Jennefer would stand up and make a big show of doing a big flexible 90 degree angle heel drop onto her face like a street fighter Super and then make a comment about having been a head cheerleader.
This would all turn Ruth on, probably.
I mean, if we weren’t fully aware of Ruth’s mental issues, or had reason to doubt like Rachel seems to, she’d be in the clear moral right.
Only reason it’s murky is we have a clear picture on Ruth.
It’s not really about morals to me anymore. I just think Rachel’s philosophy is kind of dumb. Like she’ll look back to this in 10 years and realize what an edgy idiot she was. Hopefully also realizing tormenting a clinically depressed person does more harm than good.
I really want to know the context for that line, because it’s so harsh and so bitter that I have to imagine there’s something behind it. That’s not the sort of thing you say because you just kind of dislike someone, that had been building for a while
Beyond that, not knowing any more context. Ruth doesn’t have a great track record. We’ve seen how she physically and mentally tormented Billie before they started dating and routinely terrorized the rest of the hall. That’s enough to me to be resentful of her. The problem with Rachel is she’s turned it into some sort of vindictive revenge against Ruth whenever they cross, which isn’t helping anyone but clearly still taking a toll on Ruth who has clinical depression.
there was a really good Star Trek bit in the Patreon comments about this, I don’t know if that commenter posts here so I don’t want to steal their thunder
I rarely check the Patreon posts (don’t like to read ahead) but I’m guessing they’re quoting from the TOS episode, “The Trouble With Tribbles”. That line came to my mind as well. 😀
Oh, she’s calling herself the scow. I think it’s meant to be a play on referring to something terrible but entertaining to watch as a “dumpster fire,” but a dumpster just doesn’t have enough garbage to satisfy her opinion of herself, so she upgraded it to an entire garbage scow, which can hold the contents of hundreds of dumpsters.
A garbage scow on fire is thus the Uberdumpster fire. The greatest, grandest incarnation of a dumpster fire one can get without finding a way to light that one giant garbage patch in the ocean on fire.
Wow. This is the 2nd reference to Quark I’ve seen this month! A show I hadn’t thought about in years. Is Richard Benjamin psychically inducing memories of the show to the world populace in the hopes of a reboot?
In all seriousness I strongly suspect that Jason beginning to talk about childhood scoliosis is probably some kind of foreshadowing for parental abuse in his backstory– possibly like being spanked for poor posture or something. He hasn’t said much about his father but it’s pretty clear that Jason wants to get the hell away from him… and that’s all before you take into account what an asshole said dad was in the other continuity.
I sincerely hope it’s not spanking-adjacent. Last time that came up, we had people shouting others down about their parents, getting needlessly personal.
But if the other person (or animal, piece of furniture, car, deity, app that keeps freezing witch you need it most etc) doesn’t get the reference then what? They probably get even more mad.
I don’t know, for me video games are a coping mechanism that just makes more problems than they solve (I have issues with escapism turning into procrastination and visa versa). I really like video games, but I have to be careful they all too easily turn from ibuprofen to opiate.
Random question but where was Jason living before he met Ruth? His presence in her dorm makes me wonder. Surely he wasn’t homeless. Where does he keep his bow ties and shit? Could he afford an apartment on a bartenders salary?
I really like Ruth – she is a fantastically written character – and green is good color on her, but I don’t like her turning into the Grench. Just because she feels bad doesn’t mean she should be dragging Jason down (he has enough flaws already).
Also, can we have a Christmas Special? (How The Ruth Ruined Christmas?)
she’s gonna tape an antler to the side of Jason’s face
(I do like them as a couple, they’re weirdly sweet and Jason trying to help her navigate depression spiral city, even though it’s not working, is nice)
oh god oh fuck it’s the return of the line that has lived rent free in my head since fucking May 28th 2017. The thing I fear, that even after transitioning, even after all the work I’ve done to become the girl I am, the good person I am, that I haven’t actually changed and I’m still that same awful person I was before. It’s been almost SIX YEARS and it’s the return of the single most damaging line this comic has ever given me.
I’m not sure if this will be reassuring but that line came from a jaded college student, who feels validated in guilt tripping a clinically depressed girl for bullying her and other unknown reasons instead of moving on with her life. Rachel is not really a credible source for critiques on life and human’s capacity to change.
If you’re trying your best to be a better person then good for you. That’s more than most people do. More than I do most days as a pretty average person. Redemption is possible in my opinion. I hope you keep trying and thriving as best you can. A better you can hopefully help more people than you’ve hurt or think you have.
Rachel can’t “move on with her life”, because she still has to put up with Ruth, who is a physically and psychologically abusive bully, having power over her every day of her life she’s at college.
Rachel absolutely can move on. If she wants to escape Ruth she can easily put in for a transfer and never have to see Ruth again. We canonically know 3 people who have transferred successfully now. Jennifer, Malaya, and Booster.
The situation with Ruth is unfair. That sucks. Even Ruth doesn’t want her job. But Rachel isn’t trying to improve that, maybe appeal with the administration to fire her even though that probably won’t work. (I don’t know how internal complaints and issues work at IU), or fix her situation with Ruth, or get away from Ruth. She just lives her life, until she runs into Ruth by chance and takes that opportunity to remind Ruth how awful she is, which I don’t think even helps Rachel.
I don’t know what Ruth did to Rachel. Knowing Ruth’s history it could be truly despicable but Rachel is choosing to remain bitter instead of acting for her heath or the health of others. I sympathize to an extent, but at some point it’s just her choice.
Rith was caught having a sexual mutually-suicidal relationship with someone under her supervision and drinking in the premises, and those two things combined weren’t enough to remove her from her position. I have no idea why you’d think that Rachel filing a complaint would do anything in that regard.
Also, Rachel has, presumably, built a series of relationships with the fraction of her floormates who aren’t abusive shits, and she shouldn’t have to upend all of those when she’s the victim here.
Of course, even switching dorms isn’t an assurance that she’d be free from Ruth, because even after the shitshow Ruth went to another dorm and physically assaulted THOSE people, too.
I’m just going to concede as sincerely as I can. My original comment was not meant to start an argument over Ruth and Rachel’s history etc. I was trying to reassure YanderePanzer who seemed to take her quote about redemption not being real to heart.
Thing is, at the time of that conversation, Ruth was keeping all the things her abusiveness had gotten her (check the strip before it). She was still in a relationship with Billie, she was still RA. Her bad behaviour got no consequences and all the profits.
Let’s say you’re playing a game and you cheat not all the way to the win, but far enough ahead of everyone else that your win is assured anyway. What is it worth if you say “I’m not gonna cheat anymore”, even if it’s true?
Contrast, for example, with this strip and the ensuing one, where Rachel implies she believes in the possibility of people getting better, because HERE there were consequences to bad behaviour other than rewarding it:
She also doesn’t have a responsibility to pile on at a suicidal person. There’s too much talk about “responsibility” and who’s “owed” this or “entitled” to that. It doesn’t matter what she’s got a responsibility to do, it matters what she actually does. And what she does is go out of her way to deliberately interact with Ruth, solely to put her down and tell her she can never be better than she was.
Rachel doesn’t “go out of her way” to deliberately interact with Ruth. She hasn’t put a freaking locator on her. They live in the same dorm, and their paths constantly cross by happenstance. In fact, a sizeable chunk of their interactions take place at floor meetings, called by Ruth.
You know who’s a bad person, and goes far, FAR beyond mere “bad”? Ruth, a psychologically and physically abusive bully who has repeatedly assaulted people.
I guess Rachel also has a magic spell on her that prevents her from just walking past and not barking like a rabid dog whenever Ruth is in her line of sight. Lol.
Those floor meetings weren’t optional. If you didn’t attend, Ruth would track you down and physically drag you there. There was a very big penalty to not attending, and that was getting assaulted and then attending anyway.
I think whether that one has a positive or negative spin depends whether you have internalized that the ‘good’ parts of yourself or the ‘bad’ parts of yourself are the core, and whether you are at present on an upward or downward trajectory (because it absolutely isn’t a straight line)
Of course usually that saying is used for advice that you can’t change OTHER PEOPLE (just allow and help them to become more themselves), not that you can’t change yourself. Presumably the desire to change yourself implies that the desired result is sufficiently already a part of you that it would be becoming more yourself? Or it’s just a saying that attempts to encompass advice that applies to some situations but not others, and not a universal truth.
I’ve known tons of people who change, really change.
Rachel is angry and hurt at Ruth. And she doesn’t believe that Ruth, specifically, has changed.
But Rachel is not correct about people.
We’re all full of voices that point at us, mocking and accusing, when we change, but those voices lie. They are echoes, memories from outside ourselves. They are someone else’s discomfort over you becoming real to yourself.
We all grow and change, and you have the right to turn away from the people who refuse to let you change. Some damage can’t be undone and that’s a fact of life. Some people just want a villain in their story because it’s easier to project onto others rather than address what’s inside themselves. Either way, you can still decide for yourself who you want to be and you’re allowed to surround yourself with people who affirm you and encourage you to be that person rather than with people who will never see you for anything than who they think you were
But at the same time, those people don’t have to accept your change. Especially not at first glance or face value.
You don’t have to accept an abuser back into your life because they claim to have changed and that’s the situation Rachel was in. She had no reason to think Ruth was really committed to changing
Rachel is a shitty edgy and jaded 20 year old who was lashing out, and said some things she won’t even agree with in a couple years in a heated moment. Her words hold no weight and it’s a bullshit, awful point of view. Idk how much it helps, I’m a dumb jaded 22 year old myself but, change is always possible, redemption is achievable and beautiful so long as you put the work in. Idk you personally but it sounds like you’ve put the hard work in and changed drastically as a person. I commend you for that 🙂
You know, while I don’t entirely agree with Ruth here… I also kinda get it.
Not redemption, but the issue with effective self-change within the same environment.
Between Highschool and College, I reinvented myself entirely. I would have done so during high school, but there was too much inertia from the people around me. I couldn’t change until I left home and put myself into a new environment with fresh people. Only then, in that new place, could I be a different person than I was before.
So yeah, I get what she means. Certainly some individuals around her are making her attempts to change more difficult.
The problem is we act like forgiveness is a necessary requirement for redemption, when it simply isn’t. All redemption requires is that you acknowledge your past actions and try your hardest to make up for them and be a better person going forward, what others think of you doesn’t factor in at all. Even forgiving yourself isn’t necessary for redemption in my view.
Depends how you think of redemption. Some systems have it so it is necessary and yeah, that’s rough. Both for the person who is trying to do better and the person who’s being asked for forgiveness. Imagine being told you need to forgive someone for them to be better but you don’t feel forgiving. Talk about pressure.
I like to think of it your way. Whether you succeed in being a better person might depend on who you ask but the possibility of being better is always there.
I dunno. The only thing that matters to me in this world is what other people think of you. Other people make up 100% of the world’s population and their opinions hold power over you. I submit that one cannot be happy in a world in which they are hated and rejected by all.
The problem with that line of reasoning is that it tends to assume the people judging you are good. When, in truth, society’s morals frequently do not align with what is truly good. For example, you would be considered a bad person according to people living in 1840s Alabama if you helped slaves escape. Also, happiness? I didn’t say a thing about happiness. Oftentimes being good won’t make you happy. Being good involves sacrifice, and almost never grants reward.
Big ups to what Some1 said above. I’d also like to challenge your submission by asking for an example of this happening to someone (and before you name any political figures, German or otherwise, know that whichever one you’re thinking of still has supporters somewhere; and before you name yourself, let me gently suggest that you might be projecting your own feelings onto others more than you’re reading their feelings).
I wouldn’t necessarily agree that “what others think of you doesn’t matter at all” because an important part of redemption is listening to the people who were harmed to understand what harm was done and disregarding that isn’t redemption; you can’t grow if you don’t know what you did wrong and sometimes you can only know that by listening to the people who were hurt. However, some of those people won’t forgive you, and that’s just how it goes, and that’s where you need to separate yourself from what others think of you, because it’s impossible to be universally liked.
I don’t know if that’s true about redemption. I’m not sure I really understand what people mean by redemption, outside of fictional narrative arcs or religious contexts.
It is true of change. It’s true of growth. Seems to me that’s more important. You might never get people you’ve hurt to forgive you, but you can change and stop hurting others. That’s the important thing.
I’m not so keen on their relationship. I mean, it sure looks like he’s into it, but she doesn’t appear to have much respect for any sort of boundaries.
It’s one of those things where I understand why AA and other such programs ask you to apologize to people, but there’s always the reality that some people would rather you just keep walking, that coming to them for absolution might just cause them more problems rather than give them closure.
Forgiveness isn’t in everyone’s arsenal, contrition doesn’t always make things better, and some stories must remain a fragment. It sucks, but closure is talked up so much because you cannot always count on it. It’s great when it happens, but some people would rather move on.
Apology benefits both parties. Forgiveness benefits both parties. Even if one party refuses it, the other still benefits. The benefit is in the doing. Any reward is gravy.
Not necessarily. If the person you’ve hurt wants no contact and your very presence is traumatic to them, seeking them out can just be continuing the abuse.
Ruth, you’ve got your tenses confused. I will always have been what I was before. But today I can be different. Tomorrow I can build on that difference.
People who only see who I was have nothing to say to who I am now.
AA has a step about acknowledging harm done but recognizes that asking for forgiveness may just make the harm worse. I think that belongs late in the process after one has changed the harmful behavior not early on when the harm may be ongoing.
AA has some very serious cult issues in general and the ones that push you to get forgiveness or you can’t move on in the program tend to be very big red flags that this is gonna be a toxic one.
Yes and no. There’s some definite cult like ones but people who have tried to change the program have often found it completely falling apart too. It turns out that for a lot of people, knowing your victim still hates you is a major stumbling road to change.
Yeah, if AA has worked for you or someone you care about, I’m not trying to knock that and say it’s totally worthless, but there’s definitely things in the set up of them that lend themselves to cult building. A lot of them will eventually fall apart but it’s why some alcoholics urge people to try rehab councillors or therapists instead of AA. That’s just from what I know of them, not being an alcoholic or having alcoholic family who’ve tried AA myself.
I don’t know why but I like to believe people, generally, have some good in them. I want to see people try to be good and I want to believe in and reward them being good. It’s why I get my heart broken so much when they choose to do bad things. Perhaps my expectations are too high, or perhaps I’m just too optimistic. I always wanna give people the benefit of the doubt that maybe they can become a better version of themselves if they just consider others feelings a little more.
I believe there is good and evil within everyone, we either choose for ourselves which one of those two we give power too or we just different to one of the two infinities.
There are those who knowingly choose to imbrace the worse things about themselves and never chooses to change for the better and instead thrives on doing the opposite, that’s what my definition of a irredeemable person.
Is if Jason and Asher met and completely hit it off, like, they become complete bros, only they can’t hang out because Jennifer and Ruth are…Jennifer and Ruth
What if they became more than bros though? Like the bestest bros. Bros that bro down on occasion even. Asher has already shown interest in a bro, for those who know. *wink wink*. And Jason wears bow ties. Let there be bros!
God, absolutely yes. Fuck. I can think of no better dynamic to add to those four than “everyone is bisexual”. It’d be hilarious.
Asher all “do you think they’d stop fighting if we made out?” followed by Ruth hollering “JASON DO NOT MAKE OUT WITH THE ENEMY”, Jason shrugging in disappointment. Antics abound.
Jason, brattily: awwww but i wannaaaaaaa
Ruth: no! I’ll punish you real hard if you do that
Jason *instantly shoves tongue into Asher*
Ruth: …oh right. Duh.
Everybody asking about what’s scow it’s like myself, tired to open Google Translator and waiting for someone bring context before I surpass my shame and ask. (yadda yadda Maple Leafs are real?)
Redemption, some don’t think they need it because they never admit to doing anything wrong, some don’t think it’s possible to obtain or that it’s even real, and some others don’t want it because they either don’t think they deserve it or they prefer being the unapologetic cruel person they are.
That aside, I say even if you don’t believe in Redemption or think yourself even worthy of it, change is not only real but inevitable. Sure though there are things about a person that deep down in their core never change, but at end of the day we are still human and we mature, learn and mature above what we were the day before. Whether that change is for the good or bad though is mostly up to the person.
Fuck the concept of “redemption” and the entire conversation surrounding it. The important thing is, Ruth is hotter and more interesting than Rachel will ever hope to be. Seriously, what’s Rachel ever done, aside from scold people? Every time she shows up, she’s wagging her finger at somebody. Ruth at least has hobbies and relationships with people and red hair and gorgeous green eyes and freckles for centuries.
Since Ruth and Rachel knew each other before the main story started and we don’t know any of Rachel’s back story she may have very good reasons to dislike Ruth
Especially given that Ruth verbally abused, sexually assaulted, publicly bullied and physically assaulted Billie (at least goaded Billie into attacking so Ruth could “defend” herself)
I don’t actually care about Rachel’s reasons or backstory. She bores me on a fundamental level, and Ruth is hotter to me, so Rachel doesn’t even have that going for her.
I also don’t mind that Ruth did all that stuff to/with/for Billie, because they were a hot couple who did hot things together.
Rachel seems boring because we don’t know anything about her. If Ruth only popped up every now and then and we didn’t get to know her, you’d feel the same about her.
But Rachel and Ruth were roommates their first year, and from right off the bat, Ruth showed she was an a-hole and a bully. (https://www.dumbingofage.com/2019/comic/book-10/01-birthday-pursuit/resort/) LIVING with that… yeah, kind of sours you on that person, and they can become “irredeemable”. And most people like that, in reality, don’t try looking for redemption, because they still think there’s nothing wrong with them.
So while we see Ruth trying for redemption, and to be better… Rachel is under no obligation to give any kind of forgiveness. To her, Ruth may be trying to LOOK like a better person… but having lived with her, she has a slightly clearer idea of what she was like behind closed doors. Then, when Ruth got her position… and let it go to her head to an extreme, well for Rachel that solidifies exactly the kind of person Ruth is.
It doesn’t matter if she was a hot girl, part of a “hot couple who did hot things together”… that can’t ever excuse abuse of any kind. That’s mainly what Rachel’s “Redemption is a Story” is about, I think. “Oh, you’re trying to be a better person? Doesn’t ever change the damage you did… and I don’t forgive you for that.”
And she doesn’t have to… because she’d never be able to trust that an apology from Ruth is sincere. Any apology given would seem self-serving, to try and make herself *look* better… and not because she recognizes its truly wrong. (From Rachel’s perspective)
You seem to be under the impression that I don’t understand the story, Rachel’s place in it, the amount of info we have on her, or some combination of those things.
I know we don’t know a lot about her and that affects my interest. I know Ruth was a bothersome roomie to her. I know Rachel isn’t blah blah blah obligation blah.
What I don’t know is why you read a post starting with “fuck this concept and the conversation around it” and though I was potentially somebody to try and have that conversation with/at.
I don’t care about all that, and I already said as much. Ruth is hotter than Rachel to me, and that raw fact is my top priority between the two of them. I don’t give half a runny shit about “excusing abuse” or whatever words you wanna put in my mouth. If you wanna talk about their various qualities as well-drawn, attractive cartoons, we can talk about that, but I’m just not remotely interested in this high-minded morality thing.
Well, I wasn’t expecting a “conversation” with it… it’s a comment on the internet. Just like you had a need to write your opinion… I had an urge to write mine. And I wrote it for whoever needs to hear it.
I wasn’t putting any words in your mouth… but the impact of “I don’t care about this person because this other trash-fire is hotter to me” is very much excusing abusive behavior. That’s what that action is doing.
If you want to be sexually attracted to hand-drawn cartoons… okay, go for it, I guess. I’m here for the story those cartoons tell.
Okay but it’s really silly to spread your “urge” under a comment explicitly saying the poster didn’t want to be part of that conversation, instead of making a separate post or responding to literally anyone other than that person.
And people can be here for the story while also thinking a character is hot. You’re not impressing anyone by pretending not to know that.
Are you saying my post is misogynistic, or that something in the comic is, or poking fun at the idea of one of those things? I don’t understand your response.
I see. Well, by that standard, Penny did nothing wrong.
(She did, she absolutely did. Just… green-eyed redheads, what can you do? Sorry, Rory.)
(“Absolutely no problem whatsoever.”)
Not sure if “what has Rachel ever done” is a serious question but she DID save Ruth’s life by alerting the building manager, who got Ruth to a hospital. So as much as she hates Ruth, she at least did that.
I’m glad Jason, at least, is taking the correct message: that he shouldn’t be in education. Any other career should be open to him, but that one’s closed.
Ruth still needs therapy, but we knew that already.
I’m more and more sure that they are a great couple. Jason understands Ruth so well, I think he will be able to help her a lot in her life. And about Ruth, she looks so sad and desperate but she’s still able to see him. Yes, she’s kinda mean with Jason, but there’s something that make me think this is not totally negative in their peculiar type of relationship.
Do you know that the idea being considered here is whether or not someone who has exploited a position of power and/or authority in a community to do harm should be allowed to have the trust of that community again and under what circumstances? And that the specific word “redemption” is simply a close fit for that discussion within a culture whose language has been heavily shaped by Christianity?
I mean, we also realise that most of the days are named after Norse gods and most months are named after Roman gods or deified Roman emperors, but nobody construes our use of them for a following of those beliefs.
Redemption is considered important within Christianity, yes, but the concept doesn’t originate with Christianity, and Christianity hardly has ownership of it.
Nor should one assume that people who have problems with mainstream Christianity are automatically running in the opposite direction of everything it has to say.
It’s not bad because its christian or anything, but it’s worth interrogating why we might find that framing appealing, or convenient or comfortable. It comes with baggage.
For instance, i feel like redemption carries the implication of an external judge? So i find it fine and neat as a literary analysis tool because many writers do set up characters to be judged negatively by the reader only to turn that judgment around, and it’s this negotiated wiping of the slate, we get to decide if they have earned that. its jarring enough to me that characters, like in-character, talk about “redemption” as a real-life thing and not in a tongue-in-cheek, trope-savvy, meta sort of way. But then seeing this same earnestness to consider redemption as a irl thing in the comments, without scare quotes or apparent acknowledgement of the loadedness of it as a concept, it feels very weird, idk.
There’s also the issue that redemption focuses the transgresser, not the aggrieved, and while we do have language for focusing the victim i feel like the redemption arc is very, very important to us culturally, and honestly just a lot more fun. Villains are cool, victims are boring, moral ambiguity is unsettling and kind of unnerving, almost uncanny. We seem to really believe in innocence, in purity, and celebrate purification. Redemption is a resolution to an issue of ethical wobbling, a return to a state of moral stability.
What else. There’s the implication of sin as a serious moral category. Anyway, i’ve made my case for handling this concept with care enough, i think.
I feel like this is makes a LOT of assumptions and is built around trying to interrogate redemption from a Christian perspective. Redemption as a concept is the idea that there is an absolute “bad” that you as a person can be and that is something that can be judged from:
* God
* Society
* Ethical system you believe in
* Your family
* Yourself
It interrogates the idea there is a non-functioning version of a person or actively harmful which I’d say 99% of people believe in regardless of their other ethical systems.
Also, there’s a kind of a Western centrism that acts like Christianity is the only religion there is. It ignores the existence of other Abrahamic religions, Hinduism, and Buddhism among others.
It’s like, “do these religions and their concepts of religion don’t count?”
Um this is a comic that’s not only written and read by people, and featuring characters, within a majority christian culture but that even explicitly focuses on christian values and their subversion. So i think that’s a bad faith argument.
Yes and no is what I’d gather because while it is a book in the context of Christian culture, it is also written by an atheist and the character (Rachel) is an atheist. Redemption being addressed from a secular POV is to be considered. Also, to be aware it’s a more neutral word despite the importance of redemption in Christianity.
But we words that work fine without appealing to such a loaded worldview, like responsibility, accountability, or framing it in terms of self-searching etc.
Very much with you there on the concept of redemption.
It obviously makes sense in a Christian context – though I think that’s different from the literary one. Tied strongly to Christ redeeming us from sin through his sacrifice, not so much to individual efforts to change or atone.
It makes sense in a literary context, where we often see outright villains not only reform, but atone for their actions, often very dramatically. Commonly through a heroic death. Linking in a way to Jesus – just dying for their own sins, not everyone’s.
Applied to real life though, it’s very rarely that neat. Lives don’t get wrapped up with neat narrative closure. We change, we grow, we heal. We can stop doing the bad things we once did. I don’t know what redemption means in a real context.
Thanks, yes, that’s very well put.
I feel like the christian connotations are still present in the literary analysis use of the term, because of christian ideals around the imitation of Christ as a moral ideal. which is fine when applied to culturally christian works like this one
I mean, to me, “redemption”, particularly in this context, means “Put the bad things someone has done in the context of their life and also the good things they’ve done, to a point where others want to associate with them despite the bad things.”
I don’t think that’s a particularly Christian concept at all.
Loading ...
half surprised Ruth isn’t concerned that Jason could just kick her in the face, the way they’re on the bed like that
I’m sure JENNIFER would have
next comic: Jason is now permanently hunched
Is he going to wind up at Notre Dame?
Ruth in full Frollo cosplay singing the line about “Who is the MONSTER (pointing to herself) and who is the MAAAAANNNN”
Jason just like “you…you know this isn’t even Frollo’s part, love. You know this.”
When do we get to the big unforgettable music number, Hunch if You Want To Keep Your Femers?
No, the college dropped its bell ringing degree program some years ago.
South Bend isn’t that far.
Jennefer would stand up and make a big show of doing a big flexible 90 degree angle heel drop onto her face like a street fighter Super and then make a comment about having been a head cheerleader.
This would all turn Ruth on, probably.
First time I’ve seen Yoto spelt with an R, a U and a H before.
😀 Haha ok you got me a bit.
I’m QUITE fond of the “Goddamn Cheerleader” momentmush ! mush, i say !
Pull up, Ruth.
Ruth would respond that she doesn’t DESERVE to pull up and also she’s tearing out the controls, what are you gonna do NOW, smarty pants
Rachel really got to her with that, huh
Ugh. Rachel probably won’t be redeemed for saying that either.
I mean, if we weren’t fully aware of Ruth’s mental issues, or had reason to doubt like Rachel seems to, she’d be in the clear moral right.
Only reason it’s murky is we have a clear picture on Ruth.
It’s not really about morals to me anymore. I just think Rachel’s philosophy is kind of dumb. Like she’ll look back to this in 10 years and realize what an edgy idiot she was. Hopefully also realizing tormenting a clinically depressed person does more harm than good.
I mean I’m not sure there’s any universe where telling someone suicidal they’ll never be better is clear.
I really want to know the context for that line, because it’s so harsh and so bitter that I have to imagine there’s something behind it. That’s not the sort of thing you say because you just kind of dislike someone, that had been building for a while
Rachel’s also seen Ruth show real emotion before. So their next meeting is gonna be super interesting.
From what we’ve seen Ruth was generally unpleasant to be around and a bully.
https://www.dumbingofage.com/2019/comic/book-10/01-birthday-pursuit/resort/
Beyond that, not knowing any more context. Ruth doesn’t have a great track record. We’ve seen how she physically and mentally tormented Billie before they started dating and routinely terrorized the rest of the hall. That’s enough to me to be resentful of her. The problem with Rachel is she’s turned it into some sort of vindictive revenge against Ruth whenever they cross, which isn’t helping anyone but clearly still taking a toll on Ruth who has clinical depression.
She really does crush everything.
scow?
Do you not know what it is?
Google says a small dinghy but I don’t think that’s far to Jennifer’s hips
Google says it’s a sort of sailing boat.
Like a barge.
Looked it up, apparently it’s a type of boat.
Scow, in American English, usually refers to a barge that hauls garbage.
there was a really good Star Trek bit in the Patreon comments about this, I don’t know if that commenter posts here so I don’t want to steal their thunder
It was very funny though
I rarely check the Patreon posts (don’t like to read ahead) but I’m guessing they’re quoting from the TOS episode, “The Trouble With Tribbles”. That line came to my mind as well. 😀
So Ruth isn’t an abusive garbage scow on fire, she should be hauled away as garbage (on fire)?
In her opinion? Yes.
Oh, she’s calling herself the scow. I think it’s meant to be a play on referring to something terrible but entertaining to watch as a “dumpster fire,” but a dumpster just doesn’t have enough garbage to satisfy her opinion of herself, so she upgraded it to an entire garbage scow, which can hold the contents of hundreds of dumpsters.
A garbage scow on fire is thus the Uberdumpster fire. The greatest, grandest incarnation of a dumpster fire one can get without finding a way to light that one giant garbage patch in the ocean on fire.
I googled ‘garbage scow on fire’ and was not disappointed.
Sci fi?” The (too-quickly cancelled) sitcom Quark was set on an interstellar garbage scow. It should have run for eight years, not eight weeks.
If you’re wondering can garbage scow?”, Buck Henry created it.
I watched Quark in first run, and loved it.
(Then again, I was young and dumb.)
Wow. This is the 2nd reference to Quark I’ve seen this month! A show I hadn’t thought about in years. Is Richard Benjamin psychically inducing memories of the show to the world populace in the hopes of a reboot?
a garbage barge… a garbarge?
or is that where you PARK a scow
Garbarage. a garbage garage.
It bothers me so much that I don’t recognize this word, because there’s no way I haven’t heard it before
No, thanks. I already ate and I’m still pretty full.
This is abusive. Jason’s back is gonna be fucked up in about five to ten years.
I know, right?
In all seriousness I strongly suspect that Jason beginning to talk about childhood scoliosis is probably some kind of foreshadowing for parental abuse in his backstory– possibly like being spanked for poor posture or something. He hasn’t said much about his father but it’s pretty clear that Jason wants to get the hell away from him… and that’s all before you take into account what an asshole said dad was in the other continuity.
I sincerely hope it’s not spanking-adjacent. Last time that came up, we had people shouting others down about their parents, getting needlessly personal.
IIRC some of us tried to steer back to levity by quoting the Four Yorkshiremen sketch, but that didn’t break up the fighting.
More fights should be resolved with references.
But if the other person (or animal, piece of furniture, car, deity, app that keeps freezing witch you need it most etc) doesn’t get the reference then what? They probably get even more mad.
It’s a tricky manoeuvre is all i’m saying.
The “Four Deaf Yorkshiremen” sketch (and spinoff movie) were pretty badasse.
The punchline is the real clincher, though:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2upAsFzO9AU
Jason’s called his dad a bond villain.
In the Walkyverse but I don’t recall it being mentioned in the DoAverse.
“Essentially a supervillain” is his own words and that’s not the only time he’s talked about how his father is evil
Fucked up the tags on that first link, whoops
If it were anyone but Ruth this strip might dissolve to a recreational massage occurring in the skip off-panel.
(I’ve had serious back issues and even a bit of training can give someone the ability to provide lots of relief.)
A really hot and beautiful abusive garbage scow. The fire just made her hotter.
Sure the fumes where toxic but that’s how you get high on love, right?
I like Ruth better when she doesn’t feel like she has to be randomly violent.
And now, to contrast Dorothy’s coping mechanisms, please enjoy Ruth, who is just not coping at all.
They should all play more video games. 😛🎮
I don’t know, for me video games are a coping mechanism that just makes more problems than they solve (I have issues with escapism turning into procrastination and visa versa). I really like video games, but I have to be careful they all too easily turn from ibuprofen to opiate.
likewise
Most video games are basically identical anyway. I haven’t played one in nearly five years.
Sorry my sarcasm detector is broken 😅
I was looking up the last time Ruth and Jason appeared and remembered that the December 28, 2022 comic still has Robin tagged instead of Ruth.
Now there’s a crackship for ya.
Dunno. Robin and Jason has never been explored in any comic that I recall.
Watch me having forgotten an entire sequence of events in the Walkyverse.
They were probably in the same room for some of the weddings.
Random question but where was Jason living before he met Ruth? His presence in her dorm makes me wonder. Surely he wasn’t homeless. Where does he keep his bow ties and shit? Could he afford an apartment on a bartenders salary?
I am unsure. I don’t think he outright lives with Ruth, though, so much as keeps ending up there.
He’s said that her room has heat and his place has none.
I really like Ruth – she is a fantastically written character – and green is good color on her, but I don’t like her turning into the Grench. Just because she feels bad doesn’t mean she should be dragging Jason down (he has enough flaws already).
Also, can we have a Christmas Special? (How The Ruth Ruined Christmas?)
Ruth’s in her Grink arc
she’s gonna tape an antler to the side of Jason’s face
(I do like them as a couple, they’re weirdly sweet and Jason trying to help her navigate depression spiral city, even though it’s not working, is nice)
Any Christmas story will be a random flashback and be published in the hottest part of summer.
oh god oh fuck it’s the return of the line that has lived rent free in my head since fucking May 28th 2017. The thing I fear, that even after transitioning, even after all the work I’ve done to become the girl I am, the good person I am, that I haven’t actually changed and I’m still that same awful person I was before. It’s been almost SIX YEARS and it’s the return of the single most damaging line this comic has ever given me.
Really, truly, Damn You Willis.
I’m not sure if this will be reassuring but that line came from a jaded college student, who feels validated in guilt tripping a clinically depressed girl for bullying her and other unknown reasons instead of moving on with her life. Rachel is not really a credible source for critiques on life and human’s capacity to change.
If you’re trying your best to be a better person then good for you. That’s more than most people do. More than I do most days as a pretty average person. Redemption is possible in my opinion. I hope you keep trying and thriving as best you can. A better you can hopefully help more people than you’ve hurt or think you have.
Rachel can’t “move on with her life”, because she still has to put up with Ruth, who is a physically and psychologically abusive bully, having power over her every day of her life she’s at college.
Rachel absolutely can move on. If she wants to escape Ruth she can easily put in for a transfer and never have to see Ruth again. We canonically know 3 people who have transferred successfully now. Jennifer, Malaya, and Booster.
The situation with Ruth is unfair. That sucks. Even Ruth doesn’t want her job. But Rachel isn’t trying to improve that, maybe appeal with the administration to fire her even though that probably won’t work. (I don’t know how internal complaints and issues work at IU), or fix her situation with Ruth, or get away from Ruth. She just lives her life, until she runs into Ruth by chance and takes that opportunity to remind Ruth how awful she is, which I don’t think even helps Rachel.
I don’t know what Ruth did to Rachel. Knowing Ruth’s history it could be truly despicable but Rachel is choosing to remain bitter instead of acting for her heath or the health of others. I sympathize to an extent, but at some point it’s just her choice.
We also know that Roz hasn’t been able to transfer, and was in fact extremely mad that Jennifer was transferred out before her.
Rith was caught having a sexual mutually-suicidal relationship with someone under her supervision and drinking in the premises, and those two things combined weren’t enough to remove her from her position. I have no idea why you’d think that Rachel filing a complaint would do anything in that regard.
Also, Rachel has, presumably, built a series of relationships with the fraction of her floormates who aren’t abusive shits, and she shouldn’t have to upend all of those when she’s the victim here.
Of course, even switching dorms isn’t an assurance that she’d be free from Ruth, because even after the shitshow Ruth went to another dorm and physically assaulted THOSE people, too.
I’m just going to concede as sincerely as I can. My original comment was not meant to start an argument over Ruth and Rachel’s history etc. I was trying to reassure YanderePanzer who seemed to take her quote about redemption not being real to heart.
JBento, you’ve made some more than fair points.
Thing is, at the time of that conversation, Ruth was keeping all the things her abusiveness had gotten her (check the strip before it). She was still in a relationship with Billie, she was still RA. Her bad behaviour got no consequences and all the profits.
Let’s say you’re playing a game and you cheat not all the way to the win, but far enough ahead of everyone else that your win is assured anyway. What is it worth if you say “I’m not gonna cheat anymore”, even if it’s true?
Contrast, for example, with this strip and the ensuing one, where Rachel implies she believes in the possibility of people getting better, because HERE there were consequences to bad behaviour other than rewarding it:
https://www.dumbingofage.com/2017/comic/book-7/04-the-do-list/fertile/
That doesn’t change the fact that it was an absolutely horrific thing to say to someone probably still on suicide watch
Rachel has absolutely zero responsibility to give a flying fuck about her abuser’s health, mental or otherwise.
She also doesn’t have a responsibility to pile on at a suicidal person. There’s too much talk about “responsibility” and who’s “owed” this or “entitled” to that. It doesn’t matter what she’s got a responsibility to do, it matters what she actually does. And what she does is go out of her way to deliberately interact with Ruth, solely to put her down and tell her she can never be better than she was.
Rachel is a bad person ¯\_ಠ_ಠ_/¯
Rachel doesn’t “go out of her way” to deliberately interact with Ruth. She hasn’t put a freaking locator on her. They live in the same dorm, and their paths constantly cross by happenstance. In fact, a sizeable chunk of their interactions take place at floor meetings, called by Ruth.
You know who’s a bad person, and goes far, FAR beyond mere “bad”? Ruth, a psychologically and physically abusive bully who has repeatedly assaulted people.
I guess Rachel also has a magic spell on her that prevents her from just walking past and not barking like a rabid dog whenever Ruth is in her line of sight. Lol.
I don’t think the floor meetings are a really good example though. Rachel has complete freedom not to go to them, without any penalty.
You mean, the floor meetings that Ruth got the entire wing used to a “show up or I’ll assault you and drag you there” protocol? THOSE floor meetings?
Yes, those floor meetings. Put the fangs away, I’m not here to fight.
Those floor meetings weren’t optional. If you didn’t attend, Ruth would track you down and physically drag you there. There was a very big penalty to not attending, and that was getting assaulted and then attending anyway.
At this stage, I regret saying anything and wish to end this interaction.
One of my parents always had an odd way of phrasing this.
People don’t change but become more of themself.
Phrased more oddly as it’s been years.
It’s an odd concept, but it might help to view things through that lens.
Oof. That’s even worse than Rachel’s line.
I think whether that one has a positive or negative spin depends whether you have internalized that the ‘good’ parts of yourself or the ‘bad’ parts of yourself are the core, and whether you are at present on an upward or downward trajectory (because it absolutely isn’t a straight line)
Of course usually that saying is used for advice that you can’t change OTHER PEOPLE (just allow and help them to become more themselves), not that you can’t change yourself. Presumably the desire to change yourself implies that the desired result is sufficiently already a part of you that it would be becoming more yourself? Or it’s just a saying that attempts to encompass advice that applies to some situations but not others, and not a universal truth.
But consider using it in the same context as Rachel’s line. With someone who had been abusive, but was trying to change.
Have you sure that line was NEVER about your, ever.
Redemption is a history for people like Ruth that still use they toxic behavior for their own benefits.
You got a new your, and that was not a history. Your new you are real.
I’ve known tons of people who change, really change.
Rachel is angry and hurt at Ruth. And she doesn’t believe that Ruth, specifically, has changed.
But Rachel is not correct about people.
We’re all full of voices that point at us, mocking and accusing, when we change, but those voices lie. They are echoes, memories from outside ourselves. They are someone else’s discomfort over you becoming real to yourself.
We all grow and change, and you have the right to turn away from the people who refuse to let you change. Some damage can’t be undone and that’s a fact of life. Some people just want a villain in their story because it’s easier to project onto others rather than address what’s inside themselves. Either way, you can still decide for yourself who you want to be and you’re allowed to surround yourself with people who affirm you and encourage you to be that person rather than with people who will never see you for anything than who they think you were
But at the same time, those people don’t have to accept your change. Especially not at first glance or face value.
You don’t have to accept an abuser back into your life because they claim to have changed and that’s the situation Rachel was in. She had no reason to think Ruth was really committed to changing
Rachel is a shitty edgy and jaded 20 year old who was lashing out, and said some things she won’t even agree with in a couple years in a heated moment. Her words hold no weight and it’s a bullshit, awful point of view. Idk how much it helps, I’m a dumb jaded 22 year old myself but, change is always possible, redemption is achievable and beautiful so long as you put the work in. Idk you personally but it sounds like you’ve put the hard work in and changed drastically as a person. I commend you for that 🙂
You are YOU. And nobody else can define YOU for you. Only YOU can know who YOU truly are.
You got this.
What I mean is, your past does not define who you are now. Sorry I was unclear.
You know, while I don’t entirely agree with Ruth here… I also kinda get it.
Not redemption, but the issue with effective self-change within the same environment.
Between Highschool and College, I reinvented myself entirely. I would have done so during high school, but there was too much inertia from the people around me. I couldn’t change until I left home and put myself into a new environment with fresh people. Only then, in that new place, could I be a different person than I was before.
So yeah, I get what she means. Certainly some individuals around her are making her attempts to change more difficult.
👏👏👏💯
The problem is we act like forgiveness is a necessary requirement for redemption, when it simply isn’t. All redemption requires is that you acknowledge your past actions and try your hardest to make up for them and be a better person going forward, what others think of you doesn’t factor in at all. Even forgiving yourself isn’t necessary for redemption in my view.
Huh, I never thought of it like that. That actually makes a lot of sense.
Depends how you think of redemption. Some systems have it so it is necessary and yeah, that’s rough. Both for the person who is trying to do better and the person who’s being asked for forgiveness. Imagine being told you need to forgive someone for them to be better but you don’t feel forgiving. Talk about pressure.
I like to think of it your way. Whether you succeed in being a better person might depend on who you ask but the possibility of being better is always there.
I dunno. The only thing that matters to me in this world is what other people think of you. Other people make up 100% of the world’s population and their opinions hold power over you. I submit that one cannot be happy in a world in which they are hated and rejected by all.
By all, sure, but that ties into what Jason’s saying, that you can try to do better, it just may have to be elsewhere.
The problem with that line of reasoning is that it tends to assume the people judging you are good. When, in truth, society’s morals frequently do not align with what is truly good. For example, you would be considered a bad person according to people living in 1840s Alabama if you helped slaves escape. Also, happiness? I didn’t say a thing about happiness. Oftentimes being good won’t make you happy. Being good involves sacrifice, and almost never grants reward.
A reasonable amount of goodness grants rewards in game theory. Then again, so does mob mentality.
Big ups to what Some1 said above. I’d also like to challenge your submission by asking for an example of this happening to someone (and before you name any political figures, German or otherwise, know that whichever one you’re thinking of still has supporters somewhere; and before you name yourself, let me gently suggest that you might be projecting your own feelings onto others more than you’re reading their feelings).
I wouldn’t necessarily agree that “what others think of you doesn’t matter at all” because an important part of redemption is listening to the people who were harmed to understand what harm was done and disregarding that isn’t redemption; you can’t grow if you don’t know what you did wrong and sometimes you can only know that by listening to the people who were hurt. However, some of those people won’t forgive you, and that’s just how it goes, and that’s where you need to separate yourself from what others think of you, because it’s impossible to be universally liked.
I don’t know if that’s true about redemption. I’m not sure I really understand what people mean by redemption, outside of fictional narrative arcs or religious contexts.
It is true of change. It’s true of growth. Seems to me that’s more important. You might never get people you’ve hurt to forgive you, but you can change and stop hurting others. That’s the important thing.
Since we’re on the topic, I’ll recommend a book. Cuz I’m a librarian. https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/59883978-on-repentance-and-repair
Ruth is the lady who sucks
Plus she got depression
thank you for the Achewood flashback.
Depends on the environment, Jason. Sometimes they’re ruined forever but sometimes we get to come back.
Ruth, redemption is in the eye of the beholder.
The eye of the Beholder is an anti-magic cone.
“People don’t change. You’re thinking of Changelings”
-Ricky Spanish
Odo changed into a more well rounded individual.
Yay surprise DS9 reference!
Is destiny really calling you to fail? 🎵 I never, I never, I never, I never 🎶
That’s cute – a new storyline during the Super Bowl.. Don’t be drowning yourself in all those commercials, eh
i mean, inappropriate timing/mood, but seems like it’d be an awkward funny opportunity to flirt/hunch over on top of her ;P
Ruth is showing that she feels like she can’t change from being a bully by acting like one, right after she says it.
And Jason just lets her bully him.
I’m not so keen on their relationship. I mean, it sure looks like he’s into it, but she doesn’t appear to have much respect for any sort of boundaries.
It’s one of those things where I understand why AA and other such programs ask you to apologize to people, but there’s always the reality that some people would rather you just keep walking, that coming to them for absolution might just cause them more problems rather than give them closure.
Forgiveness isn’t in everyone’s arsenal, contrition doesn’t always make things better, and some stories must remain a fragment. It sucks, but closure is talked up so much because you cannot always count on it. It’s great when it happens, but some people would rather move on.
Apology benefits both parties. Forgiveness benefits both parties. Even if one party refuses it, the other still benefits. The benefit is in the doing. Any reward is gravy.
Not necessarily. If the person you’ve hurt wants no contact and your very presence is traumatic to them, seeking them out can just be continuing the abuse.
No, apology and forgiveness don’t always benefit both parties.
Ruth, you’ve got your tenses confused. I will always have been what I was before. But today I can be different. Tomorrow I can build on that difference.
People who only see who I was have nothing to say to who I am now.
Ugh, that wasn’t supposed to be part of this thread.
The best way to handle that is to stay away in that case and this is from a family full of substance abusers.
AA has a step about acknowledging harm done but recognizes that asking for forgiveness may just make the harm worse. I think that belongs late in the process after one has changed the harmful behavior not early on when the harm may be ongoing.
AA has some very serious cult issues in general and the ones that push you to get forgiveness or you can’t move on in the program tend to be very big red flags that this is gonna be a toxic one.
What do they expect you to do, force the person to forgive you?
Keep asking and doing stuff until they feel pressured to is often how it turns out.
Yes and no. There’s some definite cult like ones but people who have tried to change the program have often found it completely falling apart too. It turns out that for a lot of people, knowing your victim still hates you is a major stumbling road to change.
Even if you’re not entitled to forgiveness.
Again, family of substance abusers.
Yeah, if AA has worked for you or someone you care about, I’m not trying to knock that and say it’s totally worthless, but there’s definitely things in the set up of them that lend themselves to cult building. A lot of them will eventually fall apart but it’s why some alcoholics urge people to try rehab councillors or therapists instead of AA. That’s just from what I know of them, not being an alcoholic or having alcoholic family who’ve tried AA myself.
What the heck is a scow?
https://duckduckgo.com/?t=ffab&q=scow+definition&ia=definition
I don’t know why but I like to believe people, generally, have some good in them. I want to see people try to be good and I want to believe in and reward them being good. It’s why I get my heart broken so much when they choose to do bad things. Perhaps my expectations are too high, or perhaps I’m just too optimistic. I always wanna give people the benefit of the doubt that maybe they can become a better version of themselves if they just consider others feelings a little more.
This strip definitely comes to mind upon reading this– https://www.dumbingofage.com/2011/comic/book-1/05-media-rumble/break/
“Just because someone stumbles and loses their path, doesn’t mean they’re lost forever.” – Professor Charles Xavier
I believe there is good and evil within everyone, we either choose for ourselves which one of those two we give power too or we just different to one of the two infinities.
There are those who knowingly choose to imbrace the worse things about themselves and never chooses to change for the better and instead thrives on doing the opposite, that’s what my definition of a irredeemable person.
You know what would be really, really funny
Is if Jason and Asher met and completely hit it off, like, they become complete bros, only they can’t hang out because Jennifer and Ruth are…Jennifer and Ruth
What if they became more than bros though? Like the bestest bros. Bros that bro down on occasion even. Asher has already shown interest in a bro, for those who know. *wink wink*. And Jason wears bow ties. Let there be bros!
God, absolutely yes. Fuck. I can think of no better dynamic to add to those four than “everyone is bisexual”. It’d be hilarious.
Asher all “do you think they’d stop fighting if we made out?” followed by Ruth hollering “JASON DO NOT MAKE OUT WITH THE ENEMY”, Jason shrugging in disappointment. Antics abound.
Jason, brattily: awwww but i wannaaaaaaa
Ruth: no! I’ll punish you real hard if you do that
Jason *instantly shoves tongue into Asher*
Ruth: …oh right. Duh.
Ruth cruelly block us from getting the Jason lore we crave.
Of course I know what a garbage scow is! It’s the ship name for Walky and Amber!
I approve. And still ship it.
Yeah I was just happy to see canon acknowledgement of that line even if it’s being applied to another ship.
Garbage scow will forever be Amber and Walky though, sexy bisexual suicide pact is the one to top for Jennifer and Ruth.
Everybody asking about what’s scow it’s like myself, tired to open Google Translator and waiting for someone bring context before I surpass my shame and ask. (yadda yadda Maple Leafs are real?)
He’s trying to say Scoliosis, a spinal curvature.
It’s corrected in a number of ways, from bracing to surgery.
Folk like me got a spinal fusion which means slouching is actually pretty hard to do accidentally.
In the second panel Ruth uses the word “scow.” I didn’t know what it was either but the other comments say some type of boat.
I believe garbage scow is a boat that carries garbage.
HUNCH! *End of storyline*
>,>
<.<
Now that's a way to end a storyline. lol
Redemption, some don’t think they need it because they never admit to doing anything wrong, some don’t think it’s possible to obtain or that it’s even real, and some others don’t want it because they either don’t think they deserve it or they prefer being the unapologetic cruel person they are.
That aside, I say even if you don’t believe in Redemption or think yourself even worthy of it, change is not only real but inevitable. Sure though there are things about a person that deep down in their core never change, but at end of the day we are still human and we mature, learn and mature above what we were the day before. Whether that change is for the good or bad though is mostly up to the person.
Fuck the concept of “redemption” and the entire conversation surrounding it. The important thing is, Ruth is hotter and more interesting than Rachel will ever hope to be. Seriously, what’s Rachel ever done, aside from scold people? Every time she shows up, she’s wagging her finger at somebody. Ruth at least has hobbies and relationships with people and red hair and gorgeous green eyes and freckles for centuries.
Since Ruth and Rachel knew each other before the main story started and we don’t know any of Rachel’s back story she may have very good reasons to dislike Ruth
Especially given that Ruth verbally abused, sexually assaulted, publicly bullied and physically assaulted Billie (at least goaded Billie into attacking so Ruth could “defend” herself)
I don’t actually care about Rachel’s reasons or backstory. She bores me on a fundamental level, and Ruth is hotter to me, so Rachel doesn’t even have that going for her.
I also don’t mind that Ruth did all that stuff to/with/for Billie, because they were a hot couple who did hot things together.
Ah Ruth in leather pants XD
Sure, I wouldn’t mind seeing that. She’d look good in leather.
Yes. Very yes.
Ruth needs a sport bike outfit like Sal’s. Maybe Carla can have one delivered from that warehouse via drone.
It’s her Tech Major, right? Nobody majoring this is funny or cool.
‘ey. >:(
Believe me, I’m Tech Major, too.
…
Yeah, you’re right. 🙁
Amber and Danny would like a word.
Rachel seems boring because we don’t know anything about her. If Ruth only popped up every now and then and we didn’t get to know her, you’d feel the same about her.
But Rachel and Ruth were roommates their first year, and from right off the bat, Ruth showed she was an a-hole and a bully. (https://www.dumbingofage.com/2019/comic/book-10/01-birthday-pursuit/resort/) LIVING with that… yeah, kind of sours you on that person, and they can become “irredeemable”. And most people like that, in reality, don’t try looking for redemption, because they still think there’s nothing wrong with them.
So while we see Ruth trying for redemption, and to be better… Rachel is under no obligation to give any kind of forgiveness. To her, Ruth may be trying to LOOK like a better person… but having lived with her, she has a slightly clearer idea of what she was like behind closed doors. Then, when Ruth got her position… and let it go to her head to an extreme, well for Rachel that solidifies exactly the kind of person Ruth is.
It doesn’t matter if she was a hot girl, part of a “hot couple who did hot things together”… that can’t ever excuse abuse of any kind. That’s mainly what Rachel’s “Redemption is a Story” is about, I think. “Oh, you’re trying to be a better person? Doesn’t ever change the damage you did… and I don’t forgive you for that.”
And she doesn’t have to… because she’d never be able to trust that an apology from Ruth is sincere. Any apology given would seem self-serving, to try and make herself *look* better… and not because she recognizes its truly wrong. (From Rachel’s perspective)
Ruth is a main character and Rachel exists mostly to fuel drama in other characters’ storylines.
You seem to be under the impression that I don’t understand the story, Rachel’s place in it, the amount of info we have on her, or some combination of those things.
I know we don’t know a lot about her and that affects my interest. I know Ruth was a bothersome roomie to her. I know Rachel isn’t blah blah blah obligation blah.
What I don’t know is why you read a post starting with “fuck this concept and the conversation around it” and though I was potentially somebody to try and have that conversation with/at.
I don’t care about all that, and I already said as much. Ruth is hotter than Rachel to me, and that raw fact is my top priority between the two of them. I don’t give half a runny shit about “excusing abuse” or whatever words you wanna put in my mouth. If you wanna talk about their various qualities as well-drawn, attractive cartoons, we can talk about that, but I’m just not remotely interested in this high-minded morality thing.
Well, I wasn’t expecting a “conversation” with it… it’s a comment on the internet. Just like you had a need to write your opinion… I had an urge to write mine. And I wrote it for whoever needs to hear it.
I wasn’t putting any words in your mouth… but the impact of “I don’t care about this person because this other trash-fire is hotter to me” is very much excusing abusive behavior. That’s what that action is doing.
If you want to be sexually attracted to hand-drawn cartoons… okay, go for it, I guess. I’m here for the story those cartoons tell.
Good lord. Do you think my reactions to a cartoon actually have an effect on my real-life morals?
Okay but it’s really silly to spread your “urge” under a comment explicitly saying the poster didn’t want to be part of that conversation, instead of making a separate post or responding to literally anyone other than that person.
And people can be here for the story while also thinking a character is hot. You’re not impressing anyone by pretending not to know that.
It’s giving misogyny
Are you saying my post is misogynistic, or that something in the comic is, or poking fun at the idea of one of those things? I don’t understand your response.
I see. Well, by that standard, Penny did nothing wrong.
(She did, she absolutely did. Just… green-eyed redheads, what can you do? Sorry, Rory.)
(“Absolutely no problem whatsoever.”)
Oh, idk about anyone doing “nothing wrong”. Ruth is just hot enough that I don’t care if she kills somebody.
Relatable.
Not sure if “what has Rachel ever done” is a serious question but she DID save Ruth’s life by alerting the building manager, who got Ruth to a hospital. So as much as she hates Ruth, she at least did that.
Oh yeah, she was there. Neat.
She preserved Ruth’s hotness by getting the campus authorities involved so Ruth could get help! 😀
My main problem with ruth is that her hair is very flat. Like, why is it that way? Is her skull flat? Can she even wear headphones? I have concerns.
Aw, Ruth…:(
I hate Rachel so damn much.
Who is the abusive one here?
I’m glad Jason, at least, is taking the correct message: that he shouldn’t be in education. Any other career should be open to him, but that one’s closed.
Ruth still needs therapy, but we knew that already.
I’m more and more sure that they are a great couple. Jason understands Ruth so well, I think he will be able to help her a lot in her life. And about Ruth, she looks so sad and desperate but she’s still able to see him. Yes, she’s kinda mean with Jason, but there’s something that make me think this is not totally negative in their peculiar type of relationship.
Yall realize the word “redemption” is a christian concept right
Just checking
Yeah. I know.
Do you know that the idea being considered here is whether or not someone who has exploited a position of power and/or authority in a community to do harm should be allowed to have the trust of that community again and under what circumstances? And that the specific word “redemption” is simply a close fit for that discussion within a culture whose language has been heavily shaped by Christianity?
I mean, we also realise that most of the days are named after Norse gods and most months are named after Roman gods or deified Roman emperors, but nobody construes our use of them for a following of those beliefs.
I guess I don’t see what this “checking” is for?
Redemption is considered important within Christianity, yes, but the concept doesn’t originate with Christianity, and Christianity hardly has ownership of it.
Nor should one assume that people who have problems with mainstream Christianity are automatically running in the opposite direction of everything it has to say.
So… huh?
I mean, secular redemption exists as well. Its a basic concept of, “if there’s a bad then there is a concept of becoming good.”
It’s not bad because its christian or anything, but it’s worth interrogating why we might find that framing appealing, or convenient or comfortable. It comes with baggage.
For instance, i feel like redemption carries the implication of an external judge? So i find it fine and neat as a literary analysis tool because many writers do set up characters to be judged negatively by the reader only to turn that judgment around, and it’s this negotiated wiping of the slate, we get to decide if they have earned that. its jarring enough to me that characters, like in-character, talk about “redemption” as a real-life thing and not in a tongue-in-cheek, trope-savvy, meta sort of way. But then seeing this same earnestness to consider redemption as a irl thing in the comments, without scare quotes or apparent acknowledgement of the loadedness of it as a concept, it feels very weird, idk.
There’s also the issue that redemption focuses the transgresser, not the aggrieved, and while we do have language for focusing the victim i feel like the redemption arc is very, very important to us culturally, and honestly just a lot more fun. Villains are cool, victims are boring, moral ambiguity is unsettling and kind of unnerving, almost uncanny. We seem to really believe in innocence, in purity, and celebrate purification. Redemption is a resolution to an issue of ethical wobbling, a return to a state of moral stability.
What else. There’s the implication of sin as a serious moral category. Anyway, i’ve made my case for handling this concept with care enough, i think.
I feel like this is makes a LOT of assumptions and is built around trying to interrogate redemption from a Christian perspective. Redemption as a concept is the idea that there is an absolute “bad” that you as a person can be and that is something that can be judged from:
* God
* Society
* Ethical system you believe in
* Your family
* Yourself
It interrogates the idea there is a non-functioning version of a person or actively harmful which I’d say 99% of people believe in regardless of their other ethical systems.
Also, there’s a kind of a Western centrism that acts like Christianity is the only religion there is. It ignores the existence of other Abrahamic religions, Hinduism, and Buddhism among others.
It’s like, “do these religions and their concepts of religion don’t count?”
Um this is a comic that’s not only written and read by people, and featuring characters, within a majority christian culture but that even explicitly focuses on christian values and their subversion. So i think that’s a bad faith argument.
Yes and no is what I’d gather because while it is a book in the context of Christian culture, it is also written by an atheist and the character (Rachel) is an atheist. Redemption being addressed from a secular POV is to be considered. Also, to be aware it’s a more neutral word despite the importance of redemption in Christianity.
But we words that work fine without appealing to such a loaded worldview, like responsibility, accountability, or framing it in terms of self-searching etc.
Very much with you there on the concept of redemption.
It obviously makes sense in a Christian context – though I think that’s different from the literary one. Tied strongly to Christ redeeming us from sin through his sacrifice, not so much to individual efforts to change or atone.
It makes sense in a literary context, where we often see outright villains not only reform, but atone for their actions, often very dramatically. Commonly through a heroic death. Linking in a way to Jesus – just dying for their own sins, not everyone’s.
Applied to real life though, it’s very rarely that neat. Lives don’t get wrapped up with neat narrative closure. We change, we grow, we heal. We can stop doing the bad things we once did. I don’t know what redemption means in a real context.
Thanks, yes, that’s very well put.
I feel like the christian connotations are still present in the literary analysis use of the term, because of christian ideals around the imitation of Christ as a moral ideal. which is fine when applied to culturally christian works like this one
I mean, to me, “redemption”, particularly in this context, means “Put the bad things someone has done in the context of their life and also the good things they’ve done, to a point where others want to associate with them despite the bad things.”
I don’t think that’s a particularly Christian concept at all.
Jason demonstrating how thoroughly relationships can fuck you up right down to the base level and simplest things.
Poor guy.