|
 "It's not rape, because she's a good person!"
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2016 22:47
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 12:48 |
|
|
Unreal. Digging into replies to that tweet a little bit, she agreed with a tweet saying there were very specific legal definitions of rape, so of course this is not rape. Which, just, what?
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2016 22:53
|
|
|
If it's a legitimate rape, the libertarian body has ways of shutting that whole thing down
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2016 22:55
|
|
|
Wittgen posted:Unreal. Digging into replies to that tweet a little bit, she agreed with a tweet saying there were very specific legal definitions of rape, so of course this is not rape. Which, just, what? In some countries, marital rape is by legal definition impossible as spouses are supposed to have automatic consent.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2016 23:10
|
|
|
Hell, you don't even need to switch the genders for both characters, this would be self-evident if Alison was male and even with Max as female, M/M or F/F would make wigs flip. The only thing that prevents this from being blindingly obvious is pre-concieved notions of what each gender can and cannot do AND THEY JUST DID A YEAR-LONG CHAPTER ON RAPE CULTURE.  e: it is a rare treat to watch a webcomic pratfall in real-time, usually I learn of it after the fact. Batman's Shameful Secret > Strong Female Protagonist: The Key to Having a Sympathetic Rapist is to Make The Victim a Libertarian e2: How did I miss the first time through that the full line was "Well sweetheart, I was only asking as a courtesy. Let's go." I know I've said the comic needed an editor but I mostly meant pacing, this is something that should have been caught days before this came out. I mean I'm hooked, but only because I desperately want this to continue the trainwreck. 
ManlyGrunting fucked around with this message at 06:13 on Oct 6, 2016 |
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2016 00:42
|
|
|
Hogge Wild posted:
Seeing as her avatar is an orc/half-orc I gotta wonder if she's a Dominic Deegan fan herself. e: I hope I didn't mis-otherkin somebody 
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2016 03:14
|
|
|
Wittgen posted:Unreal. Digging into replies to that tweet a little bit, she agreed with a tweet saying there were very specific legal definitions of rape, so of course this is not rape. Which, just, what? No you see Count Dracula is going into Mina Harker's bedroom at night, penetrating her with his teeth, taking her blood and transforming her from a demure Victorian woman into a sexual night slave. That's not rape at all! Why would you even think that?!
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2016 05:09
|
|
|
BravestOfTheLamps posted:Sans words, sans art, sans taste, all ends in loss. The real sad part is. This probably isn't just an artist who is trying to damage control a page that has been misinterpreted. The imagery and phrasing is very suggestive and if it were just her standing over him I probably wouldn't have noticed anything. Calling him sweetheart and stating that his consent wasn't really a factor just left no ambiguity. No, instead the artist actually believes that if nobody is actually being penetrated there isn't any grounds for a rape comparison. Christ.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2016 06:13
|
|
|
This webcomic keeps getting better I'm kind of impressed
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2016 07:23
|
|
|
Oh my goodness the artist even deleted the tweet? How do you do an entire chapter on rape and then completely miss the similar overtones to a person who can do whatever they want forcing someone to use their body in a way they don't want? ? ? ? It's amazing how this comic started out great, got kinda bad, got entertainingly bad, and has become a full-on train-wreck. It's an amazing flip.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2016 19:03
|
|
|
Maybe they deleted the tweet because they realized how wrong they were? Probably not.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2016 19:32
|
|
|
FlocksOfMice posted:Oh my goodness the artist even deleted the tweet? ahahahahaha e: did anyone get a screenshot?
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2016 19:51
|
|
|
So seeing she'd deleted that tweet I went into her feed and uhhhhhh https://twitter.com/MollyOstertag/status/783685897854128128 https://twitter.com/MollyOstertag/status/783695243031916544
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2016 20:02
|
|
|
Serene Dragon posted:So seeing she'd deleted that tweet I went into her feed and uhhhhhh and here's the comic in the case she removes it too: 
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2016 20:06
|
|
|
Hogge Wild posted:
"You can't rape men."
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2016 20:14
|
|
|
Every time I read it I get more and more 
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2016 20:31
|
|
|
Ashcans posted:Maybe they deleted the tweet because they realized how wrong they were? Probably not. Whenever I see something controversial deleted, I always hope it's because reasonable people responded proportionately and convinced them that they were wrong. In practice, I imagine that's rarely the case. mycot posted:"You can't rape men." I don't think it's fair to put words in her mouth. I'll agree that this page suggests a narrow outlook on what perpetrators and victims of rape look like, but I suspect it's a product of carelessness as opposed to a firmly held belief.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2016 21:13
|
|
|
Serene Dragon posted:So seeing she'd deleted that tweet I went into her feed and uhhhhhh  That... makes me honestly uncomfortable with this whole thing in a way that I wasn't before. Like, no, the specific act being committed isn't technically rape, but every single aspect of the situation--from the relative positions, to specific phrasing she uses ("Well, sweetheart, I was only really asking as a courtesy") to the fact that she is using physical violence to force Max into a specific physical act ("sprinkle a little pixie dust"!  ) is basically textbook rape. And if that was intentional, I'd find it to be an interesting take! But when you write it, like this, and you can't see for yourself how this comes across, just... what?
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2016 21:19
|
|
|
I'm pretty sure no one looks at that page and says "that is literally rape" but it's a very good metaphor for it, and responding to that with "b-b-b-but the dictionary definition says X" is super lame weaselly bullshit.The Lord of Hats posted:And if that was intentional, I'd find it to be an interesting take! But when you write it, like this, and you can't see for yourself how this comes across, just... what? I agree it'd be an interesting story direction but the comic has had a recurring problem with this kind of big dumb blind spot.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2016 21:26
|
|
|
How much text has to be changed to make the page about rape?
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2016 21:37
|
|
|
The Lord of Hats posted:
FWIW, this is the artist, not the writer, right? I could easily see someone just making the pages as described to them and not processing the metaphors. After someone points it out to her, she basically says 'I didn't see that that, but your interpretation is valid.'
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2016 22:10
|
|
|
So, do the creators not believe in metaphors or something? I don't know how someone can write that page and not see the parallels.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2016 22:14
|
|
|
Xelkelvos posted:How much text has to be changed to make the page about rape?
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2016 22:21
|
|
|
Xelkelvos posted:How much text has to be changed to make the page about rape? Someone PM'd me this: 
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2016 23:17
|
|
|
Alison's dead, dead eyes in panel three are what really seal the deal. That is the look of someone committing themselves to monstrosity.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2016 00:26
|
|
|
Bobulus posted:FWIW, this is the artist, not the writer, right? I could easily see someone just making the pages as described to them and not processing the metaphors. After someone points it out to her, she basically says 'I didn't see that that, but your interpretation is valid.' To make the page she had to read the script, create the thumbnails for it (sort of like storyboarding for comics), take the thumbnails and pencil them, then do the inks, then add the flat colors, then render the whole thing. And after all that she presumably did the lettering as well. That's, like, 8-10 hours of work. 8-10 hours spent staring at this page, and at no point did she stop to think, "Huh. This is pretty rapey." Typical Pubbie fucked around with this message at 01:18 on Oct 7, 2016 |
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2016 01:16
|
|
|
Understandably, she is now looking for someone else to handle comment moderation. Probably for the best, because hoo lawd.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2016 04:19
|
|
|
Typical Pubbie posted:To make the page she had to read the script, create the thumbnails for it (sort of like storyboarding for comics), take the thumbnails and pencil them, then do the inks, then add the flat colors, then render the whole thing. And after all that she presumably did the lettering as well. That's, like, 8-10 hours of work. 8-10 hours spent staring at this page, and at no point did she stop to think, "Huh. This is pretty rapey." To be fair, one tends to develop blind spots in respect to their own work. Which is why peer review is as valued as is. A big recent example I can think of where you can look at something and think "How the gently caress did no one see this?!" is the movie Zootopia. Or rather, an earlier version thereof. Now, I consider it a real good movie and has a great message against the small bits of racism that come from our upbringing and society that, however well meaning, can be just as harmful as overt racism, if not moreso. However, the making of that movie had several major shakeups relatively late in its production. One of which is dumping a plot point that had been in near the beginning: The idea that predator animal people would be required to wear shock collars that would jolt them anytime they got "too excited". Needless to say, it was hosed up, everyone else who saw it (Including people from Pixar) said it was hosed up, but they kept trying to make it work until the writing was on the wall, underlined, and highlighted. Despite all that, everyone involved agrees that the change was absolutely the right thing to do. In other words, this comic needs a drat editor. Unlucky7 fucked around with this message at 06:42 on Oct 7, 2016 |
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2016 06:38
|
|
|
I'm looking forward to today's train wreck. Any idea how much lead time they work with, like if they decide to rewrite, how long would it take?
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2016 07:59
|
|
|
I don't even know why she put him in a headlock and bent him over and humped his rear end  She's super strong and can fly at high speed, she could physically control him just by holding his wrist.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2016 08:24
|
|
|
Flesh Forge posted:I don't even know why she put him in a headlock and bent him over and humped his rear end But then the artist couldn't masturbate to it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2016 08:27
|
|
|
This comic is so twisted.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2016 09:03
|
|
|
I lost it at teary eyed Alison in the last panel.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2016 09:18
|
|
|
Serene Dragon posted:I lost it at teary eyed Alison in the last panel. "... Good" she says as she gives him a hug. It's so sick.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2016 09:21
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2016 09:29
|
|
|
"Why do you make me hurt you? This is your fault."
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2016 09:31
|
|
|
This is one of those instances where I wish I could compare the script to the finished product.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2016 09:33
|
|
|
Typical Pubbie posted:This is one of those instances where I wish I could compare the script to the finished product. Yeah, I would bet there wasn't any of the black panel stuff and it showed it until the comments section on the last post showed up.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2016 09:35
|
|
|
Nah, the movement from total darkness to gradual illumination in the last three panels is obviously intentional. And yeah, this comic would, in general, do a lot better with an editor.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2016 13:01
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 12:48 |
|
|
The fact that the author wrote a rape scene and the artist drew it without either of them knowing it is bad. The fact that there is a rape scene, I actually like. I like Allison being so desperate for any sort of tangible progress in her idiotic quest to save the world with a liberal arts degree that she starts doing terrible things that won't even help if you think about it. I like the drat fool optimistic thing that this comic has been smashing hopelessly against the rocks.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2016 15:42
|
|
