Grrl Power #545 – Tit for tit
Technically Sydney only exposed one fifth of Harem’s boobs, so she could argue that wearing an aggressive V-neck would be commensurate reparation.
When Harem said “everyone,” Sydney pictured having to be on stage in the auditorium with the whole team there, select members of the press, and everyone who ever bullied her or she ever had a crush on. Cause that’s just how her brain works. Also, probably no one actually saw Harem’s boobs anyway. She was on the edge of the pool and the splash covered everything up. Doesn’t mean Harem won’t sneak a whoopie cushion under Sydney at some point.
Maxima officially has good hearing, but nothing approaching super human. She can’t hear outside of the normal human range, though her hearing hasn’t worsened over time since she got her powers, so she has the hearing of a ~15 year old. But if people want to think she has super hearing, she won’t dissuade them.
Double res version will be posted over at Patreon. $1 and up, but feel free to contribute as much as you like.
Harem broke the cutie. Isn’t that 7 years bad luck?
No, that’s for mirrors (not saying they don’t sometimes contain cuties…) This is worth at least 13 years.
13 years, 5 harems, 1 year 219 days each.
Your math is a little shaky
Of course he is, he has been staring at boobs for the past few months.
+1
You dropped a year.
Ah the power of typo… sorry… 2 years 219 days each.
Isn’t Sydney more the woobie than the cutie?
(Admittedly Krona may give her a run for her money)
Man, every time I feel that I can claim to be bilingual, American throws another wobbler on me!
Not American. Though TV Tropes can lay claim to it.
I drew my conclusions from the dictionary. I noted that there was a TV Tropes hit, on my results. But I avoid that site, for the sake of my mental and emotional health. I enjoy film and TV programs* too much to want to weaken the experience that way.
* Usually old ones on YouTube, admittedly, not being able to watch the live stuff.
wow i thought at first you were making some joke about otakus and anime and mangas and stuff, good thing i googled “woobie”, saved me a lot of confusion
People havent heard of the word woobie before? Does no one here go on tv tropes ever?
Only the sensible ones.
:-P
To be fair, going to that site is a good way to loose a day.
Or at the very least a couple of hours.
That’s no excuse! It is a cornucopia of essential knowledge! :)
I have lost more than one day on Tropes. In succession…
Thanks to this comic, I have 5 windows open there right now.
#Confessyourunpopularopinion
Sydney has seemed off-model for the a while now, and especially in this update. I know she’s bound to be drawn differently with her hair in a different style and without her glasses, but panel #1 honestly looks like a different character. Her eyes keep getting bigger and her jawline is getting more and more square. It’s not that she looks bad, but definitely different.
#theorylampshadingartevolution
What if… What if the orbs are slowly changing her in line of all supers being conventionally beautiful, maybe not turning her into an amazon of Maxima measures but still affecting her appearance a tad.
that or shes going to end up looking like thor from stargate, but still with that blonde hair.
Literally lol’d
I still am not convinced that the orbs are alien (at least not outer space, maybe outer dimensional or outer reality, or tool of god level stuff)
Not unpopular with me. The Who’s Who, the current vote incentive, and the Patreon donation box all show Sydney without the features you are describing. Personally I have always preferred Sydney’s older look with a narrower face than that even. So whilst I have gotten used to the changes, I still hanker for ‘original flava’.
That said though I do love the expressiveness that Dave manages to bring in to Sydney’s face. Every week we see something subtly (or, in this case not so subtly) different. Which given the number of times we see her is actually staggeringly impressive. Part of which requires having a face which lends itself to showing such well. Hence why I think her features have evolved in these ways.
Plus this is also a necessary part of Dave’s artistic exploration. Finding new techniques and ways of depicting things.
Still we can hope that he will experiment with reincorporating some of her classic features again.
*wags tail cheekily*
Same here, on most of your points :D
Don’t have a problem with art-evolution (just look at the start of “Questionable Content” or even “Sequential Art” to the latest pages), but the last month or so has seen a vast change in Sydney (and look at what happened to Anvil at the Wars Compund), hopefully DaveB will take note of our concerns and start re-incorporating some of what made Sydney so beloved, if not, well, it’s his comic and art and not going to rage-quit over it
I’m curious why you would point out the first panel instead of the final panel as an example of Sydney being drawn differently. That look of nausea on her face makes her look more different than the different hair style does.
The first is representative of the trend. A change in the basic way that Sydney is depicted.
Whereas the final panel is a stand-alone expression which is deliberately shown as being distinctly different. So has no bearing on the standard depiction of the character. Halo has always had isolated very extreme portrayals (such as looking demonic). Hence the last picture is unremarkable, in that context.
It mostly feels like a slow change/development of style to me. Which is to be expected tbh, I haven’t read a lot of long running comics that stay the same.
It looks like everything is getting a bit more rounded including the eyes, I don’t think the absolute proportions are changing too much though. Sydney has always had huge ones,
Art evolution happens, I’ve actually been noticing it more with Max than Sydney, but both their faces are gaining a more naturalistic, 3D depth in some frames. (It didn’t show that, but I was particularly impressed with Sydney underwater fixing her hose, one of the best renditions of her face I think we’ve seen).
And of course Sydney hasn’t had her glasses on for the pool arc, which does affect her appearance.
I know! Its like her face is made of stretchy putty or something. I’m not complaining to vigorously as I’d only notice it if I binge read the comic once again, but man its striking, one panel she’s animesque beautiful, the next she looks almost like a cartoon with her face.
I feel like what we are seeing is also a natural confliction between the different art styles he uses to represent different characters in light of the new art and particularly coloring styles he uses.
Maxima was initially meant to be very “Silver Age Comic” while Sydney is “anime chibiesk” (dont know the terms, maken em up!) but as everyone and everything gravitates towards realism these styles start to look unnatural.
Sydney here looks particularly uncanny valley standing next to the freckled and lively harem, as an example.
In Maxima’s case, I feel like he’s already let the silver age look go, and the fluctuations weve been seeing strip by strip are him try to pull her new face down.
Exhausted, forgive grammar
No problems. You conveyed your meaning well. And made insightful points.
No forgiveness given. We shall meet to decide your fate in gladiatorial combat to the death for your horrid crime of whatever you did for which you are apologizing.
Haha holy crap this comment section
Yes, Sydney has looked a bit different this last month, but I think that’s entirely intented by DaveB, considering that she’s spent most of the last month (our time) _wet_. Yes, his art style has been evolving, but I think the current scene also necessitates certain changes in all the cast’s appearance.
No glasses, changes in hairstyle, they’re changes that can make drastic changes in how one’s is looked at.
Perhaps Halo has always had a more conventional cuter look (I’ll say it that way, as not to offend the easily offended) but has preferred to keep away from it, maybe because of her idealized, must be some nerdy comic book nerd look?
2010
2014
2018?
Sorry Dave.
*hangs head in shame*
Not sure how the Sorry Dave comment works here. :(
That’s her normal look and not the more conventional cuter look. :p
Sydney does not look like a beach ball! Yet.
There is time to stop her vanishing chin!
Ok, looking at the water implosion on panel 4 brings up the question, can harem teleport the air from where she’s teleporting to back to where she’s teleporting from? because if not she should make a sonic boom or something whenever she teleports.
you see that she was replaced by air when she vorped, so it makes sense to assume that he switch place with whatever she teleports into, makes me wonder what would happen if she ported into a wall
Agreed.
Harem told Sydney that she can sense any obstacles blocking her path, and is able to abort the teleport if that is the case.
So it is another case of even Harem not knowing. Possibly the ‘rule’ works for gasses and liquids, but behaves differently for solids. We see plenty of things where that is true, as they are different states of matter. Thus even super-powers might not behave consistently.
The only way to find out would be to place something in her way. But even if it was something small (say a pin) and in a non-critical part of her body, there is a serious risk involved, if they swapping does not occur.* Having atoms trying to exist in a place where there are other atoms already, could cause an extremely energetic reaction.
In other words it might have an effect akin to a nuclear explosion (albeit with only a pin-sized amount of matter). That however would likely be enough to kill that body, at the very least, and might cause widespread local devastation wherever it occurred (say destroying the room or the building).
So even trying to do the same with a carried item, into a wall, would pose a similar risk.
Of course Harem and Archon can get physicists and mathematicians to speculate on the results. But as they lack any means of replicating teleportation, to test their hypothesis, the only way, to find out for sure, is for Harem to try it out. And risking dying is not part of her game-plan.
* One thing we can infer though is that it is unlikely Harem’s power would incorporate a ‘sense and abort’ feature, if it were not hazardous.
Or, Archon could set up sensors to see what happens with *really* small obstacles, such as dust specks, mold spores, and viral particles. Especially when she changes the number of bodies (in which case a simple swap wouldn’t actually work).
Good point on the former.
However, regarding the latter, dismissing a body just sends it into storage (figuratively speaking, all we know is that it is no longer physically in the universe nor is it affected by time). So that side would be no use for such an experiment. Whereas retrieving one is simply teleporting it back into reality.
Functionally there is no difference between doing that and teleporting from elsewhere in the world, if one is only concerned about what is happening at the arrival point (which is the key issue to determine the initial question). So whilst I think it would be useful to conduct some tests relating to the ‘changing the number of bodies’, I do not believe it would contribute usefully to this specific point.
one thought I’ve had a long time re teleportation. When teleporting in 2 dimensions, object moves thru third D, and when arriving at destination, it starts as a point and expands to it full size & 2D shape, pushing aside whatever is in the new place. So in 3d, using the 4th, Harem’s arriving body just pushes aside air or water very very quickly. should appear as tiny Harem rapidly expanding as if from a distance, and create a brief gust of air or current of water, but that doesn’t show in most comics/movies, etc.
Yup. And we have received not a single hint along those lines. Despite having seen Harem teleport next to people a number of times. The comic does have details such as the orbs’ glow appearing on hair. And we know that Dave has speculated over this particular issue, earlier in the comic. So it is something he has given thought to.
As such I would expect to have seen some clues, by now, if what you describe is how he envisages the power working.
Or have her grab a stick, hold it out, and have her try to teleport so that intersects something instead. If she can do that, it’s disturbingly effective as an offensive ability.
Separating all the molecular bonds in a given cross-section of a sturdy solid to transpose its position would take a lot of energy. Crushing the atoms of intersecting objects into the same space would take far more energy still. That’s assuming some form of conservation of energy applies here, of course.
It could also cost her a clone just testing! Sounds like something she’s not likely to want to explore just out of curiosity. Though she might attempt it if she can see no other possibility.
Something that might be slightly less dangerous to test would be trying to teleport a part of something. And if she can’t take a part of something she might be able to teleport something that’s not actually a part of something larger, such as grabbing someones shirt and worping away with it, or grabbing a nail that’s been driven into a tree and teleporting. Some day it might be important to know exactly what she can take and what not. Also she might want to experiment with touch. Does she need to actually hold an item to port it? The guns consists of several parts, some that are internal and she ports those together with the ones she’s actually touching, such as the slide and frame on a pistol. If she can port a pair of tongs and whatever they are holding she could be an asset if they ever have to remove a bullet from someone. Just have someone with a bit of medical experience find the bullet, grab it with the tongs and let Harem takeover and port the tongs and the bullet out. It should make for slightly less tissue damage. But all of this is just guessing.
Harem probably has tested at least some of these ideas and many more, but without more in comic info we have little idea about her limits apart from the ones covered in Dabblers science specials.
It has been generally accepted that Harem has a similar zero-range TK to Maxi, and just like with Maxi, it’s intuitive: she doesn’t have to be specific about what she takes with her, just “I want to take this giant gun” and as long as it is within her weight-limit then the whole thing goes with her, or not if it exceeds the limit
Makes me want to see her teleport into a tank of supercooled water, thus creating the most perfect ice sculpture of all time, complete with hair, fingernails, possible tears, etc at her departure point.
I’m not sure Daphne would be dying to try that.
badum-tish
depends on the volume of air iirc.
Note: that “SPLASH” is simply the water filling in the Blondini-shaped void, not as a result of the displaced air
There are two possible options. One being the gap is a vacuum, the other being it is replaced by air (presumably from Harem’s arrival point. I don’t think we have any evidence to say one is certain, so it is fair for people to draw their own conclusions.
What we can see though (in panel 3) is that Harem does definitely leave a void, our only divergence is whether there is air in there, or nothing at all. Either would cause the water to fill the void though, so we cannot draw a conclusion, to decide which, just from the movement of the water.
Personally I feel that the ‘SPLASH’ sound points towards air, rather than vacuum, because that is a normal sound we are used to hearing in baths and swimming pools, in a standard air-filled environment. Whereas we would expect something distinctly different from hearing a vacuum collapse. Dave does pay attention to his onomatopoeia, so could probably find a way of conveying that, if he had such an intent.
I have previously cited other supporting evidence, such as us never having seen the effects of a collapsing void in air-to-air teleports. No hair being drawn towards it, for example. Nor away from it, if the reverse is happening, at the arrival point (i.e. if air is being displaced outwards to make room for the arriving body).
Cumulatively I think the various small points are consistent with Daphne swapping places with the air or fluid at her destination point.
We will be able to tell this definitively if we ever see her teleport into water, provided we see what happens at her departure point too.
Potential spoiler speculation: This would be a suitable revenge prank if she happens to be above Sydney at the time. Clearly for ‘some future date’. I do not think that even Daphne is insensitive enough to engineer such a situation at the present time. And she has caused more than enough harm here already, that any decent person would abandon such revenge plans, without any further provocation.
My guess is that when we get to see Harem port into water there won’t be a corresponding deluge of water at her point of origin. In the comments there will then be a short but heated debate regarding wherever the porting of the volume she takes up at the target area is selective, if it’s decided by some kind of inherent failsafe, or if she always leaves the corresponding volume of air.
I personally think there is some displacement of air going on in ordinary air to air porting, or there wouldn’t be a sound effect. Granted she doesn’t seem to leave a Harem shaped total vacuum, but there seems to be a slightly lower pressure. Well, at this time ODKFS
ODKFS
Orangutans Don’t Kiss Flying Squirrels?
WDTHTDWA? (What Does That Have To Do With Algebra?)
She kinda does leave a Harem-shaped vacuum, because we can see her image when she *VORP*s out
A great opportunity to check if any of the orbs has a healing function has presented itself.
True. But not for the first time. My respect for Sydney would drop markedly if she had never tried healing herself from any of the numerous injuries we have seen her with.
However such has never been shown, so it is fair to raise the point.
In rooms like that one, if nobody is splashing around, you’d be surprised how well sound carries over the water.
They are on the roof. But you are correct, despite that.
For Sydney with her body image issues – made a million times worse by being surrounded by super models all day now – this is a very likely response to Harem’s suggestion. One anxiety attack, turned all the way up to 11. I am glad the Max was on the ball on it.
A whoopee cushion retaliation would be completely appropriate and I doubt Syd would be *too* bothered by it.
Sydney’s body image does seem to be absurdly bad though doesn’t it? I mean granting that her social “skills” might have led her to think she’s less attractive than she is, skinny is in these days, and has been for a while. Heck she hews closer to the super model standard of beauty than most of the cast.
No, not it is not ‘absurdly bad’, those issues happen all the time (why do you believe so many young women, and a few young men, kill themselves, literally, because of ‘body issues’?), also, while GrrlVerse is only a slight deviation from OurVerse, it is still not the same, specially regarding ‘standards of beauty’, for one thing, the only ones who believe in that skinny-as-an-anorexic-stick look are the fashion houses and modelling agencies
“Few young men”, the Anon says. It’s more probably for a socially-decried ‘ugly’ woman to find someone than for an ‘ugly’ man, even among females who are considered ugly. Facing a life without partnership, companionship, alone and unwanted, plenty of us off ourselves.
Possibly. But alone is alone. No matter that others might find it easier to overcome their challenges.
As an incurable romantic, I do get comfort from seeing someone disfigured, or perhaps with a severe disability, who still finds love. So even though every year that goes by I feel my chances slipping away, I keep hope alive.
Just keep trying. If one approach does not work, try another. Not easy I know. First you have to overcome depression. Then awkwardness/shyness. And lack of success will make both worse.
But find a way to make a connection, with the right person, and they will see past the looks. Some kind of shared activity, over time, can do this. Preferably a hobby, that you shine in.
Skinny? Are we talking about what the fashion industry has been shoving in women’s faces for the better part of this millenium atleast? That, in my opinion, goes beyond skinny. It’s borderline anorexic. It’s like the fashion industry is conspiring to destroy women both physically and mentally.
“First we convince them that they’re ugly by pushing this unrealistic and unhealthy beauty ideal on them, thus breaking them mentally. They’ll finish the job by destroying themselves physically in their attempts to become skeletal chic. It’s brilliant! [diabolical snickering]”
Stress Induced nosebleeds are actually a real thing btw.
Combining this particular distressing (to Sydney at least) train of thought with the very recent close drowning call, and it’s not completely unbelievable that she could have a spontaneous anxiety/stress induced nosebleed. Harem’s little comment just so happened to be the straw that broke the proverbial camel’s back.
Personally prefer camel toe to camel back :P
LOVE Maxima’s reaction here – totally in character.
Let not the fact that I rather agree with her spoil that reaction. :D
Maxima sure got over there in a quick hurry…!
Did you expect a few panels of her casually strolling to Sydney’s rescue?
She is fast enough to catch bullets.
As long as Sydney don’t recreate that scene from Carrie(the 1976,film)…!
Sidney isn’t one to bare others or herself. She has body issues, everyone’s body is an issue with her. She is also a spaz as we see and has some gruesome reactions to this like blood flow. She means well. But she is like a time bomb with very sensitive detonator.
Sydney does not have an issue with “everyone’s body” her sole issue is when surrounded by people with an “idealised” body* and then only because she fails to meet those unobtainable** standards. She has repeatedly stated that she feels inadequate by comparison.
She is very sensitive. I am not sure if the ‘time bomb’ analogy is fair mind. When she was hanging with Leon (who does not trigger her fear of inadequacy, as he is of a divergent body-type himself) she was very comfortable in his company.
So there is no implication that at a certain time she will explode. She could live her whole life and never have to confront the issue, if she had not been forced into close proximity with so many super-enhanced individuals.
The gist of your point is not unreasonable, but I would suggest a pressure cooker might be a better analogy. The team had inadvertently been putting the pressure on Sydney, in the shower, and with various other incidents. With it being unrelenting, it has gradually worsened, and Sydney has had no outlet from that, or chance to come to terms with it, before this redoubling of the pressure on her.
The nosebleed being a reasonable analogy to the pressure release on the cooker. But only poetically. The actual analogy being that she needs some help to bring her to a better emotional place. Otherwise, yea, returning to the analogy that without such a release of pressure she could explode. Albeit that would be an emotional breakdown.
Sometimes those can have violent consequences mind. So your bomb analogy is not completely unfair. Even a pressure cooker can become a bomb.
* As promoted by Hollywood, glossy magazines, and plastic surgeons as examples.
** Plastic surgery does actually turn the unobtainable into the obtainable. At a price. And that is not just a monetary price, there are medical risks associated with any surgery, then there is also the loss of diversity. Plus the loss of character, in giving in to such social pressures, and making the most of being a different body-type.
There are plenty of people with different tastes, to appreciate such. Sadly many fall into the same trap by idealising the forms that society tells them are best. But many others retain diversity of taste and recognise that their personal preferences do not fit in the pigeon holes that society likes to push on us.
I can see the sad irony of a couple getting together because of, say, the woman having breasts artificially enlarged by surgery.*** Only to find that, in the long term, her partner keeps getting attracted to women without those. Each having gone with the ideal that media promote. Only to find that they would have been better, in one case, accepting what nature gave her and, in the other, in recognising what their own tastes were, rather than relying on images pushed at them, on the red carpet or in porn.
*** Hopefully just as one strong factor, amongst others, as opposed to being the only one. Anyone that shallow is probably destined to have unsatisfying relationships, if they cannot recognise deeper things that their prospective partners have, such as their personality and moral worth.
I think Maxima overreacted to Harem’s little taut, I mean c’mon, sexual blackmail? She just busting Sydney’s balls a bit. But clearly sexual/feminism stuff is an issue for her as much as Sydney’s body image is. It’s good characters have quirks and hang-ups though, makes them feel more realistic and relatable.
Harem had already made an attempt to get Sydney to show what she’s got, and Sydney told her it ain’t gonna happen, so Harem decided to take an innocent prankccident and force Sydney to strip, in public, using her own guilt over the prankccident, so yes, ‘sexual blackmail’ sounds about right
Yes, Sydney made a blunder with her prank, but Harem took it too far (even if panel Critical Shutdown hadn’t happened)
Right, sexual blackmail, off the table. Kidnapping, no problem. Can we get a ruling on plain ole’ blackmail? How about grievous bodily tickling? Yea? Nay? Tbd?
actually… when Maxima deduced what Harem had done in that ambulance she gave her a superwedgie
That was more because of what the impression of the lipstick-covered ‘prisoners’ left in the minds of any viewers
it’s because Harem KNOWS Sydney is uncomfortable with the sexual banter that goes around, and this is going a little close to forcing Sydney to participate.
To illustrate,my point, if you happen to be eating pork at work when a muslim employee comes in, you don’t need to stop. However, making a big deal about it- and/or trying to force said employee to eat pork themselves- could well legitimately get you a punch to the face. (witness Sydney being irritated when Harem started up conversation that mocked Sydney for being a vegetarian.)
To cut a long story short, Harem REALLY needs someone to hammer home the difference between banter and sexual harassment. Particularly since there is an argument it’s borderline sexual assault.
Pretty sure that pinching someone in the face for offering them pork is not legitimate, its battery :)
actually, in the situation as I described, it might not be. There IS a point at which the legal system says “what the $%^& did you expect to happen?” and refuses to protect you from the consequences of your actions. Making a massive deal about eating pork to a muslim employee may well count, since it’s sufficiently mocking that it can reasonably be construed an attack.
*looks at the word legal* I don’t think that word means what you think that word means
It is always safest to judge your arguments well, when debating law with a practicing lawyer. :-)
Pander cunningly sucked you into a trap there, by focusing on the ‘offering’. Being obnoxious or offensive is pretty well protected in the USA, due to the first amendment of its constitution. Other, more civilised, countries would offer legal redress more readily under ‘creating a public nuisance’ or ‘outraging public decency’ laws. Which can have unlimited fines or prison terms.
Likewise behaving in that manner, at work, is likely to result in dismissal. Probably in the USA too, but if a behaviour is not considered illegal, then that may not follow.
However whether there is a legal remedy, or not, taking a swing at someone for just speaking would not be legally justified. It would constitute an assault. It may get a minimal sentence mind, with a sympathetic judge, due to the provocation. But it is safer to rely on whatever legal protection a country might offer instead.
So Pander is making an important distinction. The bit she ignored though:
Would allow the employee to deploy their fists. The application of force means that self defense comes into play. Providing the response is proportionate, to the threat, then it is legally justified.
Yorp, what kind of law do you practice?
He he. Not me, Pander.
Although I don’t know about her evil twin. Probably still a lawyer, but one preferring anti-bono rather than pro-bono.
*shudders at the thought of a massive anti-bono explosion*
A lot of people are Anti-Bono: he’s a pretentious twat and his music sucks :P
I knew I should have cut the red wire, to defuse that explosion!
He he. Just watched a movie that had a choice between the red wire or the green one.
The final line was…
“Maybe it was the green one”
After cutting the red.
Ha, brilliant ending to a film!
Just so. Not quite so good for the participants though. They felt quite crushed.
Wasn’t trying to trick anyone :) I said offering because if you literally tried to force pork into someone else’s mouth, that would be assault and battery, which CAN be responded to with force :)
To Mike Peterson: I mainly do general litigation, tax law, and trademark/copyright law (although I do other stuff usually as a per diem), but I’ve also done criminal law, real estate law, and corporate law.
To Guesticus: I lost all respect for Bono because of how he tried to cheat Randy Marsh out of World’s Biggest Turd. :) Even though that was a cartoon.
Yup, I did cover that, at the end of my comment. :-)
Intentional or not though, you did manage to trap someone. There was an obvious (if hypothetical) injustice being described. Which you appeared to leap to the defense of. Albeit that you were actually only picking out the one part that was defensible, and addressing that separately. So all your words were true and fair.
But they concealed a 20 foot deep trap, with spikes at the bottom. Totally accidentally, of course.
*wags tail allegorically*
He didn’t cheat Randy, Bono is, literally, a giant turd :P
Don’t forget that the comic has an ever-expanding readership here. Either Bono or someone who holds him to be a loved one could be hurt by your words.
Although I appreciate you are riffing off Panda’s comment, society becomes a nicer place if we always assume that the target of such remarks is listening, and we take their feelings into consideration. Taken in isolation, your comment is very harsh.
I dated someone on the periphery of the music industry, for a while, so got to see a bit of celebrities’ private lives. There can be a big difference between the public and private persona. And some of them come across a lot nicer in person, than the impression we may have of them, from press reporting.
Everyone makes mistakes, or speaks out of turn, from time to time. Us private individuals can get away with it, as it will be forgotten. But any mis-step someone in the public eye makes will be raised time and time again.
So, unless you are a fan, and seek out the other side of a story, we will often be exposed to more of a negative impression than may actually be fair.
to be fair, I did say and/or. Pander could have been clearer, yes, but they may well have had a point.
However, I don’t entirely agree that it would take them attempting to force the muslim employee to eat pork. What I have in mind is where they are being sufficiently obnoxious that it would come down to the muslim employee having to avoid the cafeteria, or use force. To tie it into the comic, Harem’s behaviour- especially if it continues- could conceivably force Sydney to leave Archon because she can’t deal with harem’s behaviour. When it gets that bad- particularly since it would mean Sydney would likely have to stop using the orbs- I would contend that the distinction between words and fists is meaningless- it’s assault, just not a physical assault.
oh, and also, I live in the UK, which colours my viewpoint somewhat.
You are mixing up good arguments with bad ones, I am afraid. There are laws which protect employees from harassment, including the purely verbal variety, precisely because they would have no other choice but to quit their job, if such did not exist. And for many people that is not a viable option, as they need to put food in their bowls.
So whilst it is a very serious matter, it does not elevate the verbal abuse to the status of assault.
And it is very important that such is not done, otherwise violent people would exploit any law which allowed that. If some thug wanted to beat someone up, with impunity, they need merely verbally provoke them, but carefully avoiding passing whatever threshold was deemed to be sufficient to justify a physical attack.
Of course the person being harassed is feeling flustered, intimidated, and scared, plus would not necessarily have studied where the fine line lay. They never are nasty, so would have no day-to-day need for that knowledge.
But, as you say, folks can only be pushed so far before they respond. So one harsh word out of place later and the individual is being beaten half to death. Fully legally because the precedent of physical defense, against a verbal assault had been established.
Fortunately not in this world though.
Do note that separately there are circumstances where society does feel that sufficient provocation has been made. However it is important that the act is not written off as being OK. It will be registered as an offence, but when punishment is allocated it will be minimal or token only.
This means that anybody on parole, who chooses to try and act in the kind of way I described above will be committing an offense that breaks the terms they are permitted back into society on.
This is just one example of why it is important, but it shows that repeat offenders who try to find a loophole in the system can be prevented from abusing a feature that is there to stop innocent people from being punished if caught up in extraordinary circumstances and behave in a manner that is technically not legal.
I approve of the current Pope’s statement, for instance, that if anyone (well he cited his assistant as an example) insulted his mother, he would punch him.
It would not be legal, to do so, but he would escape punishment.
I disagree, although I think it’s largely semantic.What I see it is that if someone would commit an ofense, but not actually be punished for it, then there’s no point making it an offense in the first place.
Punch someone who has pushed you far enough? fine if the provocation would cause an average, reasonable person to do the same thing.
Beat someone half to death? you’re getting punished unless there are extremely good mitigating circumstances.
Basically, what it comes down to is that there is a point someone can be pushed to where the verbal attack is sufficient that an ordinary person could not reasonably be expected to control themselves. In the case of a thug harassing someone and a harsh word being spoken, it wouldn’t qualify.
Taking the last point first, I was merely indicating that the thug would keep pushing the victim, until their response broke whatever threshold was required. It would be up to you to define what constituted ‘assault’ if it could be conducted with words alone.
Whatever you decide is the tipping point, where on one side it is legal and the other a criminal offense, the provoker will remain just on the legal side. And the mug he is playing will tip over onto the other side. Which, in that balancing act, certainly can be a single word.
To avoid us going round in circles, I will give you a different example. It is illegal to speed. Even if a cop is in hot pursuit this remains true.* So even if you have to rush a pregnant mum to the hospital, you would be breaking the law if you sped. And for good reason, as even a minor accident could endanger the life of the unborn baby and the mother.
However, traditionally, if the driver is suitably cautious, courts will usually not punish this. It still has to remain an offense though, as this is an exception rather than the rule.
If we were to use your logic then speeding should be legalised again, for everyone. Which would cause tens of thousands more deaths per year, even just in the UK.
Doing it the way round that the system currently works though means that it is at the courts discretion. Which is the right way around. Because most of the time the person speeding is doing so illegally, and we must not allow them to waste hundreds of thousands of court hours trying to prove whether it was ‘justifiable speeding’ or not.
It is always illegal, so all that is necessary is to prove who was driving the car and what speed they were doing. Making the process straight forward and saving valuable court time for cases that genuinely need deep analysis.
Likewise we must not say ‘it is legal to punch anyone who says something offensive to you’. Otherwise you will have hospitals overwhelmed with patients. Violence should be the last recourse. So making it illegal as the base line, but allowing the courts discretion, for the rare instances where it is justified, allows justice to be served, but without promoting it as being the appropriate route to take.
Plus it also puts makes sure that the perpetrator does not feel it is OK to carry on punching people all the time.
The courts waved a more severe penalty once. But if the person keeps refusing to follow legally available routes, such as calling the police, or making a complaint about workplace religious discrimination, then they should not be so lenient again!
Bear in mind that your proposed solution would be pushing society down the path to vigilantism. There is a good reason why Archon come down heavily against that. It is all too easy for people to follow that path. And it only ends in chaos and injustice.
What if the sandwich being offered was actually a chicken sandwich, and the employee was (like Harem) just making a light-hearted teasing joke? In bad taste, and inappropriately sure. But ended up with a broken nose, because it was taken as being an assault. They could be disfigured for life, but perfectly legally!
* I am speaking using the laws of England and Wales. Although the principles are probably similar in other jurisdictions.
again, our disagreement is largely semantic, though I disagree with what you say would be the end result. Basically, the way I see it, the court’s discretion to not punish a crime if it was arguably justified should extend- in highly limited circumstances- to not convicting.
it is emphatically NOT an excuse for vigilantism- just that if someone drives you so mad that no reasonable person could control themselves,punching someone in the heat of the moment should not result in a criminal conviction.
As to your former, the system does actually have that mechanism. If the public prosecutor deems that there is no public interest in bringing a case to court, then it will not even get there in the fist place.
Ironically sympathetic press coverage can actually be detrimental to this kind of situation. An unreported incident need only consider the interests of the individuals involved. Whereas a widely-reported one needs to have a result that makes clear to the public that punching is not the appropriate route.
There is all too much violence in society. Risking increasing it, just to give you satisfaction that things seem fairer the way you propose, is not actually beneficial to society.
Sadly politicians often do not consider the actual results of proposed law changes. They too just look at what they are attempting to achieve, rather than what will be the likely outcome.
The thing which supports my position is that it is the way that has worked, for hundreds of years. And there are means of legal recourse for the situations described, without resorting to violence.
And where violence is necessary (in defending from a physical assault, including the force-feeding example) that is already legal, under self-defense laws.
Your last paragraph explains why it is necessary that the law remain as it is. Because currently it is illegal to punch someone unless you can prove you were acting in self-defense. Whereas your way people can go around punching whoever they like and claim that it was in the heat of the moment.
Which would then require that the victim of the punching be able to prove that it was not. Which is a lot harder to do. And would chew up a lot of court time. And the difficulty in securing prosecutions would mean that bullies would become emboldened and punch more.
Which would take up more court time, pushing up the costs of justice (in paying for it somehow), reduce the number of cases that they can actually resolve satisfactorily, and create an ever-worsening spiral of violence.
Think that is nonsense? Look at how conflicts were handled in the wild west. Have a read through and realise that I was skirting around the way that gunslinger bullies would behave. Punching can kill. Guns just do it more efficiently. We should not encourage killing, to resolve disputes. You only resort to that when there is a comparable risk.
Words should be fought with words or by legal means.
Breaking out my bar certification, one sec. :)
Actually there’s no point where talking about eating pork gives a legal excuse to get punched. There’s no amount of verbal abuse even that will allow, in the law, a person to punch the verbal abuser, let alone someone who is talking about eating pork. In fact, there’s almost no point PERIOD where any sort of speech can legally allow physical damage, except a verbal threat of violence with a reasonable apprehension of doing the threat.
Actually, I can think of one or two specific situations where speech can cause you to be legally punched without making any threats at all. Specifically, martial arts tournaments and boxing matches are legally considered to be sports, not mutual assault.
Somehow, mutual assault, even with a signed agreement and rules, is considered to be mutual crime…unless you have a signed agreement to engage in a boxing match or martial arts tournament, even though that shouldn’t matter by the letter of the law.
There are often exceptions to laws, such as the one you specified. But provisions are specifically made for such, so that the legal principles do not change for other circumstances covered by the base law.
Do not read on if you are of a sensitive disposition. The following deals with an exceptionally gruesome real-life case.
In Germany there was, in the last few years, a case where two men exchanged emails arranging to meet up, so that one could eat the other. As in kill and cannibalism him. So not only was this done with concent it was indisputable written concent. Even with this though the perpetrator was convicted of murder and cannibalism.
These are things which are expressly forbidden by law, and for which even concent does not allow an exception. Countries (such as Switzerland) which legally practice euthanasia put in very precise laws to limit the circumstances, to avoid abuses that might extend it beyond its humanitarian intent.
I suspect it’s not super hearing per se, but rather the sort of selective hearing that listens for trouble, typically found in drill instructors, officers and moms.
I am also thinking that “naturally” pointed ears like hers might confer a small advantage.
Maxima has sharp ears? =P
Helps her to hear those cutting remarks…
And there is usually some trouble where ever Sydney is.
and teachers, but i guess drill instructors are uber teachers
On another note I wonder if the orb can create water or change the temperature of the air. Maybe even create different types of atmospheres.
before Sydney had Harem “fart”, that was indeed the next line of experimentation that Maxima was planning on trying… it just got cut short a bit due to Sydney goofing off with the newly found powers of that orb…
I really feel Sydney here, I’d probably react the same if someone asked me to do that.
Whaaaaat? Aren’t nose bleeds usually an ephorism for arousel in magna and comics? And that particular one is…. messy.
*sigh* I’ll say it. Does she have a public embarrassment fetish or something?
The theory behind those nosebleeds is that a virgin doesn’t know where to send the rush of blood to, so it comes out the nose instead of going to the proper location. It was originally something only boys did.
Yeah, this was my thought as well. If we’re going by manga/anime tropes and shorthand, the idea of flashing everyone just made Syd extremely aroused (Rush of blood to the nose be a stand-in for a rush of blood to… other locations). I’d be fine with that, but I get the feeling that isn’t what was intended here.
If it was intended, then never mind. Syd can totally have an exhibitionist streak, even if it is one she would be way to embarrassed to ever explore.
Pretty sure it’s just a blushing overdose, what with how she’s reddening in the previous panels. Not that you’re at all wrong about the normal connotations.
Yes, but in real life, a nose bleed could be caused by a sonic concussion, or a brain hemorrhage. In other words, Sydney’s brain exploded. Explains the pupils.
Nosebleeds have many causes, one of which is anxiety. No exploding brain necessary. It is very rare though, so should not be the first diagnosis which springs to mind, unless supporting facts point to it, such as with Sydney.
What we are seeing is a side effect of the ‘save point’ restore of a few days ago catching up to her. The pressure of the chroniton particles in her brain that allowed her to keep her memories have reacted with the excess of neurotransmitters due to her agitated state. They have created a microsingularity that may grow to engulf the Earth unless they can induce a gravimetric inversion using an opposing flood of endorphins. Quick, bring in the internet cat videos!
Nooooooooooo!
Calm down yorp. You are the preferred treatment but getting the videos may be needed and will take time to find and load them, just as an ambulance will prep medical equipment that isn’t immediately needed but would take to long after the need arises.
Oh ye gods I just about choked to death laughing at the last panel!!!
It is soooooooooooo Sydney, isn’t it? I laughed my fat but off!
I think that rather than a “superhero superpower” Maxima just has “mom-style super-hearing of shenanigans in process.”
Where I come from, we call that “teacher’s ears”. My mother has them. All I have to do if I want to annoy her is go to one of the back bedrooms, shut the door, and slide the dresser drawers open and shut, open and shut, open and shut…
(From the kitchen): “Stop doing that!” Yes, she can hear that, through a closed door, and all the way at the other end of the house.
How old is Maxima, now that you mention it? With her powers it’s difficult to tell, but since she has such a high military rank, it wouldn’t be unrealistic for her to be at least in her forties, or even her fifties, but she doesn’t act like she is that old most of the time and in the flashbacks of her teenage years there are cellphones, so she can’t be that old.
That is something I would normally check in the cast list, but that is offline, for maintenance, for the time being. At the lower ends of your estimates, from memory though. Late thirties?
Military personnel advised Dave that Maxima was rather young to believably be a full colonel. Hence why he changed her to a Lieutenant Colonel (although has yet to alter the early references to the obsolete rank).
Several times, we have seen Maxima (when Sydney can’t see her) showing mother-like concern or even pride in Sydney. Although some have described such as big-sister-like behaviour, there is a considerable age gap between the two. But it is not an unreasonable way to describe the ‘vibe’.
Here I think she is demonstrating appropriate concern, be that for either of those attitudes, or for the more obvious one, as Halo’s commanding officer.
That makes sense, Thanks ^^. It would make sense that her powers would make it difficult to tell. I took her for a much younger woman when I started reading.
Mid- to late 30s is a reasonable estimate. Under normal circumstances, the youngest age at which you can reach O-5 (Lt. Colonel) is 34 to 38. Possibly younger, if you get a promotion for exceptional service.
I’ll buy exceptional service giving her some speedy promotions, but what about her transferal to Archon? If the government is looking to fill the ranks of a new branch, doesn’t that mean they fill from the top down, giving promotions to help fill the gaps?
Was she given the Lt. Colonel rank before or after she transferred to ARCHON?
Arc-SWAT specifically employs just supers, except for a few support roles. In particular it is important that the leader be able to survive super attacks. If a human were to be appointed leader than their life-expectancy would be about five seconds, in a super-fight.
So even following your proposal would result in Maxima being the ranking officer, as she was the most senior officer when the supers from the various armed forces were amalgamated, to form the core of the unit. Continuing this supposition, that is.
There were not many. Super Hiro, being a major, ended up as the second in command. With Anvil being a lieutenant. These are all reasonable ranks for their age. So there probably would not have been a need to promote any, to get to what we see today.
Although Archon have had a couple of engagements now. So there may be some promotions forthcoming. Not that there are loads of troops to be commanded, within Arc-SWAT (although there may be within Archon, as a whole). But, setting the latter to one side, the higher the rank that any of the heroes have, the easier it will be to issue orders or have suggestions accepted, by allied military (or police) units.
Actually, 15 year olds DO have super hearing; they’re just bad at listening!
Super selective hearing you mean?
Youngsters are able to pick up higher frequency sounds that older folks can no longer hear. If you hear a teenager complaining about an incessant squeaking noise, or something similar, but cannot hear anything yourself,* do not discount their comment as nonsense.
Of course it could just be wild imaginings, or squeaky voices telling them to go postal. However it may be noise pollution, from nearby machinery, or an animal infestation, which they can genuinely hear, that you cannot.
Super selective hearing can occur at any age. That is more down to the person’s personality. Although age and personal circumstances can exacerbate the likelihood of it occurring. For instance someone in a dependent situation might be more likely to develop that power, than at other times of their lives.
If they can’t get away from situations they dislike, then people can tend to ‘tune out’ things which they do not want to hear.
* Picturing yourself as a wrinkly if you are not actually one
Her pupils are of different sizes… did she just give her a stroke?
You are not the first to think that. Possible but I doubt it. I think it is just to emphasise her extreme emotional state.
chill Sydney, eveythings fine
new Gravatar
You should know that was already tried.
https://www.grrlpowercomic.com/archives/468
I am slightly more concerned she managed to find a bath robe.
I took that as being a clever call-back to the earlier scene. An image well modified, to evoke that boding.
Mittens are Sydney’s unusual weakness. But steps really are a defense, against a potential threat to mankind!
Shortly before falling into the fountain the robot was heard to repeat the phrase “My vision is impaired. I cannot see!”
After this initial failure for world conquest, the robots have gone on to try simulating human appearance and have been seen invading our shopping malls. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4140600/Woman-busy-texting-walks-straight-fountain.html (the guidance system still needs some work)
It looks like Sydney may be in for counseling for her body image issues.
Probably a good idea, but Sydney could legitimately be pissed off at Harem even without Sydney having body image issues. It’s… not a good idea to try to force someone into exposing themselves- which is what Harem did.
Why? She is as fine about her body as any other normal person, except when forced to be exposed to near-naked Supers
BAd HAREM! *rolls up newspaper*
BAD! *hits Harem on the nose*
Go for it! You learn her!
My cats do that so often I’ve given up trying to stop it.
PS: Is that a Yorpie childhood picture?
Heh. Nope.
But I did have a ‘secret room’ in one end of a cupboard, for when I felt like getting away. So close.
Eye dilated differently, color drained from face… Sensory overload in 3, 2, 1.
One thing that I often wonder about teleportation: Did Harem leave behind a vacuum? Or did she swap in the air/other matter from her destination? Or something else?
You will find debate on that issue within these comments pages.
I think this current new story has relevance to some of the threads. Sadly such articles (racially aggravated or otherwise) are all too common.
It also is pertinent to the comic page. Not to imply that Harem was deliberately bullying (as opposed to the clearly verbal bullying the victim in the news item was subjected to). However it does show that things which some people take as being trivial matters, can have terrible impact on people. Especially if they are in a vulnerable state of mind.
Am I actually going to have to be the one that points out anvil made a comment that the hearer would set their context to so, daphne thought it a crack on the shower fart, varia took it to be about the large amount of splashing, and leander went to her recent stripping incident then made it the common accepted meaning with her response as Kenya planned. I was waiting since Saturday for someone else to mention this.
Heh. Machiavellian level of planning.
Possibly Anvil plays a very deep game. Deep enough that she has never given any hints of such manipulating. Although I must give credit for her taking advantage of wanting to hug Max and Hiro, for surviving, as an excuse for getting them together.
However that was pretty overt, as opposed to devious. My impression is that Anvil is straight forward. A consistent rock , that the rest of the team swirls around.
Not that we have seen enough of her for me to say that with any certainty. But it does match the patterns so far.
This is the most recent page, so it feels like the best one to post this on. I’ve been reading Grrl Power for quite some time now, and I still find myself occasionally clicking on a random link in the archive and reading a few of the older pages and stories.
I’ve never really ran into that before, this is one of the only comics I’ve consistently read and reread and rereread. I don’t know what it is that makes it so enjoyable, but I hope I never get tired of it and I can’t wait for the day physical books appear so I can buy them all.
Aww.
*wags tail happily*
I experience that same re-read effect when I read El Goonish Shive, where Dan puts referential links in his commentary, and in Too Much Information, where most of the links come from readers’ comments. Of more than a dozen comics I keep links to in my favorites list, These three are my most re-read. Since I save these and a handful of others to my hard drive for re-reading at leisure (OOTS, Misfile, Questionable Content, Menage a’ 3/Sandra on the Rocks), they are not alone.
Similarly, with this comic and some of the ones you list.
The one that I find sucks me in the easiest though is the Mansion of E. Being a daily updater, with a vast cast and a complicated range of plots going on, it is very easy to forget about a particular character, arc, or even a whole faction. So, like Dan, the author does link back to ‘last seen’ occurrences. And that can very easily result in an extended refresher session… which might become an archive trawl.
Not that I am trying to plug that, in preference to any of the others you listed, they are all good comics. It is just that the feature under discussion is highly prevalent with such frequent updates. 365 pages a year means it is easy to loose track of things.
The other daily-updaters I know of though do not do that linking back as often (or at all). So archive trawls would usually occur for other reasons, and thereby be less frequent.
Nah, it’s more of Syd’s just overload in terms of being teased into showing herself off, when she’s constantly conscious of being surrounded by, as the sign said WAY back in the day, “some of the most beautiful women on the planet”. Just like I would be conscious and intimidated be being a regular guy having to work with people like Hiro, Math, and Achilles, who’re all literally ripped like superheroes.
“Sexual Blackmail” is a pretty heavy dysphemism to use when describing a young adult woman showing her breasts to four women she shares a public shower with on a regular basis.
This isn’t on the same level as someone suggesting Sidney is obligated to give blowjobs to strangers behind the port-o-johns in the city park.
Dial it back a bit, Maxima.
Have another look at the final panel. Maxima knows she is dealing with someone who, underneath all her bluster, is actually very shy and sensitive. It may not seem like a big deal to you, or to Harem, but to someone in a vulnerable position, it is.
Which is why Maxima takes it so seriously. Unless you know somebody very well it is safest to assume that they are in such a position. Even if outwardly they seem stable and self-confident, that is just the defense that people build around themselves, to shield themselves.
Just see how shy Harem herself was, on the previous page, when she unexpectedly lost her top. Despite all the experiences she will have had regularly hanging out in night clubs, as an attractive super.
Sidney’s reaction does not redefine the nature of Harem’s actions.
If I open a door, and the knob smashes some poor guy in the balls whom I didn’t know was there, the degree to which he is unhappy about it does not redefine my own actions from “simple accident” to “Assault with a Deadly Portal”.
Incorrect.
Oscar Pistorius tried a variant of that defense, claiming that he could not see his girlfriend through the door, when he shot through it. He was found guilty of murder, in his second trial, as they established the necessary intent.
The result of the first trial was closer to your analogy though, as intent was not determined. However in the circumstances it was reasonable to assume that somebody was beyond the door, otherwise he would not be firing through it.
South African law does not allow the killing of even a burglar, unless there is a clear and present danger, over and above their presence. Therefore the result of that trial was culpable homicide. He should have known better than to shoot, as there was a risk of killing someone.
Which is where your analogy breaks down, as the strawman in your example has no knowledge of the presence of another person. So that is genuinely an accident. However if you modify it such that they know there is a person on the other side of the door, then it ceases to be an accident, but does become assault (if intent is proven) or a lesser crime otherwise.
Likewise with sexual harassment situations, the onus is on the perpetrator to ensure that the victim will not be harmed by their actions. So if they call it wrong, they are culpable.
Thus Dave could do two separate comics, one where Sydney laughs at the action, with the other being as above. In the former Harem would still be rebuked by Maxima, but for inappropriate behaviour, because she is risking emotionally harming Sydney, even though she turned out to be OK with it. *
For the comic above though, Harem is fully culpable for the results. They occurred because of her actions and she had failed to ensure that they would not cause harm.
Basically unless you know for certain that somebody is emotionally stable, and is fine with being teased, in a sexual manner, you do not behave that way. And, best not to, even then.
* Plus Harem is still under probation for sexually harassing Maxima! In Maxima’s case it was not emotional damage that resulted but reputational. But that only increases the severity of her offences, it is not a necessary factor to consider in determining whether sexual harassment has occurred in this case.
It is worth noting though that the excuse of ‘she was only playing a prank’ does not hold true in any of sexual harassment situations described. Nor does the defense of ‘I did not know that would be the result’. As Harem cannot read Sydney’s mind she is obliged to assume that Sydney is vulnerable, unless proven otherwise.
Only if Sydney says “I am OK with being teased like that” would Harem be able to present a defense of that kind, with any hope of success.
I find it odd you would compare firing a murder weapon designed to kill humans through a door, with using a door for its intended purpose, and consider that a valid comparison.
I’m also unwilling to accept the rule of poorly written laws as a functional definition of Right and Wrong, or rationalizations as logic.
Still, I don’t see this discussion going anywhere. Agree to disagree.
I did it because it demonstrated the legal principles. in a case that is well known. A door can injure or kill, and so can a gun. A gun just does it better. But if the person using the tool is doing so with intent then it is attempted (or actual murder). Or assault, as the case may be.
I also broke down exactly the principles involved and indicated where my analogies differed from yours. Plus it helped to show where yours failed to be fit for purpose.
In particular showing that the lack of visibility, to the victim, did not negate the crime. Not whilst they had reason to believe another person was there.
As such it is a valid comparison. You can use the same principles to determine if an assault was intentional, as you can for a murder. The use of a gun versus an improvised weapon may or may not influence the particular charges laid and/or the potential sentence, depending on the jurisdiction. In the UK it would drastically increase the jail time.
But it would not affect whether it was right or wrong. Nor whether innocent or guilty.
That is a perfectly fair and correct statement in isolation, and if speaking as a matter of principle. Do note that it is predicated on the assumption that the laws are ‘poorly written’. Which for the UK (and I imagine other jurisdictions too) they are not.
If they were to use the definition that you propose as being the appropriate one, then people would be free to conduct sexual harassment unchecked. Because all they need to is claim that it was their opinion that it would not cause harm, and the law would support that.
Yours would be a very cruel and unjust change to society. Presently people can get protection against such verbal bullying, in the workplace and elsewhere. Whereas under your system it would be almost impossible to protect the vulnerable. Workplace dissatisfaction and suicides would increase amongst the vulnerable.
It would be a better place for bullies though.
That is probably best, if a debate is fruitless. Don’t think that it will protect you from loosing your job, or being fund guilty, in a legal action against you though. Because the courts will not recognise your ‘unwillingness to accept the rule of law’, as having merit, regardless of your opinion on ‘how poorly it is written’.
> it was their opinion that it would not cause harm, and the law would support that.
Actually, that is EXACTLY how US law works. Well, sortof. For any given action to constitute a crime under US law (which is relevant to the comic, given who Arc-SWAT work for) it must be illegal and the perpetrator must intend to break the law. In Latin, that would be actus rea and mens rea.
There is also a reasonability standard. Would a reasonable person shoot a gun through a door for no apparent reason? Probably not. But would a reasonable person open a door? That IS what doors are for, after all.
In the murder example you gave — which is a lot closer to a straw man than Hinoron’s argument, and only escapes it because you didn’t actually misstate Hinoron’s argument — shooting a gun through a door is both illegal and, under the reasonability standard, highly unreasonable that someone would do it without malicious intent.
I’m not sure what relevance South African law has to an argument about laws in the USA, mind you.
In Hinoron’s example, someone does something that is not illegal or unreasonable, but someone is accidentally harmed by it. You failed to actually address his point, and instead went off on a tangent about a man who lied about his intent when he fired a gun at someone. Under US law, crushing someone’s nuts with a doorknob by accident because you were unaware they were behind the door you were opening would not be illegal in any way.
It was Hinoron who went off at a tangent. His initial statement claimed that Harem could not be held accountable for her actions. This is false.
Supporting it by citing the example of an accident caused by opening a door is not a valid comparison. Harem has seen Sydney wrapping herself up as a mummy, in the showers, and she has spoken about her shyness when compared to the ‘super hero perfection’ of her team mates.
Harem should have anticipated that her behaviour would cause distress and emotional harm to Sydney. Hence Maxima’s non-nonsense allowed rebuke.
And legally it is not necessary to prove that Harem should have anticipated it, as I detailed above.
I was offering a courtesy to show how the totally inappropriate door example could be extended to actually come closer to the real circumstances. Doing that though does not make Hinoron‘s incorrect example correct. It is just to illustrate where it was wrong.
South African law and various (but not all) of the US states laws are descended from the laws of England and Wales. Because their legal systems are related it is legally permissible to cite precedent in one country if none exists in the country the case is being heard in. The same applies to Australia, New Zealand, Canada and India.
I have seen press reports of this being done on more than one occasion. It is especially relevant in new and developing fields like information technology. Although the precedent is not considered binding, in any way, it does help the court to see how the issue has been approached previously. Thus speeding up the provision of justice and also helps avoid any pitfalls which may have been brought up in the previous case.
Whilst I am not doing this, as there are plenty of local precedents which could be cited, in court, I chose to cite it because it is world-famous and the basic principles are the same. So it allows readers to understand the issues more easily, without having to wade through a link to some other case that they will not have previous familiarity with.
So you are saying that someone who is driving recklessly and crashes, killing several people, cannot be prosecuted, in the US? Because it was not their intent? Bollox. Their actions were likely to cause an accident and risked killing people. They are accountable for their actions.
You only need to establish intent if trying to prove that they were attempting to murder the other people.
Here Harem is not intentionally causing mental distress and harm, but was recklessly endangering her by her actions. She is culpable for the results.
This is not a hypothetical. This is how the law works. You are applying different laws inappropriately to this situation.
Which I agreed with. Please read the comments carefully.
Plus bear in mind that you are arguing in support of sexual harassment. As you clearly do not understand the law, in this area, I suggest you read up on it, before encouraging people to break the law by arguing that their actions are legal.
Yes my knowledge is based on UK law. But if it was radically different in the US, in this particular regard, I believe that the news reporting on such, by the BBC, would point that out, for the benefit of British viewers/readers. I cannot recall any such, and I do follow prominent sexual harassment cases.
Which all too often, in the US, are against high-profile individuals, who settle cases out of court. But simply because this evasion of justice is a legal alternative and you do not get to see high profile people going to jail, does not mean that their actions were legal. It simply means that their victims would rather become millionaires, than see their persecutor going to jail.
What in the … how did Sydney’s face?
Don’t smash your head into random furniture Sydney!
(being a… procurer of random nosebleeds myself, I cannot understand how hers started here)
I have… so many… ellipses… in my bag… gotta use… them all… Sydneymon.
There be no headbanging going on.
It is purely a case of spontaneous human nosebleed. Albeit anxiety-induced rather than unexplained.
Yes, but you see…. if this was the case, she’d never have been able to eat spicy food in the first place.
The capillary reaction would cause nosebleeds every time, if stress can induce them.
She’d be bleeding into every bowl she eats. I wanted to mix the phrase capillary into “capital punishment”, but it comes out all funny “capilarital punishment” doesn’t really slide off the tongue.
However, blood coated noodles would. They’d slide right out of the mouth reeeeal fast. Eeek. >.<;
Yes, the Math is a little shaky. (Or would be.)
Okay, so this comic is already hillarious but this page just about broke me.
I know I’m a bit late to the party on this page, but I just realized something…..
It was this particular Harem – ‘Strawberry Harem’, I mean – that broke her wrist in the fight a few days back (from the comic’s perspective) & just had it set by Doc Chevy.
Shouldn’t she still have a cast?
Yeah, she definitely should. I forgot.
Sydney doesn’t have boobs though.
She is probably more aerodynamic that way.