“I would also naturally need to record the event for later study. A fellow student, Roz, has offered to provide the necessary equipment in return for “10%”. I do not understand her terms. How may I furnish her with 10% of a sex?”
“The best case scenario were obviously multiple cameras from different angles, operated by colleagues (note: get other scientifically interested people to work with me. Preferably a few men for the (possibly) different perspective.) to make sure every interesting detail is captured on video.” Of course it might turn out difficult for her to find sufficiently motivaled males to evaluate the many hours of footage. Males are known to be lazy slobs.
(I have already written this comment, but it seems like it has been eaten by the system. Later comments of mine already appeared so I “repost” this. Sorry if this ends up as a double post.)
I’m not sure that cancels out. Is masturbation really 10% of the sex of a ten-person-orgy? Wouldn’t rather the number of sexual encounters, i.e. the cardinality of the vertex set of the local subgraph of the hookup graph, be divisible by ten? And even then, wouldn’t we need to work with weighted edges? How would we determine the weight? And could the edges be directed?
I would think it’s about how much time is spent interacting sexually with the rest of the orgy. So to get 10% of the sex one would need to partake in 10% of all sexual contact in the orgy. Now where it gets complex is how to balance sexual contact that is initiated by a particular subject versus sexual contact initiated by others toward them. And what do we do when one person has sexual contact with multiple persons, does this count the same as when all attention is focused on a single individual. And that’s not even talking about different levels and types of sexual context.
It’s complex, but with a nice grant I think we can work it out!
And so it was that commenters of a certain comic on the internet began their journey to develop the new science and mathematics that would bring about a new age of man:
Actually the mathematical tools at our disposal are already quite powerful. We’d just need to decide for a model. (I suggest a general approach: A map from the entire time in question to the directed, weighted graphs representing the current orgy constellations at each given point in time. Or equivalently the full directed graph and a map from each edge to a “time to weight” map for that edge. Simplifications of this model for specific situations should prove to be easy.) The hard part is figuring out what exactly the weights mean and how we measure it as accurately as possible.
It sounds like Dina is _currently_ asexual, but is curious. She is taking her time, waiting for the right guy^D^D^Dscientifically rigorous situation to come along.
I am probably sexual and Dina nontheless reminds me very much of myself. I hope Dina doesn’t turn out to be asexual, since this brings with it the risk of reinforcing the did-not-have-a-significant-other-has-to-be-closeted-or-ace-stereotype some people seem to have. (Also I’d like to see that Slipshine, mostly for scientific reasons.)
Considering the word of Willis tells is sexuality doesn’t change across universes I’m going to attribute this to Dina being Dina rather than her being asexual.
I’m pretty sure Walkyverse Dina was not asexual (trying to minimize the spoilers) so I doubt this Dina is either, but we can’t know for sure.
True I guess all we really know she’s not aromantic. However she’s shown even less interest in romance than she has in sex so far (with this being her first hint of interest in either).
She went a whole month without expressing romantic attraction on panel. I don’t think that’s strange or even noteworthy. Certainly it doesn’t outweigh the fact that she explicitly, by her own word, has yet to experience sexual attraction, and by word of god is attracted to men across universes.
You sound like you’re just a little dead set on treating aro/ace as a single package.
I’m not sure where you got that from at all (heck I’m Heterosexual and Panromantic myself, I’m well aware these things don’t have to line up).
I was just pointing out that in this universe she’s not shown any indication of romantic feelings yet while she’s at the very least shown curiosity with regards to sex. That doesn’t really exclude anything, her romantic and sexual identities could line up or could be completely different.
What I was trying to say was that based on the fact we’ve not seen her show romantic interest in anyone yet she could just as easily be bi/panromantic as heteromantic, which says nothing about her sexuality. Though I admit I might have said it in a slightly awkward way, and if I could I’d edit it for clarity.
Ah, yeah. I agree with that. But also I think that since we know for a fact she’s attracted to men, and have nothing indicating she’s attracted to anybody else, heteromantic is still the most applicable word to describe her romantic orientation despite bi/pan being possibilities.
Very true, that’s why I said the only thing we know for certain. Heteromantic is probably more likely than her being bi/pan but there’s leeway there, just like there is with her sexual inclination.
Either way I’m going to enjoy finding out, I just hope it’s not as drama filled as it was with others, not sure I could take that with Dina.
I’m still a little grumpy after having the Legend of Korra ending spoiled to me on the same frikkin’ day the episode aired, with no more warning than “Hey, guess what SPOILER! Xbeenfnzv* is official!”. I mean, I was hoping for Xbeenfnzv* to happen, but I tried to keep my expectations low. The spoilers ramped those expectations up to eleven, and so I got massively disappointed when instead of kissing and relationship talk and maybe making it official to their friends, I just got some last-second handholding.
I’m sure that if I had kept reading the spoilers, I would have found out about the details, but when I come across a spoiler for something that I want to experience first-hand, I’m really not inclined to keep reading.
So please, people: Don’t do off-topic spoilers with minimal warning for brand new things, no matter how awesome they are.
*Like Chris Phoenix says above, decode at rot13.com.
Can this, like, rampant encryptification of text not be a thing? I kind of have to moderate this site and it’s not super fun to have to run all this shit through another site just to make sure someone’s not plowing ethnic slurs onto here.
I bring this up because suddenly, today, this is frigging everywhere.
I don’t derive pleasure from picking up the groceries, but I do it because it pleases my fiancee. An asexual could place similar significance to having sex with their romantic partner.
You have just described a depressingly large fraction of marriages.
BTW, given the complexity of HTML tags available, a “preview” or “go back and edit” option would be nice.
And, even though I included cite=”DieKatzchen” in the blockquote statement, nothing of the sort appeared. What does cite mean, if not “attribute the block quote to someone”?
Um, she has shown a little bit of romantic feelings. Remember when Walky’s notes ended up in Dina’s hands? She practically fell in love at first sight. Of course, Walky had to ruin it later by saying dinos with feathers are just lame, but I don’t think she found out who wrote those notes.
I actually linked to that comic further down. But I’m not quite sure if that counts or not, as her feelings weren’t really directed at anything other than an abstract concept. So I don’t know where that would fall on the romantic spectrum though I think it doesn’t prohibit her from being aromantic.
I’m not saying she is actually aromantic though, I’m inclined to believe that while she might be asexual, though I lean more towards not having interest right now rather than being truly asexual, she’s definitely not aromantic).
However you’re right in saying that comic demonstrates that she is capable of experiencing love in the abstract regardless of her romantic inclination. In the end I just don’t think we’ve seen enough of her showing or talking about her feelings to be remotely sure about her romantic inclination at this point (though we obviously can, and will, speculate).
Asexual: Having minimal or no interest in sex.*
Celibate: Voluntarily refraining from sex.
Not getting any: Involuntarily forgoing sex.
*Does not rule out an interest in a romantic relationship, just the actual sex part. Can include making out and heavy petting or not, depending on the person.
Yeah I don’t think Asperger is necessarily related to sexuality at all. Now I can’t speak of females but as an Aspie guy I can say I’m pretty sure my level of sexuality is above average.
That being said it does seem that there’s a chance that Dina’s obsession with science and dinosaurs means there’s really no time or interest for sexual matters, however that wouldn’t exactly mean she’s asexual, just that she’s not currently interested in sex.
Autism as a whole does seem to correlate to asexuality, which follows, since Autism as a whole has social blindness/disconnection inherent to it.
But it’s a massively wide spectrum that is currently being used as a catch-all for most socially-non-fluid neuro-atypical individuals, so it’s hard to specify a singular subset as being more or less ace.
But, for reference, I’m part of several large asexual groups, and a fairly reliably 80% of people per group tend to also be ace. Likewise, key Autistic figures such as Temple Grandin have given the strong impression that they’re asexual.
But of course, it’s a wide spectrum (and one that’s currently being used as a generic diagnosis similar to how ADHD used to be- though in fairness, far, far more accurately) so assumptions shouldn’t ever be made.
Now, Asperger’s I’m less familiar with, but all the Aspies I know are sexual, though, they aren’t super driven by it either- they like it, but in the same way most people like chocolate or playing games they like or something. It’s not like the more mainstream portrayal of hypersexuality, and sex being the best, most important, most validating thing ever.
Of course, since that IS a social portrayal, it’s hard to tell who REALLY is like that, and how many people just follow along because of their socially-affirmed expectations on the matter.
Autism and sexuality is a rather complex subject for many reasons, not least of all because the vast majority of Autism research is focused on children. And like you alluded to there’s the fact that it is very difficult to disentangle sexuality and social behavior. Combine that with the fact that, like you said, right now autism represents an enormous spectrum of developments, which might not even all refer to the same actual phenomenon, but simply have a high overlap in symptoms.
I must admit my knowledge about asexuality and autism is limited, as it isn’t something that I’ve personally experienced, nor has it really come up in my reading of and discussions with autism researchers (which is highly linked to most of these having a focus on childhood autism). However what I do know is that I do have a more complex than typical sexuality (I would consider myself heterosexual but panromantic) and my gender identity is not typical (I identify as male, but I often struggle to identify with all the male behaviors and feel much more at home with women).
I guess this fits with the fact that it’s a wide spectrum with the only real common theme being the fact that development is not typical, which means many unique variations exist, and also means that people who developed with autistic traits have more varied (and therefor more atypical) sexual, gender and romantic identities. It’s interesting you brought up Temple Grandin, because I don’t really identify with how she experiences autism, so it’s not surprising I also experience sexuality differently.
With regards to Aspergers it gets even more complex, not in the least because the diagnosis doesn’t actually exist anymore (I used it as it was used above me). Generally though it refers to people who developed with autism but have no language deficiency. As language is a social construct this often means they also aren’t as limited in social interactions (it’s much harder to learn languages without social aspects such as shared attention) so it would not be surprising if, on average, the sexuality of people with Aspergers are slightly more typical (though as I mentioned before there’s a lot of variance and uniqueness even here). And of course because, like you said, much of what we consider sexuality is social behavior, it’s very hard to fully comprehend or study (as an example, though I’m panromantic, my lack of social confidence has prohibited me from really acting on it beyond a few occasions all of which happened to be heteroromantic in nature).
Finally there’s the link between hypersexuality and autism, but this is a different animal altogether. This is far more linked to repetitive and hyperfocused behavior (common traits of autism) than being truly sexual, it’s simply the continuous exhibition of a particular behavior (and is far less common among those with higher functioning autism).
TL:DR. Autism is a very varied phenomenon, and there’s no such thing as a typical autistic person. What is true however is that there does seem to be more variation than there is in the typical population which means links seem to exist between autism and a host non-typical sexual and gender identities. And one must always remember that the severity of the autistic traits has a huge effect on what kind of behavior is shown by any individual.
I think the point is that there are many many shades of Asperger’s, so while it might be true that there’s a higher prevalence of asexuality among people with Asperger it doesn’t necessarily go hand in hand, every inch of the sexual spectrum is represented within the Asperger community.
Wouldn’t there be something in between though? Some stage where a deep attraction or something is needed to remove the inhibitions around it? Sex isn’t just some minor thing, and getting to it would be complicated, especially for people who aren’t pre-programed with the social norms.
The one asperger’s guy I know is poly and has a lot of sex. Doesn’t seem to be a compulsion, he just is very very good at making it happen and making it work for him.
Wild. I am aspie, and I can’t imagine the effort that would take. And the unpleasantness of all that social interaction would far outweigh any pleasure from the sex.
And of course I think if I did achieve a casual hook up it would really be bad for me. I wouldn’t have thought so before, but ever since I had sex (with the person I love) I have felt that sex without that emotional connection would really hurt.
Just like the thread above, just goes to show how much variety there is among aspies
Personally I’m with you on this one. However I could see how it would work, in the end if you learn the right behaviors it would not be that difficult, and potentially enjoyable (setting it up I mean). I sort of have a similar thing when it comes to scientific discussions, it’s just a very natural and smooth situation for me, so it never really costs me energy and I always enjoy it. Someone with asperger’s who has the same thing with flirting could easily have a lot of success without it being overwhelming or unpleasant.
I’m with you on the casual hookup though. While I do have sexual urges, I don’t think I’d enjoy it nearly as much if there’s no emotional connection, in the end sex is just as much emotional as physical. I don’t think it would hurt for me though, it would just not be as enjoyable. But that falls firmly in the camp of variety between people (aspie or not tbh), there’s overlap but luckily for us we’re all individuals in the end, which makes the world so much more interesting.
Now if only everyone could start accepting we’re all individuals and value each of us as such while at the same time seeing trying to understand each individual person with all their qualities as interesting, fun and elucidating we’d be on our way to utopia.
(Also I am beginning to worry that my angry Joyce gravatar makes any speculation about characters’ sexualities seem more confrontational than it’s meant to be)
I WANT HANKY-PANKY BUT I HAVE SOCIAL INHIBITIONS REGARDING THE MATTER AND PERHAPS IF I DO IT WITH DINA IT DOESN’T COUNT AS A SIN BECAUSE I’M JUST HELPING HER WITH HER ACADEMIC STUDIES, IT’S _FOR SCIENCE_.
“I am slightly confused by the fact that you don’t even believe in evolution but want to help me with my science. But I’ll take you if you can use a camera.”
I posted in the past that Dina may be lesbian but unaware as she was raised in a seriously heteronormative environment all she knows is she is not attracted to men. The possibility of being attracted to other women hasn’t even crossed her mind.
Going on past versions of her I very much doubt Dina is lesbian, though bi or pansexuality are very much possible, as could many types of romantic identity.
If Dina has paid even a fraction as much attention to extant reptiles as she has to dinosaurs (and there are some “dinosaurs” that have to be classified with “reptiles” rather than “birds”), she would at least have heard of courtship and sexual behaviour between females:
I totally agree with that, but would like to add: I’m Spock-like (or at least try to be) and am very tired of people who value logic over emotions being regarded as asexual. (E.g. Spock isn’t, much to his dislike, iirc.)
“With all due respect, sir. There is a 34.5783% probability that I’ll meet a Romulan whose offspring with me would have at least a 87.5678% probability of inventing an Infinite Improbability Drive. In this case I’d have to defy your orders for the greater good.”
Carla is asexual and definitely not Spock-like, so while that hasn’t been addressed in DoA it could certainly offset the risk of that sort of stereotyping.
Not that I think it’s even an issue. As an ace guy, I’d be very excited for an ace Dina. Ace characters are very short in supply in general; it’d be one thing to make a boring character asexual but Dina is very popular. I can’t think of any reason an ace person would complain.
I would have being interested at all probably makes asexual unlikely, she just hasn’t figured out what she wants yet. Much like Danny didn’t know he was bi till he met Ethan, the potential was always there, it’s just no other guy had pushed his buttons up to that date.
I agree pardner, things look pretty hairy and I expect there will be a lot of pommeling yet before the last cow gets punched and the pun storm tails off …
What you both mean is probably the title text, but since they agree, you are forgiven. (=
Also it says: “sex is weird and personal and you can look at it for a monthly subscription fee on slipshine”
I always leave myself wide open. This is because I welcome any sudden discharge of funny insults. They are quite often the climax of a comment thread. Of course, consent is important in this game and it makes far less fun doing alone. The more people join in, the better.
So newllend (and anybody else) is welcome to give examples of such, if they deem the shots worthy being written down. (I’m really curious!)
Naw, they don’t have to. However, many people tend to misunderstand and be insulted nonetheless. The line between non-mean shots and mean shots is blurry and largely depends on the people involved, especially the target. This is why I’ve made expressively clear I’m hard to insult, especially if it’s funny.
Also, thank you very much.
That almost semens like a come on … I can’t believe that no one has risen to this the occasion? Unfortunately, I’ve taken a vow of nicety but maybe you will consider this a horrible punishment or at least be willing to call it being rubbed in a wrong way?
Okay, I didn’t realize that that was intentional until .5 seconds after posting my comment, but there’s still a typo there. Both words incorporated into that pun lack that “-s” at the end.
I’m guessing half the fanbase has the exact same reaction as Amber right now. One fourth is comfortable, and the other fourth is getting kinda creepy at the prospect.
Dina is not asexual, as Willis has said sexual orientations will not change across universes. Carla may be asexual, however. Not sure if the stagnant sexual orientations apply where there are also species changes.
I have seen people saying that recently, but I haven’t seen a reference produced for it yet. It might apply in general, but have exceptions, or it might have come from back when people were going on about Ethan’s sexuality.
Anyway, unless I see better evidence I am not buying that as a solid rule.
I’m positive I’ve seen the source for this, but as I can’t currently find it, fair enough. That said, I had yet to “feel those inclinations” at 18 and I am not asexual. I know I am not alone in this. People develop at different rates, including sexually. Maybe she will never be interested, but I think basing that assumption on this statement at this age is jumping the gun.
oh right, I’d seen that too. Of course, was she ever actually shown to have sexual feelings for Walky or Mike, or just romantic ones? I can’t remember, but she could still be asexual.
She had romantic feelings for Walky, what she had with Mike is unidentifiable, but she only actually showed strong sexual feelings for Walky when he acted mature.
Willis confirmed on Tumblr that Carla is still asexual.
As for Dina, from what I understand she never showed sexual attraction in IW, only romantic attraction. It is important to not confuse the two, but the rampant use of words like “heterosexual” as a catch-all for both can make it difficult.
Yeah pretty much this, I don’t get this western (and especially American) obsession with being somehow immoral or sinful. Sex is just sex, sure it can be dirty but it can also be innocent, and it sure as hell doesn’t define the innocence of a person.
Dina could end up liking someone having sex and remaining just as innocent as she is now. Just as Mary might very well not be a sexual being at all yet she’s pretty damn far from innocent to me.
“There is no such thing as innocence, only degrees of guilt?” I rather preferred “Innocence proves nothing.”
Really, innocence is such a fluid concept. I prefer madness. Just as fluid, but 90% more fun.
Jeeze guys, I just meant that I don’t want to see Dina in a slipshine comic some day. I wasn’t saying that I think she should never have sex, even if she wants to. :l
Seriously.. the idea of seeing a Dina slipshine weirds me out as much as the idea of the internet rule 34ing Hannelore (from QC) does… -shudder-
I can see where you’re coming from. But I wouldn’t really compare Dina with Hannelore. Dina has no interest in sex, but that’s really all there is, with Hannelore there’s a clear aversion to sexual contact, which is quite different if you ask me.
Hannelore is cannon heteroxexual, but averse to physical contact and germophobic. Sometimes she can be so overcome by desires she “forgets” her phobias and aversions. I’m too lazy to finish the archive crawl to find the link, but there is a comic where Hanna willingly jumps into the arms of a fireman collecting door-to-door for a charity.
Walkyverse Dina would be at least that old. No idea of her age was explicitly stated, but if she was, say, 20 when that comic began she’d be 35 now.
But she apparently just popped back into existence from a hole in reality, so who knows if that’s a properly aged Dina from an alternate reality, or a reconstituted Dina who died years ago and hasn’t aged, or what.
(rant begins; feel free to skip)
Meh, this is just a pet peeve of mine-it’s not at all clear that Uto-Aztecan speakers(the language family that includes Nahuatl) were in modern-day Mexico before the mid-first millennium CE and the migration of the Mexica to the valley of Mexico(and according to their own histories their split from the other Chichimecs) happened sometime in the 1000-1200 ballpark, so it’s reasonable to place Mexica ethnogensis sometime in the late first millennium BCE.
(rant over)
Just a random thought, Loving the webcomic, but when the comments start really stacking up, it gets hard to track, even for someone like me. What’s the chances of getting those vertical lines under people’s pics, to keep track of who replied to who? I’ll understand if it’s not possible, just saying it might be worth looking at…
And while he is at it, he might want to reduce the indentation of the first layer of nesting to ultimately allow for a higher nesting depth. I run into those limits far to often for my liking.
Probably not. I imagine her flirting is very direct and literal. Until she says something like “I am interested in pursuing a sexual and/or romantic relationship with you” i’m going to assume she’s not interested in anybody. For now anyway.
Seeing much of Dina in myself, I agree with that. If I say that I like you skirt, I mean exactly that and nothing more. (But then again, I’m very shy and if I indeed should one day try to hit on a girl, I might try to emulate other means of communication than telling her directly. And I would horribly fail.)
I agree. After 32 years of life, and constantly pushing my social abilities, I *think* I might be able to successfully flirt if I tried really hard. But I’d rather not risk it, and just be direct. I know I can’t always detect flirting.
I am 20 and have not detected anybody flirting ever. Nearly all I know about flirting I know from fiction.
Also I plan on persuading a former schoolmate to collect a list of people who were interested in me and, if they are OK with that, a few friends of mine. I could totally deal if the list were empty, but if not, there might be hilarious revelations.
Also, I decided to take you as my twelve-year prognosis of personal development in that area. (Except, of course you tell me you were way worse with 20 or something like that.)
From personal experience I would suggest you will learn. I don’t think I really noticed any flirting till I was in my mid-twenties myself. And even then it would often come in the form of, hey the way that girl was acting a week ago, I think she might be flirting with me…..
Society is way to focused on norm-based development, everything has it’s age and place, in the end things come when they come and as long as you don’t really miss it and you’re happy with your life then I don’t see why anyone would care.
Without being an expert I’d assume there not being known much about the ritual dances of long dead dinosaurs, with movement fossilizing so bad and whatnot. Thus her need to be historically accurate might prevent her from such.
Display of colourful plumage and spikes, while thinkable, are rather not for flirting with a particular person, but rather out doing your competition. It might be utilized but I can hardly imagine those used in a situation akin to Swoops quote.
I’m not so sure it has to go wrong. Now it’s been a while since I read about the “other” Dina, but this one is a lot more lovable, and this is not nearly as violent a universe. Not to mention she has a far better support system.
That being said, Dave Willis is a Jerkface, so I guess anything that hasthe potential of Dina getting hurt is a risky endeavor at best.
True, but they do get rather distracting. Better to jot them down during the afterglow while the memory’s fresh and vivid, or just memorize everything and make an entry documenting it when you find time.
Putting the humor aside for a moment, Amber’s growing fractures in personality are getting worse. Unless AG’s costume comes with a second set of lady parts she is still having sex no matter who she was dressed as at the time.
Worse case scenario -if ‘AG’ gets pregnant that will obliterate any remaining sanity because if AG is having sex and not her, how is Amber pregnant then??
Dina, I’m glad that you acknowledge when you overstep the bounds of yours and Amber’s intimacy, but please avoid giving shippers straight lines like that. You’ll ever hear the end of it.
Maybe Dina’s not Ace, but rather only attracted to those that she becomes emotionally involved with (or intellectually, which may be the closest to emotional closeness Dina gets to people). Let’s put her in a room with a paleontologist, then we’ll know.
I understand demisexuality, but I’ve never heard the term demiromantic. I can’t quite get my mind around how that would work: able to feel romantically drawn only to someone with whom they already have a (non-romantic) intimate bond?
>able to feel romantically drawn only to someone with whom they already have a (non-romantic) intimate bond?
Exactly that. We don’t get romantic feelings until we have been close friends with someone for quite some time.
In my case, that means that any form of traditional dating makes no sense at all. If I wanted to go out of my way to “meet someone” I would need to go try to make friends with new people and then wait months minimum and possibly years to see if I end up becoming romantically attracted to them… and then see if they are interested. Luckily I don’t care that much, so I don’t have to go looking. If it happens it happens, if not that is fine. It only happened to me once so far.
I told a friend about it recently and she thought she might be too. She was really pleased to hear there was a name for it. Hell, that was my experience, I found it on tumblr, in discussion about the larger ace community and was like, oh wow where was this info my whole life?
Demiromanticism is an interesting one. I think it might be really common, but there just isn’t awareness of it as a named concept…
Also it has degrees and seems to me to eventually shade right over into “normal” alloromantic stuff. I mean, most people are not going to have strong romantic feeling for someone right out of the gate. But it is the degree to which that is delayed that makes it different.
I could see how demiromantic would make a lot of sense in the context of asexuality. For me romantic interest can have two forms, it can either come from initial sexual attraction being reinforced by finding out the person I’m attracted to is also a great person or I can know a person for a long time, realize they’re awesome and then become romantically interested in them.
I think without my specific sexual attraction my experience would be pretty similar to yours. Not to mention it makes a lot of sense, it’s quite easy to know if you’re sexually attracted to someone (at least on a physical level) but to me true romantic interest requires that you really know the person, and that takes time.
And http://www.asexuality.org has a forum section for talking about “romanticism, aromanticism, the area in between, and the many kinds of attractions.” I haven’t really checked it out too much though.
Just out of curiosity, do you have any similar links with regards to Asperger/Autism. I’ve looked around a bit but it seems most is faced on public awareness, which is obviously great, but I’d love to find something more community oriented. I’m fine with finding information, what I’m looking for is more like minded people.
Oh, you might find something there, I don’t know… our little sub-community all left for greener pastures years ago. The dot just isn’t what it once was 🙁
Best general tech site with some real community I know is Ars Technica, though of course some like Hacker News or certain sub-Reddits. LWN if you do Linux…
BTW, feel free to friend me (or not!) on any social media. Kelly Clowers on FB or tumblr. “randle_revar” if you do hit slashdot, though I am not terribly active there now.
Isn’t that always the case, half the time you found out about something awesome it’s no longer awesome, or won’t be very soon.
The problem with your suggestions is that while I consider myself a geek/nerd, actual technology is kind of out of my wheelhouse (I’m more of a Social Science/Game/Comic/Fantasy nerd). So while I reckon I have a lot in common with the people there I sort of lack in the main aspect of the communities.
I’m definitely planning on adding you on the social medias though. Actually checking out your tumblr right now, I approve of the Robert Jordan related posts, a lot!
Meh new FB sucks, very annoying you can’t send a message with a friend request anymore. It’s not like everyone will instantly recognize the name of everyone they might like to be friends with on FB….
There’s more than one kind of intellectual involvement.
“Trying to force everything into an endothermic-poikilothermic dichotomy may make categorization simple, but is not adequate to deal with a group of such diversity” –> deep abiding dislike, faster than you’d ever imagine.
Noooo! Don’t do it! There is good reason that there are at least 3 major groupings related to that. Way too complicated for a dichotomy! Also, those two are not the counterparts to each other.
Jacob? Bleh. She needs someone science-y and nerdy. And I don’t know if he would understand her well. She seems aspie, and believe me, sex and intimacy can be different for us.
I just started to ship Dina with Roz. They could have a completely open and instructive discussion about sex. It would be a bit like a tutorial, but Roz wouldn’t mind.
Somehow my mind went to this scenario: “Well, to make a complete tutorial, they would need male parts, too. A trusted gentleman, of good build, who doesn’t kiss and tell. A beautiful and good mannered […]” *Starts writing fanfic that’s totally about himself and barely about Dina and Roz anymore*
I’ll admit I never saw more of the Kinsey biopic than a brief clip, but this was how I interpreted how Liam Neeson played the part: very methodical and clinical, not allowing himself or anyone else to get distracted by smirking innuendo, schoolyard jokes, or other things irrelevant to the inquiry / research.
Sex and intimacy are completely different. Having sex with a prostitute is almost indifferent, there is an orgasm but no emotional connection, but that is “physically intimate”, but two straight men (ex. Holmes and Watson) can be so emotionally intimate that they are almost a single mind without ever touching more than a firm handshake.
I’m sorry, I wasn’t very clear. I should have phrased that better. I was asking about aspergers relationship to romance as well it’s relationship to sex.
I think it varies a lot. I would suspect a somewhat higher percent of aspies would be aromantic, demiromantic, etc. But I don’t have any real evidence of that, just my own experience.
It definitely can make romance harder, once it is there. Asperger’s (and autism) is tied up with empathy and theory of mind, so we can appear/be quite selfish at times, and can have a hard time understanding our partner, especially if they are neurotypical. There are therapists that specialize in working with couples that are on the spectrum (one or both). The issues can also have some resemblance to the issues faced by couples where one has severe ADD/ADHD
As far as aspies and sex, I dunno if there is any major known effect or correlation…haven’t really looked into it.
There is some scientific evidence that there’s more variance in sexual, romantic and gender identities among people with autistic traits than there is in the population as a whole. Which makes some sense as the most common identities are those based on neurotypical development.
While it is true that romantic relationships are harder for people who have autistic tendencies there’s at the very least anecdotal evidence that some people actually prefer relationships with people with these traits as they can be very reliable, direct and open. I think a lot of it depends (as always) on the person as a whole.
The empathy/ToM thing is even more complex, new evidence seems to indicate it’s not so much a lack of these than a lack of an information filter, meaning a lot more information comes in making it harder to focus on relevant information. Because of this learned behaviors have to take the role of intuition, making it harder to be confident in what we see and acting on it. While this can obviously have it’s disadvantages it can work very well in an established relationship (for example when I was a kid I’d know instantly if my mom had a bad day at work and I was almost always able to cheer her up, because I’d seen it often enough to know what the right interpretation of the situation was).
“The more you know, the more people will bug you to help them.”? That’s my experience at least. But yeah, learning and teaching are my favourite hobbies as well. Also I second Kellies (Kellys?) post.
Very very true. I guess the key is to know a lot about interesting stuff that doesn’t relate to much to day to day problems. Knowing a lot about social science = lots of interesting discussions and teaching moments, knowing a lot about computers = people constantly asking you to solve their problems.
One of my peeves is how rarely fandom, as a whole, acknowledges the latter. The assumption seems to be that any intimate relationship must inevitably become sexual.
Yeah… I spent a fair amount of time of overthinking how that expresses itself in fandoms. For a writer, sex is a very striking way to express intimacy. It’s a shortcut for an inexperienced writer to say “look, they have a relationship, they have even come as far as sex.”
For the same reason I believe that the overfixation of bdsm that sometimes shows up in fandoms is beause it’s a very visually striking way to show that “they are toots doing it! Their sex is very interesting”
Humans Fans are horny, yes, and they like to fantasize about hawt people getting it on … which is going to be any two (or more) actors, given how casting works.
1) I don’t really agree with that. Yes Jacob is a sexy sexy man, but he’s also very sweet, romantic and caring. I think he and Dina would go just fine, better than a lot of the couples we’ve seen so far.
2) I’m not sure really, he likes her as a person, but he wants a real relationship, and Sarah hasn’t really shown she’s up for that. There’s something going on there but not sure if it’s sexual, or ever will be.
I agree with your first point, but the second one can simply be spelled out like this; Sarah just anted to fuck, Jacob, wants something more serious; so I personally don’t see it happening. Personally I’d rather see Jacob with Rox, in a relationship that eventually grows past mere sexual attraction. I was denied this in shortpack, and it seems I’ll be denied this here again -.-
Dina seems to be saying the she is asexual, and feels no sexual attraction to anyone. If so, she wouldn’t be the only ace in the strip: Carla is also canonically asexual.
To be honest to me one of the defining things about this comic is that it is representative of the diversity that exists in reality, and asexuality is very much part of that diversity, so I don’t see why Dina couldn’t be asexual.
That being said the idea of this particular version of Dina liking a boy or girl is just to cute to imagine so I hope she’s not asexual, though having an asexual represented here would be pretty damn interesting and fit very well within the universe (and I’m guessing even if it’s not Dina there’s at least one asexual character out there, we just don’t know who yet).
I really like the idea of ace!Dina, but I also agree that it’d be adorable to see her fall for someone (only then probably also sad). So, I guess I’ll choose to believe that she’s asexual and hetero/homo/bi/something-romantic, for now.
Hmm that would work quite well actually. And I love the idea of a character who’s romantic and sexual status don’t quite match up, though Carla might (among other things) fit that bill already.
Although I do think romance and sexuality seem equally foreign to Dina right now. I think this is probably as close as she got to romantic feelings.
Not sure there’s evidence in this universe, but afaik she’s asexual but homoromantic. I can’t wait for that getting cleared up, Carla is awesome in every way.
Speaking as a person who has also never had… inclinations, I have no problem whatsoever relating to Dina. Or to that side of her, anyway.
Dude, DoA may have a higher percentage of non-straight characters than your corner of the world, but so what?
And I have been trying to track that shirt down for the last 3 days. Google Image Search says it doesn’t exist outside of DoA, but I know I have seen it somewhere before.
Having sex as a low priority, to the point you don’t really care if it happens or not doesn’t automatically make someone asexual. It just means a lower sex drive than most have.
I don’t think sexual inclinations at 18 are really indicative of anything. Sure sexual development can start with puberty but that doesn’t mean it has to, or that it develops the same way for everyone. Current scientific thinking is that development goes well into young adulthood (at least 28) so there’s plenty of time for the inclinations of an 18 year old to change. Just like far from everyone who identifies as purely hetero or homosexual at 18 will still do so at 30 years of age.
Yeah, sure, but until that happens it’s not like anybody’s insane for saying they’re gay when they’ve only ever been attracted to their own sex and never to the opposite. That’s still exactly what the word means. They’re not misusing it.
True, my point was more with the regard to outsiders assigning sexuality than self-identity.
Essentially because sexual identity can be transient I think it could be considered presumptive to assign someone a sexual identity based on their behavior at 18 years of age. Self-assigned sexual identity is a different animal altogether though, and I agree that whatever sexuality someone of any age considers themselves to be is their sexuality, regardless of future or past sexuality.
They’re fictional characters. Nobody in this comment thread has the power to force Dina to identify as anything she doesn’t want to.
Words mean things though. We know that Danny is attracted to men and women, so we in the comment section call him bisexual, because that’s the word that describes that. If his identity later develops in another direction he will not have been harmed by any of this at all, because he’s fictional.
Dina is sexually attracted to nobody. She does not experience sexual inclinations. Asexuality is the word that describes this. If one day she begins experiencing sexual attraction, or if she decides she doesn’t want to identify as asexual, she will not have been hurt by commenters using this word to describe her, because she too is not real.
If she’d said “I don’t eat meat” we wouldn’t be sitting here arguing about whether that means she’s a vegetarian or whether it’s appropriate to call her a vegetarian when she doesn’t necessarily identify with vegetarianism or maybe will one day cease to be a vegetarian. “Vegetarian” is just the word that means that thing she said.
I realize that. But my comment was not really aimed at Dina but at what she represents. I think what’s important in this is the use of the word “yet”. It could very well indicate that Dina considers herself to be sexual but has not yet been in a situation where she has felt specific sexual inclinations. Based on the comments here there are people who identify with Dina yet don’t consider themselves asexual.
So while it’s true that labeling Dina as asexual doesn’t directly affect anyone it seems to me it does indirectly affect those that identify with her situation yet do not consider themselves to be asexual. So while I agree with you that there’s nothing harmful to calling her asexual, and there’s nothing malicious my argument came from the idea that these kinds of labels can be uncomfortable to some people, and therefor it’s a good idea to examine them further, as it might lead to a better understanding of all aspects of the sexuality spectrum, and in my mind a better understanding of the world generally leads to a better world.
Frankly you just seem a little too determined to come up with excuses why it’s wrong to call the asexual character asexual.
If it offends anybody to see asexuality called asexuality, that’s their issue. The community doesn’t need to cater to that.
It’s fine to identify with her despite not being asexual, or having chosen not to identify as asexual despite knowing that the word does describe you, but that doesn’t make the character any less asexual nor does it mean that the community needs to be silent regarding her asexuality.
That’s the problem with textbook definitions I guess. It tells us that because people exhibit a number of behaviors it falls under a certain label, while reality is far more fluid (both within and between individuals).
And that’s not even mentioning that in many instances personal experience is at least as if not far more important than exhibited behaviors or scientific knowledge. These kinds of things are very useful for understanding humanity as a whole, but are seriously lacking when it comes to understanding individual experiences.
Whether you to identify as asexual if of course your choice, but don’t act like people are weird for thinking someone who doesn’t experience sexual attraction might be asexual.
I’ve experienced sexual attraction, it’s how I figured out I was gay, I just have little drive to act on it. Likewise, you have no idea if Dina’s been attracted to anyone, just that she’s never acted on it either, though at least she’s starting to plan for it.
Inclination: a feeling of wanting to do something : a tendency to do something
When she says she’s yet to experience sexual inclinations, that does not mean that she’s yet to act on her sexual attraction. She’d need to say something else entirely in order to communicate what you seem to have drawn from that. Something like “I’ve yet to partake in these activities”.
And yeah, I know the problems with dictionaries, but it’s not like this is some slang or colloquium or figure of speech we’re dealing with either.
One the one hand, this seems to be exactly what he said: inclination to have sex (what Dina claims not to have had) ≠ sexual attraction (what you assume her not to have). On the other hand you were technically correct in the beginning. Some definitions classify people with sexual attraction, but unusual low inclination to act on it, as ace. Not all though.
Ultimately the ace community usually goes by how you identify. Yeah, if you have no sexual urges by 28, that would certainly be a technical fit (ace people can be sex-repulsed or not, it doesn’t matter). If you don’t care to identify that way though that is fine.
Dina could identify as ace now if she wanted (well she probably doesn’t know about the terms or the community), and later she might find out she changed, or was not ace in the first place, she just hadn’t felt it yet. That’s all fine, people change and or discover new things about themselves sometimes. Dina being only 18 or so it is more likely things could go any direction. But at this time ace headcanons are pretty reasonable.
I have to admit I don’t know much about the ace community. But I would think that even when it comes to a lack of or limited sexual attracion there’s still many different shades of gray. I’d say there’s a pretty big difference between someone who has no interest whatsoever in sex and someone who has no inclination to seek it out but is open to the idea. They might seem very similar but on a personal level there’s a world of difference.
It doesn’t make someone necessarily asexual, but it does make them a prime candidate.
I used to describe my perspective on sex similar to how you’ve described yours, until I learned more about asexuality and the how arousal and sexual attraction are not necessarily synonymous, and ended up personally describing myself as asexual.
Wait a minute! “Amazi-Girl is doing that, not me?”
But that was just because Danny, given the choice of “mask or no mask,” went with “mask.” How would this conversation between Amber and Dina have gone if Danny had chosen “no mask?”
*confused*
Now that I think about it, that does kind of confuse me. For lack of a better term, was she “Amber” when she and Danny had sex, or, as this comic implies, was she Amazi-Girl?
She does have her Amber cheek blush after her momentary worry that she hurt him.
How does it make more sense for her than for any other character we haven’t yet seen in any romantical or erotical encounter? Or rather: If it doesn’t make more sense for her (which seems to be the case to me), why did you think it was worth pointing out?
Oh, with my avatar this looks more aggressive than I meant it. While I’m slightly annoyed that many people jump to conclusions way to quickly, I’m to the largest part plain curious and mean it exactly the way I wrote it. Imagine it read by the voice you gave Dina in this very comic.
I think why many people think it makes sense for Dina is that she hasn’t really shown much interest in any type of interpersonal relationship, especially those of a romantic nature. However considering we’ve only seen her in limited social interactions, and we’ve seen very little ragarding her personal desires or opinions (not counting those involving dinosaurs), I do agree it’s probably mostly projection.
The jump from “socially inactive” to “wants to be sexually inactive” still doesn’t make sense to me. (Isn’t this actually a nerd/geek/whatever stereotype: “fat, ugly, has no friends and watches porn the entire day, daydreaming about women they can’t have because they are such loosers.”?)
Also I don’t recall Mike, Carla or Marcie expressing such an interest, but then again my memory is really bad.
I never claimed the connection between Dina’s social behavior and sexual or romantic inclination made sense. I was just hypothesizing on possible reasons people would have to see Dina as asexual.
I think part of the difference between Dina and Mike and Marcie is that we’ve seen a lot more of her (and many people are far more familiar with Walkyverse mike than Dina, not to mention he seems to have changed very little). Carla is a lot more complex as she’s know to be transgender and her sexuality is quite a major point in shortpacked, so there’s less speculation as there’s more information.
And I never claimed that you claimed that. (= I was just elaborating why, IMHO, this shouldn’t be a reason for Dina to be seen as ace.
I forgot about the influence of the Walkyverse though.
Oh, and there are actually 105 comics tagged “Mike” and only 100 tagged “Dina”. But since Dina tends to be less repetitive and more memorable, it might seem as if she had appeared far more. And your other arguments were far stronger anyway, so who cares?
Don’t worry about that, I’m an aspie on an internet forum, I’m going to misconstrue some things regardless of intent, it’s unavoidable. As long as people are patient and willing to explain there’s never any harm, and often it’s more interesting and there’s more to be learned than if I got everything the first time around.
Like I said though I agree social behavior (or using the catchword Etraversion) has to be linked to sexuality or romantic inclination at all.
And the presence of the walkyverse can make things rather complex, because you never know if someone is taking that into account or not, I’ve found myself switching between seeing Dina as purely a DoA character and taking her other versions into account just commenting on today’s comic alone.
Well, we know Carla is ace (word of god). Marcie, yeah we have no idea, but she has been onscreen even less than Dina, she’s not going to get as many headcanons in general. Mike makes a comment to Amazi-girl that sounds sexual – after she tackled him, he wanted to know if she was going to tie him up and said he’d “be into that”. Who knows with Mike though.
Oh, I’m sorry. Counting to three is obviously to hard for me. (Also I’m awake far to long.) Total mispost. (I still wouldn’t be sure of that, however I can’t name any sources.) Still incredibly sorry.
Weird, for some reason I can’t reply to your posts Rorror.
I can’t blame you for the confusion though, I created the entire post and then added in the momsexual part at the last minute, so it’s not clear from the context I meant spitesexual. Though now that I think of it I think the momsexual part of Mike might very well just be a subsection of spitesexual.
There is a maximal nesting depth on DoA comments (actual it is just about anywhere, but in some places it’s really high) and we exceeded reached it. It actually happens rather frequently around here.
Stgerlachus, you can’t reply to Rorror because this thread is nested too deep now. The idea is to keep the column from getting absurdly skinny. (of course if the column was wider in the first place…)
And I assure you that my last comment reads a lot more fluent, if you assume the “exceeded” were stricken out (or missing altogether), as it should have been.
Quick, think of your youngest sibling/cousin/child having sex. Yeah, that is about the same reason people are happy enough believing “Nopenopenopenononono. No. Asexual.”
She’s three and I am gifted with a very good imagination. Luckily I’m also gifted with the ability to precognise things I really shouldn’t think to much about. And since I don’t think comparing Dina to a 3yo is fair, I’ll substitute some 12yos I know. And then? So what? My main concerns come from the general direction of (statutory) rape and possibly unhealthy attractions to not-yet-fully pubertised bodies (Those concerns are entirely conscious and don’t apply to grown-up women, as young as they may look.), but other than that, let ’em be.
The main point is that people don’t want to picture Dina having sex. She is the “little sister” of the cast, and the idea makes a lot of people uncomfortable.
I get that and I think they shouldn’t be. But that’s not my pigeon, of course. On a less related note: I really don’t wanna picture my parents having sex, but since they are my (presumed biological) parents (as well as of my siblings), it doesn’t make all that much sense for them to be ace. And, you know, “sense” was my original question. Your perspective proved to be interesting nonetheless.
While there’s a valid case against pedophilia, you also have to be careful about immediately writing off females with thin frames and flat chests as being so aberrant that they HAVE to fall under that purview. I’ve known lots of individuals in their teens and 20s that looked like preteens, and had self-image issues tied to that.
So far people seem to only be promoting Dina in Slipshine for the narrative factor, but lets take an even look at it:
1: The only argument against Dina in Slipshine- in sharp contrast to the seeming approval of other characters being there- is due to her body shape. Meaning that the focus is more on her body shape, than her character. Now being asexual, I might be missing something here, but that seems an odd reason to be interested in a specific character (do people that read the Amazi-girl/Amber one like girls with strong frames and large breasts, and only read it for that?), but just as importantly
2: Willis’ art has improved dramatically over the years [hell, even just from the start of DoA], but lets face it, if you can conceive precise real world elements such as age from his art (outside of narrative context), you’re wanting to perceive those things. And if that’s the case
3: I’m sure you can find better art to soothe your abberant sexual desires elsewhere.
Kaoy’s point makes a lot more sense to me, though.
Though, she’s NOT an actual sister or anything, so that seems more a willful denial of lifestyle depth [as Rorror pointed out, comparable to ignoring that your parents are (likely) sexual beings]. More curiously, why would having a pay-locked sexually-based narrative on a site where you presumably couldn’t accidentally access it, force you to read it and recognize her as a sexually active individual?
Or is it just because the implication of the activity would be present in the main comic?
That seems kinda perverse to me- like saying ‘Ew, Willis just noted Galasso had sex. That creeps me out, because he’s an older man.’
It’s definitely a personal issue based on personal hang-ups, and strong expectations on the value of sex, ‘ideal’ forms of sex, and presumed corruptive elements of sexual interaction.
Of course, we shouldn’t force her into a Slipshine just ‘to see what happens’, but if it fits the narrative- and one assumes eventually (though whether or not its within the scope of the length of the comic) it will.
Besides, I find the mental image of Dina making a ‘rawr’ (hands out as claws, nose crinkled, mouth open) dinosaur pose while in a vulnerable position (such as being naked) really cute. In the sense that it fits her character, much like Walky making a Monkey Master reference after sex, or Amber having sex while in costume.
Well, my expectations and valuation of sex are obviously typical, so I obviously can’t identify with how strongly the topic may disconcert, but that being the sole reason to not explore a potentially fascinating narrative- and certainly one that has a subset of individuals here that would pay Willis to explore it- seems a rather poor rationale.
Or rephrasing, denying a character equal representation to other characters due to presumed archetype and body form seems in line with denying them due to perceived race or gender or so forth.
But then again, I already clarified, I don’t quite get this topic 😛
Anyway, definitely respect the perspective you provided, Kaoy, and definitely feel Dina should be treated with respect to a fluid narrative, rather than just having her slapped on Slipshine just because she can be [that’d be more in line with any of the cartoon sex fan art floating around the internet, and really, that’s already my presumed expectation of the other DoA Slipshine offerings, and (lack of sexual interest aside) why I haven’t even considered going to Slipshine to read them].
You make some interesting points. Except, of course, most of your points aim at Slipshine, a topic we weren’t discussing in this thread.
Further, since this your comment is technically a reply to mine and you used “you”, I felt addressed by some of your points (even though they don’t seem to make sense):
2: I can barely tell the age of RL humans, no chance here indeed. The “12yo” came from the Riley arc.
3: I don’t get my jollies from (pre-)pubescent (looking) (cartoon) characters. If this was really aimed at me, I wonder where you got the idea.
Lastly I dislike your choice of words in “3:”, “aberrant” seems to be pejorative, but that might just be my lack of experience in the English language.
To be fair, we do retain our young in our own bodies while they develop. And don’t even get me started on what we feed them! A simple protein slurry served up in a mixture or emulsified fats and body water? *hurk*
She’s happy because people finally recognize that Brontosauruses aren’t real, and because Jurassic World is coming out.
Geeze, that wasn’t so hard to figure out.
I presume she’s unhappy because of scientific misrepresentations in the film, and crying because someone.. you know, I actually can’t see a circumstance where she’d feel upset enough to cry. That one is legitimately interesting- and perhaps more than a bit worrisome. :X
Obviously Joe should be her partner and Roz should operate the camera as Dina’s proxy notation device. They’ve already proven capable for their respective portions of this endeavor.
Wow. Amber is even more messed up than I thought. Amazi-Girl is having sex with Danny, not her? Hoo boy. I think Amber needs to time alone to figure herself out before she’s ready for a significant other. This is not a healthy situation for her or Danny.
I agree with this, somewhat; for a long time I’ve felt like maybe Amber is developing Dissociative Identity Disorder, but that would involve Amber losing her memory of everything Amazi-Girl does and vice versa. I still think her personality may be “splintering,” as the psychologists call it.
I think she means that it is her Amaza-girl persona that is dating Danny, not her. Basically, from a public perspective, if people found out about Danny and Amaza-Girl but knew through the grapevine that Danny and Amber were getting it on it could make the connection very easy to catch.
I doubt it’s possible to have EVERY sexuality represented. Human sexuality is just too complex (so is gender), but all of the most common sexualities seem to be present in DOA at present (if there is, indeed, an asexual character).
Hey, she could surprise herself and really get into it during ‘analysis’. The narrative could involve the internal struggle to not lose herself while trying to maintain her scientific rigor.
For Dina, on the other hand, it could be an interesting, fascinating bit of character development, with all the innocence of first romance, as approached by a socially-atypical character. Add in her counterpart’s likely more-mainstream expectations, and you could have an interesting bit of contrast and charming awkwardness.
Or, you know, it could be emotionally damaging, and leave Dina joining Ruth and Billie in an alcoholic spiral into oblivion.
For better or worse, the potential for intriguing and complex character exploration exists here, assuming it’s approached as a sexually-based narrative, rather than as simple pornography.
Nevermind that we’ve ALL been wondering if she has dinosaur tattoos anywhere.
I can actually relate to Amber’s view on the topic of sex. Especially the “Imagining others as sexual beings” bit.
I think I can also relate to Dina here, somehow, but I’m not sure why exactly.
Just a random thought, Loving the webcomic, but when the comments start really stacking up, it gets hard to track, even for someone like me. What’s the chances of getting those vertical lines under people’s pics, to keep track of who replied to who? I’ll understand if it’s not possible, just saying it might be worth looking at…
I had to check out the comments to see how many people wanted to see Dina sex, and after a few dozen I couldn’t find any except as jokes about how to frame it as a scientific experiment. I’m not going to read all 400 but I’m pleasantly surprised at the comment section’s restraint on this topic.
8D Ok, I’m going to echo what a lot of people have said already in calling (or at least intensely hoping) Dina as being on the asexual spectrum (and I’m echoing the previous group that suggested demisexual, because it would be awesome to have that actually be represented somewhere for all my demi friends and because I think that would fit spoiler stuff in the other universe in a really interesting way*).
And I really hope this turns out to be the case because I would love to have an ace representation that had a similar lifelong relationship to sex to myself. I mean, it’s great sex-repulsed/sex-apathetic asexuals are starting to get webcomic depictions and aren’t being forced into situations they don’t want or that erase their boundaries and their interests, but it would be awesome to have one webcomic ace character who reflected at least partially my admittedly odd path of recognizing a lack of inclination (this line is the one that most makes me think its ace spectrum, because it is really hard to not be ace spectrum and never have had that “inclination” feeling before legal adulthood), deciding to research the heck out of it because here was something I didn’t know, and then deciding “hey, now that I have this information, it would be interesting/fun to try it out and see if it’s at all accurate”**. Because it would be awesome if there were ace representation of aces who were actually chill with sex as a participant, even though there was no attraction/sexual desire. And it would be awesome if it was in this comic, because it would mean it would be the second time a character in a Willis work reflected an aspect of my life I never expected to actually see represented somewhere (first was Ultra Car/Carla being both a transwoman and ace). So yeah, all the squeeing noises.
* (rot13 with spoilers)Jnyxlirefr Qvan jnf bsgra fubja nf orvat nyzbfg qrfcrengr va ure nggrzcgf gb xrrc gur srj oblf fur jnf nggenpgrq gb pybfr ng unaq (jvgu vg abg orvat shyyl pyrne vs vg jnf whfg ebznagvp be frkhny nggenpgvba). Guvf vf abg gb fnl gung qrzvfrkhnyf ner qrfcrengr, ohg engure gb abgr gung vg zvtug chg Qvan’f npgvbaf va fbzr pbagrkg vs Jnyxl naq Zvxr ernyyl jrer gur bayl crbcyr va ure yvsr fur rire sryg ebznagvp naq frkhny nggenpgvba gb naq jvgu fbpvrgl’f phygher gung orvat hacnegarerq vf gur terngrfg rivy, vg zvtug znxr frafr gung fur jnf zber jvyyvat gb tb gb rkgerzr zrnfherf gb cebgrpg n srryvat fur sryg jnf vaureragyl ener. Vg vf n fvzvyne fvghngvba bs n qrzv sevraq bs zvar jub vf univat gebhoyr yrggvat n synzvat qbhpuront tb orpnhfr fnvq n-ubyr vf bayl gur frpbaq crefba va ure yvsr fur’f rire orra ebznagvpnyyl naq frkhnyyl nggenpgrq gb.
** In my own personal experience, actual sex turned out to be a ton of fun, largely because it was like the most intense puzzle game ever where there was a whole bunch of things to keep track of and if I got it all correct, then my partners got to experience this intensely pleasurable thing that could brighten their whole day and bringing that to my partners was a giant emotional rush.
I personally love the large amount of Aro/Ace characters in webcomics. I’m Aro/Ace myself and I just get so sick of the fact no one can just stay single and happy in mainstream media. Webcomics is my one place I can escape to to find any characters I can relate to at all.
Amber’s dialogue in the last panel, “I’m enjoying not having to think of you as a sexual being”, unintentionally (on her part, not sure where Willis intends to go with this) plays into some pretty awful dynamics. I’ve been following a blog called the Asexual Agenda for some months now and it’s hosted some interesting discussion of race and asexuality. In this post, blogger Katie discusses how asexuality relates to racist concepts of Asian women.
My asexuality is compliant in the sense that I am not the subject of sexual desire. I do not seek, nor desire others to fulfill my sexuality. Left simply at my lack of initiative, I can be cast as the submissive, exotic woman. Existing to be chosen, to have sexuality exercised upon me, yet possessing no endogenous sexual drives that would upset the dynamics that render me powerless and voiceless.
My asexuality also removes me from the ultimate realization of these dynamics. I am not compliant – I am declining – I am uninterested, unimpressed, and the subject is rejected not because another man has “claimed” me, but by my own withdrawal from his pursuit. I do not fulfill his sexual fantasies, but neither do I subvert his with any of my own.
My refusal toward objectification is in direct defiance of the role expected of my identities. But my acceptance of not being a subject, in not possessing any of my own sexual desires, is compliant. So where does that leave me, in a colonially-shaped conception of my asexuality?
(This isn’t the ultimate point of the post, so I would recommend you read the whole thing.)
This is somewhat similar to the experiences of disabled people. Some asexual people are disabled, some disabled people are asexual, but allosexual disabled people are harmed by the stereotype of them as nonsexual beings. For more discussion of how disability and asexuality can be related, check out this collection of posts (especially this post by Alyssa, an Autistic and asexual person).
Anyway, my point isn’t to rain on everyone’s parade or call you bad people for thinking Dina might be asexual – especially since there are certainly women in the world who are autistic (not that Dina is necessarily autistic, but this post is in the context of people reading her as autistic), asexual, and Asian. The phrase “yet to experience these inclinations myself” can be interpreted many ways and could definitely indicate she falls on the asexual spectrum. But I do think it’s important to consider the larger context of Dina as a character. And I really do think that was an ugly thing for Amber to say. I think she did mean it in a “too much information” sense, and I know Amber cares about Dina and would never try to hurt her, but one of the main points of this comic is that even caring people can unconsciously absorb and reinforce harmful stereotypes. Dina may act childlike sometimes but she’s not a child, and it’s not right for Amber to express value judgments about her being a sexual being or not.
There’s a lot of HTML in this post… I sure hope I got it all right…
Loading ...
I imagine this is exactly how Dina was born
Surely you mean hatched.
And please don’t call me Shirley
Don’t call me Anne, that’s my mother’s name.
Oh, you said “and.” Carry on.
Please don’t call me ‘carrion’.
The police? Where?!
Please don’t call me Ware.
Why do people keep calling me Kami?
Her whole family are raptors, just wearing suits made of human skin. That’s why they are so robotic. They simply can’t comprehend human emotions.
I’ve said this before, but if you remove that hat, underneath there’s a glass dome with a tiny raptor operating levers.
This isn’t even her final form
no, her mother is a Raptor; her father is Chris Pratt.
A+ perfect hope to see Dina in Jurassic World.
it was a reference to a one-off strip of the comic Cartridge
my statement stands.
“I would also naturally need to record the event for later study. A fellow student, Roz, has offered to provide the necessary equipment in return for “10%”. I do not understand her terms. How may I furnish her with 10% of a sex?”
“The best case scenario were obviously multiple cameras from different angles, operated by colleagues (note: get other scientifically interested people to work with me. Preferably a few men for the (possibly) different perspective.) to make sure every interesting detail is captured on video.” Of course it might turn out difficult for her to find sufficiently motivaled males to evaluate the many hours of footage. Males are known to be lazy slobs.
note: get other scientifically interested people to work with me.
Hey, it’s twelve of the guys from control group B!
(I have already written this comment, but it seems like it has been eaten by the system. Later comments of mine already appeared so I “repost” this. Sorry if this ends up as a double post.)
I guess they ran into problems with the blind trials though.
“Ok, here is your sex for today.”
“Hey, why do I get two?”
“I guess you’re getting lots more sex than everyone else.”
“YESSSS!”
Probably couldnt do a placebo arm?? This is a very tricksy challenge in research design!!
10% of a sex is easy so long as the number of participants is a multiple of ten. Roz will make the necessary arrangements.
I’m not sure that cancels out. Is masturbation really 10% of the sex of a ten-person-orgy? Wouldn’t rather the number of sexual encounters, i.e. the cardinality of the vertex set of the local subgraph of the hookup graph, be divisible by ten? And even then, wouldn’t we need to work with weighted edges? How would we determine the weight? And could the edges be directed?
I would think it’s about how much time is spent interacting sexually with the rest of the orgy. So to get 10% of the sex one would need to partake in 10% of all sexual contact in the orgy. Now where it gets complex is how to balance sexual contact that is initiated by a particular subject versus sexual contact initiated by others toward them. And what do we do when one person has sexual contact with multiple persons, does this count the same as when all attention is focused on a single individual. And that’s not even talking about different levels and types of sexual context.
It’s complex, but with a nice grant I think we can work it out!
And so it was that commenters of a certain comic on the internet began their journey to develop the new science and mathematics that would bring about a new age of man:
Orgynomics.
Actually the mathematical tools at our disposal are already quite powerful. We’d just need to decide for a model. (I suggest a general approach: A map from the entire time in question to the directed, weighted graphs representing the current orgy constellations at each given point in time. Or equivalently the full directed graph and a map from each edge to a “time to weight” map for that edge. Simplifications of this model for specific situations should prove to be easy.) The hard part is figuring out what exactly the weights mean and how we measure it as accurately as possible.
Are you describing something like this?
http://researchnews.osu.edu/archive/chainspix.htm
I’m going to go out on a limb an assume the oval structure was the interaction between an athletic team and cheerleaders…
oh my god I love you guys so much.
This comic always has the best comments, seriously.
Far more general, but similar idea.
I think that I spotted Joe in there!!
If it’s power of ten instead of multiple of ten, ten to the zeroth power is one. 🙂
So is Dina asexual or just being Dina?
Sounds like “just being Dina” goes hand in hand with being asexual.
It sounds like Dina is _currently_ asexual, but is curious. She is taking her time, waiting for the right guy^D^D^Dscientifically rigorous situation to come along.
Obligatory “Clever girl”
Dina’ll figure it out in time.
I’m sure the two are perfectly capable of coexisting.
Ace Dina!
(I am asexual and right now Dina is reminding me of myself.)
I am probably sexual and Dina nontheless reminds me very much of myself. I hope Dina doesn’t turn out to be asexual, since this brings with it the risk of reinforcing the did-not-have-a-significant-other-has-to-be-closeted-or-ace-stereotype some people seem to have. (Also I’d like to see that Slipshine, mostly for scientific reasons.)
Agreed.
This is setting up for her meeting Becky. I have foreseen it.
Becky convincing Dina to run some tests might be something that causes the internet to shut down.
Well, I’m pretty much always down for ace characters, even if stereotypes.
A Slipshine would be Hi-larious!
Post Coitus conversation: “What do you mean Brontosaurus? I must leave now”
Considering the word of Willis tells is sexuality doesn’t change across universes I’m going to attribute this to Dina being Dina rather than her being asexual.
I’m pretty sure Walkyverse Dina was not asexual (trying to minimize the spoilers) so I doubt this Dina is either, but we can’t know for sure.
She could still be asexual heteromantic. I don’t recall any of her attraction being explicitly sexual in nature.
True I guess all we really know she’s not aromantic. However she’s shown even less interest in romance than she has in sex so far (with this being her first hint of interest in either).
She went a whole month without expressing romantic attraction on panel. I don’t think that’s strange or even noteworthy. Certainly it doesn’t outweigh the fact that she explicitly, by her own word, has yet to experience sexual attraction, and by word of god is attracted to men across universes.
You sound like you’re just a little dead set on treating aro/ace as a single package.
I’m not sure where you got that from at all (heck I’m Heterosexual and Panromantic myself, I’m well aware these things don’t have to line up).
I was just pointing out that in this universe she’s not shown any indication of romantic feelings yet while she’s at the very least shown curiosity with regards to sex. That doesn’t really exclude anything, her romantic and sexual identities could line up or could be completely different.
What I was trying to say was that based on the fact we’ve not seen her show romantic interest in anyone yet she could just as easily be bi/panromantic as heteromantic, which says nothing about her sexuality. Though I admit I might have said it in a slightly awkward way, and if I could I’d edit it for clarity.
Ah, yeah. I agree with that. But also I think that since we know for a fact she’s attracted to men, and have nothing indicating she’s attracted to anybody else, heteromantic is still the most applicable word to describe her romantic orientation despite bi/pan being possibilities.
Very true, that’s why I said the only thing we know for certain. Heteromantic is probably more likely than her being bi/pan but there’s leeway there, just like there is with her sexual inclination.
Either way I’m going to enjoy finding out, I just hope it’s not as drama filled as it was with others, not sure I could take that with Dina.
Ciphered to show similar consideration. Only decode this if you don’t care to be spoiled about other-universe stuff:
VVEP, gur Jnyxlirefr’f Qvan arire qvq nalguvat gung jnf zbgvingrq ol yhfg be rira frrzrq gb ernyyl srry vg ba-cnary. Fur jnf dhvgr zbgvingrq ol ebznapr, svefg jvgu Jnyxl naq yngre jvgu Zvxr, naq fur jnf pncnoyr bs univat frkhny eryngvbaf, ohg frrzrq gb ivrj gurz nf yvggyr zber guna n gbby gb xrrc Zvxr sebz yrnivat ure. Zna, V guvax V tbg zber qrcerffrq guvaxvat nobhg guvf abj guna V qvq jura V ernq gur bevtvany fgbevrf. Urer’f ubcvat riragf va Fubegcnpxrq guebj n yvggyr zber unccvarff gb gur Qvan fubjvat hc gurer abj.
(Sorry, that should be “if you don’t care IF YOU ARE spoiled about other-universe stuff.”)
Umm… is the a decoder ring to help out?
tr a-zN-ZA-M n-za-mA-Z
BASH
I LOVE YOU
But we only have 14 hours to save the Earth?
Try this: http://rot13-encoder-decoder.waraxe.us/
Online rot13 decoder, also encodes blank text.
Decode at http://www.rot13.com/index.php
“rot13” means add 13 to the first 13 letters, subtract 13 from the second half of the alphabet.
G pese ti wa ni nini esu ti akoko kan pẹlu rẹ Yoruba akosile.
See, that’s how you do spoiler warnings!
I’m still a little grumpy after having the Legend of Korra ending spoiled to me on the same frikkin’ day the episode aired, with no more warning than “Hey, guess what SPOILER! Xbeenfnzv* is official!”. I mean, I was hoping for Xbeenfnzv* to happen, but I tried to keep my expectations low. The spoilers ramped those expectations up to eleven, and so I got massively disappointed when instead of kissing and relationship talk and maybe making it official to their friends, I just got some last-second handholding.
I’m sure that if I had kept reading the spoilers, I would have found out about the details, but when I come across a spoiler for something that I want to experience first-hand, I’m really not inclined to keep reading.
So please, people: Don’t do off-topic spoilers with minimal warning for brand new things, no matter how awesome they are.
*Like Chris Phoenix says above, decode at rot13.com.
Even though it doesn’t contain spoilers, I’ll cypher my response since it references your statement
V’q yvxr gb cbvag bhg gung V frr abguvat jebat jvgu na nfrkhny crefba univat frk va beqre gb cyrnfr gurve ebznagvp cnegare. Gurer’f n ovt qvssrerapr orgjrra orvat nfrkhny naq npgviryl qvfyvxvat frk. V qba’g qrevir cyrnfher sebz cvpxvat hc gur tebprevrf, ohg V qb vg orpnhfr vg cyrnfrf zl svnaprr. Na nfrkhny pbhyq cynpr fvzvyne fvtavsvpnapr gb univat frk jvgu gurve ebznagvp cnegare.
Can this, like, rampant encryptification of text not be a thing? I kind of have to moderate this site and it’s not super fun to have to run all this shit through another site just to make sure someone’s not plowing ethnic slurs onto here.
I bring this up because suddenly, today, this is frigging everywhere.
That’s a good point. So, that’s not how we handle spoilers, then.
You have just described a depressingly large fraction of marriages.
BTW, given the complexity of HTML tags available, a “preview” or “go back and edit” option would be nice.
And, even though I included cite=”DieKatzchen” in the blockquote statement, nothing of the sort appeared. What does cite mean, if not “attribute the block quote to someone”?
Try <quote=”name”> “quoted text”</quote>
Um, she has shown a little bit of romantic feelings. Remember when Walky’s notes ended up in Dina’s hands? She practically fell in love at first sight. Of course, Walky had to ruin it later by saying dinos with feathers are just lame, but I don’t think she found out who wrote those notes.
I actually linked to that comic further down. But I’m not quite sure if that counts or not, as her feelings weren’t really directed at anything other than an abstract concept. So I don’t know where that would fall on the romantic spectrum though I think it doesn’t prohibit her from being aromantic.
I’m not saying she is actually aromantic though, I’m inclined to believe that while she might be asexual, though I lean more towards not having interest right now rather than being truly asexual, she’s definitely not aromantic).
However you’re right in saying that comic demonstrates that she is capable of experiencing love in the abstract regardless of her romantic inclination. In the end I just don’t think we’ve seen enough of her showing or talking about her feelings to be remotely sure about her romantic inclination at this point (though we obviously can, and will, speculate).
Someone needs to spell out the subtle nuances of “asexual” vs. “celibate” vs. “not getting any”.
Asexual: Having minimal or no interest in sex.*
Celibate: Voluntarily refraining from sex.
Not getting any: Involuntarily forgoing sex.
*Does not rule out an interest in a romantic relationship, just the actual sex part. Can include making out and heavy petting or not, depending on the person.
What Jams just said. Ace. This is the way I am, reminds me of me.
Goes hand in hand with Dina being an Aspie.
Hey, the only severely Aspie girl I know is straight and sex-addicted.
Yeah I don’t think Asperger is necessarily related to sexuality at all. Now I can’t speak of females but as an Aspie guy I can say I’m pretty sure my level of sexuality is above average.
That being said it does seem that there’s a chance that Dina’s obsession with science and dinosaurs means there’s really no time or interest for sexual matters, however that wouldn’t exactly mean she’s asexual, just that she’s not currently interested in sex.
Autism as a whole does seem to correlate to asexuality, which follows, since Autism as a whole has social blindness/disconnection inherent to it.
But it’s a massively wide spectrum that is currently being used as a catch-all for most socially-non-fluid neuro-atypical individuals, so it’s hard to specify a singular subset as being more or less ace.
But, for reference, I’m part of several large asexual groups, and a fairly reliably 80% of people per group tend to also be ace. Likewise, key Autistic figures such as Temple Grandin have given the strong impression that they’re asexual.
But of course, it’s a wide spectrum (and one that’s currently being used as a generic diagnosis similar to how ADHD used to be- though in fairness, far, far more accurately) so assumptions shouldn’t ever be made.
Now, Asperger’s I’m less familiar with, but all the Aspies I know are sexual, though, they aren’t super driven by it either- they like it, but in the same way most people like chocolate or playing games they like or something. It’s not like the more mainstream portrayal of hypersexuality, and sex being the best, most important, most validating thing ever.
Of course, since that IS a social portrayal, it’s hard to tell who REALLY is like that, and how many people just follow along because of their socially-affirmed expectations on the matter.
*a fairly reliably 80% [of online asexual groups I’m part of] also are autistic spectrum.
Which probably makes a whole lot more sense than what I initially wrote.
Autism and sexuality is a rather complex subject for many reasons, not least of all because the vast majority of Autism research is focused on children. And like you alluded to there’s the fact that it is very difficult to disentangle sexuality and social behavior. Combine that with the fact that, like you said, right now autism represents an enormous spectrum of developments, which might not even all refer to the same actual phenomenon, but simply have a high overlap in symptoms.
I must admit my knowledge about asexuality and autism is limited, as it isn’t something that I’ve personally experienced, nor has it really come up in my reading of and discussions with autism researchers (which is highly linked to most of these having a focus on childhood autism). However what I do know is that I do have a more complex than typical sexuality (I would consider myself heterosexual but panromantic) and my gender identity is not typical (I identify as male, but I often struggle to identify with all the male behaviors and feel much more at home with women).
I guess this fits with the fact that it’s a wide spectrum with the only real common theme being the fact that development is not typical, which means many unique variations exist, and also means that people who developed with autistic traits have more varied (and therefor more atypical) sexual, gender and romantic identities. It’s interesting you brought up Temple Grandin, because I don’t really identify with how she experiences autism, so it’s not surprising I also experience sexuality differently.
With regards to Aspergers it gets even more complex, not in the least because the diagnosis doesn’t actually exist anymore (I used it as it was used above me). Generally though it refers to people who developed with autism but have no language deficiency. As language is a social construct this often means they also aren’t as limited in social interactions (it’s much harder to learn languages without social aspects such as shared attention) so it would not be surprising if, on average, the sexuality of people with Aspergers are slightly more typical (though as I mentioned before there’s a lot of variance and uniqueness even here). And of course because, like you said, much of what we consider sexuality is social behavior, it’s very hard to fully comprehend or study (as an example, though I’m panromantic, my lack of social confidence has prohibited me from really acting on it beyond a few occasions all of which happened to be heteroromantic in nature).
Finally there’s the link between hypersexuality and autism, but this is a different animal altogether. This is far more linked to repetitive and hyperfocused behavior (common traits of autism) than being truly sexual, it’s simply the continuous exhibition of a particular behavior (and is far less common among those with higher functioning autism).
TL:DR. Autism is a very varied phenomenon, and there’s no such thing as a typical autistic person. What is true however is that there does seem to be more variation than there is in the typical population which means links seem to exist between autism and a host non-typical sexual and gender identities. And one must always remember that the severity of the autistic traits has a huge effect on what kind of behavior is shown by any individual.
Teal deer
Well, let me screw with your definition here. Straight, virgin Aspie. Sorry dude, I’m going to go with S’toon on this one.
I think the point is that there are many many shades of Asperger’s, so while it might be true that there’s a higher prevalence of asexuality among people with Asperger it doesn’t necessarily go hand in hand, every inch of the sexual spectrum is represented within the Asperger community.
Wouldn’t there be something in between though? Some stage where a deep attraction or something is needed to remove the inhibitions around it? Sex isn’t just some minor thing, and getting to it would be complicated, especially for people who aren’t pre-programed with the social norms.
Aspie male, can confirm sexuality.
The one asperger’s guy I know is poly and has a lot of sex. Doesn’t seem to be a compulsion, he just is very very good at making it happen and making it work for him.
Wild. I am aspie, and I can’t imagine the effort that would take. And the unpleasantness of all that social interaction would far outweigh any pleasure from the sex.
And of course I think if I did achieve a casual hook up it would really be bad for me. I wouldn’t have thought so before, but ever since I had sex (with the person I love) I have felt that sex without that emotional connection would really hurt.
Just like the thread above, just goes to show how much variety there is among aspies
Personally I’m with you on this one. However I could see how it would work, in the end if you learn the right behaviors it would not be that difficult, and potentially enjoyable (setting it up I mean). I sort of have a similar thing when it comes to scientific discussions, it’s just a very natural and smooth situation for me, so it never really costs me energy and I always enjoy it. Someone with asperger’s who has the same thing with flirting could easily have a lot of success without it being overwhelming or unpleasant.
I’m with you on the casual hookup though. While I do have sexual urges, I don’t think I’d enjoy it nearly as much if there’s no emotional connection, in the end sex is just as much emotional as physical. I don’t think it would hurt for me though, it would just not be as enjoyable. But that falls firmly in the camp of variety between people (aspie or not tbh), there’s overlap but luckily for us we’re all individuals in the end, which makes the world so much more interesting.
Now if only everyone could start accepting we’re all individuals and value each of us as such while at the same time seeing trying to understand each individual person with all their qualities as interesting, fun and elucidating we’d be on our way to utopia.
(Also I am beginning to worry that my angry Joyce gravatar makes any speculation about characters’ sexualities seem more confrontational than it’s meant to be)
I WANT HANKY-PANKY BUT I HAVE SOCIAL INHIBITIONS REGARDING THE MATTER AND PERHAPS IF I DO IT WITH DINA IT DOESN’T COUNT AS A SIN BECAUSE I’M JUST HELPING HER WITH HER ACADEMIC STUDIES, IT’S _FOR SCIENCE_.
There you go, Willis, Slipshine gold.
“I am slightly confused by the fact that you don’t even believe in evolution but want to help me with my science. But I’ll take you if you can use a camera.”
(Y) I ship it.
So I shouldn’t be shipping Becky/Dina?
A proper scientific analysis requires multiple data groupings.
Besides, Becky is a feisty redhead, Dina may find it hard to dissuade Becky (or herself) if Becky gets herself set on Dina.
I for one can support this research ship. ^_^
Setting sail, for SCIENCE!
aaaallll aaabooard!
You monster.
…should we call this the Borealis?
I posted in the past that Dina may be lesbian but unaware as she was raised in a seriously heteronormative environment all she knows is she is not attracted to men. The possibility of being attracted to other women hasn’t even crossed her mind.
Going on past versions of her I very much doubt Dina is lesbian, though bi or pansexuality are very much possible, as could many types of romantic identity.
If Dina has paid even a fraction as much attention to extant reptiles as she has to dinosaurs (and there are some “dinosaurs” that have to be classified with “reptiles” rather than “birds”), she would at least have heard of courtship and sexual behaviour between females:
Despite reproducing asexually, and being an all female species, the whiptail still engages in mating behavior with other females of its own species, giving rise to the common nickname “lesbian lizards”. A common theory is that this behavior stimulates ovulation, as those who do not “mate” do not lay eggs.
I’d rather she not. I’m not asexual, but I’m still tired of seeing asexuals being portrayed as Spock/Data-like or “robot”-like.
I totally agree with that, but would like to add: I’m Spock-like (or at least try to be) and am very tired of people who value logic over emotions being regarded as asexual. (E.g. Spock isn’t, much to his dislike, iirc.)
Please refrain from seducing Romulan captains in the line of duty.
“With all due respect, sir. There is a 34.5783% probability that I’ll meet a Romulan whose offspring with me would have at least a 87.5678% probability of inventing an Infinite Improbability Drive. In this case I’d have to defy your orders for the greater good.”
Apparently you haven’t seen this episode.
It was heart-breaking.
I have seen most of TOS but remember nearly nothing and anything else I haven’t seen anyway. Maybe I’ll watch it if you tell me which one it is.
http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/The_Enterprise_Incident_(episode)
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0708464/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1
The Enterprise Incident
http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/The_Enterprise_Incident_(episode)
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0708464/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1
The Enterprise Incident
OK, I had definitely seen that episode. Totally forgot about it though. Alas, I don’t have the time to rewatch the entirety of TOS.
Reboot Spock doesn’t seem to mind not being asexual.
And Data is “fully functional”.
I wouldn’t know. The last TNG episode aired before my birth and nonetheless I only ever watched TOS.
Carla is asexual and definitely not Spock-like, so while that hasn’t been addressed in DoA it could certainly offset the risk of that sort of stereotyping.
Not that I think it’s even an issue. As an ace guy, I’d be very excited for an ace Dina. Ace characters are very short in supply in general; it’d be one thing to make a boring character asexual but Dina is very popular. I can’t think of any reason an ace person would complain.
She’s not asexual, she’s just waiting for a good sock-ironing man to come along.
I would have being interested at all probably makes asexual unlikely, she just hasn’t figured out what she wants yet. Much like Danny didn’t know he was bi till he met Ethan, the potential was always there, it’s just no other guy had pushed his buttons up to that date.
Copious!
Copious conjugal commentary.
ON COPULATION
Can’t cope! Capricious cackling commences.
Hey, whatever a man and a woman and another woman with a penis and a midget do to a donkey is their gosh darn business.
The donkey might disagree.
How do you know the donkey wasn’t meant with the “their” as well?
I happen to know that asses still have rights. Whether they should have them or not is another matter.
They have lefts as well.
Unless they’ve had a buttocksectomy.
1) I know they have rights.
2) This is good.
3) How exactly is this related to my comment?
o.O;
You can just say you didn’t care for the pun 😛
I love puns and seem to have gotten every pun in this thread but this one. (Except it’s only the ass/donkey or right/left pun.) Please elaborate.
Because they’re doing it ‘to’ the donkey, not ‘with’ the donkey.
I see how this might be seen as indication, however I seem to be to literal minded to agree with you.
“That’s not what I meant when I said I wanted a girl with a nice ass”.
Bummer dude, better luck next time? Or maybe you should equid horsing around and get into a stable relationship.
Neigh!
I take it from the way you bridled at that suggestions that you prefer to remane un hitched?
We seem to have gotten off-track. Could you rein it in a little?
Of horse!
Something tells me I should saddle up, this is gonna be a long pun ride…
I agree pardner, things look pretty hairy and I expect there will be a lot of pommeling yet before the last cow gets punched and the pun storm tails off …
Plenty of puns to trot out. I think it’ll be a while before we run a-foal.
Don’t be filly, I’m sure we colt all them long ago 🙂
I think it behooves me to say something stern to all of you, but I can’t think what…
Ah, the alt text #shamlessselfpromotion, and we do mean shameless.
Funny. I’m not seeing any alt-text at all–and I’m not surfing from a mobile either. What does it say?
What you both mean is probably the title text, but since they agree, you are forgiven. (=
Also it says: “sex is weird and personal and you can look at it for a monthly subscription fee on slipshine”
Does Dina really want to learn how to be “Normal” from Amber “Amazi-Girl” O’Malley?
The sad thing is, she’s only the 9th worst person in this comic to learn how to be normal from.
I’m gonna need that list
If she comes to the conclusion that sex is best performed while dressed as a superhero, her future boyfriend is in for a pleasant surprise.
Except he fears bats, for example.
That’s not the superhero I imagine Dina would dress as.
This a) fits her doubly (Congrats!) and b) would sure as hell creep many people out. I rest my case.
Ignoring that that is creepy as hell, Dina would get angry at the use of pterosaur elements in a dino costume.
Not to mention the lack of feathers!
It’s hard to make feather-like detailing. I think Dina would be able to forgive such a simplification.
You don’t know Dina. She would at least try to do it herself before admitting that.
“Great Lakes Avengers”?
Somebody needs to avenge what was done to Lake Erie, but I doubt that’s what the comic is about.
Read the Dan Slott run, “GLA: Misassembled”. Good stuff.
If she comes to the conclusion that sex is best performed while dressed as a superhero, her future boyfriend is in for a pleasant surprise..
Possibly. There are some who would say you should give it a go. That said, the linked person is a bit…opinionated…
I’m consistently amazed at your ability to have Amber partake in silly conversations and smoothly work her massive psychological issues into them.
She’s like Mike on steroids!
I say that because it’s impossible to get mad at her, therefore preventing any spiteful “I’ll show you!” remarks.
Dina reminds me so much of myself. (=
So many shots can be fired here
Sorry, but I did not understand. Could somebody explain?
And if “Yes”, please do.
Sounds to me like newllend might be suggesting you had left yourself open for a series of insults?
I always leave myself wide open. This is because I welcome any sudden discharge of funny insults. They are quite often the climax of a comment thread. Of course, consent is important in this game and it makes far less fun doing alone. The more people join in, the better.
So newllend (and anybody else) is welcome to give examples of such, if they deem the shots worthy being written down. (I’m really curious!)
I think I like you.
Do Shots have to be mean? i’d be willing to wager you’re a very nice person. You seem diplomatic, opened criticism, and well spoken.
Sorry. I meant to say “open to criticism”
Naw, they don’t have to. However, many people tend to misunderstand and be insulted nonetheless. The line between non-mean shots and mean shots is blurry and largely depends on the people involved, especially the target. This is why I’ve made expressively clear I’m hard to insult, especially if it’s funny.
Also, thank you very much.
That almost semens like a come on … I can’t believe that no one has risen to this the occasion? Unfortunately, I’ve taken a vow of nicety but maybe you will consider this a horrible punishment or at least be willing to call it being rubbed in a wrong way?
Semens? Best typo?
Okay, I didn’t realize that that was intentional until .5 seconds after posting my comment, but there’s still a typo there. Both words incorporated into that pun lack that “-s” at the end.
I think so, but I don’t see how. But it’s newllend, so who knows.
I’m guessing half the fanbase has the exact same reaction as Amber right now. One fourth is comfortable, and the other fourth is getting kinda creepy at the prospect.
And then there’s the portion who’s into it so.
I believe that would fall under ‘creepy’ for many.
Indifference ahoy!
Oh dear god Willis, PLEASE don’t sexualize Dina, she’s supposed to be innocent. :[
Well, until somebody claims that dinosaurs didn’t have feathers, or that evolution didn’t happen, then s*** gets real.
Don’t see why she can’t be sexual and innocent, although she’s not exactly being sexual here
To me, “I’ve yet to experience these inclinations myself” sounds a lot like someone on the asexual spectrum.
Dina is not asexual, as Willis has said sexual orientations will not change across universes. Carla may be asexual, however. Not sure if the stagnant sexual orientations apply where there are also species changes.
I have seen people saying that recently, but I haven’t seen a reference produced for it yet. It might apply in general, but have exceptions, or it might have come from back when people were going on about Ethan’s sexuality.
Anyway, unless I see better evidence I am not buying that as a solid rule.
I’m positive I’ve seen the source for this, but as I can’t currently find it, fair enough. That said, I had yet to “feel those inclinations” at 18 and I am not asexual. I know I am not alone in this. People develop at different rates, including sexually. Maybe she will never be interested, but I think basing that assumption on this statement at this age is jumping the gun.
oh right, I’d seen that too. Of course, was she ever actually shown to have sexual feelings for Walky or Mike, or just romantic ones? I can’t remember, but she could still be asexual.
She had romantic feelings for Walky, what she had with Mike is unidentifiable, but she only actually showed strong sexual feelings for Walky when he acted mature.
I seem to remember her initiating an at it … in the lab, apparently on the floor. That may count or not. Next piece of context.
(they are all consecutive strips)
Willis confirmed on Tumblr that Carla is still asexual.
As for Dina, from what I understand she never showed sexual attraction in IW, only romantic attraction. It is important to not confuse the two, but the rampant use of words like “heterosexual” as a catch-all for both can make it difficult.
Yeah pretty much this, I don’t get this western (and especially American) obsession with being somehow immoral or sinful. Sex is just sex, sure it can be dirty but it can also be innocent, and it sure as hell doesn’t define the innocence of a person.
Dina could end up liking someone having sex and remaining just as innocent as she is now. Just as Mary might very well not be a sexual being at all yet she’s pretty damn far from innocent to me.
I think she can learn a lot about sex. Is Joe around? Or Roz? They can teach her.
I seriously believe a conversation between Roz and Dina about sex would be awesome.
I concur.
There’s no such thing as innocent in this comic don’t you know this site at all, don’t you know the internet at all?
“There is no such thing as innocence, only degrees of guilt?” I rather preferred “Innocence proves nothing.”
Really, innocence is such a fluid concept. I prefer madness. Just as fluid, but 90% more fun.
My friend, I like you’re style… 😛
Jeeze guys, I just meant that I don’t want to see Dina in a slipshine comic some day. I wasn’t saying that I think she should never have sex, even if she wants to. :l
Seriously.. the idea of seeing a Dina slipshine weirds me out as much as the idea of the internet rule 34ing Hannelore (from QC) does… -shudder-
I can see where you’re coming from. But I wouldn’t really compare Dina with Hannelore. Dina has no interest in sex, but that’s really all there is, with Hannelore there’s a clear aversion to sexual contact, which is quite different if you ask me.
Says someone with “best Claire face” as a gravatar.
Hannelore is cannon heteroxexual, but averse to physical contact and germophobic. Sometimes she can be so overcome by desires she “forgets” her phobias and aversions. I’m too lazy to finish the archive crawl to find the link, but there is a comic where Hanna willingly jumps into the arms of a fireman collecting door-to-door for a charity.
Google is your friend:
http://questionablecontent.net./view.php?comic=1224
Doesn’t help that she looks, like, twelve.
She’s actually 30, in my headcanon.
Walkyverse Dina would be at least that old. No idea of her age was explicitly stated, but if she was, say, 20 when that comic began she’d be 35 now.
But she apparently just popped back into existence from a hole in reality, so who knows if that’s a properly aged Dina from an alternate reality, or a reconstituted Dina who died years ago and hasn’t aged, or what.
Extremely well-preserved zombie!Dina.
Did Dina ever leave the Walky/Shortpacked reality in the first place?
Ask Mike.
I thought she was like a 7,000 year old Sumerian warrior-spirit or somethihng
Don’t you mean 4000 year old Aztec High Priestess?
There were no Aztecs 4,000 years ago.
Well yeah, there was only this single priestess, who later on gave life to other Aztecs through parthenogenesis.
(rant begins; feel free to skip)
Meh, this is just a pet peeve of mine-it’s not at all clear that Uto-Aztecan speakers(the language family that includes Nahuatl) were in modern-day Mexico before the mid-first millennium CE and the migration of the Mexica to the valley of Mexico(and according to their own histories their split from the other Chichimecs) happened sometime in the 1000-1200 ballpark, so it’s reasonable to place Mexica ethnogensis sometime in the late first millennium BCE.
(rant over)
I can’t help but wonder if a Slipshine comic with Dina taking notes while she masturbates would be awesome or horrible.
That sounds like something Faz would do.
Worst Slipshine comic ever.
Watch it somehow also end up being the most popular.
People really just like it for the cut-away at the end to Joe in an orgy giving a thumbs-up… right?
Think it would be weird
She wouldn’t take not, she’d take dictations. You need your hands free!
If she’s masturbating, she’s not taking di…er…<Emily Litella>never mind. >_>
“0:03:40 – Still nothing. I’m beginning to wonder if pausing every ten seconds to take notes is as effective as I’d hoped.”
Like I said, dictation!
Though I would suggest a voice recorder rather than a human for dictation purposes.
“0:03:40 – Still nothing. I’m beginning to wonder if pausing every ten seconds to quote observations is as effective as I’d hoped.”
A slightly off-topic message for Mr Willis;
Just a random thought, Loving the webcomic, but when the comments start really stacking up, it gets hard to track, even for someone like me. What’s the chances of getting those vertical lines under people’s pics, to keep track of who replied to who? I’ll understand if it’s not possible, just saying it might be worth looking at…
Either way, keep up the great work!
And while he is at it, he might want to reduce the indentation of the first layer of nesting to ultimately allow for a higher nesting depth. I run into those limits far to often for my liking.
That sounds incredibly hot to ol’ Barf here.
The spirit of inquiry, ohhhhhh yeaaaaaaaaaah
Except I’m dead serious also
Oh! Rub, bish, rub …
Huh, so Dina is at least semi gray-ace. Bit predictable, but hey, more ace representation is always good.
That was new terminology for me. Thanks for sharing!
Yeah. Very broad category though
Between “clinical” and “copious note-taking,” I could totally see Dina turning out to be a medical fetishist.
Is….is Dina hitting on Amber?
Think we got that from the last page.
Oh… I wasnt sure…
Flirtation via light touch
Probably not. I imagine her flirting is very direct and literal. Until she says something like “I am interested in pursuing a sexual and/or romantic relationship with you” i’m going to assume she’s not interested in anybody. For now anyway.
Seeing much of Dina in myself, I agree with that. If I say that I like you skirt, I mean exactly that and nothing more. (But then again, I’m very shy and if I indeed should one day try to hit on a girl, I might try to emulate other means of communication than telling her directly. And I would horribly fail.)
So do you or do you not like my skirt? You need to stop playing with my emotions like this.
I think your skirting a fine line here Swoop.
Don’t mind me, I’m just being a drama llama.
Does that mean I can OR can’t continue to dress you down?
Keep up the puns and you can do whatever you want.
Sadly not true, no matter how hard I pun I never really take flight … no matter how hard I end up panting … maybe my wordplay is just too blousey?
That’s it, we’re done, alpaca up.
Hey keep your shirt on, while we may be over the hump, I’m sure we can top this …
Afterwards guanaco get a drink and play some poker?
I agree. After 32 years of life, and constantly pushing my social abilities, I *think* I might be able to successfully flirt if I tried really hard. But I’d rather not risk it, and just be direct. I know I can’t always detect flirting.
Hey, remember its OK to fail, and you’re possibly one us late bloomers …
Thanks. Though I am fine if I figure out flirting or if I don’t. Demiromantics need it less than most 😀
I am 20 and have not detected anybody flirting ever. Nearly all I know about flirting I know from fiction.
Also I plan on persuading a former schoolmate to collect a list of people who were interested in me and, if they are OK with that, a few friends of mine. I could totally deal if the list were empty, but if not, there might be hilarious revelations.
Also, I decided to take you as my twelve-year prognosis of personal development in that area. (Except, of course you tell me you were way worse with 20 or something like that.)
From personal experience I would suggest you will learn. I don’t think I really noticed any flirting till I was in my mid-twenties myself. And even then it would often come in the form of, hey the way that girl was acting a week ago, I think she might be flirting with me…..
Society is way to focused on norm-based development, everything has it’s age and place, in the end things come when they come and as long as you don’t really miss it and you’re happy with your life then I don’t see why anyone would care.
Or, it could come up in a conversation like this:
Friend “Wow you were really flirting with her, I though she was in a relationship.”
Me ” … I was?”
Well, my twelve-year prognosis did say I’d go from never to not always detecting flirting. (=
That, or she tries displaying more colorful plumage and engaging in a ritual dance.
Without being an expert I’d assume there not being known much about the ritual dances of long dead dinosaurs, with movement fossilizing so bad and whatnot. Thus her need to be historically accurate might prevent her from such.
Display of colourful plumage and spikes, while thinkable, are rather not for flirting with a particular person, but rather out doing your competition. It might be utilized but I can hardly imagine those used in a situation akin to Swoops quote.
So I guess Dina is finally showing some interest in things other than dinosaurs. That’s a good thing, right?
Probably not. From previous experience, her character development is 1: loves dinosaurs, 2: gets interested in boys, 3: bad things happen repeatedly.
REPEATEDLY.
I’m not so sure it has to go wrong. Now it’s been a while since I read about the “other” Dina, but this one is a lot more lovable, and this is not nearly as violent a universe. Not to mention she has a far better support system.
That being said, Dave Willis is a Jerkface, so I guess anything that hasthe potential of Dina getting hurt is a risky endeavor at best.
First rule of Willis: Anything that can go wrong, will.
Slight correction:
–
First rule of Willis:
Everything that could go wrong, Willis.
Well, if anything this Dina is unlikely to drug someone for several weeks so they can be her boyfriend.
Not on purpose, anyway. She seems to have a lot of confused mishaps though.
Considering her dietary choices a Leslie style secondary sugar high might well be involved.
Dina is just so my favorite. and note taking could be neat.. get exactly whats best down pat haha no wasted stuff
True, but they do get rather distracting. Better to jot them down during the afterglow while the memory’s fresh and vivid, or just memorize everything and make an entry documenting it when you find time.
Putting the humor aside for a moment, Amber’s growing fractures in personality are getting worse. Unless AG’s costume comes with a second set of lady parts she is still having sex no matter who she was dressed as at the time.
Worse case scenario -if ‘AG’ gets pregnant that will obliterate any remaining sanity because if AG is having sex and not her, how is Amber pregnant then??
I don’t think anyone will get pregnant in this comic. It would take way too long to end that arc.
It would depend how the character handled the pregnancy, how long the arc would take. I agree that I don’t see it happening, though.
Her split personality doesn’t actually go as deep as she just pretended to Dina: http://www.dumbingofage.com/2014/comic/book-4/04-the-whiteboard-dong-bandit/hurt/
I agree. Denying that “Amber” is having sex is bad, especially since Danny thinks he has been having sex with Amber.
Danny doesn’t understand he’s balls deep in crazy.
I’m not sure he doesn’t understand, it’s hardly the biggest secret. Though knowing Danny willful ignorance is very much a possibility.
Isn’t that Danny’s default condition at college. I think he starts to get the idea
Danny said “mask”, so
Pregnancy shouldn’t be much of a risk, considering she carries around Amazi-Condoms. That is, unless other people keep ganking them for their own use..
http://www.dumbingofage.com/2014/comic/book-4/01-the-only-dope-for-me-is-you/reservations-2/
Dina, I’m glad that you acknowledge when you overstep the bounds of yours and Amber’s intimacy, but please avoid giving shippers straight lines like that. You’ll ever hear the end of it.
Nothin’ straight about that line.
Well played.
Maybe Dina’s not Ace, but rather only attracted to those that she becomes emotionally involved with (or intellectually, which may be the closest to emotional closeness Dina gets to people). Let’s put her in a room with a paleontologist, then we’ll know.
Demisexual? Could well be. Could also be Demiromantic.
I understand demisexuality, but I’ve never heard the term demiromantic. I can’t quite get my mind around how that would work: able to feel romantically drawn only to someone with whom they already have a (non-romantic) intimate bond?
Only romantically attracted to close collaborators?
Really? Imagine someone profoundly uncomfortable with or perhaps terrified of strangers …
>able to feel romantically drawn only to someone with whom they already have a (non-romantic) intimate bond?
Exactly that. We don’t get romantic feelings until we have been close friends with someone for quite some time.
In my case, that means that any form of traditional dating makes no sense at all. If I wanted to go out of my way to “meet someone” I would need to go try to make friends with new people and then wait months minimum and possibly years to see if I end up becoming romantically attracted to them… and then see if they are interested. Luckily I don’t care that much, so I don’t have to go looking. If it happens it happens, if not that is fine. It only happened to me once so far.
I didn’t know this existed but it might actually apply to me as well. That’s quite interesting. Thank you.
I told a friend about it recently and she thought she might be too. She was really pleased to hear there was a name for it. Hell, that was my experience, I found it on tumblr, in discussion about the larger ace community and was like, oh wow where was this info my whole life?
Demiromanticism is an interesting one. I think it might be really common, but there just isn’t awareness of it as a named concept…
Also it has degrees and seems to me to eventually shade right over into “normal” alloromantic stuff. I mean, most people are not going to have strong romantic feeling for someone right out of the gate. But it is the degree to which that is delayed that makes it different.
I could see how demiromantic would make a lot of sense in the context of asexuality. For me romantic interest can have two forms, it can either come from initial sexual attraction being reinforced by finding out the person I’m attracted to is also a great person or I can know a person for a long time, realize they’re awesome and then become romantically interested in them.
I think without my specific sexual attraction my experience would be pretty similar to yours. Not to mention it makes a lot of sense, it’s quite easy to know if you’re sexually attracted to someone (at least on a physical level) but to me true romantic interest requires that you really know the person, and that takes time.
I found useful stuff on this blog: https://thethinkingasexual.wordpress.com/tag/demiromantic/
And http://www.asexuality.org has a forum section for talking about “romanticism, aromanticism, the area in between, and the many kinds of attractions.” I haven’t really checked it out too much though.
Pretty interesting stuff, thanks for the links.
Just out of curiosity, do you have any similar links with regards to Asperger/Autism. I’ve looked around a bit but it seems most is faced on public awareness, which is obviously great, but I’d love to find something more community oriented. I’m fine with finding information, what I’m looking for is more like minded people.
Gosh, I don’t know for that, sorry.
I mostly just hang out with a bunch of huge nerds originally from Slashdot. There is enough AS/aspieness and sub-clinical variants there 😀
No worries, just throwing it out there. Never know if you don’t try.
I’m definitely going to check out slashdot though. If only finding and exploring new communities wasn’t such a hassle ;).
Oh, you might find something there, I don’t know… our little sub-community all left for greener pastures years ago. The dot just isn’t what it once was 🙁
Best general tech site with some real community I know is Ars Technica, though of course some like Hacker News or certain sub-Reddits. LWN if you do Linux…
BTW, feel free to friend me (or not!) on any social media. Kelly Clowers on FB or tumblr. “randle_revar” if you do hit slashdot, though I am not terribly active there now.
Isn’t that always the case, half the time you found out about something awesome it’s no longer awesome, or won’t be very soon.
The problem with your suggestions is that while I consider myself a geek/nerd, actual technology is kind of out of my wheelhouse (I’m more of a Social Science/Game/Comic/Fantasy nerd). So while I reckon I have a lot in common with the people there I sort of lack in the main aspect of the communities.
I’m definitely planning on adding you on the social medias though. Actually checking out your tumblr right now, I approve of the Robert Jordan related posts, a lot!
Meh new FB sucks, very annoying you can’t send a message with a friend request anymore. It’s not like everyone will instantly recognize the name of everyone they might like to be friends with on FB….
There’s more than one kind of intellectual involvement.
“Trying to force everything into an endothermic-poikilothermic dichotomy may make categorization simple, but is not adequate to deal with a group of such diversity” –> deep abiding dislike, faster than you’d ever imagine.
>endothermic-poikilothermic dichotomy
Noooo! Don’t do it! There is good reason that there are at least 3 major groupings related to that. Way too complicated for a dichotomy! Also, those two are not the counterparts to each other.
I thought that was the joke.
Yes, that was the point. So either Kelly proved it, or I went too far and picked something that would mean it wasn’t really a palaeontologist. 🙂
Sexualize, Dina? I second this! Just let it be someone soft who breaks her in, soft like Jacob!
Jacob? Bleh. She needs someone science-y and nerdy. And I don’t know if he would understand her well. She seems aspie, and believe me, sex and intimacy can be different for us.
I just started to ship Dina with Roz. They could have a completely open and instructive discussion about sex. It would be a bit like a tutorial, but Roz wouldn’t mind.
…I now want that to be a thing so, so much.
Works for me
While my post was ultimately a joke…Roz and Dina works, but Jacob an Dina doesn’t….what?
Somehow my mind went to this scenario: “Well, to make a complete tutorial, they would need male parts, too. A trusted gentleman, of good build, who doesn’t kiss and tell. A beautiful and good mannered […]” *Starts writing fanfic that’s totally about himself and barely about Dina and Roz anymore*
I’ll admit I never saw more of the Kinsey biopic than a brief clip, but this was how I interpreted how Liam Neeson played the part: very methodical and clinical, not allowing himself or anyone else to get distracted by smirking innuendo, schoolyard jokes, or other things irrelevant to the inquiry / research.
I hope this isn’t too personal of a question, But in what way is the sex and intimacy different? If that was too personal of a question I apologize.
I’m a virgin and was never tested for any forms of autism, but I like to think there are couples out there whose pillowtalk usually starts with something like “Thanks for helping my trick my body into believing it fulfilled its genetic imperative!”.
Sex and intimacy are completely different. Having sex with a prostitute is almost indifferent, there is an orgasm but no emotional connection, but that is “physically intimate”, but two straight men (ex. Holmes and Watson) can be so emotionally intimate that they are almost a single mind without ever touching more than a firm handshake.
I’m sorry, I wasn’t very clear. I should have phrased that better. I was asking about aspergers relationship to romance as well it’s relationship to sex.
I think it varies a lot. I would suspect a somewhat higher percent of aspies would be aromantic, demiromantic, etc. But I don’t have any real evidence of that, just my own experience.
It definitely can make romance harder, once it is there. Asperger’s (and autism) is tied up with empathy and theory of mind, so we can appear/be quite selfish at times, and can have a hard time understanding our partner, especially if they are neurotypical. There are therapists that specialize in working with couples that are on the spectrum (one or both). The issues can also have some resemblance to the issues faced by couples where one has severe ADD/ADHD
As far as aspies and sex, I dunno if there is any major known effect or correlation…haven’t really looked into it.
Thank you for sharing. I know what the words “aromantic” and “demiromantic” mean now, so thank you for that to.
You are welcome. I am always happy to discuss and help people understand where I have personal experience.
There is some scientific evidence that there’s more variance in sexual, romantic and gender identities among people with autistic traits than there is in the population as a whole. Which makes some sense as the most common identities are those based on neurotypical development.
While it is true that romantic relationships are harder for people who have autistic tendencies there’s at the very least anecdotal evidence that some people actually prefer relationships with people with these traits as they can be very reliable, direct and open. I think a lot of it depends (as always) on the person as a whole.
The empathy/ToM thing is even more complex, new evidence seems to indicate it’s not so much a lack of these than a lack of an information filter, meaning a lot more information comes in making it harder to focus on relevant information. Because of this learned behaviors have to take the role of intuition, making it harder to be confident in what we see and acting on it. While this can obviously have it’s disadvantages it can work very well in an established relationship (for example when I was a kid I’d know instantly if my mom had a bad day at work and I was almost always able to cheer her up, because I’d seen it often enough to know what the right interpretation of the situation was).
Thanks for the info in this post and the others you have made! Very informative!
Thanks for the compliment. I strive to understand everything that interests me as best I can, and explain them as clearly as possible.
It’s always nice when it’s appreciated, not to mention it’s always good to share information.
The more you know *insert comet graphic*
“The more you know, the more people will bug you to help them.”? That’s my experience at least. But yeah, learning and teaching are my favourite hobbies as well. Also I second Kellies (Kellys?) post.
Very very true. I guess the key is to know a lot about interesting stuff that doesn’t relate to much to day to day problems. Knowing a lot about social science = lots of interesting discussions and teaching moments, knowing a lot about computers = people constantly asking you to solve their problems.
With regards to the last part, thanks a lot.
Eek responded one level to far back…. Meant this for the post by Rorror at 5 am…
One of my peeves is how rarely fandom, as a whole, acknowledges the latter. The assumption seems to be that any intimate relationship must inevitably become sexual.
Yeah… I spent a fair amount of time of overthinking how that expresses itself in fandoms. For a writer, sex is a very striking way to express intimacy. It’s a shortcut for an inexperienced writer to say “look, they have a relationship, they have even come as far as sex.”
For the same reason I believe that the overfixation of bdsm that sometimes shows up in fandoms is beause it’s a very visually striking way to show that “they are toots doing it! Their sex is very interesting”
Also, fans are horny.
HumansFans are horny, yes, and they like to fantasize about hawt people getting it on … which is going to be any two (or more) actors, given how casting works.1) I agree, Jacob and an insecure freshman ain’t gonna happen. Jacob is not Joe.
2) Isn’t Jacob still interested in Sarah?
1) I don’t really agree with that. Yes Jacob is a sexy sexy man, but he’s also very sweet, romantic and caring. I think he and Dina would go just fine, better than a lot of the couples we’ve seen so far.
2) I’m not sure really, he likes her as a person, but he wants a real relationship, and Sarah hasn’t really shown she’s up for that. There’s something going on there but not sure if it’s sexual, or ever will be.
I agree with your first point, but the second one can simply be spelled out like this; Sarah just anted to fuck, Jacob, wants something more serious; so I personally don’t see it happening. Personally I’d rather see Jacob with Rox, in a relationship that eventually grows past mere sexual attraction. I was denied this in shortpack, and it seems I’ll be denied this here again -.-
Roz*
Look, Amber, I get that this is all weird coming from Dina, but WHY is there untouched bacon on your plate?
Good point.
How is it possible that Dina doesn’t have… inclinations?
Sometimes it seems that every character in this strip is gay or closeted.
Well, with the exceptions of 16 out of the 18 people on the cast page.
Dina seems to be saying the she is asexual, and feels no sexual attraction to anyone. If so, she wouldn’t be the only ace in the strip: Carla is also canonically asexual.
To be honest to me one of the defining things about this comic is that it is representative of the diversity that exists in reality, and asexuality is very much part of that diversity, so I don’t see why Dina couldn’t be asexual.
That being said the idea of this particular version of Dina liking a boy or girl is just to cute to imagine so I hope she’s not asexual, though having an asexual represented here would be pretty damn interesting and fit very well within the universe (and I’m guessing even if it’s not Dina there’s at least one asexual character out there, we just don’t know who yet).
I really like the idea of ace!Dina, but I also agree that it’d be adorable to see her fall for someone (only then probably also sad). So, I guess I’ll choose to believe that she’s asexual and hetero/homo/bi/something-romantic, for now.
Hmm that would work quite well actually. And I love the idea of a character who’s romantic and sexual status don’t quite match up, though Carla might (among other things) fit that bill already.
Although I do think romance and sexuality seem equally foreign to Dina right now. I think this is probably as close as she got to romantic feelings.
Carla was asexual iirc.
Not sure there’s evidence in this universe, but afaik she’s asexual but homoromantic. I can’t wait for that getting cleared up, Carla is awesome in every way.
There isn’t evidence in-comic yet but he confirmed it on Tumblr.
And transchassis
Unless I’m totally mistaken this Carla is transgender herself. Though there’s not yet been any indication of her sexual or romantic inclinations.
Yes, this Carla is trans. That’s why she has a single room.
ha ha ha ha
HA HA HA HA HA HA
ha ha ha ha ha
#10
Two more “Ha”s and it could have been a haiku.
It should have been a haiku.
Speaking as a person who has also never had… inclinations, I have no problem whatsoever relating to Dina. Or to that side of her, anyway.
Dude, DoA may have a higher percentage of non-straight characters than your corner of the world, but so what?
Was the second sentence supposed to elaborate on the first? Because it doesn’t.
Yay, Dina is asexual. Probly.
Dina needs to grind more missions before she gets enough experience to unlock the ‘Talking About Sex’ intimacy level with Amber.
Wow for once Sal isn’t winning a poll, she’s finally been dethroned.
Wow Amber, that last line was kind of rude actually. Not that Dina would be offended, but still.
How is “I’m glad you don’t TMI me.” rude?
Err…is that a Barney t-shirt Dina is wearing??
With feathers.
And I have been trying to track that shirt down for the last 3 days. Google Image Search says it doesn’t exist outside of DoA, but I know I have seen it somewhere before.
I agree … I sort of half-way suspect QC, but can’t afford to start an archive binge …
It doesn’t show up in QC. It is the sort of thing that would fit in there, though.
Curious … it really has a bear-monster feel to it in addition to seeming familiar …
Having sex as a low priority, to the point you don’t really care if it happens or not doesn’t automatically make someone asexual. It just means a lower sex drive than most have.
Yeah, sure, but she’s yet to experience sexual inclinations at eighteen. That’s kind of the textbook definition of asexuality I’m pretty sure.
I don’t think sexual inclinations at 18 are really indicative of anything. Sure sexual development can start with puberty but that doesn’t mean it has to, or that it develops the same way for everyone. Current scientific thinking is that development goes well into young adulthood (at least 28) so there’s plenty of time for the inclinations of an 18 year old to change. Just like far from everyone who identifies as purely hetero or homosexual at 18 will still do so at 30 years of age.
Yeah, sure, but until that happens it’s not like anybody’s insane for saying they’re gay when they’ve only ever been attracted to their own sex and never to the opposite. That’s still exactly what the word means. They’re not misusing it.
True, my point was more with the regard to outsiders assigning sexuality than self-identity.
Essentially because sexual identity can be transient I think it could be considered presumptive to assign someone a sexual identity based on their behavior at 18 years of age. Self-assigned sexual identity is a different animal altogether though, and I agree that whatever sexuality someone of any age considers themselves to be is their sexuality, regardless of future or past sexuality.
They’re fictional characters. Nobody in this comment thread has the power to force Dina to identify as anything she doesn’t want to.
Words mean things though. We know that Danny is attracted to men and women, so we in the comment section call him bisexual, because that’s the word that describes that. If his identity later develops in another direction he will not have been harmed by any of this at all, because he’s fictional.
Dina is sexually attracted to nobody. She does not experience sexual inclinations. Asexuality is the word that describes this. If one day she begins experiencing sexual attraction, or if she decides she doesn’t want to identify as asexual, she will not have been hurt by commenters using this word to describe her, because she too is not real.
If she’d said “I don’t eat meat” we wouldn’t be sitting here arguing about whether that means she’s a vegetarian or whether it’s appropriate to call her a vegetarian when she doesn’t necessarily identify with vegetarianism or maybe will one day cease to be a vegetarian. “Vegetarian” is just the word that means that thing she said.
I realize that. But my comment was not really aimed at Dina but at what she represents. I think what’s important in this is the use of the word “yet”. It could very well indicate that Dina considers herself to be sexual but has not yet been in a situation where she has felt specific sexual inclinations. Based on the comments here there are people who identify with Dina yet don’t consider themselves asexual.
So while it’s true that labeling Dina as asexual doesn’t directly affect anyone it seems to me it does indirectly affect those that identify with her situation yet do not consider themselves to be asexual. So while I agree with you that there’s nothing harmful to calling her asexual, and there’s nothing malicious my argument came from the idea that these kinds of labels can be uncomfortable to some people, and therefor it’s a good idea to examine them further, as it might lead to a better understanding of all aspects of the sexuality spectrum, and in my mind a better understanding of the world generally leads to a better world.
Frankly you just seem a little too determined to come up with excuses why it’s wrong to call the asexual character asexual.
If it offends anybody to see asexuality called asexuality, that’s their issue. The community doesn’t need to cater to that.
It’s fine to identify with her despite not being asexual, or having chosen not to identify as asexual despite knowing that the word does describe you, but that doesn’t make the character any less asexual nor does it mean that the community needs to be silent regarding her asexuality.
I’m 28 and still don’t feel inclination to have sex and I| wouldn’t call myself asexual. Wouldn’t mind doing it. don’t care if it ever happens
That’s the problem with textbook definitions I guess. It tells us that because people exhibit a number of behaviors it falls under a certain label, while reality is far more fluid (both within and between individuals).
And that’s not even mentioning that in many instances personal experience is at least as if not far more important than exhibited behaviors or scientific knowledge. These kinds of things are very useful for understanding humanity as a whole, but are seriously lacking when it comes to understanding individual experiences.
Whether you to identify as asexual if of course your choice, but don’t act like people are weird for thinking someone who doesn’t experience sexual attraction might be asexual.
I’ve experienced sexual attraction, it’s how I figured out I was gay, I just have little drive to act on it. Likewise, you have no idea if Dina’s been attracted to anyone, just that she’s never acted on it either, though at least she’s starting to plan for it.
Geeze, do I have to be that guy here? Do I have to pull out the dictionary?
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/inclination
Inclination: a feeling of wanting to do something : a tendency to do something
When she says she’s yet to experience sexual inclinations, that does not mean that she’s yet to act on her sexual attraction. She’d need to say something else entirely in order to communicate what you seem to have drawn from that. Something like “I’ve yet to partake in these activities”.
And yeah, I know the problems with dictionaries, but it’s not like this is some slang or colloquium or figure of speech we’re dealing with either.
One the one hand, this seems to be exactly what he said: inclination to have sex (what Dina claims not to have had) ≠ sexual attraction (what you assume her not to have). On the other hand you were technically correct in the beginning. Some definitions classify people with sexual attraction, but unusual low inclination to act on it, as ace. Not all though.
Ultimately the ace community usually goes by how you identify. Yeah, if you have no sexual urges by 28, that would certainly be a technical fit (ace people can be sex-repulsed or not, it doesn’t matter). If you don’t care to identify that way though that is fine.
Dina could identify as ace now if she wanted (well she probably doesn’t know about the terms or the community), and later she might find out she changed, or was not ace in the first place, she just hadn’t felt it yet. That’s all fine, people change and or discover new things about themselves sometimes. Dina being only 18 or so it is more likely things could go any direction. But at this time ace headcanons are pretty reasonable.
I have to admit I don’t know much about the ace community. But I would think that even when it comes to a lack of or limited sexual attracion there’s still many different shades of gray. I’d say there’s a pretty big difference between someone who has no interest whatsoever in sex and someone who has no inclination to seek it out but is open to the idea. They might seem very similar but on a personal level there’s a world of difference.
It doesn’t make someone necessarily asexual, but it does make them a prime candidate.
I used to describe my perspective on sex similar to how you’ve described yours, until I learned more about asexuality and the how arousal and sexual attraction are not necessarily synonymous, and ended up personally describing myself as asexual.
I’m callin’ it now, Dina and Becky will be the hottest ship in the comments for 2015 :p
And by hottest you mean cutest and most awkward? Right?
As in most popular ship, but yes it would awkward and cute!
Ok then we’re in total agreement, it would be awesome indeed.
Wait a minute! “Amazi-Girl is doing that, not me?”
But that was just because Danny, given the choice of “mask or no mask,” went with “mask.” How would this conversation between Amber and Dina have gone if Danny had chosen “no mask?”
*confused*
i guess you’d have to read the slipshine
I have! Guess I’m going to have to read it again, then. 🙂
Now that I think about it, that does kind of confuse me. For lack of a better term, was she “Amber” when she and Danny had sex, or, as this comic implies, was she Amazi-Girl?
She does have her Amber cheek blush after her momentary worry that she hurt him.
You have to read the slipshine. Nobody’s going to spoil it for you.
He chose mask? I didn’t think he would make a decision, honestly.
You’ll have to read the slipshine.
And as the votes keep coming in, the race gets closer and closer!
I mean, Dina asexual makes some sense, because she’s Dina, but I don’t want it to be true.
How does it make more sense for her than for any other character we haven’t yet seen in any romantical or erotical encounter? Or rather: If it doesn’t make more sense for her (which seems to be the case to me), why did you think it was worth pointing out?
Oh, with my avatar this looks more aggressive than I meant it. While I’m slightly annoyed that many people jump to conclusions way to quickly, I’m to the largest part plain curious and mean it exactly the way I wrote it. Imagine it read by the voice you gave Dina in this very comic.
I think why many people think it makes sense for Dina is that she hasn’t really shown much interest in any type of interpersonal relationship, especially those of a romantic nature. However considering we’ve only seen her in limited social interactions, and we’ve seen very little ragarding her personal desires or opinions (not counting those involving dinosaurs), I do agree it’s probably mostly projection.
The jump from “socially inactive” to “wants to be sexually inactive” still doesn’t make sense to me. (Isn’t this actually a nerd/geek/whatever stereotype: “fat, ugly, has no friends and watches porn the entire day, daydreaming about women they can’t have because they are such loosers.”?)
Also I don’t recall Mike, Carla or Marcie expressing such an interest, but then again my memory is really bad.
I never claimed the connection between Dina’s social behavior and sexual or romantic inclination made sense. I was just hypothesizing on possible reasons people would have to see Dina as asexual.
I think part of the difference between Dina and Mike and Marcie is that we’ve seen a lot more of her (and many people are far more familiar with Walkyverse mike than Dina, not to mention he seems to have changed very little). Carla is a lot more complex as she’s know to be transgender and her sexuality is quite a major point in shortpacked, so there’s less speculation as there’s more information.
And I never claimed that you claimed that. (= I was just elaborating why, IMHO, this shouldn’t be a reason for Dina to be seen as ace.
I forgot about the influence of the Walkyverse though.
Oh, and there are actually 105 comics tagged “Mike” and only 100 tagged “Dina”. But since Dina tends to be less repetitive and more memorable, it might seem as if she had appeared far more. And your other arguments were far stronger anyway, so who cares?
Don’t worry about that, I’m an aspie on an internet forum, I’m going to misconstrue some things regardless of intent, it’s unavoidable. As long as people are patient and willing to explain there’s never any harm, and often it’s more interesting and there’s more to be learned than if I got everything the first time around.
Like I said though I agree social behavior (or using the catchword Etraversion) has to be linked to sexuality or romantic inclination at all.
And the presence of the walkyverse can make things rather complex, because you never know if someone is taking that into account or not, I’ve found myself switching between seeing Dina as purely a DoA character and taking her other versions into account just commenting on today’s comic alone.
Well, we know Carla is ace (word of god). Marcie, yeah we have no idea, but she has been onscreen even less than Dina, she’s not going to get as many headcanons in general. Mike makes a comment to Amazi-girl that sounds sexual – after she tackled him, he wanted to know if she was going to tie him up and said he’d “be into that”. Who knows with Mike though.
Afaik mike is either pan or spitesexual (and obviously momsexual). Though I guess the second is an identity wholly unique to mike ;).
I wouldn’t be sure of that. The acronym MILF might exist for a reason.
Oh, I’m sorry. Counting to three is obviously to hard for me. (Also I’m awake far to long.) Total mispost. (I still wouldn’t be sure of that, however I can’t name any sources.) Still incredibly sorry.
Weird, for some reason I can’t reply to your posts Rorror.
I can’t blame you for the confusion though, I created the entire post and then added in the momsexual part at the last minute, so it’s not clear from the context I meant spitesexual. Though now that I think of it I think the momsexual part of Mike might very well just be a subsection of spitesexual.
There is a maximal nesting depth on DoA comments (actual it is just about anywhere, but in some places it’s really high) and we exceeded reached it. It actually happens rather frequently around here.
Stgerlachus, you can’t reply to Rorror because this thread is nested too deep now. The idea is to keep the column from getting absurdly skinny. (of course if the column was wider in the first place…)
And I assure you that my last comment reads a lot more fluent, if you assume the “exceeded” were stricken out (or missing altogether), as it should have been.
I guess that makes sense. In the end you’d have a column with only 1 word per line, it would get rather unreadable.
Yeah, with Mike I just assume it to be a mean comment, intended to upset Amber,
SHORTPACKED! SPOILER WARNING
even though I have later been spoilered about a certain event in Shortpacked!, whose URL I don’t care searching for right now.
Marcie is confirmed bisexual.
wait, really? I totally missed that
Can anyone confirm this? I also don’t remember this piece of info.
http://itswalky.tumblr.com/post/98237331432/today-is-bi-visibility-day-but-it-may-not-be-the
Thanks!
Quick, think of your youngest sibling/cousin/child having sex. Yeah, that is about the same reason people are happy enough believing “Nopenopenopenononono. No. Asexual.”
She’s three and I am gifted with a very good imagination. Luckily I’m also gifted with the ability to precognise things I really shouldn’t think to much about. And since I don’t think comparing Dina to a 3yo is fair, I’ll substitute some 12yos I know. And then? So what? My main concerns come from the general direction of (statutory) rape and possibly unhealthy attractions to not-yet-fully pubertised bodies (Those concerns are entirely conscious and don’t apply to grown-up women, as young as they may look.), but other than that, let ’em be.
The main point is that people don’t want to picture Dina having sex. She is the “little sister” of the cast, and the idea makes a lot of people uncomfortable.
I get that and I think they shouldn’t be. But that’s not my pigeon, of course. On a less related note: I really don’t wanna picture my parents having sex, but since they are my (presumed biological) parents (as well as of my siblings), it doesn’t make all that much sense for them to be ace. And, you know, “sense” was my original question. Your perspective proved to be interesting nonetheless.
While there’s a valid case against pedophilia, you also have to be careful about immediately writing off females with thin frames and flat chests as being so aberrant that they HAVE to fall under that purview. I’ve known lots of individuals in their teens and 20s that looked like preteens, and had self-image issues tied to that.
So far people seem to only be promoting Dina in Slipshine for the narrative factor, but lets take an even look at it:
1: The only argument against Dina in Slipshine- in sharp contrast to the seeming approval of other characters being there- is due to her body shape. Meaning that the focus is more on her body shape, than her character. Now being asexual, I might be missing something here, but that seems an odd reason to be interested in a specific character (do people that read the Amazi-girl/Amber one like girls with strong frames and large breasts, and only read it for that?), but just as importantly
2: Willis’ art has improved dramatically over the years [hell, even just from the start of DoA], but lets face it, if you can conceive precise real world elements such as age from his art (outside of narrative context), you’re wanting to perceive those things. And if that’s the case
3: I’m sure you can find better art to soothe your abberant sexual desires elsewhere.
Kaoy’s point makes a lot more sense to me, though.
Though, she’s NOT an actual sister or anything, so that seems more a willful denial of lifestyle depth [as Rorror pointed out, comparable to ignoring that your parents are (likely) sexual beings]. More curiously, why would having a pay-locked sexually-based narrative on a site where you presumably couldn’t accidentally access it, force you to read it and recognize her as a sexually active individual?
Or is it just because the implication of the activity would be present in the main comic?
That seems kinda perverse to me- like saying ‘Ew, Willis just noted Galasso had sex. That creeps me out, because he’s an older man.’
It’s definitely a personal issue based on personal hang-ups, and strong expectations on the value of sex, ‘ideal’ forms of sex, and presumed corruptive elements of sexual interaction.
Of course, we shouldn’t force her into a Slipshine just ‘to see what happens’, but if it fits the narrative- and one assumes eventually (though whether or not its within the scope of the length of the comic) it will.
Besides, I find the mental image of Dina making a ‘rawr’ (hands out as claws, nose crinkled, mouth open) dinosaur pose while in a vulnerable position (such as being naked) really cute. In the sense that it fits her character, much like Walky making a Monkey Master reference after sex, or Amber having sex while in costume.
Well, my expectations and valuation of sex are obviously typical, so I obviously can’t identify with how strongly the topic may disconcert, but that being the sole reason to not explore a potentially fascinating narrative- and certainly one that has a subset of individuals here that would pay Willis to explore it- seems a rather poor rationale.
Or rephrasing, denying a character equal representation to other characters due to presumed archetype and body form seems in line with denying them due to perceived race or gender or so forth.
But then again, I already clarified, I don’t quite get this topic 😛
Anyway, definitely respect the perspective you provided, Kaoy, and definitely feel Dina should be treated with respect to a fluid narrative, rather than just having her slapped on Slipshine just because she can be [that’d be more in line with any of the cartoon sex fan art floating around the internet, and really, that’s already my presumed expectation of the other DoA Slipshine offerings, and (lack of sexual interest aside) why I haven’t even considered going to Slipshine to read them].
You make some interesting points. Except, of course, most of your points aim at Slipshine, a topic we weren’t discussing in this thread.
Further, since this your comment is technically a reply to mine and you used “you”, I felt addressed by some of your points (even though they don’t seem to make sense):
2: I can barely tell the age of RL humans, no chance here indeed. The “12yo” came from the Riley arc.
3: I don’t get my jollies from (pre-)pubescent (looking) (cartoon) characters. If this was really aimed at me, I wonder where you got the idea.
Lastly I dislike your choice of words in “3:”, “aberrant” seems to be pejorative, but that might just be my lack of experience in the English language.
Don’t think Dina is necessarily ace. She just thinks that mammals are weird.
To be fair, we do retain our young in our own bodies while they develop. And don’t even get me started on what we feed them! A simple protein slurry served up in a mixture or emulsified fats and body water? *hurk*
Mammals are totally weird. :X
I need to see an arc that starts with Dina showing an emotion and the entire arc is just everyone else trying to figure out why.
Want more drama? Have her crying. Want intrigue? Make her visibly angry, or even seething with rage. Want humor? Make her cheery.
BAM
NEW ARC COMING FALL 2015
GET ON IT WILLIS YA CHUMP
You mean like when she got upset at Joyce for denying evolution and dinosaurs?
Well, yeah, but that was once, and we knew the reason immediately. I just think it’d be an interesting thing to make an arc out of.
That would be awesome! And more and more characters get roped into figure it out.
She’s happy because people finally recognize that Brontosauruses aren’t real, and because Jurassic World is coming out.
Geeze, that wasn’t so hard to figure out.
I presume she’s unhappy because of scientific misrepresentations in the film, and crying because someone.. you know, I actually can’t see a circumstance where she’d feel upset enough to cry. That one is legitimately interesting- and perhaps more than a bit worrisome. :X
“Yes, your secret identity–”
“WON’T BE SECRET MUCH LONGER IF YOU KEEP SAYING THAT OUT LOUD.”
Obviously Joe should be her partner and Roz should operate the camera as Dina’s proxy notation device. They’ve already proven capable for their respective portions of this endeavor.
Actually Danny “operated” the cam.
I somehow missed the camera on the foot all these years.
Regardless, someone put it there knowing it would work out. Guessing Roz, so she still gets props.
Id like to see Joe X Dina ,
Becuase I think they could be unique challenges to each other
…..Why do I feel like the seeds have thus been laid (….no pun intended) for a Mike involved threesome?
Foursome!
Wow. Amber is even more messed up than I thought. Amazi-Girl is having sex with Danny, not her? Hoo boy. I think Amber needs to time alone to figure herself out before she’s ready for a significant other. This is not a healthy situation for her or Danny.
Amber wouldn’t want Danny to cheat on his girlfriend.
I agree with this, somewhat; for a long time I’ve felt like maybe Amber is developing Dissociative Identity Disorder, but that would involve Amber losing her memory of everything Amazi-Girl does and vice versa. I still think her personality may be “splintering,” as the psychologists call it.
I think she means that it is her Amaza-girl persona that is dating Danny, not her. Basically, from a public perspective, if people found out about Danny and Amaza-Girl but knew through the grapevine that Danny and Amber were getting it on it could make the connection very easy to catch.
I can imagine Dina getting Roz and Joe for study.
“Can you please change to that last position? It was very intriguing.”
“… I would have to take copious notation.”
No problem, Dina. Faz has already done so, and is willing to share his research.
Got to love that shameless plug hover text XD
Yes, Dina. One day you will get to walk the dinosaur!
Translation: No Dina pornographique.
Dina’s bedroom apparel includes binoculars, a clipboard and a lab coat.
And also pajamas.
Because bed.
So Dina is an asexual? I guess we DO have representatives of every sexual persuasion on DOA now. 😀
Dina being asexual is still up in the air. But the Dumbiverse already has someone who’s asexual, Carla.
I doubt it’s possible to have EVERY sexuality represented. Human sexuality is just too complex (so is gender), but all of the most common sexualities seem to be present in DOA at present (if there is, indeed, an asexual character).
The thought of a Dina-Slipshine is intruiging.
That could actually get me to buy (sign up or whatevvrr) one…
Would Dina really be a suitable character for a slipshine? Doesn’t feel quite right to me.
Hey, she could surprise herself and really get into it during ‘analysis’. The narrative could involve the internal struggle to not lose herself while trying to maintain her scientific rigor.
Riley wouldn’t be appropriate- as much for her age, as the fact that we already know her orientation as being pancereal. ( http://www.dumbingofage.com/2013/comic/book-4/01-the-only-dope-for-me-is-you/hungry/ )
For Dina, on the other hand, it could be an interesting, fascinating bit of character development, with all the innocence of first romance, as approached by a socially-atypical character. Add in her counterpart’s likely more-mainstream expectations, and you could have an interesting bit of contrast and charming awkwardness.
Or, you know, it could be emotionally damaging, and leave Dina joining Ruth and Billie in an alcoholic spiral into oblivion.
For better or worse, the potential for intriguing and complex character exploration exists here, assuming it’s approached as a sexually-based narrative, rather than as simple pornography.
Nevermind that we’ve ALL been wondering if she has dinosaur tattoos anywhere.
..no, just me? Well, I bet you’re wondering now~
I cant believe i found this comic because it made a poop joke on he second page.
First page, actually.
So the next slipshine will feature Dina? That thought weirds me out too.
I can actually relate to Amber’s view on the topic of sex. Especially the “Imagining others as sexual beings” bit.
I think I can also relate to Dina here, somehow, but I’m not sure why exactly.
Copious notation… Copulation… Unintentional wordplay is best wordplay.
Anyone else thinking of S*P and wondering if she’ll find a nice guy who likes dinosaur costumes?
Well, the “simple” S*P costumes won’t do. They’ll have to have feathers. Also, why a guy? Why not a gal? Or some non-binary g.*?
Because Dina has a history of being into guys but no sign of being into ladies
Use http://www.rot13.com/index.php to decipher. It’s Walky! spoilers ahead!
Fur frrzrq gb or nggenpgrq gb Jnyxl cevznevyl sbe uvf vagryyvtrapr (naq uvf tebja-hc-arff, nf fubeg nf vg ynfgrq) naq vagb Zvxr sbe orvat n avpr qehax. V guvax vg gb or ragveryl cbffvoyr gung guvf jnf vaqrcraqrag bs gurve traqre. Lbhe nethzrag’f fgvyy tbbq, bs pbhefr.
I stand corrected; individual who enjoys detailed dinosaur costumes, then. Gender matters less than their acceptance of feathers, let’s say.
Well, you go on and enjoy not thinking of her in that way. I will go on to enjoy thinking of her that way.
Does this mean that Dina will end up doing it with Galasso? D: Please, tell me Dina won’t end up doing it with Galasso.
Galasso already has a lady friend.
We are also still waiting on the bed scene with Galasso and Mary, as “promised” in the hovertext of a previous strip.
First Slipshine of 2025: Dina Takes
CoitusCopious Notation.I am certain someone has beaten me to this joke already, but I don’t have time to troll through the entire thread to be sure, today.
A slightly off-topic message for Mr Willis;
…Hopefully in the right place this time…
Just a random thought, Loving the webcomic, but when the comments start really stacking up, it gets hard to track, even for someone like me. What’s the chances of getting those vertical lines under people’s pics, to keep track of who replied to who? I’ll understand if it’s not possible, just saying it might be worth looking at…
Either way, keep up the great work!
I had to check out the comments to see how many people wanted to see Dina sex, and after a few dozen I couldn’t find any except as jokes about how to frame it as a scientific experiment. I’m not going to read all 400 but I’m pleasantly surprised at the comment section’s restraint on this topic.
8D Ok, I’m going to echo what a lot of people have said already in calling (or at least intensely hoping) Dina as being on the asexual spectrum (and I’m echoing the previous group that suggested demisexual, because it would be awesome to have that actually be represented somewhere for all my demi friends and because I think that would fit spoiler stuff in the other universe in a really interesting way*).
And I really hope this turns out to be the case because I would love to have an ace representation that had a similar lifelong relationship to sex to myself. I mean, it’s great sex-repulsed/sex-apathetic asexuals are starting to get webcomic depictions and aren’t being forced into situations they don’t want or that erase their boundaries and their interests, but it would be awesome to have one webcomic ace character who reflected at least partially my admittedly odd path of recognizing a lack of inclination (this line is the one that most makes me think its ace spectrum, because it is really hard to not be ace spectrum and never have had that “inclination” feeling before legal adulthood), deciding to research the heck out of it because here was something I didn’t know, and then deciding “hey, now that I have this information, it would be interesting/fun to try it out and see if it’s at all accurate”**. Because it would be awesome if there were ace representation of aces who were actually chill with sex as a participant, even though there was no attraction/sexual desire. And it would be awesome if it was in this comic, because it would mean it would be the second time a character in a Willis work reflected an aspect of my life I never expected to actually see represented somewhere (first was Ultra Car/Carla being both a transwoman and ace). So yeah, all the squeeing noises.
* (rot13 with spoilers)Jnyxlirefr Qvan jnf bsgra fubja nf orvat nyzbfg qrfcrengr va ure nggrzcgf gb xrrc gur srj oblf fur jnf nggenpgrq gb pybfr ng unaq (jvgu vg abg orvat shyyl pyrne vs vg jnf whfg ebznagvp be frkhny nggenpgvba). Guvf vf abg gb fnl gung qrzvfrkhnyf ner qrfcrengr, ohg engure gb abgr gung vg zvtug chg Qvan’f npgvbaf va fbzr pbagrkg vs Jnyxl naq Zvxr ernyyl jrer gur bayl crbcyr va ure yvsr fur rire sryg ebznagvp naq frkhny nggenpgvba gb naq jvgu fbpvrgl’f phygher gung orvat hacnegarerq vf gur terngrfg rivy, vg zvtug znxr frafr gung fur jnf zber jvyyvat gb tb gb rkgerzr zrnfherf gb cebgrpg n srryvat fur sryg jnf vaureragyl ener. Vg vf n fvzvyne fvghngvba bs n qrzv sevraq bs zvar jub vf univat gebhoyr yrggvat n synzvat qbhpuront tb orpnhfr fnvq n-ubyr vf bayl gur frpbaq crefba va ure yvsr fur’f rire orra ebznagvpnyyl naq frkhnyyl nggenpgrq gb.
** In my own personal experience, actual sex turned out to be a ton of fun, largely because it was like the most intense puzzle game ever where there was a whole bunch of things to keep track of and if I got it all correct, then my partners got to experience this intensely pleasurable thing that could brighten their whole day and bringing that to my partners was a giant emotional rush.
*** Yay potentially ace-spectrum Dina!!!!
I personally love the large amount of Aro/Ace characters in webcomics. I’m Aro/Ace myself and I just get so sick of the fact no one can just stay single and happy in mainstream media. Webcomics is my one place I can escape to to find any characters I can relate to at all.
Some day, when Faz returns.
May that day never come…
aro/ace Dina? aro/ace Dina. I love and I can’t wait to see if this is gonna be expanded upon.
For some reason I want to see Becky have a date with Dina just to make things 100% more awkward for Joyce and Amber.
…copious copulation notes?
Amber’s dialogue in the last panel, “I’m enjoying not having to think of you as a sexual being”, unintentionally (on her part, not sure where Willis intends to go with this) plays into some pretty awful dynamics. I’ve been following a blog called the Asexual Agenda for some months now and it’s hosted some interesting discussion of race and asexuality. In this post, blogger Katie discusses how asexuality relates to racist concepts of Asian women.
(This isn’t the ultimate point of the post, so I would recommend you read the whole thing.)
This is somewhat similar to the experiences of disabled people. Some asexual people are disabled, some disabled people are asexual, but allosexual disabled people are harmed by the stereotype of them as nonsexual beings. For more discussion of how disability and asexuality can be related, check out this collection of posts (especially this post by Alyssa, an Autistic and asexual person).
Anyway, my point isn’t to rain on everyone’s parade or call you bad people for thinking Dina might be asexual – especially since there are certainly women in the world who are autistic (not that Dina is necessarily autistic, but this post is in the context of people reading her as autistic), asexual, and Asian. The phrase “yet to experience these inclinations myself” can be interpreted many ways and could definitely indicate she falls on the asexual spectrum. But I do think it’s important to consider the larger context of Dina as a character. And I really do think that was an ugly thing for Amber to say. I think she did mean it in a “too much information” sense, and I know Amber cares about Dina and would never try to hurt her, but one of the main points of this comic is that even caring people can unconsciously absorb and reinforce harmful stereotypes. Dina may act childlike sometimes but she’s not a child, and it’s not right for Amber to express value judgments about her being a sexual being or not.
There’s a lot of HTML in this post… I sure hope I got it all right…
dina you ace as hell
also amber’s last line is very true – it’s fuckin weird to assume almost everyone i know is sexual