You know, I never comment on stuff, but I have to say something. My customers named Karen are normally among the more friendly people I come in contact with. Women named Linda however… total bongos
I think in Carol’s mind their discussion had reached its natural conclusion, since she had stated her firm beliefs as they relate to the facts of the matter and therefore neither she nor Linda had anything more to say.
Also known as the “Let’s agree to disagree” [because I’m wrong and you’re an idiot who can’t appreciate my brilliance that is so brilliant that it doesn’t require any form of logical validation] strategem.
( And why any sensible person never uses that particular phrase. :S )
[If you don’t get it, it’s google-able.]
Anyway, “agree to disagree” is perfectly reasonable when discussing preferences. Which is what it’s for. It doesn’t work as well for, like, other people’s well-being.
There’s alternative phrases to “Let’s Agree to Disagree”, and both standard language comprehension [note the statement's imposing phrasing, as well as the implied dismissiveness] and regional preferences make the phrase interpretable as deliberately insulting. Again, you can Google for confirmation on those aspects. Personally, putting aside predeterminations of meaning, I’ve yet to see anyone use “agree to disagree” without meaning it as an insult. Given that there are countless alternative phrases that work just as well, it’s generally best to avoid that phrase unless you’re with people you know won’t mind it [or if you’re TRYING to be insulting, I suppose].
It’s not swearing until you make a promise, duh.
So “I swear to fuck you up” is a swear, but “fuck your fucking face you fucking fuckmonkey” is totally just you appreciating the versatility of “the F word”. 😛
*Also, it’s okay to blasphemy if it’s part of your own religion, because it’s “OUR word”. It’s only a problem when outsiders use it, because it’s totally no longer offensive when we use it. Geesh, you’d know this if you were part of our culture. It’s a pity you’re a goddamn heathen. :shakes head remorsefully:
I am pedantic, a bit anal-retentive in the defence of the Queen’s English, and like to show off. I also try to limit ‘bad language’ for special occasions – it’s more effective that way. 8)
If I’d say ‘shit’ and someone said ‘Stop swearing’ I’d reply with: “That isn’t swearing, that is a vulgarity – which is usually referring to something directly with a simple word instead of a ‘polite’ phrase such as ‘bowel movement’. Swearing (or a ‘profanity’) involves religion such as ‘God damn you’ or ‘By the bowels of Christ’. A vulgarity is an action that is considered immoral or socially reprehensible such as ‘Mother Fucker’ or ‘eat shit’ (which has the added point for including vulgarities).
Sorry, just showing off.
Of course, modern usage of ‘swearing’ includes all three, but I still use ‘whom’ whenever I can, so I’m a classicalist. 8)
Does the Relationship Gauntlet have Relationship Stones?
Time – Time to calm the f**k down.
Space – A safe Space to discuss issues.
Reality – Exist in the same Reality.
Mind – Mindful of each other’s sensitivities.
Soul – Share the same Soul.
Power – An equal Power dynamic.
“Soul – Share the same Soul.”
Let’s change that to “be harmoniously in sync with one another’s soul”.
Sharing the same soul- soul often being interchangable with ‘identity’- is just a sign of codependence. It’s when souls integrate smoothly and complexly but don’t overlap that you have a healthy relationship.
“Power – An equal Power dynamic.”
Whelp, that proves that Home Improvement was about an unhealthy family. Tim was always going on about wanting “more power”, after all.
Though at least in Home Improvement he wasn’t a bigoted, die-hard conservative who treated the females in his family like garbage and defied all considerations of logic, like Tim Allen’s role in Last Man Standing [which he appears to enjoy and appreciate immensely], notably following the first season [after which they swapped the only liberal actress out, turning the character into an abusable caricature, existing solely to support conservative bias. Yeesh, what a show.
I liked the one time he was right about something, that vaccines are good, and then immediately walked it back by running to stop his son-in-law from taking his child to get necessary and required vaccinations.
“You can’t take your son to get vaccines without your wife’s permission! It’s her son, she owns it!”
The show was clearly so impressed with itself for its mouthpiece saying coherent, reasonable sentences, too.
Such a good show, with rational, well-written characters and insightful humor!
To the POV of people like Carol, it’s not even that they expect you to show a united front all the time, it’s that to them, their opinion is Objectively Right and the only reasons you would disagree are if you’re ignorant or willfully choosing the wrong opinion as an act of petty defiance or because you enjoy acting immorally.
It’s not that she expects him to present a united front, it’s that to her, the only reason he would pick the “wrong” choice is to throw a tantrum.
Yep, in the same sense that brave protesters staring in the face of a police force ready to bash them with Geneva-convention-defying methods all while a pandemic rages about are called “whiny snowflakes” by Trumpists. The same ones who cry out about the “tyranny” of masks. This sort of people will mock virtue as a despicable weakness and treat their own fragility as a show of strength.
I’ve always found it odd that the family members I’ve stood up to usually claimed to think it was that I couldn’t stand my ground, when it was very much the fact that I *could* stand my ground that I wasn’t going along with their idiocy.
Maybe, maybe not. We know they’ve walked out on churches that Hank found objectionable for various reasons before. We also know that one of their kids is estranged and he regrets it. We’ve got hints that there’s an ongoing story of Hank’s development behind the scene that we’re only getting to see recent highlights of.
That’s a good point. I don’t know what the other churches did that Hank found unacceptable, but I bet it was less severe than releasing an armed child abductor upon his daughter and her friends.
He’s likely 1000% done with that place, and if Carol is this determined to double down on her loyalty to them, well, that could be the breaking point for them.
I’ve suspected for a while that Carol’s behaviour to Hank behind closed doors is, if not outright abusive, then at least heavily controlling, and the way she’s talking here seems to confirm it. This might be the extent to which he’s able to defy his wife.
Like how Joyce’s brother pulled out the ‘stop being so emotional’ card on her regarding someone pointing a gun at her… Probably learned that handy little dismissal technique from mom…
I wouldn’t really be able to argue well against that perspective, if it was just a philosophy that emotions should be buried, especially in public. At that point, it’s basically just cultural, without any kind of bias or inherent irrationality [even if it’s lacking in comprehension of how humans work, efficiency in dealing with issues, etc – being subpar doesn’t necessarily equate to being unsupportable, after all].
But these individuals always, ALWAYS, make exceptions for their own issues. This isn’t about having a certain philosophy in how life should be approached, it’s about control, abuse, and the degradation of others. They do it because they’re invalidating the individuals in question and their perspectives, not because they’re supporting any kind of universally applied belief structure.
And these are the kind of people we have leading the government, infesting the police forces, the legal and judicial system, and so forth. Joyous.
But it’s not a philosophy. It’s a controlling strategy. It’s about provoking the other person into anger, then dismissing them on the grounds that they’re emotional.
Wow, you articulating this distinction is helpful for me. It’s not about the idea itself, but the double standard. I’ve dealt with this in my family, and also with new age fundamentalists who tell everyone else that they’re creating their reality with their mind, but refuse to accept responsibility for their own experiences.
Oh my God… this sort of gaslighting is what I faced from my mother in contexts unrelated to religion. Also what I faced from an ex boyfriend. “Any form of disagreement or rebellion is seen as a tantrum because I am infantilized and incapable of having a correct point of view” 😡😔
On the one hand, I want to say “Ow”, but on the other hand, I’m something like 98% sure I got my BPD from my undiagnosed mother. And literally not even 5 minutes ago, I explained to someone reading the strip over my shoulder, “Just think my mom, but fundie instead of Catholic.” So…..that’s a lot of words to say “yeah, that fits.”
I don’t mean to hurt you, Meli. Just the fact that you are working through your emotions means you’re doing the good work to be better. My Mom wasn’t a bad person, and neither are you. She tried hard to be good, and so do you. Do you know I headcanon Rose Quartz and the Diamonds from Steven Universe as BPD? They all fit into one of the four BPD Mom subtypes, but they all got better. You’re getting better, too, I promise. ::hug::
This is reinforcing to me that Hank may have wanted to walk away from their church already, but was sticking it out for Carol. He wants the word of Christ and hasn’t found it yet. Carol just wants an echo chamber to belong to.
Many people don’t extricate themselves from a bad enviroment at the first time, sometimes not at the fifth or even the tenth and may take a lot if it’s family.
But between all the children being now adults, and that his trust on that particular church has been eroding and eroding and now dealing that big chunk on the responsability of the current events is on that one and his wife… he may not divorce her right here and right now… but their relationship won’t probably get better…
Humans tend to habitualize, as part of their adaptive processes. This unfortunately causes us to easily become innured to negative aspects in the relationships around us, especially if we were introduced to those factors when we couldn’t properly process them in the first place [eg, as a child].
Mature- in the most genuine sense of the word- adults are distinguishable in the fact that they know when to cut and run from an entanglement, and are capable of determining a productive manner by which to do so. Anyone else can’t really call themselves mature, as they’re still yielding to negative external influences in the same manner that a child would.
That doesn’t mean they’re completely lacking in maturation, it just means they haven’t achieved a full comprehension of the elements that compose maturity. Similarly, the bias against children being able to be mature is nonsensical, as many children are far more mature than adults; Then again, that may just be a factor of how immature adults can be, as even the most mature children do still certainly lack in certain social perceptions (though which those are may perhaps vary).
My point here isn’t to dismiss those who haven’t achieved “proper maturity”, it’s to note how rare and difficult such development can be. Now consider Hank, who we can assume was raised in a very conservative environment, met carol as part of that environment, was further influenced by social expectations and compulsions [and hormonal and psychological influences] relating to relationships. After getting something as fortunate as a family, you’re going to try and make that work. And having someone dear to you, you’re going to try and excuse things, even if those things are somewhat extreme. And the extremeness, in this case, was diminuitized by the culture he was influenced by.
Perhaps the strongest sign of love and respect (at least, from a behavior-entrenched individual) is that someone is willing to bend and re-adapt, and acknowledge error, if it’s for your sake. Hank is showing us that stability and comfort and security and tradition are important to him, but his children are more important. ..which I think was also the basis of the plot of Fiddler on the Roof? 😛
Hank doesn’t have to be a great guy, a good guy, a mature guy. We’re not evaluating him for dating, or for election to a Nobel Peace Prize. He just has to be someone capable of basic rationality, with a proper sense of responsability, who is willing to fight against the bad environment he has fallen into when it counts.
But, much like someone realizing they have an addiction, it can be comfortable to fall back into old patterns. What will define Hank as an individual and as a father, will be how firmly he draws the line in defending his children, even if it’ll cost him his social connections (including his marriage).
Far too many humans take a concilatory approach when they shouldn’t, and take offense at others who take a more mature or responsible approach, insisting that such individuals just aren’t yielding enough. [Incidentally, you all are totally okay with giving terrorists and abusive spouses a pass, right? I mean, I’m sure they’ve learned their lesson once we’ve pointed out their flaws. /sarcasm]
So, if Hank chooses comfort and yielding to pressure in this circumstance, he’ll actively be indicating that he values his own comfort over his children. Given carol’s current behavior, it seems extremely unlikely she’ll change her perspectives enough to allow for any kind of proper yielding on her part [always love how the abusers are never held to the philosophy that people should yield to others]. So yeah, by this point, Hank is facing down a divorce.
But as Romanticide touched on, in the past, it was never that extreme. Hank and carol had differing perspectives, but none which both actively and immediately threatened their children, nevermind marginalized their feelings, circumstances, and very existence. So that he hasn’t broken free until then does say something about his character, but it doesn’t go so far as to indicate that he’d been operating with negative perspectives in the past, nor that he’d previously had enough compulsion to leave the relationship.
Now, however.. definitely a different matter. After all, it’s not every day that your wife is actively responsible for the release of a gun-wielding self-absorbed zealot who has threatened your daughter, and who then terrorizes your daughter again, with your wife then dismissing your daughter and feeling no remorse over the matter. I mean, presumably it isn’t..
*and are capable of determining a productive manner by which to do so. Anyone else can’t really call themselves mature, as they’re still yielding to negative external influences in the same manner that a child would or are approaching those matters with the emotional maturity one would expect of a child.
To be fair I doubt their situation was ever This extreme. Hank might be fine with arguments about changing Churches or the domestic situation. But releasing a dangerous psycho and almost getting their daughter killed? Yeah I doubt he’ll stand for that.
No but see his virtue signals were the same as her virtue signals so that makes him the good guy in all situations. Because if he’s held accountable for his criminal activity then she might be held accountable for her own too.
And this happens in all groups. I see this in activists I once thought were my allies, who aren’t willing to revise their views on someone and will double down and defend things that someone has done simply because of a shared identity. Honestly I used to do this myself (and probably still do in ways I’m not aware). It’s very human.
What are the odds Linda just goes ‘well if they’re all like that, that’s way too exhausting for me. Back to getting a student with less support network and resources expelled!’? Because I consider it a non-zero chance.
It’s atypical, certainly. However, sometimes abusers like her can be a part of any group–even one supposedly based on teachings that are explicitly contradictory.
It’s certainly true that Christians who disregard the meaning of the name are already halfway there.
…that moment when you husband is obviously furious with you and your main concern is that you feel embarrassed.
I’m actually not surprised by this. Covering up problems to project a “happy family” image is part of the fundie life-script. And punctuating it with an obvious lie denying the previous sentence is a nice touch.
She had print outs of all the parents on her desk and was ready to hit the deck the second any of them came in. This group? She’s been seal crawling towards the bathroom for the last five minutes.
Anyone else having trouble with the comments section loading? It’s been going on for a week or more: comic loads but not the rest of the page. I have to CTRL+F5 once or twice to see the comments. I thought it was just my work computer and the VPN, but it happens at home also.
And even after the comments load, the “page loading” indicator at the top of my browser tab is still humming along, trying to finish loading the page. And presumably eating up RAM.
I could be wrong, but I get the sense it started when Hiveworks changed the look of the scroll of links to other comics. If they messed up their coding there, it might make sense that it’s the loading from them that’s the problem.
Though some other Hiveworks comics don’t seem to have the problem, but maybe it’s because they use Disqus for their comments?
Haven’t noticed it on other pages, but the page *does* lock after that Hiveworks bar loads. After that, all I see is the white “tag page” bar below it on the left side. Nothing else.
Nope. Have not had trouble seeing comments.
Yes, trouble with the page pausing a quarter of a sec. after loading the banner, before loading the rest of the way. But not holding back anything.
I’ve had that happen before, though it’s been about a year. When i back traced the freeze it was an ad failing to load correctly and freezing the whole tab. That ended after a few days.
Yep, been having it for a while now. Sometimes it now fully loads and other times it is trying to load for an eternity and sometimes it only loads half the comments and not even the colour of the site to go with them.
And sometimes it loads fully…except the avatars.
Granted, at least most of them are arbitrary. Maybe half, from a brief scroll-down (while they’re working.)
No, wait, I am definitely wrong. They did leave in different directions, but Carol must have stepped back and pivoted to her left while Charles pivoted in place to watch her go past.
Uhg. That passive aggressive dragging of strangers into your business so you can vent to someone because you HAVE to right then. Getting caught in those headlights will make you feel like a deer staring down an awkward semi.
Also, I wonder how much of this has been stewing under the surface between Hank and Carol. Clearly he’s pretty livid about what she’s done but is just now seems to be coming to a head.
Yeah. But I can imagine that she’s been riding the, “our friend is dead, don’t make me talk about this NOW” train for a bit now. So Hank probably hasn’t been able to talk to Carol at all about what she did/ what happened.
I assume. Could be wrong.
Also Linda take notes your not as bad as her yet but since you and Carol share similar tendencies it wouldn’t be hard for you to work your way up to her level.
Thursday. Joyce skipped church the day (Sunday) before Dina and Sarah’s birthday, placing the party as Monday (consistent with Calc and Gender Studies classes in the same storyline). Mike was missing all Tuesday. Kidnapping was Wednesday morning and it’s the next day.
Eh I can see why damn would be worse than fuck if you were super religious. Fuck just translates to sexual intercourse, while to damn someone means to actually say they should go to Hell. And if you believe Hell is a real place…
Plus she says god-damned, which is essentially saying God damned a child.
Which the TRULY profane would combine. I recall one of the Canterbury Tales about these rogues who were fond of swearing by “God’s blood and bones”. It was funny to me since the one telling the tale (iirc, which is not always a good assumption) was insisting how righteous he was.
I saw an interview with one of the writers of Deadwood, who said that in historical realism the swearing would have been dominated by blasphemy, not scatology and sexual vulgarity, but that they changed most of the “God” and “damn” to “shit” and “fuck” because realistic dialogue sounded quaint and created the wrong impression.
i think the last line was supposed to be something like “i am the perfect religious mother, i NEVER swear. so if i’m swearing now, it must be because someone REALLLYYYYY messed up.”
kinda like if you were to say “i don’t usually like salmon, but this is delicious” you mean that someone did such a good job that you can’t help but love it.
On the poll: Amazi-Girl. Sal herself knew Amber threw the fight when Sal was choking her, so yeah, canonically, it’s Amazi-Girl.
As for the comic, I love that Carol is saying this after saying “fucking” to Linda previously, and now, after the arguably “worse” ‘goddamn’. It’s pretty indicative of her character to blatantly do something and then care about her image enough to tell a bald-faced lie about it.
Captain.
Though related to a peer,
I can hand, reef, and steer,
And ship a selvagee;
I am never known to quail
At the fury of a gale,
And I’m never, never sick at sea!
Chorus.
What, never?
Captain.
No, never!
Chorus.
What, never?
Captain.
Hardly ever!
From the Pirates of Penzance (watch the Linda Ronstadt version)
Yes Carol. Because the man walking away to avoid associating with the woman who is throwing a temper tantrum over her plan to let out a crazed psycho failing is the one acting like a child
I hope Hank divorces her and she freaks the fuck out
Fundagelicalese: “throwing a tantrum like a goddamned child”
English: declining to march to the tinpot’s tune
This is so going to end up Hank with Joyce, Jocelyn, and Jordan going no contact with Carol and John.
Poor Joyce, in just a matter of months her world is crashing down around her. It’s going to hurt and be scary, but I think she’s learned enough to already know it’ll be for the better.
I hope she doesn’t get it into her head that it’s in any way her fault. Carol will say it is, because she didn’t consign Becky to the flames of Hell. And because she’s friends with that Satan-loving atheistical, heathen, devil worshipper. Which is Hank’s fault because he didn’t insist Joyce shun Dorothy.
One thing we do know for sure is that none of this is Carol’s fault and her church is perfect.
Due to the sliding timescale, Trump is unlikely to be mentioned directly until he’s out of office; however, Willis did draw a (non-canonical) comic of Joyce’s upbringing in 2016 which should basically answer your question. Here you go: https://www.dumbingofage.com/2016/blog/antichrist/
Wasn’t there a Patreon strip involving AOC though? I suppose it’s a fairly safe bet that she’ll be in office for a while, but still, that does anchor the strip to fairly recently. As, admittedly, do Pokemon Go and the like.
That’s not really gaslighting, gaslighting is an attempt to manipulate someone by making them believe they are in the wrong, or more traditionally make them believe they are insane. Carol is just lying (badly).
She did literally swear and is now insisting she never swears. That can be a form of gaslighting to make you doubt your memory of doing something and denying it happened immediately afterwards. It probably won’t *work* but it often doesn’t the first time you do it to someone, especially when they are a stranger pretty much.
Tbh, I am not sure if it’s so much gaslighting as a compliance demand: my father will often pull that sort of thing. “I never (thing I just did.)”
The point isn’t so much to get you to question your reality (this happened in public, Hank has too many options for reality checking, gaslighters prefer to gaslight about stuff that can’t be easily checked), it’s instead a demand that ppl comply with her image. It’s her way of testing loyalty of her subjects (see also how Trump will continue to spew lies even when called on it: being believed isn’t the point, the point is who will follow along knowing she’s full of it).
I have literally seen people with experience of gaslighting say it is a form of gaslighting before where someone says or does something then immediately denies it ever happened. It absolutely is a way that someone will try to gaslight you. Just because the situation around it may make it *ineffective*, does not mean it isn’t gaslighting. What makes it gaslighting is that if you did it over and over and over again, it would warp someone’s perception into actually questioning whether they are making stuff up.
For gaslighting the question isn’t ‘is this effective’, it is ‘if I did this every single time it happened, would it make the other person start to think they are losing it?’ Because gaslighting is only really effective from the get go on people that already doubt their perceptions, memory and sanity (like say, if you have psychosis or PTSD like Amber). Most people have some degree of confidence in their perception, memory and sanity which makes it extremely ineffective to start with. Because gaslighting relies on repetition to make someone start to second guess themselves.
Should have made it more clear I was speaking from my experience, and referring specifically to the case where there are unbiased witnesses: IME with my family, my parents used to pull the deny the thing I just did in public with witnesses as compliance testing.
They absolutely would deny stuff they just did in private (eg, smacking me hard enough to leave a welt and the scoffing that doesn’t hurt when I yelped), but when they did it in public the point wasn’t me it was the ppl around me, to see if they would enable what just happened.
Gaslighting isn’t an interchangeable synonym for lying, and I’m not sure it would apply here. I don’t think Carol is attempting to make the Walkertons question reality or to harm them psychologically to gain control over them. She’s just a hypocrite and in denial about her behavior.
Gaslighting as a term is incredibly overused. To the point where it risks making the word meaningless. Gaslighting is based on degrading and demoralizing someone over a period of time, it is not a synonym for lying.
When Joyce was explaining how her mother likes a slightly raunchy song so her headcanon is that it’s about a married couple so it’s OK, it was kinda cute: nobody was being hurt by it, it’s a relatively minor stretch that doesn’t (I believe) directly contradict any of the actual facts presented, and the end result was that Joyce had a bit more “normal [for a white US teen]” cultural exposure than she would have had otherwise. But this is basically Carol’s MO, isn’t it? Reshape reality in her own mind until it better fits her agenda, then insist that this is objective fact.
I’m a fuzzy apostate low-church Protestant turned atheist, so I may be misusing the term, but the connotation is of a self-righteously holy person who is a hypocrite or is only “performatively” holy, right? That being a designation that would stick in the craw of someone like Joyce’s mom, it seemed appropriate. Or, what am I missing, here?
That’s the connotation in Christianity, but they actually were a Jewish sect trying to keep things together under an oppressive empire, so a lot of folks don’t care for the caricature of them that show up in the Christian texts and, fairly, dislike the use of their name as an insult.
OTOH, it’s not like there are any Pharisees around anymore and haven’t been for nearly 2000 years, so I’m not sure that absent any other anti-semitic context it’s really a problem.
Yeah, this is the first I’ve ever heard of anyone objecting to it, or that it somehow indicates anti-Semitism. It seems silly to abandon a term for religious hypocrites so well known that even heathens like me know what it means to…what, avoid hurting the feelings of any resurrected zombie Pharisees that are or may one day be out there? Something like “please don’t say ‘I got gypped'” I understand, since that’s a current ethnic group and that usage hurts real people, but when the group you’re defending from allegedly offensive terminology doesn’t even *exist* anymore, I think that’s going off the deep end.
Am I the only one not surprised that Carol completely missed the point on every level? I actually feel sorry for Linda and Charles because it’s quite clear that they have no idea whatsoever what has just happened!
More concerned with public appearances than actually resolving issues, demands total compliance to her point of view, erupts at the slightest disagreement? Carol reminds me a lot of certain members of my family. All she needs is to start using Jordan as an insult.
Also it is very refreshing to see Hank stand up to her.
Hrrmm. It seems like the divorce topic might have been discussed already maybe?…Hrmmm.
And not that I’m at all invested in the Brown marriage at this point but I think Carol has made a mistake here. I don’t know why they got married. For all I know it could even be a wedlock thing, but uhhh she had to see something in Hank right?
A guy like Ross maybe seems appealing if you’re into dudes willing to do literally anything to protect your flawed religious values, but It’s really heavily implied that domestic life was not great. *Becky’s mom* She’s not around for a reason and that implied reason is really bad. Most people don’t consider suicide an option if their home life is going well and that’s all I’ll say on that without a confirmation. But that’s the dark side of a guy like Ross.
So when she’s says Hank never stands his ground I think she’s lost sight of what ground she’s standing on, because it’s shaky as fuck and Ross has fallen in! It could of been you falling in with him Carol. It might still happen. I think she’s lost sight of what was appealing about Hank to being with. He’s a good guy.
For someone like Carol, she likes Ross, sure, and probably secretly wants to be him a bit, but she’ll never be romantic with someone like him because she’s cut from the same cloth and they both are the sort to choose people they think they can victimize – not that it’s a conscious thing. Someone as aggressive as Ross is too likely to stand up to her.
Carol is what happens when you give someone with Ross’s level of domineering religious fundie controlling and abusive tendencies feminine socialization. They’re two sides of the same coin. The reason her aggression is mostly passive aggression is that fundie circles don’t approve of physically violent women so she learned how to do the same shit with her words.
My headcanon is that, like Joyce, Carol was sent to college entirely to get her ‘MRS Degree’ (find a husband). She found Hank but, as others have noted, young (and possibly pre-Jordan) Carol was a lot wilder than she is now. Consequently, the marriage was a bit rushed because she’d fallen pregnant.
This has two consequences if it was the case: Firstly, her own regrets and sense of guilt probably makes Carol a lot stricter than she probably would have been otherwise. Secondly, there may have never been any long-term future for her relationship with Hank; they’re incompatible personalities and would have realised this before they had a half-dozen children in the crossfire if things hadn’t turned out the way they did.
My offhand headcanon is that their basic conflict is “what do you do when your kids go off the script?” Carol just want to double down on controlling and manipulation. Hank wants to be more flexible and tolerant while trying to nudge them back onto the right path. Alternatively, Hank used to agree with Carol’s methods, but he has now realized that they don’t work and wants to try something else.
I’m on a similar page with Slartibeast. Maybe Hank and Carol were pretty compatible in their younger years, but people grow and people change. Looking at the ages of their children, they’ve likely been married about 30 years. (Do we actually know an official length of their marriage??) That’s a looooong time for people to change. Shoot, guys, I’m not the same person I was even 10 years ago, you know? And having children can really magnify even small incompatibilities of personality that may have been workable before into much larger conflicts, as the outcomes can be seen as much higher stakes when kids are involved. I guess what I’m trying to say in my ramble is a marriage doesn’t have to start as an incompatible mess to become one.
I’m sure they’ve both changed over the years.
OTOH, the few hints we’ve gotten about Jordan suggest they disagreed about how to handle that situation as well, so it’s likely Slartibeast is right about their conflict over handling the kids.
Who won that previous conflict and how its failure changed their attitudes is an interesting question.
I wonder where things changed though and who exactly did. Carol’s grumbling seems to imply that disagreements like this have happened before, maybe even often. Not just potentially with Jordan but other things as well and I have to wonder why she even chose to be with him if this was a part of his personality she detested so much. It really makes me think that maybe she got pregnant and that started the whole thing. They’ve been married for probably close to 30 years give or take. She has to know what Hank is like.
Same goes for Hank honestly. Why would you want to start a family with a woman who values her religion over even the lives and safety of her own children?
My impression of Becky’s mom is that she succumbed to severe depression. If she was denied anything, it was likely the opportunity to seek professional help rather than just “sucking it up”, or anonymously asking people to pray for her.
My current understanding about abuse and how it relates to many mental health issues is its sort of like the relationship between smoking and lung cancer. You can smoke and never get lung cancer, and you can get lung cancer without smoking. But smoking does indeed cause lung cancer.
If I didn’t already know Ross was an abusive A hole I would not think his wife’s suicide was caused by him being an abusive A hole.
But we already know he’s an abusive A hole to Becky, and I believe there is a f-ing strong link between being an abusive A-hole to your daughter and being an abusive A-hole to your wife. So me head cannon is that his wife’s suicide is over half his fault.
My impression personally is a combination of factors – a possible genetic tendency towards depression, a husband who was, at best, extremely controlling, and a society (which she had largely grown up in, I suspect) that stifled any ambition she could possibly have outside a husband and children. And she loved Becky, but I kind of headcanon Bonnie as a Becky who could never break away – maybe not sexuality-wise, but I think she had the same desire to learn beyond what the church allowed.
Ross refusing to let her out of that box killed her, Ross likely refusing to acknowledge she could not pray this pain away killed her, and I suspect he was abusive to Bonnie as he was to Becky (even pre-outing – no cell phone when she’s left for college is one hell of a red flag,) but I think their entire community was itself a factor.
Oh, left out also – Bonnie loved Becky, and so if she couldn’t see a way out for herself I can see her despairing even worse that she couldn’t see a future for her daughter where she was happy.
Basically: Bonnie makes me sad, as incredibly little as we know of her, because I extrapolate her from what Joyce and Becky might have had to be.
The most common reason fundangelicals get married is so they can have sex (because:no sex outside of marriage). And since that happens when they’re waaaay too young to make that sort of commitment, they get divorced. That’s why they have a higher than average divorce rate. It’s also why there’s such an emphasis on ‘no divorce’ in that culture, because magic man is supposed to fix any problems in the marriage, if you talk at the ceiling enough. My guess is that Hank and Carol bought into that line of propaganda hook, line and sinker, although Carol obviously swallowed more of it.
Probably for the same reason a lot of hyper-religious people got married: they were young, they were in love, they wanted to have sex. The problem with that? You don’t build a strong foundation first. All things you tolerated early on turn into eventual actual annoyances that drive you insane. You haven’t discussed how to handle differences in opinion so you actually argue about them. They had kids so they refused to divorce. Issues escalated.
We know Hank fell in line at some point and that Joyce challenging them has made him start to rethink letting things slide and what views he was letting himself sink into. That Joyce punching Toedad reminded him of his old self. That if churches were too intolerant, he left them. That his old rebellious spirit and love for actual real people has been coming back to him.
We also know Carol became stricter with time. Jocelyne was the one that made sure Joyce got to experience Halloween because the rest did after all.
So Hank has already do thing like this in private? GOOD TO KNOW! Now Linda and Charles will have a lot of thinking about this, visibly already dead, couple they’ve just met.
“Could never stand his ground, always had to throw a tantrum like a goddamned child”
Translation
“this idiot is useless. what’s the point of having a husband if he doesn’t agree with you 100% of the time and parrot your opinions?”
“Hank! You get back here and become the tribal, stereotypical, aggressive male presence I’ve decided I need to make my point stronger and win this argument that kidnapping is only a problem when the children don’t listen to the adult and he physically hurts them!”
I wonder if Linda and Charles will learn something from this? Like, will Linda say something about how she can’t believe how controlling Carol is, and Charles will be inspired by what he just saw and the fact his son grew part of a spinal column and point out that she kinda is?
He talked to Sal at Parents Day, though mostly to comment on her hair. Not overly manly, though he sorta trailed off cause her hair was all frizzy and poofy, as hair of such people is prone to naturally doing, if Boondocks hasn’t lied to me.
I dunno if it’s just me or not but that beat panel just absolutely sells Hank seething as he tries to bite back a reply he *knows* will escalate stuff but really, *really* wants to vent.
I seem to remember Joyce talking to Sarah about her parents being married, not divorced and how this seemed to be a big thing for her. I think that was foreshadowing this and that her parents are not going to stay together much longer. This sounds like Hank’s breaking point.
I took it to mean that embarrassment in general is not his concern in the face of what else is going on, and the emphasis on *I’m* is a reproach of her skewed priorities
I lean more towards the second, but there’s another version of the first that works: he’s walking away because he knows that if he stays, he’s going to snap even harder, and the public embarrassment will be even stronger if he does. Walking away is the best thing he can do.
But I think it’s more likely the second, a sarcastic “Yeah, really! Our daughter was kidnapped and you helped, but what I’m concerned about is the embarrassment! Sure! You really think that’s what I’m concentrating on? Get your fucking priorities straight, woman.”
Yeah, as awkward as this whole scene is for anyone present who isn’t involved in it (and even some who were, judging from Linda and Charles’s stunned silence,) public embarrassment and blowouts are absolutely trivial compared to ‘our daughter was kidnapped by a murderer, twice in one morning.’
I had a friend and later housemate who was really indoctrinated/socialized into this. And she wasn’t even a super extreme fundie, more of a centrist Christian. So many times I watched her lie to people’s faces about how perfect and wonderful her home life was while I knew it was a dumpster fire.
Loading ...
Shut the fuck up, Carol.
I love how even Linda is like “woah!” in panel 3.
Shut the fuck up Carol indeed.
On the contrary. She’s doing great. Let her keep digging.
I love Charles face. Just yes, that is Walkys dad.
And meanwhile, in panel 4, he’s checking out that fine ample hiney. Apparently Walky got his taste for those from him as well.
I know! Those eyes nearly crawling off the side…
Honestly, her name should be Karen
Somehow, that feels an insult to Karens.
You know, I never comment on stuff, but I have to say something. My customers named Karen are normally among the more friendly people I come in contact with. Women named Linda however… total bongos
Nice way to duck out of the argument with Linda tho…
I think in Carol’s mind their discussion had reached its natural conclusion, since she had stated her firm beliefs as they relate to the facts of the matter and therefore neither she nor Linda had anything more to say.
Also known as the “Let’s agree to disagree” [because I’m wrong and you’re an idiot who can’t appreciate my brilliance that is so brilliant that it doesn’t require any form of logical validation] strategem.
( And why any sensible person never uses that particular phrase. :S )
[If you don’t get it, it’s google-able.]
…there’s something to “get” in there?
Anyway, “agree to disagree” is perfectly reasonable when discussing preferences. Which is what it’s for. It doesn’t work as well for, like, other people’s well-being.
There’s alternative phrases to “Let’s Agree to Disagree”, and both standard language comprehension [note the statement's imposing phrasing, as well as the implied dismissiveness] and regional preferences make the phrase interpretable as deliberately insulting. Again, you can Google for confirmation on those aspects. Personally, putting aside predeterminations of meaning, I’ve yet to see anyone use “agree to disagree” without meaning it as an insult. Given that there are countless alternative phrases that work just as well, it’s generally best to avoid that phrase unless you’re with people you know won’t mind it [or if you’re TRYING to be insulting, I suppose].
I really really want Joyce’s first verbal “fuck” to be directed towards her mother.
I have never known I wanted something so much as I did when I read this statement. Please please please, I hope so…
…followed by Joe stepping in from off-panel with $20.
Yes, please!
I believe she earns a ride with Sal, too.
“I DON’T FUCKING SWEAR AND SHIT GODDAMNIT TO HELL”
It’s not swearing until you make a promise, duh.
So “I swear to fuck you up” is a swear, but “fuck your fucking face you fucking fuckmonkey” is totally just you appreciating the versatility of “the F word”. 😛
*Also, it’s okay to blasphemy if it’s part of your own religion, because it’s “OUR word”. It’s only a problem when outsiders use it, because it’s totally no longer offensive when we use it. Geesh, you’d know this if you were part of our culture. It’s a pity you’re a goddamn heathen. :shakes head remorsefully:
Charles: But you just-
Carol: #FakeNews!
You just said “fucking” just 10 seconds ago, Carol.
I didn’t even catch that!
To somebody like Carol, “goddamn” is probably much, much worse than “f*cking” because it’s “taking the Lord’s name in vain”.
I am pedantic, a bit anal-retentive in the defence of the Queen’s English, and like to show off. I also try to limit ‘bad language’ for special occasions – it’s more effective that way. 8)
If I’d say ‘shit’ and someone said ‘Stop swearing’ I’d reply with: “That isn’t swearing, that is a vulgarity – which is usually referring to something directly with a simple word instead of a ‘polite’ phrase such as ‘bowel movement’. Swearing (or a ‘profanity’) involves religion such as ‘God damn you’ or ‘By the bowels of Christ’. A vulgarity is an action that is considered immoral or socially reprehensible such as ‘Mother Fucker’ or ‘eat shit’ (which has the added point for including vulgarities).
Sorry, just showing off.
Of course, modern usage of ‘swearing’ includes all three, but I still use ‘whom’ whenever I can, so I’m a classicalist. 8)
Okay I need to remember and use “by the bowels of Christ”
See how educational the comment section is.
Wait you said “all three” but I only see two concepts vulgarity or profanity.
You defined “vulgarity” twice. With different definitions.
And, uh, “whom” is standard English.
…but you just did.
Linda is in awe. An ability to warp reality even greater than her own.
Linda: Charles… I’m not… like that, am-
Charles: Best not to look at that too closely, hun. Let’s just take the win and move on, ok?
Dayum, Hank totally threw down the relationship gauntlet and fucked off
Relationship Gauntlet > Infinity Gauntlet
Does the Relationship Gauntlet have Relationship Stones?
Time – Time to calm the f**k down.
Space – A safe Space to discuss issues.
Reality – Exist in the same Reality.
Mind – Mindful of each other’s sensitivities.
Soul – Share the same Soul.
Power – An equal Power dynamic.
Yeah, Hank’s not wearing that Gauntlet anymore.
“Soul – Share the same Soul.”
Let’s change that to “be harmoniously in sync with one another’s soul”.
Sharing the same soul- soul often being interchangable with ‘identity’- is just a sign of codependence. It’s when souls integrate smoothly and complexly but don’t overlap that you have a healthy relationship.
“Power – An equal Power dynamic.”
Whelp, that proves that Home Improvement was about an unhealthy family. Tim was always going on about wanting “more power”, after all.
Though at least in Home Improvement he wasn’t a bigoted, die-hard conservative who treated the females in his family like garbage and defied all considerations of logic, like Tim Allen’s role in Last Man Standing [which he appears to enjoy and appreciate immensely], notably following the first season [after which they swapped the only liberal actress out, turning the character into an abusable caricature, existing solely to support conservative bias. Yeesh, what a show.
I liked the one time he was right about something, that vaccines are good, and then immediately walked it back by running to stop his son-in-law from taking his child to get necessary and required vaccinations.
“You can’t take your son to get vaccines without your wife’s permission! It’s her son, she owns it!”
The show was clearly so impressed with itself for its mouthpiece saying coherent, reasonable sentences, too.
Such a good show, with rational, well-written characters and insightful humor!
I would deeply love for Hank to get a chance to talk with the Keeners.
Yeah he’s walking in their direction so very possible. Hope he can join their lunch too.
“I’m newly interested in hearing the word of Atheos, do you have any tracts?”
Ahahah nice. =D
*hands a blank piece of paper*
I would deeply love for Hank to get a chance to talk with the Keeners without Carol (or someone else) messing it up.
@panel 4 but this IS him standing his ground.
Reminds me a little of this argument: https://www.dumbingofage.com/2016/comic/book-6/03-when-god-closes-the-door/buckle/
She can’t see it since what she really means is he doesn’t stand *her* ground. She expects him to be united with her at all times.
Wonder where Joyce got that idea?
Except in their ideology she is supposed to take HIS stances.
She does take the stances that according to her ideology he is supposed to take.
Well, the practical implementation is like the rider having to go where the horse runs. At one level, that’s an accurate description.
To the POV of people like Carol, it’s not even that they expect you to show a united front all the time, it’s that to them, their opinion is Objectively Right and the only reasons you would disagree are if you’re ignorant or willfully choosing the wrong opinion as an act of petty defiance or because you enjoy acting immorally.
It’s not that she expects him to present a united front, it’s that to her, the only reason he would pick the “wrong” choice is to throw a tantrum.
Yep, in the same sense that brave protesters staring in the face of a police force ready to bash them with Geneva-convention-defying methods all while a pandemic rages about are called “whiny snowflakes” by Trumpists. The same ones who cry out about the “tyranny” of masks. This sort of people will mock virtue as a despicable weakness and treat their own fragility as a show of strength.
I’ve always found it odd that the family members I’ve stood up to usually claimed to think it was that I couldn’t stand my ground, when it was very much the fact that I *could* stand my ground that I wasn’t going along with their idiocy.
So they’ve done this before.
That’s not reassuring to Hank’s development.
Maybe, maybe not. We know they’ve walked out on churches that Hank found objectionable for various reasons before. We also know that one of their kids is estranged and he regrets it. We’ve got hints that there’s an ongoing story of Hank’s development behind the scene that we’re only getting to see recent highlights of.
That’s a good point. I don’t know what the other churches did that Hank found unacceptable, but I bet it was less severe than releasing an armed child abductor upon his daughter and her friends.
He’s likely 1000% done with that place, and if Carol is this determined to double down on her loyalty to them, well, that could be the breaking point for them.
Let’s hope so, for Hank.
I’ve suspected for a while that Carol’s behaviour to Hank behind closed doors is, if not outright abusive, then at least heavily controlling, and the way she’s talking here seems to confirm it. This might be the extent to which he’s able to defy his wife.
Oh, for sure. “he’s throwing a tantrum and being unreasonable” is gaslighting at it’s finest.
Like how Joyce’s brother pulled out the ‘stop being so emotional’ card on her regarding someone pointing a gun at her… Probably learned that handy little dismissal technique from mom…
I wouldn’t really be able to argue well against that perspective, if it was just a philosophy that emotions should be buried, especially in public. At that point, it’s basically just cultural, without any kind of bias or inherent irrationality [even if it’s lacking in comprehension of how humans work, efficiency in dealing with issues, etc – being subpar doesn’t necessarily equate to being unsupportable, after all].
But these individuals always, ALWAYS, make exceptions for their own issues. This isn’t about having a certain philosophy in how life should be approached, it’s about control, abuse, and the degradation of others. They do it because they’re invalidating the individuals in question and their perspectives, not because they’re supporting any kind of universally applied belief structure.
And these are the kind of people we have leading the government, infesting the police forces, the legal and judicial system, and so forth. Joyous.
But it’s not a philosophy. It’s a controlling strategy. It’s about provoking the other person into anger, then dismissing them on the grounds that they’re emotional.
“But it’s not a philosophy. It’s a controlling strategy.”
That’s literally what I just said? :’P
tl;dr-recap: The issue is that it’s a controlling strategy RATHER than a philosophy.
Wow, you articulating this distinction is helpful for me. It’s not about the idea itself, but the double standard. I’ve dealt with this in my family, and also with new age fundamentalists who tell everyone else that they’re creating their reality with their mind, but refuse to accept responsibility for their own experiences.
All of this is terribly familiar to me. I was a Hank, minus the religious trappings, in a far too long-lasting relationship with a Carol of my own.
Oh my God… this sort of gaslighting is what I faced from my mother in contexts unrelated to religion. Also what I faced from an ex boyfriend. “Any form of disagreement or rebellion is seen as a tantrum because I am infantilized and incapable of having a correct point of view” 😡😔
My mom had BPD when she was alive. I’m betting Carol has it. She’s a typical Queen subtype.
On the one hand, I want to say “Ow”, but on the other hand, I’m something like 98% sure I got my BPD from my undiagnosed mother. And literally not even 5 minutes ago, I explained to someone reading the strip over my shoulder, “Just think my mom, but fundie instead of Catholic.” So…..that’s a lot of words to say “yeah, that fits.”
I don’t mean to hurt you, Meli. Just the fact that you are working through your emotions means you’re doing the good work to be better. My Mom wasn’t a bad person, and neither are you. She tried hard to be good, and so do you. Do you know I headcanon Rose Quartz and the Diamonds from Steven Universe as BPD? They all fit into one of the four BPD Mom subtypes, but they all got better. You’re getting better, too, I promise. ::hug::
This is reinforcing to me that Hank may have wanted to walk away from their church already, but was sticking it out for Carol. He wants the word of Christ and hasn’t found it yet. Carol just wants an echo chamber to belong to.
Yes! That’s EXACTLY what it feels like.
That depends on how you like where he’s headed.
Many people don’t extricate themselves from a bad enviroment at the first time, sometimes not at the fifth or even the tenth and may take a lot if it’s family.
But between all the children being now adults, and that his trust on that particular church has been eroding and eroding and now dealing that big chunk on the responsability of the current events is on that one and his wife… he may not divorce her right here and right now… but their relationship won’t probably get better…
Humans tend to habitualize, as part of their adaptive processes. This unfortunately causes us to easily become innured to negative aspects in the relationships around us, especially if we were introduced to those factors when we couldn’t properly process them in the first place [eg, as a child].
Mature- in the most genuine sense of the word- adults are distinguishable in the fact that they know when to cut and run from an entanglement, and are capable of determining a productive manner by which to do so. Anyone else can’t really call themselves mature, as they’re still yielding to negative external influences in the same manner that a child would.
That doesn’t mean they’re completely lacking in maturation, it just means they haven’t achieved a full comprehension of the elements that compose maturity. Similarly, the bias against children being able to be mature is nonsensical, as many children are far more mature than adults; Then again, that may just be a factor of how immature adults can be, as even the most mature children do still certainly lack in certain social perceptions (though which those are may perhaps vary).
My point here isn’t to dismiss those who haven’t achieved “proper maturity”, it’s to note how rare and difficult such development can be. Now consider Hank, who we can assume was raised in a very conservative environment, met carol as part of that environment, was further influenced by social expectations and compulsions [and hormonal and psychological influences] relating to relationships. After getting something as fortunate as a family, you’re going to try and make that work. And having someone dear to you, you’re going to try and excuse things, even if those things are somewhat extreme. And the extremeness, in this case, was diminuitized by the culture he was influenced by.
Perhaps the strongest sign of love and respect (at least, from a behavior-entrenched individual) is that someone is willing to bend and re-adapt, and acknowledge error, if it’s for your sake. Hank is showing us that stability and comfort and security and tradition are important to him, but his children are more important. ..which I think was also the basis of the plot of Fiddler on the Roof? 😛
Hank doesn’t have to be a great guy, a good guy, a mature guy. We’re not evaluating him for dating, or for election to a Nobel Peace Prize. He just has to be someone capable of basic rationality, with a proper sense of responsability, who is willing to fight against the bad environment he has fallen into when it counts.
But, much like someone realizing they have an addiction, it can be comfortable to fall back into old patterns. What will define Hank as an individual and as a father, will be how firmly he draws the line in defending his children, even if it’ll cost him his social connections (including his marriage).
Far too many humans take a concilatory approach when they shouldn’t, and take offense at others who take a more mature or responsible approach, insisting that such individuals just aren’t yielding enough. [Incidentally, you all are totally okay with giving terrorists and abusive spouses a pass, right? I mean, I’m sure they’ve learned their lesson once we’ve pointed out their flaws. /sarcasm]
So, if Hank chooses comfort and yielding to pressure in this circumstance, he’ll actively be indicating that he values his own comfort over his children. Given carol’s current behavior, it seems extremely unlikely she’ll change her perspectives enough to allow for any kind of proper yielding on her part [always love how the abusers are never held to the philosophy that people should yield to others]. So yeah, by this point, Hank is facing down a divorce.
But as Romanticide touched on, in the past, it was never that extreme. Hank and carol had differing perspectives, but none which both actively and immediately threatened their children, nevermind marginalized their feelings, circumstances, and very existence. So that he hasn’t broken free until then does say something about his character, but it doesn’t go so far as to indicate that he’d been operating with negative perspectives in the past, nor that he’d previously had enough compulsion to leave the relationship.
Now, however.. definitely a different matter. After all, it’s not every day that your wife is actively responsible for the release of a gun-wielding self-absorbed zealot who has threatened your daughter, and who then terrorizes your daughter again, with your wife then dismissing your daughter and feeling no remorse over the matter. I mean, presumably it isn’t..
*and are capable of determining a productive manner by which to do so. Anyone else can’t really call themselves mature, as they’re still yielding to negative external influences in the same manner that a child would or are approaching those matters with the emotional maturity one would expect of a child.
To be fair I doubt their situation was ever This extreme. Hank might be fine with arguments about changing Churches or the domestic situation. But releasing a dangerous psycho and almost getting their daughter killed? Yeah I doubt he’ll stand for that.
YOU’RE goddamned, Carol!
At a time like this, she’s worried about them noticing her swearing.
It’s not enough to hold the righteous high-ground unless everyone KNOWS you’re doing it.
Particularly when you’re not.
It’s a great example of the form.
“Putting children in cages isn’t something the White House is known for.”
“But you’ve put–”
“It’s not something we’re known for. Whether we did it doesn’t matter.”
“Don’t embarrass me while I defend a violent criminal!”
No but see his virtue signals were the same as her virtue signals so that makes him the good guy in all situations. Because if he’s held accountable for his criminal activity then she might be held accountable for her own too.
And this happens in all groups. I see this in activists I once thought were my allies, who aren’t willing to revise their views on someone and will double down and defend things that someone has done simply because of a shared identity. Honestly I used to do this myself (and probably still do in ways I’m not aware). It’s very human.
Knock knock on the door
Who’s it for?
There’s nobody in here
Look in a MIRROR, my friend!
Pretty sure the one throwing the tantrum like a child is you, Carol
No, see the thing is, the person not engaging with the hysterical asshole is the one being immature.
What is written above “center desk”?
“Read” for Read Hall (I think).
READ, or the Owl will eat you
Best. Comment (or was it cookies?). Ever.
“READ, or the Owl will eat you”
DuoLingo’s marketing is just getting really aggressive these days.
Brings this guy to mind.
You mean that wasn’t the intended meaning already?
Rad Center Desk
Watching Linda being flabbergasted is hilarious
That feeling of being out-Karen’d.
What floors me is that Linda has shut up for an entire strip. Sorry, Linda. Turns out you were not the craziest mom in the room, after all.
What are the odds Linda just goes ‘well if they’re all like that, that’s way too exhausting for me. Back to getting a student with less support network and resources expelled!’? Because I consider it a non-zero chance.
[autobiography intensifies], I’m guessing?
Funny. I think he’s standing his ground pretty well. It just happens to be a different ground than hers..
Slightly more elevated.
It’s over, he has the high ground.
It’s over, Carol!
She demanded that he yield immediately, and is angered that he did not. That’s the opposite of her complaint.
But I’m starting to think she’s the type who does not use words to describe reality, but merely as a form of decoration.
Fancy a Christian using words not to describe reality. Can it be?
It’s atypical, certainly. However, sometimes abusers like her can be a part of any group–even one supposedly based on teachings that are explicitly contradictory.
It’s certainly true that Christians who disregard the meaning of the name are already halfway there.
And it’s to the left.
*carol’s chin intensifies*
She’s going full Sentinel Prime! You never want to go full Sentinel!
Oh I just love when you can really see the anger on a persons face by how much firmer their chin becomes. She’s not just mad, she’s furious
You’re the one throwing a tantrum, Carol
…that moment when you husband is obviously furious with you and your main concern is that you feel embarrassed.
I’m actually not surprised by this. Covering up problems to project a “happy family” image is part of the fundie life-script. And punctuating it with an obvious lie denying the previous sentence is a nice touch.
I made a comment below that was supposed to be under this.
I don’t swear, I just defend kidnappers. (And also swear)
Meanwhile, Asma sits on the floor under the desk. She only bent down to grab a pencil but she sure as shit ain’t coming back up til this stops
She had print outs of all the parents on her desk and was ready to hit the deck the second any of them came in. This group? She’s been seal crawling towards the bathroom for the last five minutes.
“We just had to get Lesner therapy,” she thinks to herself, “way to go and defuse our big gun.”
Don’t lesnerize!
Hooray for Fredric Brown!
Actually, that was Robert Sheckley, in his short story “Protection” (1956), collected in “Pilgrimage to Earth”.
[/nerdsplaining]
Willis should do a bonus comic of just her Reactions to this comic and the Previous two.
Anyone else having trouble with the comments section loading? It’s been going on for a week or more: comic loads but not the rest of the page. I have to CTRL+F5 once or twice to see the comments. I thought it was just my work computer and the VPN, but it happens at home also.
Yes. It is at least showing up, but not the entire comments section, and it seems kind of random as to where it stops and when it happens
Yeah, I’ve had the same problem.
And even after the comments load, the “page loading” indicator at the top of my browser tab is still humming along, trying to finish loading the page. And presumably eating up RAM.
Yes. This too. Looks like “loading from cdn.hiveworks.com/? something something”
Feels like it just started in the last week or so.
I could be wrong, but I get the sense it started when Hiveworks changed the look of the scroll of links to other comics. If they messed up their coding there, it might make sense that it’s the loading from them that’s the problem.
Though some other Hiveworks comics don’t seem to have the problem, but maybe it’s because they use Disqus for their comments?
I got it on other Hiveworks sites too – GWS and Sleepless Domain, for instance, but not as badly.
I’m hoping they’re getting feedback about this.
Wait, Sleepless Domain has a comment section?
It doesn’t, but it’s part of Hiveworks and it has their banner (which is I think the common element).
Haven’t noticed it on other pages, but the page *does* lock after that Hiveworks bar loads. After that, all I see is the white “tag page” bar below it on the left side. Nothing else.
I was wondering if that was the case!
Nope. Have not had trouble seeing comments.
Yes, trouble with the page pausing a quarter of a sec. after loading the banner, before loading the rest of the way. But not holding back anything.
Had trouble yesterday, but I assumed it was the overload of comments.
Yeah, same problem.
Yes. I have had problems loading the entire page for about two weeks. Refreshing a few times allows it to load…eventually.
I’ve had that happen before, though it’s been about a year. When i back traced the freeze it was an ad failing to load correctly and freezing the whole tab. That ended after a few days.
Yeah, usually the page stalls for a few seconds after the banner and half the strip loads, then it finishes filling in.
When I scroll to the bottom of the page, it lurches back down a few comments. I end up chasing the Post Comment button.
Yep, been having it for a while now. Sometimes it now fully loads and other times it is trying to load for an eternity and sometimes it only loads half the comments and not even the colour of the site to go with them.
And sometimes it loads fully…except the avatars.
Granted, at least most of them are arbitrary. Maybe half, from a brief scroll-down (while they’re working.)
… No? I’m using my iPhone to read the strip, and I’m not seeing that problem. I will try viewing on my laptop and see if it works there as well.
Yeah, definitely. It’s been annoying. Linux and Windows. Firefox and Chrome.
If the glitch happens it doesn’t ever finish, without reloading. It’s not the number of comments. Seems top happen regardless.
I did recently but it seemed to have resolved itself. Unfortunately, I wasn’t paying attention to which browser I was using.
Oof, nevermind, it did it again just now. (Firefox on Mac)
All of the bad, but not super-villain parents look at Carol and go “now that’s a bad parent.”
Even Blaine looks at her and goes “Whoof! What’s HER problem?”
There goes Mr.Brown, channeling his inner Hank Hill.
This whole situation just ain’t right, I tell you hwhat.
Sure, Carol, because that’s not what standing your ground looks like. And about the swearing – whatever you say, Karen – I mean, Carol.
From her perspective it is: She’s obviously right, so what he’s doing is being to weak to stand up for what’s godly in the face of secular pressure.
Wasn’t there a scene in the first kidnapping with Ross asking God for the strength to follow through? Same thing.
Yeah, I can see why she thinks so – I just also think she’s full of shit.
Sounds like Hank has been more vocal lately! Notice they didn’t leave panel the same direction. They are split!
She just needs to get the gun.
What, so she can take her shitty attitude out back and shoot it like a rabid animal? In an abstract way, of course.
But they did leave in the same direction, judging from Carol and Charles’ sudden reversal of positions
No, wait, I am definitely wrong. They did leave in different directions, but Carol must have stepped back and pivoted to her left while Charles pivoted in place to watch her go past.
Uhg. That passive aggressive dragging of strangers into your business so you can vent to someone because you HAVE to right then. Getting caught in those headlights will make you feel like a deer staring down an awkward semi.
Also, I wonder how much of this has been stewing under the surface between Hank and Carol. Clearly he’s pretty livid about what she’s done but is just now seems to be coming to a head.
“Don’t you do this in public” implies a fair bit of private disagreement.
Yeah. But I can imagine that she’s been riding the, “our friend is dead, don’t make me talk about this NOW” train for a bit now. So Hank probably hasn’t been able to talk to Carol at all about what she did/ what happened.
I assume. Could be wrong.
Remember their argument about letting Joyce go back to IU last time she and Becky went home for a weekend?
Also Linda take notes your not as bad as her yet but since you and Carol share similar tendencies it wouldn’t be hard for you to work your way up to her level.
It’s important to have goals.
For a second I thought Charles was wearing a shirt with a big cross on it.
Looks like Hank and Carol’s marriage is sinking like the Titanic.
“But our marriage is unsinkable!” — Carol
what day is it?
I think it’s Monday. The kidnapping happened over the weekend.
Thursday. Joyce skipped church the day (Sunday) before Dina and Sarah’s birthday, placing the party as Monday (consistent with Calc and Gender Studies classes in the same storyline). Mike was missing all Tuesday. Kidnapping was Wednesday morning and it’s the next day.
I don’t get that last line. You swore in the first panel of yesterday’s comic. Why are you putting on alms now? Even for Carol this is a little off.
Eh I can see why damn would be worse than fuck if you were super religious. Fuck just translates to sexual intercourse, while to damn someone means to actually say they should go to Hell. And if you believe Hell is a real place…
Plus she says god-damned, which is essentially saying God damned a child.
Fun fact – in the medieval/early modern period this was the logic of swearing. The bodily was not nearly as bad as the blasphemous swear.
Which the TRULY profane would combine. I recall one of the Canterbury Tales about these rogues who were fond of swearing by “God’s blood and bones”. It was funny to me since the one telling the tale (iirc, which is not always a good assumption) was insisting how righteous he was.
Umm, doesn’t God damn ALL children? Isn’t that why they have to be baptized? Or is that that not a fundy thing?
[Ultron] Theology is so weird. [/Ultron]
I saw an interview with one of the writers of Deadwood, who said that in historical realism the swearing would have been dominated by blasphemy, not scatology and sexual vulgarity, but that they changed most of the “God” and “damn” to “shit” and “fuck” because realistic dialogue sounded quaint and created the wrong impression.
i think the last line was supposed to be something like “i am the perfect religious mother, i NEVER swear. so if i’m swearing now, it must be because someone REALLLYYYYY messed up.”
kinda like if you were to say “i don’t usually like salmon, but this is delicious” you mean that someone did such a good job that you can’t help but love it.
You broke a commandment, bastitch. You said a bad word in the previous strip.
It really seems Carol liked more Ross than Hank since Carol keeps talking about “standing”.
Hank keeps droping mics like a badass.
That’s like the only thing she’s done that wasn’t breaking any commandments.
And Carol’s the one approving of dropping Mikes, here.
Too soon
But Mike would approve, so is it really too soon?
I think you’re wrong – Carol clearly doesn’t swear.
Oh Hank’s standing his ground alright – against his over-projecting, reason-forsaking spouse.
On the poll: Amazi-Girl. Sal herself knew Amber threw the fight when Sal was choking her, so yeah, canonically, it’s Amazi-Girl.
As for the comic, I love that Carol is saying this after saying “fucking” to Linda previously, and now, after the arguably “worse” ‘goddamn’. It’s pretty indicative of her character to blatantly do something and then care about her image enough to tell a bald-faced lie about it.
I voted Sarah, because she brought a baseball bat to the first fight we see her get in.
LOL IT IS MY MOTHER!!!
No it’s Amber. Amazi-girl will beat you up, but Amber will put you in the hospital.
What, never?
…well, hardly ever
So give three cheers, and one cheer more …
These guys Gilbert and Sullivan.
She never uses a big, big D
https://youtu.be/4Np-PjftJN8?t=99
And she never swears.
What? Never?
No, never!
What Never? …. well hardly ever!
And she never ever swears in school
Captain.
Though related to a peer,
I can hand, reef, and steer,
And ship a selvagee;
I am never known to quail
At the fury of a gale,
And I’m never, never sick at sea!
Chorus.
What, never?
Captain.
No, never!
Chorus.
What, never?
Captain.
Hardly ever!
From the Pirates of Penzance (watch the Linda Ronstadt version)
Think that is from H.M.S. Pinafore, not Pirates of Penzance.
HMS Pinafore. Watch the Essgee Productions version.
Carol: Listen, this is all BECKY’S FAULT. She’s embarrassed us with her lesbianism and resisting her father’s ownership of her.
Hank: Lallalalalalala!
I wanna see a bonus strip with Hank and Charles hanging out just going “man our lives are like a soap opera”
Why would Hank embarrass her? She’s doing such a good job all by herself.
Yes Carol. Because the man walking away to avoid associating with the woman who is throwing a temper tantrum over her plan to let out a crazed psycho failing is the one acting like a child
I hope Hank divorces her and she freaks the fuck out
Is that last line a callback? I feel like this joke happened before with Mary.
found it!
Me? Oh, I never swear.
Fundagelicalese: “throwing a tantrum like a goddamned child”
English: declining to march to the tinpot’s tune
This is so going to end up Hank with Joyce, Jocelyn, and Jordan going no contact with Carol and John.
Poor Joyce, in just a matter of months her world is crashing down around her. It’s going to hurt and be scary, but I think she’s learned enough to already know it’ll be for the better.
I hope she doesn’t get it into her head that it’s in any way her fault. Carol will say it is, because she didn’t consign Becky to the flames of Hell. And because she’s friends with that Satan-loving atheistical, heathen, devil worshipper. Which is Hank’s fault because he didn’t insist Joyce shun Dorothy.
One thing we do know for sure is that none of this is Carol’s fault and her church is perfect.
I see now why Joyce was afraid of the word “divorce.” She saw it coming.
Willis — What does Carol think of Trump these days?
Due to the sliding timescale, Trump is unlikely to be mentioned directly until he’s out of office; however, Willis did draw a (non-canonical) comic of Joyce’s upbringing in 2016 which should basically answer your question. Here you go: https://www.dumbingofage.com/2016/blog/antichrist/
Wasn’t there a Patreon strip involving AOC though? I suppose it’s a fairly safe bet that she’ll be in office for a while, but still, that does anchor the strip to fairly recently. As, admittedly, do Pokemon Go and the like.
Has Hank’s hair always been white? I thought he was blond. Has he aged that much in the last few in-universe months?
If you click on the character tags, you get access to all their strips. This is Hank’s first appearance:
https://www.dumbingofage.com/2010/comic/book-1/01-move-in-day/loft/
Could’ve just said to use the first button.
She never swears? Wow, the gaslighting is strong with that one
That’s not really gaslighting, gaslighting is an attempt to manipulate someone by making them believe they are in the wrong, or more traditionally make them believe they are insane. Carol is just lying (badly).
Although maybe it’s just really really really terrible gaslighting.
She did literally swear and is now insisting she never swears. That can be a form of gaslighting to make you doubt your memory of doing something and denying it happened immediately afterwards. It probably won’t *work* but it often doesn’t the first time you do it to someone, especially when they are a stranger pretty much.
Tbh, I am not sure if it’s so much gaslighting as a compliance demand: my father will often pull that sort of thing. “I never (thing I just did.)”
The point isn’t so much to get you to question your reality (this happened in public, Hank has too many options for reality checking, gaslighters prefer to gaslight about stuff that can’t be easily checked), it’s instead a demand that ppl comply with her image. It’s her way of testing loyalty of her subjects (see also how Trump will continue to spew lies even when called on it: being believed isn’t the point, the point is who will follow along knowing she’s full of it).
I have literally seen people with experience of gaslighting say it is a form of gaslighting before where someone says or does something then immediately denies it ever happened. It absolutely is a way that someone will try to gaslight you. Just because the situation around it may make it *ineffective*, does not mean it isn’t gaslighting. What makes it gaslighting is that if you did it over and over and over again, it would warp someone’s perception into actually questioning whether they are making stuff up.
For gaslighting the question isn’t ‘is this effective’, it is ‘if I did this every single time it happened, would it make the other person start to think they are losing it?’ Because gaslighting is only really effective from the get go on people that already doubt their perceptions, memory and sanity (like say, if you have psychosis or PTSD like Amber). Most people have some degree of confidence in their perception, memory and sanity which makes it extremely ineffective to start with. Because gaslighting relies on repetition to make someone start to second guess themselves.
Should have made it more clear I was speaking from my experience, and referring specifically to the case where there are unbiased witnesses: IME with my family, my parents used to pull the deny the thing I just did in public with witnesses as compliance testing.
They absolutely would deny stuff they just did in private (eg, smacking me hard enough to leave a welt and the scoffing that doesn’t hurt when I yelped), but when they did it in public the point wasn’t me it was the ppl around me, to see if they would enable what just happened.
There’s an implied “but” there; “See what you made me do?”
Gaslighting isn’t an interchangeable synonym for lying, and I’m not sure it would apply here. I don’t think Carol is attempting to make the Walkertons question reality or to harm them psychologically to gain control over them. She’s just a hypocrite and in denial about her behavior.
Gaslighting as a term is incredibly overused. To the point where it risks making the word meaningless. Gaslighting is based on degrading and demoralizing someone over a period of time, it is not a synonym for lying.
So that f-bomb she dropped in the last comic wasn’t swearing?
It doesn’t fit in with her self-image, so it never happened.
Nor the goddamned in this one.
Hank walks away so hard he pops right out of the frame.
oh Carol… he didn’t embarass you more than you already did…
Huh, we keep bringing up Jordan, and I found this: https://www.dumbingofage.com/2013/comic/book-3/04-just-hangin-out-with-my-family/takeafter/
“we don’t see eye to eye but he’s still a good kid”
Watch Carol’s face in that strip.
All this conflict was already there.
When Joyce was explaining how her mother likes a slightly raunchy song so her headcanon is that it’s about a married couple so it’s OK, it was kinda cute: nobody was being hurt by it, it’s a relatively minor stretch that doesn’t (I believe) directly contradict any of the actual facts presented, and the end result was that Joyce had a bit more “normal [for a white US teen]” cultural exposure than she would have had otherwise. But this is basically Carol’s MO, isn’t it? Reshape reality in her own mind until it better fits her agenda, then insist that this is objective fact.
Wotta Pharisee
Heya, um, maybe don’t use that exact term?
I’m a fuzzy apostate low-church Protestant turned atheist, so I may be misusing the term, but the connotation is of a self-righteously holy person who is a hypocrite or is only “performatively” holy, right? That being a designation that would stick in the craw of someone like Joyce’s mom, it seemed appropriate. Or, what am I missing, here?
That’s the connotation in Christianity, but they actually were a Jewish sect trying to keep things together under an oppressive empire, so a lot of folks don’t care for the caricature of them that show up in the Christian texts and, fairly, dislike the use of their name as an insult.
Does anyone ever use that term in that other sense, though?
Yes. Comes from a lot of antisemites.
I can kind of see that.
OTOH, it’s not like there are any Pharisees around anymore and haven’t been for nearly 2000 years, so I’m not sure that absent any other anti-semitic context it’s really a problem.
When it’s still getting hurled at Jewish people regardless of whether Pharisees are still around, I’d still say there’s a problem.
Fair. I’ve mostly seen it used in the way Barf did above, not specifically at Jews.
Yeah, this is the first I’ve ever heard of anyone objecting to it, or that it somehow indicates anti-Semitism. It seems silly to abandon a term for religious hypocrites so well known that even heathens like me know what it means to…what, avoid hurting the feelings of any resurrected zombie Pharisees that are or may one day be out there? Something like “please don’t say ‘I got gypped'” I understand, since that’s a current ethnic group and that usage hurts real people, but when the group you’re defending from allegedly offensive terminology doesn’t even *exist* anymore, I think that’s going off the deep end.
Jewish people still exist and are still being hurt by that term.
So when do we find out that Carol changed her name from Karen sometime off panel?
Man, I’d like it if we could stop insulting people actually named Karen.
imagine a whole group of women changing their name from karen to something else because they get offended by that lmao
Agreed. They should be referred to as Ivankas.
I’d like it if we could just put people named Karen in a big hole filled knee-deep with dollar store wine. Nature will figure itself out.
“always had to throw a tantrum like a goddamn child”
OH THE IRONY, IT HURTS SO GOOD
is…is Charles checking out Carol’s ass as she walks away? Because it…kinda looks like he is
My man Charles likes women who can step on him.
Who among us
Okay but panel 4.5 and 5 is literally my Catholic uncle. Every time I see him.
Am I the only one not surprised that Carol completely missed the point on every level? I actually feel sorry for Linda and Charles because it’s quite clear that they have no idea whatsoever what has just happened!
Can I recommend an Alma strip of this scene for a Patreon Bonus strip?
Carol kindly piss off
Hank go and hug your daughter.
I wonder if Linda or Charles will go over to Hank and give him their lawyer’s card. “They’re good at divorces,” they’ll say.
Too bad Carol wants to shout at Hank more than she wants to stand her (very shakes) ground against Linda.
I hope Hank takes the next step.
You go, Hank.
(and he indeed went)
More concerned with public appearances than actually resolving issues, demands total compliance to her point of view, erupts at the slightest disagreement? Carol reminds me a lot of certain members of my family. All she needs is to start using Jordan as an insult.
Also it is very refreshing to see Hank stand up to her.
Who knew we have members of the presidential family reading here?
Amusingly the ppl I am referring to include ppl who love Trump and hate him, proving that abusive jackasses span the political spectrum.
But I have no known relation to the Trump clan, just in a fairly dysfunctional family myself.
Apropos of nothing in particular, are both Carol and Linda supposedly that well endowed that their busts cast THAT distinctive a shadow/shading?
Your tits don’t create a perfectly horizontal bar on your torso? What are you, some kinda mutant?
Initially I thought it was the pattern on the fabric they are wearing.
Hrrmm. It seems like the divorce topic might have been discussed already maybe?…Hrmmm.
And not that I’m at all invested in the Brown marriage at this point but I think Carol has made a mistake here. I don’t know why they got married. For all I know it could even be a wedlock thing, but uhhh she had to see something in Hank right?
A guy like Ross maybe seems appealing if you’re into dudes willing to do literally anything to protect your flawed religious values, but It’s really heavily implied that domestic life was not great. *Becky’s mom* She’s not around for a reason and that implied reason is really bad. Most people don’t consider suicide an option if their home life is going well and that’s all I’ll say on that without a confirmation. But that’s the dark side of a guy like Ross.
So when she’s says Hank never stands his ground I think she’s lost sight of what ground she’s standing on, because it’s shaky as fuck and Ross has fallen in! It could of been you falling in with him Carol. It might still happen. I think she’s lost sight of what was appealing about Hank to being with. He’s a good guy.
For someone like Carol, she likes Ross, sure, and probably secretly wants to be him a bit, but she’ll never be romantic with someone like him because she’s cut from the same cloth and they both are the sort to choose people they think they can victimize – not that it’s a conscious thing. Someone as aggressive as Ross is too likely to stand up to her.
Carol is what happens when you give someone with Ross’s level of domineering religious fundie controlling and abusive tendencies feminine socialization. They’re two sides of the same coin. The reason her aggression is mostly passive aggression is that fundie circles don’t approve of physically violent women so she learned how to do the same shit with her words.
My headcanon is that, like Joyce, Carol was sent to college entirely to get her ‘MRS Degree’ (find a husband). She found Hank but, as others have noted, young (and possibly pre-Jordan) Carol was a lot wilder than she is now. Consequently, the marriage was a bit rushed because she’d fallen pregnant.
This has two consequences if it was the case: Firstly, her own regrets and sense of guilt probably makes Carol a lot stricter than she probably would have been otherwise. Secondly, there may have never been any long-term future for her relationship with Hank; they’re incompatible personalities and would have realised this before they had a half-dozen children in the crossfire if things hadn’t turned out the way they did.
My offhand headcanon is that their basic conflict is “what do you do when your kids go off the script?” Carol just want to double down on controlling and manipulation. Hank wants to be more flexible and tolerant while trying to nudge them back onto the right path. Alternatively, Hank used to agree with Carol’s methods, but he has now realized that they don’t work and wants to try something else.
I’m on a similar page with Slartibeast. Maybe Hank and Carol were pretty compatible in their younger years, but people grow and people change. Looking at the ages of their children, they’ve likely been married about 30 years. (Do we actually know an official length of their marriage??) That’s a looooong time for people to change. Shoot, guys, I’m not the same person I was even 10 years ago, you know? And having children can really magnify even small incompatibilities of personality that may have been workable before into much larger conflicts, as the outcomes can be seen as much higher stakes when kids are involved. I guess what I’m trying to say in my ramble is a marriage doesn’t have to start as an incompatible mess to become one.
Coming back to add that strong religious convictions can also keep people in not so great marriages far past their expiration date as well!
I’m sure they’ve both changed over the years.
OTOH, the few hints we’ve gotten about Jordan suggest they disagreed about how to handle that situation as well, so it’s likely Slartibeast is right about their conflict over handling the kids.
Who won that previous conflict and how its failure changed their attitudes is an interesting question.
I wonder where things changed though and who exactly did. Carol’s grumbling seems to imply that disagreements like this have happened before, maybe even often. Not just potentially with Jordan but other things as well and I have to wonder why she even chose to be with him if this was a part of his personality she detested so much. It really makes me think that maybe she got pregnant and that started the whole thing. They’ve been married for probably close to 30 years give or take. She has to know what Hank is like.
Same goes for Hank honestly. Why would you want to start a family with a woman who values her religion over even the lives and safety of her own children?
My impression of Becky’s mom is that she succumbed to severe depression. If she was denied anything, it was likely the opportunity to seek professional help rather than just “sucking it up”, or anonymously asking people to pray for her.
My current understanding about abuse and how it relates to many mental health issues is its sort of like the relationship between smoking and lung cancer. You can smoke and never get lung cancer, and you can get lung cancer without smoking. But smoking does indeed cause lung cancer.
If I didn’t already know Ross was an abusive A hole I would not think his wife’s suicide was caused by him being an abusive A hole.
But we already know he’s an abusive A hole to Becky, and I believe there is a f-ing strong link between being an abusive A-hole to your daughter and being an abusive A-hole to your wife. So me head cannon is that his wife’s suicide is over half his fault.
My impression personally is a combination of factors – a possible genetic tendency towards depression, a husband who was, at best, extremely controlling, and a society (which she had largely grown up in, I suspect) that stifled any ambition she could possibly have outside a husband and children. And she loved Becky, but I kind of headcanon Bonnie as a Becky who could never break away – maybe not sexuality-wise, but I think she had the same desire to learn beyond what the church allowed.
Ross refusing to let her out of that box killed her, Ross likely refusing to acknowledge she could not pray this pain away killed her, and I suspect he was abusive to Bonnie as he was to Becky (even pre-outing – no cell phone when she’s left for college is one hell of a red flag,) but I think their entire community was itself a factor.
Oh, left out also – Bonnie loved Becky, and so if she couldn’t see a way out for herself I can see her despairing even worse that she couldn’t see a future for her daughter where she was happy.
Basically: Bonnie makes me sad, as incredibly little as we know of her, because I extrapolate her from what Joyce and Becky might have had to be.
The most common reason fundangelicals get married is so they can have sex (because:no sex outside of marriage). And since that happens when they’re waaaay too young to make that sort of commitment, they get divorced. That’s why they have a higher than average divorce rate. It’s also why there’s such an emphasis on ‘no divorce’ in that culture, because magic man is supposed to fix any problems in the marriage, if you talk at the ceiling enough. My guess is that Hank and Carol bought into that line of propaganda hook, line and sinker, although Carol obviously swallowed more of it.
Her ground isn’t shaky, it’s toxic quicksand and he’s refusing to let himself be dragged down by her anymore.
Probably for the same reason a lot of hyper-religious people got married: they were young, they were in love, they wanted to have sex. The problem with that? You don’t build a strong foundation first. All things you tolerated early on turn into eventual actual annoyances that drive you insane. You haven’t discussed how to handle differences in opinion so you actually argue about them. They had kids so they refused to divorce. Issues escalated.
We know Hank fell in line at some point and that Joyce challenging them has made him start to rethink letting things slide and what views he was letting himself sink into. That Joyce punching Toedad reminded him of his old self. That if churches were too intolerant, he left them. That his old rebellious spirit and love for actual real people has been coming back to him.
We also know Carol became stricter with time. Jocelyne was the one that made sure Joyce got to experience Halloween because the rest did after all.
I love the way Hank’s walking out of the panel there. Carol storms off stage right, but stays firmly within the panel boundary.
The ‘camera’ is following her but, yes, it does the job of emphasising he growing gap between them in emotional terms.
This. Hank is noping out of there so hard, he’s even left panel borders!
I appreciate this very much. It really drives the point home visually.
Willis uses the huge outline font very sparingly, so it’s to great effect in panel three.
So Hank has already do thing like this in private? GOOD TO KNOW! Now Linda and Charles will have a lot of thinking about this, visibly already dead, couple they’ve just met.
Embarrassment is for people who can feel shame, Carol.
“Could never stand his ground, always had to throw a tantrum like a goddamned child”
Translation
“this idiot is useless. what’s the point of having a husband if he doesn’t agree with you 100% of the time and parrot your opinions?”
“Hank! You get back here and become the tribal, stereotypical, aggressive male presence I’ve decided I need to make my point stronger and win this argument that kidnapping is only a problem when the children don’t listen to the adult and he physically hurts them!”
Carol is soooo uncomfortable to read/watch.
I wonder if Linda and Charles will learn something from this? Like, will Linda say something about how she can’t believe how controlling Carol is, and Charles will be inspired by what he just saw and the fact his son grew part of a spinal column and point out that she kinda is?
…maybe not, but I can dream.
Charles has so little development overall it would be surprising, but I definitely wouldn’t hate it if it happened!
Speaking of which, has Charles even had a line? Like, ever?
He talked to Sal at Parents Day, though mostly to comment on her hair. Not overly manly, though he sorta trailed off cause her hair was all frizzy and poofy, as hair of such people is prone to naturally doing, if Boondocks hasn’t lied to me.
If either of ’em is gonna change, I’d put the money on Charles.
Petition to rename Carol to Karen.
Signs the petition
Jesus. Does she realise that if she’s not swearing then a god damned child is a horrible horrible thing?
So i also found this little bit of, uh, foreshadowing i guess?
https://www.dumbingofage.com/2013/comic/book-3/04-just-hangin-out-with-my-family/overbearin/
I tried linking, but to no avail
…. well fine, make me a fool, self…
F*ck her and her holier than thou attitude.
carol reminds me of my mom lol
Uh oh, Linda has achieved nuclear fission. Run to the bunkers!!
No, he’s just not standing your ground because it’s toxic quicksand and he refuses to be dragged down with you anymore.
I dunno if it’s just me or not but that beat panel just absolutely sells Hank seething as he tries to bite back a reply he *knows* will escalate stuff but really, *really* wants to vent.
And I’m glad he did.
I seem to remember Joyce talking to Sarah about her parents being married, not divorced and how this seemed to be a big thing for her. I think that was foreshadowing this and that her parents are not going to stay together much longer. This sounds like Hank’s breaking point.
I’m confused about panel 3. What does “that” refer to? I have two very different understandings of it.
Does he mean “I am embarrassed by you right now!”?
Or does he mean, “My priority is Joyce and being embarrassed is not what you should be concerned with right now!”?
I am now leaning more towards the first. The second could/would also lead back to the first.
I took it to mean that embarrassment in general is not his concern in the face of what else is going on, and the emphasis on *I’m* is a reproach of her skewed priorities
I lean more towards the second, but there’s another version of the first that works: he’s walking away because he knows that if he stays, he’s going to snap even harder, and the public embarrassment will be even stronger if he does. Walking away is the best thing he can do.
But I think it’s more likely the second, a sarcastic “Yeah, really! Our daughter was kidnapped and you helped, but what I’m concerned about is the embarrassment! Sure! You really think that’s what I’m concentrating on? Get your fucking priorities straight, woman.”
Yeah, as awkward as this whole scene is for anyone present who isn’t involved in it (and even some who were, judging from Linda and Charles’s stunned silence,) public embarrassment and blowouts are absolutely trivial compared to ‘our daughter was kidnapped by a murderer, twice in one morning.’
I dunno Carol, he looks like he’s standing his ground against your bullshit quite nicely.
Unlike you, the scoreboard doesn’t lie, Carol.
Sometimes all you can say is “sheesh”.
I had a friend and later housemate who was really indoctrinated/socialized into this. And she wasn’t even a super extreme fundie, more of a centrist Christian. So many times I watched her lie to people’s faces about how perfect and wonderful her home life was while I knew it was a dumpster fire.
This was supposed to be in response to jsmr
Divorce👏that👏hag👏👏👏
Shit, reading the archives I was reminded of a time another self righteous assbutt also claimed to never swear. HM.
Panel 4 is a perfect example of projection.