Joe, oof. Look, I know he’s like 18 or 19. He’s still got a whole lot of kid to him, but I hope he grows the fuck up. I guess Walkyverse one did, in a matter of speaking, so he’s got a chance.
Not Mary’s MO. Mary’s less about making others miserable per se, and more about being more powerful than others, lording things over others, etc etc. Doing sneaky stuff secretly doesn’t get her that.
And also, why would she care about Joe making a list….unless she herself was near the top, I guess, and she wanted a roundabout way to advertise whatever popularity she can get.
I read it as “when we found out about the leak, we were just concerned about its effect on Joe, not on anyone else”. He didn’t seem to be aware of the leak, and I don’t think this changes that. He’s not that sneaky.
I don’t think so even remotely just as I don’t think Rachel did when Joe blamed her and it sounds out of character to me – Danny can be passive-aggressive, but he isn’t actively selfish.
I dunno, this seems pretty specific to “compromising his list for the sake of Danny”, which he’s done before (remember when he raised Dorothy’s number because he thought Danny was mad about it being low?). And it’s not really a “punishment”.
Not defending Joe overall or saying that Cerberus was wrong; I just don’t think this SPECIFIC comic is proof of those concerns being valid.
I think panel 3 was the carrot, and panel 5 was the stick (punishment). he’s still using the list to manipulate danny, just in a slightly different way than on women. :/
and what makes it feel extra icky is it’s the sort of thing that would probably work on me. it’s like my own brain isn’t even on my team and aaaarrrrgghhh it sucks so much. 😛
He didn’t compromise it for Danny, he said he would raise her to an 8 from a 7 but when Joyce read it, it said Dorothy was a 7, meaning he lied back then to try to appease Danny but he didn’t actually change the number. He also lied to Amber later on about putting Billie as an 8 even though ‘she is really a 6 but her boobs are a 10’ as she was listed as a 6.
Is it possible Joe curates this list without telling Danny or others about changes?
If I have notes on, say, director Preston Sturges for my own amusement, and I watch something related to a Sturges film, or read a smart essay, i may change my mind about things and write that down.
Joe seems he could be wrapped up in his player status as much as I get into mid-20th century Hollywood directors. (I’m not saying Joe’s list is akin to a piece of critical scholarship, BTW.)
Yup, he’s got a fairly creepy and consistent habit of that and this feels like more of the same.
And it’s one of the more… eeee parts of his shit, because it’s the weaponizing of sexuality as intended punishment for “uppityness”. And that’s something that’s been wielded against me a lot.
Everyone is listed under pseudonyms, but all the girls have figured out who is who. Does Joe think that boys have less smarts? It would probably be easy for a predator to figure out Joe’s code. Especially if the code is a description.
If you already know who they are enough to figure it out, what information does the list give you, though?
Of course, Rachel and Danny both have more than hints about the content, and they both think it’s dangerous. Of the three, I trust Joe’s evaluation least.
Yeh, I bet there are tactical notes
And even if there aren’t, he’s gamified girls. there’s a ‘catch em all’ pokedex out there now- and look at the massive appeal of pokemon.
This is what’s confusing me. He describes physical appearances and then rates them. How is this a creeper map? Unless he included their dorm rooms, which I don’t think he did because Joyce seemed to be figuring out who people were just by the descriptions.
They think a creeper is going to forget about people said creeper has already seen/liked, and start seeking out girls that some random dude named Joe finds attractive?
He is giving enough hints that he is giving creepers some knowledge on how best to target some of these girls even if it isn’t all and his rating gives an idea of whether they are considered hot and a prime target or whether they are low enough that they may be insecure.
The list itself gives validation to actively pursuing these girls by existing – gives hints on their appearance and behaviour, and if you already know them, the list is pointless, but if you know none or only some of them, it can be an encouragement to find them and sleep with them like it is a scavenger hunt – a game. And for a sexual predator or generally just someone twisted enough to trick people into sleeping with them based on false pretenses, Joe’s list could easily act as a hit list/mark list – it has a thrill aspect to it which would only increase the further down the list they get as the challenge of getting the next one would be harder and harder.
It would add excitement in deciding who they go after next, do they go for a 1 or a 10? Do they clear the high numbers first or the low? Should they start with a 5 and work their way up, ignoring lower numbers all together?
The list makes targeting these girls seem like a sick game and while it doesn’t lead directly to their rooms, it identifies some of them well enough that if you see them you could stalk them to their dorm area.
I can’t remember the exact nature of Joe’s list – does he also write about women that he has had naked times with? A lot of people out there (especially sexual creeps) do not understand that a sexually active woman is NOT the same thing as a free prostitute. If any entries are about women that joe has actually been intimate with, that could also give implied “permission” for creeps to confuse that distinction – which means some of the women could be especially likely targets. Hell, even if he didn’t, it wouldn’t be too huge a leap to see how a sexual stalker could see the whole list as permission to behave in awful ways towards so many. It doesn’t even need to be full on assault – it could simply be creating an unhealthy and hostile attitude around campus. This whole list is appalling. Joe needs to get some serious growth and atonement done.
In fairness, “everyone” is all the people who attend the dorm and are mutually included on the list, so they kind of have more background information to cross-reference.
But yeah, I don’t think we can give Joe a lot of credit for “elaborate code,” here.
The conversation between Joe and Danny in this strip is literally making me nauseated. I’m trying to parse out why; at this point, despite my theory, it seems like Danny didn’t “leak” the list. And he’s calling Joe out for having such a list in the first place.
I don’t know…IMHO, it kind of seems masturbatory, if that makes any sense. Danny tells Joe the list is dangerous, but he also says “we didn’t stop to think” and “[Joe] skew[s] towards benevolence.” Danny draws a clear line between himself, Joe, and “real creeps.” While Danny ultimately goes back to his calling-Joe-out stance, they share a “moment” when Joe says he’s “downgraded” Dorothy because she wasn’t “good enough” for Danny.
If anyone couldn’t tell (HA!), this particular story arc is triggering a lot of my own personal sh!te. I have to maybe sit with this more, but something about this strip just sets my teeth on edge. I keep thinking of the old white men who recently decided what reproductive care women in the U.S. can and can’t have. (Planned Parenthood is being MASSIVELY defunded in the U.S.) There was not a single woman on that panel. The pictures I’ve seen show the committee of men with self-congratulatory smiles plastered on their faces. Maybe they thought they were doing the right thing. Maybe they thought they were protecting women. Maybe Joe and Danny think that too. But I don’t like it when women are left out of conversations ABOUT women, and men pat each other on the back for having these conversations at all.
Sorry if this is muddled. Like I said, I’m working through some stuff right now.
*sympathy through light physical contact if comfortable*
Like I said the other day, for dudes like Danny who genuinely want to be good eggs, it is SO IMPORTANT to talk to their friends about this shit, and course-correct when they do things like idk create exhaustive lists of comparatively how much they want to fuck every woman they encounter. Guys who want to be allies to women need to be using their privilege to go “no, no, this is wrong and gross.” I think Danny is struggling with that responsibility vs wanting to be the unconditionally supportive best friend, and thankfully in the last panel his better nature wins out.
Please take care of yourself and take time out if you need it, be well.
there have been wayyy too many things making me I’m glad I’m not American this week :/ Not that the rest of the world is all that great either. This universe is broken, can we get a replacement already? 😛
I getcha, but in the private sphere, I want dudes to be able to have conversations about women without women being present. Just as long as the recognise the need to seek female input, and they’re not finished as long as they can’t hold those discussions with women.
From my own experience, I’ve had at least one SUPER valuable discussion with a friend about an issue pertaining to a marginalised community neither of us are part of. I’d had opportunity to ask community members about it, but it was NOT A FRIENDLY TOPIC, and as much as I wanted to explore it, I did NOT want to burden someone else with something which to me was largely academic, but to them constituted a personal safety risk.
there’s only so far reading and listening can take you, sometimes you need discussion, and sometimes that role is better or more safely filled by an ally than by a member of the identity group. That one discussion is obviously not conclusive or complete, but I’m better equipped now to not be terrible to a group of people who experience greater than average terribleness- and I didn’t have to inflict my intermediate terribleness on those people to get there.
I agree that allies can totally step up to explore things with their pals, particularly when the discussion would stress out marginalized people (who are sick of explaining it yet again, or who would rather not encounter the growing pains of those new to the conversation, who will be reminded of every other conversation they’ve had to hold about this topic, etc).
I think Jaime was more referring to those making serious life-and-death policy decisions, without even consulting people who are most impacted by those decisions — such as only giving rich men a say in reproductive healthcare. That’s not an initial discussion, that’s a high-level one, where the impact falls most strongly upon people who don’t get to be in the room.
Derp, I reread your comment and I’m pretty sure we’re already in agreement.
Initial conversation, complete with growing pains, to explore an issue with an open mind: can talk to a patient member of the identity group who isn’t sick of it, and/or can talk to an ally (who has gotten direct info), with the intention of getting more direct info eventually.
Big sweeping policy discussions: direct info is needed, and people of that identity must be involved in the conversation, do not pass Go, do not collect etc.
yeh we’re in all of the agreement =p
That’s my bad for zeroing in on a subsection of a position and not clearly indicating what context I’m talking about
Sure he will Joe, that’s why he’s already had his second college girlfriend and is halfway to his first boyfriend (and probably would already have one if it wasn’t for their mutual relationship with Amber).
One of the more tragic aspects of toxic masculinity is how it poisons everything including homosocial friendships.
Like, either the friendship adapts to the toxicity at which point you end up getting locked into promoting each others’ worst qualities and becoming more and more likely to leap on each other over any perceived femininity. Or the friendships break apart as the less committed to toxicity friend drifts away.
It’s something I’ve noticed in a lot of PUA narratives, the unfocused on story of friends getting frustrated and done with their friends creepy predatory crap and slowly drifting away, the author unaware of what he’s losing for a system that will never bring him what he wants.
Panel 1: I’m really proud of Danny here. It’s really hard to call out a buddy who needs to be called out on hurtful behavior and it’s even harder when it’s your best friend for life that you’ve only just started repairing things with.
And you see that in his pained expression. This is hurting him, but it’s important to him that he says this, because he cares about being a decent guy and wants to keep believing in his friend as a decent guy. And you see that in his words. They are so full of compassion and possibly unearned credit. He tries to highlight that this wasn’t something either of them realized, he speaks to Joe’s “benevolent skewing”, and offers a lot of room for Joe to be earnest and own the harm his list has done.
And you see in Joe’s eyes that this is rough for him too. He’s been running out of friends and this is the one who’s been there for him in every crisis. But it becomes a choice for him. He can stand by his friend and his morality or he can stand by the system that’s been ruining more and more of his life.
Panel 2: And that’s the central tragedy of this PUA shit. Those choices are wrapped up in one’s insecurities and fears and so when it comes down to friends or “the system”, the system ends up winning over. It becomes a sunk costs deal, where the more is sacrificed in mental health, friendships, reputation, career, the more the people stuck in it feel they have to make the system work less all that be wasted.
For Joe? He’s wasted years of his life on this sad boner log and his anti-vulnerability performance. He’s made it the central part of his personal mythology.
And this moment breaks my heart. Danny’s so eager to have Joe just go “yeah, maybe I didn’t think this through all the way”, to show that concern for others he knows is in there, but Joe can’t bring himself to do otherwise than try and defend the system and minimize his culpability.
He sacrifices himself for a toxic cluster of nothing that will only increasingly ruin his life and what he pays in this moment is painful to see. His morality is being tanked as is his empathy just to remove himself from guilt, from vulnerability, from being wrong.
And he just ends up offering excuses. And excuses he knows are bullshit. “Everyone’s listed under pseudonyms”, except we know that there are multiple people listed under their real names and everyone has easily been able to figure out who is who simply from the descriptions and having a passing familiarity with the people around them.
“Nobody’s gonna loiter”, except there was a sexual predator incident that happened right outside the dorms that affected one of his supposedly closest friends.
And it’s the last part that is the most tragic. He’s still defending the crappy dehumanization. Still insisting on these meaningless boner numbers. He can’t bear to let it go.
And I’m not even fully blaming him. It’s very human to double down on bad decisions and the way the system is set up for men, it’s something that gets heavily pressured above admitting fault or ignorance. And for Joe, he’s still reeling and holding on to the fantasy that this isn’t the end of this little LARP game he’s been playing with other people’s lives.
But it’s still tragic to see someone throw it all away for something so mind-numbingly empty and harmful.
Can’t say I really disagree any of your points. Guess I’m just happy this is a Willis storyline, and at least to me the whole point of reading his work is watching someone with faults go through character development and become a better person.
I know! I love that part. I love that when there are bad elements in a character that harm others, it gets highlighted and that characters tend towards redemption arcs, while still depicting the mindsets that block that personal growth.
It makes everything feel real, but hopeful. Which makes it a beautiful thing to disappear into as I watch my country burn.
Panel 3: Wow, Joe. That’s… really fucked. But let me start with Danny.
This is what empathy looks like and what someone who wants to be a good egg’s response to learning the system he is a part of is like. He connects the abstract to the personal, realizes someone deeply close to him was endangered by this and continues to be endangered by this so long as it’s up.
He resists Joe’s attempts to minimize it, he realizes that the violence she suffered at the hands of Ryan is not miles removed from the more casual sexism of Joe. He’s seeing his role in a bad system and it’s destroying him. Like, he’s curling up into himself, his face looks sick, and he’s looking away down at the floor. It’s hammering home.
And on the other end of the spectrum… holy fuckballs.
Like, okay, first up, it’s a bobdamn self-serving lie* specifically designed to shortcut his buddy’s moral development which is bad enough, but it’s also one that threatens to make Danny a worse person by playing on his worst instincts. Phrasing as a compliment what is actually a nasty implication (that a woman deserves to be made unsafe and be publicly shamed for making a hard decision to terminate a relationship that meant a lot to her).
*Because a) he admits it and b) if it wasn’t a lie, Joyce would have already removed his entrails.
And it fits into a toxic narrative. That women who leave men are doing a violence unto those men, that they should be seen as deserving of violence or a lack of protection. And it gets a lot of women murdered by their violent exes. It’s not a good thing.
And Joe dips into it for what? To get his buddy to stop thinking through the implications of a system he is valuing over the well-being of other humans and his own friend’s personal code of ethics? Just to smarm his way out of facing consequences or having to make the hard decision to shut down his sad little boner diary?
And the content of his statement is even worse. Like, fuck, Dorothy is his friend, someone who’s gotten his back in a major way before, someone supposedly important enough to him that he freaked out when he thought he went too far and drove her away.
And he just throws her into the garbage heap out of some creepy bro-code sidebar? Treating her like someone to be hurt and punished like any other “female” who goes against him? It’s a horrible little statement which is why it makes sense why Danny completely breaks when the full implication hits him in Panel 5.
I don’t think Joe’s saying Dorothy deserves anything. He’s saying he did swap her name out for a pseudonym.
One that’s nice to Danny, although yeah at her expense (and that might not be a lie, just because he says it is; he’s, y’know, lying).
I don’t actually believe Joe even changed the entry like he says. When Joyce was reading off a bunch of entries, she listed the pseudonym, and then her guess as to who it was supposed to be. Until she got to Dorothy, when she just read her name. Maybe there just wasn’t room to fit any more text in the word bubble, but it makes me think she didn’t need to guess, because it was just there.
Well, technically Joe may not be lying, since we don’t know 1) when the list was hacked, and 2) when Joe might have changed the name to a pseudonym. If the list was hacked BEFORE the change, then it would still have Dorothy’s real name on it.
Not that I think is what happened, just putting that possibility out there.
Panel 4: This panel breaks my heart. Like, Danny wants their relationship to be healed and have his best friend back and without thinking through the implications and the context, it sounds like something flattering. Like, aw, my best buddy thought the person I always thought was too good for me was actually someone I was too good for and he’s openly calling me his best friend like I’ve wanted him to do again.
A worse egg of a Danny would have taken it at face value and become a little bit worse for having done so.
And Joe… Joe breaks my heart. He’s so smug in this panel, basking in un-earned positive feelings from Danny for a thing that was a desperate distraction and subject change to avoid growing up. He thinks in that smug moment that he’s gamed the conversation, that he can keep his little bro-circle and nothing actually needs to change or be atoned for.
That he can keep carrying on in his self-destructive way. He thinks he “got away with it”, but the “getting away with it” is blocking his own morality, his own growth. And that’s tragic to see him so smug about that.
Panel 5: And here we see it all break. The full implication and context of what Joe did and the level of disregard he just showed Dorothy when she only just barely escaped a sexual predator with a revenge fetish and a knife hits him like a club and all of his desire to go softly, softly just disintegrates.
He was freaking out about the morality and Joe was more concerned about his precious little “system” and preserving it for nothing, even when it’s a clear harm and tried to distract him with that. And it deeply offends Danny. That Joe would seek to make him a worse person, that he would dismiss the critiques of his awful list, that he would try to do something so callous to his friends just to avoid consequences.
It’s like the moment when you fully see what you thought was a friend for what they actually were and it horrifies you and disgusts you. Maybe this friendship is repairable, but this easily could be the point they break once and for all.
And Joe… Joe is scary sometimes. Like, here, he just tried to do that to his friend and instead of going “hey, sorry, I didn’t think things through, I’m scared bro”, he clings to the only emotion he feels he is allowed as a man which is anger and turns it into a cudgel against Danny’s greatest insecurities.
Like, fuck, Danny has fucked himself for years over the fear that if he didn’t listen to his shitty parents and mold himself completely around his relationships, then he would have no value and never have a partner again. That he would die old, cold, and alone. And he’s been terrified that Dorothy was the best partner he’ll ever have and that that fuck up was his peak.
These are things he has genuine phobias and issues surrounding and Joe just stabs him there to make him hurt for the crime of calling him out on his shit and his cynical attempt to change the subject and protect his awful system.
And that makes him dangerous. Someone who will go for those deep insecurities and fears simply for not playing by their internal script is not someone to be trusted and can do immense harm if you let them into your life*. They can destroy a person and leave them a wreck.
*And for those who want to note that Danny calls him something rude, that’s not quite the same. Calling Joe and his list disgusting are harsh, yes, but it targets no deep insecurity or fear. Like, Danny didn’t make a jab at Joe’s parents’ divorce or his fear of vulnerability or any of that. He just called Joe’s actions disgusting, because they were. And yet to that, Joe just goes for the jugular just to make him hurt. That’s the difference.
Joe may be a decent guy in time. A loyal friend, a caring lover, a worthy man. But right now? He needs to spend some time getting over himself and this toxic spiral he’s indebted himself to. He needs to care more about the people he cares about in life than a broken system that has only brought him pain.
But for Joe, that fear of maturity, of vulnerability, of introspection blocks him, just as it does so many other men trapped in toxic masculinity. I hope for his escape, but this was a major setback. Because if he’s even willing to torch his longest friendship for his commitment to the system, then… yeah.
And I think Joe has a very stark choice waiting for him now. And I hope for his sake and Danny’s that he makes the right decision now that he’s gotten this out of his system.
idk i feel like part of it may be that…Joe doesn’t take the idea seriously that there could be anything beyond this?? this is his reality, that he has made himself to fit, and realizing that it’s not reality is…something he is not at all prepared to deal with. that cognitive dissonance is what’s tripping him up here, clinging to the vestiges of old relationships and reassurances.
and, like – he can validate Danny’s sexuality for a little bit because Danny’s the only person still willing to speak to him. but respect Danny’s exgirlfriend? no, that’s not something he’s willing to do, because it’s not something that groks for him.
…i. huh. there are ways you can see this as the toxic masculinity inverse to Joyce’s toxic Christianity.
BECAUSE YEAH. YEAAH. with PUAs and this whole…culture….you can really see it as analogous to a cult, because it clearly operates on some of the same manipulative abusive dynamics. except it operates by teaching its members how to form their own cults. like a pyramid scheme!! a pyramid scheme that just keeps getting shittier.
That is indeed a very exceptionally valid view of quite a lot of this type of cultural viewpoint. Unfortunately, in a lot of ways, however, it’s just the inevitable outcome of any particular group taking a hardline stance and becoming part of some of the deepest systemic cultural problems, entrenched factionalization and cultural assimilation.
I just wanted to express support and condolences at HB2796. That shit is as clear a declaration of war as I’ve ever seen that doesn’t actually include the word ‘war.’
Interesting that the bill defines gender as based on “genetic sex”. I see lawsuits demanding genetic testing for any legal uses of gender.
It doesn’t say “based on your genitalia” or “based on what the doctor wrote on your birth certificate”.
We’re the new hotness for the bigot set and they will rip us apart and feast on our entrails before they are ripped from power.
The worst part of it is the completely fucked up shit Gohmert and King have been saying about the bill. Like, it’s bad enough having your rights stripped away, it’s worse having them ripped away because of an Infowars-esque word salad of what two scared old white men who think a taco bell is too ethnically diverse believe about us.
… wait, it’s an OREGON bill? How did they get something through OREGON’S legisla-… …. it’s about music therapy? Huh?
…. oh, wait, there’s an HB 2796 for Washington state, maybe that’s it…. …. colleges need to indicate textbook costs in the course description during registration?
….
Oh, hey, Vulcanodon gave a link! I’m a derp!
*clicks, reads*
…… Eeeeyup. The only thing surprising to me is that they haven’t already pushed it through. Probably another reason to get in way of the AHCA, as if we needed one. The longer they get bogged down with that, the longer it will take them to do anything else.
Yeah, thay’s exactly how I read it. Diplomatic, but not a full endorsement.
As someone who’s as much as a doormat as Danny has been in the past, it is REALLY hard to call your friends out on their shit even if you secretly strongly disapprove. ;~;
Yeah, I really don’t get how people expect this to go. Joe is not going to change quickly. And if we want him to change quickly I’m not sure why you would want Danny to stay away from Joe. Most people, especially social exiles, congregate to where they are given at least a degree of acceptance and understanding. The crap Joe is getting in-universe is well deserved. And Danny staying away from Joe might be good for *Danny’s* mental health. But if the objective is getting through to Joe and getting him to steer out of a mindset he’s sunk deeper and deeper into for years, then completely isolating him is just asking for a horrible backfire where he starts associating with the wrong crowd.
Basically, neither Danny nor anyone else should have to sacrifice their self esteem, morality, patience, or energy to better Joe. He’s not entitled to anyone’s emotional labor. If being Joe’s friend is not healthy for Danny (and it isn’t!), then he shouldn’t have to be a crutch for Joe’s redemption. If Joe is not willing to even admit he did something wrong, then Danny has every right to walk away from a friendship with someone who hasn’t been supportive, understanding, kind, or empathetic to him, someone who has been demeaning and condescending and right now, cruel to him.
Danny SPECIFICALLY should not have a friend like Joe because of his self worth issues, and it would be some progress for Danny to draw the line and say: “Hey, this is not okay, I’m walking out.”
And if Joe sinks further into douchebaggery after that, it’s not Danny’s fault, it’s his own for being so entrenched in his own bullshit that he won’t even listen to his friends.
Except that Danny seems to me to be in an emotionally healthy place right now and continues to stick with Joe of his own accord. Danny has consistently rebuffed Joe’s approach to life while remaining by his side and influencing him in various ways. Joe isn’t unhealthy for Danny. Danny is healthy for Joe. And Danny seems happy enough doing what he does.
The blame game is one issue. I could blame people for doing drugs, for not paying their rent, for dropping out when things get hard, for refusing to work entry level when they lose their management job, for making all the shitty decisions that lead them to the hole they’re in and the drag they place on society. But people make bad choices and have blind spots no matter what walk of life they’re from. I’m often amazed how so many of the people who share the label “liberal” with me are so tolerant of some shitty ingrained mentalities and want to get them help, but are so quick to emotionally discard people like Joe. If you’ve got personal trauma arising out of it, fine, but the law of probabilities seems to indicate that a significant number of people are treating Joe this way just because he’s a white CIS guy who grew up in a cushier bubble.
Okay, first, that last statement is not a great one because it dances close to the false accusation of reverse sexism/racism. And the fact that you’re trying to use it against me in an argument when I’m defending another white cis dude (Danny) is a little ridiculous.
The facts are that Joe is a dude with significant amounts of privilege that he’s using in harmful ways and some of his toxic mindsets stem directly from being a white cis guy. He doesn’t deserve any slack for this. He isn’t innately entitled to patience for this. ESPECIALLY because he’s not a real person, I don’t have to coddle a fictional character for this. And a lot of people have scars and bad experiences and trauma from dealing with shit exactly like this, so I have a lot less patience for these calls to defend behavior that is ultimately indefensible. I’m going to care a lot more about people who’ve been hurt in real life by the behavior of PUA types like Joe than I am about any feelings I might have about Joe’s potential redemption arc.
Your use of ‘the blame game’ is a false analogy. Joe is absolutely to blame for his actions. He’s not an addict, he’s not depressed or mentally ill, he’s not suffering from societal oppression as far as his sex goes, he is a dude with a history of objectifying and sexually harassing women. He is in control of these actions and he made a deliberate choice, one after another. And people reading this comic who are critical of him have watched it as the comic went on.
That said, Joe isn’t healthy for Danny. And just because Danny continues to stick with Joe, that doesn’t work as ‘proof’ that Joe is healthy because people stick with toxic friends or even just friends who are drifting apart from them for all sorts of reasons, misplaced loyalty, nostalgia, hope, etc. I myself stuck with friends like Joe for a good long while (years!!!) before finally cutting them off. It didn’t make them healthy for me.
Danny doesn’t seem happy doing this. Throughout this whole arc, he’s seemed annoyed with Joe, conflicted, upset that it takes something like this for Joe to spend time with him. Danny, like many people with self worth issues, tends to go out of his way to support others at the expense of himself, even people who might mistreat him. This doesn’t mean it’s behavior that’s healthy for him.
A good friendship, like any good relationship, involves respect on both sides and care on both sides. Joe has dismissed and insulted Danny and made it clear he doesn’t respect or value him unless he’s desperate for company. Joe has made cutting comments to Danny instead of being supportive or helping him. Joe has ignored many of Danny’s attempts to open up to him or talk, citing bullshit or acting like he was bored.
And even now, when Danny in the gentlest terms says: “Hey, we didn’t think about this, maybe she has a point,” Joe refuses to back off of his gross position and just keeps on digging.
If Danny walks away from him for this, it’s justifiable. He might not, but if he does, it’s a good choice. He’s not responsible for saving Joe. I’m not saying Joe is irredeemable or forever awful, but he doesn’t have the right to demand the time and effort of the people around him, especially when they get tired and disgusted with his crap.
Defending Danny? No you’re not. Danny needs no defending here. He’s doing nice things out of the goodness of his heart and isn’t remotely the target of any ire from anybody.
And again, the fact that Joe has privilege and gets zero patience for it is the extremely non-productive mindset I’m talking about. Having a shorter fuse with them because their bubble was comfier, isolating them more than other people who do similar wrongs, that hurts the cause. I don’t expect people with personal sexism trauma to be patient with him. I don’t expect gay people to be patient with early Joyce. But the rest of us? Our cutting of different amounts of slack for people engrained with toxic mindsets based on their class says more about our biases than it does about them. Joe needs to be enlightened, and teaching with pure negative feedback isn’t a poor way to go about it.
And yes, Joe is to blame for his actions in the same way anyone ingrained with a certain culture is to blame for theirs. But blame isn’t the end of the process.
Danny can certainly walk away if he chooses. He has chosen not to and he’s not in a bad mental place because of it. He’s accepted the annoyance and people seem to think he will wilt when he’s showing no sign of it.
Point by point: I’m defending Danny’s decision, if he makes it, to walk away from Joe and stop helping him, and in doing so also defending anyone else who makes this same decision instead of submitting to being a stepping stone for someone else’s progress.
Your ‘rest of us’ strikes me as weird. Who is the ‘rest of us’? Am I? Who do you think has no patience with Joe? I just told you that plenty of people who are critical of Joe ARE people with bad experiences with cisdudes. I just told you that I personally am one of those people who is speaking from long experience with sexism. No woman is safe from the effects of sexism, so there’s that as well.
You’re coming at it from this angle that is: Joe needs to be taught, and people should be patient with him. Mine is: no one who is not a teacher HAS to be patient with him and teach him because that is not their job. Your life is not a teaching opportunity. And the people,especially the women, in the comment section getting angry and ditching people like this do not have to put their anger on hold to be a teachable moment for douchebags like Joe. THAT is what I’m saying.
Joe needs to be taught? Joe needs patience and help? Fine. But people who are victims of sexism, people who are being treated poorly by him, people who are not teachers or even interested in teaching, do not have to swallow their pain or anger to help him be better person and evolve. You’re basically saying that it’s the fault of the people who are being harmed for not being patient enough with the people harming them. That is some rank bullshit.
At no point did I indicate I would be critical of Danny for leaving Joe, and nobody has been, so if you’re defending such a hypothetical decision it’s against a hypothetical opponent. What I am criticizing is people saying that Danny *should* leave Joe. Danny is in a healthy place, is willing to be patient with Joe and is doing the job people with sexism trauma understandably aren’t willing to do.
When I say “rest of us”, I am referring to both the community here and fellow liberals generally.
You should really back up and read my post again, because there is no way you could have honestly typed that last paragraph if you saw what I was saying. I explicitly said I don’t expect people with trauma to be patient with Joe. I do expect them to respect that Danny is doing the job they are not equipped to do. Instead they seem to want Joe completely isolated and exiled.
I read what you said, and I don’t like being condescended to as if I didn’t.
On that subject, I do think Danny should leave Joe because he’s just not a good friend. Taking sexism entirely out of it, he hasn’t been a good friend for a while. And Danny doesn’t owe him any of his time.
I think we just saw Danny lose the patience he’s had so far. (So much patience! It amazes me.) And I think Danny leaving might just be the wake up call Joe needs to realize that he is alienating everyone around him. You can only teach someone who’s willing to learn, and Joe needs to decide if his friends are worth more to him than his crappy worldview.
Well I don’t like being mischaracterized. So the most likely possibilities were thus: (1) I didn’t write what I thought I wrote (which I examined and rejected); (2) you didn’t read what I said (which appears to be what you think I called you out on, which I did not; (3) you didn’t comprehend what I said (which is what I actually called you out on); or (4) you were lying. Given these four options and my examination and dismissal of the first, I went with the option that gave you the most benefit of the doubt. I don’t see how this is condescending to you.
I’ve seen the concerns for Danny’s mental well being and happiness. While it’s a fine sentiment, Danny has volunteered his time and energy of his own accord to help Joe out. He is trying to get through to Joe as his lifelong friend, and has accepted the costs, which he is in a mental position to bear. Isolation is a far worse way to approach this and is precisely the sort of group behavior that drives social exiles into the wrong circles. By sticking with his friend and giving him the patience others aren’t willing to, Danny is doing the world a service.
And count me skeptical on Danny harboring lasting anger at Joe over this. I’m seeing it as Danny simply taking another approach at what he feels is the right time.
Accusing someone of ‘not comprehending’ as if their ability to read is lacking is condescending. And you’re still doing it. You can say things that give an impression you didn’t mean, which is also a possibility. And I don’t really have the energy to take apart everything you said to defend my reading of your statements, so I’m not going to bother at this point.
I never argued that Danny would remain angry. My only argument is that I’m on the side of people who think Danny should leave Joe if he’s burned out on Joe’s nonsense, because Joe’s been pretty awful. If he doesn’t, great. If he’s still in position to help Joe, great. But he doesn’t have to, Joe’s not entitled to it, and honestly I wouldn’t be fussed if he didn’t.
That isolation vs. support argument is super complicated because…well, it’s case by case. There are some people who are manipulators or who see your sticking with them as support no matter what you do. Those are people who need ditching. There are people who will learn and appreciate your support and lash out when isolated. I can’t tell which Joe is yet. Joyce is the latter.
If I think you are wrong, saying you are wrong is not condescention. If you are wrong about what I said, then I will say so. You obviously have the ability to read, we are communicating in written form. But if somone reads the words and gets the wrong idea of what they mean, then they are still not comprehending the message. Hence my suggestion of a second reading. Thinking that the person I’m debating doesn’t understand my message isn’t condescending if they have demonstrated that they do not understand my message.
I don’t see any signs of burn out or mental instability on Danny’s part. Much of what I’ve seen has been people telling Danny to leave Joe because of some mental issues which show no sign of manifesting or because Joe doesn’t deserve help. I say that approach is unproductive.
It’s a good point about manipulators. Robin, despite ultimately leaving affected by her time with Leslie, did manipulate Leslie’s affections and Leslie would have been better off cutting off all ties. Joe seems like a simple guy to me. He never created the list out of a desire to manipulate.
What the hell is Danny talking about? Does the list include personal identifying information, or is it literally just a list of first names with numbers next to them? What nefarious use could anyone get out of the list, and if there IS nefarious use, isn’t that Rachel’s fault and not Joe’s, since she’s the one who published it?
But the only way you could know Joyce is the churchy girl is if you know Joyce, and if you know Joyce, then you already know Joyce, and presumably already know what she looks like.
I think the idea is that “a real scumbag” would take Joe’s ratings and pick out a target based on them. They also came with little descriptions according to Joyce rattling off her own, and they had to be detailed enough that women were able to find out their rankings.
Also I think the implication is that the women rated are mostly from Clark Wing, so someone would know who to search for.
So? Joyce’s entry not providing much of any use doesn’t negate the fact that other entries (like Billie’s) clearly did, and as Danny noted, some women (like Dorothy) are listed by their real name.
Remember that what Joyce listed off was merely the pseudonyms and ratings. For her own entry, we got that AND a couple paragraphs of description.
Billie would likely be identifiable from “Chubby Cheerleader” on its own. Who knows how much else Joe put in the description for her or anyone else?
But even if NONE of the entries had ANY specifically harmful information, the entire point of the list is a “who to fuck” guide. Even if not one person ever actually expressed interest in the list or actually looked at it, THAT is what the list was for. That’s the purpose for which Joe created and shared it. If used as intended, any girl with a relatively high rating could expect to have a noticeable uptick in creepy dudes approaching them in or around the building where they sleep.
Once you have a good target you just go looking for whomever suits the description. ‘churchy blond girl’ and ‘desperate chubby ex-cheerleader’ are not going to be hard to find.
You might make the point that it’s the leaker’s fault, IF not for the fact that Joe was already giving out the password like candy and it’d be very easy for it to get into the wrong hands just straight from him.
You know, this strip does make me think… maybe the ‘hacker’ was Raidah. No evidence, just a guess, but she would fit the profile…
– She was offended by the idea of a ‘do’ list
– We’ve seen from her actions with Sarah that she doesn’t always have a lot of empathy (and as such wouldn’t care how publishing the list affected others)
– Even if she’s not a computer expert, she might have obtained the password from Jacob (or overheard it when Joe passed it on.)
I actually read that strip as him sending it to Raidah, when she’s all disgusted by the idea of the list
– “You have a ‘do list’?”
– “Oh, did I forget to send you the password?”
Raidah’s been my suspect since day one of when it became clear the list had been publicised.
Or maybe day two. Let me check…
No, it’s been since day one.
Still, not entirely sure about it. And of course, we all know that DYW likes to change the plot based on how we guess things are going, just to prove us all wrong.*
So in the end, it must’ve been Jocelyne that did it!
*And anyone saying I’m being completely paranoid and incapable of admitting that I might simply be wrong will be thrown in the Imperial Dungeon!
It would still be primarily Joe’s fault for creating it at all regardless of who published it because remember, he had an RSS feed and subscribers and gave out the password, he was still sharing it, just not as widely as this.
The list could be used in several nefarious ways – at the lowest level, it encourages trying to find out who the description applies to like a creepy scavenger hunt and increased sexual harassment of women over rankings they can’t control. It turns sex with women into a game which in more dangerous hands could result in it being a mark list for sex crimes as well as it would add a thrill aspect by having to find, identify, possibly stalk and isolate your targets which would be rather disturbing but entirely possible.
Even if someone who finds list doesn’t know their exact locations, they would only need to find ONE of the people listed and stalk them back to campus or dorms to suddenly know where a fair number of these people are.
Joe’s descriptive pseudonyms and descriptions also tend to, whether intentionally or not, include topic starters that could allow someone to start to try to win their trust and trick them into having sex with them and then drop them entirely. Sal? Smokes. Billie? Cheerleader. Joyce? Christian. While this wouldn’t be breaking the law at least, it would still be morally repugnant to treat women this way as ‘conquests’.
“Joe’s descriptive pseudonyms and descriptions also tend to, whether intentionally or not, include topic starters that could allow someone to start to try to win their trust and trick them into having sex with them and then drop them entirely. Sal? Smokes. Billie? Cheerleader. Joyce? Christian.”
Using Joyce’s faith to earn her trust is exactly what Ryan did.
Predatory people would look at this and see an opportunity, or in several cases, a vulnerability. It wouldn’t be too hard to read between the lines and see “this girl is naive and trusting”, “this girl is very insecure about her attractiveness”, “this girl is promiscuous”.
honestly i have no idea what the “other time” is, or what the “he” is in Matt’s comments. i am completely and utterly baffled. did Vimes actually have to tell an Ankh-Morpork Joe not to rate women at some point in his career?? are there somehow two times Joe was told in-canon to not rate women? or are we talking about Vimes’ novel where he starts out telling his kid a bedtime story at a specific time every day and ends it fighting the power of darkness to get back to his kid to tell him his bedtime story and permanently jailing that amorpheous son of a gun
i went with the last one, so, like, i mean, i guess that’s what it meant. but mostly also i could totally see Vimes telling his son a bedtime story about why it’s bad to rate women. like. that would be totally and completely up his alley. it would probably go something like “and then the seamstress yelled ‘Don’t rate women, Joe!’ and dumped all his underthings in the Ankh-Morpork river, leaving him to run naked and embarrassed through the city streets with ‘mother….lover’ embroidered onto his back. Don’t rate women, young Sam. They’re people just like us.”
Nah, the real question is… what would happen is Sybil found the list? Or Havelock? Or Angua or Carrot? Vimes managed to not kill/arrest Rust or Selachii, and as bad as Joe is, those are far worse. Joe is a douchebro, but he’s not Carcer or Wolf.
If Carrot found the list, he’d give Joe a slightly disappointed look, and Joe would find himself deleting the entire website page and apologizing to everyone in the dorm before he knew what hit him.
If Sybil found it, Joe would either end up celibate or develop a thing for older women.
Anyone else notice how the way Joe’s insult to Danny frames the latter’s worth as being tied to his girlfriend or lack thereof perfectly summarizes both PUA and popular culture?
Is it? Saying he “peaked with Dorothy” doesn’t seem like it specifically excludes the possibility of same-sex relationships. “Dying alone” would suggest the lack of a girlfriend or boyfriend equally
Or am I just not seeing it? (which is entirely possible)
Actually the opposite: With Joe having no problem re Danny being bi it would then make the last panel remark hurt even more: “Even with females and males in your scope of romantic partners, you’ll die alone”.
For the first three panels, Danny is taking some measure of ownership of the situation. The List Crisis is a “we” thing, at least to a degree. He feels that the responsibility was partially on him — on both of them, but partially on him — to consider all the ramifications of the list.
Which… maybe as a human being living in society it is, and maybe as the person who helped set up the list’s “security” back in single-digit-grades it is, and maybe as the guy who might in a perfect unobtainable world be someone Joe would listen to is, but by and large isn’t. This is JOE’S crisis. Yet Danny seems to be taking partial ownership of it.
Joe wouldn’t follow Danny into responsibility-land. I think if he had, Danny would have been willing to stay there.
But by panel 5, Joe’s attempt to shuck responsibility was bothering Danny more than Danny’s own responsibility.
That seems reasonable to me. I don’t think Danny was escaping responsibility in panel 5. He was focusing on the biggest disconnect between attitude and fact: Joe.
Joe is just a sexist asshat who is doing everything he can to avoid owning up to his actions. Most of the people around him would definitely be better off without him in their lives at this point.
idk it just seems like joe really…struggles with seeing people outside of the roles he’s cast for them in his life, and his life is one big porno. but if his life isn’t one big porno, what even is it??? a neutral thing that’s whatever you make of it?? bullshit
this probably makes much more sense as a post but you know what, i have adhd, it’s midnight, i officially have gone past the event horizon of caring, formatting can suck it and it doesn’t matter how you do it as long as you do it anyways
I’m not so sure that paternalistic male sexism is harmless. In a mythical world where women are happy with the choices made for them, it could be harmless.
But in a world where women are adult people with their own minds? A paternalistic sexist is likely to double down and try to squelch those minds wherever they disagree with him.
This is a really interesting followup to the whole issue of Joe.
My feelings towards the guy have gone on a bit of a roller-coaster. Like, on the one hand, should be be blamed and shamed and isolated for being open about his desire to have as much sex as possible with as many willing women as possible? Divorced from context, no, not really. But there IS context in both Joe himself and the greater situation.
At the end of the day, you don’t get cookies for not being a rapist. You DO deserve a lot of public ridicule if you treat women exclusively as sex objects, and exponentially more if you do so in a way that actually endangers their lives. Heck, he can’t even admit to his own culpability, or the fact that – however unintentionally – he did a bad thing and hurt people.
And on a separate note, he’s been a TERRIBLE friend to Danny and Dorothy. After disappearing from Danny’s life through his lowest points and treating Danny’s own willingness to be vulnerable as a direct betrayal, he now only shows concern for Danny’s mental health once Danny’s behavior takes a dramatic shift (and involves noisy ukulele practice). Concern that immediately evaporates once he realizes that he has worse things to worry about than tangled chords. Concern which he only feigns to steer Danny back in line with his own interests. Danny – like most people with poor self-images – didn’t realize that he was doing all the heavy lifting in their friendship and that Joe hasn’t really offered much of anything. And finally – FINALLY – the wool is leaving Danny’s eyes.
What I find really sad about how a crappy friend he is, is that one of his HIGHEST points in the comic so far is apologising to Dorothy back when his jokes went to far. He obviously cared about her, he obviously respected her and he could arse himself to drop his bro-persona for a moment and give her a sincere apology.
That was great, so that’s why his crappy treatment of her now is extra crappy.
Joe kind of straddles the line. On the one hand, I’m a big believer in sex positivity, and people shouldn’t be shamed because they like sex or because they’ve had a lot of (consensual) sex partners. On the other hand, Joe, while he never pushes beyond “No”, does have a tendency to only see women as far as “how desirable they are as sexual partners”. In and of itself, this is fine as long as you don’t TREAT women with contempt, derision or hostility (you can’t control how people think, and the day when we DO start making thoughts illegal is a day that I think should fill all of us with terror), but a lot of guys who fall into this mindset do not, and that’s the real world issue we need to tackle.
He doesn’t actually accept that No either. He keeps pushing around it, trying to find a way to get to yes.
Until the yelling or the threats start. At which point, he gets to treat the girl as a crazy bongo.
What would a person do with a list of nicknames and arbitrary attractiveness ratings?
Did he put information about them like contact info, social media information, or other information that a stalker mind find use for?
Yeah, he’s a dick for itemizing people (you are only allowed to do that if you are in Congress and trying to take people’s health insurance like that sociopath Paul Ryan). But I do not see any actual danger.
It includes physical descriptions in most of the pseudonyms and presumably, they all have descriptions like Joyce’s did. Sexual harassment, sexual assault, rape and stalking based on the information in the list are all possible – they’d only need to find and stalk one of them to the dorms to know where several are after all (like how Ryan only had to follow Dorothy). I’ve commented on this to a couple of people above as well.
That isn’t even the only danger though if you think about it as a serial killer could also pick a target off it, a kidnapper could pick a target off it, a racist looking to assault someone to make a point could always pick a ‘suitable’ target off it. The list inherently encourages you to see the people on it as targets and there are a lot of bad types of people that could take advantage of that.
I only dabble in the comments occasionally, could someone answer me this – is the general consensus on the “Joe=Bad” train that the List itself is bad, or his attitude towards it, or is it mainly the fact that it was, if not publicly available, then heavily advertizd as a thing that exists and can potentially be read?
Joe’s attitude and behavior towards women was bad enough on its own. If kept to himself, Joe’s list and rating system would simply have been a manifestation of that demeaning, objectifying way he views women.
The way he repeatedly told women his rating of them and acted like it should matter made it worse.
Putting the list online and making a point of trying to share it, even with people he had only just met made it worse still.
Wow, Joe is such an amazing *sshole, isn’t he? The sad thing is that in real life there are guys that can be just total tools and yet girls will still fall for them (at least for one night). At our college we had a guy named Bo who was a one-trick pony; he’d go up to a girl at a party and ask a girl point-blank “do you spit or swallow?” It didn’t matter how many girls he offended (he got drinks in his face and slapped on more than one occasion), eventually he’d leave with a girl. So I guess he scored a lot more frequently than anybody else, but I wouldn’t want that many girls thinking I was a total douche-canoe (like Joe finds himself right now).
Several commenters have defended the idea that because pseudonyms are used, the list wouldn’t be useful to sexual predators. But a sexual predator would see that list and be fascinated by it. They’d start decoding it, figuring out who is who. Like a sick little puzzle to solve.
Old, cold and alone – Joe projecting his worst fear. He’s going to end up like Jack Nicolson in Carnal Knowledge. Focused on casual sex as a preventative for being alone, thus making sure he end up alone.
OK, you have to admit, they’re kind of adorable together. I never thought I’d say this about Joe of all people. But it’s hilarious watching them interact.
I would like to take this opportunity to remind everyone of Hanlon’s Razor. “You should never attribute an action to malice when stupidity is a reasonable explanation”
Loading ...
Danny: “I AM SERIOUSLY RETHINKING THAT BEST FRIEND FOR LIFE REMARK”
Joe: “YOU HAVE NO OTHER FRIENDS, IT IS YOUR DEFAULT STATE”
The joke is on Joe, Danny’s already found another well chinned Jewish hunk.
Joe: Who are you?
Ethan: I’m you, but stronger. And gay. And I like robots.
Nice Whirlvatar, btw.
Recent… events made me switch from my Tailgate grav.
*sniffle*
Yeah that was…that was a real kick in the gut.
It was also very abrupt and I don’t see it lasting.
Only about six million years.
Long enough for flowers to grow over it, at least. Months, maybe years.
I do hope it gets undone eventually. To do otherwise would be very unsatisfying.
Yeah same here, but i feel slightly sorry for fangry, knowing what cyclonus (and the rest of team rodimus) will do to him.
Ethan: also, i’ll actually make out with him.
Yep, plausibly.
Awwww, it seems like it’s been quite a while since we last saw Ethan.
And this one is nice to people!
Eh, he’s polite to people.
Until they’re wrong about Transformers.
And EVERYONE IS WRONG ABOUT THEM EVENTUALLY
Danny’s a good egg!
But alas, still an egg.
Guess how you transliterate “egg” in Chinese.
bahahaha I’d almost forgotten that 🙂
How?
蛋 / dan4
He is but an egg?
…are Ethan and Joe his water brothers?
But what type of egg? Ostrich? Pigeon? Hummingbird?
Thousand year old?
Fried? Boiled? Scrambled?
*gasp*
…no…could it be…
…deviled?
That’s a fine pickle.
It’s one to relish.
Scotch
Cadbury Creme?
Joe and Danny have a great friendship, not even New Danny can resist the it.
I like Danny.
Joe, oof. Look, I know he’s like 18 or 19. He’s still got a whole lot of kid to him, but I hope he grows the fuck up. I guess Walkyverse one did, in a matter of speaking, so he’s got a chance.
Joe…come the fuck on.
Better than dying young, on fire, and surrounded by people watching you burn.
Nice metaphor.
“We didn’t stop to think” the plot thickens
That’s the entire series slogan.
Thinking? Who has time for that.
Danny is waking up. Yaaaaas!
bloodrose?
Bloodrose.
…Bloodrose?
Wooooooooooo last panel Danny! Wooooooooooo!!
What a good egg 😀
So, we all think Danny leaked it, yes?
(Which is a bit passive-aggressive and selfish – as opposed to calling him on it directly – but totally in keeping with his character)
I dunno, I’m pretty sure it’s Mary. She was happy before, and she only smiles when another person’s miserable by her actions
Not Mary’s MO. Mary’s less about making others miserable per se, and more about being more powerful than others, lording things over others, etc etc. Doing sneaky stuff secretly doesn’t get her that.
And also, why would she care about Joe making a list….unless she herself was near the top, I guess, and she wanted a roundabout way to advertise whatever popularity she can get.
According to Agatha she has a high ranking.
But I don’t think it was Mary.
it sounds out-of-character to me.
His use of “We” is interesting though
I read it as “when we found out about the leak, we were just concerned about its effect on Joe, not on anyone else”. He didn’t seem to be aware of the leak, and I don’t think this changes that. He’s not that sneaky.
Yeah that’s plausible as well
He helped Joe set up the list originally. He considers himself complicit in creating it.
That’s sufficient to explain his worried reaction last strip.
I don’t think he leaked it. I could be wrong, but I don’t see him doing it.
I think that was just the dawning realization that it’s something serious with the potential to hurt real people, and not just a harmless diversion.
I don’t think so. Then again, I’m pretty spotty at guessing these things.
I don’t, I think Danny is feeling bad because he helped put together Joe’s website
Nah.
I still don’t think it follows that Danny must have leaked it, as opposed to just now being aware of just how serious the leak really is
I would love there to be a book-maker and running odds for this stuff, even if it weren’t for real money.
I’m with Cerberus. No leak. Just a whole lot of stupid.
Nah, there’s a leak, because comedy and tropes.
Unless Willis really wants to pull a fast one on us.
Hmm…
I don’t think so even remotely just as I don’t think Rachel did when Joe blamed her and it sounds out of character to me – Danny can be passive-aggressive, but he isn’t actively selfish.
Not a chance that Danny leaked it.
It’s possible. I’m not sure one way or the other, really. I suppose he’s one of the top suspects.
You say “You’re Unscrupulous!”
And you say “You’re naive!”
Synchronized like magic!
Good Friends, you n’ me–Joni Mitchell
woah
no hearts of gold
no nerves of steel
no blame for what we can and cannot feel
Have I finally found another person who knows and likes that song? Hi!
Who doesn’t like Michael McDonald and Thomas Dolby as co-conspirators?
Joe is a tough egg. There’s no getting through to him.
Very few people become a better person with an instant epiphany. Typically the doubts and concerns seep in long after the confrontation.
Sadly true. I wonder how he can change.
The same way everyone on the planet changes.
*lightening bolt*
Taking in account the decompressed time in this comic book….
I’d say a decade.
Like, Joe hasn’t even been in college for a semester yet.
His shell is so tough, he may never hatch.
Old, cold, and alone? As opposed to young, burning, and surrounded by an orgy of people?
I mean, minus the death that sounds like a decent weekend. Maybe less on fire, and more at a bonfire, though.
I imagine burning is caused by an STD from said orgy.
What kind of cut-rate orgy doesn’t have condoms available? tsk tsk I will note this in my yelp rating
i understood that reference
GO DANNY! 😀
and then, without applause, joe became a nihilist arby’s spokesman.
I wasn’t aware that applause and nihilism can occur concurrently.
Joe is a masterful pick up artist. Soon, Danny and he will be together like Walky and Jason.
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAUGH
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAUGH
Not Enough ‘A’
what was that Cerberus was saying yesterday about Joe using the list to punish people when they don’t comply with his expectations?
I dunno, this seems pretty specific to “compromising his list for the sake of Danny”, which he’s done before (remember when he raised Dorothy’s number because he thought Danny was mad about it being low?). And it’s not really a “punishment”.
Not defending Joe overall or saying that Cerberus was wrong; I just don’t think this SPECIFIC comic is proof of those concerns being valid.
I think panel 3 was the carrot, and panel 5 was the stick (punishment). he’s still using the list to manipulate danny, just in a slightly different way than on women. :/
and what makes it feel extra icky is it’s the sort of thing that would probably work on me. it’s like my own brain isn’t even on my team and aaaarrrrgghhh it sucks so much. 😛
He didn’t compromise it for Danny, he said he would raise her to an 8 from a 7 but when Joyce read it, it said Dorothy was a 7, meaning he lied back then to try to appease Danny but he didn’t actually change the number. He also lied to Amber later on about putting Billie as an 8 even though ‘she is really a 6 but her boobs are a 10’ as she was listed as a 6.
Is it possible Joe curates this list without telling Danny or others about changes?
If I have notes on, say, director Preston Sturges for my own amusement, and I watch something related to a Sturges film, or read a smart essay, i may change my mind about things and write that down.
Joe seems he could be wrapped up in his player status as much as I get into mid-20th century Hollywood directors. (I’m not saying Joe’s list is akin to a piece of critical scholarship, BTW.)
exactly
Yup, he’s got a fairly creepy and consistent habit of that and this feels like more of the same.
And it’s one of the more… eeee parts of his shit, because it’s the weaponizing of sexuality as intended punishment for “uppityness”. And that’s something that’s been wielded against me a lot.
That escalated quickly.
Everyone is listed under pseudonyms, but all the girls have figured out who is who. Does Joe think that boys have less smarts? It would probably be easy for a predator to figure out Joe’s code. Especially if the code is a description.
If that’s the case, “Cliche Goth” is going to have switch up scenes.
Okay, I’m forgetting, or not able to figure out, who Cliche Goth is. A lil help?
If you already know who they are enough to figure it out, what information does the list give you, though?
Of course, Rachel and Danny both have more than hints about the content, and they both think it’s dangerous. Of the three, I trust Joe’s evaluation least.
Yeh, I bet there are tactical notes
And even if there aren’t, he’s gamified girls. there’s a ‘catch em all’ pokedex out there now- and look at the massive appeal of pokemon.
This is what’s confusing me. He describes physical appearances and then rates them. How is this a creeper map? Unless he included their dorm rooms, which I don’t think he did because Joyce seemed to be figuring out who people were just by the descriptions.
They think a creeper is going to forget about people said creeper has already seen/liked, and start seeking out girls that some random dude named Joe finds attractive?
If you are able to match physical appearances to specific girls, then you already know what they look like, and thus don’t need the list.
He is giving enough hints that he is giving creepers some knowledge on how best to target some of these girls even if it isn’t all and his rating gives an idea of whether they are considered hot and a prime target or whether they are low enough that they may be insecure.
The list itself gives validation to actively pursuing these girls by existing – gives hints on their appearance and behaviour, and if you already know them, the list is pointless, but if you know none or only some of them, it can be an encouragement to find them and sleep with them like it is a scavenger hunt – a game. And for a sexual predator or generally just someone twisted enough to trick people into sleeping with them based on false pretenses, Joe’s list could easily act as a hit list/mark list – it has a thrill aspect to it which would only increase the further down the list they get as the challenge of getting the next one would be harder and harder.
It would add excitement in deciding who they go after next, do they go for a 1 or a 10? Do they clear the high numbers first or the low? Should they start with a 5 and work their way up, ignoring lower numbers all together?
The list makes targeting these girls seem like a sick game and while it doesn’t lead directly to their rooms, it identifies some of them well enough that if you see them you could stalk them to their dorm area.
I can’t remember the exact nature of Joe’s list – does he also write about women that he has had naked times with? A lot of people out there (especially sexual creeps) do not understand that a sexually active woman is NOT the same thing as a free prostitute. If any entries are about women that joe has actually been intimate with, that could also give implied “permission” for creeps to confuse that distinction – which means some of the women could be especially likely targets. Hell, even if he didn’t, it wouldn’t be too huge a leap to see how a sexual stalker could see the whole list as permission to behave in awful ways towards so many. It doesn’t even need to be full on assault – it could simply be creating an unhealthy and hostile attitude around campus. This whole list is appalling. Joe needs to get some serious growth and atonement done.
Especially if any of the boys in their dorm is a creeper.
Referring to Danny: Finish him! FINISH HIM!
“Listed under pseudonyms” ? Really? Well, I’m sure that makes all the girls who found out it was about them feel SOOOOOO much better.
“Danny peaked” with women. We don’t know how well he’ll do with dudes.
I can’t remember – did he have Joyce on this list?
If so, did he have her on by name…? 🙁
Joyce was Churchie Blonde.
Here’s the ding dang link: http://www.dumbingofage.com/2017/comic/book-7/04-the-do-list/ragdoll-2/
Thank you for that ding dang link!
That link is Diggity Dangitty!
I think he did have her name on the list, but removed it after the date with her.
I think everyone in that building knows who “churchy blonde” is. Joyce was not subtle about her religion back then.
I mean, everyone was still able to realize who they were.
In fairness, “everyone” is all the people who attend the dorm and are mutually included on the list, so they kind of have more background information to cross-reference.
But yeah, I don’t think we can give Joe a lot of credit for “elaborate code,” here.
So wait, who’s the Cliche Goth?
Cliche Goth is Bloodrose, right?
Wtf joe
Go die in a hole, joe
precious bisexual
cinnamon rolleggHey, I’ll take bisexual representation wherever I can get it! #bisexualpride 🙂
Wait, no, I want to be the cinnamon roll, why did you take the cinnamon roll option away
You can still be the cinnamon roll. All foods are welcome here 😉
…now I want crying breakfast friends buttons.
Mmmm, cinnamon roll… *noms on self*
The conversation between Joe and Danny in this strip is literally making me nauseated. I’m trying to parse out why; at this point, despite my theory, it seems like Danny didn’t “leak” the list. And he’s calling Joe out for having such a list in the first place.
I don’t know…IMHO, it kind of seems masturbatory, if that makes any sense. Danny tells Joe the list is dangerous, but he also says “we didn’t stop to think” and “[Joe] skew[s] towards benevolence.” Danny draws a clear line between himself, Joe, and “real creeps.” While Danny ultimately goes back to his calling-Joe-out stance, they share a “moment” when Joe says he’s “downgraded” Dorothy because she wasn’t “good enough” for Danny.
If anyone couldn’t tell (HA!), this particular story arc is triggering a lot of my own personal sh!te. I have to maybe sit with this more, but something about this strip just sets my teeth on edge. I keep thinking of the old white men who recently decided what reproductive care women in the U.S. can and can’t have. (Planned Parenthood is being MASSIVELY defunded in the U.S.) There was not a single woman on that panel. The pictures I’ve seen show the committee of men with self-congratulatory smiles plastered on their faces. Maybe they thought they were doing the right thing. Maybe they thought they were protecting women. Maybe Joe and Danny think that too. But I don’t like it when women are left out of conversations ABOUT women, and men pat each other on the back for having these conversations at all.
Sorry if this is muddled. Like I said, I’m working through some stuff right now.
It makes sense and I think that panel 4 is a moment when Danny teetered on the edge of some real awfulness but managed to scramble away in time.
*sympathy through light physical contact if comfortable*
Like I said the other day, for dudes like Danny who genuinely want to be good eggs, it is SO IMPORTANT to talk to their friends about this shit, and course-correct when they do things like idk create exhaustive lists of comparatively how much they want to fuck every woman they encounter. Guys who want to be allies to women need to be using their privilege to go “no, no, this is wrong and gross.” I think Danny is struggling with that responsibility vs wanting to be the unconditionally supportive best friend, and thankfully in the last panel his better nature wins out.
Please take care of yourself and take time out if you need it, be well.
*agos*
there have been wayyy too many things making me I’m glad I’m not American this week :/ Not that the rest of the world is all that great either. This universe is broken, can we get a replacement already? 😛
I getcha, but in the private sphere, I want dudes to be able to have conversations about women without women being present. Just as long as the recognise the need to seek female input, and they’re not finished as long as they can’t hold those discussions with women.
From my own experience, I’ve had at least one SUPER valuable discussion with a friend about an issue pertaining to a marginalised community neither of us are part of. I’d had opportunity to ask community members about it, but it was NOT A FRIENDLY TOPIC, and as much as I wanted to explore it, I did NOT want to burden someone else with something which to me was largely academic, but to them constituted a personal safety risk.
there’s only so far reading and listening can take you, sometimes you need discussion, and sometimes that role is better or more safely filled by an ally than by a member of the identity group. That one discussion is obviously not conclusive or complete, but I’m better equipped now to not be terrible to a group of people who experience greater than average terribleness- and I didn’t have to inflict my intermediate terribleness on those people to get there.
I agree that allies can totally step up to explore things with their pals, particularly when the discussion would stress out marginalized people (who are sick of explaining it yet again, or who would rather not encounter the growing pains of those new to the conversation, who will be reminded of every other conversation they’ve had to hold about this topic, etc).
I think Jaime was more referring to those making serious life-and-death policy decisions, without even consulting people who are most impacted by those decisions — such as only giving rich men a say in reproductive healthcare. That’s not an initial discussion, that’s a high-level one, where the impact falls most strongly upon people who don’t get to be in the room.
Derp, I reread your comment and I’m pretty sure we’re already in agreement.
Initial conversation, complete with growing pains, to explore an issue with an open mind: can talk to a patient member of the identity group who isn’t sick of it, and/or can talk to an ally (who has gotten direct info), with the intention of getting more direct info eventually.
Big sweeping policy discussions: direct info is needed, and people of that identity must be involved in the conversation, do not pass Go, do not collect etc.
yeh we’re in all of the agreement =p
That’s my bad for zeroing in on a subsection of a position and not clearly indicating what context I’m talking about
Sure he will Joe, that’s why he’s already had his second college girlfriend and is halfway to his first boyfriend (and probably would already have one if it wasn’t for their mutual relationship with Amber).
Comic Reactions:
One of the more tragic aspects of toxic masculinity is how it poisons everything including homosocial friendships.
Like, either the friendship adapts to the toxicity at which point you end up getting locked into promoting each others’ worst qualities and becoming more and more likely to leap on each other over any perceived femininity. Or the friendships break apart as the less committed to toxicity friend drifts away.
It’s something I’ve noticed in a lot of PUA narratives, the unfocused on story of friends getting frustrated and done with their friends creepy predatory crap and slowly drifting away, the author unaware of what he’s losing for a system that will never bring him what he wants.
Panel 1: I’m really proud of Danny here. It’s really hard to call out a buddy who needs to be called out on hurtful behavior and it’s even harder when it’s your best friend for life that you’ve only just started repairing things with.
And you see that in his pained expression. This is hurting him, but it’s important to him that he says this, because he cares about being a decent guy and wants to keep believing in his friend as a decent guy. And you see that in his words. They are so full of compassion and possibly unearned credit. He tries to highlight that this wasn’t something either of them realized, he speaks to Joe’s “benevolent skewing”, and offers a lot of room for Joe to be earnest and own the harm his list has done.
And you see in Joe’s eyes that this is rough for him too. He’s been running out of friends and this is the one who’s been there for him in every crisis. But it becomes a choice for him. He can stand by his friend and his morality or he can stand by the system that’s been ruining more and more of his life.
Panel 2: And that’s the central tragedy of this PUA shit. Those choices are wrapped up in one’s insecurities and fears and so when it comes down to friends or “the system”, the system ends up winning over. It becomes a sunk costs deal, where the more is sacrificed in mental health, friendships, reputation, career, the more the people stuck in it feel they have to make the system work less all that be wasted.
For Joe? He’s wasted years of his life on this sad boner log and his anti-vulnerability performance. He’s made it the central part of his personal mythology.
And this moment breaks my heart. Danny’s so eager to have Joe just go “yeah, maybe I didn’t think this through all the way”, to show that concern for others he knows is in there, but Joe can’t bring himself to do otherwise than try and defend the system and minimize his culpability.
He sacrifices himself for a toxic cluster of nothing that will only increasingly ruin his life and what he pays in this moment is painful to see. His morality is being tanked as is his empathy just to remove himself from guilt, from vulnerability, from being wrong.
And he just ends up offering excuses. And excuses he knows are bullshit. “Everyone’s listed under pseudonyms”, except we know that there are multiple people listed under their real names and everyone has easily been able to figure out who is who simply from the descriptions and having a passing familiarity with the people around them.
“Nobody’s gonna loiter”, except there was a sexual predator incident that happened right outside the dorms that affected one of his supposedly closest friends.
And it’s the last part that is the most tragic. He’s still defending the crappy dehumanization. Still insisting on these meaningless boner numbers. He can’t bear to let it go.
And I’m not even fully blaming him. It’s very human to double down on bad decisions and the way the system is set up for men, it’s something that gets heavily pressured above admitting fault or ignorance. And for Joe, he’s still reeling and holding on to the fantasy that this isn’t the end of this little LARP game he’s been playing with other people’s lives.
But it’s still tragic to see someone throw it all away for something so mind-numbingly empty and harmful.
I know this is not supposed to be the takeaway from this comment, but “sad boner list” is now one of my favourite terms. Thank you.
Can’t say I really disagree any of your points. Guess I’m just happy this is a Willis storyline, and at least to me the whole point of reading his work is watching someone with faults go through character development and become a better person.
I know! I love that part. I love that when there are bad elements in a character that harm others, it gets highlighted and that characters tend towards redemption arcs, while still depicting the mindsets that block that personal growth.
It makes everything feel real, but hopeful. Which makes it a beautiful thing to disappear into as I watch my country burn.
Panel 3: Wow, Joe. That’s… really fucked. But let me start with Danny.
This is what empathy looks like and what someone who wants to be a good egg’s response to learning the system he is a part of is like. He connects the abstract to the personal, realizes someone deeply close to him was endangered by this and continues to be endangered by this so long as it’s up.
He resists Joe’s attempts to minimize it, he realizes that the violence she suffered at the hands of Ryan is not miles removed from the more casual sexism of Joe. He’s seeing his role in a bad system and it’s destroying him. Like, he’s curling up into himself, his face looks sick, and he’s looking away down at the floor. It’s hammering home.
And on the other end of the spectrum… holy fuckballs.
Like, okay, first up, it’s a bobdamn self-serving lie* specifically designed to shortcut his buddy’s moral development which is bad enough, but it’s also one that threatens to make Danny a worse person by playing on his worst instincts. Phrasing as a compliment what is actually a nasty implication (that a woman deserves to be made unsafe and be publicly shamed for making a hard decision to terminate a relationship that meant a lot to her).
*Because a) he admits it and b) if it wasn’t a lie, Joyce would have already removed his entrails.
And it fits into a toxic narrative. That women who leave men are doing a violence unto those men, that they should be seen as deserving of violence or a lack of protection. And it gets a lot of women murdered by their violent exes. It’s not a good thing.
And Joe dips into it for what? To get his buddy to stop thinking through the implications of a system he is valuing over the well-being of other humans and his own friend’s personal code of ethics? Just to smarm his way out of facing consequences or having to make the hard decision to shut down his sad little boner diary?
And the content of his statement is even worse. Like, fuck, Dorothy is his friend, someone who’s gotten his back in a major way before, someone supposedly important enough to him that he freaked out when he thought he went too far and drove her away.
And he just throws her into the garbage heap out of some creepy bro-code sidebar? Treating her like someone to be hurt and punished like any other “female” who goes against him? It’s a horrible little statement which is why it makes sense why Danny completely breaks when the full implication hits him in Panel 5.
I don’t think Joe’s saying Dorothy deserves anything. He’s saying he did swap her name out for a pseudonym.
One that’s nice to Danny, although yeah at her expense (and that might not be a lie, just because he says it is; he’s, y’know, lying).
It doesn’t really address the underlying issue.
I don’t actually believe Joe even changed the entry like he says. When Joyce was reading off a bunch of entries, she listed the pseudonym, and then her guess as to who it was supposed to be. Until she got to Dorothy, when she just read her name. Maybe there just wasn’t room to fit any more text in the word bubble, but it makes me think she didn’t need to guess, because it was just there.
Ah okay. So he was lying.
Still:
“They’re pseudonyms anyway.”
“Dorothy’s not!”
“I recently changed that.”
He’s saying she’s not especially vulnerable.
…but he’s… lying. Ew.
Well, technically Joe may not be lying, since we don’t know 1) when the list was hacked, and 2) when Joe might have changed the name to a pseudonym. If the list was hacked BEFORE the change, then it would still have Dorothy’s real name on it.
Not that I think is what happened, just putting that possibility out there.
I don’t think it’s a real possibility. Again, Joe immediately admits it was a lie after it doesn’t get the desired reaction from Danny.
If it hadn’t been a lie, I think Joe would have said, “Fine, then I was wrong, you peaked with her, etc.”
Panel 4: This panel breaks my heart. Like, Danny wants their relationship to be healed and have his best friend back and without thinking through the implications and the context, it sounds like something flattering. Like, aw, my best buddy thought the person I always thought was too good for me was actually someone I was too good for and he’s openly calling me his best friend like I’ve wanted him to do again.
A worse egg of a Danny would have taken it at face value and become a little bit worse for having done so.
And Joe… Joe breaks my heart. He’s so smug in this panel, basking in un-earned positive feelings from Danny for a thing that was a desperate distraction and subject change to avoid growing up. He thinks in that smug moment that he’s gamed the conversation, that he can keep his little bro-circle and nothing actually needs to change or be atoned for.
That he can keep carrying on in his self-destructive way. He thinks he “got away with it”, but the “getting away with it” is blocking his own morality, his own growth. And that’s tragic to see him so smug about that.
Panel 5: And here we see it all break. The full implication and context of what Joe did and the level of disregard he just showed Dorothy when she only just barely escaped a sexual predator with a revenge fetish and a knife hits him like a club and all of his desire to go softly, softly just disintegrates.
He was freaking out about the morality and Joe was more concerned about his precious little “system” and preserving it for nothing, even when it’s a clear harm and tried to distract him with that. And it deeply offends Danny. That Joe would seek to make him a worse person, that he would dismiss the critiques of his awful list, that he would try to do something so callous to his friends just to avoid consequences.
It’s like the moment when you fully see what you thought was a friend for what they actually were and it horrifies you and disgusts you. Maybe this friendship is repairable, but this easily could be the point they break once and for all.
And Joe… Joe is scary sometimes. Like, here, he just tried to do that to his friend and instead of going “hey, sorry, I didn’t think things through, I’m scared bro”, he clings to the only emotion he feels he is allowed as a man which is anger and turns it into a cudgel against Danny’s greatest insecurities.
Like, fuck, Danny has fucked himself for years over the fear that if he didn’t listen to his shitty parents and mold himself completely around his relationships, then he would have no value and never have a partner again. That he would die old, cold, and alone. And he’s been terrified that Dorothy was the best partner he’ll ever have and that that fuck up was his peak.
These are things he has genuine phobias and issues surrounding and Joe just stabs him there to make him hurt for the crime of calling him out on his shit and his cynical attempt to change the subject and protect his awful system.
And that makes him dangerous. Someone who will go for those deep insecurities and fears simply for not playing by their internal script is not someone to be trusted and can do immense harm if you let them into your life*. They can destroy a person and leave them a wreck.
*And for those who want to note that Danny calls him something rude, that’s not quite the same. Calling Joe and his list disgusting are harsh, yes, but it targets no deep insecurity or fear. Like, Danny didn’t make a jab at Joe’s parents’ divorce or his fear of vulnerability or any of that. He just called Joe’s actions disgusting, because they were. And yet to that, Joe just goes for the jugular just to make him hurt. That’s the difference.
Joe may be a decent guy in time. A loyal friend, a caring lover, a worthy man. But right now? He needs to spend some time getting over himself and this toxic spiral he’s indebted himself to. He needs to care more about the people he cares about in life than a broken system that has only brought him pain.
But for Joe, that fear of maturity, of vulnerability, of introspection blocks him, just as it does so many other men trapped in toxic masculinity. I hope for his escape, but this was a major setback. Because if he’s even willing to torch his longest friendship for his commitment to the system, then… yeah.
And I think Joe has a very stark choice waiting for him now. And I hope for his sake and Danny’s that he makes the right decision now that he’s gotten this out of his system.
idk i feel like part of it may be that…Joe doesn’t take the idea seriously that there could be anything beyond this?? this is his reality, that he has made himself to fit, and realizing that it’s not reality is…something he is not at all prepared to deal with. that cognitive dissonance is what’s tripping him up here, clinging to the vestiges of old relationships and reassurances.
and, like – he can validate Danny’s sexuality for a little bit because Danny’s the only person still willing to speak to him. but respect Danny’s exgirlfriend? no, that’s not something he’s willing to do, because it’s not something that groks for him.
…i. huh. there are ways you can see this as the toxic masculinity inverse to Joyce’s toxic Christianity.
BECAUSE YEAH. YEAAH. with PUAs and this whole…culture….you can really see it as analogous to a cult, because it clearly operates on some of the same manipulative abusive dynamics. except it operates by teaching its members how to form their own cults. like a pyramid scheme!! a pyramid scheme that just keeps getting shittier.
ahahahahahah w o w
That is indeed a very exceptionally valid view of quite a lot of this type of cultural viewpoint. Unfortunately, in a lot of ways, however, it’s just the inevitable outcome of any particular group taking a hardline stance and becoming part of some of the deepest systemic cultural problems, entrenched factionalization and cultural assimilation.
eh fair enough i mean like any dogma can be used to form a cult if you push it far enough
~murky jerky morally ambiguous gray stuff~
idk at some point cult stuff fades into fascism fades into patriarchy and a whole host of other ills, i guess
Hey.
I just wanted to express support and condolences at HB2796. That shit is as clear a declaration of war as I’ve ever seen that doesn’t actually include the word ‘war.’
8(
It’s a window into the fearful, corrupted soul of conservatism, isn’t it? https://legiscan.com/US/bill/HB2796/2017
ick 🙁 🙁
Interesting that the bill defines gender as based on “genetic sex”. I see lawsuits demanding genetic testing for any legal uses of gender.
It doesn’t say “based on your genitalia” or “based on what the doctor wrote on your birth certificate”.
But yeah, mostly ick.
We’re the new hotness for the bigot set and they will rip us apart and feast on our entrails before they are ripped from power.
The worst part of it is the completely fucked up shit Gohmert and King have been saying about the bill. Like, it’s bad enough having your rights stripped away, it’s worse having them ripped away because of an Infowars-esque word salad of what two scared old white men who think a taco bell is too ethnically diverse believe about us.
The whole thing just leaves me numb.
-hugs-
Hadn’t heard of it…. *googles*
… wait, it’s an OREGON bill? How did they get something through OREGON’S legisla-… …. it’s about music therapy? Huh?
…. oh, wait, there’s an HB 2796 for Washington state, maybe that’s it…. …. colleges need to indicate textbook costs in the course description during registration?
….
Oh, hey, Vulcanodon gave a link! I’m a derp!
*clicks, reads*
…… Eeeeyup. The only thing surprising to me is that they haven’t already pushed it through. Probably another reason to get in way of the AHCA, as if we needed one. The longer they get bogged down with that, the longer it will take them to do anything else.
Also, I can’t quite tell how I feel about that first panel. “You…skew towards benevolence” a.k.a. “you’re not a literal actual rapist”
That’s not good enough, Danny.
“skew towards benevolence” isn’t exactly a ringing endorsement either. To me it sounds like he’s trying to be diplomatic at the start.
Yeah, thay’s exactly how I read it. Diplomatic, but not a full endorsement.
As someone who’s as much as a doormat as Danny has been in the past, it is REALLY hard to call your friends out on their shit even if you secretly strongly disapprove. ;~;
Yeah, I really don’t get how people expect this to go. Joe is not going to change quickly. And if we want him to change quickly I’m not sure why you would want Danny to stay away from Joe. Most people, especially social exiles, congregate to where they are given at least a degree of acceptance and understanding. The crap Joe is getting in-universe is well deserved. And Danny staying away from Joe might be good for *Danny’s* mental health. But if the objective is getting through to Joe and getting him to steer out of a mindset he’s sunk deeper and deeper into for years, then completely isolating him is just asking for a horrible backfire where he starts associating with the wrong crowd.
Basically, neither Danny nor anyone else should have to sacrifice their self esteem, morality, patience, or energy to better Joe. He’s not entitled to anyone’s emotional labor. If being Joe’s friend is not healthy for Danny (and it isn’t!), then he shouldn’t have to be a crutch for Joe’s redemption. If Joe is not willing to even admit he did something wrong, then Danny has every right to walk away from a friendship with someone who hasn’t been supportive, understanding, kind, or empathetic to him, someone who has been demeaning and condescending and right now, cruel to him.
Danny SPECIFICALLY should not have a friend like Joe because of his self worth issues, and it would be some progress for Danny to draw the line and say: “Hey, this is not okay, I’m walking out.”
And if Joe sinks further into douchebaggery after that, it’s not Danny’s fault, it’s his own for being so entrenched in his own bullshit that he won’t even listen to his friends.
Except that Danny seems to me to be in an emotionally healthy place right now and continues to stick with Joe of his own accord. Danny has consistently rebuffed Joe’s approach to life while remaining by his side and influencing him in various ways. Joe isn’t unhealthy for Danny. Danny is healthy for Joe. And Danny seems happy enough doing what he does.
The blame game is one issue. I could blame people for doing drugs, for not paying their rent, for dropping out when things get hard, for refusing to work entry level when they lose their management job, for making all the shitty decisions that lead them to the hole they’re in and the drag they place on society. But people make bad choices and have blind spots no matter what walk of life they’re from. I’m often amazed how so many of the people who share the label “liberal” with me are so tolerant of some shitty ingrained mentalities and want to get them help, but are so quick to emotionally discard people like Joe. If you’ve got personal trauma arising out of it, fine, but the law of probabilities seems to indicate that a significant number of people are treating Joe this way just because he’s a white CIS guy who grew up in a cushier bubble.
Okay, first, that last statement is not a great one because it dances close to the false accusation of reverse sexism/racism. And the fact that you’re trying to use it against me in an argument when I’m defending another white cis dude (Danny) is a little ridiculous.
The facts are that Joe is a dude with significant amounts of privilege that he’s using in harmful ways and some of his toxic mindsets stem directly from being a white cis guy. He doesn’t deserve any slack for this. He isn’t innately entitled to patience for this. ESPECIALLY because he’s not a real person, I don’t have to coddle a fictional character for this. And a lot of people have scars and bad experiences and trauma from dealing with shit exactly like this, so I have a lot less patience for these calls to defend behavior that is ultimately indefensible. I’m going to care a lot more about people who’ve been hurt in real life by the behavior of PUA types like Joe than I am about any feelings I might have about Joe’s potential redemption arc.
Your use of ‘the blame game’ is a false analogy. Joe is absolutely to blame for his actions. He’s not an addict, he’s not depressed or mentally ill, he’s not suffering from societal oppression as far as his sex goes, he is a dude with a history of objectifying and sexually harassing women. He is in control of these actions and he made a deliberate choice, one after another. And people reading this comic who are critical of him have watched it as the comic went on.
That said, Joe isn’t healthy for Danny. And just because Danny continues to stick with Joe, that doesn’t work as ‘proof’ that Joe is healthy because people stick with toxic friends or even just friends who are drifting apart from them for all sorts of reasons, misplaced loyalty, nostalgia, hope, etc. I myself stuck with friends like Joe for a good long while (years!!!) before finally cutting them off. It didn’t make them healthy for me.
Danny doesn’t seem happy doing this. Throughout this whole arc, he’s seemed annoyed with Joe, conflicted, upset that it takes something like this for Joe to spend time with him. Danny, like many people with self worth issues, tends to go out of his way to support others at the expense of himself, even people who might mistreat him. This doesn’t mean it’s behavior that’s healthy for him.
A good friendship, like any good relationship, involves respect on both sides and care on both sides. Joe has dismissed and insulted Danny and made it clear he doesn’t respect or value him unless he’s desperate for company. Joe has made cutting comments to Danny instead of being supportive or helping him. Joe has ignored many of Danny’s attempts to open up to him or talk, citing bullshit or acting like he was bored.
And even now, when Danny in the gentlest terms says: “Hey, we didn’t think about this, maybe she has a point,” Joe refuses to back off of his gross position and just keeps on digging.
If Danny walks away from him for this, it’s justifiable. He might not, but if he does, it’s a good choice. He’s not responsible for saving Joe. I’m not saying Joe is irredeemable or forever awful, but he doesn’t have the right to demand the time and effort of the people around him, especially when they get tired and disgusted with his crap.
Defending Danny? No you’re not. Danny needs no defending here. He’s doing nice things out of the goodness of his heart and isn’t remotely the target of any ire from anybody.
And again, the fact that Joe has privilege and gets zero patience for it is the extremely non-productive mindset I’m talking about. Having a shorter fuse with them because their bubble was comfier, isolating them more than other people who do similar wrongs, that hurts the cause. I don’t expect people with personal sexism trauma to be patient with him. I don’t expect gay people to be patient with early Joyce. But the rest of us? Our cutting of different amounts of slack for people engrained with toxic mindsets based on their class says more about our biases than it does about them. Joe needs to be enlightened, and teaching with pure negative feedback isn’t a poor way to go about it.
And yes, Joe is to blame for his actions in the same way anyone ingrained with a certain culture is to blame for theirs. But blame isn’t the end of the process.
Danny can certainly walk away if he chooses. He has chosen not to and he’s not in a bad mental place because of it. He’s accepted the annoyance and people seem to think he will wilt when he’s showing no sign of it.
Point by point: I’m defending Danny’s decision, if he makes it, to walk away from Joe and stop helping him, and in doing so also defending anyone else who makes this same decision instead of submitting to being a stepping stone for someone else’s progress.
Your ‘rest of us’ strikes me as weird. Who is the ‘rest of us’? Am I? Who do you think has no patience with Joe? I just told you that plenty of people who are critical of Joe ARE people with bad experiences with cisdudes. I just told you that I personally am one of those people who is speaking from long experience with sexism. No woman is safe from the effects of sexism, so there’s that as well.
You’re coming at it from this angle that is: Joe needs to be taught, and people should be patient with him. Mine is: no one who is not a teacher HAS to be patient with him and teach him because that is not their job. Your life is not a teaching opportunity. And the people,especially the women, in the comment section getting angry and ditching people like this do not have to put their anger on hold to be a teachable moment for douchebags like Joe. THAT is what I’m saying.
Joe needs to be taught? Joe needs patience and help? Fine. But people who are victims of sexism, people who are being treated poorly by him, people who are not teachers or even interested in teaching, do not have to swallow their pain or anger to help him be better person and evolve. You’re basically saying that it’s the fault of the people who are being harmed for not being patient enough with the people harming them. That is some rank bullshit.
At no point did I indicate I would be critical of Danny for leaving Joe, and nobody has been, so if you’re defending such a hypothetical decision it’s against a hypothetical opponent. What I am criticizing is people saying that Danny *should* leave Joe. Danny is in a healthy place, is willing to be patient with Joe and is doing the job people with sexism trauma understandably aren’t willing to do.
When I say “rest of us”, I am referring to both the community here and fellow liberals generally.
You should really back up and read my post again, because there is no way you could have honestly typed that last paragraph if you saw what I was saying. I explicitly said I don’t expect people with trauma to be patient with Joe. I do expect them to respect that Danny is doing the job they are not equipped to do. Instead they seem to want Joe completely isolated and exiled.
I read what you said, and I don’t like being condescended to as if I didn’t.
On that subject, I do think Danny should leave Joe because he’s just not a good friend. Taking sexism entirely out of it, he hasn’t been a good friend for a while. And Danny doesn’t owe him any of his time.
I think we just saw Danny lose the patience he’s had so far. (So much patience! It amazes me.) And I think Danny leaving might just be the wake up call Joe needs to realize that he is alienating everyone around him. You can only teach someone who’s willing to learn, and Joe needs to decide if his friends are worth more to him than his crappy worldview.
Well I don’t like being mischaracterized. So the most likely possibilities were thus: (1) I didn’t write what I thought I wrote (which I examined and rejected); (2) you didn’t read what I said (which appears to be what you think I called you out on, which I did not; (3) you didn’t comprehend what I said (which is what I actually called you out on); or (4) you were lying. Given these four options and my examination and dismissal of the first, I went with the option that gave you the most benefit of the doubt. I don’t see how this is condescending to you.
I’ve seen the concerns for Danny’s mental well being and happiness. While it’s a fine sentiment, Danny has volunteered his time and energy of his own accord to help Joe out. He is trying to get through to Joe as his lifelong friend, and has accepted the costs, which he is in a mental position to bear. Isolation is a far worse way to approach this and is precisely the sort of group behavior that drives social exiles into the wrong circles. By sticking with his friend and giving him the patience others aren’t willing to, Danny is doing the world a service.
And count me skeptical on Danny harboring lasting anger at Joe over this. I’m seeing it as Danny simply taking another approach at what he feels is the right time.
Accusing someone of ‘not comprehending’ as if their ability to read is lacking is condescending. And you’re still doing it. You can say things that give an impression you didn’t mean, which is also a possibility. And I don’t really have the energy to take apart everything you said to defend my reading of your statements, so I’m not going to bother at this point.
I never argued that Danny would remain angry. My only argument is that I’m on the side of people who think Danny should leave Joe if he’s burned out on Joe’s nonsense, because Joe’s been pretty awful. If he doesn’t, great. If he’s still in position to help Joe, great. But he doesn’t have to, Joe’s not entitled to it, and honestly I wouldn’t be fussed if he didn’t.
That isolation vs. support argument is super complicated because…well, it’s case by case. There are some people who are manipulators or who see your sticking with them as support no matter what you do. Those are people who need ditching. There are people who will learn and appreciate your support and lash out when isolated. I can’t tell which Joe is yet. Joyce is the latter.
If I think you are wrong, saying you are wrong is not condescention. If you are wrong about what I said, then I will say so. You obviously have the ability to read, we are communicating in written form. But if somone reads the words and gets the wrong idea of what they mean, then they are still not comprehending the message. Hence my suggestion of a second reading. Thinking that the person I’m debating doesn’t understand my message isn’t condescending if they have demonstrated that they do not understand my message.
I don’t see any signs of burn out or mental instability on Danny’s part. Much of what I’ve seen has been people telling Danny to leave Joe because of some mental issues which show no sign of manifesting or because Joe doesn’t deserve help. I say that approach is unproductive.
It’s a good point about manipulators. Robin, despite ultimately leaving affected by her time with Leslie, did manipulate Leslie’s affections and Leslie would have been better off cutting off all ties. Joe seems like a simple guy to me. He never created the list out of a desire to manipulate.
“But put that list in the hands of a REAL creep-”
What the hell is Danny talking about? Does the list include personal identifying information, or is it literally just a list of first names with numbers next to them? What nefarious use could anyone get out of the list, and if there IS nefarious use, isn’t that Rachel’s fault and not Joe’s, since she’s the one who published it?
As a hypothetical example, someone could laser their focus on “Desperate Chubby Cheerleader” or the naive churchy blonde girl.
Rachel also did not publish it.
But the only way you could know Joyce is the churchy girl is if you know Joyce, and if you know Joyce, then you already know Joyce, and presumably already know what she looks like.
I think the idea is that “a real scumbag” would take Joe’s ratings and pick out a target based on them. They also came with little descriptions according to Joyce rattling off her own, and they had to be detailed enough that women were able to find out their rankings.
Also I think the implication is that the women rated are mostly from Clark Wing, so someone would know who to search for.
So? Joyce’s entry not providing much of any use doesn’t negate the fact that other entries (like Billie’s) clearly did, and as Danny noted, some women (like Dorothy) are listed by their real name.
Remember that what Joyce listed off was merely the pseudonyms and ratings. For her own entry, we got that AND a couple paragraphs of description.
Billie would likely be identifiable from “Chubby Cheerleader” on its own. Who knows how much else Joe put in the description for her or anyone else?
But even if NONE of the entries had ANY specifically harmful information, the entire point of the list is a “who to fuck” guide. Even if not one person ever actually expressed interest in the list or actually looked at it, THAT is what the list was for. That’s the purpose for which Joe created and shared it. If used as intended, any girl with a relatively high rating could expect to have a noticeable uptick in creepy dudes approaching them in or around the building where they sleep.
Once you have a good target you just go looking for whomever suits the description. ‘churchy blond girl’ and ‘desperate chubby ex-cheerleader’ are not going to be hard to find.
You might make the point that it’s the leaker’s fault, IF not for the fact that Joe was already giving out the password like candy and it’d be very easy for it to get into the wrong hands just straight from him.
Was he? I actually didn’t know that, but then he’s got no right to complain about it leaking
Well, he offered it to at least one person (Jacob) without him actually asking for it. (Heck, if anything Jacob might have been a bit offended by it.)
http://www.dumbingofage.com/2017/comic/book-7/02-everything-youve-ever-wanted/boyspizzaretreat/
You know, this strip does make me think… maybe the ‘hacker’ was Raidah. No evidence, just a guess, but she would fit the profile…
– She was offended by the idea of a ‘do’ list
– We’ve seen from her actions with Sarah that she doesn’t always have a lot of empathy (and as such wouldn’t care how publishing the list affected others)
– Even if she’s not a computer expert, she might have obtained the password from Jacob (or overheard it when Joe passed it on.)
I’ve been thinking this as well!
I actually read that strip as him sending it to Raidah, when she’s all disgusted by the idea of the list
– “You have a ‘do list’?”
– “Oh, did I forget to send you the password?”
Raidah’s been my suspect since day one of when it became clear the list had been publicised.
Or maybe day two. Let me check…
No, it’s been since day one.
Still, not entirely sure about it. And of course, we all know that DYW likes to change the plot based on how we guess things are going, just to prove us all wrong.*
So in the end, it must’ve been Jocelyne that did it!
*And anyone saying I’m being completely paranoid and incapable of admitting that I might simply be wrong will be thrown in the Imperial Dungeon!
Rachel didn’t publish it.
It would still be primarily Joe’s fault for creating it at all regardless of who published it because remember, he had an RSS feed and subscribers and gave out the password, he was still sharing it, just not as widely as this.
The list could be used in several nefarious ways – at the lowest level, it encourages trying to find out who the description applies to like a creepy scavenger hunt and increased sexual harassment of women over rankings they can’t control. It turns sex with women into a game which in more dangerous hands could result in it being a mark list for sex crimes as well as it would add a thrill aspect by having to find, identify, possibly stalk and isolate your targets which would be rather disturbing but entirely possible.
Even if someone who finds list doesn’t know their exact locations, they would only need to find ONE of the people listed and stalk them back to campus or dorms to suddenly know where a fair number of these people are.
Joe’s descriptive pseudonyms and descriptions also tend to, whether intentionally or not, include topic starters that could allow someone to start to try to win their trust and trick them into having sex with them and then drop them entirely. Sal? Smokes. Billie? Cheerleader. Joyce? Christian. While this wouldn’t be breaking the law at least, it would still be morally repugnant to treat women this way as ‘conquests’.
“Joe’s descriptive pseudonyms and descriptions also tend to, whether intentionally or not, include topic starters that could allow someone to start to try to win their trust and trick them into having sex with them and then drop them entirely. Sal? Smokes. Billie? Cheerleader. Joyce? Christian.”
Using Joyce’s faith to earn her trust is exactly what Ryan did.
Predatory people would look at this and see an opportunity, or in several cases, a vulnerability. It wouldn’t be too hard to read between the lines and see “this girl is naive and trusting”, “this girl is very insecure about her attractiveness”, “this girl is promiscuous”.
uuuggghhh. I’m so sick of Joe Joe-ing it up, I’m picturing Vimes yelling “don’t rate women, joe!” instead of “where’s my cow?!”
omg
Is that a ten? She says “fuck off.”
That is not a number. That is Rachel. Women are most certainly not numbers. Don’t rate women, Joe!
he would
…that would make the most amazing bedtime story
I think that was in reference to the other time he said that. Which is a bit extreme for this case.
r u kidding me that is a fabulous bedtime story whether he’s telling it to the essence of darkness or to his son
shuk the fuck up and go to sleep, kiddos
It was, but now I wanna know what Zoe is thinking 🙂
honestly i have no idea what the “other time” is, or what the “he” is in Matt’s comments. i am completely and utterly baffled. did Vimes actually have to tell an Ankh-Morpork Joe not to rate women at some point in his career?? are there somehow two times Joe was told in-canon to not rate women? or are we talking about Vimes’ novel where he starts out telling his kid a bedtime story at a specific time every day and ends it fighting the power of darkness to get back to his kid to tell him his bedtime story and permanently jailing that amorpheous son of a gun
i went with the last one, so, like, i mean, i guess that’s what it meant. but mostly also i could totally see Vimes telling his son a bedtime story about why it’s bad to rate women. like. that would be totally and completely up his alley. it would probably go something like “and then the seamstress yelled ‘Don’t rate women, Joe!’ and dumped all his underthings in the Ankh-Morpork river, leaving him to run naked and embarrassed through the city streets with ‘mother….lover’ embroidered onto his back. Don’t rate women, young Sam. They’re people just like us.”
Nah, the real question is… what would happen is Sybil found the list? Or Havelock? Or Angua or Carrot? Vimes managed to not kill/arrest Rust or Selachii, and as bad as Joe is, those are far worse. Joe is a douchebro, but he’s not Carcer or Wolf.
If Carrot found the list, he’d give Joe a slightly disappointed look, and Joe would find himself deleting the entire website page and apologizing to everyone in the dorm before he knew what hit him.
If Sybil found it, Joe would either end up celibate or develop a thing for older women.
The last speech bubble is missing a period
Don’t rate women, Joe.
Not Enough nopenopenopenopenope
I think I can sum up both my own reaction and Danny’s ultimate reaction thusly: AAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!*
*read in either anguish or anger, which ever you think sounds better
Anyone else notice how the way Joe’s insult to Danny frames the latter’s worth as being tied to his girlfriend or lack thereof perfectly summarizes both PUA and popular culture?
Yeah. It’s also kind of Queerphobic because Joe knows Danny is bisexual. ☹️
Is it? Saying he “peaked with Dorothy” doesn’t seem like it specifically excludes the possibility of same-sex relationships. “Dying alone” would suggest the lack of a girlfriend or boyfriend equally
Or am I just not seeing it? (which is entirely possible)
I don’t see it either.
I read it as he peaked with the first person that he dated, no specific gender attached.
I agree with you on the not queerphobic.
Actually the opposite: With Joe having no problem re Danny being bi it would then make the last panel remark hurt even more: “Even with females and males in your scope of romantic partners, you’ll die alone”.
Christ, that insult Joe slings at Danny is pretty much what his emotionally abusive mom said to him when she found out he and Dorothy broke up.
OUCH!!!
I just noticed a subtle shift in this strip.
For the first three panels, Danny is taking some measure of ownership of the situation. The List Crisis is a “we” thing, at least to a degree. He feels that the responsibility was partially on him — on both of them, but partially on him — to consider all the ramifications of the list.
Which… maybe as a human being living in society it is, and maybe as the person who helped set up the list’s “security” back in single-digit-grades it is, and maybe as the guy who might in a perfect unobtainable world be someone Joe would listen to is, but by and large isn’t. This is JOE’S crisis. Yet Danny seems to be taking partial ownership of it.
Yet by Panel 5? It’s all on Joe.
Joe wouldn’t follow Danny into responsibility-land. I think if he had, Danny would have been willing to stay there.
But by panel 5, Joe’s attempt to shuck responsibility was bothering Danny more than Danny’s own responsibility.
That seems reasonable to me. I don’t think Danny was escaping responsibility in panel 5. He was focusing on the biggest disconnect between attitude and fact: Joe.
Joe is just a sexist asshat who is doing everything he can to avoid owning up to his actions. Most of the people around him would definitely be better off without him in their lives at this point.
I love Danny
who’s got benevolent sexism for tonight’s theme ding ding ding
i.e. just because you think you’re “benevolent” doesn’t mean that you actually are
also??? thinking you can label other people as a determinator of their identity in relation to your own has never stopped being creepy
idk it just seems like joe really…struggles with seeing people outside of the roles he’s cast for them in his life, and his life is one big porno. but if his life isn’t one big porno, what even is it??? a neutral thing that’s whatever you make of it?? bullshit
this probably makes much more sense as a post but you know what, i have adhd, it’s midnight, i officially have gone past the event horizon of caring, formatting can suck it and it doesn’t matter how you do it as long as you do it anyways
Actually, one post per paragraph isn’t so bad for formatting. Way better than wall-of-text
eyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy thanks
Paternalistic males tend towards a benevolent form of sexism. Benevolence is a good trait in itself, but it never guarantees harmlessness.
I’m not so sure that paternalistic male sexism is harmless. In a mythical world where women are happy with the choices made for them, it could be harmless.
But in a world where women are adult people with their own minds? A paternalistic sexist is likely to double down and try to squelch those minds wherever they disagree with him.
Oh no, I didn’t say paternalism is harmless. I was referring to it as a benevolent form of sexism. It still tends to be harmful.
ye just because you try to be benevolent doesn’t mean you actually end up being benevolent
maybe you just enjoy the feeling of being benevolent, and not the actual action of doing it
Who’s got two thumbs and doesn’t understand how creepers would end up being any different from using the list?
haha same
they’d just have more information to work with
This is a really interesting followup to the whole issue of Joe.
My feelings towards the guy have gone on a bit of a roller-coaster. Like, on the one hand, should be be blamed and shamed and isolated for being open about his desire to have as much sex as possible with as many willing women as possible? Divorced from context, no, not really. But there IS context in both Joe himself and the greater situation.
At the end of the day, you don’t get cookies for not being a rapist. You DO deserve a lot of public ridicule if you treat women exclusively as sex objects, and exponentially more if you do so in a way that actually endangers their lives. Heck, he can’t even admit to his own culpability, or the fact that – however unintentionally – he did a bad thing and hurt people.
And on a separate note, he’s been a TERRIBLE friend to Danny and Dorothy. After disappearing from Danny’s life through his lowest points and treating Danny’s own willingness to be vulnerable as a direct betrayal, he now only shows concern for Danny’s mental health once Danny’s behavior takes a dramatic shift (and involves noisy ukulele practice). Concern that immediately evaporates once he realizes that he has worse things to worry about than tangled chords. Concern which he only feigns to steer Danny back in line with his own interests. Danny – like most people with poor self-images – didn’t realize that he was doing all the heavy lifting in their friendship and that Joe hasn’t really offered much of anything. And finally – FINALLY – the wool is leaving Danny’s eyes.
What I find really sad about how a crappy friend he is, is that one of his HIGHEST points in the comic so far is apologising to Dorothy back when his jokes went to far. He obviously cared about her, he obviously respected her and he could arse himself to drop his bro-persona for a moment and give her a sincere apology.
That was great, so that’s why his crappy treatment of her now is extra crappy.
Joe kind of straddles the line. On the one hand, I’m a big believer in sex positivity, and people shouldn’t be shamed because they like sex or because they’ve had a lot of (consensual) sex partners. On the other hand, Joe, while he never pushes beyond “No”, does have a tendency to only see women as far as “how desirable they are as sexual partners”. In and of itself, this is fine as long as you don’t TREAT women with contempt, derision or hostility (you can’t control how people think, and the day when we DO start making thoughts illegal is a day that I think should fill all of us with terror), but a lot of guys who fall into this mindset do not, and that’s the real world issue we need to tackle.
He doesn’t actually accept that No either. He keeps pushing around it, trying to find a way to get to yes.
Until the yelling or the threats start. At which point, he gets to treat the girl as a crazy bongo.
Is there a plot thread wherein the reason behind all those points being learned/reactions on his parent’s interactions (mainly his father’s acts)?
What would a person do with a list of nicknames and arbitrary attractiveness ratings?
Did he put information about them like contact info, social media information, or other information that a stalker mind find use for?
Yeah, he’s a dick for itemizing people (you are only allowed to do that if you are in Congress and trying to take people’s health insurance like that sociopath Paul Ryan). But I do not see any actual danger.
It includes physical descriptions in most of the pseudonyms and presumably, they all have descriptions like Joyce’s did. Sexual harassment, sexual assault, rape and stalking based on the information in the list are all possible – they’d only need to find and stalk one of them to the dorms to know where several are after all (like how Ryan only had to follow Dorothy). I’ve commented on this to a couple of people above as well.
That isn’t even the only danger though if you think about it as a serial killer could also pick a target off it, a kidnapper could pick a target off it, a racist looking to assault someone to make a point could always pick a ‘suitable’ target off it. The list inherently encourages you to see the people on it as targets and there are a lot of bad types of people that could take advantage of that.
Scroll up a bit to read Sam’s explanation of the risks.
(I’m not explaining it myself because I’m not good at that kind of thing.)
Oh look, Sam replied themself. Just now. Coincidence much.
I only dabble in the comments occasionally, could someone answer me this – is the general consensus on the “Joe=Bad” train that the List itself is bad, or his attitude towards it, or is it mainly the fact that it was, if not publicly available, then heavily advertizd as a thing that exists and can potentially be read?
All of the above.
Joe’s attitude and behavior towards women was bad enough on its own. If kept to himself, Joe’s list and rating system would simply have been a manifestation of that demeaning, objectifying way he views women.
The way he repeatedly told women his rating of them and acted like it should matter made it worse.
Putting the list online and making a point of trying to share it, even with people he had only just met made it worse still.
Wow, Joe is such an amazing *sshole, isn’t he? The sad thing is that in real life there are guys that can be just total tools and yet girls will still fall for them (at least for one night). At our college we had a guy named Bo who was a one-trick pony; he’d go up to a girl at a party and ask a girl point-blank “do you spit or swallow?” It didn’t matter how many girls he offended (he got drinks in his face and slapped on more than one occasion), eventually he’d leave with a girl. So I guess he scored a lot more frequently than anybody else, but I wouldn’t want that many girls thinking I was a total douche-canoe (like Joe finds himself right now).
It’s really gonna be nigh impossible to come back from this.
Good job Joe.
Good job Willis.
Several commenters have defended the idea that because pseudonyms are used, the list wouldn’t be useful to sexual predators. But a sexual predator would see that list and be fascinated by it. They’d start decoding it, figuring out who is who. Like a sick little puzzle to solve.
Any list containing any listings related to people, is open to the sort of abuse you’re mentioning, so I don’t think that counts.
The rating does aggravate it, but we shouldn’t excuse the individual actions of sexual predators by blaming it on lists.
Piffle. There is a big difference between “lists” and a “Do List”.
Thank you, a succinctly put point on how it can be damaging.
Old, cold and alone – Joe projecting his worst fear. He’s going to end up like Jack Nicolson in Carnal Knowledge. Focused on casual sex as a preventative for being alone, thus making sure he end up alone.
Didn’t Jack Nicholson die like that in The Shining, as well? Especially cold?
You’re a real piece of work, Joe. I award you no points, and may god have mercy on your soul.
Everyone dies alone, Joe.
Ooh. Nice Dresden Files reference.
The door is one person wide
–Malcolm
Everybody dies frustrated and sad, and that is beautiful.
Eat Friendly’s.
Good Danny, dont let his silver tongue get to you
So Joe and Danny leaked the list together?
I did not see that coming.
Awww, I loved that little friendship moment, for the panel that it lasted.
It lasted through all the panels.
OK, you have to admit, they’re kind of adorable together. I never thought I’d say this about Joe of all people. But it’s hilarious watching them interact.
Now I can only think of that one scene in Bravest Warriors.
“OLD! ALONE! BANANAS!”
He almost accepted the challenging thought.
Aha! The secret to Joe’s charm: he’s been practicing on his bisexual best
friend the entire time.
I would like to take this opportunity to remind everyone of Hanlon’s Razor. “You should never attribute an action to malice when stupidity is a reasonable explanation”