Remove this ad

avatar

SmashLampjaw

Living Spambot

Posts: 1,959

#121 [url]

May 3 17 3:21 AM

The review's fairly good, though I really think the "On seeking medical (or any) advice" section needs work. It's extremely long-winded, at some points talking about how to think about thinking, and is only casually tied to the comic being reviewed. The sudden shift in subject matter from "this shitty comic sucks" to "here's how you should evaluate health information, gentle reader" is gradual, but given this section is as long as the writing review it's noticeable. (The bit about fursuits also deviates into another subject but does so briefly enough that it doesn't have time to register.)

The problem is not with highlighting OJST's failures using health information. It's with the presentation. To put this in perspective, if you all deleted the two paragraph introduction and the five paragraphs following "YOU HAD ONE JOB OH JOY SEX TOY" you would only kill a single vague reference to the comic, and the [new] first and final paragraphs would still make sense in the new context. That's seven paragraphs of off-topic fluff. Out of thirteen.

It would be much better for the review to tie the entire attempt at education into criticism of the comic/authors. Insults can be logical and informative. Demonstrate the research failures, putting the information you want the reader to learn into the explanation of what the authors should have done while using their failure to do so as proof they suck at what they do. That's how you sneak facts into people's brains. Additionally, there shouldn't be two paragraphs leading into the section talking about us and our relationship to the reader. Endlessly inserting themselves into their fanbase is the primary justification for targeting web comic creators as part of the reviews, FFS. It's not that it goes meta, it's that it goes meta for far too long about Serious Business™ to the point it sounds like we overvalue our site's importance in the readers' collective day.

Lastly, I'd recommend renaming the section to something related to the comic so it reads less like an Official BWW PSA. Maybe "Research Review", "Safety Review", or "Educational Value Review".

.


Issues composing posts in Yuku's editor?  See this guide to using BBCode.

Quote    Reply   
Remove this ad
avatar

Shan

Living Spambot

Posts: 1,962

#122 [url]

May 3 17 3:49 AM

That was kind of what I was thinking without being able to ... you know, put it into actual words because ... well, I could be better with those.

However, since this isn't your typical webcomic because it's talking about health advice which really does have an impact on people there are a few elements I did want to get across.

Obviously, though, I couldn't go and cover every single medical topic they talk about (for that would be huge).

Secondly, I'm not qualified. Big problem with doctors is that a lot of them think they're experts in not only every branch of medicine but a lot of things outside it too. It's reasonable for OJST and lots of other people to say talk to a doctor but they are prone to be just as stubborn if not more so with their ignorance.

I guess what I was trying to say, here's one example of a topic, here's a few omissions (to be fair, a lot of doctors didn't know about how even gold star lesbians can catch HSV - and a lot of them would be too embarrassed to talk about even asking about sex toys, never mind knowing to wash them and think to tell you about it).

So, the intent was a general point you in a direction of being in the right frame of mind to think about these topics and knowing when and where to persist.

Sure, it needs work, can I have until the end of the weekend to see what I can do with it to see if it's salvageable by me before the specialists step in?

Quote    Reply   
avatar

SmashLampjaw

Living Spambot

Posts: 1,959

#123 [url]

May 3 17 4:15 AM

I see nothing wrong with taking the authors behind the woodshed for a beating over their health information. It's even better that you made up a whole new section for it since they pretend to be an educational comic (which is fairly unusual outside of propaganda). It's really just a problem in the presentation in this case. There's too much of it and the review stops reading like a review during most of it.

.


Issues composing posts in Yuku's editor?  See this guide to using BBCode.

Quote    Reply   

#124 [url]

May 3 17 4:33 AM

The section on health info is perfect - spot on, especially the bit about HPV and sex toys. That seems like an incredible epic fail on part of the comic

Great work overall on the comic review guys

Quote    Reply   
avatar

Shan

Living Spambot

Posts: 1,962

#125 [url]

May 3 17 4:40 AM

Yes, even I noticed that about the review stopping reading like a review. I just felt if I spent my usual timeframes on trying to get it to work nothing at all would go up and I guess most people see these things earlier in their posting than later (current review entering its fifth month of drafting - good news, I think I'm close now! I can feel another burst of editing soon). I hadn't stopped thinking about it and expected it would need changing but I wanted to see what you thought first. Now I have, so I should fix it by the end of this weekend as much as I can and if necessary someone else should step in at that point.

On that note, I had a similar logic behind The Vegan Artbook, I have dropped a couple of messages to izzus. With OJST and it, I don't and I can't correct a lot of things as I am not an expert so really all I'm trying to do is point out that 'Don't stop here, just remember to keep looking' (corollary - the quality of your doctors can be variable - so don't default to stopping their either in all cases).

Also, we're not a peer reviewed medical journal or science textbook either. This stuff can be hard, so I'm not beating OJST over the head for that either. Doctors screw that stuff up too - also there's been some stuff that I've learned about from the newspaper first off because it's just uncommon and unusual too.

That April 4th comic, though *shudder*. I'm all for more woolsheds to be built after the first one's broken because the beatings were so severe that the shockwaves collapsed it.

Quote    Reply   
avatar

SmashLampjaw

Living Spambot

Posts: 1,959

#126 [url]

May 3 17 3:00 PM

Shan wrote:
Also, we're not a peer reviewed medical journal or science textbook either. This stuff can be hard, so I'm not beating OJST over the head for that either. Doctors screw that stuff up too - also there's been some stuff that I've learned about from the newspaper first off because it's just uncommon and unusual too.
Yeah, but OJST is built on the notion it's educational smut, like they're doing a public service. You shouldn't feel bad about taking them to task for failing at it, especially considering their misinformation may have given lesbians cancer. We're their peers so we review them.

.


Issues composing posts in Yuku's editor?  See this guide to using BBCode.

Last Edited By: SmashLampjaw May 3 17 3:03 PM. Edited 1 time.

Quote    Reply   
avatar

Shan

Living Spambot

Posts: 1,962

#127 [url]

May 12 17 4:11 AM

OK, had a first pass at streamlining and cutting down that section. If nothing else, at least some of the redundancy is gone.

Quote    Reply   

#130 [url]

May 14 17 4:00 AM

40K pledged for a 15K kickstarter?

exterminatus when?


also, the latest update to the 'comic' is about how "beautiful" fat people can be. They explicitly mention fatty body hair, stretch marks and flab as... sexy...

what in the sweet negro jesus http://www.ohjoysextoy.com/hotbod/

Quote    Reply   
Remove this ad
avatar

plarblman

Living Spambot

Posts: 1,167

#131 [url]

May 14 17 4:38 AM

You know what? Remember how we mentioned that they went to a swingers party and ended up doing fuck all? And now we have this shit about describing the wonders of fatness in excruciating detail?

Im getting more and more convinced that Erika and Matthew just enjoy blowing lots of hot air. They're not actually sincere about what they write half the time. What I wonder about is if it's more out of cynical market exploitation, or ideological pressure to be as woke as possible. I'm guessing the latter.

Quote    Reply   
avatar

Shan

Living Spambot

Posts: 1,962

#132 [url]

May 14 17 4:57 AM

webkilla wrote:
40K pledged for a 15K kickstarter?

exterminatus when?


also, the latest update to the 'comic' is about how "beautiful" fat people can be. They explicitly mention fatty body hair, stretch marks and flab as... sexy...

what in the sweet negro jesus http://www.ohjoysextoy.com/hotbod/

The thing is, though that biology may have something to say on the subject.

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2016/sep/06/fat-but-fit-wont-prevent-type-2-diabetes-risk-study-finds

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/to-your-health/wp/2015/12/22/fat-but-fit-may-be-a-myth-researcher-say/?utm_term=.8059a8df0227

http://jezebel.com/folks-are-awfully-smug-about-declaring-fat-fit-a-my-1475579163

In the Jezebel link, there is a commenter who makes the excellent point that excess weight can be devastating for your joints as well as contribute to terrible arthritis. That alone can be terrible for your quality of life before we even get into the potential metabolic issues.

Quote    Reply   
avatar

You

Casual User

Posts: 31

#133 [url]

May 14 17 5:40 AM

That last update seems like something it would be used as a gag in Family Guy.

Well, good thing I never considered myself to be handsome.

Quote    Reply   
avatar

SmashLampjaw

Living Spambot

Posts: 1,959

#134 [url]

May 21 17 7:22 AM

I finally had time to read the new version. There are some minor improvements but it still very clearly reads like a PSA crammed in the middle of a review instead of another section of the review. I have to stress again the problem with it is you stop talking about the material being reviewed to have a conversation with the reader about doing research for their health. Why are you treating this site like a good place to get information out just because people are reading it? There is a world of difference between informing readers of something to support a point about what you're reviewing and using something you know people are reading as a venue to educate them.

I find this particularly frustrating because every time I've brought this up with you in other reviews, your reaction is to completely avoid talking about it and to just focus on other things I've said to seem like you're responding to my entire post without changing or defending your behavior. That doesn't make me forget the problem, it just makes me increasingly suspicious of you for your evasiveness.

Regardless, let me illustrate the problem. The highlighted parts are where you're using this site as a platform for unrelated information. The other parts are actually a good use of facts to point out failures by the authors.
.
.

Current version wrote:
On analyzing factual information

This webcomic is different to most others in that it provides factual information about some potentially serious conditions. Important point for not just medical information but also legal, financial and other news is to always consider multiple sources. It's especially important with potentially life and death situations.

We're going to use just one page to demonstrate this Human papillomavirus (HPV) as our example, the one thing I want you to take away from this section of this review is don't stop looking for advice at one source and that includes even your doctor. For example, something missing from this page is found in this article "An “urban myth” that lesbian women do not need pap smears because they do not have sex with men means they are putting their health at risk, a study from the University of Sydney has found."

They didn't mention that at the time of this review. So this really does stress our point that if you're ever learning about a topic for the first time, keep going. Other sources may turn up things not in others. Especially take note when they contradict each other. In this particular case, a lot of doctors still don't know that or would even think of it either. So also remember, even the people trained in the area you're seeking advice don't always know or think of everything at the time you meet them.

Continuing on in that same article. "While women most commonly acquire HPV through sex with a man, it can can also be transmitted through genital skin-to-skin contact, or sex toys, making pap smears important for LGBTQ women as well."

Oh wait, they didn't mention sex toys at all either.

YOU HAD ONE JOB OH JOY SEX TOY

So always remember that generally, chances are no one source has everything (or everything right). Reduce your risks of missing anything or getting things wrong by accessing multiple sources but also weighing reliability.

The takeaway lesson here is err on the side of caution before you stop seeking information and considering a matter settled (especially in regards to your health - the most tragic cases are the ones where there was time, years even to do something if only someone had kept looking into it). This was a very famous case in the UK in relation to HPV and does stress the importance of being proactive while there's still time to do something.

A further point to make is doctors won't always get it right and omit telling you about things because they get it wrong or they just don't know either. Sometimes they also make mistakes, lack the skill, just simply forget and even get embarrassed themselves with particular topics and hence it's not unheard of for things to be missed. Don't forget this also applies with other specialists in other areas and not just health fields too.

We won't deny it's a tricky balancing act but I guess what we're saying is good luck but do your best to make your own luck.


And for goodness sake, if you absolutely must share your sex toys - make as sure as you can that you wash them properly first before sharing. Now that's some advice you won't currently get from the subject of this review and hence stressing even more the importance of finding multiple sources of information on a topic and doing your research.

.
.
This is (mostly) your same words without all of the superfluous information:
.
.
Educational Value Review

This webcomic is different to most others in that it tries to provide factual information about some potentially serious conditions. It fails. We're going to use just one page to demonstrate this - Human papillomavirus (HPV). Something missing from this page is found in this article: "An “urban myth” that lesbian women do not need pap smears because they do not have sex with men means they are putting their health at risk, a study from the University of Sydney has found." They didn't mention that at the time of this review.

Continuing on in that same article. "While women most commonly acquire HPV through sex with a man, it can can also be transmitted through genital skin-to-skin contact, or sex toys, making pap smears important for LGBTQ women as well."

Oh wait, they didn't mention sex toys at all either.

YOU HAD ONE JOB OH JOY SEX TOY

And for goodness sake, if you absolutely must share your sex toys - make as sure as you can that you wash them properly first before sharing. Now that's some advice you won't currently get from the subject of this review
Do you notice the difference in direction, despite the vast majority of it still your own words in the same order you presented them?

.


Issues composing posts in Yuku's editor?  See this guide to using BBCode.

Last Edited By: SmashLampjaw May 21 17 10:58 AM. Edited 4 times.

Quote    Reply   
avatar

plarblman

Living Spambot

Posts: 1,167

#136 [url]

Jun 14 17 7:07 AM

Is it at all surprising after the cuckhold strip? I mean I generally try to avoid making assumptions about people but the comic gives off a strong vibe of... I'm not sure how to put it. It just didn't sound like men being assertive in relationships was commonplace. Too much give, not enough take.

Quote    Reply   

#138 [url]

Jun 14 17 11:41 PM

Shan wrote:
I hope to god they at least followed our advice and wash that thing properly on a regular basis after each use.

that's probably one of the few things we can except that they already do.

Quote    Reply   
avatar

SmashLampjaw

Living Spambot

Posts: 1,959

#140 [url]

Jun 15 17 3:05 PM

Shan, where are you at on editing the section? Because it looks like you've slightly changed it since we last talked (almost a month ago now) and it's still enormous.

.


Issues composing posts in Yuku's editor?  See this guide to using BBCode.

Last Edited By: SmashLampjaw Jun 15 17 3:11 PM. Edited 1 time.

Quote    Reply   
Remove this ad
Add Reply

Quick Reply

bbcode help