Remove this ad

avatar

fallinq

Heavy User

Posts: 292

#21 [url]

Mar 13 16 12:13 AM

eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee23 wrote:

peabrain wrote:

eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee23 wrote:
Again, even if it is, why would this affect anyone's judgement on a (let me use this term again) 5/6 panel, practically continuity-less comedy comic?

I'm not really sure I understand what you mean here. Could you elabroate?

To feel the need to call a dumb joke comic that isn't trying to accomplish anything "misogynistic" is silly. Calling these types of comics' portrayal of women shallow and misogynistic really doesn't prove anything because of how they're written. If it's pervasive and clearly biased towards women, OK. Because that could actually affect how you enjoy the comic. But, again, if it's anything like VG Cats or Shadbase and shows no real bias towards women by making terrible things happen to everyone, then I really don't see any valid reason to call it "misogynistic".

I need a gif of that part in The Big Lebowski where The Dude says, "Well that's just, like, your opinion, man."

When someone makes a comic with a punchline that involves brutalizing a woman, one person might feel that it's misogynist because it's the fact that a WOMAN is getting hurt that's supposed to be funny, and another person might feel it's not misgynist because it's the over-the-top brutality that's supposed to be funny. Since neither of these people can read the author's mind, neither of them really know the original intent. They're both entitled to their interpretation and opinion, although if they're claiming that the author is a bad person IRL, they better back up that claim with hard evidence. But simply using the word "misogyny" to describe a punchline or the treatment of a fictional character isn't, in and of itself, a big deal.

Look, I'm definitely not a feminist. I've already gotten into a bit of an off topic argument about it on the Goblins thread. But what do you want us to do about this? Edit all these reviews to remove any use of the word misogyny? That seems a little authoritarian to me. Not to mention, it's the same kind of hypersensitive speech policing that makes SJW's so troubling.

I don't mind having a discussion about when it is and isn't appropriate to call something misogynist, but bringing censorship into other people's reviews would be a huge mistake, IMHO. Let the original authors decide if they want to change it. Otherwise, leave them as they are.

Quote    Reply   
Remove this ad
avatar

Sindy

Living Spambot

Posts: 833

#22 [url]

Mar 13 16 12:41 AM

Also I already told you Sohmer aka LICD writer IS mysoginistic. Like, badly. Fans know it, his entire comic premise is "women are penis plugs for Rayne", and it oozes over into LFG and his other comic. So the fact that you believe a comuc shouldn't be taken seriously, sure. But this guy had REAL FANS say that he treated them like shit IN REAL LIFE for being women. So yes, he is a mysoginist so is his comic.

Quote    Reply   

#23 [url]

Mar 13 16 12:36 PM

fallinq wrote:

eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee23 wrote:

peabrain wrote:

eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee23 wrote:
Again, even if it is, why would this affect anyone's judgement on a (let me use this term again) 5/6 panel, practically continuity-less comedy comic?

I'm not really sure I understand what you mean here. Could you elabroate?

To feel the need to call a dumb joke comic that isn't trying to accomplish anything "misogynistic" is silly. Calling these types of comics' portrayal of women shallow and misogynistic really doesn't prove anything because of how they're written. If it's pervasive and clearly biased towards women, OK. Because that could actually affect how you enjoy the comic. But, again, if it's anything like VG Cats or Shadbase and shows no real bias towards women by making terrible things happen to everyone, then I really don't see any valid reason to call it "misogynistic".

I need a gif of that part in The Big Lebowski where The Dude says, "Well that's just, like, your opinion, man."

When someone makes a comic with a punchline that involves brutalizing a woman, one person might feel that it's misogynist because it's the fact that a WOMAN is getting hurt that's supposed to be funny, and another person might feel it's not misgynist because it's the over-the-top brutality that's supposed to be funny. Since neither of these people can read the author's mind, neither of them really know the original intent. They're both entitled to their interpretation and opinion, although if they're claiming that the author is a bad person IRL, they better back up that claim with hard evidence. But simply using the word "misogyny" to describe a punchline or the treatment of a fictional character isn't, in and of itself, a big deal.

Look, I'm definitely not a feminist. I've already gotten into a bit of an off topic argument about it on the Goblins thread. But what do you want us to do about this? Edit all these reviews to remove any use of the word misogyny? That seems a little authoritarian to me. Not to mention, it's the same kind of hypersensitive speech policing that makes SJW's so troubling.

I don't mind having a discussion about when it is and isn't appropriate to call something misogynist, but bringing censorship into other people's reviews would be a huge mistake, IMHO. Let the original authors decide if they want to change it. Otherwise, leave them as they are.

Keep in mind that all I've done is suggest that some of examples weren't accurate and haven't actively gone out of my way to censor anyone. It's the fact that the word "misogyny" is used when a comic is not exclusive in its use of violence or any other kind of thing and it's more weird than anything to suggest that that makes misogynist. If suggesting that the use of the word when describing dumb comics like these is "authoritarian" than every other suggestion is authoritarian also. This is not a political thing at all, it's more of just applying valid criticisms; again even if it is "misogynistic", why would it matter if it doesn't really affect the comic? It's even less about the word itself, it’s about people looking at dumb joke comics and thinking "I must be the morally righteous man to slay this beast!” The After Eden review is a perfect example of this, it took a comic that, while tacking social issues, didn't really try to change anyone's mind, and the reviewer used that as fuel for their rant complaining about religion. And although that's an extreme example, it's basically a more developed version of people acting like they're morally righteous because they're writing a review on a comic. These comics aren't trying to make a point and all of their characters have to be/are completely one-dimensional. It could be argued that Strawberry Death Cake and After Eden are exceptions to this; the former for having a story and the latter attempting to be some kind of satire (but even then, the rant about it was ridiculous example of soap-boxxing.)

Quote    Reply   

#24 [url]

Mar 13 16 12:44 PM

Sindy wrote:
Also I already told you Sohmer aka LICD writer IS mysoginistic. Like, badly. Fans know it, his entire comic premise is "women are penis plugs for Rayne", and it oozes over into LFG and his other comic. So the fact that you believe a comuc shouldn't be taken seriously, sure. But this guy had REAL FANS say that he treated them like shit IN REAL LIFE for being women. So yes, he is a mysoginist so is his comic.

Still it's hard to see how that would affect anyone's opinion on a bare bones sex, raunchy comedy. If anything, that should only be mentioned in a segment on the author because that's basically the only thing that incriminates the treatment of women in the comic. I sincerely doubt that they had no problem with the treatment of women in the comic before they found out he was a dick. Again, even if we accept that it's misogynistic, I'd still be forced to say that it doesn't matter. Also, not to be disrespectful, but you're spelling "misogynistic" incorrectly.

Quote    Reply   
avatar

Sindy

Living Spambot

Posts: 833

#26 [url]

Mar 13 16 10:37 PM

I know I type it wrong. Can't be bothered to keep correcting a word I've used maybe a dozen times in my life out of which half in this thread. I'd rather allocate neurons to words I use more often, like rifle models or Star Wars races.

Also, you should stop policing what people find offensive. I thought you're that kind of guy, then I thought I was wrong, but nah. You're that kind of guy.

​So here's a funny story: Not everyone in the world is either a 12yo who laughs at dick, cunt punt, aborted fetuses and violence-centered jokes or someone who is #sotriggered by them that you need to school. Fact of the matter is, some people are past this type of humor and instead of finding a "haa I kicked my gf in the uterus and she torpedoed a miscarried fetus" joke funny, they go "the fuck is this shit now?". It appears a lot of those people write reviews here. Sucks for people who aren't past the 12yo humor stage yet.

I mean, shit, I cuss like a sailor, make and take boobs and sandwich jokes, laugh when someome says a sniper keeps raping them in that counterstrike match, and even I can't look at an entire comic whose premise is either haha my self insert fucks and flips off girls aren't I clever that the logo has a condom on? (LICD) or haha I'm drawing copyrighted female characters getting raped by old grandpas or niggers (Shadbase) or haha girls can't play vidya but they sure are some sassy bitches amirite (every gamer comic ever) or whatever were the others you brought up. I have a hunch the reviewers are exactly like that and constant casual edgy jokes targeted at a demographic (be it women, kids, blacks, autistics) aren't funny and speak a lot of the author.

It's okay. You'll probably stop finding them funny and start finding them obnoxious too once you've heard enough "Here's a women are only good for cumdumping and sandwiches joke I'm so edgy". Or maybe you won't, who am I to judge. I can't even type misogyny right half the time.

Last Edited By: Sindy Mar 13 16 10:52 PM. Edited 1 time.

Quote    Reply   
avatar

Kraken

Forum Leech

Posts: 483

#27 [url]

Mar 14 16 6:44 AM

eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee23 wrote:

Sindy wrote:
Also I already told you Sohmer aka LICD writer IS mysoginistic. Like, badly. Fans know it, his entire comic premise is "women are penis plugs for Rayne", and it oozes over into LFG and his other comic. So the fact that you believe a comuc shouldn't be taken seriously, sure. But this guy had REAL FANS say that he treated them like shit IN REAL LIFE for being women. So yes, he is a mysoginist so is his comic.

Still it's hard to see how that would affect anyone's opinion on a bare bones sex, raunchy comedy. If anything, that should only be mentioned in a segment on the author because that's basically the only thing that incriminates the treatment of women in the comic. I sincerely doubt that they had no problem with the treatment of women in the comic before they found out he was a dick. Again, even if we accept that it's misogynistic, I'd still be forced to say that it doesn't matter. Also, not to be disrespectful, but you're spelling "misogynistic" incorrectly.

Serioulsy, have you read Least I Could Do?

If your operational definition of misogyny is skewed so far that it doesn't cover a blatant piece of work like LICD, then you're effectively rendering the word useless. And no, admitting US Angel Corps was geuinely hateful doesn't make your argument any stronger -- it just shows you require a case of misogyny to be absurdly extreme to show up on your own radar.

So... what's your stake in this? Why does it rub you the wrong way to see "misogyny" applied to Shadbase, VG Cats, and LICD?

Quote    Reply   

#28 [url]

Mar 14 16 1:29 PM

Sindy wrote:
I know I type it wrong. Can't be bothered to keep correcting a word I've used maybe a dozen times in my life out of which half in this thread. I'd rather allocate neurons to words I use more often, like rifle models or Star Wars races.

Also, you should stop policing what people find offensive. I thought you're that kind of guy, then I thought I was wrong, but nah. You're that kind of guy.

​So here's a funny story: Not everyone in the world is either a 12yo who laughs at dick, cunt punt, aborted fetuses and violence-centered jokes or someone who is #sotriggered by them that you need to school. Fact of the matter is, some people are past this type of humor and instead of finding a "haa I kicked my gf in the uterus and she torpedoed a miscarried fetus" joke funny, they go "the fuck is this shit now?". It appears a lot of those people write reviews here. Sucks for people who aren't past the 12yo humor stage yet.

I mean, shit, I cuss like a sailor, make and take boobs and sandwich jokes, laugh when someome says a sniper keeps raping them in that counterstrike match, and even I can't look at an entire comic whose premise is either haha my self insert fucks and flips off girls aren't I clever that the logo has a condom on? (LICD) or haha I'm drawing copyrighted female characters getting raped by old grandpas or niggers (Shadbase) or haha girls can't play vidya but they sure are some sassy bitches amirite (every gamer comic ever) or whatever were the others you brought up. I have a hunch the reviewers are exactly like that and constant casual edgy jokes targeted at a demographic (be it women, kids, blacks, autistics) aren't funny and speak a lot of the author.

It's okay. You'll probably stop finding them funny and start finding them obnoxious too once you've heard enough "Here's a women are only good for cumdumping and sandwiches joke I'm so edgy". Or maybe you won't, who am I to judge. I can't even type misogyny right half the time.

I didn't mean to offend you with the "misogyny" remark, I wasn't trying to be smug. Again, I just said that even if is misogynistic, it doesn't matter with the comic. I care if it's not funny, and they're usually not funny. But my main point still remains. I'm not trying to police anyone, I'm just stating my opinion. And like I just said, if me saying that people shouldn't be offended is a form of "policing" than you saying that people have a right to be offended is equally "policing" towards me.

Quote    Reply   

#29 [url]

Mar 14 16 1:31 PM

peabrain wrote:
Why doesn't it matter that the comic is misogynistic? Would it matter if the comic was racist?

Because they're not serious, they're not attempting to convey anything, and it really doesn't seem wholly biased towards making fun of anyone. It'd be the same thing with race or religious beliefs or political beliefs, etc, etc, etc. 

Quote    Reply   

#30 [url]

Mar 14 16 1:41 PM

Kraken wrote:

eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee23 wrote:

Sindy wrote:
Also I already told you Sohmer aka LICD writer IS mysoginistic. Like, badly. Fans know it, his entire comic premise is "women are penis plugs for Rayne", and it oozes over into LFG and his other comic. So the fact that you believe a comuc shouldn't be taken seriously, sure. But this guy had REAL FANS say that he treated them like shit IN REAL LIFE for being women. So yes, he is a mysoginist so is his comic.

Still it's hard to see how that would affect anyone's opinion on a bare bones sex, raunchy comedy. If anything, that should only be mentioned in a segment on the author because that's basically the only thing that incriminates the treatment of women in the comic. I sincerely doubt that they had no problem with the treatment of women in the comic before they found out he was a dick. Again, even if we accept that it's misogynistic, I'd still be forced to say that it doesn't matter. Also, not to be disrespectful, but you're spelling "misogynistic" incorrectly.

Serioulsy, have you read Least I Could Do?

If your operational definition of misogyny is skewed so far that it doesn't cover a blatant piece of work like LICD, then you're effectively rendering the word useless. And no, admitting US Angel Corps was geuinely hateful doesn't make your argument any stronger -- it just shows you require a case of misogyny to be absurdly extreme to show up on your own radar.

So... what's your stake in this? Why does it rub you the wrong way to see "misogyny" applied to Shadbase, VG Cats, and LICD?

Because Angel Corps is almost completely centered on bringing misery to female characters (along with the intent being misogyny), and this could seriously hinder a comic. I've said this next part probably 4 times in this thread already so bear with me. Stupid, minimalistic joke comics should not be treated as if they're trying to do anything other than get a laugh; no matter what their crutch is. Shadbase and VG Cats use indiscriminate shock and LICD uses sex. It's OK to point out how their humor has crutches but it's almost completely asinine to point out unintentional connotations created by their jokes. If the humor is solely based around demeaning women (LICD is the closest to this but I'd still say it's fairly inoffensive in the way it does it) or if they're trying to actually make characters (where the women are all underdeveloped fuck-ups and the men don't get the same treatment) then it'd be a legitimate criticism for the writing. If I have to say this again, I will. I'm not trying to censor anyone, this is simply my opinion.

Quote    Reply   
Remove this ad
avatar

Kraken

Forum Leech

Posts: 483

#31 [url]

Mar 14 16 2:31 PM

eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee23 wrote:

Kraken wrote:

eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee23 wrote:

Sindy wrote:
Also I already told you Sohmer aka LICD writer IS mysoginistic. Like, badly. Fans know it, his entire comic premise is "women are penis plugs for Rayne", and it oozes over into LFG and his other comic. So the fact that you believe a comuc shouldn't be taken seriously, sure. But this guy had REAL FANS say that he treated them like shit IN REAL LIFE for being women. So yes, he is a mysoginist so is his comic.

Still it's hard to see how that would affect anyone's opinion on a bare bones sex, raunchy comedy. If anything, that should only be mentioned in a segment on the author because that's basically the only thing that incriminates the treatment of women in the comic. I sincerely doubt that they had no problem with the treatment of women in the comic before they found out he was a dick. Again, even if we accept that it's misogynistic, I'd still be forced to say that it doesn't matter. Also, not to be disrespectful, but you're spelling "misogynistic" incorrectly.

Serioulsy, have you read Least I Could Do?

If your operational definition of misogyny is skewed so far that it doesn't cover a blatant piece of work like LICD, then you're effectively rendering the word useless. And no, admitting US Angel Corps was geuinely hateful doesn't make your argument any stronger -- it just shows you require a case of misogyny to be absurdly extreme to show up on your own radar.

So... what's your stake in this? Why does it rub you the wrong way to see "misogyny" applied to Shadbase, VG Cats, and LICD?

Because Angel Corps is almost completely centered on bringing misery to female characters (along with the intent being misogyny), and this could seriously hinder a comic. I've said this next part probably 4 times in this thread already so bear with me. Stupid, minimalistic joke comics should not be treated as if they're trying to do anything other than get a laugh; no matter what their crutch is. Shadbase and VG Cats use indiscriminate shock and LICD uses sex. It's OK to point out how their humor has crutches but it's almost completely asinine to point out unintentional connotations created by their jokes. If the humor is solely based around demeaning women (LICD is the closest to this but I'd still say it's fairly inoffensive in the way it does it) or if they're trying to actually make characters (where the women are all underdeveloped fuck-ups and the men don't get the same treatment) then it'd be a legitimate criticism for the writing. If I have to say this again, I will. I'm not trying to censor anyone, this is simply my opinion.

Uh-huh.

You assume a lot of insider knowledge about what is "intended" by these comics, which is interesting in and of itself. However, I submit that "intention" is a weak basis for your argument. Most bigoted assholes do not actually intend to be bigoted assholes, yet somehow they manage it anyway. If you think the only way misogyny is able to occur in a webcomic is if author cackles madly, "Yes, this will show those foolish women! How I hate them!" while writing, you're rendering the term useless.

Because it bothers you. Obviously.

Here's my guess: no telepathy, just deduction. It bothers you because you find those comics entertaining, and you don't want to be called a misogynist for it.

See, I doubt it would bother you quite so much if the reviews said these things:
1) Anyone who enjoys Shadbase should print the comics out and wipe their ass with it. When your rectum develops cancerous polyps, consider that to be your wiser self speaking to you about how bad this comic is.
2) Least I Could Do is the cause of global warming. Every time knuckle-dragging dumbshit laughs at LICD, the Earth itself makes an incremental move towards wiping out the whole human race.
3) If you enjoy VG Cats, perhaps you should try drinking your own diarrhea. Clearly, your sense of taste is just that bad.

As insulting and outlandish as those statements would be in a review, I strongly doubt they would've inspired you to pipe up with a "general grievance." But "misogyny?" Ah... that tweaks a nerve. Now the reviewers are being "almost completely asinine" and jumping to conclusions that you're certain are "completely unintentional."

Of course it's your opinion. Isn't that implicit? And it's comforting to know that you aren't trying to censor anyone, since you don't have the power to do so anyway. My opinion (in case you need me to declare that what I'm saying is indeed my opinion) is that you're uncomfortable with the possibility that finding hateful "humor" funny makes you, somehow, complicit in its hatefulness. So you're doing your darndest to rationalize innocent intent on the part of the creators of said humor, and draw borders around what is and isn't "legitimate criticism" to protect your own sensibilities.

Quote    Reply   

#32 [url]

Mar 14 16 3:03 PM

Kraken wrote:

eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee23 wrote:

Kraken wrote:

eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee23 wrote:

Sindy wrote:
Also I already told you Sohmer aka LICD writer IS mysoginistic. Like, badly. Fans know it, his entire comic premise is "women are penis plugs for Rayne", and it oozes over into LFG and his other comic. So the fact that you believe a comuc shouldn't be taken seriously, sure. But this guy had REAL FANS say that he treated them like shit IN REAL LIFE for being women. So yes, he is a mysoginist so is his comic.

Still it's hard to see how that would affect anyone's opinion on a bare bones sex, raunchy comedy. If anything, that should only be mentioned in a segment on the author because that's basically the only thing that incriminates the treatment of women in the comic. I sincerely doubt that they had no problem with the treatment of women in the comic before they found out he was a dick. Again, even if we accept that it's misogynistic, I'd still be forced to say that it doesn't matter. Also, not to be disrespectful, but you're spelling "misogynistic" incorrectly.

Serioulsy, have you read Least I Could Do?

If your operational definition of misogyny is skewed so far that it doesn't cover a blatant piece of work like LICD, then you're effectively rendering the word useless. And no, admitting US Angel Corps was geuinely hateful doesn't make your argument any stronger -- it just shows you require a case of misogyny to be absurdly extreme to show up on your own radar.

So... what's your stake in this? Why does it rub you the wrong way to see "misogyny" applied to Shadbase, VG Cats, and LICD?

Because Angel Corps is almost completely centered on bringing misery to female characters (along with the intent being misogyny), and this could seriously hinder a comic. I've said this next part probably 4 times in this thread already so bear with me. Stupid, minimalistic joke comics should not be treated as if they're trying to do anything other than get a laugh; no matter what their crutch is. Shadbase and VG Cats use indiscriminate shock and LICD uses sex. It's OK to point out how their humor has crutches but it's almost completely asinine to point out unintentional connotations created by their jokes. If the humor is solely based around demeaning women (LICD is the closest to this but I'd still say it's fairly inoffensive in the way it does it) or if they're trying to actually make characters (where the women are all underdeveloped fuck-ups and the men don't get the same treatment) then it'd be a legitimate criticism for the writing. If I have to say this again, I will. I'm not trying to censor anyone, this is simply my opinion.

Uh-huh.

You assume a lot of insider knowledge about what is "intended" by these comics, which is interesting in and of itself. However, I submit that "intention" is a weak basis for your argument. Most bigoted assholes do not actually intend to be bigoted assholes, yet somehow they manage it anyway. If you think the only way misogyny is able to occur in a webcomic is if author cackles madly, "Yes, this will show those foolish women! How I hate them!" while writing, you're rendering the term useless.

Because it bothers you. Obviously.

Here's my guess: no telepathy, just deduction. It bothers you because you find those comics entertaining, and you don't want to be called a misogynist for it.

See, I doubt it would bother you quite so much if the reviews said these things:
1) Anyone who enjoys Shadbase should print the comics out and wipe their ass with it. When your rectum develops cancerous polyps, consider that to be your wiser self speaking to you about how bad this comic is.
2) Least I Could Do is the cause of global warming. Every time knuckle-dragging dumbshit laughs at LICD, the Earth itself makes an incremental move towards wiping out the whole human race.
3) If you enjoy VG Cats, perhaps you should try drinking your own diarrhea. Clearly, your sense of taste is just that bad.

As insulting and outlandish as those statements would be in a review, I strongly doubt they would've inspired you to pipe up with a "general grievance." But "misogyny?" Ah... that tweaks a nerve. Now the reviewers are being "almost completely asinine" and jumping to conclusions that you're certain are "completely unintentional."

Of course it's your opinion. Isn't that implicit? And it's comforting to know that you aren't trying to censor anyone, since you don't have the power to do so anyway. My opinion (in case you need me to declare that what I'm saying is indeed my opinion) is that you're uncomfortable with the possibility that finding hateful "humor" funny makes you, somehow, complicit in its hatefulness. So you're doing your darndest to rationalize innocent intent on the part of the creators of said humor, and draw borders around what is and isn't "legitimate criticism" to protect your own sensibilities.

If it's hateful humor, it's still an attempt at humor. VG Cats and Shadbase use offensive humor and I don't see the use in pointing out that's misgonistic because of this. Yes, it's a crutch but it still doesn't make sense to me to mention misogyny in particular. I don't find them particulalry funny but that's never been my point. Their intentions aren't the basis for my argument and that's why I included that as a passing mention; at least not in the sense you meant. I only mentioned Angel Corps because if it's blatantly obvious that the comic's creator has a problem with women and it bleeds so heavily into their content then a lot of the more harmless stuff becomes a bit more grating. If you're making a dumb, shallow, and offensive comic, it's OK to point that out as a cheap way to get laughs; it's just strange to me that they would point out misogyny in particular as if it's proving something. Whether or not the creators have actual prejudices is not something I based this around, it's whether or not they are trying to be offensive with stupid humor or actually trying to write something. I said it was my opinion just to show that I'm not trying to impose this on anyone. I just wanted to make that clear. 

Last Edited By: eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee23 Mar 14 16 3:09 PM. Edited 1 time.

Quote    Reply   
avatar

fallinq

Heavy User

Posts: 292

#33 [url]

Mar 14 16 3:24 PM

eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee23 wrote:

Kraken wrote:

eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee23 wrote:

Kraken wrote:

eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee23 wrote:

Sindy wrote:
Also I already told you Sohmer aka LICD writer IS mysoginistic. Like, badly. Fans know it, his entire comic premise is "women are penis plugs for Rayne", and it oozes over into LFG and his other comic. So the fact that you believe a comuc shouldn't be taken seriously, sure. But this guy had REAL FANS say that he treated them like shit IN REAL LIFE for being women. So yes, he is a mysoginist so is his comic.

Still it's hard to see how that would affect anyone's opinion on a bare bones sex, raunchy comedy. If anything, that should only be mentioned in a segment on the author because that's basically the only thing that incriminates the treatment of women in the comic. I sincerely doubt that they had no problem with the treatment of women in the comic before they found out he was a dick. Again, even if we accept that it's misogynistic, I'd still be forced to say that it doesn't matter. Also, not to be disrespectful, but you're spelling "misogynistic" incorrectly.

Serioulsy, have you read Least I Could Do?

If your operational definition of misogyny is skewed so far that it doesn't cover a blatant piece of work like LICD, then you're effectively rendering the word useless. And no, admitting US Angel Corps was geuinely hateful doesn't make your argument any stronger -- it just shows you require a case of misogyny to be absurdly extreme to show up on your own radar.

So... what's your stake in this? Why does it rub you the wrong way to see "misogyny" applied to Shadbase, VG Cats, and LICD?

Because Angel Corps is almost completely centered on bringing misery to female characters (along with the intent being misogyny), and this could seriously hinder a comic. I've said this next part probably 4 times in this thread already so bear with me. Stupid, minimalistic joke comics should not be treated as if they're trying to do anything other than get a laugh; no matter what their crutch is. Shadbase and VG Cats use indiscriminate shock and LICD uses sex. It's OK to point out how their humor has crutches but it's almost completely asinine to point out unintentional connotations created by their jokes. If the humor is solely based around demeaning women (LICD is the closest to this but I'd still say it's fairly inoffensive in the way it does it) or if they're trying to actually make characters (where the women are all underdeveloped fuck-ups and the men don't get the same treatment) then it'd be a legitimate criticism for the writing. If I have to say this again, I will. I'm not trying to censor anyone, this is simply my opinion.

Uh-huh.

You assume a lot of insider knowledge about what is "intended" by these comics, which is interesting in and of itself. However, I submit that "intention" is a weak basis for your argument. Most bigoted assholes do not actually intend to be bigoted assholes, yet somehow they manage it anyway. If you think the only way misogyny is able to occur in a webcomic is if author cackles madly, "Yes, this will show those foolish women! How I hate them!" while writing, you're rendering the term useless.

Because it bothers you. Obviously.

Here's my guess: no telepathy, just deduction. It bothers you because you find those comics entertaining, and you don't want to be called a misogynist for it.

See, I doubt it would bother you quite so much if the reviews said these things:
1) Anyone who enjoys Shadbase should print the comics out and wipe their ass with it. When your rectum develops cancerous polyps, consider that to be your wiser self speaking to you about how bad this comic is.
2) Least I Could Do is the cause of global warming. Every time knuckle-dragging dumbshit laughs at LICD, the Earth itself makes an incremental move towards wiping out the whole human race.
3) If you enjoy VG Cats, perhaps you should try drinking your own diarrhea. Clearly, your sense of taste is just that bad.

As insulting and outlandish as those statements would be in a review, I strongly doubt they would've inspired you to pipe up with a "general grievance." But "misogyny?" Ah... that tweaks a nerve. Now the reviewers are being "almost completely asinine" and jumping to conclusions that you're certain are "completely unintentional."

Of course it's your opinion. Isn't that implicit? And it's comforting to know that you aren't trying to censor anyone, since you don't have the power to do so anyway. My opinion (in case you need me to declare that what I'm saying is indeed my opinion) is that you're uncomfortable with the possibility that finding hateful "humor" funny makes you, somehow, complicit in its hatefulness. So you're doing your darndest to rationalize innocent intent on the part of the creators of said humor, and draw borders around what is and isn't "legitimate criticism" to protect your own sensibilities.

If it's hateful humor, it's still an attempt at humor. VG Cats and Shadbase use offensive humor and I don't see the use in pointing out that's misgonistic because of this. Yes, it's a crutch but it still doesn't make sense to me to mention misogyny in particular. I don't find them particulalry funny but that's never been my point. Their intentions aren't the basis for my argument and that's why I included that as a passing mention; at least not in the sense you meant. I only mentioned Angel Corps because if it's blatantly obvious that the comic's creator has a problem with women and it bleeds so heavily into their content then a lot of the more harmless stuff becomes a bit more grating. If you're making a dumb, shallow, and offensive comic, it's OK to point that out as a cheap way to get laughs; it's just strange to me that they would point out misogyny in particular as if it's proving something. I said it was my opinion just to show that I'm not trying to impose this on anyone. I just wanted to make that clear. 

Actually, something doesn't get a free pass just because it does what it does in the name of humor. Comedy still often has a message behind it, and the word "misogyny" doesn't have a part of the definition that says, "it only counts if it's delivered in a 100% serious manner." You can tell a joke about black people being monkeys, and it'll still be racist, despite it being "just a joke."

Anyway, I think everyone on this thread needs to calm down and eat some fruit or something. There's no need to get annoyed or make personal insinuations about people you don't know while you're nitpicking over the use of a single word on a comedy review site for crappy webcomics. I know the internet is serious business, but I promise you, this isn't going to have a major impact on your life. Especially since way-too-many-e's said he's not actually calling for us to change the reviews, he just wants to gripe about it.

Quote    Reply   

#34 [url]

Mar 14 16 3:29 PM

eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee23 wrote:

Kraken wrote:

eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee23 wrote:

Kraken wrote:

eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee23 wrote:

Sindy wrote:
Also I already told you Sohmer aka LICD writer IS mysoginistic. Like, badly. Fans know it, his entire comic premise is "women are penis plugs for Rayne", and it oozes over into LFG and his other comic. So the fact that you believe a comuc shouldn't be taken seriously, sure. But this guy had REAL FANS say that he treated them like shit IN REAL LIFE for being women. So yes, he is a mysoginist so is his comic.

Still it's hard to see how that would affect anyone's opinion on a bare bones sex, raunchy comedy. If anything, that should only be mentioned in a segment on the author because that's basically the only thing that incriminates the treatment of women in the comic. I sincerely doubt that they had no problem with the treatment of women in the comic before they found out he was a dick. Again, even if we accept that it's misogynistic, I'd still be forced to say that it doesn't matter. Also, not to be disrespectful, but you're spelling "misogynistic" incorrectly.

Serioulsy, have you read Least I Could Do?

If your operational definition of misogyny is skewed so far that it doesn't cover a blatant piece of work like LICD, then you're effectively rendering the word useless. And no, admitting US Angel Corps was geuinely hateful doesn't make your argument any stronger -- it just shows you require a case of misogyny to be absurdly extreme to show up on your own radar.

So... what's your stake in this? Why does it rub you the wrong way to see "misogyny" applied to Shadbase, VG Cats, and LICD?

Because Angel Corps is almost completely centered on bringing misery to female characters (along with the intent being misogyny), and this could seriously hinder a comic. I've said this next part probably 4 times in this thread already so bear with me. Stupid, minimalistic joke comics should not be treated as if they're trying to do anything other than get a laugh; no matter what their crutch is. Shadbase and VG Cats use indiscriminate shock and LICD uses sex. It's OK to point out how their humor has crutches but it's almost completely asinine to point out unintentional connotations created by their jokes. If the humor is solely based around demeaning women (LICD is the closest to this but I'd still say it's fairly inoffensive in the way it does it) or if they're trying to actually make characters (where the women are all underdeveloped fuck-ups and the men don't get the same treatment) then it'd be a legitimate criticism for the writing. If I have to say this again, I will. I'm not trying to censor anyone, this is simply my opinion.

Uh-huh.

You assume a lot of insider knowledge about what is "intended" by these comics, which is interesting in and of itself. However, I submit that "intention" is a weak basis for your argument. Most bigoted assholes do not actually intend to be bigoted assholes, yet somehow they manage it anyway. If you think the only way misogyny is able to occur in a webcomic is if author cackles madly, "Yes, this will show those foolish women! How I hate them!" while writing, you're rendering the term useless.

Because it bothers you. Obviously.

Here's my guess: no telepathy, just deduction. It bothers you because you find those comics entertaining, and you don't want to be called a misogynist for it.

See, I doubt it would bother you quite so much if the reviews said these things:
1) Anyone who enjoys Shadbase should print the comics out and wipe their ass with it. When your rectum develops cancerous polyps, consider that to be your wiser self speaking to you about how bad this comic is.
2) Least I Could Do is the cause of global warming. Every time knuckle-dragging dumbshit laughs at LICD, the Earth itself makes an incremental move towards wiping out the whole human race.
3) If you enjoy VG Cats, perhaps you should try drinking your own diarrhea. Clearly, your sense of taste is just that bad.

As insulting and outlandish as those statements would be in a review, I strongly doubt they would've inspired you to pipe up with a "general grievance." But "misogyny?" Ah... that tweaks a nerve. Now the reviewers are being "almost completely asinine" and jumping to conclusions that you're certain are "completely unintentional."

Of course it's your opinion. Isn't that implicit? And it's comforting to know that you aren't trying to censor anyone, since you don't have the power to do so anyway. My opinion (in case you need me to declare that what I'm saying is indeed my opinion) is that you're uncomfortable with the possibility that finding hateful "humor" funny makes you, somehow, complicit in its hatefulness. So you're doing your darndest to rationalize innocent intent on the part of the creators of said humor, and draw borders around what is and isn't "legitimate criticism" to protect your own sensibilities.

If it's hateful humor, it's still an attempt at humor. VG Cats and Shadbase use offensive humor and I don't see the use in pointing out that's misgonistic because of this. Yes, it's a crutch but it still doesn't make sense to me to mention misogyny in particular. I don't find them particulalry funny but that's never been my point. Their intentions aren't the basis for my argument and that's why I included that as a passing mention; at least not in the sense you meant. I only mentioned Angel Corps because if it's blatantly obvious that the comic's creator has a problem with women and it bleeds so heavily into their content then a lot of the more harmless stuff becomes a bit more grating. If you're making a dumb, shallow, and offensive comic, it's OK to point that out as a cheap way to get laughs; it's just strange to me that they would point out misogyny in particular as if it's proving something. I said it was my opinion just to show that I'm not trying to impose this on anyone. I just wanted to make that clear. 


Actually, something doesn't get a free pass just because it does what it does in the name of humor. Comedy still often has a message behind it, and the word "misogyny" doesn't have a part of the definition that says, "it only counts if it's delivered in a 100% serious manner." You can tell a joke about black people being monkeys, and it'll still be racist, despite it being "just a joke."

 
Anyway, I think everyone on this thread needs to calm down and eat some fruit or something. There's no need to get annoyed or make personal insinuations about people you don't know while you're nitpicking over the use of a single word on a comedy review site for crappy webcomics. I know the internet is serious business, but I promise you, this isn't going to have a major impact on your life. Especially since way-too-many-e's said he's not actually calling for us to change the reviews, he just wants to gripe about it.


Yes, a joke about blacks being monkeys is still racist and a sexist joke is still sexist. But it does it really matter? If it's a funny joke, it's funny. I just don't see the point in mentioning it, especially when it's already established that it's the entire point of it and that they use it a crutch; that's all you need. 

Also, I'm sorry if I've been disrespectful, it's just starting to begin to feel like I'm running in circles with my points. There are 23 E's, by the way, hence the name.

Quote    Reply   
avatar

Kraken

Forum Leech

Posts: 483

#36 [url]

Mar 14 16 7:55 PM

eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee23 wrote:
I really hope that if I become a regular here that people won't hate me for what I said in this thread.

I don't hate you. Far from it. If I read you right, I've been where you've been right now.

I grew up in an environment (both family and community) where racism was funny, anti-semitism was a scream, and homophobia was downright hilarious. Somehow, in the self-contradictory way that humans have, all this squared with being a decent, broad-minded human being who judged people by content of their character as opposed to the color of their skin (or gender, religion, sexuality, whatever). As I grew older and into my own autonomy, I thought I could hold these sorts of opposite values at once. I was sure could tell racist jokes and still not be a racist.

Turned out not to be the case. Turned out that I started to feel like a hypocrite laughing at fag jokes on one hand and advocating for gay rights on the other.

So when you say:
Yes, a joke about blacks being monkeys is still racist and a sexist joke is still sexist. But it does it really matter? If it's a funny joke, it's funny.

... I get where you're coming from. I just don't agree anymore.

I still have to live with that little bigoted voice in my head that likes to insert "nigger, kike, faggot, spic" into my stream of consciousness. But I don't have to give it voice, and I don't have to feed it. Maybe someday, I'll starve it down to nothing.

Quote    Reply   

#37 [url]

Mar 14 16 8:36 PM

Kraken wrote:

eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee23 wrote:
I really hope that if I become a regular here that people won't hate me for what I said in this thread.

I don't hate you. Far from it. If I read you right, I've been where you've been right now.

I grew up in an environment (both family and community) where racism was funny, anti-semitism was a scream, and homophobia was downright hilarious. Somehow, in the self-contradictory way that humans have, all this squared with being a decent, broad-minded human being who judged people by content of their character as opposed to the color of their skin (or gender, religion, sexuality, whatever). As I grew older and into my own autonomy, I thought I could hold these sorts of opposite values at once. I was sure could tell racist jokes and still not be a racist.

Turned out not to be the case. Turned out that I started to feel like a hypocrite laughing at fag jokes on one hand and advocating for gay rights on the other.

So when you say:
Yes, a joke about blacks being monkeys is still racist and a sexist joke is still sexist. But it does it really matter? If it's a funny joke, it's funny.

... I get where you're coming from. I just don't agree anymore.

I still have to live with that little bigoted voice in my head that likes to insert "nigger, kike, faggot, spic" into my stream of consciousness. But I don't have to give it voice, and I don't have to feed it. Maybe someday, I'll starve it down to nothing.

There's a time and place for everything. Again, it's all about context.You seem to have a strong emotional connection to this so I now understand the passion and subsequent agression.

Quote    Reply   
avatar

peabrain

Regular User

Posts: 167

#38 [url]

Mar 14 16 9:18 PM

Some people just don't find sexist or racist or homophobic jokes funny. When I see the "suck for a buck" lady on LICD, I don't think it's hilarious. It makes my stomach hurt. I think it's absolutely disgusting that Sohmer and others find that funny.

Quote    Reply   
avatar

Sindy

Living Spambot

Posts: 833

#39 [url]

Mar 14 16 11:04 PM

No we won't hate you for what you're arguing here if you post somewhere else. We've all disagreed on things or agreed on other topics throughout the forum.

​Anyway we should probably stop spinning in circles in this thread. You're someone who thinks jokes are irrelevant and anything's free game. Most of us in here are pretty tired of edgy jokes for different reasons. You won't budge, we won't budge, sssoooo...

​Also is your username related to that story about magical number 23?

Quote    Reply   

#40 [url]

Mar 15 16 11:45 AM

peabrain wrote:
Some people just don't find sexist or racist or homophobic jokes funny. When I see the "suck for a buck" lady on LICD, I don't think it's hilarious. It makes my stomach hurt. I think it's absolutely disgusting that Sohmer and others find that funny.

I'd just like to make this last point that it doesn't really matter what the content is if you use it properly.

Quote    Reply   
Remove this ad
Add Reply

Quick Reply

bbcode help