I had roomies named Joy and Joey, and that was quite bad enough, thank you, especially in those pre-cell days of landlines.
A call would come in for one of them and no matter how carefully the caller tried to enunciate, the only way to get the right one for sure straight off would be to ask, “Boy Joey or girl Joy?”
Or name a boy and a girl named Aaronn and Erin. We had that in my fraternity. Aaronn told us we could call him “Ay Ay Ron” (Key and Peele reference) but some people refused to and insisted that you could hear a difference in the pronunciation of “Airon” and “Ehrin” and got all pissy when you asked for clarification.
Specifically Arial, which I’d like to pretend I know because I recognize it having seen it so often in my youth, but which I actually know because I opened up the page’s html source and ctrl+F’ed the word “font” until I found something with a font name
A lot of variations are from translating through cultures, and then there’s the tradition of naming boys after their father or grandfather. Results in more standardized spelling.
I once dated an Irish girl who was a bit put off when I was able to spell “siobhan” correctly. I think she was a little to used to crowing over people getting it not even close. Since like many Irish names it isn’t spelled anything even remotely close to phonetically. She-vahn? She-von? Shive-ahn? I give up.
Also, I hate it when I forget my remote-universe-detonator. I’m always leaving it in the bowl with my car keys…
Actually, Irish is spelled phonetically (or at least as phonetically as English). It’s just that Old English and Old Irish were exposed to the Latin alphabet at around the same time and they weren’t exactly on speaking terms back then. As a result, English and Irish developed two completely different spelling systems as the Latin Alphabet was ham-fisted onto the two languages.
Off the top of my head I’d say Shinead or Sinèad are also valid spellings?
Hmm, Wikipedia says it’s the Irish form of the same root as Joan or Jane. 😂
I remember finding out that Shawn, Sean and Shaun were are pronounced the same. Boggled the mind.
A certain video game came out with a character called Sara. I was actually yelling at my computer, because where I’m from, “Sara” is always pronounced “sah-ra”, not “sair-ra”, and it made me irrationally angry.
In this case, I think the point is he’s interacted with her before and should know her name; guessing would mean he didn’t care enough to remember, and doing that regularly implies a PUA-like level of disrespect for women as individuals.
Using people’s name makes them like you more. Proven fact in psychology. If you can somehow glean someone’s name, be it from a nametag, facebook, or one of their friends, you can start using it immediately and put that person more at ease with your presence.
There’s also a degree of embarrassment in someone else knowing your name and you not knowing there’s. If you can find a not-creepy way to find out and use someone’s name, they’re forced by social pressure to find out what yours is. That gives you an ‘in’ for further conversation, because now it isn’t just you talking to them, they asked you something.
Really, this is all beginner-level social aptitude stuff. Being a pick-up artist is basically just utilizing that in order to be promiscuous.
That’s not universally true, whatever psychology says about it. I work retail, and having customers use my name immediately often feels weird and intrusive. Like I didn’t introduce myself to you, what right do you have to know my name.
This.so.much, it is like telemarketing people (are they people?) starts using my first name. Let me put it this way, unlike normaly they don’t get the “click” in the ear, but an earful of … hmm … well chosen opinions of their heritage and choice of career.
We are decidedly people, and most of us hate our jobs. On the same token, most of us who work (or worked telemarketing) did or do it because there’s no other gig in town and we’re desperate for work. Or we lack the physical capacity to do a job that requires standing, and so our choices are narrow.
Not a fun thing. I mean, I personally loved it when I did survey calls. Those were a lot of fun and could often lead to fun conversations with people. But overall? Telemarketing is a crappy racket and we don’t want to do it either.
I’ve done it once because everybody I’ve known who worked retail complained about never being addressed by their name despite the presence of a name tag. I’m not sure which is more common – wanting to be addressed by name or not.
Absolutely, I’ve seen people perk up when addressed by their name. Always thought it had something to do with being polite and acknowledging their humanity, rather than just treating them like a faceless automaton in a Mickey D’s uniform.
Well, in that one case I was asking her how her name was pronounced and told her it was pretty (so did my boyfriend) and she seemed to perk up so hopefully I did a good.
The name tag also allows you to identify people, whether or not you address them by name. Management likes this as it makes it easier for them to track what their employees are doing by way of customer feedback. (Even if you’re going directly to the store manager with compliments/complaints, saying, for example, “they were a white woman with brown hair” isn’t always enough to identify someone).
That’s probably because sociologically speaking it is blurring the lines between the formal and informal relationship you have with them as a customer and as a person. It sounds like you’d like to keep it neatly formal. I vaguely speculate without sufficient details.
Another psych grad who learned that but also agrees it’s a case by case basis. Working retail I did NOT like customers calling me my name unless they were regulars and We were cool. Or they could ASK to call me my name or if I introduce myself it’s okay, but… i dunno, just don’t use my name in retail situations.
Case by case basis, but I think that the overwhelming ‘no, that’s wierd’ coming from this comment section has more to do with Dave Willis’ comics attracting insular geeks than anything else. We’re not a very representative sample of the general public. That applies to a lot of things when it comes to this communities skewed perception of just about everything vis-a-vis society as a whole.
Most ‘rules’ that social psych comes up with aren’t true for every human being, but are true for a large enough subset of the population for exceptions to be statistical outliers. Your typical outgoing non-geek person isn’t reading this comic because their reaction to the world ‘webcomic’ is a vacant stare and perhaps a dismissive comment about nerds.
Context is important. I prefer people use my last name if our relationship is strictly business or professional. I’m smart enough to know that a telemarketer using my first name is hoping to sell me some crap and wants to manipulate me into buying it. I tend to resent the attempt at manipulation because I know the comraderie is false and a pretense. If I don’t understand your motives I might feel differently.
Then too, I’ve seen debt collectors call you up and use your first name as a way to confirm who you are. So I’m instinctively wary when I hear people I don’t recognize throwing my name around like we’re the oldest of friends.
Not specifically but name guessing is generally a scammy con artist type of trick where they know the most common names so they can make a good guess of what your name is likely to be even if they didn’t care to remember it at the time. It is like how scammy fake psychics would be able to in a room full of people find someone with a connection to a David or a Peter but never ask for names odd for the region like Rexford or Mateo.
So while not specifically a PUA thing, it is still not really in your favour to know the most common names and use that for evidence of why it wasn’t a lucky guess…
Especially since, in this case, Joe’s dead wrong. Sarah was in the top 5 for both her current birth year (1998) and Joe’s (1999). Mary and Patricia are far, far lower on those lists and have been for some time. Sarah’s much more popular. If he were truly quoting the lists for back then, he’d be better off guessing Emily or Hannah – or, if he’s quoting the most current list, Emma, Olivia, or Isabella.
It’s also, he comes from a Jewish background. Sarah is an exceedingly common name in Jewish groups, so this would not be an uncommon name to guess if he was guessing names.
Maybe he doesn’t have the by-year numbers memorized and is just going by the average?
My very first Google search for this agrees with Joe that Mary and Patricia are the top choices and Sarah is #23. And if that’s wrong… well, Joe wouldn’t be the first person to think that Google made him an expert.
Interesting, because when I search for popular names, I usually get the list for the current year.
Also, Mary and Patricia are the number one and two because for a long time, Mary had a stranglehold on the number one slot on the yearly lists. We have the yearly lists going back to – I think – the 1880s for the US. So, while those names may be most popular over all, if Joe’s mostly interacting with college age women, he’d have far more luck guessing things like Emily, Hannah, Jessica, etc. Mary and Patricia have had a very sharp decline for a long while.
So protip Joe: if you are genuinely trying to be better, don’t use the phrase “sexually exiled”.
Further protip: be understanding when women don’t immediately believe you’ve become not-a-shitheel in an afternoon; actions take longer to establish and actions are all that matter.
I think “sexually exiled” means that Danny and Ethan’s cuddle party moved to Danny’s (and Joe’s) room. At least, that’s what it would have meant in my dorm. (Often abbreviated to “sexiled”, of course. And romantic cuddling would get the same term, because otherwise you have to be nosy to find out exactly what the touching people are/were doing.)
Hmm. It’s possible, Ethan did talk about getting Danny to his room to sleep, but cuddling his sleeping body would be…kinda super duper weird. And Danny didn’t look like he’d be functional to wake up anytime soon.
My imagination might be going overboard with the thought of a sleepy Danny waking up just enough upon being moved to say something like “u stay? zzzz”.
Possible, but I don’t think it fits the context. It doesn’t make sense in terms of “trying to redirect my social energy elsewhere”. He’s trying to convince Sarah he’s changed, not that he just can’t go to his room right now.
Not to shut down your imagination, of course. Carry on. 🙂
I was trying to figure out why that line bothered me and it hit me. It’s such an “incel” way of looking at the situation. For those blissfully ignorant of this hate group, incels are people who call themselves “involuntarily celibate” and mostly kvetch about how cruel women are to them for not sleeping with wanna-be serial killers and harassing folks.
Like, he’s taken his action and pushed it more on women. It’s not “I fucked up and have earned a bad reputation by my actions”, it’s “I’ve been cut off from the pussy train and so now need to bother random strangers until they know I’m good now.
Yessss Sarah. I hope part of this conversation also calls him out for outsourcing his emotional labor onto the first girl he saw. he could have gone to Danny or another guy friend, but instead he just stood there and tried to talk to the first woman that passed by, whether because of those emotional labor conventions or because even in a moment of introspection he can’t imagine passing up an opportunity to talk to women, even about something other than his normal topics.
Hell, that would’ve been a much better choice than Sarah. I think if he’d gone to Danny to sincerely talk about feelings, Danny would’ve cried tears of joy. After verifying that Joe wasn’t running a deliriously high fever, that is.
See, I don’t think this is a case of first girl he saw. I think he’s reaching out to someone he has a sort of connection to (see e.g. their last interaction http://www.dumbingofage.com/2017/comic/book-7/02-everything-youve-ever-wanted/romans/ ), albeit a connection that is mired in his PUA bullshit, but possibly with hints that there could be something genuine underneath if he stopped Joeing it up.
Joe only has two friends and they’re both unavailable. What he could do, though, is find some way to self-soothe until one of them *is* available. Read a book or something, Joe.
This! I feel like guys are taught to undervalue emotional labor and are not aware of how often they are socialized to ignore how much free emotional labor they frequently expect from any woman near them.
Him dumping that on a woman who has repeatedly told him to go away in other contexts is the central reason why this interaction is going so amazingly poorly for him.
In all seriousness: admitting that Joyce talks about her a lot would probably be a little too personal for him right now. He’s still new at trying to be “a people” instead of whatever mask he was putting on before, so brutal honesty is better (in his mind) than something that could lead to possible emotional vulnerability.
Robin’s wedding? (not only does God answer lesbian prayers, his son does lesbian weddings!)
Though Joyce wasn’t particularly religious in that context.
I was thinking that for a while now. They have both been looking for casual sex with no commitments, and if she could ignore her dislike of him for a moment, she might notice he looks a lot like her primary lust-object. Of course, that might be a huge step back for Joe, depending on how it goes down.
As I have to explain repeatedly and often to dudes on okcupid, looking for casual sex with *someone* does not mean looking for casual sex with *anyone*, and Sarah’s opinions on Joe are very very clearly stated at the current time.
Yeah, but Sarah doesn’t like ANYBODY. Even Joyce makes her cranky. Her dislike of Joe doesn’t necessarily mean she thinks he’s any worse than any other guy. Except maybe Jacob.
Joe and Jacob are both built like a wall, but that’s the extent of their similarities.
Quite aside from being different races and the phenotypic differences that come with that, they’ve got totally different styling (Joe favouring douchey bro styling, Jacob either neutral-casual or sharp as a razor).
You know that whole trope where a woman gets extremely angry at someone and loudly expresses how much they hate that person, but it turns out she actually wants to fuck him really badly?
It’s complete bullshit. A harmful myth used to justify ignoring someone clearly, emphatically saying “no”, when its only true maybe one time in a thousand.
To be fair, Dumbing of Agehas gone down that path once already, with it kinda being the Ruth/Billie origin story in this ‘verse.
Which doesn’t disprove the point (as the beginning of Billie and Ruth’s relationship was…all kinds of messed up), and actually makes it less likely that the same thing would be done a second time for a different pairing.
Yes, but Billie never shrieked in Ruth’s face that she was not on her menu and she never threatened someone making an unwanted advance with testicular torsion in Ruth’s presence.
It’s true they hated each other, but different kinds of hate than Sarah and Joe.
IIRC, Billie gave Ruth a very very firm “no” and Ruth no longer attempted anything with her. Then Billie ended up being the one that progressed the relationship.
Rare? He did it once, and then took no for an answer. He’s implied he’d like to sleep with her, but made no advances after she made it clear she was “not on your menu, carnivore!”
He basically went “I’m not going to mention I have easy access to a sex swing” at her LONG after she told him to back the fuck off, which is the same as straight up mentioning it. He has NOT respected her boundaries at all, WHICH IS THE ENTIRE POINT OF HIS ARC RIGHT NOW.
Considering he’s already has a story of trying to get another shot in after being shot down (see Fart Captor’s link), I’m saying Shiro’s interpretation is much more likely to be correct.
Heck, remember when Raidah mentioned open disgust about his “to do” list, and the first thing he did was sending her a link to it?
Or when Joyce had hired a chaperone, and the first thing he did was trying to get rid of said chaperone?
Joe’s got quite a history of ignoring “no” until it has to be yelled at him (or worse), and then tries to act like it’s their fault for saying no.
On the other hand, at that point he had already had it shouted at him and explicitly said he’d abandon his attempts to flirt (or whatever you call it) with Sarah. I wouldn’t swear on it, but I think in between the shouting and the meeting Joe and Sarah had interacted without any hitting-on taking place.
As for Raidah, grossing out girls is a time-honoured tradition of all little boys. And my impression of Joe is that he’s firmly in the camp of not going for someone else’s girlfriend since that would be a huge violation of every bro-code. Correct me if I’m wrong, please. As things stand, however, I wouldn’t read too much into that.
Joyce hiring a chaperone happened way in the beginning, it was the first time Joe encountered… let’s call it “strong objections” to his ways in this comic. By the time of the sex-swing incident he’d already started to change, I’d say. Furthermore, if you went on a date, would you want MIKE of all people to chaperone you?
No. In fact, I’d likely cancel the date then and there.
I would not however proceed with it and try to bribe the chaperone to disappear in the middle of it. Cause that’s crap.
And yes, he explicitly said he was done hitting on her. So what? He lied. People do that. Maybe he even thought he was telling the truth, since he didn’t actually ask her again – he just commented on “what she was doing to him”.
Names are overrated. They have nothing to do with who we are as people. They don’t describe us, aren’t relevant to our personalities in any way, they’re just meaningless words. No wonder it is so hard to remember them sometimes. We should really have a better system.
Well most nicknames are just shorter versions of one’s given name, in which case they have the same problem of not being descriptive enough to be memorable. But if they actually are descriptors then yes, excellent.
I think people grow into their names, and most names mean stuff! (Mine is ‘God is my light’ or ‘A light unto me’, and it’s very apt.)
The other day I met a 3rd Grader named Gabriel who was disappointed to learn he might be named after an angel, until I informed him it was the cool Old Testament kind of angel, like the kind who would carry a flaming sword. He liked that way more. I’ll have to look up what it means literally, in case I see him again.
My irl name means “from England”–which was always vaguely disappointing to me, as I am not, but now it looks like that’s where I’ll end up. I did not select my partner with this in mind, but here we are!
Mine taken literally, is “The king of success in the universe”, and my brothers are “king of politics in the universe” (we keep telling him to deal with Trump before he starts another world war)and ” King of promotion in the universe”, while if you just base it on phonetics they mean “yellow steamed fish”, “yellow boiled fish” and “yellow shallow fried fish”. I kinda prefer the first meaning.
Well, that’s how names started in the first place, by something descriptive. Like hey, you, that guy who lives by that big rock. Then the process evolved and now everyone is named Mary or Patricia.
I have to disagree. Names can be very important for people. Otherwise, nobody would ever bother to take time and care when changing them. And while they may not literally describe a baby’s future personality (that would be a pretty tall order for someone who’s only just had a baby) they do sometimes describe physical traits, offer a reference to someone important to their parents denoting history, or describe what the parents thought/hoped the baby would be.
Sure, they can be important to YOU. But a names primary purpose is not for the benefit of the person who bears it, it’s for the benefit of others. As such, it makes more sense to have it be something which actually describes some aspect of who the person is, which makes it easier to remember. Obviously that is difficult to pick for a baby. So maybe don’t give them a full name until later.
I think we’re going to have to disagree because I don’t see a person’s name’s primary purpose as being for the benefit of other people. It’s for the person living with it first and foremost. If you forget a random person’s name, oh well, odds are you won’t see them again. Meanwhile your own name can and often are very important to people and saying they only matter for other people seems reductive to me.
You don’t need a name to remember who you are. It’s so that other people can refer to you. You don’t need it. They do. But I respect that you feel differently.
You say that like you never need to refer to yourself. Also a way to sum up everything without needing to make a long clunky descriptor (which would be different for everyone because people note different things about others).
My real first name has two syllables; among the people I know, only my aunt calls me by it. There is a common one-syllable shortening that I have gone by my entire life, but there is also a common two-syllable diminutive that I have never gone by. It makes a difference to me which of those names people use.
If someone uses the formal name, then (assuming they are not my aunt) they are someone who got my name out of directory or something.
If someone uses the diminutive, either they are being preemptively and unwarrantedly friendly, or they are trying to, well, diminish me.
I guess what I’m getting at, is that the name other people use to address you both reflects and colors their relationship with you. And that matters to most people even if they don’t need a name to remember who they are.
Here’s a thought experiment that you don’t have to actually try because it has actually been done any number of times, and you only need to google for the results: try communicating online using a name that is differently-coded from either your gender or ethnicity or both.
I mostly use other peoples faces to remember who people are.
Names primary purpose is to talk about the person named to another person, so they are mostly for other peoples benefit.
Names have plenty of uses. They let you know you specifically are being addressed in a crowd. And names are a handy tool for making lists and charts about people. Names allow you to mark something as yours.
But thanks to Gargoyles I have thought about a society without names. I can make it clear who I’m addressing with body language or enough descriptions. Society somehow used to function with most people being illiterate. But trying to have a conversation about other people without names gets clunky and weird and you end up having to us descriptions in place of names and its not a one time thing under unusual circumstances but something you need to keep doing until Catapult teen might as well be Lexingtons name but nobody calls it a name.
Names have magic mystic power, too.
If you’re very sick, you can get your name changed, in the hopes that the Angel of Death won’t be able to find you.
Super intriguing.
I went to the desert on a horse with no name it felt good to get out of the rain. In the desert you can’t remember your name because there ain’t no one to give you no pain.
I know it is actually can but I find it tough to believe that going to a place where nobody uses your name will make your name easier to remember.
When I was in high school, a new boy transferred into my grade. Some other boys were showing him around/giving him the who’s who of our grade, and one pointed me out in the hall.
“That’s Tori,” he said. No additional information.
“Ok,” the new boy replied, confused. “What’s her deal?”
The first boy turned to stare him directly in the eyes. “She’s Tori.” And then kept walking.
I know most people wouldn’t take that as a compliment, but that really meant a lot to me at the time, and it still means a lot to me now. Everyone else got flattened into some generic descriptor. I got to just be me.
Even now, coming out as transgender, I’m adamant about keeping my name. To me it’s still the only word that can capture all of who I am.
It’s really cool when a name adopts that kind of acknowledged meaning within a particular social environment. It becomes a descriptor. Unfortunately, no one outside that environment understands that meaning, as you noted.
That’s true, but I’m on the same page as BBCC: it’s less about other people understanding me from the meaning of my name, and more about my name having everything to do with who I am. When other people refer to me by name, they’re recognizing me as a whole, complex person, not just whichever part of me is deemed most pertinent or most memorable.
I understand what you’re saying. But me calling you Tori doesn’t mean that I comprehend or recognize anything whatsoever of the complex, whole person that you are.
“Y’know, I once had a student in my health class, name of Red Angelo! {Bubs nods} True story! His folks named him that! And he had a sister, named Grape-Flavored Jell-O With Fruit Floatin’ In It! No bull! And if you flash your lights at a car with its headlights orf, you get shot by gangsters!”
Names are not for DESCRIBING a person, they are for IDENTIFYING them. I have a Thing about wanting names to be unique, but even if they aren’t in a given social environment, people usually get nicknames or clarifiers appended to that so others can understand which person is being talked about.
There is a difference between ‘I want to talk with a tall person’ and ‘I want to talk with that specific person who I identify by them being tall’. You don’t need to Know Everything about a person to tell them apart from the others: clothes, hair, appearance, context, those all serve to tell if that is The Person You Are Thinking About or someone else.
Names aren’t there so you can Know What The Person Is Like. They are there so you can tell Which Person It Is.
Also – the further down a name list a name is, the fewer babies are actually named that. Like, last year, 330 little girls were named Ava in Alabama (the number one name in the state) – that’s ALL OVER the state of Alabama. The odds of running into a whole bunch of them isn’t as high as people think. That’s why I’ve never understood the fuss over ‘popular’ names among new parents. Sure, Ava’s number one, but it’s only 330 little girls in a state of nearly 5 million. Chill.
It would be much more beneficial to see what names are popular in your own town. In my area, there’s a criminally-high amount of Dylans, Camerons, Stevens, Kaitlyns, Alyssas, Austins, Jacobs, and Cades. At least most of their parents had the common courtesy to pick one of the various outlandish spellings, so you could tell them apart.
Right? My full name can translate to “God-given Defender of Royalty”, if you wanted to take the Hebrew, Anglo-Saxon, and Old English/French origins at face value. Not at all descriptive of a withdrawn agnostic with a disdain for authority. Names are just an identifier, and usually not even unique to the individual.
Mm, I understand where you’re coming from but I’ll just note that my experiences with names is vastly different, especially with regards to how much agency and choice I had over it and it’s importance to me.
The lack of meaning isn’t inherently bad. Once there was a dinosaur they found stealing eggs, so they named it “egg-snatcher”, in Greek Oviraptor. Now, it turns out it wasn’t stealing, it was protecting its own nest. The meaning is wrong. The old drawings were wrong too, because it turns out they were feathery.
But in order to not create a break in learning, they can still be called [i]Oviraptor[/i] without problems. Because everyone understands it’s only a name, not necessarily a good description, the moniker can be constant without throwing everyone off.
Honestly, the idea of giving a unique description for things is hard too. “Please get me a mostly-red-fruit-the-one-with-the-core-and-the-kind-that’s-sweet-but-not-too-sweet” is both longer and more ambiguous than “please get me a honeycrisp apple”. Because the characters are properties of the thing, not its identity.
All that applies to people too. No description is ever going to encapsulate all the things that distinguish me from everyone else, and if it ever did it would run into problems because I change over time. But you can say “3oranges” and it will single me out here immediately.
Then there’s the fact that the whole point of language as a concept is that it is arbitrary. There is nothing inherently three-like about the word “three” (although you could argue there are three phonemes), nor is the word “orange” inherently orange-y, nor even does that final -s inherently embody the concept of “more than one”. Most words are heteronymous, and most of the autonyms we have got that way by accident (if you don’t count onomatopoeia – a word which is itself a heteronym). And that’s not even mentioning language evolution; “calculus”, for example, used to mean “pebble”; now it means “higher-level mathematics” or “manipulation of symbols”, depending on context. If everything else around us can have a completely arbitrary name, why can’t we extend that same courtesy to our fellow people?
Have you been back long? Last time I remember you it was when you gave us note of your accident and surgery, though admittedly the recent avatar shuffle has thrown my commentator recognition capabilities out of whack, so it’s entirely possible you’ve been around always and I just missed you on account of you no longer being Roz. Did everything go ok?
Omg! Hi! No I actually just back to commenting. The surgery went well. I have two massive scars from my wrist nearly to my elbow. It still hurts but it’s healing. I’m finally getting to where I can use my hand again. I start therapy next week. I’ve had to hire a lawyer because the place said they weren’t going to pay for everything. It’s been an ordeal. Since I couldn’t use that arm and I kept getting migraines off and on, I started trying to write. It’s nowhere near finished but I’m trying to cut my baby teeth on fan fiction. Also helped a stranger get help who was suicidal which there are no words for. Oh and my birthday is in a few days and I have a stress headache from close minded asshats tearing me apart because my town is full of people who aren’t cool with the fact I exist.
How have you been? I wish I had commented sooner but it’s been so long and I figured who’s gonna miss my weirdness ya know?
… It seems like Sarah is trying to give him a chance to prove himself. That’s unexpectedly nice of her given that their previous interactions have given her no reason to indulge him.
If I didn’t ship Joyce with Joe I’d want Sarah and he to become ‘With Benefits’ (sarah would never approve of the ‘friend’ part). That’s just my weirdness though, I know a lot of people that don’t discount a person their friend has slept with, but for me, they are totally off limits for anything more than casual if they’ve boned a friend.
Purely FWIW, I can see Joe eventually whittling the list down to a few girls who he can’t charm ‘that way’ and deciding from there who he wants to try to start a proper mutual relationship with. I suspect it will be Rachael just because I have a feeling that they may some common skeletons in their closets.
Mary and Patricia are the most common female names in the US, but only when you look across all age groups, so right now they’re “mom” or “grandma” sounding names. For most 90s babies, for instance, the most common are Jessica and Ashley.
It you wanna be REALLY SPECIFIC and narrow it down to late 90s Indiana, Sarah’s number six for both her current birth year (1998) and Joe’s current birth year (1999). In comparison, Mary was in the 40s for both years and Patricia isn’t in the top 100.
As weird as it is, having Joyce shadow Joe around with Danny accompanying the soundtrack with his glorious instrument might actually help Joe realize what he should and shouldn’t do.
I know it’s basically treating Joe like a dog but when you’re learning how to NOT want to hump every leg you see, sometimes you need the water bottle sprayed in your face.
Wow. Joe’s life is one of those movies which requires frequent, overdone music to hit home, not to the viewer, but to the protagonist, how “a people” typically feel in a given situation.
Makes for a bad movie which telegraphs everything, but Joe needs that until he can internalize it.
OK, so here it is: First of all, people generally want fonts/typefaces to be easy to read. Neither CS nor Papyrus are particularly easy to read*, so people avoid them like the plague.
(Joke’s a bit on them, though; because research suggests that by using fonts that are harder to read, you’ll end up retaining information better. Something about the brain making more of an effort, and nobody (including our brains) wants to make an effort for nothing.)
CS also has a reputation of being used in places where it’s usually called for to look more professional. Which isn’t the fault of CS itself; just of how some ad/promo people misuse it.
*Statistically speaking, that is. Sure, some people can read’em just fine, but as we know, there’s nothing out there so bad, you can’t find anyone not preferring it to the alternative.
Back when CERN announced discovering the Higgs boson in comic sans, it was being said it was easy to read, maybe even too easy from the research you said.
Myself, I think it’s a good font for word puzzles more than text.
If I could choose for Joe I’d choose Dorothy as she is/was a friend so someone he cares about, she probably cares at least a little for Joe, is intelligent and is good at listening to others problems
Plus, it’d be someone that it would be more appropriate to be that emotionally intimate with. Like, sharing feelings with a stranger is a super dangerous thing that often leads to bad. You need to establish a rapport to do that and long history is that.
Yes and no. Yeah, he’s trying to talk to her without hitting on her, which is good. But he’s still pushing his presence onto her unwanted. Not so good.
Of course he’s not going to talk to a guy. Danny’s not around and guys don’t talk about stuff like feelings. That’s for girls.
Oh wait. Maybe he’s still got a ways to go.
This! He’s still assuming he is entitled to her time and attention when she was just walking someone else minding her own business. And that’s a deeper entitlement that’s going to take a lot more work.
Although Joe had tried to engage Sarah in a sexual way before, that is not the only way they know each other. He had interacted with her socially before (the pizza dinner with Jacob, Joyce, Sarah, and Joe; and should I remind you that in that situation, Joyce/Sarah joined them uninvited). During that dinner, that interaction, Joe did not hit on Sarah (or Joyce) for that matter, and they even engaged in some minor small talk.
While it might be too much to ask a major favor (hey, could I borrow $100?), an attempt at engaging in some minor small talk doesn’t seem like in requires any sort of ‘entitlement’.
And if Sarah’s available time were really at such a premium, why did she bother engaging with Joe at all (i.e. asking “why are you talking to me?”, and normally questions are things you might think deserve an answer) when she could have just given him a “go away” and continued on with her life?
As gets said everytime: he didn’t hit on her specifically. He did comment on how “Sarah’s behavior is doing all sorts of things to me” and bring up his sex swing though. Admittedly with some prompting from Joyce – but any normal person would have found something else to say.
In other words, he did his usual “sure, fine, I won’t hit on you” kind of hitting on her.
“And if Sarah’s available time were really at such a premium, why did she bother engaging with Joe at all”
I find it very easy to get sucked into conversations against my will. Probably a big part of that is women being socialised to be ‘polite’ and follow the social cues of the other person. It feels rude and scary to interrupt someone and unilaterally end the conversation.
In one rather extreme case, a guy in a bar started what was.. less a conversation and more a rapid-fire interrogation, and I was three answers in before I got over my shock enough to .. well, literally run away. I couldn’t even manage a “no” or “stop” at that point. :/
It wouldn’t surprise me in the slightest if Joe has an excellent memory for names. He just chooses not to use them or think about them because it’s easier to avoid the emotional intimacy that he seemingly fears if you dehumanise the other party.
I’d believe that. It’s easier to dehumanize and objectify someone as an object than a name that reveals their personhood and there’s a lot of male culture built into the idea of objectifying a description or a job rather than a person. So a stripper named Tanya just becomes a stripper in their head and so on and so forth.
When Joyce left gender studies class to go after Becky, and Dorothy and Walky went after her, Joe said “I care about whats-her-name too.” Despite clearly knowing her real name.
So, aha, I kinda love all the discussion about names tonight. I’ve been thinking about writing a name book specifically for authors since I was 12 (as in, a baby name book with, preferably, no babies on the cover and the words ‘FOR AUTHORS’ specifically on it so I can carry it around without getting dirty looks – I’m a 21 year old who looks 12. It’s fun being seen with naming guides). So names have become a bit of a hobby for me.
I’ve been compiling a list of interesting names for the past decade or so. Surnames included. It’s a word document (or rather, three word documents, because the version that had male names, female names, and surnames all on the same document was getting way too fucking long), and it isn’t even remotely alphabetized or sorted in any way, but I could send you a copy if you like.
Someone is currently working on that. It was floating around #ownvoices writing twitter a bit ago and there was a team who started putting together the database and UI.
Atonement. The thing about atoning for one’s mistakes is no one is obligated to help you with that or accept it. One’s past deeds are still there and mistrust based on previous actions don’t just go away because you’ve decided to be good now.
It’s a hard thing sometimes for newly repentant people to accept. They long for the absolution of those they have wronged, for those people to tell them they are okay now and see them trying. But they are not owed that. And sometimes they will never receive that. And that’s just a thing they have to accept instead of letting bitterness take over.
Panel 1: And here we run into the consequences of Joe not learning the important lesson about entitlement to women’s time yet, and instead trying to just change the behaviors and attitudes on the surface.
Sarah was under no obligation to reveal potential vulnerability and emotional hurt to a person who has not previously proven to be trustworthy with that information and moreso, who she doesn’t have that sort of established intimacy with.
It’s an imposition, not something that reveals he understands that he should be interacting with women the same way he does guys or Joyce.
And it gets more clear when you remember the context of their interactions. Sarah had to scream at Joe to back off because of earlier aggressive motions on his part and is someone famously not down to talking about feelings with people she’s not extremely on close terms with and even then not reliably.
And yet he approached her with that open. Demonstrating he hasn’t retained the core lesson yet and it’s not just about doing exactly what he was doing but with its opposite.
And he tops it off with once again getting defensive when Sarah goes off on him instead of apologizing and walking off. Like, dudes, you can do that, I swear to you it will not reduce your masculinity to do that.
Panel 2: Sarah is totally justified in thinking this. She hasn’t seen his conversation with Joyce. All she’s seen is him being previous Joe, getting scorched for it, and now acting friendly but in an equally invasive and overly familiar manner.
She’s absolutely justified in assuming this is more PUA horseshit, because that’s the reputation. And that’s a struggle Joe has here. No one else has seen his inner monologue or his attempts to grow and no one is responsible for making it easier so he doesn’t have to confront in a real manner the harm he caused being a creepy PUA asshole.
And Joe’s response doesn’t cover him in glory either. Moaning about his “sex-exiling” which is basically just him getting the social consequences of women knowing how he has actively and intentionally hurt them and dehumanized them and made them feel less safe in an environment they went to to learn and making it about his desire to socially interact with folks in a positive way.
And here’s the thing about that. It’s part of getting back from fucking up. Like Ruth, he’s learning that an atonement doesn’t mean everyone accepts and doesn’t mean one’s past crimes and reputation just go away. Just like with Ruth, it won’t be a magic transformation, but a struggle every day until the habits are broken.
And I believe in Joe. I believe in his ability to improve. I believe that that’s why his story is paralleling Ruth’s to a degree. But he has an additional hurdle she doesn’t have and that’s the social messaging he has received his entire life that he is entitled to the time, body, and attention of the women in his life.
Hopefully he’ll take away more than “Sarah is mean” from this interaction.
Panels 3-4: I’m hoping Joe thinks about why she’s asking this question. Why she assumed he wouldn’t remember names. Cause it gets to the dehumanization of his “list”. Like, it’s bad enough that women were reduced to a boner update of how he was feeling when he first saw their body with no awareness of their humanity.
But it was also done in this deliberately dehumanized style. Women reduced to characteristics or manners of dress instead of names and that being done entirely so Joe’s empathy wouldn’t kick in about the grossness of his actions that still catalogue the boner updates of a horny high schooler about people who were in high school.
Joe’s list reduced Sarah to “cranky roommate” and was filled with the racist stereotype that because she’s gruff and black, she’s a danger to the sweet-eyed blonde white girl in her space even though the reality is that far more often it is the black girl who is in much more danger.
And I hope he realizes that’s the reason she brought it up. I hope he internalizes that this is not going to be as easy as just saying “I’m good now” and expecting things to go back to normal.
Panel 5: Like, his defensive posture is also insulting and telling as well. Like, it’s the same “woah, back off dangerous person” gesture he segued into by ignoring clear signs of disinterest and basically forcing Sarah into a position where she had to scream at him to back off.
And like, that’s kinda super racist given the context. Going up to someone you wronged. Who has ever reason to mistrust you and then when they rightfully go off on you, make a motion to insinuate they’re being irrational and prone to violence.
It’s a subconscious effort to exploit social oppressions to make himself appear to be the rational victim rather than a person getting some very expected consequences for previous ill behavior.
Now, do these criticisms mean I don’t believe in Joe’s ability to grow? No, he’s also shown growth here, not doubling down and going on the offensive when he’s feeling defensive and not making excuses for bad behavior.
There’s signs of growth here, but that road of atonement is going to be way harder than he’s letting himself believe it to be. And very worth it to keep him from becoming a bitter hateful jackass future him will despise.
I’m pretty sure, given the last strip, he’s already resigned himself to failure. Like, he’s going to try, and he’s going to fail, and that’s that. I don’t think he’s underestimating the difficulty of atonement, I think he genuinely believes what he’s trying to do isn’t actually possible. AKA, overestimating the difficulty.
Honestly, he shouldn’t have started with ‘trying to be a people’ at Sarah. Joe’s going to be babystepping a while, and Sarah’s barely capable of ‘being a people’ herself much of the time. Roz would be a better option – he owes her an apology or seventeen anyway – and if he wanted a genuine Being A People bunny slope? Dorothy. Or possibly Sierra.
I think he desperately wants to flame out and have “everything go back to normal”, but he’s never going to be able to go back to what he was doing without understanding exactly how awful it is and having his conscience nag him.
I think he’ll eventually grow, improve, and claw his way to atonement, because that’s the only path outside of denying reality or having a tantrum about how hard it is. And I doubt those are the arcs Willis wants to explore with him.
Eh, I don’t think Joe’s defensive posture is super racist. I think his defensive body language is him trying to show Sarah he’s harmless, which was his whole intent in this conversation. Now it does have the unintentional effect of framing Sarah as aggressive while Joe cowers to the outside observer, which IS bad.
And I’m not saying unintentional racism is harmless, just that Joe didn’t set out to make Sarah look like the “angry black woman” stereotype.
I mean I just read Joe’s posture as mostly a comic reaction to Sarah’s posture, she got in close, leaned in towards him, and was pissed off at him (as she should be) drawing Joe in a way that makes him look like he’s backing off is just standard to drawing interaction between people, it would look odd and wooden for Joe to be standing still in response
It’s kinda natural to get in a defensive posture when people are yelling at you though, even if it’s justified. It’s an instinct to shy away from loud righteous fury and honestly a lot of people get annoyed and think you’re mocking them if you consciously try not to cringe away. They think you’re acting defiant or something, or that you think you’ve done nothing wrong.
Mary and Patricia are the most common names because they were common back in the day, if he wanted to be on the safe side it would be better to go with the top girl names for people born from 1995-1998- https://www.ssa.gov/oact/babynames/top5names.html And Sarah is in the top five all 4 years. Check-MATE!
By golly, you know seventy-five septillion, eight hundred seventy-four sextillion, two hundred thirty-nine quintillion, five hundred seventy-three quadrillion, nine hundred seventy-five trillion, six hundred twenty billion, eight hundred ninety-seven million, five hundred eight thousand, nine hundred twenty-seven Sarahs!?
Off-strip: Did Willis ever say what type of iguana Fuckface is? I went to our national zoo today, and in the reptile house they had a Cuban Iguana sleeping on a branch, and I SWEAR it was Fuckface.
So, since we’re talking names a lot, I thought it’d be appropriate to crack open The New Baby Name Survey which I have right beside me. It’s a book from 2008 that attempted to ascertain what type of person Americans pictured when they heard a certain name. It doesn’t have a methodology, so I have no idea how it was administered or how accurate the results are, but it’s a fun little book anyways, so let’s see how Americans (circa 2008 or so) viewed the names of our main cast!
Just a note – the names ‘Malaya’ and ‘Roz’ aren’t listed in the survey results. ‘Mary’ is though, so I’ve included her for kicks. Quoting from the book:
Joyce – Joyce does the best she can to provide for her kids. She’s considered to be a good-natured and kindhearted divorced mom living an ordinary life in the suburbs. She’s probably smart, hardworking, and organized, making her a perfect bookkeeper. People picture her as overweight and middle-aged.
Dorothy – The most famous Dorothy wanted to be somewhere over the rainbow, but she inspires only one of this name’s images. Most people describe Dorothy as a kind, forgiving, and hospitable friend who’s honest and hardworking. Thanks to the lead character in The Wizard of Oz, some believe she’s brave, adventurous, and independent. Still others find her to be a pushy and overbearing older woman.
David – People happily look to David for leadership. He’s pictured with a tall, athletic build, and he’s known to be caring and thoughtful with a quiet confidence that makes him a good leader. Hardworking and responsible, David may also have a lighter, outgoing side.
Jennifer – Jennifer is ready to take on any challenge. Most people imagine Jennifer as intelligent, successful, and eager to tackle risks with a good attitude and high spirits. Socially, some sense she’s friendly and caring, but others imagine she’s a preppy snob from the ‘in’ crowd.
Billie (survey listed both so why not?) – Billie likes to have a good ol’ time. She’s imagined as a country girl who’s unsophisticated and uneducated but a lot of fun. People believe she’s goofy and mischievous, and she likes to knock back the beers at the honky-tonk. As for her looks, she’s pictured as leggy, blonde, and a little scruffy.
Amber – Amber has only a few close friends, but she’s well liked by everyone. Most people see her as a soft-spoken and shy girl who’s quietly popular. She’s known to have a kind heart and sweet personality. Other people imagine she’s vivacious, free spirited, and spunky. Interestingly, people se her with any combination of eye colour, hair colour, and body build.
Danny – Danny sure is a happy-go-lucky guy. He’s pictured as a cheeky, red-haired, Irish joker. People say he’s youthful and energetic.
Sarah – Every little thing about Sarah is gentle. She’s thought to be wholesome and sweet natured, shy and soft-spoken, and peaceful and patient. Appropriately, people even picture her with a petite frame, gentle face, kind eyes, and a warm smile.
Ethan – Ethan is more of a listener than a talker. People consider him to be reserved, compassionate, and down to earth. They say he’s handsome, but can be a little mousy at times.
Sally – Every afternoon, Sally has the neighbourhood gals over for coffee and gossip. This name reminds people of a sociable and very chatty housewife. Although she’s happy and funny, Sally is considered to be a loud mouth, and she most likely can’t keep a secret. People imagine she’s slightly chubby.
Becky – Becky is positively perky and popular. She’s thought to be friendly, fun, and cheery, which no doubt makes her the centre of attention. She’s most likely blonde with freckles and a nice smile. A few people, unfortunately, see her as spoiled.
Dina – There are two images of Dina – one has fun, and the other has manners. Most people describe Dina as a raspy-voiced woman who loves to drink, smoke, flirt, and have a wild time. They also say she’s spunky and outspoken. Others see her as demure, ladylike, and sweet. Either way, she’s attractive, petite, and fair.
Ruth – Ruth’s personality may be just about anything. Many people think Ruth is helpful, gentle, faithful, and honourable. Others say she’s confident, bold, boisterous, and larger than life. And then there are a few who believe she’s merely average and generic. As for her appearance, she may be tall or squat, but she’s thought to be homely.
Joe – Joe may be an ordinary guy, but every guy wishes he were like Joe. People imagine Joe as kindhearted, fun, and lovable – which coupled with his handsome good looks, makes him popular with girls. People also picture Joe as an athlete – not surprising when you consider such famous athletes as Joe DiMaggio, Joe Montana, and Joe Namath.
Mike – Everybody likes Mike, and Mike likes everybody. People tend to think of Mike as a popular guy who’s smart and sweet. He seems to be your average, all-American suburbanite. Physically, people describe him as good-looking, tall, and strong.
Marcie (listed as Marcy) – Marcy knows all the scuttlebutt in her suburban neighbourhood. This name reminds people of a friendly but gossipy soccer mom. People say she’s caring and funny, but her outspokenness and rumour mongering have given this brunette a reputation as a big mouth.
Jacob – Jacob is the boy next door. He’s pictured as a nice suburban kid who gets along with everybody. He probably gets good grades and has a good sense of humour, and he’s also strong and easy on the eyes.
Carla – Cheers was one of TV’s best-loved sitcoms, and Carla, the wisecracking waitress, was one of its best-loved characters, For this reason, Carla is described as a loud and lively woman full of sarcasm, spunk, and wit. With dark hair and a short build, she’s also known to be honest, loyal, and a good friend.
Lucy – Just like the name Lucille, this name’s image links to comic queen Lucille Ball. Lucy strikes people as a playful and wacky comedian who’s outgoing, affectionate, peppy, and smart. She’s depicted as a pretty redhead.
Leslie – Leslie is easily misunderstood. He’s known to be a selfless, kind man who’s polite and quiet. But it’s not hard to see how his refined manners can come across as snobbish or stern to some people.
Mary – The mother of Jesus, biblical Mary is THE namesake of one of the most popular names. People picture Mary as a nurturing and gentle mother who’s religious, traditional, and simple. She most likely has a conservative, mousy appearance.
Roz is probably short for Rosalyn or a similar name, I’m not sure if it’s ever come up. Some of these don’t fit the characters at all, but Mike really goes above and beyond in being the polar opposite, “likes everybody” ha ha no.
Joe’s game is weak on this one. You don’t go by the most common names as they are now, you go by the most common baby names in the year that the person was born. Like Average Life Expectancy. And in *that* case (assuming a birth year of either 1997 or 1998), Sarah actually spikes up to number 4.
Yes, but that doesn’t actually matter. Mary and Patricia have been on the decline for a very very long time and Sarah’s been pretty consistently higher for years. The point stands that, FOR JOE, if you want to guess names with accuracy, you should go by the name statistics from when that person was born.
Granted, those statistics probably won’t help because there are so many people and even the number one names aren’t often helpful.
I worked with a young woman named Pat. She told me about one time when she lived with another young woman named Pat, and was dating a man named Patrick. When he would call and her roommate answered, it went like this: “Hi, Pat. This is Pat. Is Pat there?”
Loading ...
“BONUS ROUND: Spell my name. H, or no H?”
“shit”
Now that’s just mean
Or worse – “Sera”
Saira.
And yes, I knew a Saira.
I’ve seen all those variants, but here’s another hat to throw into the ring on that one:
One ‘R’ or two?
At what point to “Sarah” and “Sierra” start to blur together?
At around Saerra.
I just googled it. Not only is it a real name, but google even asked if I meant Sierra. Sounds like a winner.
Fun prank idea: Have three daughters, name them Sarah, Sierra, and Saerra, and never teach them how to spell.
I had roomies named Joy and Joey, and that was quite bad enough, thank you, especially in those pre-cell days of landlines.
A call would come in for one of them and no matter how carefully the caller tried to enunciate, the only way to get the right one for sure straight off would be to ask, “Boy Joey or girl Joy?”
Or name a boy and a girl named Aaronn and Erin. We had that in my fraternity. Aaronn told us we could call him “Ay Ay Ron” (Key and Peele reference) but some people refused to and insisted that you could hear a difference in the pronunciation of “Airon” and “Ehrin” and got all pissy when you asked for clarification.
Re: ∆(Airon-Ehrin): English has a lot of subtle vowel differences that we should probably just ignore.
Sven and Simon for me. Not quite as bad, but I’m generally bad at names, so I got confused a lot.
Other languages have a lot of subtle vowel differences that we Americans will definitely just ignore.
Seras were never agreeable girls.
Eh. Whatever will be, will be.
Which Sera, Sirrah?
Que Sera Sera.
Would typing without Sarah be using sans sarahf?
Yes, and typing without angels is sans seraphim.
Even though Punnish is my native language, I have never heard this particular wordplay before. Well done!
*looks at font* technically yes
Specifically Arial, which I’d like to pretend I know because I recognize it having seen it so often in my youth, but which I actually know because I opened up the page’s html source and ctrl+F’ed the word “font” until I found something with a font name
Ariel is an angel but Arial is sans seraph, that a/e difference
Why change the past, when you can own this day?
Well, I mean… they got her into that uniform, no argument… and she barely pup a fight about her coffin bed…
Seras Victoria, Hellsing.
All my yessssss.
Her tongue tells tails of rebellion ~
Tales*
Gods, I’m tired
Que seras?
If you google Kay, it’s likely to give you kay sera as an autofill.
Zarrah
¿Qué?
¿Sera?
¿SERA?
Nani?
Ooh, or an even worse one – a girl named after the “Land Before Time” character, Cera.
Cera
Cera the ceratops
Or Xera.
John Cena.
John Xena
I’ve noticed that girl names seem to have a ton of variations in spelling, while boy names are usually spelled the same way. I wonder why that is.
I dunno, boy names have plenty of variation, too. All names can have some weird-ass spellings. My name, for example.
Yeah, depends what name you look at.
I’ve seen Cameron, Cameren, Kameron, Kamerun, and Camren, all pronounced exactly the same way. And that’s just for that name.
A lot of variations are from translating through cultures, and then there’s the tradition of naming boys after their father or grandfather. Results in more standardized spelling.
One of my classmates in high school wanted to spell my name “Sahra”. Which apparently also is a valid name, it’s just not where I put my ‘h’.
Shara?
He is lucky this is English and not Polish “h” or “ch”
I once dated an Irish girl who was a bit put off when I was able to spell “siobhan” correctly. I think she was a little to used to crowing over people getting it not even close. Since like many Irish names it isn’t spelled anything even remotely close to phonetically. She-vahn? She-von? Shive-ahn? I give up.
Also, I hate it when I forget my remote-universe-detonator. I’m always leaving it in the bowl with my car keys…
The Irish language is beautiful and mysterious. So, yeah, transliterating names is tricky.
Actually, Irish is spelled phonetically (or at least as phonetically as English). It’s just that Old English and Old Irish were exposed to the Latin alphabet at around the same time and they weren’t exactly on speaking terms back then. As a result, English and Irish developed two completely different spelling systems as the Latin Alphabet was ham-fisted onto the two languages.
Off the top of my head I’d say Shinead or Sinèad are also valid spellings?
Hmm, Wikipedia says it’s the Irish form of the same root as Joan or Jane. 😂
I remember finding out that Shawn, Sean and Shaun were are pronounced the same. Boggled the mind.
A certain video game came out with a character called Sara. I was actually yelling at my computer, because where I’m from, “Sara” is always pronounced “sah-ra”, not “sair-ra”, and it made me irrationally angry.
Joe puts a surprising amount of work into his ploys
… is name-guessing a PUA thing? I’ve never heard that one.
In this case, I think the point is he’s interacted with her before and should know her name; guessing would mean he didn’t care enough to remember, and doing that regularly implies a PUA-like level of disrespect for women as individuals.
Joe does seem to be pretty good at remembering names once he learns them.
It’s not Joe’s fault he has PUA skills!
… Okay, maybe it is.
Or street magician level of disrespect for individuals.
Using people’s name makes them like you more. Proven fact in psychology. If you can somehow glean someone’s name, be it from a nametag, facebook, or one of their friends, you can start using it immediately and put that person more at ease with your presence.
There’s also a degree of embarrassment in someone else knowing your name and you not knowing there’s. If you can find a not-creepy way to find out and use someone’s name, they’re forced by social pressure to find out what yours is. That gives you an ‘in’ for further conversation, because now it isn’t just you talking to them, they asked you something.
Really, this is all beginner-level social aptitude stuff. Being a pick-up artist is basically just utilizing that in order to be promiscuous.
That’s not universally true, whatever psychology says about it. I work retail, and having customers use my name immediately often feels weird and intrusive. Like I didn’t introduce myself to you, what right do you have to know my name.
Maybe if the context is someone acting like they remember you well from a brief prior interaction? I feel the same way though.
This.so.much, it is like telemarketing people (are they people?) starts using my first name. Let me put it this way, unlike normaly they don’t get the “click” in the ear, but an earful of … hmm … well chosen opinions of their heritage and choice of career.
We are decidedly people, and most of us hate our jobs. On the same token, most of us who work (or worked telemarketing) did or do it because there’s no other gig in town and we’re desperate for work. Or we lack the physical capacity to do a job that requires standing, and so our choices are narrow.
Not a fun thing. I mean, I personally loved it when I did survey calls. Those were a lot of fun and could often lead to fun conversations with people. But overall? Telemarketing is a crappy racket and we don’t want to do it either.
Yes! Why do some people think that a nametag is an invitation to address you by name?
I’ve done it once because everybody I’ve known who worked retail complained about never being addressed by their name despite the presence of a name tag. I’m not sure which is more common – wanting to be addressed by name or not.
Absolutely, I’ve seen people perk up when addressed by their name. Always thought it had something to do with being polite and acknowledging their humanity, rather than just treating them like a faceless automaton in a Mickey D’s uniform.
Well, in that one case I was asking her how her name was pronounced and told her it was pretty (so did my boyfriend) and she seemed to perk up so hopefully I did a good.
Wait, I had no idea that was considered rude. Why the name tag then? Is this a rudeness in most cultures, or only some?
Usually people who wear a nametag for work aren’t the ones who made the decision to wear said nametag.
People wear nametags because they have to, not because they want to.
The name tag also allows you to identify people, whether or not you address them by name. Management likes this as it makes it easier for them to track what their employees are doing by way of customer feedback. (Even if you’re going directly to the store manager with compliments/complaints, saying, for example, “they were a white woman with brown hair” isn’t always enough to identify someone).
… Because you’re wearing a dohickey that identifies you by your name. That’s why.
That’s probably because sociologically speaking it is blurring the lines between the formal and informal relationship you have with them as a customer and as a person. It sounds like you’d like to keep it neatly formal. I vaguely speculate without sufficient details.
Another psych grad who learned that but also agrees it’s a case by case basis. Working retail I did NOT like customers calling me my name unless they were regulars and We were cool. Or they could ASK to call me my name or if I introduce myself it’s okay, but… i dunno, just don’t use my name in retail situations.
Case by case basis, but I think that the overwhelming ‘no, that’s wierd’ coming from this comment section has more to do with Dave Willis’ comics attracting insular geeks than anything else. We’re not a very representative sample of the general public. That applies to a lot of things when it comes to this communities skewed perception of just about everything vis-a-vis society as a whole.
Most ‘rules’ that social psych comes up with aren’t true for every human being, but are true for a large enough subset of the population for exceptions to be statistical outliers. Your typical outgoing non-geek person isn’t reading this comic because their reaction to the world ‘webcomic’ is a vacant stare and perhaps a dismissive comment about nerds.
Context is important. I prefer people use my last name if our relationship is strictly business or professional. I’m smart enough to know that a telemarketer using my first name is hoping to sell me some crap and wants to manipulate me into buying it. I tend to resent the attempt at manipulation because I know the comraderie is false and a pretense. If I don’t understand your motives I might feel differently.
Then too, I’ve seen debt collectors call you up and use your first name as a way to confirm who you are. So I’m instinctively wary when I hear people I don’t recognize throwing my name around like we’re the oldest of friends.
That has the exact opposite effect on me. Do not use my name unless I introduce myself (thereby giving you permission to use it)
Not specifically but name guessing is generally a scammy con artist type of trick where they know the most common names so they can make a good guess of what your name is likely to be even if they didn’t care to remember it at the time. It is like how scammy fake psychics would be able to in a room full of people find someone with a connection to a David or a Peter but never ask for names odd for the region like Rexford or Mateo.
So while not specifically a PUA thing, it is still not really in your favour to know the most common names and use that for evidence of why it wasn’t a lucky guess…
Especially since, in this case, Joe’s dead wrong. Sarah was in the top 5 for both her current birth year (1998) and Joe’s (1999). Mary and Patricia are far, far lower on those lists and have been for some time. Sarah’s much more popular. If he were truly quoting the lists for back then, he’d be better off guessing Emily or Hannah – or, if he’s quoting the most current list, Emma, Olivia, or Isabella.
Pretty sure Sarah was the most common girl name in my college year, though I was born in 1985.
It’s also, he comes from a Jewish background. Sarah is an exceedingly common name in Jewish groups, so this would not be an uncommon name to guess if he was guessing names.
Maybe he doesn’t have the by-year numbers memorized and is just going by the average?
My very first Google search for this agrees with Joe that Mary and Patricia are the top choices and Sarah is #23. And if that’s wrong… well, Joe wouldn’t be the first person to think that Google made him an expert.
Interesting, because when I search for popular names, I usually get the list for the current year.
Also, Mary and Patricia are the number one and two because for a long time, Mary had a stranglehold on the number one slot on the yearly lists. We have the yearly lists going back to – I think – the 1880s for the US. So, while those names may be most popular over all, if Joe’s mostly interacting with college age women, he’d have far more luck guessing things like Emily, Hannah, Jessica, etc. Mary and Patricia have had a very sharp decline for a long while.
*reads alt text* Comic sans stars?!? Oh, that’s LOW, Sarah.
Oh, right, grav roulette.
EW FUCK NO.
galasso is only marginally better
FOOL. Galasso is outstanding. 😛
Galasso has an extremely high offense score but a poor defense score.
…. that’s not just some fan-theory. That’s Galasso cannon.
Why would Galasso have a cannon in his store?
Well, duh, for when he has to fire people.
Lesser stores serve wood-fired pizza.
Galasso serves cannon-fired pizza.
I think you rolled better the first time.
There was an attempt.
Ms Comic Sans gets no respect…
in this case i tried might be a good thing to acknowledge
So protip Joe: if you are genuinely trying to be better, don’t use the phrase “sexually exiled”.
Further protip: be understanding when women don’t immediately believe you’ve become not-a-shitheel in an afternoon; actions take longer to establish and actions are all that matter.
I think “sexually exiled” means that Danny and Ethan’s cuddle party moved to Danny’s (and Joe’s) room. At least, that’s what it would have meant in my dorm. (Often abbreviated to “sexiled”, of course. And romantic cuddling would get the same term, because otherwise you have to be nosy to find out exactly what the touching people are/were doing.)
Hmm. It’s possible, Ethan did talk about getting Danny to his room to sleep, but cuddling his sleeping body would be…kinda super duper weird. And Danny didn’t look like he’d be functional to wake up anytime soon.
My imagination might be going overboard with the thought of a sleepy Danny waking up just enough upon being moved to say something like “u stay? zzzz”.
oh yeah them! 🙂 maybe they both ended up passed out in the hallway… in which case there would, of course, be another ding-dong bandit incident. >.<
Possible, but I don’t think it fits the context. It doesn’t make sense in terms of “trying to redirect my social energy elsewhere”. He’s trying to convince Sarah he’s changed, not that he just can’t go to his room right now.
Not to shut down your imagination, of course. Carry on. 🙂
I also await the findings of whether Joe was told “You need to leave” his own room (to borrow a phrase from Walky and Dorothy).
Is this purposefully chosen on Willis’ part?
I was trying to figure out why that line bothered me and it hit me. It’s such an “incel” way of looking at the situation. For those blissfully ignorant of this hate group, incels are people who call themselves “involuntarily celibate” and mostly kvetch about how cruel women are to them for not sleeping with wanna-be serial killers and harassing folks.
Like, he’s taken his action and pushed it more on women. It’s not “I fucked up and have earned a bad reputation by my actions”, it’s “I’ve been cut off from the pussy train and so now need to bother random strangers until they know I’m good now.
Just poking my head in to say “Fuck incels“, because their existence fills me with white-hot hatred.
And THAT, children, is why honest is NOT the best policy!
No, that is why you don’t act like a sexist dick for months.
There are several reasons not to do that.
Wow, Mary doesn’t even have to be IN a comic anymore for her name to give me shivers. PREPARE THE CATAPULT SUIT.
I was gonna say, if Joe even thinks Mary is a possibility, you’d think he’d know better than to try.
Mary is just so…*Mary*. *shudders*
Someone call Carla!
*points up the page* Galasso has a cannon. Might work better.
Jus’ sayin.
Internets for everyone.
Yessss Sarah. I hope part of this conversation also calls him out for outsourcing his emotional labor onto the first girl he saw. he could have gone to Danny or another guy friend, but instead he just stood there and tried to talk to the first woman that passed by, whether because of those emotional labor conventions or because even in a moment of introspection he can’t imagine passing up an opportunity to talk to women, even about something other than his normal topics.
Hell, that would’ve been a much better choice than Sarah. I think if he’d gone to Danny to sincerely talk about feelings, Danny would’ve cried tears of joy. After verifying that Joe wasn’t running a deliriously high fever, that is.
*imagines Danny standing on his tiptoes to touch Joe’s forehead* (this is what you do to see if someone has a fever, right?)
Well that or he knows shes Joyces roommate plus they’ve had interactions in the past so shes not a complete stranger
See, I don’t think this is a case of first girl he saw. I think he’s reaching out to someone he has a sort of connection to (see e.g. their last interaction http://www.dumbingofage.com/2017/comic/book-7/02-everything-youve-ever-wanted/romans/ ), albeit a connection that is mired in his PUA bullshit, but possibly with hints that there could be something genuine underneath if he stopped Joeing it up.
Joe only has two friends and they’re both unavailable. What he could do, though, is find some way to self-soothe until one of them *is* available. Read a book or something, Joe.
This! I feel like guys are taught to undervalue emotional labor and are not aware of how often they are socialized to ignore how much free emotional labor they frequently expect from any woman near them.
Him dumping that on a woman who has repeatedly told him to go away in other contexts is the central reason why this interaction is going so amazingly poorly for him.
Truthful answer
but a better answer would’ve been “Joyce talks about you a lot”
what, and risk acknowledging he and Joyce talk semi-regularly?
In all seriousness: admitting that Joyce talks about her a lot would probably be a little too personal for him right now. He’s still new at trying to be “a people” instead of whatever mask he was putting on before, so brutal honesty is better (in his mind) than something that could lead to possible emotional vulnerability.
Isn’t that what Joe would say were he to meet Jesus*?
Joe’s list indicates Joyce “won’t shut up about Jesus” after all.
(*Between the Walkyverse and Shortpacked, don’t know if this happened.)
Robin’s wedding? (not only does God answer lesbian prayers, his son does lesbian weddings!)
Though Joyce wasn’t particularly religious in that context.
Ooh, good point. I’ll have to archive-dive to find.out.
ok but I really love Sarah’s face in the third panel? idk, something about the eyes looks so good
They gunna bone.
What
I was thinking that for a while now. They have both been looking for casual sex with no commitments, and if she could ignore her dislike of him for a moment, she might notice he looks a lot like her primary lust-object. Of course, that might be a huge step back for Joe, depending on how it goes down.
As I have to explain repeatedly and often to dudes on okcupid, looking for casual sex with *someone* does not mean looking for casual sex with *anyone*, and Sarah’s opinions on Joe are very very clearly stated at the current time.
“If only she could get over the way she can’t stand him at all, they could totally be fuck-buddies!”
If only she could put a paper bag over his personality.
Yeah, but Sarah doesn’t like ANYBODY. Even Joyce makes her cranky. Her dislike of Joe doesn’t necessarily mean she thinks he’s any worse than any other guy. Except maybe Jacob.
Joe and Jacob are both built like a wall, but that’s the extent of their similarities.
Quite aside from being different races and the phenotypic differences that come with that, they’ve got totally different styling (Joe favouring douchey bro styling, Jacob either neutral-casual or sharp as a razor).
Also abs, if I’m remembering both correctly. But yeah, outside of comic-drawing mode they likely look very different.
Well, that tends to come with being built like them, unless you’re a strongman type.
seriously though is nobody going to run with “how it goes down”? We’re disappointing Joe here
You know that whole trope where a woman gets extremely angry at someone and loudly expresses how much they hate that person, but it turns out she actually wants to fuck him really badly?
It’s complete bullshit. A harmful myth used to justify ignoring someone clearly, emphatically saying “no”, when its only true maybe one time in a thousand.
Yeah, I have the feeling Willis has changed enough for this pairing not to occur in this universe.
To be fair, Dumbing of Age has gone down that path once already, with it kinda being the Ruth/Billie origin story in this ‘verse.
Which doesn’t disprove the point (as the beginning of Billie and Ruth’s relationship was…all kinds of messed up), and actually makes it less likely that the same thing would be done a second time for a different pairing.
Yes, but Billie never shrieked in Ruth’s face that she was not on her menu and she never threatened someone making an unwanted advance with testicular torsion in Ruth’s presence.
It’s true they hated each other, but different kinds of hate than Sarah and Joe.
IIRC, Billie gave Ruth a very very firm “no” and Ruth no longer attempted anything with her. Then Billie ended up being the one that progressed the relationship.
If by “they gonna bone” you mean “Joe will experience testicular torsion, you might be right.
Sarah, don’t ask questions you don’t want to hear the answer to.
Joe, don’t say things like that without thinking about subtext and context in addition to content.
The thought of these two hooking up just crossed my mind.
It ended up with the campus resembling a post-apocalyptic wasteland.
that sounds optimistic! at least therell be a campus after they hook up!
That’s why they would need to go back to his place or a motel, rather than her place.
At her place, that “remote” detonator thingie would be in easy reach once she realizes what’s happened.
Oh god what happened to your eyes Sarah?
QUICK SOMEBODY CALL A DOCTOR!
Any doctor but Dr. Rosenthal.
….is this the first time joe and sarah have talked?
It is not.
No, but it’s one of the rare times he’s talked to her without trying to hit on her.
Rare? He did it once, and then took no for an answer. He’s implied he’d like to sleep with her, but made no advances after she made it clear she was “not on your menu, carnivore!”
No, even after that he went on to explain how hot he thinks she is and how he wanted to “harness” her “angry energy”. Which is a bit fucked up in itself, considering that anger had been almost exclusively expressed in terms of telling him to fuck off, but more importantly is absolutely not what “giving up” looks like.
Oh my god.
He basically went “I’m not going to mention I have easy access to a sex swing” at her LONG after she told him to back the fuck off, which is the same as straight up mentioning it. He has NOT respected her boundaries at all, WHICH IS THE ENTIRE POINT OF HIS ARC RIGHT NOW.
I’m still convinced he did that to replace one kind of horribly awkward with another.
Considering he’s already has a story of trying to get another shot in after being shot down (see Fart Captor’s link), I’m saying Shiro’s interpretation is much more likely to be correct.
Heck, remember when Raidah mentioned open disgust about his “to do” list, and the first thing he did was sending her a link to it?
Or when Joyce had hired a chaperone, and the first thing he did was trying to get rid of said chaperone?
Joe’s got quite a history of ignoring “no” until it has to be yelled at him (or worse), and then tries to act like it’s their fault for saying no.
On the other hand, at that point he had already had it shouted at him and explicitly said he’d abandon his attempts to flirt (or whatever you call it) with Sarah. I wouldn’t swear on it, but I think in between the shouting and the meeting Joe and Sarah had interacted without any hitting-on taking place.
As for Raidah, grossing out girls is a time-honoured tradition of all little boys. And my impression of Joe is that he’s firmly in the camp of not going for someone else’s girlfriend since that would be a huge violation of every bro-code. Correct me if I’m wrong, please. As things stand, however, I wouldn’t read too much into that.
Joyce hiring a chaperone happened way in the beginning, it was the first time Joe encountered… let’s call it “strong objections” to his ways in this comic. By the time of the sex-swing incident he’d already started to change, I’d say. Furthermore, if you went on a date, would you want MIKE of all people to chaperone you?
No. In fact, I’d likely cancel the date then and there.
I would not however proceed with it and try to bribe the chaperone to disappear in the middle of it. Cause that’s crap.
And yes, he explicitly said he was done hitting on her. So what? He lied. People do that. Maybe he even thought he was telling the truth, since he didn’t actually ask her again – he just commented on “what she was doing to him”.
It is, in fact, the fourth.
Names are overrated. They have nothing to do with who we are as people. They don’t describe us, aren’t relevant to our personalities in any way, they’re just meaningless words. No wonder it is so hard to remember them sometimes. We should really have a better system.
“Hello 24601, how are you doing today?”
“I’m fine, 12345679.”
No, that would be even worse. How about phrase that’s relevant to the person somehow? Something more descriptive and easy to remember.
A nickname. You’re thinking of a nickname.
Well most nicknames are just shorter versions of one’s given name, in which case they have the same problem of not being descriptive enough to be memorable. But if they actually are descriptors then yes, excellent.
Yeah, Joe is “good” at those …
Well that is the general idea. But you really should get to pick your own, not have one labeled upon you by a douchebag.
I think people grow into their names, and most names mean stuff! (Mine is ‘God is my light’ or ‘A light unto me’, and it’s very apt.)
The other day I met a 3rd Grader named Gabriel who was disappointed to learn he might be named after an angel, until I informed him it was the cool Old Testament kind of angel, like the kind who would carry a flaming sword. He liked that way more. I’ll have to look up what it means literally, in case I see him again.
Yeah, most names mean stuff. But not usually anything to do with the person in particular. At least not in our culture.
My irl name means “from England”–which was always vaguely disappointing to me, as I am not, but now it looks like that’s where I’ll end up. I did not select my partner with this in mind, but here we are!
I feel your pain, as I am not “from Denmark”.
Mine is “Divinely powerful one, son of the world ruler”. At one point I was dating “She who gives pleasure, from the land of the wild cherries.”
Mind you, we had to dig through a whole bunch of books of name meanings to find those particular options, but absolutely worth it. 🙂
Holy shit, do you mind if I ask what her name was? That’s absolutely poetic and I love it.
+1 on the land of the wild cherries, please. That’s terrific.
Mine taken literally, is “The king of success in the universe”, and my brothers are “king of politics in the universe” (we keep telling him to deal with Trump before he starts another world war)and ” King of promotion in the universe”, while if you just base it on phonetics they mean “yellow steamed fish”, “yellow boiled fish” and “yellow shallow fried fish”. I kinda prefer the first meaning.
Gabriel means `My friend is God`. Which you can take any number of ways, come to think of it…
My translator says GBR is strength, or sometimes hero — so, “the Lord is my Strength”.
Yay for that kid, he’ll like any of these.
I do hold that people tend to grow into their names. We’re gonna have a powerful friendly strongman on the loose. 🙂
My name means: Ruler of the People, Divine Inspiration and Protector. I’m ok with this.
Well, that’s how names started in the first place, by something descriptive. Like hey, you, that guy who lives by that big rock. Then the process evolved and now everyone is named Mary or Patricia.
Exactly! We’ve diverged from the true path.
‘Hey, Big Nose’?
In class:
Joe: I have a question, Big Nose.
Leslie: The University frowns on giving grades of “I tried” gold-stars, but in your case I’ll make an exception.
My name is Jean ValJean!
“Who are you?”
“The new Number Two.”
“Who is Number One?”
“You are Number Six.”
I have to disagree. Names can be very important for people. Otherwise, nobody would ever bother to take time and care when changing them. And while they may not literally describe a baby’s future personality (that would be a pretty tall order for someone who’s only just had a baby) they do sometimes describe physical traits, offer a reference to someone important to their parents denoting history, or describe what the parents thought/hoped the baby would be.
Sure, they can be important to YOU. But a names primary purpose is not for the benefit of the person who bears it, it’s for the benefit of others. As such, it makes more sense to have it be something which actually describes some aspect of who the person is, which makes it easier to remember. Obviously that is difficult to pick for a baby. So maybe don’t give them a full name until later.
I think we’re going to have to disagree because I don’t see a person’s name’s primary purpose as being for the benefit of other people. It’s for the person living with it first and foremost. If you forget a random person’s name, oh well, odds are you won’t see them again. Meanwhile your own name can and often are very important to people and saying they only matter for other people seems reductive to me.
You don’t need a name to remember who you are. It’s so that other people can refer to you. You don’t need it. They do. But I respect that you feel differently.
You say that like you never need to refer to yourself. Also a way to sum up everything without needing to make a long clunky descriptor (which would be different for everyone because people note different things about others).
Doesn’t everyone refer to themselves as “I” though?
Not when identifying themselves, generally. Misuse of the word ‘refer’ on my part. My bad!
We can assure you, We most certainly do not!
My real first name has two syllables; among the people I know, only my aunt calls me by it. There is a common one-syllable shortening that I have gone by my entire life, but there is also a common two-syllable diminutive that I have never gone by. It makes a difference to me which of those names people use.
If someone uses the formal name, then (assuming they are not my aunt) they are someone who got my name out of directory or something.
If someone uses the diminutive, either they are being preemptively and unwarrantedly friendly, or they are trying to, well, diminish me.
I guess what I’m getting at, is that the name other people use to address you both reflects and colors their relationship with you. And that matters to most people even if they don’t need a name to remember who they are.
Here’s a thought experiment that you don’t have to actually try because it has actually been done any number of times, and you only need to google for the results: try communicating online using a name that is differently-coded from either your gender or ethnicity or both.
Yep. Connotation vs. denotation. Connotations of names are far more important than people often think.
I mostly use other peoples faces to remember who people are.
Names primary purpose is to talk about the person named to another person, so they are mostly for other peoples benefit.
Names have plenty of uses. They let you know you specifically are being addressed in a crowd. And names are a handy tool for making lists and charts about people. Names allow you to mark something as yours.
But thanks to Gargoyles I have thought about a society without names. I can make it clear who I’m addressing with body language or enough descriptions. Society somehow used to function with most people being illiterate. But trying to have a conversation about other people without names gets clunky and weird and you end up having to us descriptions in place of names and its not a one time thing under unusual circumstances but something you need to keep doing until Catapult teen might as well be Lexingtons name but nobody calls it a name.
I have a great deal of trouble with faces and names, and am all for using descriptors and body language as the majestic gargoyles do.
And with no other people using your name, you get to know yourself, your ‘true name’, as it were.
Names have magic mystic power, too.
If you’re very sick, you can get your name changed, in the hopes that the Angel of Death won’t be able to find you.
Super intriguing.
I went to the desert on a horse with no name it felt good to get out of the rain. In the desert you can’t remember your name because there ain’t no one to give you no pain.
I know it is actually can but I find it tough to believe that going to a place where nobody uses your name will make your name easier to remember.
Perhaps you know yourself better without the distraction of other people.
la la laaa LA, la-la la-la…
When I was in high school, a new boy transferred into my grade. Some other boys were showing him around/giving him the who’s who of our grade, and one pointed me out in the hall.
“That’s Tori,” he said. No additional information.
“Ok,” the new boy replied, confused. “What’s her deal?”
The first boy turned to stare him directly in the eyes. “She’s Tori.” And then kept walking.
I know most people wouldn’t take that as a compliment, but that really meant a lot to me at the time, and it still means a lot to me now. Everyone else got flattened into some generic descriptor. I got to just be me.
Even now, coming out as transgender, I’m adamant about keeping my name. To me it’s still the only word that can capture all of who I am.
It’s really cool when a name adopts that kind of acknowledged meaning within a particular social environment. It becomes a descriptor. Unfortunately, no one outside that environment understands that meaning, as you noted.
That’s true, but I’m on the same page as BBCC: it’s less about other people understanding me from the meaning of my name, and more about my name having everything to do with who I am. When other people refer to me by name, they’re recognizing me as a whole, complex person, not just whichever part of me is deemed most pertinent or most memorable.
I understand what you’re saying. But me calling you Tori doesn’t mean that I comprehend or recognize anything whatsoever of the complex, whole person that you are.
You don’t need to – the name sums it up.
“Y’know, I once had a student in my health class, name of Red Angelo! {Bubs nods} True story! His folks named him that! And he had a sister, named Grape-Flavored Jell-O With Fruit Floatin’ In It! No bull! And if you flash your lights at a car with its headlights orf, you get shot by gangsters!”
-Coach Z
Okay, I literally lol’d. I’d totally forgotten about that.
In this strip, we see Sleeps-With-Many pissing off Angry-Woman.
See, this is progress.
I hope we go back to Best Boy and 100 Smiles/Hour soon.
What are they, Argonians?
Does-Not-Lift-Her-Tail-For-Douchebags is getting annoyed.
I almost spit out my Hamburger Helper… +1 internet for you.
Names are not for DESCRIBING a person, they are for IDENTIFYING them. I have a Thing about wanting names to be unique, but even if they aren’t in a given social environment, people usually get nicknames or clarifiers appended to that so others can understand which person is being talked about.
There is a difference between ‘I want to talk with a tall person’ and ‘I want to talk with that specific person who I identify by them being tall’. You don’t need to Know Everything about a person to tell them apart from the others: clothes, hair, appearance, context, those all serve to tell if that is The Person You Are Thinking About or someone else.
Names aren’t there so you can Know What The Person Is Like. They are there so you can tell Which Person It Is.
Also – the further down a name list a name is, the fewer babies are actually named that. Like, last year, 330 little girls were named Ava in Alabama (the number one name in the state) – that’s ALL OVER the state of Alabama. The odds of running into a whole bunch of them isn’t as high as people think. That’s why I’ve never understood the fuss over ‘popular’ names among new parents. Sure, Ava’s number one, but it’s only 330 little girls in a state of nearly 5 million. Chill.
It would be much more beneficial to see what names are popular in your own town. In my area, there’s a criminally-high amount of Dylans, Camerons, Stevens, Kaitlyns, Alyssas, Austins, Jacobs, and Cades. At least most of their parents had the common courtesy to pick one of the various outlandish spellings, so you could tell them apart.
Right? My full name can translate to “God-given Defender of Royalty”, if you wanted to take the Hebrew, Anglo-Saxon, and Old English/French origins at face value. Not at all descriptive of a withdrawn agnostic with a disdain for authority. Names are just an identifier, and usually not even unique to the individual.
Whoa somebody’s getting existential up in this place, somebody get me a fire extinguisher because this discourse is lit🔥🔥🍆
¡Ay caramba, he quemado mi berenjena!
Mm, I understand where you’re coming from but I’ll just note that my experiences with names is vastly different, especially with regards to how much agency and choice I had over it and it’s importance to me.
The lack of meaning isn’t inherently bad. Once there was a dinosaur they found stealing eggs, so they named it “egg-snatcher”, in Greek Oviraptor. Now, it turns out it wasn’t stealing, it was protecting its own nest. The meaning is wrong. The old drawings were wrong too, because it turns out they were feathery.
But in order to not create a break in learning, they can still be called [i]Oviraptor[/i] without problems. Because everyone understands it’s only a name, not necessarily a good description, the moniker can be constant without throwing everyone off.
Honestly, the idea of giving a unique description for things is hard too. “Please get me a mostly-red-fruit-the-one-with-the-core-and-the-kind-that’s-sweet-but-not-too-sweet” is both longer and more ambiguous than “please get me a honeycrisp apple”. Because the characters are properties of the thing, not its identity.
All that applies to people too. No description is ever going to encapsulate all the things that distinguish me from everyone else, and if it ever did it would run into problems because I change over time. But you can say “3oranges” and it will single me out here immediately.
Then there’s the fact that the whole point of language as a concept is that it is arbitrary. There is nothing inherently three-like about the word “three” (although you could argue there are three phonemes), nor is the word “orange” inherently orange-y, nor even does that final -s inherently embody the concept of “more than one”. Most words are heteronymous, and most of the autonyms we have got that way by accident (if you don’t count onomatopoeia – a word which is itself a heteronym). And that’s not even mentioning language evolution; “calculus”, for example, used to mean “pebble”; now it means “higher-level mathematics” or “manipulation of symbols”, depending on context. If everything else around us can have a completely arbitrary name, why can’t we extend that same courtesy to our fellow people?
The real question is, how did the sticker get in the skeleton in the first place?
*realizes nobody else got the Undertale reference*
*goes and hides under a rock*
BLUEWIND!!!
Have you been back long? Last time I remember you it was when you gave us note of your accident and surgery, though admittedly the recent avatar shuffle has thrown my commentator recognition capabilities out of whack, so it’s entirely possible you’ve been around always and I just missed you on account of you no longer being Roz. Did everything go ok?
Omg! Hi! No I actually just back to commenting. The surgery went well. I have two massive scars from my wrist nearly to my elbow. It still hurts but it’s healing. I’m finally getting to where I can use my hand again. I start therapy next week. I’ve had to hire a lawyer because the place said they weren’t going to pay for everything. It’s been an ordeal. Since I couldn’t use that arm and I kept getting migraines off and on, I started trying to write. It’s nowhere near finished but I’m trying to cut my baby teeth on fan fiction. Also helped a stranger get help who was suicidal which there are no words for. Oh and my birthday is in a few days and I have a stress headache from close minded asshats tearing me apart because my town is full of people who aren’t cool with the fact I exist.
How have you been? I wish I had commented sooner but it’s been so long and I figured who’s gonna miss my weirdness ya know?
*puts the Tina Turner Greatest Hits disk on the hacked Muzak and hits “Shuffle Mode”*
…. why is this playing “It’s Going to Work Out Fine”?
… It seems like Sarah is trying to give him a chance to prove himself. That’s unexpectedly nice of her given that their previous interactions have given her no reason to indulge him.
“I was just trying to be a people” will be title of my upcoming memoir.
Not if Willis makes it the Book 8 title first.
Hrm, that is a pretty good book title.
Or epitaph!
If I didn’t ship Joyce with Joe I’d want Sarah and he to become ‘With Benefits’ (sarah would never approve of the ‘friend’ part). That’s just my weirdness though, I know a lot of people that don’t discount a person their friend has slept with, but for me, they are totally off limits for anything more than casual if they’ve boned a friend.
Purely FWIW, I can see Joe eventually whittling the list down to a few girls who he can’t charm ‘that way’ and deciding from there who he wants to try to start a proper mutual relationship with. I suspect it will be Rachael just because I have a feeling that they may some common skeletons in their closets.
Probably not seeing as they already were a couple in the Walkyverse.
I’d much rather have Joe starting to become friends with Sarah -without -“benefits”*. Would be so much healthier for him.
*Isn’t being an actual friend with someone a benefit in itself?
I can see Joe is trying (in his own way, but given the context, I can get why Sarah isn’t buying it.
At the same time, the other option of walking away is still there, not like Joe won’t follow.
And if he does, he’s learned nothing. Which would make everything pointless.
Huh would have thought Sarah was more common than Patricia.
Yeah, it’s a shorter name. And Patricia is starting to sound old-fashioned, at least to me personally.
Patricia is common?
Mary and Patricia are the most common female names in the US, but only when you look across all age groups, so right now they’re “mom” or “grandma” sounding names. For most 90s babies, for instance, the most common are Jessica and Ashley.
Leslie did teach us that Jessica’s a very common name
It you wanna be REALLY SPECIFIC and narrow it down to late 90s Indiana, Sarah’s number six for both her current birth year (1998) and Joe’s current birth year (1999). In comparison, Mary was in the 40s for both years and Patricia isn’t in the top 100.
As weird as it is, having Joyce shadow Joe around with Danny accompanying the soundtrack with his glorious instrument might actually help Joe realize what he should and shouldn’t do.
I know it’s basically treating Joe like a dog but when you’re learning how to NOT want to hump every leg you see, sometimes you need the water bottle sprayed in your face.
Wow. Joe’s life is one of those movies which requires frequent, overdone music to hit home, not to the viewer, but to the protagonist, how “a people” typically feel in a given situation.
Makes for a bad movie which telegraphs everything, but Joe needs that until he can internalize it.
Best superpower: Ability to hear the incidental music.
When PUA raised its ugly head,
He boldly turned his tail and fled.
Sing Ho! for brave Sir Joseph!
This strip is hilarious good job thank you for making it
According to the list, I’m #5.
I never would have thought “Griffin” that common.
Certainly not for girls.
My name’s Elizabeth, which is what I was referring to. Clarifying because I’m not sure if you’re being sarcastic or sincere.
Can’t entirely blame Sarah, I wouldn’t really buy it either of Johnny Bravo was trying to teach himself to be less sleazy.
Maybe I’m alone in this, but I’ve never understood the hate for Comic Sans. Or Papyrus for that matter.
It’s my impression that it’s an ‘overused’ issue for most people. FWIW, I agree; then again, I rarely use more than Arial, Times New Roman or Verdana.
Would it be “keming humor” to not that when it’s late and my eyes are tired that I thought you typed ANAL, not ARIAL?
OK, so here it is: First of all, people generally want fonts/typefaces to be easy to read. Neither CS nor Papyrus are particularly easy to read*, so people avoid them like the plague.
(Joke’s a bit on them, though; because research suggests that by using fonts that are harder to read, you’ll end up retaining information better. Something about the brain making more of an effort, and nobody (including our brains) wants to make an effort for nothing.)
CS also has a reputation of being used in places where it’s usually called for to look more professional. Which isn’t the fault of CS itself; just of how some ad/promo people misuse it.
*Statistically speaking, that is. Sure, some people can read’em just fine, but as we know, there’s nothing out there so bad, you can’t find anyone not preferring it to the alternative.
Back when CERN announced discovering the Higgs boson in comic sans, it was being said it was easy to read, maybe even too easy from the research you said.
Myself, I think it’s a good font for word puzzles more than text.
Joe can move along and find a guy to talk with instead.
Like Mike! He seems like a guy who knows all about feelings, especially literally painful ones.
Well no because this is Joe reaching out to a girl, someone he knows in an attempt to “do better” so this is good on Joes part
Sarah though is under no obligation to help Joe
Ah, right right. Hmm, maybe Sierra?
If I could choose for Joe I’d choose Dorothy as she is/was a friend so someone he cares about, she probably cares at least a little for Joe, is intelligent and is good at listening to others problems
Yes, good choice. She’s known him since high school so pretty aware of his shenanigans.
Plus, it’d be someone that it would be more appropriate to be that emotionally intimate with. Like, sharing feelings with a stranger is a super dangerous thing that often leads to bad. You need to establish a rapport to do that and long history is that.
Yes and no. Yeah, he’s trying to talk to her without hitting on her, which is good. But he’s still pushing his presence onto her unwanted. Not so good.
Of course he’s not going to talk to a guy. Danny’s not around and guys don’t talk about stuff like feelings. That’s for girls.
Oh wait. Maybe he’s still got a ways to go.
This! He’s still assuming he is entitled to her time and attention when she was just walking someone else minding her own business. And that’s a deeper entitlement that’s going to take a lot more work.
Although Joe had tried to engage Sarah in a sexual way before, that is not the only way they know each other. He had interacted with her socially before (the pizza dinner with Jacob, Joyce, Sarah, and Joe; and should I remind you that in that situation, Joyce/Sarah joined them uninvited). During that dinner, that interaction, Joe did not hit on Sarah (or Joyce) for that matter, and they even engaged in some minor small talk.
While it might be too much to ask a major favor (hey, could I borrow $100?), an attempt at engaging in some minor small talk doesn’t seem like in requires any sort of ‘entitlement’.
And if Sarah’s available time were really at such a premium, why did she bother engaging with Joe at all (i.e. asking “why are you talking to me?”, and normally questions are things you might think deserve an answer) when she could have just given him a “go away” and continued on with her life?
As gets said everytime: he didn’t hit on her specifically. He did comment on how “Sarah’s behavior is doing all sorts of things to me” and bring up his sex swing though. Admittedly with some prompting from Joyce – but any normal person would have found something else to say.
In other words, he did his usual “sure, fine, I won’t hit on you” kind of hitting on her.
“And if Sarah’s available time were really at such a premium, why did she bother engaging with Joe at all”
I find it very easy to get sucked into conversations against my will. Probably a big part of that is women being socialised to be ‘polite’ and follow the social cues of the other person. It feels rude and scary to interrupt someone and unilaterally end the conversation.
In one rather extreme case, a guy in a bar started what was.. less a conversation and more a rapid-fire interrogation, and I was three answers in before I got over my shock enough to .. well, literally run away. I couldn’t even manage a “no” or “stop” at that point. :/
To be fair, that’s a pretty good grade for Joe at this point.
Well I mean, just because he isn’t doing pick up artist shit doesn’t mean he’s not a pickup artist.
Oh man I love this interaction. Sarah’s no bullshit attitude might just be a great help for Joe here <3
It wouldn’t surprise me in the slightest if Joe has an excellent memory for names. He just chooses not to use them or think about them because it’s easier to avoid the emotional intimacy that he seemingly fears if you dehumanise the other party.
I’d believe that. It’s easier to dehumanize and objectify someone as an object than a name that reveals their personhood and there’s a lot of male culture built into the idea of objectifying a description or a job rather than a person. So a stripper named Tanya just becomes a stripper in their head and so on and so forth.
When Joyce left gender studies class to go after Becky, and Dorothy and Walky went after her, Joe said “I care about whats-her-name too.” Despite clearly knowing her real name.
I actually love this.. I’M TRYING TO BE PEEPLE! THE BLUE FAIRY PROMISED ME IF I WAS HONEST AND DID GOOD DEEDS I’D BE A REAL BOY!
Somehow Joyce as a supernatural force of honesty and character development works.
So, aha, I kinda love all the discussion about names tonight. I’ve been thinking about writing a name book specifically for authors since I was 12 (as in, a baby name book with, preferably, no babies on the cover and the words ‘FOR AUTHORS’ specifically on it so I can carry it around without getting dirty looks – I’m a 21 year old who looks 12. It’s fun being seen with naming guides). So names have become a bit of a hobby for me.
I believe an entire manuscript of Gone With the Wind had to have every instance of “Pansy” changed to “Scarlett”, so choose wisely.
Or don’t use a manual typewriter. I am old enough that that’s what got me thru college, and I know there’s something about how they feel.
I’ve been compiling a list of interesting names for the past decade or so. Surnames included. It’s a word document (or rather, three word documents, because the version that had male names, female names, and surnames all on the same document was getting way too fucking long), and it isn’t even remotely alphabetized or sorted in any way, but I could send you a copy if you like.
Oooh, neat! That’d be great!
Thank you!
Someone is currently working on that. It was floating around #ownvoices writing twitter a bit ago and there was a team who started putting together the database and UI.
That is super cool!
Not a baby to be seen on this site.
I love behindthename! If I ever do get around to writing it, that site would be immeasurably helpful.
Aaaaaand I’m shipping them. Drat.
Noone ever gives me gold stickers.. :'(
Seriously, why do these comments the
<code>tag, but not the<img>tag?Oh right, because it would make moderation a nightmare and the moderation is part of why this is the best comment section on the Internet.
But just because I can’t have my cake and eat it too doesn’t mean I can’t complain for no reason!
Comic Reactions:
Atonement. The thing about atoning for one’s mistakes is no one is obligated to help you with that or accept it. One’s past deeds are still there and mistrust based on previous actions don’t just go away because you’ve decided to be good now.
It’s a hard thing sometimes for newly repentant people to accept. They long for the absolution of those they have wronged, for those people to tell them they are okay now and see them trying. But they are not owed that. And sometimes they will never receive that. And that’s just a thing they have to accept instead of letting bitterness take over.
Panel 1: And here we run into the consequences of Joe not learning the important lesson about entitlement to women’s time yet, and instead trying to just change the behaviors and attitudes on the surface.
Sarah was under no obligation to reveal potential vulnerability and emotional hurt to a person who has not previously proven to be trustworthy with that information and moreso, who she doesn’t have that sort of established intimacy with.
It’s an imposition, not something that reveals he understands that he should be interacting with women the same way he does guys or Joyce.
And it gets more clear when you remember the context of their interactions. Sarah had to scream at Joe to back off because of earlier aggressive motions on his part and is someone famously not down to talking about feelings with people she’s not extremely on close terms with and even then not reliably.
And yet he approached her with that open. Demonstrating he hasn’t retained the core lesson yet and it’s not just about doing exactly what he was doing but with its opposite.
And he tops it off with once again getting defensive when Sarah goes off on him instead of apologizing and walking off. Like, dudes, you can do that, I swear to you it will not reduce your masculinity to do that.
Panel 2: Sarah is totally justified in thinking this. She hasn’t seen his conversation with Joyce. All she’s seen is him being previous Joe, getting scorched for it, and now acting friendly but in an equally invasive and overly familiar manner.
She’s absolutely justified in assuming this is more PUA horseshit, because that’s the reputation. And that’s a struggle Joe has here. No one else has seen his inner monologue or his attempts to grow and no one is responsible for making it easier so he doesn’t have to confront in a real manner the harm he caused being a creepy PUA asshole.
And Joe’s response doesn’t cover him in glory either. Moaning about his “sex-exiling” which is basically just him getting the social consequences of women knowing how he has actively and intentionally hurt them and dehumanized them and made them feel less safe in an environment they went to to learn and making it about his desire to socially interact with folks in a positive way.
And here’s the thing about that. It’s part of getting back from fucking up. Like Ruth, he’s learning that an atonement doesn’t mean everyone accepts and doesn’t mean one’s past crimes and reputation just go away. Just like with Ruth, it won’t be a magic transformation, but a struggle every day until the habits are broken.
And I believe in Joe. I believe in his ability to improve. I believe that that’s why his story is paralleling Ruth’s to a degree. But he has an additional hurdle she doesn’t have and that’s the social messaging he has received his entire life that he is entitled to the time, body, and attention of the women in his life.
Hopefully he’ll take away more than “Sarah is mean” from this interaction.
Panels 3-4: I’m hoping Joe thinks about why she’s asking this question. Why she assumed he wouldn’t remember names. Cause it gets to the dehumanization of his “list”. Like, it’s bad enough that women were reduced to a boner update of how he was feeling when he first saw their body with no awareness of their humanity.
But it was also done in this deliberately dehumanized style. Women reduced to characteristics or manners of dress instead of names and that being done entirely so Joe’s empathy wouldn’t kick in about the grossness of his actions that still catalogue the boner updates of a horny high schooler about people who were in high school.
Joe’s list reduced Sarah to “cranky roommate” and was filled with the racist stereotype that because she’s gruff and black, she’s a danger to the sweet-eyed blonde white girl in her space even though the reality is that far more often it is the black girl who is in much more danger.
And I hope he realizes that’s the reason she brought it up. I hope he internalizes that this is not going to be as easy as just saying “I’m good now” and expecting things to go back to normal.
Panel 5: Like, his defensive posture is also insulting and telling as well. Like, it’s the same “woah, back off dangerous person” gesture he segued into by ignoring clear signs of disinterest and basically forcing Sarah into a position where she had to scream at him to back off.
And like, that’s kinda super racist given the context. Going up to someone you wronged. Who has ever reason to mistrust you and then when they rightfully go off on you, make a motion to insinuate they’re being irrational and prone to violence.
It’s a subconscious effort to exploit social oppressions to make himself appear to be the rational victim rather than a person getting some very expected consequences for previous ill behavior.
Now, do these criticisms mean I don’t believe in Joe’s ability to grow? No, he’s also shown growth here, not doubling down and going on the offensive when he’s feeling defensive and not making excuses for bad behavior.
There’s signs of growth here, but that road of atonement is going to be way harder than he’s letting himself believe it to be. And very worth it to keep him from becoming a bitter hateful jackass future him will despise.
I’m pretty sure, given the last strip, he’s already resigned himself to failure. Like, he’s going to try, and he’s going to fail, and that’s that. I don’t think he’s underestimating the difficulty of atonement, I think he genuinely believes what he’s trying to do isn’t actually possible. AKA, overestimating the difficulty.
Honestly, he shouldn’t have started with ‘trying to be a people’ at Sarah. Joe’s going to be babystepping a while, and Sarah’s barely capable of ‘being a people’ herself much of the time. Roz would be a better option – he owes her an apology or seventeen anyway – and if he wanted a genuine Being A People bunny slope? Dorothy. Or possibly Sierra.
I think he desperately wants to flame out and have “everything go back to normal”, but he’s never going to be able to go back to what he was doing without understanding exactly how awful it is and having his conscience nag him.
I think he’ll eventually grow, improve, and claw his way to atonement, because that’s the only path outside of denying reality or having a tantrum about how hard it is. And I doubt those are the arcs Willis wants to explore with him.
Eh, I don’t think Joe’s defensive posture is super racist. I think his defensive body language is him trying to show Sarah he’s harmless, which was his whole intent in this conversation. Now it does have the unintentional effect of framing Sarah as aggressive while Joe cowers to the outside observer, which IS bad.
And I’m not saying unintentional racism is harmless, just that Joe didn’t set out to make Sarah look like the “angry black woman” stereotype.
I mean I just read Joe’s posture as mostly a comic reaction to Sarah’s posture, she got in close, leaned in towards him, and was pissed off at him (as she should be) drawing Joe in a way that makes him look like he’s backing off is just standard to drawing interaction between people, it would look odd and wooden for Joe to be standing still in response
It’s kinda natural to get in a defensive posture when people are yelling at you though, even if it’s justified. It’s an instinct to shy away from loud righteous fury and honestly a lot of people get annoyed and think you’re mocking them if you consciously try not to cringe away. They think you’re acting defiant or something, or that you think you’ve done nothing wrong.
Now this is interesting; is SARAH the one who has forgotten they’ve met previously?
Probably not; she wouldn’t be jumping to the assumption he’s a PUA if she had. At least, not to judge by her first meetings with OTHER people.
Yeah, she knows they met previously. She doesn’t believe that means he knows her name, and it certainly doesn’t mean she wants him to talk to her.
If she didn’t know they’d met previously, it’d be knowing that would be the red flag – “Have you been stalking me or something?”
I’m pretty sure they dated back in roomiesverse
Mary and Patricia are the most common names because they were common back in the day, if he wanted to be on the safe side it would be better to go with the top girl names for people born from 1995-1998- https://www.ssa.gov/oact/babynames/top5names.html And Sarah is in the top five all 4 years. Check-MATE!
Even if Sarah was a more common name used in the year Sarah was born, it still wouldn’t be common enough to expect it to be an accurate guess.
I know 0 Patricias around my age but approximately 75874239573975620897508927 Sarahs. :\
By golly, you know seventy-five septillion, eight hundred seventy-four sextillion, two hundred thirty-nine quintillion, five hundred seventy-three quadrillion, nine hundred seventy-five trillion, six hundred twenty billion, eight hundred ninety-seven million, five hundred eight thousand, nine hundred twenty-seven Sarahs!?
Give or take?
Off-strip: Did Willis ever say what type of iguana Fuckface is? I went to our national zoo today, and in the reptile house they had a Cuban Iguana sleeping on a branch, and I SWEAR it was Fuckface.
Sarah seems to be rather upset in panel three. It’s like she’s not sure how to feel about this whole thing.
So, since we’re talking names a lot, I thought it’d be appropriate to crack open The New Baby Name Survey which I have right beside me. It’s a book from 2008 that attempted to ascertain what type of person Americans pictured when they heard a certain name. It doesn’t have a methodology, so I have no idea how it was administered or how accurate the results are, but it’s a fun little book anyways, so let’s see how Americans (circa 2008 or so) viewed the names of our main cast!
Just a note – the names ‘Malaya’ and ‘Roz’ aren’t listed in the survey results. ‘Mary’ is though, so I’ve included her for kicks. Quoting from the book:
Joyce – Joyce does the best she can to provide for her kids. She’s considered to be a good-natured and kindhearted divorced mom living an ordinary life in the suburbs. She’s probably smart, hardworking, and organized, making her a perfect bookkeeper. People picture her as overweight and middle-aged.
Dorothy – The most famous Dorothy wanted to be somewhere over the rainbow, but she inspires only one of this name’s images. Most people describe Dorothy as a kind, forgiving, and hospitable friend who’s honest and hardworking. Thanks to the lead character in The Wizard of Oz, some believe she’s brave, adventurous, and independent. Still others find her to be a pushy and overbearing older woman.
David – People happily look to David for leadership. He’s pictured with a tall, athletic build, and he’s known to be caring and thoughtful with a quiet confidence that makes him a good leader. Hardworking and responsible, David may also have a lighter, outgoing side.
Jennifer – Jennifer is ready to take on any challenge. Most people imagine Jennifer as intelligent, successful, and eager to tackle risks with a good attitude and high spirits. Socially, some sense she’s friendly and caring, but others imagine she’s a preppy snob from the ‘in’ crowd.
Billie (survey listed both so why not?) – Billie likes to have a good ol’ time. She’s imagined as a country girl who’s unsophisticated and uneducated but a lot of fun. People believe she’s goofy and mischievous, and she likes to knock back the beers at the honky-tonk. As for her looks, she’s pictured as leggy, blonde, and a little scruffy.
Amber – Amber has only a few close friends, but she’s well liked by everyone. Most people see her as a soft-spoken and shy girl who’s quietly popular. She’s known to have a kind heart and sweet personality. Other people imagine she’s vivacious, free spirited, and spunky. Interestingly, people se her with any combination of eye colour, hair colour, and body build.
Danny – Danny sure is a happy-go-lucky guy. He’s pictured as a cheeky, red-haired, Irish joker. People say he’s youthful and energetic.
Sarah – Every little thing about Sarah is gentle. She’s thought to be wholesome and sweet natured, shy and soft-spoken, and peaceful and patient. Appropriately, people even picture her with a petite frame, gentle face, kind eyes, and a warm smile.
Ethan – Ethan is more of a listener than a talker. People consider him to be reserved, compassionate, and down to earth. They say he’s handsome, but can be a little mousy at times.
Sally – Every afternoon, Sally has the neighbourhood gals over for coffee and gossip. This name reminds people of a sociable and very chatty housewife. Although she’s happy and funny, Sally is considered to be a loud mouth, and she most likely can’t keep a secret. People imagine she’s slightly chubby.
Becky – Becky is positively perky and popular. She’s thought to be friendly, fun, and cheery, which no doubt makes her the centre of attention. She’s most likely blonde with freckles and a nice smile. A few people, unfortunately, see her as spoiled.
Dina – There are two images of Dina – one has fun, and the other has manners. Most people describe Dina as a raspy-voiced woman who loves to drink, smoke, flirt, and have a wild time. They also say she’s spunky and outspoken. Others see her as demure, ladylike, and sweet. Either way, she’s attractive, petite, and fair.
Ruth – Ruth’s personality may be just about anything. Many people think Ruth is helpful, gentle, faithful, and honourable. Others say she’s confident, bold, boisterous, and larger than life. And then there are a few who believe she’s merely average and generic. As for her appearance, she may be tall or squat, but she’s thought to be homely.
Joe – Joe may be an ordinary guy, but every guy wishes he were like Joe. People imagine Joe as kindhearted, fun, and lovable – which coupled with his handsome good looks, makes him popular with girls. People also picture Joe as an athlete – not surprising when you consider such famous athletes as Joe DiMaggio, Joe Montana, and Joe Namath.
Mike – Everybody likes Mike, and Mike likes everybody. People tend to think of Mike as a popular guy who’s smart and sweet. He seems to be your average, all-American suburbanite. Physically, people describe him as good-looking, tall, and strong.
Marcie (listed as Marcy) – Marcy knows all the scuttlebutt in her suburban neighbourhood. This name reminds people of a friendly but gossipy soccer mom. People say she’s caring and funny, but her outspokenness and rumour mongering have given this brunette a reputation as a big mouth.
Jacob – Jacob is the boy next door. He’s pictured as a nice suburban kid who gets along with everybody. He probably gets good grades and has a good sense of humour, and he’s also strong and easy on the eyes.
Carla – Cheers was one of TV’s best-loved sitcoms, and Carla, the wisecracking waitress, was one of its best-loved characters, For this reason, Carla is described as a loud and lively woman full of sarcasm, spunk, and wit. With dark hair and a short build, she’s also known to be honest, loyal, and a good friend.
Lucy – Just like the name Lucille, this name’s image links to comic queen Lucille Ball. Lucy strikes people as a playful and wacky comedian who’s outgoing, affectionate, peppy, and smart. She’s depicted as a pretty redhead.
Leslie – Leslie is easily misunderstood. He’s known to be a selfless, kind man who’s polite and quiet. But it’s not hard to see how his refined manners can come across as snobbish or stern to some people.
Mary – The mother of Jesus, biblical Mary is THE namesake of one of the most popular names. People picture Mary as a nurturing and gentle mother who’s religious, traditional, and simple. She most likely has a conservative, mousy appearance.
Roz is probably short for Rosalyn or a similar name, I’m not sure if it’s ever come up. Some of these don’t fit the characters at all, but Mike really goes above and beyond in being the polar opposite, “likes everybody” ha ha no.
Joe’s game is weak on this one. You don’t go by the most common names as they are now, you go by the most common baby names in the year that the person was born. Like Average Life Expectancy. And in *that* case (assuming a birth year of either 1997 or 1998), Sarah actually spikes up to number 4.
But DOA has a sliding timescale??
Yes, but that doesn’t actually matter. Mary and Patricia have been on the decline for a very very long time and Sarah’s been pretty consistently higher for years. The point stands that, FOR JOE, if you want to guess names with accuracy, you should go by the name statistics from when that person was born.
Granted, those statistics probably won’t help because there are so many people and even the number one names aren’t often helpful.
It just happens to work out that my stats are true for the current point in the slide.
I would think that this could be thrown off if the person doesn’t look their age quite easily.
Do you think I chose this name because I -like- it?
(I was named after my grandfathers. Nobody asked -them- either.)
Just because it means ‘diligent’ and ‘responsible’, I’m expected to clean up after everyone else?
(Nods to any Susans out there)
Woot!
Artistically Misunderstood Cat!
I worked with a young woman named Pat. She told me about one time when she lived with another young woman named Pat, and was dating a man named Patrick. When he would call and her roommate answered, it went like this: “Hi, Pat. This is Pat. Is Pat there?”
Is Sarah more common in Canada? Cause I was working with 2 of them until last Tuesday. (Would still be if Trudeau wasn’t a liar.)
Keep at it, Joe. I believe in you.