Grrl Power #197 – Feminist v. feminist
Told ya Dabbler would bring the dirty. Boy I could write a dozen pages like this, and probably will eventually, but not in this scene. I’ve put myself on a schedule to page 200 which has kept the writing from to get too tangential, the result of that is all the pages till then have mini comics under them. Trying to keep myself on track just makes me compress in addition to cutting.
It’s interesting trying to write both sides of the feminist coin – honestly I had never considered Dabbler’s take on that expression before I wrote this page, but it wasn’t to hard to come up with it once I thought about it instead of having the usual gut reaction of “well obviously that’s sexist” and also “hur hur” (because people are complex that way.)
Eye rolls are hard to draw. Without animation, it makes someone look like they’re trying to look at their own forehead or they’re having a stroke. Maxima’s eye roll reference courtesy of Liz Lemon.
Coming up next page… the biggest reveal in the comic yet! Ok not really.
ComicMix is doing their annual webcomic faceoff. Their page is slow at the best of times so be patient with it. They’re obviously severely overloaded at the moment – that or some script they’re running on their page is wrecking Chrome. You don’t need to log in or create an account within the brackets, you actually vote below all the brackets with inconveniently non-alphabetical list. Vote for as many comics as you like, so have at it if you’re sufficiently patient to put up with their site. As I recall last year, Grrl Power made it either to the quarter or semi finals, losing finally to Ava’s Demon. It’d be cool to at least match that this year!
<– If you enjoy the comic, please consider supporting it so I can continue my hobby of drawing comics for a living… or something like that.
SuperheroThey're super, thanks for asking!
Meatspace ComicSeriously these are awesome. Check 'em out!
Not UpdatingNo longer updating or only updates sporadically, but definitely worth reading.
SeriouslySeriously you guys. If you like Grrl Power the check these out.
"Mature"Mature subject matter and occasionally something explicit but usually safe. Can't guarantee the ads are safe though.
Dongs Ahoy!Full frontal and backal. Lots of skin, sex on some or all pages, explicit or otherwise.
The problem is that when you tell people things, they have a tendency to believe those things. Maxima is woried that if that’s all you tell them, that’s all they’ll believe.
Um, no they don’t? The very existence of debate (and by extension any conflict ever in which the conflicters have had prior contact with each other) sort of means that we are fully capable of disagreeing with what we are told?
You are actually both right. We all grow up being told certain thing are truth and our child minds believe it absolutely, but when we meet someone who was raised being told an opposing viewpoint is true, we fight over it because their worldview doesn’t match our own. We might both be half right, but because neither side is willing to sit down and admit that they are wrong on some things, the fighting continues.
There is a mental fallacy wherein people can believe in something strongly enough that even if they are presented with overwhelming evidence that their belief is wrong, their mind will dismiss it simply because it goes against their belief. It is because the human mind so rigidly believes what it is told that wars have started over ideology more than anything else.
well said.
+1
it somehow feels wrong to give such a base reply to such an eloquent and insightfull statement…
+1 (squared).
I’m not saying that people always believe waht they’re told and only what they’re told. I’m just explaining the argument that most feminists make against that kind of speech. FWIW, most people will believe things that they’re told if they have no reason not to believe them. Believing is the default in most cases. I know that doesn’t mean a whole lot, though, since there’s usually at least a small reason to be skeptical of someone’s argument.
Then you should say that next time, because now it just looks like you’re backpedalling (which you may well not be)
Yes, always count on the ones reading your comments as being idiots, and plan your words accordingly
Dabbler has a point in this conversation. People should strive to be great in whatever they do.
“Coming up next page… the biggest reveal in the comic yet! Ok not really.”
Maxima is asexual?
Just a guess. I think it’s the influence of another webcomic I read which has an asexual though quite attractive protagonist.
Well, that depends when she got her powers. If she got her powers young, before she lost her virginity, she might not be able to have sex with a man.
The asexuality I’m referring to is in regards to sexual orientation and not biological mechanisms. It’s possible that Maxima’s superpowers prevents her and/or places her beyond any need to reproduce as an organism, but I’m really thinking about what sex Max is attracted to, which would be neither or none along this line of thought. (In truth, asexuality is more complex than just not being attracted to either sexes.)
I’m kinda curious, what in this page makes you assume her to be asexual?
https://www.grrlpowercomic.com/archives/601
Everyone in the room got turned on except her. I doubt even having really strong feminist views could do that.
Even if Max is ace, she could’ve still be turned on by glamour Dabbler just like the women who’re not into women did. It could be she just has some kind of superhuman willpower.
I’m not too sure of that…
She was turned on. It made her angry that someone was manipulating her labito like that.
Well, okay. Good point.
Yes but she got a mad-on instead of a hard-on. Something you really don’t want to mess with when dealing with women.
speak for yourself, its faint but if you look closely under max’s eyes on panel 9, you’ll see she is blushing but the color of her skin makes it hard to see.
I have known people who go bright red in their face when furious. And Maxima certainly was that in that scene, so I would not attribute a flush categorically to one emotion or the other.
Mythbuster verdict: INCONCLUSIVE.
(Although I go with the angry at having her libido manipulated angle for other reasons)
Man of Steel; Woman of Gold; bed of tissue paper. ;)
Reminds me of this little picture
https://www.deviantart.com/art/doesn-t-matter-had-snu-snu-418949142
which webcomic
oh and thanks for the new pages
Supernormal Step.
Assuming you’re right, and Maxima is ace (which she may well be), and it was inspired by another webcomic (possible), it probably wasn’t that one. This comic was already running and Maxima’s character already well defined when Fiona came out. Besides which, Supernormal Step isn’t linked in the sidebar. GWS is, though, and it features an ace character who’s been out much longer.
I took it to mean that SS influenced him to think of this, not that it influenced the comic.
This.
He he. I guessed that is what you were referring to it.
Let me tell you a secret. Timid blue four-armed alien girls do it for me. I am so glad that they are getting together!
Even as just friends (it seems to me, that if she would be with anyone, it would be the timid alternate dimensional (not alien) girl from Pakistan
Yep.
By the way, she is an alien. The hero is from Earth, the alien girl is from another world. Albeit an alternate Earth.
Actually, if that is the case, the hero would be the alien seeing how she is now on their Earth (they are natives, she is not)
Well argued, alien. Well, that is what you are from an alien’s point of view.
No, it’s what Sydney asked for for dinner.
That is my guess too.
me think you are referring to the web-comic, supernormal step, right?
Methinks there may be more than a few Supernormal Step fans here.
I bet it is the influence of the four-armed alien girl in a superhero setting fetish community!
Nah, it is just cause bunnies :)
*Hides his Dabbler plushie* I know not of which you speak!
Is that the one with the detachable tail?
Harem 1: Lady in parlor
Harem 2: Maid in living room
Harem 3: chef in the kitchen
Harem 4: Whore in bedroom
Harem 5: Testing out 4
She can actually do that expression all at once
LIKE. Your wit is brilliant. :-)
For modern day, I’d happily drop “Lady in the Parlor” for “Mechanic in the Garage.”
The lady in the parlor bit is vital because it emphasizes the cultural, civilizing aspect of the aspiration. Replacing the “maid in the living room” with the mechanic thing would work better for your meaning.
And this sort of aphorism only really comes from socially conservative women and Robert Heinlein, in my experience. (Although I may be eliding his old “specialization is for insects” saw with some of his dodgier “space princess” sexual-revolution posturing.) For the same reason that only Jewish comedians can get away with Jackie Mason material, and only black comedians can tell Chris Rock jokes, only a Phyllis Schlafly type could say such a thing and not be socially ostracized. Although Norman Mailer got a pass, for some reason that passeth all understanding.
And the Jerry Hall anecdote about her mother giving her this advice illustrates what I’m talking about. For people who think that “patriarchy” is enforced by angry knock-off Marlon Brandos in wife-beaters yelling at the foot of stairs, check out how modern-day Indian “patriarchy” is run. The mother-in-hell passing on the mountain of misery her mother-in-law inflicted upon her in her time is a nasty fact of life there.
I think 4 and 5 would be a bit too distracting to allow her to excel at 1-3. It would be hard enough for Harem to behave like a “lady” when she wasn’t having 2 simultaneous orgasms. Might make some sounds that are un-ladylike.
Then she gets confused around gasm-time, and all of a sudden you’ve got a harm in the kitchen, a chef in the bedroom, a whore in the garage, a lady on the front lawn, and a maid in the lighting section of an IKEA 20 miles away.
Lady in IKEA (to shop assistant): “I will have two of whatever she bought!”
Shop assistant: “Sorry madam those only come in fives.”
+5
So how did this conversation start anyways and why didn’t Arianna hear it the first time it was said assuming she didn’t just sit down now.
I have similar concerns. This update seems out-of-sequence and doesn’t really advance the plot. Maybe it can be said to demonstrate Max’s feminism and give us readers something serious to chew on, but I feel it stalls the pace and flow of the comic.
either this is a set up for the future or….. you know sometimes it doesn’t have to be part of the plot, it could just be written for the hell of it because it is funny! lol just enjoy the page. its dave’s comic, he writtes and draws what he wants
sorry for double post but also, Dave always said the whole idea behind GRRpower is to show super heroes in their downtime when they are not fighting villains, as he said, and i quote:
” nobody remembers wolverine mowing down (X) ennemy, but his sipping a margarita on the beach in pink brief, EVERYONE will remember”. ( something like that)
also, its WAY funnier ^-^
She was clearly texting.
It is an organic way of allowing us to know that some time has passed, as they are now half-way through some conversation. I was going to say that Arianna was likely chatting with someone off-panel (perhaps a waiter), then turned back to the conversation. But agree that the texting is much more likely, given it’s prominence in her face. And because we know that she is working despite being here.
One subtlety that you may have missed though, is Arianna’s half-smile. That smirk says to me that she did hear Maxima, and is getting a little bit of the payback for her earlier mis-treatment by Maxima. She knows precisely how irritated Maxima would be at having to repeat the whole saying. And is loving every moment of it!
If you mean in panel 1 (because that’s the only panel Ari shows up today), that is not a ‘half-smile’ but rather she was in the middle of eating a deck of cards
I think “A woman should be whatever she wants to be wherever she wants to.” would be better.
yes, though my first reaction was “I want to be a pony in a spaceship!”
Who are those three blobs? I guess I’ll put my money on Shemp, Curly, and Moe. The body shapes don’t really fit, though. And dead guys don’t really fit in Grrl Power. I better hold off calling my bookie.
Someone needs to find and link the page that shows the full grouping (believe Heatwave and Achilles were in that corner, but not sure who else)
I already checked, they do not match anyone in the full room picture even changing positions.
There is nobody black haired in green. The brown haired in blue could be Mr Amorphous but lacks the choke. Of the third blob we see just the head but there are only two black haired in the room, Super Hiro who is beside Anvil, and Leon who is way taller.
Achilles is blonde and long haired.
And before Yorp points it out ;) yes, they could be teammates that were out of picture, or arrive later, or change cloths, et cetera. I am just refering to the general view given before.
Sorry, I forgot Zephan, anyway he has different hairstyle and glasses.
I’m pretty sure that’s Stan, Kyle, and Kenny
Oh my god, they turned Kenny into a blob!
I sorta don’t get the bottom, off-panel joke. Why should Gwen be angry at Harem when she was the one who made the comment that grossed herself out?
She’s having oral with someone at that moment with another of her bodies.
Rather, she is in the unique position to give cunnilingus to herself. Think of it as “ultimate” masturbation.
She has a huge advantage over everyone else as she knows EXACTLY what feels good to her body when it happens and EXACTLY what to do next.
I hadn’t thought of that. Although, she doesn’t look too paralyzed there.
Lots of experience hiding what she’s feeling in her other bodies.
She doesn’t exactly hide it very well at times.
that was shock from sudden events.
Surprise… surprises her… but if she knows to expect a thing, she can isolate reactions pretty well to the body they originated in. It’s the benefit of having a single consciousness with a cluster of processors.
Well, all her bodies are at the restaurant, are you thinking about under the table or at the bathroom?
We know that some time has passed. Girls are wandering off to the loos and doing the mysterious things that they do there in pairs.
Plus do not forget that we are talking about a hero who can teleport. She could just as easily be on top of the Eiffel Tower or in a gondola in Venice.
Yes I know, I just keep finding more appealing the “under the table” scenario :)
those long tablecloths…
PS: The catering company an acquaintance works at started using short tablecloths at teenager parties cause recurrent incidents. No kidding.
Given what I just learned in this comment I am thinking it could be a play of words:
Gwen (like Dabbler) is meaning the obvious.
Harem could be refering the popular belief that some conditions leads to develope mastery in alternate sexual ways. Something like Jane Fonda in the hands (somehow) of Jon Voight in “Coming Home”.
Also, “Yeah, uh..” in the middle sub-panel hints that she’s already done so before.
(She’s been splitting into separate bodies since she was a teenage girl. I’ll leave the rest to your imagination.)
I am thinking that it is implied that Harem has performed this practice on herself in the past, one body giving, another receiving. As others have mentioned, she sees it as a form of masturbation. I doubt it is happening right “now”. I think Gwen is wanting to receive it from one of the guys.
This seems most likely.
I was under the impression that one of her bodies slept with Dabbler …… she is classified as ‘bi-the-way’ on TV tropes.
Not even a hint of the former, that I can recall. Although it would not be unreasonable to assume that they might have, given their respective libidos. Harem has gotten flirty with other girls, more than once though, so the latter might be valid, depending on its definition.
So…
“A man should be a gentleman in the parlour,
a butler in the living room,
a chef in the kitchen
and a hustler in the bedroom”
Sounds acceptable enough, although makes a good point.
to be fair, you need to replace hustler with gigolo
“Hustler”? I would think “Stud” or something.
…Then again, “Whore” doesn’t refer to sexual ability so much… -_- Maybe the closest is “Gigalo”?
Actually, ‘whore’ still works. It usually refers to a woman, but not necessarily.
‘Man whore’ is usually the term used
I’ve seen similar from women–usually the same kind of selfish odious sort as the men that pen the topic monologue; though it’s seldom done quite so poetically – usually intead it takes the forms of direct expectations:
“I deserve a man that’s rich, good looking, athletic, that will devote every waking hour to fulfilling my fantasies, who will ravage me at night, then serve me ice cream in bed in the morning…
…and anything short of that just means I’ll keep looking for my upgrade while I mark time with the best for right now”
the best irony is just like the “women belong in the kitchen” men, the “bigger better deal” women are seldom the kind to attract exactly what they want and almost inevitably end up bitterly settling for something they didn’t want, but certainly deserve.
I think you show the eye roll well in panel 5.
I didn’t recognize it would be so hard to do.
PS: The mug shots at the top shows Dabbler doing a SheHulk / Classic Star Trek Green Girl impression.
Does this mean that she has so much control over her Glamor she’s a virtual shapeshifter?
Could she do an impression of a plain woman if she needed to go somewhere without drawing attention?
Yes but she would probably never do that as she like attention a LOT.
Yeah, back in the boardroom when Syndey was just barely recruited, Maxima told Dabbler to tone it down…Dabbler indicated that she never goes below a “ten.” She definitely loves the attention: the smile on her face as Sydney’s gaze drifted downward while in the bathroom.
But Dabbler also has grown accustomed to it with some sense of aplomb & mild amusement, as she literally grabbed Sydney’s head & turned her away.
I suspect it would probably be psychologically taxing for Dabbler to not, in some way, be drawing attention to herself.
It’s quite possible this current appearance is Dabbler dialling her “Yo ho! Desire me!” all the way down to 1 and as demonstrated in the previous scene there appear to be some effects that are naturally “always on”.
She did become an Orion Slave Girl using her glamor. Don’t have the link but it was back in the conference room when she was explaining her glamor power. She can latch into the hidden fantasies of men and become what they desire most, in that case, General Faulk’s fantasy.
Succubi have hypno-everything that works through their glamours (see previous comic). I suppose that having an average to below average person draw that level of attention would be more suspicious than having a particularly attractive form to justify the effect. Plus, I doubt Dabbler could bear to blend in.
Quite.
And I do like the mini comics.
I would argue that yes, a man’s sexual prowess would come up but it would be seen as an asset. The assertion that the expression means “a woman should excel at whatever she does” is undercut by the negative connotations of the word “whore,” something for which there is no male equivalent insult as men have never been expected to be chaste.
The one exception is in a homoerotic situation. Fag is a bigger insult than Lesbo. And most anti-gay violence is aimed at men. Not to say all but there is a better acceptance of females than males being gay. Still slightly worse than awful is still bad.
Lesbians aren’t more accepted than gay men. They are mostly just sexualized by mainstream media for male enjoyment.
Then please explain why men are much more often the target of violence than women when it comes to gay bashing?
It appears that way because its on the news. Keep in mind, some of those “gay” men are actually Bisexual, but get gay-washed by the media. Its not like the specific orientations of the men really mattered to the person assaulting them– all they saw was a same sex couple and decided to be a horrible person.
Most violence towards lesbians and bi women are rape and domestic violence, perpetrated by people they know. Bisexual women in particular experience high rates of sexual assault because they are fetishized and believed to be sexually available to any man and the golden ticket to threesomes.
It ‘appears that way’ because the bashers (the physical ones) believe they can ‘cure’ a lesbian by raping it out of her, so the crime is simply that of rape rather than ‘gay-bashing’ (if it ends up being reported, and taken seriously, at all)
Both valid points and worth considering but I was mainly referencing the many times gay men have been assaulted and sometimes killed just because they were gay men, Never understood it myself but the depth of homophobia not just in this country but worldwide seems particularly higher against men. In some countries they face the death penalty just for existing. Yes women are also victims but the violence just seems higher of men. It might be that they feel gays threaten their own sexuality. And of course all “Macho” men respond to threats in the same way, violence.
Agreed
Apologies for the long post. I had a look through and could not easily trim it. But new page today, so folks can easily enough ignore it, as we all move onto the new comments pages. :)
It is a very complex issue that doubtless has a lot of influences on it. Analysing it is particularly difficult, because of the paucity of reporting, and variable standards of it where it does exist, around the globe. So it is extremely hard to pick out what aspects might be down to culture, religion, social factors or even genetic reasons. Not to mention that even addressing some of those issues is a politically very hot potato.
But western culture has influenced many parts of the world, so it does not hurt to focus on that. If only because it is what we are familiar with, even though we should be wary of thinking of it as being the only way. With those caveats out of the way, here some aspects which I believe contribute to the issue:
It starts with the historical legacy that we have. The roots for the west, being Christianity, given how dominant that has been on shaping European and thereby eventually western culture. Because sodomy was perceived harshly by Christian authorities for millennia it brought negative attention on homosexuality. Whilst lesbianism slipped under the radar.
As the result of which the former was demonised socially, culturally and legally. Whereas the latter escaped the brunt of it, presumably aided by simple discretion and common sense in avoiding being tarred with the same brush as men (perhaps literally in some instances). All of which got passed on to the cultures we have had contact with.
Which has a feed back in that the cultures that we are most familiar with seem to have the same problems we do. But we may be the very cause of it! Or there may be that there are underlying biological causes as well. And here I am not alluding to a ‘gay gene’, as that has nothing to do with how society treats gays and lesbians. The latter being the point I am addressing here.
But simply because of the ‘selfish gene’. Different sexual strategies favour the sexes, shaping their behaviour. Very loosely speaking male genetic propagation favours promiscuity, whereas female benefits more from monogamy. The simple math is that if a man has 12 children by a variety of women, his genes will get passed down much more to succeeding generations than if he was monogamous (and/or less sexually active). Whereas women are more likely to have their children survive if they find a mate who will assist in raising them. Which is more likely to occur if seeking a monogamous relationship.
That previous paragraph is a fairly standard concept. Now also bear in mind that we are becoming aware that society forms part of our heritable legacy. The culture we are in can shape our genes (literally in the emerging field of epigenetics, but also in a more general sense). And likewise culture and society itself is subject to Darwinian evolutionary rules. So if something is a successful strategy it can be passed on by those mechanisms, as well as for genetic reasons.
Which means that there are cultural, social and genetic reasons why men tend to boast about sex more than women, and likewise tend to be less discrete. Supporting that assertion, and various points made above, many people in Victorian England were completely unaware of the concept of lesbianism. Likewise legislation was focussed against homosexuals rather than lesbians.
So, in the modern western-influenced world, we have a two thousand year legacy of portraying homosexuality as evil, built into the fabric of our society, culture and laws on one hand. With the natural instincts, culture and society encouraging men to boast about sexual exploits* on the other. Which, combined, easily, if not simply, explains why there is the discrepancy when compared to lesbians. Who, despite having more than their own fair share of burdens to bear, do not suffer those particular ones to the same magnitude.
Changing the laws is the easier part, hard though that is. I think it will take quite some time yet for us to unpick those various threads from our society and culture, around the world.
* And/or be less discrete. Likewise as regards promiscuity. Note that this particular comment is about men vs women, rather than gays vs lesbians.
Yeah, laws are (relatively) easy to change, attitudes are far more resistant (unless it is negatively influenced)
whore=gigolo when speaking of professionals, which I believe is the connotation in the phrase used, and the true meaning of the word. of course, in the usage of whore=slut, there is the female attachment to both, with “manwhore” and “manslut” being common when used for men (though considering how many words used to be feminized to apply to women… though certainly “waitress” and “actress” don’t have the negative connotations of the purely sexual… though some people might see all of those as being undesirable… and in Japan, for a while there was a big overlap in actresses and prostitutes). Interstingly, “Harlot” used to apply to lecherous men before becoming used for women…
I’d go with ‘Hoe’ for women and ‘Rake’ for men! Though I do miss the term ‘Vamp’.
The male equivalent of “whore” is “gigolo”. The male equivalent of “slut” is “stud”.
The acceptability of stud vs. slut is because a woman is instinctively expected to more selective in choosing sexual partners than a man, because of the mammalian sexual model. As a man, I could start several pregnancies in one day if I can find enough willing partners; it would be a really bad idea, socially, but biologically, so long as my heart does not give out, it is do-able. A woman can only start a pregnancy about once a year, no matter how many willing partners she has. Because of this, a man’s instinct is to have sex with as many partners as possible to have as many children as possible, so that as many as possible have a decent chance of reaching adulthood. A woman’s instinct is to have sex with the best possible man in order to have the best possible children, thus giving her few children the best possible chance of making it to adulthood. It is a matter of quantity vs quality and all tied to the mammalian sexual model and our instincts. Our social structures, like marriage, are another thing altogether.
How about “A woman should be a professional at everything she does.”?
How about “A woman should be free to choose what she does and shouldn’t have her personal worth judged based on a narrow set of arbitrary criteria that were laid down by someone else.”
How about “a person…”
First off great comic as always, though I find it sorely lacking in Sydny.
Second where is Yorp? I wish to make him breath joker gas and then throw him into a vat of questionable chemicals.
He’s washing Duck Soup out of his fur.
This repeated assulting apon Yorp is probably the reason he is absent
Its not assault if it gives him a better personality and outlook on life :D
Just look what joker gas and questionable chemicals did for me…
https://youtu.be/7GQw2iZtucc
Is it just me, or did Joker have an ugly love child with Johnny Bravo?
It is you.
He didn’t sound like Johnny when he was hitting on (getting hit by) Harley to you?
The Creeper has been a DC 2nd or 3rd tier character for over 30 years now.
Probably so, but that clip was first time heard of him, and he certainly sounded like Johnny in the clip linked (hey, maybe Joker and Creepie got together and created Johnny, but that’s just sad not funny)
He’s busy becoming dinner.
“Dog makes a fine meal,” -Benjamin Martin ‘The Patriot’
Activates automatic defense matrix vs. The Creeper on YORP’S collar.
Aww, y’all missed me.
*wipes a tear from eye with paw*
You are right!
sigh…we need to aim better
“Offfers NotFred a varity of top quality firearm accuracy enhacers.”
For a price that is.
“Gives YORP the price list for all the defensive upgrades that can be unlocked on his collar.”
WARNING; Please do not try to hack the collars processors as all modifications MUST be preceded by a 5,000 character security verification code to prevent total defense mode (oubliette mode).
These codes are generated by a 1 gigabyte random number generator.
We thank you for your restraint.
Darn, I wish you had told me that before I bypassed that unit, in order to limit the remote-access controls, and certain other… peculiar features. I bet I have invalidated the guarantee by doing that?
*hangdog expression*
Yes the warrenty is now void.
The randomizer has been activated.
But the remote systems acess is still active.
*nods* I expected as much. As to the rest though, you are right to do so. The randomiser is fun! And you have already made good use of the remote access. I just limited the uses to maximise the former and encourage the latter.
*bounds off on a force-field space hopper*
Yeeee haaaaa!
“Activates 4th-8th hardwired backup recievers”
At this point, the best I can offer you is a hint.
I would have imagined Dabbler objecting to the “whore in the bedroom” part because it implies the woman is only doing it for money.
I almost question why dabs would accept the behavior to be so limited by location. her past behavior would suggest she want to replace bedroom with everywhere.
Well, if that’s how a woman wants to earn her source of living, I say why not? I’m so totally against enslaved prostitution though…Like in all things, *individual consent* is the key to a functioning society.
Meredith Brooks wrote a song I’ve always liked called Bitch (the clean name is Nothing In Between). Here it is sung by Alanis Morissette; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lRqoIHZpWUU&feature=kp
No, that’s the Meredith Brooks original, it just inexplicably has a picture of Alanis as its visual.
Well when it was released a lot of people thought it was Alanis that was singing it. Their voices and singing style was quite similar.
Storm Large wrote a song I’ve always liked called Ladylike. The refrain goes like this:
What the *bleep* is ladylike if ladies like to do what the *bleep* they like just like you? Yeah, just like you!
I like this break form the plot to just see the characters interact normally. It’s nice. I also like it when Dabbler makes sensible points about stuff, it shows that she’s not a fanservice character (no offense Dave, I never thought she was myself, but succubi do make easy fanservice characters) and that she’s on par with Max on a number of levels.
Though I am trying to figure out how “paralytic cunnilingus” would be a good thing…
Sooo good they can’t move afterwards.
OOOOH! Right. That makes sense.
Sort of like the ‘swirly’ from “Menage a 3” cranked up to 9011
random thought regarding Max’s character design: Why does she have pointed ears?
Just curious.
Aerodynamics?
“All the better to hear you with my dear!”
That will be explained at some point. Hasn’t come up yet in the comic.
It’d be really cool if it were something counterintuitive, like, “Her psychokinetic powers pinch them a bit” or something.
Realised you made a EGS reference just a few pages ago.
OMG one of her parents is a Imortal and her brother is adopted!
I doubt it, I think those EGS plotlines were fairly recent. Whereas these pages were published in 2014.
But I freely admit that there are old chunks of EGS that I have forgotten, so I could be in error.
There is a simple explanation for her appearance. Her father is a Vulcan and her mother is GOLDIE Hawn.
“Sends the Spankonator 202 after O.B. Juan
*OABPC turns your car into slag*
No no, she ran the bar in Ten Forward.
For information this is just alluding to the weird way my brain stores names. In this case ‘Whoopi Goldberg’ gets pigeon-holed with ‘Goldie Hawn’. Which I have mentioned here previously. I am unlikely to mix them up in the context of reading them, as I very much know the two actors very well. But if I am speaking (or typing and do not carefully re-check), then my brain will play practical jokes with me and make substitutes (if it gives me any name, at all, I am grateful and may be too caught up in the moment to check the small print).
Happens to me at times as well: stupid auto-spelling (or whatever that thing so-called ‘smart’ phones have)
If you like the comic do not forget to VOTE at TWC and the TOURNAMENT.
So I see the brackets but how do I vote?
It is slow on loading, you need to give it a couple minutes. Then search “Grrl” twice or scroll until you pass the four brackets.
You will see a list entitled “Mix March Madness 2014 Round 1” with the names and a check box each. You can check as many as you want. At the end you have the “VOTE” button. Takes it several seconds to process the votes and give you the current votation status.
I suggest you to use the link I put in my comment, it goes directly to the voting page instead the announcement page.
Yorp: I already vote yesterday and I am seeing it right now. Grrl Power is in the Morales Division braket against Templar.
I forgot it: it seems Chrome users have problems with that page. I do not saw any advice or workaround about that.
Yea, I clicked on Grrl Power and it bounced me back out of the website. No idea if it registered the vote by virtue of that click though, despite knocking me out.
Yea, experimenting some more, the names are just hyperlinks, taking you to each comic. The bit in the middle just takes you to another page that says “game details tba”. Voting sure is hard. Why can’t we just hold our paws up for a count?
Mind you voting in packs does always end up with all the popular dogs tied on ‘more than one’ vote. That is why you see so much fighting, to resolve the draws!
You do not vote in the brakets, read my previous post, you must go BELOW all four brakets and find a plain list with check boxes.
I thought I implied clearly enough that ‘instructions are for wimps’ ;-) :-D
I got there ok, thanks kindly. Even with Chrome. The reason why I made my previous post, as I use that, I assumed that there would be problems, having seen that comment, so came here to vent my frustration at technology :-D
Interestingly enough I found reason to vote at least twice in each of the categories. One of which ended up getting four votes.
Most interestingly being the possibility that we could end up head to head with *knees trembling* Girl Genius! Will there be a showdown between the Heterodyne and Halo? Would worlds crumble if they did? And would we see any crossover artwork to celebrate the event?
*knees wobbling wildly*
*faints*
Looks like the tournament has messed up again. Last I looked we were in joint 9th place, in the seeding, and keeping steady. There are 20 slots, so we were in the top half of potential seeds. It has now progressed to round 1 and Grrl Power is not appearing in the tournament.
I have sent them an email objecting. I suggest everyone else does too. Or else they will think they can brush it under the carpet!
Grrl Power is in the voting. It is in “game” 7 of the Moreles(3) division. I know I voted for it, and a several of my other favourite comics. Thankfully, I can get to vote for both parts of a bracket, such as Spinnerette and Modest Medusa. I guess that really means I sort of abstained from voting for either, as my vote counted for both.
Ahh, thanks. I had not bothered to read the blurb, and just looked at the list. I did not notice that there were multiple categories. Doh!
Of course!
but maybe…
:)
Jerry Hall, Mick Jagger’s ex-wife, said she had this advice on keeping a man like Mick: “My mother said it was simple to keep a man; You must be a maid in the living room, a cook in the kitchen and a whore in the bedroom. I said I’d hire the other two and take care of the bedroom bit.”
But in other news. The fact that the quote uses an old word like ‘Parlour’ means that it comes from a time when women were only expected to be housewives and nothing more and I would’ve thought that Maxima would be plenty smart enough to puzzle out that herself.
To give due credit, “housewife” was at one time a (more than) full time job: maid, cook, nanny, nurse, secretary, & therapist (not to mention the expected sexual availability), all on call 24/7, possibly also maintaining the household books, acting as a social support, & (in unfortunately many cases) punching bag. All without a paycheck (an “allowance” doesn’t count).
If you are keeping the books and have access to all the money, does it matter that there’s no salary? In my household, Dad brought the paycheck home and gave it to Mom, and she controlled how much got spent and for what.
Fiscally? Probably not. Socially & legally? Absolutely. When my parents got divorced, my father (a pastor) repeatedly referenced my mother’s “lack of a steady job” (disregarding the fact that we moved every 3-5 years, because of his job), but had expected hot meals, clean clothing & home (but don’t move anything!), complete childcare for 2 children (one extremely ADHD), answering service, & whatever else he happened to need. 40 years of marriage came down to him not having a clue that she was working 3 times as hard as him.
/rant
Sorry, touchy subject.
I’m with you on that. My dad left my mom and then bitched because she wanted the house free and clear. No child support for his 5 kids no alimony just the house so she could keep him from borrowing on it.(she had a “man’s job” that paid quite well) and he had the nerve to bitch. He got off easy.
It never stopped being a full time job, the only thing that changed was the respect/acknowledgement giving to it
Where I think the problem stems from is precisely the issue that Ebonbolt touches on- Feminism, I think, started not so much as women feeling they were considered less capable or unable to do what a man does, but rather that they weren’t appreciated enough or given enough credit for what they did do.
Consider a society where the gender that bears the children specializes in the jobs that support that biological function- making sure the immediate environment is safe and supportive for the offspring, making sure the social situations don’t be come poisonous, smoothing out interactions within the family unit and between different family units, while the gender that is not required for most of the process of creating offspring specializes in the dangerous parts of the job- lifting and carrying heavy things that might cause joint or muscle damage, hunting creatures that might kill them, defending the family from outside dangers, because if that parent dies, the offspring still have a good chance of surviving to adulthood.
This is how humans evolved, essentially. The problem with ‘inequal genders’ started when the process of hunting and protecting and the like became safer, without losing the social glamour of ‘difficult, dangerous work’, while the home and family jobs remained as difficult. Males, suddenly with more time, began dealing among each other and organizing to further simplify and ease their duties, creating social and technological change that kept snowballing until men became the ‘Ruling Class’ among the genders- however, this all doesn’t consider how the role of the female stayed at that primal, critically necessary state- without the women running the households, the men would never have had the time, nor been raised effectively, to gain that ‘higher’ social status- and I’d imagine (no evidence, merely conjecture from media of the periods) that women [i]had[/i] the control for the vast majority of history- they merely used that control to further their goals of stable, healthy families- a critical goal for human existence. There were the outlyers (hopefully only outliers), of course- men who used their greater physical strength and bullheaded resistance to social manipulation to harm and put down their ‘better halves’- but they still couldn’t reach any important positions in life without a spouse to handle the details of living- I’d bet many if not most men of those periods (essentially pre-60’s or so) would end up with malnutrition and lose their jobs due to slopy presentation of themselves since they would have no idea how to shop, cook, or clean for themselves, and not have the time to do so even if they knew how- There’s probably a reason for the old “Shoo, shoo, get out of the kitchen and go read the paper!” stereotype in older literature and film- a stereotype showing men in a specifically inferior light to women in that frame of reference.
The rise of Feminism as a major movement seems to have coincided with the rise of technology and businesses that were specifically meant to make household chores and tasks easier- ready-prepared meals (tv dinners), set-and-forget washing machines, vacuum cleaners, daycares, etc, etc. Women had more free time- and so they started joining the workforce in larger numbers. The problem was, they were now integrating into a man-created structure, created and developed over many centuries, if not millennia, by and for the male psychology and physiognomy; the ultimate “Men’s Club” you might say- even a “Brotherhood of Men”, perhaps. Women were the newcomers, and so tried to fit themselves into this pre-existing, omnipresent social structure that wasn’t ‘designed’ for them- so they were unable to rise in the ranks, achieve the same social status in this social structure, as the men who’d created it.
Thus, Feminism. But Feminism had a problem- it was trying to change, again, centuries of social constructs, essentially overnight. It was, instead of building its own separate social construct, attempting to fit itself into the monolithic pre-existing ‘man’ society- and that became ‘Make people know that women are the same/greater as men’ instead of ‘women are equals to men’.
And you even see that today- the women that rise to the top in corporate America are the ones that act’ like men- who are straighforward, pushy, determined and act hyper-confident. But there’s also small businesses, and some rather major businesses, which were started by women, run completely differently, which are just as successful. Look at Mary Kay- they don’t have stores, they don’t have constant displays of products, little overarching ‘this is how to see stuff’- instead, they took a different route- one that’s more spread out, creative, flexible, with individuals in their free time doing what they think is best for them to sell the products, with social bonds and contracts instead of ‘notice me not them’ competitive blanket advertising. And it’s a hugely successful business.
I think women are Equal to men- but they’re definitely different as well, and should play to their strengths instead of trying to pidgeonhole themselves into the roles men established for themselves.
That is probably one the of the best explanations about what feminism is and why it exists that I have ever heard.
I’d point out Religion had a fair bit more to do with gender roles then Natural/Sexual Selection, especially culturally but it would just be to point it out, I’m not trying to argue with what you have here.
Sadly, even today, women are not being treated equally (even if most people would like to think that).
I’ve seen that everywhere around, and you can see it even in the sheer numbers.
And yes, it’s probably based on religion (Christians blame women for getting kicked out of paradise, and before that even being made from a piece of man, so, yeah).
Though you can’t deny it’s gotten a bit better (in over two thousand years, not by much).
We don’t blame women for getting kicked out of paradise. Adam didn’t have to accept the apple.
It has been a doctrine of the Catholic faith, and most other Christian faiths, that Adam was -tricked- into disobeying the commandment of God. Eve gave him something to eat. He trusted her. He ate it.
It has never been a doctrine of any Christian faith that Adam was “tricked” into eating the fruit of knowledge. Eve was deceived by the serpent, Adam was just stupid and disobedient.
No we do not blame Eve for getting kicked out of the garden. Stop spreading misinformation. The Bible is explicit about the fault for that little incident falling squarely on Adam’s shoulders.
Correct.
Humans don’t seem to have any complex instinctive behaviors. They have to be taught pretty much everything. There is no actual proof that men and women think differently. It has been proven that males and females have differences in their brain structure, and it is not unreasonable to assume it makes a difference, but we do not know what difference it makes.
Without doing experiments under controlled conditions, which really isn’t going to happen, we may never know just how much of behavior comes from nature, and how much from nurture.
Automobile insurance used to be cheaper for female teen-agers than male. The stereotype was that boys were, in typical masculine fashion, more likely to get into serious high speed accidents, or engage in foolish and high risk activities while driving. Actuarial tables starting in the late 1980s showed a change. Increasingly, females proved to be just as likely to get into “male” type accidents. The stereotype that men and women had different driving habits proved to be false.
Society has a lot of stereotypes when it comes to gender roles, many of them are accepted without anyone ever thinking about it until a feminist comes around, points it out, and questions it.
The idea that women who are successful in business are “acting like men” is one of the things that feminists have been trying to fight. Why should the behavior that works best in a corporate business environment be considered “acting like men”? Who says there is anything masculine about it?
A lot of the things that were at one time believed to be a function of biology, or of men and women “thinking differently” have proved to be nothing of the kind. They were functions of society and what children get taught.
It used to be believed that females were bad at math. This has been disproven. Society lags in the willingness to accept the fact.
I think women are Equal to men- but they’re definitely different as well, and should play to their strengths instead of trying to pidgeonhole themselves into the roles men established for themselves.
The ways in which men and women are different is very much in dispute, as is who has strengths and in what. There is nothing but tradition holding up the idea that some roles belong to men.
Drat not being able to edit, and not knowing the proper syntax for quote tags.
You are outdated, there has been several controlled experiments: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23807175
They were not so useful anyway. When having passionate beliefs people do not need (or want) to collect data. So the dispute keeps going on.
You are correct, it appears my data was outdated. They now have proof that men and women do think differently. They don’t have any data on what difference that makes, if any.
I said that we don’t know if differences in behavior between men and women are caused by nature or nurture. We won’t know until there are controlled studies done.
A controlled study would require raising batches of children from infancy to adulthood in controlled conditions, teaching different groups different things about male and female roles and abilities, and seeing how much influence what people are taught makes.
I do not see such studies happening. Ever.
Oh, I see, I misread your assert the first time, my apologies.
Also, I concur.
Assertion: Research funded, in whole or in part, by the public purse should not be placed behind a pay-wall to access.
Discuss.
As much as the whole “We helped pay for it, so we should be able to see what our money is buying” sounds like a good plan, where does it stop? Governments use tax-payer’s dollars on classified stuff, and they are often classified for good reasons. Should they be declassified because Joe Blow help pay for it? Though I will concede that governments do keep many things from the public eye that there is no reason to be secretive about.
Secrets are one thing, and perfectly acceptable, if genuinely in the national interest. But general science research, such as was linked, is another.
+1.000
Science works best when it is shared. Information should always be free.
The great Billy said that 20 some years ago
I will just say: Information must to be free.
Also: Gratis versus libre
These are the times I hate not having English as a first language.
WTF is “Paralytic Cunnilingus” ?
I know the two expressions separately, but I can’t wrap my head around a context where those words fit together and create one new thing.
It’s either until the ‘giver’ has a paralysed jaw/tongue, or that the orgasm is so strong the receiver turns paralytic?
The second one.
But, shouldn’t it be “paralyzing”?
substances (drugs or venoms) that cause that effect are called “Paralytics” so It is at least some-what correct
Good to know :) Thank you all.
I found that “paralyzing” is used as well, like in “paralyzing drugs”, but it seems to be more common in scientific articles while “paralytic” appears more in “popular” articles.
Funny detail: “paralytic poison” references are mainly about World of Warcraft :)
Probably. But a substance is called “paralytic” when it causes paralysis, in medical or biological contexts. And Dabbler picks odd words.
Because dabbler’s first language is not English either, really that phrase seems a bit too nuanced for a non-native speaker, especially one who’d had problems with English before. Though maybe she’s just better at understanding sex related words…
The -ic suffix converts a noun to a adjective. The -ing suffix, in this context, converts a verb to a adjective. Paralytic comes from the noun paralysis, a state of not being able to move. Paralyzing comes from the verb paralyze, which means to induce paralysis. Either expression could be valid in this context.
My you are an all-rounder. Physicist, biologist and cunning linguist.
+1 for that pun :)
*hits Yorp with a lemon creme pie*
That pie (which is a lie by the way ;)) would have to be going faster than ‘yorp’ speed to hit Yorp (seeing how Yorp flies at the speed of ‘yorp’ :P)
the Pi was travveling faster than Ludicrous Speed. It bypassed Plaid and went straight to Argyle.
I like that Max, for being a “superman” is still complex and conflicted enough to be a believable personality. In this case, she gets so easily offended and digs deep to explain why it’s so offensive, while not bothering to sufficiently examine her own speech to see her own bigotries on full display…
Aka, for all her power, she’s still a human.
Or a golden elf of doom!
Dave – panel 8, “…I’d like it more if…”
Also, p6 is the BEST EXPRESSION – she looks like the one goofy comic-relief guy from My Little Pony (Google says his name is Snips). Plus, the… vignette? The bit with the guys, underneath… really made me chuckle.
Another good page!
Thanks! The vingette was originally supposed to be its own panel but I couldn’t make it fit, and at the same time I really didn’t want to lose it.
Don’t mind me, just trying to keep all the grammar-oriented “OCD” in one place, here.
In the Author’s comments, 2nd line of 2nd paragraph, we have:
[…this page, but it wasn’t to hard…]
…based on context I’m pretty this should be “too hard”.
Doesn’t really work, it working would require only having a “be good at it when you do X” message without also having a “do X”message. In a gym doing sport is most likely what you are there for so you could take something like “an athlete in the gym” as purely “do your best”. However take the maid bit: Is performing maid activitis the only thing you could do in the living room? Not really so it doesn’t just imply you should try to be at a professional level when doing stuff a maid would do since. It also says you should take the role of a maid in the Living Room, which is a serving role.
Which is why I have a mild dislike for arguments in stories – in many cases I find the arguments of one side weak/unconvincing and am annoyed when the other side makes only weak counter arguments or actually accepts it.
Though of course some people aren’t good at countering arguments without much time to think, so I shouldn’t except all fictional characters to be good at it.
Maybe not, but Dave certainly has a number of people here to ask. :D I’m sure we’d be happy to help out so he doesn’t have to think through this one on his own… Maybe avoid the straw-man pitfall?
I understand what you’re saying, and would retort with “why should he?”
The goal here was not to provide a well-balanced argument or good intellectual rigor – it was to provide insight to the characters’ personalities, which I think was done quite well.
Max is a mildly rabid feminist; Dabbler (and Hiro, it appears) enjoy baiting her; Harem likes to flirt, and show off how experimental and libidinous she is; Gwen is precocious, but frankly operating a bit out of her depth… All well demonstrated within this page.
Summed up very nicely
+1
One caveat, being that I do not think Hiro was joining in the baiting. His remark appears, to me, to be a self-depreciating remark that actually takes a poke at men. In this case, accepting the guilt of the male gender, and then playing along in the role. Of course, it all goes down to intent.* Which normally you would pick up from tone of voice, facial expression or body language. We lack the former, and both the latter two are concealed, due to their play acting as aristos chinking glasses.
Which means it could be taken either way. One black mark against him is that he is addressing it to Math, a known letch. So your take could be right. But, I always prefer to give the benefit of the doubt, when such exists, hence choosing to take it as the light-hearted kind of play I would make myself.
* For Math, he is clever enough that he will know Hiro’s intent. He may be joining in, in a spirit of camaraderie. Or he may just relish it from his baser behaviour.
Yes, Hiro and Math are just being ‘guys’, not baiting Maxi (fairly sure most ARCites know that it is simply not safe to bait Maxi, even Achilles knows better, and he can survive anything)
do not taunt the happy fun maxima___
“It also says you should take the role of a maid in the Living Room, which is a serving role” which is the whole point of that expression: that a woman should be a servant to a man (or at least, subservient)
“A woman should be a lady in the parlor, a maid in the living room, a chef in the kitchen, and a whore in the bedroom.”
Maxima has been shown to be rather extreme in her Feminism.
One of the things extremists tend to do is go with the worst possible interpretations. So the first problem with that quote would be with the phrase “A woman should be”. Feminists deny anyone the right to say what a woman should be.
Next problem is the word “lady”. Feminists don’t like that term, because it tends to be defined in ways that reinforce gender stereotypes.
Next problem has to do with “maid”. Maids are servants.
Next problem is with the implication that a woman should cook. Feminists object to the automatic assumption that a woman must know how to cook.
Next problem is the word “whore” which has a lot of negative connotations.
There really isn’t any way you could re-write the quote that would satisfy a feminist.
Of course feminists deny anyone the right to say what a woman should be. Nobody has the right to say that to anyone. Also, if you think Maxima’s feminism is extreme, you have clearly never met a real one.
I was mostly going off what they show in https://www.grrlpowercomic.com/archives/456
She’s got the other people walking on eggshells because they know she’s likely to take offense over things that only fairly extreme feminists complain about.
I’ve met the kind who are eager to take personal affront at anything a man says.
A think a mother and Father have the right to say that to their children, at least in so far as they COULD be… but SHOULD be? Well… An inept therapist I knew use to throw buzz words at people like “Ah, you should all over yourself.”
Well, that’s a problem that too many people have…The best kind of friend anyone could have is not one you gives advice (ie: “you *should*”), but someone who gives you options (ie: “you *could*”).
Guess not just Hiro in panel didn’t understand that Maxi was just repeating what she called a ‘demeaning’ expression (did you also miss the part in the first panel where Maxi called it demeaning? yes, yes you did)
Dabbler raises an interesting point in panel 7: That the saying only has power if the listener allows it. It may be a function of age, but down through the years I find I’m less and less offended by insults, to the point that I’m pretty sure I can’t be insulted. Maybe I’ve been insulted so much the effectiveness wore off, or I’m just too old and tired to get angry, but it’s like that scene in the bar in “Roxanne”, where Steve Martin’s “Cyrano de Bergerac” character proceeds to self-insult much worse than anything the drunk guy could come up with: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=urdf4g-LXk4 Sure, people direct hatred through words, but I find it makes them even angrier when you don’t react by getting mad. Really, it means they can no longer control you, or control your emotions, and it takes a lot of their power away. Granted they can always resort to violence, but that’s a different thing altogether.
The problem with Dabbler’s argument there is that it’s really a statement that ignores the fact that there’s an unequal balance of power between the sexes. It’s not as bad as it was in the past, but it’s still present and there’s still quite a bit of opposition to many of the rights that women actually have managed to secure. To Dabbler, who’s not even a native to Earth, it might seem like a harmless statement. To Max, it’s once again letting the patriarchy (which is still very much in existence) define what a woman’s value is.
A witty duel, but a bit one-sided. Despite being a bit of a Steve Martin fan*. I preferred the rapier wit in Cyrano de Bergerac. And have a fond memory associated with it, as I saw the French version (with English subtitles) with a French girl I was dating.
She was in tears at more than one point “It is sheer poetry, in both languages. And even though I could only follow the tone of the French side, I could totally agree with her just from the subtitles**. She assured me that they were faithfully carrying the sentiment of each line, complete with nuances.
I had never witnessed a poetogasm before.
* I absolutely adore LA story.
** “The English subtitles use… five-beat lines with a varying number of syllables and a regular couplet rhyming scheme, in other words, a sprung rhythm. Although he sustains the five-beat rhythm through most of the play, Burgess sometimes allows this structure to break deliberately: in Act V, he allows it collapse completely, creating a free verse.” – wikipedia
You forgot the XXXX on Dabbler’s choker, i guess? I am wondering about Dabbler’s clothes. Is she still wearing the pink tank top and shorts under the glamor, or is that the clothes she’s wearing and she’s just making an illusion for her skin and hair? Wondering because does the whole hypnotic boob thing still stand if she’s covering her boobs with clothes or illusion.
Loved Max’s facial expressions this comic.
You need ask what a Succubus would wear under her illusion, when surrounded by soldiers? Naturally she is going commando!
Her top at least is an illusion: as seen in the last page (if you pay close enough attention to the corset and not what is attempting to escape), the band across the top of the corset is actually slowly rotating left-to-right
Actually we’re not 100% certain she’s WEARING anything. For all we know the peach top and shorts are as much an illusion as the Bustier,hip-huggers,tan skin and blond hair!
Pretty sure that’s what she’d prefer herself, but since she’s adapting to the place, she probably at least wears those (aka DaveB making this a safe for work comic).
ahhh but we do not KNOW!!!! I demand an answer is Dabbler actually wearing anything or is she only clothed in illusion to spare the sensibilities of the humans around her.
…AND to spare Dave from having to re-rate his comic…
Back during the hammerspace incident, it was revealed that Dabbler was still wearing her pink stuff.
Actually, one of the BIG problems with that phrase, along with limiting women to the bedroom, is the fact that it tells women she MUST excel at EVERYTHING she does. That if she doesn’t keep a spotless house, perfect social graces, cook a delicious dinner, and be ready to rumble in the bed every single night, usually on top of raising her children, then she’s a failure. And not just a failure as a cook or a hostess or a house keeper, but as a WOMAN. All because she can’t maintain everything perfectly. Every. Single. Day.
And this isn’t a phrase that just hits women in the home. Women who work outside the home still get the pressure to be maid, mother, hostess, chef, and whore along with working a full time job. And I will point out that each of those is also a full time profession. How many professions are women supposed to have? Oh, right, all of them and perform at them perfectly. That’s what the phrase says.
We don’t have a similar phrase for men where he must be a lion in the boardroom, a gardener on the lawn, an NFL coach on the little league field, a pro gambler on poker night, and a stallion in the bedroom. The social pressures to excel in all endeavors are there for both genders, but they aren’t explicitly stated for men and not in a laundry list that says do all of this, perfectly, or you’re not a REAL man.. That’s why feminists have so many problems with this phrase.
There’s that, and there’s also the simple fact that it’s once again letting men define what constitutes the value of a woman.
I have to disagree with you on this point – and it’s because the poem has been taken out of context. This isn’t a laundry list of how to evaluate all women. It was a poem written by a man explaining what he was looking for in his mate. He was explaining that he wanted a woman that was multi-faceted, and multi-capable. It would be no different had it been a woman saying she wanted to find a wealthy, good-looking, athletic man that goes to church, coaches little league, and is devoted to his children and her mother (and yes, I’ve heard that exact same list spouted off by multiple women).
Not to mention that all of those roles are of service and subserviance to other people, which given the context of the quote, is fairly safe to assume to be a man.
In particular, look that the “whore in the bedroom.” Whore is a degrading slang for a prostitute, a woman who is working and who’s job is to please the man who hired her. It is a clear power structure where the woman is in service to the man, and she is not there for her own pleasure or enjoyment, but solely there to please him. So in this phrase strips “a lady” of her right to pleasure or equal treatment in the bedroom.
In the same way, a Lady in the Parlor is someone who is intent on creating a pleasant and pleasing atmosphere for others, a maid is someone who is cleaning up after others, a chef is someone who is cooking amazing food for others. Each is not a bad thing in and of itself (well degrading sex workers is a problem but lets pretend its a more respectful phrase), but put together the clear message is that women exist to serve and please others, and by implication of the last part, those others are men.
I gotta say, I’m disappointing in Maxima. I thought she’d hold her own better. Dabbler’s “It only has power over women if they let it” smacks of victim blaming and ignores the power of cultural forces, and Maxima totally goes along with it.
That being said, you know that question of “if you could have any superpower at all, what would it be?” Well, for 15 years that answer was an unwavering “Flying” but you know, last year I realized I’d want Harem’s power. For SO many reasons.
Teleportation has always been my favorite power, even without the added bonus Harem gets…
Personally I prefer the variant which allows the opening of portals. Especially as they traditionally are also associated with being able to travel to other planes too. And if they remain indefinitely stable when opened, without any restriction on how many you can have, then you can do all sorts of wonderful things!
The cold tap (faucet) in your house could bring meltwaters off an alpine glacier. The hot, fresh-made vanilla custard, still warm from the factory. Meanwhile the medicine cabinet could open straight into a 24 hour pharmacists. And if you stepped into the shower, you would find yourself under a perfect temperature waterfall on a tropical island. Or you could fill your bath, with the tears from a thousand angels, crying into a pool in the Seven Heavens.
If that happened, would finally, after nearly 30 years, be able to drink water again (after an incident after end of year, haven’t been able to drink any kind of water except directly from a mountain stream without feeling slightly nauseaous, and that includes bottled spring water and any number of subtly-flavoured water drinks)
And don’t forget fresh air from any location you choose
/sings (so badly that Yorp plugs his ears with his tail and so offkey that Harem goes to all 5 corners of the globe looking for the correct key) “Strawberry Fields Forever!” with a side helping of Vanilla Sky
*giant pile of mashed potatoes lands on G’s head with a sign that reads QUIT IT!!”
Mmm, mushy taters, someone pass the gravy
“Gives Guesticus a life time supply of school surplus gravycicles”
Ahhh, but men DO have such “shopping lists” for perfection. They’re categorized under the general headings of “manliness” & “machismo.”
Panel 8. Replace ‘if’ with ‘it’.
I don’t know why, but Maxima’s last two expressions look really weird… especially the one in the middle looks like she is squint-eyed…
I think the middle of Maxima’s expressions is supposed to be her crossing her eyes and imitating the ridiculousness of someone who would say that quote and then go “hur hur hur” at the end.
I’d side with Maxima on that one.
Sure people would argue that it means a woman must excel at everything she does, but it still fails the basic litmus test of “does that also apply to men?”
Trying to excel at everything you do is something universal, not something just for women.
That’s an invalid ‘test’.
Men and women are NOT interchangable, and SHOULDNT BE.
Note: to prove a principle wrong, logicaly speaking, it is only neccessary to come up with a single contradiction to it.
“Women need to take special care of their bodies while pregnant”.
Replace with ‘Men’. doesnt work.
But the original is still valid.
Therefore, the “replace with men” idea, is itself not a universally valid concept.
…sooooo… which stance are you taking?
you said it fails the litmus test of “does it also apply to men” then in the very next line, you said that it applies to everybody…
Marscaleb casts Confusion. It’s super effective!
Have to side with Dabbler in this one..it’s a total package…And who said she had to be a whore only with MEN? It just a matter of being excellent in everything you do.
…sounds like a cue for Harem to add onto that particular statement…
And yet, incredibly, all of you have managed to completely miss the fact that we live in a matriarchy, where the women define the roles that men may take, and what rights men may have. Don’t believe me? Take a look at any stable married couple, and see what the husband says when his wife asks for something. The response will almost always be “Yes, dear.” I’m not really sure how much more female-dominant a population can get than that.
It’s much easier to understand the position of those males who insist on maintaining “oppressive” traditions, like not wanting to see women on, for instance, welding crews, if you look at things like that. For most of these men, it’s not a case of making sure women “know their place,” it’s a case of defending those rights that are still traditionally male…including the right to be blithering idiots and do dangerous and potentially stupid things on an everyday basis.
It is worth mentioning, by the way, that the every culture of which I am aware that is truly matriarchal (please remember that power works differently in a matriarchy, because females do NOT think the same way as males do) wield a level of power, both economic and political, out of all proportion to their population and their overall wealth.
Just out of curiosity, is there any culture, anywhere in the world, at any point in history, that you don’t consider a matriarchy? Your definition would seem to imply that Saudi Arabia is a matriarchy.
Saudi Arabia is a patriarchy, and I define that based on the simple fact that it is considered perfectly acceptable in that society for a man to divorce a woman and leave her with no support, but that women do not share that right as regards to men. Power in Saudi Arabia follows a male viewpoint–it is power to coerce, to control, and, ultimately, to take what you want. This is very much an outlook that favors men, as men are generally bigger, stronger, and tougher than females (labor pains notwithstanding). This outlook shifts as much of the hardship as possible onto females, who are less able to resist, and restricts as much as possible of society’s opportunities and decisions as being the sole purview of males.
A matriarchy, on the other hand, follows much more closely what has been my experience of how a female views power: cooperative, constructive, and nurturing. Power in a matriarchy would, by that definition, mean that the achievement lies not with the taking of what you want, but with the MAKING of what you want. Matriarchal societies, again based on my experience on the difference between the sexes, tend to focus much more on preservation and development than upon war and destruction, and while these societies DO have the capacity for war and destruction, they generally tend to prefer to limit it, viewing war as more destructive than beneficial. Final authority for one’s ability to make decisions rests not with whomever can make everybody else follow their rules, but with precedent, with moral and cultural priorities, and with a careful consensus of allies (or, at least, with non-enemies).
Simply put, America has, ever since the prohibition, vested its females with the final authority in moral and cultural matters. Why, I could not tell you. But, in the end, that moral authority has proven itself to be more powerful than any amount of muscle of straight-up power.
The fact of the matter is that feminism is NOT a new thing. Women have been pushing for greater rights, and sometimes even getting them, ever since the social divide between the sexes came into being. What makes modern feminism relatively unique is not the drive for gender equality, nor even its success, but the fundamental political, cultural, and societal basis for that success: a basis built not upon immediate desires, but upon the careful consideration of moral principles. Why else would America be so concerned with abortion rights? In a patriarchy, the issue would never come up–the head of the family would make the decision, and that would be final. In an egalitarian society, the issue would be left with either individual families, or with the individuals themselves. But in our society, we debate the matter endlessly, trying to determine which moral principle should reign supreme: the right to life, or the right to self-determination?
As to the other question: there have been only a handful of societies in this world that I would consider to be matriarchal, in the sense that I have given. There have been several female-dominated patriarchies, mind you, which is something of a mind-blowing concept, but whose origins are quite logical. However, there have been very few matriarchies, simply because it is human (well, male) nature to ignore the possibilities inherent in building one’s way to prosperity, when it seems so easy to just take it from others. Vietnam, for much of its history, has been matriarchal, and both ancient Minoans, as well as the ancient inhabitants of Lesbos, were said to be matriarchal, as were the Amazons (Scythians), Sarmatians, and a few of the Celtic tribes.
In modern times, you can look to the United States in general, and the Hopi in particular, along with what’s left of the Iroquois. And…I think that’s about it. There’s supposed to be a few tribes in India who fit this definition, although I have no knowledge of that one way or another. Possibly Israel, although, again, I have no knowledge of that. But I don’t know of any others.
And, Kalietha? I’m very sorry to hear that you’ve had that problem, but I promise you, there are caring men out there. In point of fact, while I have met ONE man who would respond that way, most of the men I have met would not. They might not like what they’re being asked to do, and they might show it, but they’ll do it, because making his wife happy and his family safe is a man’s primary duty in marriage.
Just don’t ask me about laundry. I hate doing laundry.
Well said!
Most people have the belief that a male-dominated society is automatically patriarchial and a female-dominated society is automatically matriarchial; that it is impossible for a FDS to be patriarchial, or MDS to be matriarchial
O_o() What world do YOU live in? The only time’s I’ve ever heard/seen a man say ‘Yes dear’ to a woman in real life was accompanying a pat on the head (physical or in tone), in response to her discussing something emotional in her life that was really affecting her (NOT a request for anything but a listening ear and moral support), and had the attitude of ‘ you’re being female and irrational again, so maybe if I say this you’ll calm down and we can get back to what [i]I[/i] want to do’.
I’m sorry you’ve had to live in such a world. The world that I live in, the women are the central hub of the family – they decide how all but the most frivolous of expenditures are made, what the social schedule is, and who the friends/associations are; while the men are in charge of securing the funding for all that to occur. Even a control-freak like me simply had to get used to having my calendar, my menu, and my allowance dictated to me by the woman I love (and who I would happily spend every waking hour with, if I could).
You may believe what I described is anomalous, but I’d be willing to bet that the older the couple, the more common that situation is. It does make me wonder if the newer generations, in demanding “equal rights” have instead traded control for autonomy and separation.
What you’re describing for the most part doesn’t really sound appealing to me either – in a true partnership the person most able should be the one assigned a particular task, and the bigger topics (like finances) should at least be discussed by both parties, even if one is doing all the check-writing. Putting organizing the social calendar in my hands would probably result in six months of hermitude followed by two months of how-did-I-let-that-slide-time-to-make-up-for-it-with-geek-nights-three-times-a-week. Whichever gender has it, full control over major topics all on one side seems likely to result in resentment issues…
Hey! Stop peeking at my diary!
XD Am I thinking too much like you again? My apologies.
Agreed: a true partnership is one in which they work together to get things done, the one best suited to a particular role gets the role, and that can often change week by week (depending on the role/task)
Simply reversing the gender roles doesn’t solve anything, it’s just changing something from being “a man’s role” into “a woman’s role” instead of being “the one best suited for the role”: some men are better raising children than some women, but that doesn’t make that role in that partnership “the man’s role”, it’s simply a role/task that he is better suited for
Usually when you go around swtching roles, people assume that it has to be a complete swap: the man now does the cooking/cleaning/general house keeping duties and the woman becomes the breadwinner/mechanic/ms-fix-it, and that’s where things tend to get heated and blow up
I always read the saying that way. It surprises me when people come at it with a “women should ‘only’ be …”
Seems to me you have to come at it with a preconceived anti-traditionalist bias, to come up with the supposedly anti-women version. You have to read into it, stuff that isnt there.
Not to rag on your art Dave, but Max is looking very cross-eyed in panel 6. It doesn’t really fit the dialogue, IMO.
“Hur hur”
*crosses eyes*
A phrase Maxima hates that I have taken and changed around is “a woman’s place is in the kitchen.” I usually say “A Woman’s place is in the kitchen…..but so is a man’s place. There are some skills everyone should have.”
I don’t think she’d approve of the way I put it, but I don’t think there’s any truly pleasing Maxima.
Anyone who can’t do at least SOME cooking in this day and age is either lazy or stupid. Hell a good part of the meal can be cooked in a microwave now. I prefer it for my veggies.
Probably would disagree with the very concept ‘people should be placed’.
A woman’s place is in the kitchen because she has short feet and can fit in front of the stove.
XD Not all women have short feet. Or small ones. There’s a reason I usually wind up getting men’s shoes, despite being short.
It is alright I have a big kitchen :-D
But, as it happens, you would probably find your way there to sniff at my signature dish, “Yumbo.”
Yumbo?
Hoping that means ‘yummy gumbo’ and not ‘yorpie gumbo’ :P
A dish of my own invention. Oddly enough including a couple of ingredients listed together in the recent examples of ‘things you would not want to eat together’ :-D But, as part of an overall recipe, they do work together very well. It got popular enough with guests, that we decided it needed a name. I looked for something that had a ring to it like ‘gumbo’, so came up with ‘yumbo’.
Any chance we can get teh recipe out of you? I experiment in cooking all the time myself, it’d be interesting to see the result of someone else’s successful cooking creativity.
I think the only ones I ever names were my Mush and the Honey Grilled S’mores….
I have no idea what “S’mores” are, but honey grilled sounds like a delicious technique for a start.
As for the recipe for Yumbo, mmm, I dunno. It is a major draw for attracting friends over to visit! I can’t afford to fly out and visit friends around the world, so I have to tempt them over here. And the furthest corner of Europe is a bit off the beaten track, despite the cheap flights here.
Ho hum. Ok, as it is you. :-)
I guess I do have that luxury villa and miles of golden sandy beaches thing to fall back on. But I had better stick to encrypted channels. I will package it up and send it to you via the usual methods. Sometime over the weekend.
What I can say here though is the background to how the dish came about. Namely that I had large stocks of tinned and packeted food to see me through periods of being cut off during winter.* Whilst I always have a large variety of condiments, and other accessories to allow modifications, I wanted to create a basic meal from the commonest of the materials I always had a lot of.
It needed to be intrinsically tasty enough that I could potentially eat it for months without getting bored. With occasional tweaking the basic recipe by altering the sauces and extras. This for someone who insisted on eating at a different restaurant every ‘night-out’ (back in the day when I could afford such decadence). Just to avoid having to order the same dish twice (given that most restaurants would only have one or two dishes that would be different enough from the run-of-the-mill to tempt me).
* Winter temptation drops off when you substitute “glorious Mediterranean-like summer weather and some of the best beaches in Europe” for “meter-deep snow in winter and packs of roving wolves and jackals in the village”
XD Sounds similar to how my Mush came about. Though in my case it was scary-driving-on-steep-hills-coated-in-ice winter weather, not jackals and wolves. Though I like the thought of meter-deep snow! That’s enough to build a proper tunnel system…which is something I’ve always wanted to try.
Oh yes, and as for s’mores – they’re a basic camping food in the US. You cook a marshmallow over a fire until it’s all gooey (or in the microwave, if at home), and stick it with a slab of chocolate between two graham crackers. My version requires a frying pan and classes it up somewhat – as well as adding waaaay more sugar than anyone in their right mind needs XD
I respond to: “A woman’s place is in the kitchen.”
with: “Then why the heck are most chefs in restaurants and hotels MEN!?”
Because chefs can’t cook :P
“Tangents are good, especially when their dirty; EMBRACE the tangents!”…”For those wondering where my partner is, he’s napping courtesy of some heavy objects”
I wish I was your derivative so I could lie tangent to your curves.
Joking, of course, I would not wish to interpose between you and your partner
Is it a Tim Allen “Hur Hur” or a general “Hur Hur”
Thought Tim Allen’s thing was a ‘grunt’, which is not the same as a “Hur hur”
*puts paws on fence, and peers over, with just eyes showing*
Howdy neighbour.
Hey Yorpson.
Had a bad idea for a techno geek (similar to Sydney but male) villain – uses Sonics to weaken the will of targets in an area and heighten libido/arousal. Has the Big-O glove-gun (no real dmg unless male and it’s set over lvl 5 (it starts at 4 and goes way way up to Unearthly/Godly effects (especially if not on wide beam and set to narrow focus) ) . The Bukake Cannon which fires a really sticky web that’s semi liquid until an outside force is applied. It can also fire the dreaded Tentacu-net.
Definitely not an A list villain, but can be a real annoyance. The cleaning bills from encounters with him are bad enough. The idea of him being able to stop any super in their tracks – embarrassing, so Dabbler might be the only one who might look forward to fighting this guy. He could be a “Send the Rookie to take him down…solo,” type of first mission test for Sydney. (she’d be monitored of course.)
What sydney does with her own tentacu…err lightwhip? err could be bad as if not worse than what the tentacu-net could do… Sydney’s secret babysitters/monitors could be panned in a side by side panel (aghast, eyes wide in disbelief and then I see no evil, I hear no evil…I’m gonna be sick)
Sydney presenting Maxima and Dabbler each one of the Big O gloves as proof — if she didn’t keep it herself…so one for herself as a side arm that’s definitely mostly non-lethal and one to dabbler or max for a future favor…say a fourth/fifth for gaming night?
I like the panel idea, and have one covering their eyes, one getting/being sick, and Dabbler looking intrigued/aroused at what Sidney does?
This sounds suspiciously similar to the weapon wielded by the titular hero in “Orgazmo”, an early film by Trey Parker & Matt Stone:
[https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0124819/?ref_=nv_sr_1]
I like how Maxiuma’s face is all emotionally rubbery on this page. Vrry cartoony and realistic at the same time. Plus, “paralytic cunnilangus” is a great term. My ex would say I was proficient in such a practice.