honestly Sarah’s doing her a favor. That’s not really Joyce’s color scheme any way.
What would Joyce do with the ashes of the hat? Put them in a baggy, carry them around like some sort of good luck charm, use it to ward off evil spirits and hunt demons?
…Wait. There was a point to that.
Aww, Sarah’s actually being affectionate this time. I really like the two of them in this universe.
Sarah cares about Joyce. She may be sarcastic and sardonic as shit, but she’s shown many times that she’s a good friend when it comes to the important stuff.
“what… you mean i can have my cake and eat it too if i only take half? LUNACY!”
Nooo! Give the hat away if you must! Walky could take it as a peace offering, or Ethan as an awkward several-days-anniversary gift, maybe?
Sarah is somewhat unlikable for me. It seems like she sees exuberance and enthusiasm of any kind as irksome, and I don’t find her very witty. As a result, she isn’t too entertaining. Could provide good plot developments, though.
Heh, you should see what she was like in the original universe. This Sarah is friendly, outgoing and enthusiastic compaired to her. XD
There have been Monkey Master tags without Dexter. Particularly the strips after Dorothy collected the toy Walky threw at her head.
I feel like this ensemble is a blessing for cosplayers. It is now possible to dress up as Joyce in something more unique than sweater vests!
Don’t do it, Joyce! Keep the hat for the cosplayers!
“But isn’t there a thing in the ten commandments about, you know, idolatry?”
*waves crucifix” “Yes, but we ignore that one!”
Iconography and Idolatry are not the same thing!
Do you want another great Schism man!?!
Insert usual joke here about Historical Jesus showing up and being horrified that everyone’s wearing little replicas of the apparatus he spent the last hours of his mortal life being tortured to death on.
Kinda like wearing a little electric chair on a chain, isn’t it?
Wait…
I would SO do that.
So would I! I’d be all “Hah, that’s what they TRIED and it clearly didn’t take. Give it your A-game next time, puny mortals!”
I’m rooting for this to become another DoA meme.
Joyce wouldn’t have a crucifix 😕 As a general rule of thumb, and with some exceptions, crucifixes are Catholic – crosses are Protestant (the difference is whether Jesus is being crucified in the image – in which case it’s a crucifix). Protestants (like Joyce) argue that crucifixes are idols and crosses are icons; Catholics argue that the crucifix is also an icon, and one that has more meaning.
But Protestants and Catholics will argue to hell and back about the damn things, so…
Catholic, certain Orthodox factions, Coptic, Lutheran, various other protestants. Catholics are the big crucifix fans, but they are far from the only ones.
I forgot Anglicans and Methodists.
The entire point of Jesus coming to Earth was for him to die for our sins, or at least that’s what I’ve been told.
Seriously, “Joyce isn’t Catholic” is going in the FAQ.
And when you say “Not catholic” you mean to say that she is Russian Orthodox right?
Of course Joyce isn’t Catholic. She’s totally a Jehovah’s Witness.
I don’t think people think she’s Catholic so much as Catholic imagery is the most readily available mental data for most people, so a lot of stuff that is specifically Catholic comes up as just vanilla Christian for them.
If that makes any sense.
That’s true for me. I didn’t even know crusifixes were a catholic thing. I mean, is a crusifix different from a cross? I know plenty of non-catholics who wear crosses.
Crucifix shows Jesus nailed to it. Cross is just the cross itself.
Also, crucifixes tend to have more detail on the cross itself. Like it looks more like the actual crucifixion tool. Vanilla crosses are more just symbols of Christianity in general, so they tend to be just two intersecting lines or blocks.
Yeah, See when I hear Crucifix, I just think cross, So I can’t be sure the OP intended for the little Jesus to be nailed to it. This is a problem when you have a religion that branches off into so many little subsections. Like calling someone black when they’re actually Brazillian. Without asking it’d be difficult to know but it’s probably a touchy subject for them. I know people assume I’m jamaican sometimes because of my hair.
Well maybe if SOMEBODY had gotten off their high horse about indulgences in the 16th century, we’d be a little more cohesive for you!
If Jesus isn’t attached (fixed) to the cross (crux), it’s not a crucifix.
Specifically Catholic things that most protestant groups don’t do (As with all things, there are exceptions):
Crucifix
Transubstantiative Eucharist.
Fancy robes on the priest.
On that note: Priest Collars (Did meet a Lutheran Priest that had one once)
(Hell, a lot of Protestant groups don’t use the word “Priest” at all, in favor of minister or reverend or some such thing)
The Sacrament of Reconciliation.
To a lesser degree, the Sacraments in General (Though most groups still have a Baptismal and Marital Rite, as well as some variation on the Anointing of the Sick.)
Rosary.
Saints.
Pope.
But do they still have funny hats? Otherwise, what’s the point if they don’t have funny hats?
Another day, another new flavor of crazy for Joyce.
Joyce likes to keep it fresh.
Not the haaaaaat~
Always a little sad how many people make jokes about stuff like ripping off a girl’s shirt without her consent without even thinking about what they’re saying.
Maybe that was some deleted post I didn’t see? I’ve only seen posts suggesting that she should (willingly) rip off her *own* shirt, thereby to initiate the burnage. And there’s a *huge* difference between that and a lack of consent.
There was also something about lighting her shirt on fire instead of the hat. It was unclear if the shirt would still be on her or not, but that’s a whole other jar of worms.
Yeah, only not really? Street harassment is in the same vein (“show me your boobs” is technically also a suggestion that you remove your own shirt). (And yes men have said that to me on the street. Starting when I was twelve, because lucky me I “bloomed” early.)
Basically Joyce would never willingly remove her own shirt, and lately my skin has been worn kind of thin by the objectifying in comments here and at ShortPacked. It’s sad that this is a progressive space, and I STILL can’t escape comment sections dominated by discussion of female characters’ bodies even when they are doing nothing remotely sexy.
(Sal posing during the beach post or being hot on her motorcycle: fair game. Appreciating Ethan’s new haircut or Jacob’s shirtlessness: fair game. Saying Joyce should strip and show us the goods just because she took off a silly hat: depressing. The number of people who thought Howard’s gross staring at Billie was justified: depressing.)
(Seriously he is SIXTEEN. That is way too old to pretend he can’t have been taught about basic human boundaries. I don’t care how much of a nerd he is, unless he has genuine developmental problems he should have been discouraged harshly. Instead everyone thinks it’s fine.)
(And yeah they were joking, but a lot of jokes we make reflect the things we really think but don’t feel able to say without our shields up. Humor is not an iron-clad defense.)
Sorry to get all srs bzns. Like I said, worn thin. Straws and camel’s backs and all that jazz. It’s been a rough like year for ladies. Can’t even get a damn Wonder Woman movie, ugh.
Even I, who openly draws pretty hot and heavy stuff was a bit perturbed. I love dirty jokes. I was raised on them. But after a bit it stops bein’ funny and starts feelin’ creepy. I guess I can’t really defend the Howard thing without coming off creepy either. I dunno, I’ve always felt teenagers are horomone driven. I can vouch that most of my high school life was spent staring at boobs. I liked boobs, what can I say. Granted standing a few inches from aforementioned boobs in a daze may be creepy, but I can’t in all good concience act like it’s not something I would have done. I guess all I can see wrong is him being way close and sh.it and not trying to hide it. But I thought the joke was that it caught him off guard. I dunno. maybe I’m no better than anyone else. I just like boobs and lookin’ at ’em at a safe distance.
It’s fine to like boobs. I like them too. 😉 And for what it’s worth i have no problems with sex or sexiness or your art! But we have a real problem in our culture with dissociating “boobs” from “person they are attached to”, and that person has the right to not be stared at. You know?
This is especially true because being looked at sexually is very unsafe for women in this country. It literally scares me to be ogled because that sometimes leads to being followed and sometimes to being groped, and because not responding positively to being ogled gets you labeled a bongo really, really fast.
It’s super uncomfortable to know that the guy who calls out “Where you going, gorgeous?” is almost always one step away from “Stupid rude bongo, I paid you a COMPLIMENT, how dare you ignore me?”
I know this is hard to wrap your head around because dudes just don’t live in this world. The closest you can get is to imagine really big buff gay guys, but even then the odds that you’ve ever been cat called on the street by someone you found physically imposing are low, whereas I guarantee you that it’s something every woman has experienced millions of times since puberty.
But trust me when I say that being ogled by strangers is uncomfortable at best.
I’m not saying that Howard or any other teen should be ashamed of his hormones — but I am saying that he and every straight guy should be encouraged to exercise a little more self-control in public and reminded that women are in fact people with feelings to be respected, not just mannequins with body parts for his perusal. The height of heterosexual masculinity should be recognized as giving a woman fully consensual pleasure as a good partner, rather than tricking as many as possible into “giving it up”.
(I specify straight rather than “straight and bi” because this isn’t actually a DUDE thing, it’s a straight dude thing and especially a straight white dude thing; other flavors of dude are more cautious with expressions of their sexuality, largely because of fear. Straight white dudes can literally get away with murder compared to the rest of us. Privilege in yet another form.) (But gay dudes are not always great at recognizing women as valuable human beings either, for the further depressing record.)
Niether are Black dudes. As one myself I am constantly disturbed by the portrayal of women by many african americans. I find it kinda gross, tbh. Like I like sexy things a bunch. Granted I never really act on it at least socially cuz I’m kinda shy and afraid to to talk and communicate with people I find attractive (WAAAAAAAAY TOO MANY BAD EXPERIENCES). I just hate when women are generalized into bongoes and hoes. I wish there were more men generalized as boy-candy and man-hoes. It just feels uncomfortable to be on the opressive side of the discrimination (granted I guess the constant knowledge that I too am discrimated against is not any better). I don’t like making a woman just boobs and butts when I see them which is why I don’t like to write my characters like that. They’re just people who happen to have rockin’ bods. (also gay guys never cat call me. Clearly I need to work out some. At least it might boost my self esteem a bit….or lower it assuming they think I’m gay. Not that there’s anything wr- I’m rambling)
Heh, I’m talking more in terms of interacting with women. I find that the non white boy version of cat calling is much more “make eye contact, smile, say some variation of ‘how’s it going?’ ” and less demanding attention from women who aren’t looking at them.
A lot of attention gets paid to for example misogyny in rap lyrics, though, so they do get called out on it; meanwhile misogyny in country songs or boy band lyrics or anything where the artists we know are predominantly white gets a big ole pass. (Disclaimer: it might also be subtler when it’s in the top ten on the radio, less name calling more celebrating the Nice Guy Friendzone fairy tale, but we don’t hear about it at ALL.)
So again not saying misogyny in rap music isn’t a problem but I think it gets a disproportional amount of attention due partly to racism.
Meanwhile gay dudes have a tendency to invade female personal space and touch us because, according to self-reflection from gay guys, they aren’t attracted to us so it’s okay. This includes what is essentially groping but also unsolicited fashion advice etc.
I don’t know where you live, but I can say, Non-white boy catcalling tends to be dirty and sometimes agressive. No offence to my people, but I see a lot of us dissrespecting women cuz we can.
/sobs
I’ve been busy all weekend and have been itching to respond to this the first chance I got. Hopefully not everyone has moved on to the next thread.
“[…] reminded that women are in fact people with feelings to be respected, not just mannequins with body parts for his perusal. The height of heterosexual masculinity should be recognized as giving a woman fully consensual pleasure as a good partner, rather than tricking as many as possible into ‘giving it up.'”
I really think I need to start a blog about what romantic/sexual pursuits should be for heterosexual males. This part of your post is something that TOO MANY GODDAMN SO-CALLED “MEN” FORGET OR DON’T KNOW IN THE FIRST PLACE. Whether it’s shallow players or the fucking little boys afflicted with the “nice guy” syndrome, too many guys forget that the target of their pursuits are people as well.
I agree the the height of heterosexual masculinity is giving *consensual* pleasure as a good partner. To add to that, I think also about providing a sense of safety to the point where a woman isn’t afraid of you, your intentions, or what you might do if you’re blown off. Successfully getting across that you’re genuinely non-threatening is one of the most important aspects when interacting with a woman in romantic contexts. I love talking to women. Each woman (and person, honestly, but I have much more interest in women than men) is fascinating to get to know. Even though I’m settled down now I can’t stop talking to women. It’s no longer with romantic hopes, but it’s still a rush to me to have a woman lower her guard and just be herself with me and–most importantly–to know that their trust in me is not and never will be misplaced because I will respect them at all times.
But if they didn’t want to be bothered by me? I take it in stride. Don’t throw a goddamn hissy fit about it. It makes you come off creepy as hell and dangerous. And I never approached one if it looked like she was busy. Protip: if a woman is reading a book or has headphones on in a public place, they probably don’t want to talk to you. Doesn’t matter how nice or interesting you think you are or how much you think she would be interested in hearing what you want to say if only she’d give you a chance.
Don’t be surprised if they rebuff you and go back to what they were doing–how would you like it if you were interrupted? I get irritated as hell if I’m interrupted playing my 3DS while waiting for an oil change or when eating a meal because I’m much more interested in what I’m doing than talking to people. Rearranging my house in Animal Crossing takes effort, dammit. I wouldn’t want to interrupt anyone else’s groove.
OK, there are rare times when I did interrupt a woman. The *only* time I did that was when I saw a woman reading alone at a Chili’s in an airport and I was alone and reading a book too. I took a look at what she was reading, it was familiar (I can’t remember what it was right now, though, since it was a long time ago), prompted her that I was familiar with the book and hoped she was enjoying it. She said that she was, appreciated that someone else knew it and liked it, then went back to her book and meal–I did the same. I would’ve picked up the conversation if she wanted to keep going, but she immediately went back to her food. Body language here was important. I knew I was interrupting her, so I made sure she knew I was just as interested in returning to my book/meal as she was. I didn’t put the book down like I was expecting a talk. I kept it mostly up to send the message that I wasn’t going to try and engage her beyond my initial statement/question–we both had things we were doing. It was to let her know “Here is a statement. Do with it what you like, but this is just as much a show of solidarity in a shared interest as anything else.”
She did nothing with it and that was the end of it. I hoped my body language conveyed what I wanted to convey. If it did, great. If not and she thought I was a creep? I can’t really help that. Why?
“It’s super uncomfortable to know that the guy who calls out ‘Where you going, gorgeous?’ is almost always one step away from ‘Stupid rude bongo, I paid you a COMPLIMENT, how dare you ignore me?'”
It happens. It’s happened to my girlfriend. It’s happened to my other girlfriends, my flings, my friends, my friends with benefits, etc. Just because I am not vile does not mean that other men are not vile. Before I was slightly miffed that women would automatically assume that of that me even though I wouldn’t ever do any of the things they feared of me in a worst-case scenario. But, again, I don’t live in their world. The sorts of things that happen to them do not happen to me. I never have to worry about such things. They do.
Which is why, in my mind, providing a genuine, safe atmosphere is one of the best things a man can provide for any woman he comes across. Part of that is taking “no” as an answer, big or small. THAT is the height of heterosexual masculinity to me.
This was a beautiful comment and I want to thank you for adding it but also for what you are doing. Agreed 100%.
I think the airport woman, though she probably looked cool on the outside, was a little nervous as she turned back to her book — but I also think that you letting the matter drop probably made her day. Specifically made it just a little bit less scary to be talked to be a strange dude.
In addition to everything else, we have also been socialized to feel like we are being horribly rude if we actually indicate that we don’t want to talk and afraid of being rude; I once read a great codifying quote that went something like, “There’s this fantasy in America that a real lady should be able to deftly maneuver her way through any social situation without resorting to rudeness, that we should be able to reject a man’s advances so masterfully that he never even knows he was rejected but still moves on peaceably. These masterful manipulators can escape any situation without ever raising their voices or letting their smiles falter. And a woman who can’t, well, she was never a real lady, and so does not deserve to be treated as one.” Naturally this last part means you deserve to be harassed/verbally abused/sexually assaulted, which is what makes this expectation so excruciatingly nasty.
And women all feel that pressure, all the time, so those of us who have not forcefully rejected it and those of us who don’t feel we can try desperately to ignore cat calls because pretending not to hear it is the politest thing we can do.
We have also been taught to take harassment in silence because “boys will be boys”; from a very very early age, we are all taught that it doesn’t matter who “started something” and that the person who defends themselves is just as bad as the aggressor. From a young age girls are also taught to be careful how they dress and not allowed to go topless in public even as small children; there are awful anecdotes from all over the country about sexist dress codes that don’t let girls wear skirts or shorts in the summer and otherwise pull them aside and try to make them feel responsible for their male peers’ inability to concentrate, and — worse still — for distracting their male teachers. The onus is always on us to watch what we wear, lest a guy with no self-control be affected by it, and it fills you with so much shame and depression and fear.
So — again: thank you for your words and your daily effort. I guarantee you that every woman’s life around you is made a tiny bit better by your work, even if they don’t consciously notice it, and that is no small thing.
Li — two thumbs up. Thanks for venting. You speak for more than just yourself.
You’re welcome. Thank you for saying so.
Just seeing what you’ve added to FAQ Willis and I have to ask… why does Joyce not being Catholic have to do with believing in saints? Or do catholics place more emphasis on them and I’m not aware of this?
Catholics are the ones that have saints (and saint days and saint names and all of that). Protestants don’t believe in saints, in the sense of people-the-pope-declared-to-be-holier-than-human. Some Protestants (Church of God in Christ, is one group) call all the church members “saints,” but that’s a totally different thing.
Us non-religious tend to get confused about the differences between Protestantism, Catholicism, and Orthodoxy, but basically saints uniquely belong to the latter two. Protestants (the vast majority of them, at least) consider the very idea of saints to be idolatry. I think the idea is that they believe praying to something is the same as worshiping something, and so Protestants see saints as being akin to polytheism and ancestor worship.
I am Protestant so I think I’d know this. Maybe it’s different in america? I’ve celebrated St. George’s day as part of the Church of England plenty of times. I’ve never encountered anyone at church who considers the saints as some form of worship to other idols. So I’m guessing it’s just different in America then.
St George is a National Saint, so celebrating him in church is prolly something that started when the country was all Catholic then we held on to it ‘cos it was a good excuse for a party/celebration and Henry VIII is known for liking his food.
This is just a theory, but it sounds somewhat logical to me.
The CofE (and the Anglican Communion in general) is a lot closer to the Roman Catholic Church in most things than most Protestant denominations – to the point that it’s a bit of an internal argument whether Anglicanism is Protestant or something different from both Catholic and Protestant. There are even some who argue that it’s actually a Catholic church that’s gone through some reforms. (The fact that they didn’t really break away due to any doctrinal differences, but rather Henry VIII disagreeing with the Pope on whether certain exceptions applied to him, certainly argues for the ‘not Protestant’ interpretations.)
Hey, I’m religious and I didn’t know any of this. I think it’s more like “people not in these mainstream religions”.
Either that or I’m utterly oblivious. Either-or. 😛
SHE SAID IT Sarah said the thing
Penis? FAAACE? Premarital Hanky-Panky?!
Well that ends that.