No, please no. We need to wean her and Billie off of the liquid refreshments of an intoxicating sort! I don’t expect it to happen over night, or without occasional relapsing, but rhyming her name with booze won’t help!
(Although, while I’d rather see them going at it sober… No, bad me! Get that mental image of Billie taking a long drink of Ruth Vermouth out of your head! No! Bad!)
Okay, I’ve seen a lot of these types of posts with regards to Billie and Ruth, and held my tongue until now, but it’s type to speak up.
There is NOTHING wrong with enjoying alcohol. NOTHING.
That is not to say Billie and Ruth do not have issues. They both have very serious issues they should see a therapist about. Alcohol is not, however the problem. Their alcohol use is an attempt to cope with the other issues in their lives that they do not know how else to deal with and are overwhelmed by the very idea of facing.
They do not need to quit drinking, they need to learn self control. They need to know when it is okay to lose control and when it isn’t. They need self confidence, and they need to shake the self image they both have that they are worthless.
None of these things are caused by the drinking. They are what causes the drinking. Them quitting alcohol is treating a symptom, not the disease. Assuming that either of them possessed the strength to quit, which they don’t, it would only make things harder for them because they now would have no coping mechanism to deal with their own feelings of inadequacy. In Ruth’s case, the problem is exacerbated by the fact that her parents were killed by a drunk, but that is only a wrinkle in the fabric that is her negative self image. She thinks she is worthless, and does things to cope with that image that only end up justifying it in her own eyes. She will never be able to quit drinking until she likes herself.
Billie on the other hand has severe abandonment issues. She drinks to forget that, in her eyes, no one really cares about her. It’s why cheerleading was so important to her, it’s why she went to Walky when things started to fall apart, it’s why she has latched onto Ruth, who has been nothing but awful to her since day one, because in Billie’s mind, Ruth’s behavior at least shows she cares.
Both of these women use alcohol to cope with their problems, but it is not in and of itself their problem.
I will totally admit that this MIGHT be true. But it is also completely true that for some people alcohol is 100% a problem in and of itself. There are a lot of people who slide so far into addiction that alcohol becomes their life, and some people can only be cured of that addiction by avoiding so much as a sip of booze. So yes, there are certainly big problems in their lives that they turned to drinking to “deal” with. But I’d wager that the alcohol will not make their lives one jot easier, and indeed will probably make solving their core issues far more difficult than they otherwise would be.
The thing is, the booze is just making their issues worse. Booze is just an object. it’s neither good nor evil. But they’re using that object as a crutch and a band-aid, sticking their heads in the sand to their bigger problems.
Until they remove that crutch, and find a healthier way of healing, that’s not just a band-aide, they’re just going to go down the slippery slope of “It’s not that bad!” until they’re dead in a ditch.. or dead in walky’s bed bare assed, where Dorothy finds them and her legs start accusing Walky of cheating on her via cadavers.
Thank you. I’ve been feeling the same way for a while now about those two, and wasn’t entirely sure why or what it was. This pins it down a lot for me. Well said!
“None of these things are caused by the drinking. They are what causes the drinking. Them quitting alcohol is treating a symptom, not the disease”
Alcoholism -is- a disease. I think you’re playing with fire here with your flippant attitude towards its destructive nature.
At one point you could have argued that a person just needed self control yet could still drink, but this isn’t the case for people with alcoholism.
So yeah, Alcohol is a problem.
While alcohol may just be a symptom, it serves as gaping wound that becomes an infection and prevents any hope of healing. When you’re drinking to hide from your problem, it follows that you need to STOP DRINKING if you’re ever going to face them.
There’s no world where the kind of drinking Ruth and Billie are getting up to is a good thing. I know that’s not what you meant, but that’s why it needs no defense.
I would respectfully disagree. Especially in Ruth’s case where its established in her own words that the alcoholic is fueling the depression cycle. The alcoholism itself links directly back to the original source of the depression and would be a very large factor in her self-loathing. Neither character has an option of drinking responsilby at this point. They both need to stop, the sooner the better.
Yes, if both characters were real human beings they’d desperately need professional psychologically assistant to help get at the root emotional issues. But that’s never easy for someone already caught, and it certainly doesn’t absolve alcohol’s role. In various militaries there is something called a “force multiplier,” which means something that dramatically increases a groups effectiveness. Alcohol is a depression multiplier, it makes depression much worse.
You are correct that there is nothing wrong with enjoying alcohol responsibly, but that’s not the same as giving it a free pass. Pre-existing depression + alcohol = very bad. Ruth and Billie need to stop drinking, combined with counseling. Doing either alone won’t be enough.
If someone posted the same set of things but, say, about heroin, would you consider that valid?
When you have a dependency on a drug (and a lot of alcoholics have literally developed a *chemical dependency*, which is why cold-turkey quiting can be fecking dangerous), THAT’S BAD, and in some cases, that *IS* literally the whole of your problems. And some people, through genetics or just crap luck, are more susceptible to developing a dependency/addiction. Sometimes, alcohol/alcoholism *is* the disease.
What caused them to become alcoholics is a problem, too. But that doesn’t mean alcoholism is just a symptom. It can (and, in the case of these two, I think, has) grown into a lovely little monster all of it’s own accord. Even if they resolved their other issues, they’d still have this to battle.
I really want in on this discussion, because I have opinions on the matter and I think it deserves a respectful, tactful discussion. However, since the posters above already have said anything I could have added in a tactful and respectful way I’m sort of lost.
Yes, alcohol is not their only problem, but yes alcohol is one of their problems, and drinking has a tendency of become a problem in its own right, not the least because how repeated drinking changes the body. They need help, and one of the things they need help with is finding a way of controlling their drinking. Speaking as an armchair psychologist with a limited view into their situation I would say that quitting altogether is much safer than trying to find a manageable middle ground. That “one glass is one too much” thing AA talks about does not come from nowhere.
Still, I agree that their issues tend to be oversimplified in these discussions. If they were real people we would be horribly unhelpful, and even as cartoons that we project some of our own hopes and fears to, we reduce complex issues to quick fixes.
Did you seriously just attempt to equivocate heroin with alcohol? Really? That’s your argument?
Heroin is a massively addictive drug that destroys the lives of almost everyone it touches. There is a reason it has never been as widespread cocaine, or marijuana, or alcohol, or even meth. The reason is because it KILLS most of it’s long term users. There is no such thing as a light user of heroin.
Alcoholism can be a problem, but that is not what is going on here. When I lived in the dorms I had a very good friend who was dependent on alcohol. She got the shakes if she didn’t have any on a given day. It was so bad that she would collect recycling from other residents for beer money. Alcohol dependence is not the need to get wasted. It’s the need to constantly have alcohol in your system. Billy and Ruth abuse alcohol, that’s obvious. But they are NOT alcoholics. They simply lack any developed coping mechanism for their other psychological issues. Ruth’s depression is the root issue, which she drinks to get away from, but due to her past, once she sobers up, that behavior reinforces the depression. If she were an alcoholic, the depression would have long since stopped being the reason for the drinking, the drinking would be a reason unto itself. Billie likewise reinforces her abandonment issues by making herself believe that she deserves to have everyone leave her, but again, the issues are the root cause, not the consequence, of her drinking.
And for the record, I quit smoking 8 months ago after 11 years. I’ve had friends who were alcoholics, meth addicts, and the full spectrum of psychological issues. I completely understand Billie because I struggle with the same abandonment issues. I’m not dismissing alcoholism as a problem, I’m saying that these two do not have it. They have very serious issues that are not alcohol dependance, and use alcohol abuse to escape them. Alcohol abuse =/= Alcohol Dependance. Alcohol Dependence = Alcoholism.
You’re right, but I expect that the “AA” theory of alcoholism will be pushed hard. For a culture that used to preach self-restraint, America has always been bad at the concept of moderation.
(For those who don’t know, AA is a giant lie. It has a success rate exactly the same as attempts to quit cold turkey.
Speaking as the step-son of a man who clawed his way out of alcoholism and now works for the state to help alcoholics and other addicts break their own habits I’m gonna call totally BULLSHIT on this “AA is a giant lie” crap. Does it work for everyone? Absolutely not. Do plenty of people benefit enormously from AA or some similar network of support to beat their addictions? Abso-fucking-lutely. The truth is there are many different paths one can walk to sober up, and what works for one person might not work for another one. No two people’s brains are shaped quite the same way, so no two people will respond to addiction in quite the same way. What is most important is to find the path that works best for YOU, and under no circumstances accept the myth that there is only one solution.
Or, to sum it up, “AA is a giant lie” is itself a dangerous lie, just as awful as the statement “AA is the only solution”.
Missing the point. I am not arguing that alcoholism is not a problem. I am arguing that Billie and Ruth are not alcoholics. They abuse alcohol to cope with personal issues, but they don’t fiend. If the criteria of an alcohol is “Someone who enjoys getting drunk”, or “Someone who drinks to cope with their problems”, I don’t know anyone who isn’t an alcoholic. The definition I’ve always used is the same I use for every other addiction: “Someone who fiends for XXX”. I have drank plenty, smoked about 1/4 my weight in marijuana, and smoked a half a pack of cigarettes a day for 11 years. I’ve only ever fiended for cigarettes.
What is Fiending?
It’s the craving. It’s the need. You can’t understand it if you never felt it, and you don’t need it explained if you have. How it manifested with cigarettes was that I would pick half-smoked cigarettes out of my ashtray when I was out, bum cigarettes off complete strangers, yell at my loved ones over minor things because I was so on edge. The entire time I abused alcohol which a fair degree of frequency. But alcohol never had that kind of hold on me. I have, however, known people who did fiend for it. I had a fiend in the dorms who would collect recycling for beer money, but not to get drunk. She needed to have 2 beers every night or she couldn’t sleep. By 5 pm she would get the shakes. That is fiending. Billie and Ruth have not been shown fiending. They detoxed for a bit, but that’s not the same thing. You get over detoxing. Fiending never goes away. I’ve been 8 months without a cigarette and I still get the urge to bum a cigarette off a random stranger.
Alcohol is an addictive substance. Some people (and unfortunately, entire ethnic groups too – I’m in one) are more vulnerable to developing alcohol addiction than others on a genetic level. It’s not just a case of a person becoming emotionally addicted; there are chemical elements too.
Right? Joyce is really gunning to be eating that rug. Walky is doing the best he can for his almost sister, and Joyce’s inability to understand social situations is no longer innocent.
Nah. In the previous page, she had her hair pushed back by her sweat band. The very topmost parts of her hair are still somewhat conformed to that previous shape. Watch, it’s actually getting *more* normal over time as gravity sets in.
That is just barely funny enough to keep me from vomiting because of the basis for that joke. I suppose you deserve some kind of reward…. here’s an internet…. go nuts.
I once used “because unicorns don’t like lime jello” as a reason for something when bickering with my mother. I think we were arguing about which direction to commence crossing an intersection with.
It made sense at the time, in the sense that I didn’t want to make sense. “Here, have a non sequitur to indicate my frustration that we’re even having this argument.”
You’re right, a world where people just deal with their problems wouldn’t be very entertaining at all. It would be like
Joyce: Dorothy, rather than being all pissy and passive aggressive, I want you to know that it makes me a little jealous that you spend so much time with Walky instead of me.
Dorothy: Wow Joyce, I’m sorry I’ve made you feel that way, I’ll try to find more time for you and my other friends instead of using it all on Walky
OR…
Dorothy: I’m sorry Joyce, but I’m doing the best I can. I swear I’m doing my best to spend time with everyone while also keeping up with my studies
And then….
Dorothy: Thanks for telling me how you felt instead of doing something stupid and sitcom-y
Anyway I don’t like giving Joyce more ammo for her fantasy Bull shit but she has a point, I mean if you’ve seen any romantic Anime you’d know the entire child hood friends thing plays into effect a lot.
“Because you JUST said you needed to swing by Walky’s room to see if Billie was there, or if he knew her whereabouts. Remember? Come on, it’s how this whole stupid conversation started!”
“HEY DOROTHY ARE YOU SURE YOU’RE NOT BEING CHEATED ON ARE YOU SURE ARE YOU SURE ARE YOU SURE ARE YOU SURE ARE YOU SURE EVERYONE YOU KNOW WILL ONE DAY DIE”
At this point, I have that feeling constantly about everyone in this comic. Better prep your “DAMN YOU WILLIS”s while you still have the chance. Something tells me we’re going to need them ready for full auto at some point.
Yeah, I remember the part in QC where everything went to hell all at once. Come to think of it, the same thing happened in Shortpacked. Maybe Willis is just getting the jump on it this time. The number of volatile relationships in this comic is rapidly approaching critical mass.
Aren’t relationships you plan to continue for as long as possible kind of meant to be between you and someone you ARE close to or plan to become close to? That’s the only relationship Joyce would ever consider having personally – a long term one where the people involved should become as close as possible. The closest people can be without being related is being childhood friends – so of course them dating would seem romantic to Joyce.
But biologically, if you are raised in close proximity to someone for many years, your body turns off your ability to be attracted to them – hence why siblings do not become attracted to each other unless they were separated from a young age and why childhood friends can end up with one-sided attractions when one does lose the ability to feel the attraction but the other doesn’t for whatever reason. So it isn’t a common thing for childhood friends to form a relationship except in fiction.
Really hoping that yelling wakes Walky up. He’s horribly ill-equipped to handle this conversation this time of morning, which should make him having to either incredibly fun or incredibly gutwrenching.
I feel like a few weeks ago, someone asked on tumblr whether we’d hear from Becky again any time soon, and the answer was kind of cryptic. But now I can’t find that post!
I’m seriously more than half expecting to find out that the reason Becky hasn’t been answering her phone is that about a week into Bible college she ended up having sloppy drunken/stoned sex with some other girl who she didn’t even know, and now she can’t face Joyce to tell her she didn’t save it until Indiana made it legal for her to marry her.
Why are they over there, Joyce? I dunno, maybe because BILLIE IS ALSO DOROTHY’S FRIEND AND MAYBE DOROTHY WANTS TO MAKE SURE SHE’S OKAY? Also wow way to be the worst friend ever would like me to make you a medal? I could knit you a hat that says BAD bongo on it, but we’d have to be clear that you’re bad, and a bongo, not Nicki Minaj.
Eh I think they’re more acquaintances than anything else, having rarely interacted with one another. Dorothy herself has said she knows little about Billie.
No, Joyce. No it is not. In fact, it is second only to ‘Old bitter woman convincing young woman to give up her professional life to follow True Love’ in its annoyance. (Dammit, Slings and Arrows, why did you ruin yourself by doing that?)
Does Joyce not get the concept that people can be childhood friends without romantic attachments to each other I know that she’s sheltered but, sheesh…
Some people don’t get that people can be friends. No, scratch that: A lot of people don’t.
And I didn’t forget a “just” in there: Friendship is beautiful thing, and it infuriates me when its meaning is reduced to “when a female has the audacity to deny a male sex.
If we’re talking friendzoning, I’ve noticed in the last year or so people having been objecting to it while characterising it as “when a female has the audacity to deny a male sex.” Odd thing is, everywhere I’ve seen it used by guys, it’s been “female only thinks of a male as a friend while he was hoping for a romantic relationship. I’m not sure why this changed, or why it is that the change seems to come from people wanting something to complain about.
It hasnt changed. Not at all.
Like all tropes of male/female relationships, its simply subject to abuse by a minority of jerk males. ( not unlike the Female version of “Gary Stu” ).
Some Feminists, in my humble unasked for opinion are doing a very foolish thing. They are taking any neutral language that heterosexual males use to describe their relationships with women and redefining them with the worst-loaded sexists uses they can find, thus stigmatizing the majority. As a Non Het- male I think this is incredibly foolish and can only backfire. Its switching gears from the fight for full equality ( Which is NOT finished by a Looong shot and seriously needs all our help) to use Feminism to engage In Heterosexual Dating-Gender Power Games.
In America Feminism has a branding problem. Most people agree with Feminisms aim of full equality, yet loathe to identify as a feminist.
By Redefining the word, as a person being nice purely for sex, it attempts to shame and stigmatize for having a sex drive and being interested in untimate relations with women. Are their cases where Feminism id correct? Absolutely. But Redefining the language is shameless and naked case of Verbal Domination. Its actaully a Brain-washing technique called “loading the language” This does two things: IF deflects 100% criticism of women for using men also, and it denies heterosexuual men the right ti think about their relationship in neutral terms.
You can repeat Everything I just said with recent attempts to convert the term “nice guy” into ‘evil manipulative passive-aggressive douchbag. ‘ ( which no doubt some men calling themselves that actually are. ) Its only natural that some men want to distinguish themselves from the jerks — who they may have seen torment themselves, their mothers, sisters and friends . Maybe the recent “He for She” campaign would be more successful if Feminsist didnt stigmatize men for being “nice”
This is stereo-typing. Its bigotry. I see this as the Female version of the disgusting Pick-up-artists language games. Its hard not to.
Note: I am not a het. male, nor have I ever self-identified as a “nice guy” .
Yeah skippy, I have entirely too many bros in my presence on a regular basis. It’s not the feminists who redefined it as ‘denying a dude sex’. Also, will remember to consult with dudes on how best to advance my goals, that is 100% at the top of my priority list.
“By Redefining the word, as a person being nice purely for sex, it attempts to shame and stigmatize for having a sex drive and being interested in untimate relations with women.”
What. No. Modern feminism is, if anything, far too interested in sucking up to dudes’ sexuality. Also again premise wrong here.
“You can repeat Everything I just said with recent attempts to convert the term “nice guy” into ‘evil manipulative passive-aggressive douchbag. ‘ ( which no doubt some men calling themselves that actually are. ) ”
Have you read ANYTHING about that? AT ALL? Because I’m starting to think you haven’t.
And for a dude complaining bout brainwashing (HAHAHAHAHAHA), I like how you’re not even looking at the status quo on these matters. You’re just that embedded in the fucking culture, aren’t you?
Uh, it’s not the feminists that are doing that. It is definitely the dudes, who took “unrequited love”, a neutral and already existing concept, and turned it into a thing that women do to men.
(If you look into any male-dominated social space, you will see that those who cry “friendzone” honestly believe women are never rejected under any circumstances, hence the gendering of the term.)
It’s just… honestly pretty hilarious that you think friendzone was “twisted” by feminists. Funnier that you think Nice Guy(TM) stigmatizes niceness. Like… That’s not even remotely what’s happening.
I can only guess you have these perceptions because you’ve never actually read feminists at the source, instead taking at face value what anti-feminists claim feminists say, do, and want.
The people who should actually be working on their image are the men who are interested in women. They’re the ones who go from calling out “hey beautiful” on the street to shouting, “bongo, I WAS TALKING TO YOU” in three seconds flat. They’re the ones who send creepy OKCupid messages.
They’re the ones who go on killing sprees after being romantically rejected. (Or, as in Rodger’s specific case, deciding they would be rejected ahead of time. And yes I have to specify “in his case”, because men have gone on killing sprees for the same reason before.)
Maybe the men who want to “distinguish themselves from the jerks” should make more of an effort to speak out against the jerks, instead of pinning a special snowflake award on their shirts and getting mad when basic human decency doesn’t guarantee romantic love with the women of their choice?
Maybe they should object to the pick up artists who blatantly advertise themselves as successful rapists and give tips to their followers on how to accomplish the same.
These aren’t part of some feminist conspiracy, buddy. Feminists have done nothing but shine a flashlight into the bowls of Reddit, but link to articles on A Voice For Men; they do nothing but provide places for women who have received gross and sometimes scary messages on sites like OKCupid to share their horror stories (almost always censoring out the man’s name), so that they know they aren’t alone.
The fact that there’s so much shit to find? That you can easily with a second of googling find millions of pages of MEN talking about how “this bongo” they never bothered asking out “just” wants to be friends, and how awful and unfair and CRIMINAL that is? (Literally you can find people suggesting that the government should provide them with the women of their choice on pain of prison.)
The rest of the world seems to have a lot of trouble grasping this.
My opinion is, is if a person cant be my friend, whether or not I lay you,
whether or not a sexual relationship lasts ( as most dont ) , then you dont deserve to get in my pants at all.
Gay men are worse. Instead of a’ friendzone’ they have a ‘Whore-Zone’. If you get ‘whorezoned’ you are socially shunned, for all but sex.
“Friendzone” is actually a compliment. Albeit a back-handed one.
Personally, I would be Honored to be “friendzoned” by a woman.
Heterosexual men naturally dislike it, because it conveys lower social status, then Female-Female friendships and Male-Female sexual relationships.
Its also potentially a very unstable and disposable relationship, likely to be ended any time a woman gets into a serious romantic relationship; In my experience. YMMV
It isn’t really lower in social status than female-female friendships though – I don’t measure my friendships by gender, I measure them by how long I can tolerate someone personally (as I am an introvert to a degree).
The only reason such a friendship should be unstable is if a) the guy is a jerk, or b) the guy doesn’t actually care about being a part of the female’s life unless they are in a romantic relationship with them.
Because otherwise, friendships with guys shouldn’t be any more disposable than any other friendship when you form a relationship.
Ha! A heavily-freckled acquaintance once told me he’d just run into a very concerned lady who thought he should see a doctor about them. She hadn’t much exposure to Caucasians and didn’t know they were a perfectly normal (and harmless) skin colouring.
Freckles are actually not just a white person thing. Same with light hair and eyes. And no, you don’t have to have a white person in your family tree for these things either 😉
One of your best friends is in a relationship that, even with its attendant issues, has the potential to be a really good thing for the two people involved in it. Sabotaging that because it feeds your personal fantasies is not the act of a good friend.
Sincerely
Common Sense
P.S: The people around you are not dolls you can play a real life game of house with.
Potentially hurting others entirely for the reason of ones personal fantasies is a bit of a sore spot for me. Thanks for portraying that aspect of the strip when I was too distraught to do so.
Agh, why is everyone hating on Joyce for saying these things, this is not a surprising Joyce thing to say. At the end of the day, if Dorothy really did believe in her convictions that Walky and Billie wouldn’t be a thing, she wouldn’t have walked all the way over to his room out of worry.
Joyce is just looking out for her friend, yeah she’s wrong about it, but she’s just doing what she thinks is the right thing to do.
Also just yesterday’s strip she said she needed to swing by here. So kind of a PERFECTLY NORMAL thing for Dorothy to head over with her on their way out.
I’m kind of disappointed that Dorothy’s already forgotten about that part.
Shes telling her friend, who might be scared that her boyfriend is cheating, that its romantic if billie and walky got together. Seriously, who does that? Joyce does that.
OR, she’s telling her friend, who she may or may not have an enormous girlcrush on, that it might, just perhaps, be romantic if someone were to say, suddenly realize that the person standing by their side (and wearing an orange t-shirt) was actually the perfect person match for her, then they could get married and become the first lesbian co-presidents and have a dozen lesbian babies together Haha I’m not talking about us, silly Dorothy, I just mean in general terms it might be romantic if that happened to somebody.
joyce whether intentional or not it really feels like you are playing the Iago to Dorothy’s Othello here. Quit filling her head with bad thoughts and paranoia pla.
I’d expect this reaction from pretty much anyone who has absolutely no experience with an actual relationship, for herself or seen it with her equally sheltered friends, beyond what she’s read in exaggerated romance fan fiction. It’s ignorance, not cruelty.
I’m interested in Joyce’s motivations here, but not really worried about them. She’s extremely sheltered and has been raised to believe that it’s all on the woman to keep a relationship pure (no sex before marriage) and true. She’s supposed to be the gatekeeper and the watchwoman. I think she is genuinely worried about Walky and Dorothy. Possibly also nervously chattering because of nightmares 🙁
One of the things I find fascinating about the comments sections for webcomics is how often character actions are assumed to be part of a methodical, deliberate, and intentional plan.
Human nature. In the absence of concrete facts we invent elaborate and often negative ideas behind intention and motivation. Something I am very familiar with having Attention Deficit Disorder. People LOVE to assume the worst about you- so unexpected behavior stemming a missed social cue becomes a deliberate malicious action on your part.
Or you know the result of the feelings that character has. XD Like… everybody has motivations. Characters and real people. Motivations don’t have to be part of a sustained character arc. For example, Joyce goes to the cafeteria because she is hungry. That is what motivates her to go get food.
What I was saying, evidently not clearly enough, is that I don’t think Joyce has ulterior motives. I think she’s just trying to be a good friend, and perhaps a bit chattier than she would be if not for bad dreams, which I admitted openly was a guess.
Lots of people are assuming all kinds of big conspiracy-esque things about the conversation, but I’m not one of them.
I’m not sure if this is a ‘new’ thing, but that sounds very close to an interpretation of “I kissed dating goodbye” that I heard in more fundamental circles of my church. Basically, ‘dating’ is too sin driven and secular, so kids were encouraged to become friends and then just naturally transition from friendship direct to marriage. Guaranteed to prevent any sort of pre-marital hanky panky! (This does not prevent any sort of pre-marital hanky panky)
Loading ...
TALK THE TALK AND WALK THE WALK…Y
FORK THE PORK
BAKE THE SNAKE
Shake & Bake?
Wake & Bake! ☀
Trust the bust
Like the Mike
Bury the Mary
…Despair-ah the Sarah?
Willis, your characters have some hard-ass names to rhyme, you know that?
VERMOUTH THE RUTH
Internets—several, just for you…
No, please no. We need to wean her and Billie off of the liquid refreshments of an intoxicating sort! I don’t expect it to happen over night, or without occasional relapsing, but rhyming her name with booze won’t help!
(Although, while I’d rather see them going at it sober… No, bad me! Get that mental image of Billie taking a long drink of Ruth Vermouth out of your head! No! Bad!)
Okay, I’ve seen a lot of these types of posts with regards to Billie and Ruth, and held my tongue until now, but it’s type to speak up.
There is NOTHING wrong with enjoying alcohol. NOTHING.
That is not to say Billie and Ruth do not have issues. They both have very serious issues they should see a therapist about. Alcohol is not, however the problem. Their alcohol use is an attempt to cope with the other issues in their lives that they do not know how else to deal with and are overwhelmed by the very idea of facing.
They do not need to quit drinking, they need to learn self control. They need to know when it is okay to lose control and when it isn’t. They need self confidence, and they need to shake the self image they both have that they are worthless.
None of these things are caused by the drinking. They are what causes the drinking. Them quitting alcohol is treating a symptom, not the disease. Assuming that either of them possessed the strength to quit, which they don’t, it would only make things harder for them because they now would have no coping mechanism to deal with their own feelings of inadequacy. In Ruth’s case, the problem is exacerbated by the fact that her parents were killed by a drunk, but that is only a wrinkle in the fabric that is her negative self image. She thinks she is worthless, and does things to cope with that image that only end up justifying it in her own eyes. She will never be able to quit drinking until she likes herself.
Billie on the other hand has severe abandonment issues. She drinks to forget that, in her eyes, no one really cares about her. It’s why cheerleading was so important to her, it’s why she went to Walky when things started to fall apart, it’s why she has latched onto Ruth, who has been nothing but awful to her since day one, because in Billie’s mind, Ruth’s behavior at least shows she cares.
Both of these women use alcohol to cope with their problems, but it is not in and of itself their problem.
I will totally admit that this MIGHT be true. But it is also completely true that for some people alcohol is 100% a problem in and of itself. There are a lot of people who slide so far into addiction that alcohol becomes their life, and some people can only be cured of that addiction by avoiding so much as a sip of booze. So yes, there are certainly big problems in their lives that they turned to drinking to “deal” with. But I’d wager that the alcohol will not make their lives one jot easier, and indeed will probably make solving their core issues far more difficult than they otherwise would be.
The thing is, the booze is just making their issues worse. Booze is just an object. it’s neither good nor evil. But they’re using that object as a crutch and a band-aid, sticking their heads in the sand to their bigger problems.
Until they remove that crutch, and find a healthier way of healing, that’s not just a band-aide, they’re just going to go down the slippery slope of “It’s not that bad!” until they’re dead in a ditch.. or dead in walky’s bed bare assed, where Dorothy finds them and her legs start accusing Walky of cheating on her via cadavers.
shaking her ass like a bee playing charades…
Thank you. I’ve been feeling the same way for a while now about those two, and wasn’t entirely sure why or what it was. This pins it down a lot for me. Well said!
“None of these things are caused by the drinking. They are what causes the drinking. Them quitting alcohol is treating a symptom, not the disease”
Alcoholism -is- a disease. I think you’re playing with fire here with your flippant attitude towards its destructive nature.
At one point you could have argued that a person just needed self control yet could still drink, but this isn’t the case for people with alcoholism.
So yeah, Alcohol is a problem.
While alcohol may just be a symptom, it serves as gaping wound that becomes an infection and prevents any hope of healing. When you’re drinking to hide from your problem, it follows that you need to STOP DRINKING if you’re ever going to face them.
There’s no world where the kind of drinking Ruth and Billie are getting up to is a good thing. I know that’s not what you meant, but that’s why it needs no defense.
I would respectfully disagree. Especially in Ruth’s case where its established in her own words that the alcoholic is fueling the depression cycle. The alcoholism itself links directly back to the original source of the depression and would be a very large factor in her self-loathing. Neither character has an option of drinking responsilby at this point. They both need to stop, the sooner the better.
Yes, if both characters were real human beings they’d desperately need professional psychologically assistant to help get at the root emotional issues. But that’s never easy for someone already caught, and it certainly doesn’t absolve alcohol’s role. In various militaries there is something called a “force multiplier,” which means something that dramatically increases a groups effectiveness. Alcohol is a depression multiplier, it makes depression much worse.
You are correct that there is nothing wrong with enjoying alcohol responsibly, but that’s not the same as giving it a free pass. Pre-existing depression + alcohol = very bad. Ruth and Billie need to stop drinking, combined with counseling. Doing either alone won’t be enough.
Is that avatar from the D&D arcade game? Because, if so, you are awesome.
If someone posted the same set of things but, say, about heroin, would you consider that valid?
When you have a dependency on a drug (and a lot of alcoholics have literally developed a *chemical dependency*, which is why cold-turkey quiting can be fecking dangerous), THAT’S BAD, and in some cases, that *IS* literally the whole of your problems. And some people, through genetics or just crap luck, are more susceptible to developing a dependency/addiction. Sometimes, alcohol/alcoholism *is* the disease.
What caused them to become alcoholics is a problem, too. But that doesn’t mean alcoholism is just a symptom. It can (and, in the case of these two, I think, has) grown into a lovely little monster all of it’s own accord. Even if they resolved their other issues, they’d still have this to battle.
I really want in on this discussion, because I have opinions on the matter and I think it deserves a respectful, tactful discussion. However, since the posters above already have said anything I could have added in a tactful and respectful way I’m sort of lost.
Yes, alcohol is not their only problem, but yes alcohol is one of their problems, and drinking has a tendency of become a problem in its own right, not the least because how repeated drinking changes the body. They need help, and one of the things they need help with is finding a way of controlling their drinking. Speaking as an armchair psychologist with a limited view into their situation I would say that quitting altogether is much safer than trying to find a manageable middle ground. That “one glass is one too much” thing AA talks about does not come from nowhere.
Still, I agree that their issues tend to be oversimplified in these discussions. If they were real people we would be horribly unhelpful, and even as cartoons that we project some of our own hopes and fears to, we reduce complex issues to quick fixes.
Did you seriously just attempt to equivocate heroin with alcohol? Really? That’s your argument?
Heroin is a massively addictive drug that destroys the lives of almost everyone it touches. There is a reason it has never been as widespread cocaine, or marijuana, or alcohol, or even meth. The reason is because it KILLS most of it’s long term users. There is no such thing as a light user of heroin.
Alcoholism can be a problem, but that is not what is going on here. When I lived in the dorms I had a very good friend who was dependent on alcohol. She got the shakes if she didn’t have any on a given day. It was so bad that she would collect recycling from other residents for beer money. Alcohol dependence is not the need to get wasted. It’s the need to constantly have alcohol in your system. Billy and Ruth abuse alcohol, that’s obvious. But they are NOT alcoholics. They simply lack any developed coping mechanism for their other psychological issues. Ruth’s depression is the root issue, which she drinks to get away from, but due to her past, once she sobers up, that behavior reinforces the depression. If she were an alcoholic, the depression would have long since stopped being the reason for the drinking, the drinking would be a reason unto itself. Billie likewise reinforces her abandonment issues by making herself believe that she deserves to have everyone leave her, but again, the issues are the root cause, not the consequence, of her drinking.
And for the record, I quit smoking 8 months ago after 11 years. I’ve had friends who were alcoholics, meth addicts, and the full spectrum of psychological issues. I completely understand Billie because I struggle with the same abandonment issues. I’m not dismissing alcoholism as a problem, I’m saying that these two do not have it. They have very serious issues that are not alcohol dependance, and use alcohol abuse to escape them. Alcohol abuse =/= Alcohol Dependance. Alcohol Dependence = Alcoholism.
You’re right, but I expect that the “AA” theory of alcoholism will be pushed hard. For a culture that used to preach self-restraint, America has always been bad at the concept of moderation.
(For those who don’t know, AA is a giant lie. It has a success rate exactly the same as attempts to quit cold turkey.
http://www.wired.com/2010/06/ff_alcoholics_anonymous/2/ )
Speaking as the step-son of a man who clawed his way out of alcoholism and now works for the state to help alcoholics and other addicts break their own habits I’m gonna call totally BULLSHIT on this “AA is a giant lie” crap. Does it work for everyone? Absolutely not. Do plenty of people benefit enormously from AA or some similar network of support to beat their addictions? Abso-fucking-lutely. The truth is there are many different paths one can walk to sober up, and what works for one person might not work for another one. No two people’s brains are shaped quite the same way, so no two people will respond to addiction in quite the same way. What is most important is to find the path that works best for YOU, and under no circumstances accept the myth that there is only one solution.
Or, to sum it up, “AA is a giant lie” is itself a dangerous lie, just as awful as the statement “AA is the only solution”.
Missing the point. I am not arguing that alcoholism is not a problem. I am arguing that Billie and Ruth are not alcoholics. They abuse alcohol to cope with personal issues, but they don’t fiend. If the criteria of an alcohol is “Someone who enjoys getting drunk”, or “Someone who drinks to cope with their problems”, I don’t know anyone who isn’t an alcoholic. The definition I’ve always used is the same I use for every other addiction: “Someone who fiends for XXX”. I have drank plenty, smoked about 1/4 my weight in marijuana, and smoked a half a pack of cigarettes a day for 11 years. I’ve only ever fiended for cigarettes.
What is Fiending?
It’s the craving. It’s the need. You can’t understand it if you never felt it, and you don’t need it explained if you have. How it manifested with cigarettes was that I would pick half-smoked cigarettes out of my ashtray when I was out, bum cigarettes off complete strangers, yell at my loved ones over minor things because I was so on edge. The entire time I abused alcohol which a fair degree of frequency. But alcohol never had that kind of hold on me. I have, however, known people who did fiend for it. I had a fiend in the dorms who would collect recycling for beer money, but not to get drunk. She needed to have 2 beers every night or she couldn’t sleep. By 5 pm she would get the shakes. That is fiending. Billie and Ruth have not been shown fiending. They detoxed for a bit, but that’s not the same thing. You get over detoxing. Fiending never goes away. I’ve been 8 months without a cigarette and I still get the urge to bum a cigarette off a random stranger.
1) The entire time I abused alcohol *with* a fair degree of frequency
2) I had a *friend* in the dorms who would collect recycling for beer money, but not to get drunk.
Alcohol is an addictive substance. Some people (and unfortunately, entire ethnic groups too – I’m in one) are more vulnerable to developing alcohol addiction than others on a genetic level. It’s not just a case of a person becoming emotionally addicted; there are chemical elements too.
Evicerate the pony.
Blow the Joe
…Clamber the Amber…?
…Emblazon…the Jason…?
‘sa peener the Dina
Fill us, the Willis
Subpoena?
Be in, tha E-than!
That’s… one way to put it, Dorothy.
Bad Joyce! Don’t subliminally undermine people!
Right? Joyce is really gunning to be eating that rug. Walky is doing the best he can for his almost sister, and Joyce’s inability to understand social situations is no longer innocent.
That panel 4 face will haunt my dreams tonight.
Good gods, that face is terrifying.
It is Joyce’s panel 2 face that will haunt me… *shiver*
Her hair is becoming increasingly more frazzled.
Theroy: Her rationality comes from her hair.
Maybe Dotty also straightens her hair like Sal and in this universe strong shocking emotions cause hair to revert to its natural form.
Nah. In the previous page, she had her hair pushed back by her sweat band. The very topmost parts of her hair are still somewhat conformed to that previous shape. Watch, it’s actually getting *more* normal over time as gravity sets in.
That fucking face.
Do you mean her O face, or
the one immediately preceeding it?
*reads Dotty’s last line* “Sooo, that what tampons are for…” 😛
That is just barely funny enough to keep me from vomiting because of the basis for that joke. I suppose you deserve some kind of reward…. here’s an internet…. go nuts.
I’m just glad you didn’t rag on me for plugging a bloody joke like that. 😛
I’ll admit that was clever, but let’s not pad this thread with too heavy a flow of puns.
or you’ll vomit all ovaries face?
Bloody good show, that was the most visceral torrent of puns I’ve heard in a while.
Alright, enough is enough. I’m putting a stopper on this before anyone else decides to spout off.
We need to restrict puns like these to only a few times a month.
I guess if we didn’t, the comments would be too saturated.
(Trying to think of one more before bed) Uh… Uh…. PERIOD JOKE!….. (nailed it)
You people disgust me. Period.
There, how’s that?
I just don’t cotton to this kind of joking.
Of course they’ll stop entirely after a certain number of years.
Owwwww.
I’m not sorry. You’ve brought this all on yourself.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9-95uLna-P0
Or she’s just curious to see her boyfriend potentially in action
That final panel should be used as a response to questions people can’t answer (with slightly altered text to fit the situation)
Yes.
‘I’m not a rebel.’
‘Then why did you go to a party when your parents said not to?’
‘I DON’T KNOW. MAYBE MY DESIRE TO REBEL ESCAPES THROUGH MY LEGS.’
I once used “because unicorns don’t like lime jello” as a reason for something when bickering with my mother. I think we were arguing about which direction to commence crossing an intersection with.
It made sense at the time, in the sense that I didn’t want to make sense. “Here, have a non sequitur to indicate my frustration that we’re even having this argument.”
And then tomorrow, Dina answers the door.
I need a close up Dorothy in that last panel.
That’s gonna be my new Icon on everything.
Dammit Joyce, cant you just leave well enough alone?
And where is the fun in that? 😀
You’re right, a world where people just deal with their problems wouldn’t be very entertaining at all. It would be like
Joyce: Dorothy, rather than being all pissy and passive aggressive, I want you to know that it makes me a little jealous that you spend so much time with Walky instead of me.
Dorothy: Wow Joyce, I’m sorry I’ve made you feel that way, I’ll try to find more time for you and my other friends instead of using it all on Walky
OR…
Dorothy: I’m sorry Joyce, but I’m doing the best I can. I swear I’m doing my best to spend time with everyone while also keeping up with my studies
And then….
Dorothy: Thanks for telling me how you felt instead of doing something stupid and sitcom-y
right though! i thought we were past her annoying phase
Life is annoyance.
Well enough is an upstanding citizen, damnit!
HE’S GOT A FAMILY FOR CHRIST’S SAKE!
My irrationality escapes through my mouth.
Good thing it wasn’t trying to escape through her fist.
Welp, that face.
That…that just happened. Find me the brain bleach.
I hate it that happens.
Anyway I don’t like giving Joyce more ammo for her fantasy Bull shit but she has a point, I mean if you’ve seen any romantic Anime you’d know the entire child hood friends thing plays into effect a lot.
>>> if you’ve seen any romantic Anime
.
.
I’ve seen some with tentacles.
“I just want to marry the tentacle monster next door.”
I do my best to avoid that shit.
Dorothy, you’re full of shit and you know Joyce is right.
Uh, as outside viewers we know Dorothy is right and Joyce is wrong, so why would you say that?
Joyce really needs to shut up. She’s not helping. Like, at all.
Haha Like I said yesterday that’s kind of her thing.
I mean its been confirmed:http://www.dumbingofage.com/2014/comic/book-4/04-the-whiteboard-dong-bandit/godpertunity/
Anyone else notice that Joyce is still wearing her ‘sleeping attire’ from when she was up all night surfin’ da ‘net?
I think she is avoiding nightmares.
That second panel’s kinda ironic considering that pretty much all of their friends think Joyce and Dorothy are going to bang at some point
“Because you’re an awful friend, Joyce, that’s why!!”
“Because you JUST said you needed to swing by Walky’s room to see if Billie was there, or if he knew her whereabouts. Remember? Come on, it’s how this whole stupid conversation started!”
“HEY DOROTHY ARE YOU SURE YOU’RE NOT BEING CHEATED ON ARE YOU SURE ARE YOU SURE ARE YOU SURE ARE YOU SURE ARE YOU SURE EVERYONE YOU KNOW WILL ONE DAY DIE”
Joyce is like the shame orb from QC, isn’t she?
I can’t shake the feeling that Walky/Dorothy is heading for catastrophe…
At this point, I have that feeling constantly about everyone in this comic. Better prep your “DAMN YOU WILLIS”s while you still have the chance. Something tells me we’re going to need them ready for full auto at some point.
Yeah, I remember the part in QC where everything went to hell all at once. Come to think of it, the same thing happened in Shortpacked. Maybe Willis is just getting the jump on it this time. The number of volatile relationships in this comic is rapidly approaching critical mass.
don’t worry walky is doing naked yoga with ethan what will go wrong
Eventually. Either that or Dorothy fails to get into Yale. Which would be interesting too.
I really don’t think that’s romantic, Joyce. I think I’m the anti-romantic but I think it’d be kinda weird to date someone you’re that close to.
Keep in mind that lots of “romance” is bullshit, like ANYTHING THAT COMES OUT OF HOLLYWOOD
See also: the entire concept of a “love-hate relationship”
Aren’t relationships you plan to continue for as long as possible kind of meant to be between you and someone you ARE close to or plan to become close to? That’s the only relationship Joyce would ever consider having personally – a long term one where the people involved should become as close as possible. The closest people can be without being related is being childhood friends – so of course them dating would seem romantic to Joyce.
But biologically, if you are raised in close proximity to someone for many years, your body turns off your ability to be attracted to them – hence why siblings do not become attracted to each other unless they were separated from a young age and why childhood friends can end up with one-sided attractions when one does lose the ability to feel the attraction but the other doesn’t for whatever reason. So it isn’t a common thing for childhood friends to form a relationship except in fiction.
Really hoping that yelling wakes Walky up. He’s horribly ill-equipped to handle this conversation this time of morning, which should make him having to either incredibly fun or incredibly gutwrenching.
“Billie needs me right now. So I let her sleep with me”.
Becky is still waiting for you to notice her, Joyce.
I feel like a few weeks ago, someone asked on tumblr whether we’d hear from Becky again any time soon, and the answer was kind of cryptic. But now I can’t find that post!
If you donate to Willis’ Patreon, bonus strip this month is going to be Becky! yayyyyyyy Becky!
Indeed. Joyce, follow your own romantic ideals and hook up with Becky, then deal with the fall-out.
Shipping is underway.
I’m genuinely waiting for this to happen
I’m seriously more than half expecting to find out that the reason Becky hasn’t been answering her phone is that about a week into Bible college she ended up having sloppy drunken/stoned sex with some other girl who she didn’t even know, and now she can’t face Joyce to tell her she didn’t save it until Indiana made it legal for her to marry her.
Stop not helping, Joyce! Ship another couple for a change already.
Are you talking about Billie/Walky, Dorothy/Walky, or Joyce/Dorothy?
(I’m holding out for Joyce/Dorothy/Walky, myself.)
“so that’s why she runs in the morning”
Yep, this is a real thing for some people in case you were wondering
Dem freckles.
I think this may be my favorite ending to a DOA strip yet…
Nah, my vote still goes to
“I hope to God you’re talking about what I think you’re talking about, because God help her if there’s more than one”.
Oooh, good point… forgot about that one.
Man, if I didn’t know any better, I’d say Joyce is trying to stoke that distrust.
Probably trying to prepare the way so that she can make a move on Dorothy. -nods-
“Math is easy; you just have to follow the steps”.
She says sinisterly as she holds up some sort of incriminating object.
OK Joyce, that’s just nasty. Stop.
Please Joyce, end this shipcest!
Why are they over there, Joyce? I dunno, maybe because BILLIE IS ALSO DOROTHY’S FRIEND AND MAYBE DOROTHY WANTS TO MAKE SURE SHE’S OKAY? Also wow way to be the worst friend ever would like me to make you a medal? I could knit you a hat that says BAD bongo on it, but we’d have to be clear that you’re bad, and a bongo, not Nicki Minaj.
Eh I think they’re more acquaintances than anything else, having rarely interacted with one another. Dorothy herself has said she knows little about Billie.
Now that it’s been brought up, I wanna see more Dorothy-Billie interactions.
joyce this ain’t cool!!!!!!!!!!
Like I said yesterday, Joyce knows exactly what she’s doing.
No, Joyce. No it is not. In fact, it is second only to ‘Old bitter woman convincing young woman to give up her professional life to follow True Love’ in its annoyance. (Dammit, Slings and Arrows, why did you ruin yourself by doing that?)
That must have been in the third season, yes? I have a hard time finding third season episodes.
Man, that was the best show (also I agree 100% about that trope).
Joyce would definitely go for formula manga romance, figuring she just described it…
Does Joyce not get the concept that people can be childhood friends without romantic attachments to each other I know that she’s sheltered but, sheesh…
Some people don’t get that people can be friends. No, scratch that: A lot of people don’t.
And I didn’t forget a “just” in there: Friendship is beautiful thing, and it infuriates me when its meaning is reduced to “when a female has the audacity to deny a male sex.
If we’re talking friendzoning, I’ve noticed in the last year or so people having been objecting to it while characterising it as “when a female has the audacity to deny a male sex.” Odd thing is, everywhere I’ve seen it used by guys, it’s been “female only thinks of a male as a friend while he was hoping for a romantic relationship. I’m not sure why this changed, or why it is that the change seems to come from people wanting something to complain about.
Let’s just be friends.
It hasnt changed. Not at all.
Like all tropes of male/female relationships, its simply subject to abuse by a minority of jerk males. ( not unlike the Female version of “Gary Stu” ).
Some Feminists, in my humble unasked for opinion are doing a very foolish thing. They are taking any neutral language that heterosexual males use to describe their relationships with women and redefining them with the worst-loaded sexists uses they can find, thus stigmatizing the majority. As a Non Het- male I think this is incredibly foolish and can only backfire. Its switching gears from the fight for full equality ( Which is NOT finished by a Looong shot and seriously needs all our help) to use Feminism to engage In Heterosexual Dating-Gender Power Games.
In America Feminism has a branding problem. Most people agree with Feminisms aim of full equality, yet loathe to identify as a feminist.
By Redefining the word, as a person being nice purely for sex, it attempts to shame and stigmatize for having a sex drive and being interested in untimate relations with women. Are their cases where Feminism id correct? Absolutely. But Redefining the language is shameless and naked case of Verbal Domination. Its actaully a Brain-washing technique called “loading the language” This does two things: IF deflects 100% criticism of women for using men also, and it denies heterosexuual men the right ti think about their relationship in neutral terms.
You can repeat Everything I just said with recent attempts to convert the term “nice guy” into ‘evil manipulative passive-aggressive douchbag. ‘ ( which no doubt some men calling themselves that actually are. ) Its only natural that some men want to distinguish themselves from the jerks — who they may have seen torment themselves, their mothers, sisters and friends . Maybe the recent “He for She” campaign would be more successful if Feminsist didnt stigmatize men for being “nice”
This is stereo-typing. Its bigotry. I see this as the Female version of the disgusting Pick-up-artists language games. Its hard not to.
Note: I am not a het. male, nor have I ever self-identified as a “nice guy” .
Sorry for the rant.
Yeah skippy, I have entirely too many bros in my presence on a regular basis. It’s not the feminists who redefined it as ‘denying a dude sex’. Also, will remember to consult with dudes on how best to advance my goals, that is 100% at the top of my priority list.
“By Redefining the word, as a person being nice purely for sex, it attempts to shame and stigmatize for having a sex drive and being interested in untimate relations with women.”
What. No. Modern feminism is, if anything, far too interested in sucking up to dudes’ sexuality. Also again premise wrong here.
“You can repeat Everything I just said with recent attempts to convert the term “nice guy” into ‘evil manipulative passive-aggressive douchbag. ‘ ( which no doubt some men calling themselves that actually are. ) ”
Have you read ANYTHING about that? AT ALL? Because I’m starting to think you haven’t.
And for a dude complaining bout brainwashing (HAHAHAHAHAHA), I like how you’re not even looking at the status quo on these matters. You’re just that embedded in the fucking culture, aren’t you?
Uh, it’s not the feminists that are doing that. It is definitely the dudes, who took “unrequited love”, a neutral and already existing concept, and turned it into a thing that women do to men.
(If you look into any male-dominated social space, you will see that those who cry “friendzone” honestly believe women are never rejected under any circumstances, hence the gendering of the term.)
It’s just… honestly pretty hilarious that you think friendzone was “twisted” by feminists. Funnier that you think Nice Guy(TM) stigmatizes niceness. Like… That’s not even remotely what’s happening.
I can only guess you have these perceptions because you’ve never actually read feminists at the source, instead taking at face value what anti-feminists claim feminists say, do, and want.
The people who should actually be working on their image are the men who are interested in women. They’re the ones who go from calling out “hey beautiful” on the street to shouting, “bongo, I WAS TALKING TO YOU” in three seconds flat. They’re the ones who send creepy OKCupid messages.
They’re the ones who go on killing sprees after being romantically rejected. (Or, as in Rodger’s specific case, deciding they would be rejected ahead of time. And yes I have to specify “in his case”, because men have gone on killing sprees for the same reason before.)
Maybe the men who want to “distinguish themselves from the jerks” should make more of an effort to speak out against the jerks, instead of pinning a special snowflake award on their shirts and getting mad when basic human decency doesn’t guarantee romantic love with the women of their choice?
Maybe they should object to the pick up artists who blatantly advertise themselves as successful rapists and give tips to their followers on how to accomplish the same.
These aren’t part of some feminist conspiracy, buddy. Feminists have done nothing but shine a flashlight into the bowls of Reddit, but link to articles on A Voice For Men; they do nothing but provide places for women who have received gross and sometimes scary messages on sites like OKCupid to share their horror stories (almost always censoring out the man’s name), so that they know they aren’t alone.
The fact that there’s so much shit to find? That you can easily with a second of googling find millions of pages of MEN talking about how “this bongo” they never bothered asking out “just” wants to be friends, and how awful and unfair and CRIMINAL that is? (Literally you can find people suggesting that the government should provide them with the women of their choice on pain of prison.)
That is not feminism’s doing.
I romantacize friendships, so i agree with you.
The rest of the world seems to have a lot of trouble grasping this.
My opinion is, is if a person cant be my friend, whether or not I lay you,
whether or not a sexual relationship lasts ( as most dont ) , then you dont deserve to get in my pants at all.
Gay men are worse. Instead of a’ friendzone’ they have a ‘Whore-Zone’. If you get ‘whorezoned’ you are socially shunned, for all but sex.
“Friendzone” is actually a compliment. Albeit a back-handed one.
Personally, I would be Honored to be “friendzoned” by a woman.
Heterosexual men naturally dislike it, because it conveys lower social status, then Female-Female friendships and Male-Female sexual relationships.
Its also potentially a very unstable and disposable relationship, likely to be ended any time a woman gets into a serious romantic relationship; In my experience. YMMV
It isn’t really lower in social status than female-female friendships though – I don’t measure my friendships by gender, I measure them by how long I can tolerate someone personally (as I am an introvert to a degree).
The only reason such a friendship should be unstable is if a) the guy is a jerk, or b) the guy doesn’t actually care about being a part of the female’s life unless they are in a romantic relationship with them.
Because otherwise, friendships with guys shouldn’t be any more disposable than any other friendship when you form a relationship.
Certainly no rational person would voluntarily go running at such an ungodly hour.
Does Dorothy have measles?
Not measles, freckles.
She needs to get them looked at.
A) Fuck you, Freckles are beautiful.
B) See A).
Ha! A heavily-freckled acquaintance once told me he’d just run into a very concerned lady who thought he should see a doctor about them. She hadn’t much exposure to Caucasians and didn’t know they were a perfectly normal (and harmless) skin colouring.
I am reminded of her. 🙂
Freckles are actually not just a white person thing. Same with light hair and eyes. And no, you don’t have to have a white person in your family tree for these things either 😉
“irrationality escapes through my legs”
This is legitimate science.
First the irrationality centers in the pelvic area, then it shoots straight up to the brain, and then down through the legs.
I mean, that’s how Dorothy hooked up with Walky in the first place…?
I checked the comments specifically to make sure someone said, “I keep my irrationality just above my legs.”
Good job!
Dear Joyce
One of your best friends is in a relationship that, even with its attendant issues, has the potential to be a really good thing for the two people involved in it. Sabotaging that because it feeds your personal fantasies is not the act of a good friend.
Sincerely
Common Sense
P.S: The people around you are not dolls you can play a real life game of house with.
Thank you! Well said, on all counts!
Potentially hurting others entirely for the reason of ones personal fantasies is a bit of a sore spot for me. Thanks for portraying that aspect of the strip when I was too distraught to do so.
I wish MY irrationality escaped through my legs, it usually decides to take the far shorter route to my mouth instead.
Agh, why is everyone hating on Joyce for saying these things, this is not a surprising Joyce thing to say. At the end of the day, if Dorothy really did believe in her convictions that Walky and Billie wouldn’t be a thing, she wouldn’t have walked all the way over to his room out of worry.
Joyce is just looking out for her friend, yeah she’s wrong about it, but she’s just doing what she thinks is the right thing to do.
because we think she has ulterior motives.
Also just yesterday’s strip she said she needed to swing by here. So kind of a PERFECTLY NORMAL thing for Dorothy to head over with her on their way out.
I’m kind of disappointed that Dorothy’s already forgotten about that part.
As I recall Clinton had the same problem.
Hate you joyce
Shes telling her friend, who might be scared that her boyfriend is cheating, that its romantic if billie and walky got together. Seriously, who does that? Joyce does that.
OR, she’s telling her friend, who she may or may not have an enormous girlcrush on, that it might, just perhaps, be romantic if someone were to say, suddenly realize that the person standing by their side (and wearing an orange t-shirt) was actually the perfect person match for her, then they could get married and become the first lesbian co-presidents and have a dozen lesbian babies together Haha I’m not talking about us, silly Dorothy, I just mean in general terms it might be romantic if that happened to somebody.
You got to be hip to Joyce’s unique comedy stylings.
I don’t think Joyce is doing this on purpose. More of inexperience with these situations, I believe. Benefit of the doubt for her. 🙂
joyce whether intentional or not it really feels like you are playing the Iago to Dorothy’s Othello here. Quit filling her head with bad thoughts and paranoia pla.
What is paranoia pla?
….i meant to type pls OTL
I’d expect this reaction from pretty much anyone who has absolutely no experience with an actual relationship, for herself or seen it with her equally sheltered friends, beyond what she’s read in exaggerated romance fan fiction. It’s ignorance, not cruelty.
Joyce, you really need to learn when to stop. I mean, just don’t talk… for at least a little while.
Catching up to the comic sucks.
joyce stop being a butt and trying to ruin good relationships,
These boots were made for walky
I love the last panel. Please do a small spinoff or something with Deranged Dorothy.
Man boy howdy, that punchline reads so differently if you don’t bother reading the rest of the strip first.
Man, I don’t think Joyce has once made that Panel 2 face and then said something that wasn’t awful.
I think what she says here is a lot more awful in context than it would be in isolation.
Or are that many people repulsed by the idea of falling in love with someone you’ve known since you were young?
Oh, Joyce. I’m not entirely convinced you aren’t subconsciously shipping Walky with someone else so that you can have Dorothy to yourself.
… Not necessarily that way, but… potentially.
Also Dorothy’s hair looks really cute like that.
I’m interested in Joyce’s motivations here, but not really worried about them. She’s extremely sheltered and has been raised to believe that it’s all on the woman to keep a relationship pure (no sex before marriage) and true. She’s supposed to be the gatekeeper and the watchwoman. I think she is genuinely worried about Walky and Dorothy. Possibly also nervously chattering because of nightmares 🙁
I don’t think Joyce has “motivation” here.
One of the things I find fascinating about the comments sections for webcomics is how often character actions are assumed to be part of a methodical, deliberate, and intentional plan.
Human nature. In the absence of concrete facts we invent elaborate and often negative ideas behind intention and motivation. Something I am very familiar with having Attention Deficit Disorder. People LOVE to assume the worst about you- so unexpected behavior stemming a missed social cue becomes a deliberate malicious action on your part.
Or you know the result of the feelings that character has. XD Like… everybody has motivations. Characters and real people. Motivations don’t have to be part of a sustained character arc. For example, Joyce goes to the cafeteria because she is hungry. That is what motivates her to go get food.
What I was saying, evidently not clearly enough, is that I don’t think Joyce has ulterior motives. I think she’s just trying to be a good friend, and perhaps a bit chattier than she would be if not for bad dreams, which I admitted openly was a guess.
Lots of people are assuming all kinds of big conspiracy-esque things about the conversation, but I’m not one of them.
Joyce is very perceptive when she’s wearing her Velma colors.
Does that make Dorothy Daphne or Shaggy?
Come on Joyce! You already learned that romactic fiction is all lies.
I’m not sure if this is a ‘new’ thing, but that sounds very close to an interpretation of “I kissed dating goodbye” that I heard in more fundamental circles of my church. Basically, ‘dating’ is too sin driven and secular, so kids were encouraged to become friends and then just naturally transition from friendship direct to marriage. Guaranteed to prevent any sort of pre-marital hanky panky! (This does not prevent any sort of pre-marital hanky panky)
Misread that as “escapes between my legs” and had horrible mental images.
MY TEXT IS TOO STRONG FOR YOUR TEXT BUBBLE
Panel 4 should be a meme
Oh my. Panel 2 practically drips with foreshadowing.
Dorothy in Panel 4 appears to be channeling Lynn from “I Am Arg!”.
Guess Joyce doesn’t believe in what she says as much as her mouth agrees with.
I just caught this foreshadowing. Damn you Willis!
Holy mother of foreshadowing o_o