Grrl Power #293 – Zonked
Why settle into bed gently when you can slam into it mid laugh? For those of you wondering, Sydney used to go with the geeky sheets, but eventually she decided she wears her geekdom on her sleeve enough already, and generally speaking you can get better quality sheets if they’re not concerned about having Star Wars or She-Ra printed on them. This was originally the last page book 1 but I realized I needed to address at least one more thing, so the next page wraps it up and then we’re off to book 2!
Most of the posters in Sydney’s room are movie posters, but the one above her computer is a Rainbow Dash I found at DeviantArt (used with permission :)
Be sure to check out the Valentine’s Day Sex Drive picture I did this year (NSFW, as are all the participants). I particularly like the Star Cross’d Destiny submission as well, so be sure to check that one out through their vote incentive, and check out the comic too (click on the comic thumbnail on the left.) The main character tends to look a bit like Maxima at times. She does have purple hair, but she only looks like she has gold skin occasionally because Blair, the artist, actually takes colored lighting into account when she colors. :)
I hope to have the vote incentive updated by next weekend, but I’m having some much needed foundation work done on my house this week and that involves jackhammering through the floor in a few places in my office, disassembling the computer and general distractions as I have to deal with all that stuff, so we’ll see.
Here’s the link to the new comments highlighter for chrome, and the GitHub link which you can use to install on FireFox via Greasemonkey.
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.
Sydney is going to be looking for a new apartment tomorrow. If she doesn’t wake up to find a news crew or five outside I will be surprised. I’m pretty sure Dave will have comment or comments about where members of the team live show up in conversation ‘tomorrow’.
Thought for the group mind: Given the level of damage that big fight caused, will landlords start having a ‘NO SUPERS’ policy for their tenants?
Probably not for 2 reasons, 1) the Anti-discrimination laws would probably apply as long as there’s no damage to the building, and 2) how would you tell someone like V “I’m not gonna rent to you because I’m afraid you’ll pull the doors off the hinges while your distracted”
discrimination laws like that often have loopholes. all a landlord of an apartment would have to do is site risk to other tenants. through in things such as negligence and insurgence and you would be surprised how easy a no supers policy would hold up
I cannot speak as to US cases, because such do not feature as significant enough to crop up on my international news feeds. But, certainly for UK cases, every attempt I have seen, of organisations trying to employ loopholes to evade discrimination laws, gets stomped on by the courts.
Sometimes a local decision may go the way of the evaders. But it always gets challenged, and pushed to higher courts, ultimately to the European Court of Human Rights, if need be. Loopholes only get recognised if they are ones that the legislation was intended to cover. If it is being tried on, in an abusive fashion, the courts are not dumb. They uphold the intent of the law. Even reading through transcripts of Parliamentary debate, on framing the law, if the letter of the law is unclear.
The problem is if different laws get into conflict. Also, different systems are likely to apply laws quite differently. I wonder, for instance, what the Sharia would have to say on the matter.
As for most democratic societies where a case attracts sufficient public attention, it would probably come down to which party of opinion makes themselves heard loudest ( which usually isn’t the majority ).
Since supers just Began to be out in the open it is unlikely any discrimination laws would be on the books for them. Typically discrimination laws are specific to a classification of people like race, gender, religion etc .
Typically they do not specify the particular religion or race though. Otherwise you would end up with individuals of an unlisted minority being persecuted. So they are phrased like “discrimination based on race or religion”. It would not be too difficult to have supers recognised as a minority race, under existing anti-discrimination laws.
That said though, there has been legislation enacted for Archon to be founded as a new arm of the military. And the way it works in the US, they often have multiple laws bundled into one package. So it is entirely possible that any ambiguities in such laws might have been clarified, to specifically ensure supers are protected.
The last thing that society needs is a bunch of angry supers, who are being denied anywhere to live and being legally turned down for jobs, that they are qualified to perform. Let alone not being allowed on a public bus with ‘normal folks’.
I think it would be extremely difficult for Sydney to be recognized as part of any such minority group considering that she has no biological superpowers. Also the law only protects against unjustifiable discrimination. Hollywood for example is not obligated to open up hiring for all roles to all races and sexes. They are free to put out requests for “Only Asian women in their twenties” if that’s what the role calls for.
Yea, I was aware that Sydney is a special case. But the press briefings would have been prepared some time ago (Arianna had been plotting this for a while). As such it would not say ‘do not disturb super cops at home, except Halo, because she was not born with her powers’. Archon would be trying to enforce a principle, and would not want to draw attention to any technical loophole.
Sadly Sydney did rather mess things up, by doing her advert. That said, Arianna is pro enough that she could run interference on that. Sydney is a raw recruit, and would not realise the implications of taking that action. Any press who do not seem inclined to overlook that, Arianna could play hard-ball with.
“If you want to find yourself on the invite list, ever again, you will play ball and not harass any of our staff, at home or off duty! The same goes for interview requests or the chance of an exclusive, someday.”
The Hollywood thing is a perfectly legitimate loophole, that is there for a sensible reason. However airlines have tried something similar, and have failed. Just because they want women, who fit in a particular image they are trying to create, does not mean that employment should be prohibited to those who do not fit the look.
Sydney is in a different class of Empowered to the actual Supers (Maxima, Harem, V, etc.), but she’s hardly alone in that class We already know of Zephan, and possibly X/Tingles as other Item Users, and it’s debatable whether Peggy also fits in that category or in a different subset (Augments?). Learned Powers like Gwen’s fit better within Supers, but are probably a different sub-category again.
It doesnt matter whether Sydney has superpowers or not. Superpowers is not a protected class against discrimination anyway.
Actually, for those who are born with the powers, it is. Discrimination by race is heavily legislated. If black skin counts, then so does golden. Or those who can fly, instead of walk.
Ah, but race is inherited, my parent are white so I’m white.
Having super powers would be more akin to being autistic. Nobody knows what causes it, you just have to deal with it when it shows up.
Not necessarily. I have seen white children of black parents, and vice versa. The genes for skin pigmentation, like any other, can skip a generation. All it takes is for one of their ancestors to have the appropriate genes, and it could be expressed. Which is why census forms (in the UK, I do not know the US situation) allow you to choose your ethnicity. What you appear to be may not be what you consider yourself to be.
Until supers start having children, we will not be able to say whether such traits are inheritable, or not. However enough of the physiological changes match those of inheritable traits that a good case could be put for treating them as if they were the same.
For example Maxima’s hair and skin. And the athletic and well endowed proportions of all natural born supers. Either of which make a super stand out in a crowd, enough that they can be victimises and persecuted, just for their appearance. Which are amongst the reasons for framing race discrimination laws in the first place.
Note that the earliest of such laws were drawn up before the nature of DNA and inheritability were firmly understood. So the letter of the law does not require DNA tests to prove your race. You just have to be an identifiable minority.
For information, note that people can be charged with racially aggravated assault (for instance) even if attacking somebody who turns out not to be of the race they thought. You do not see race hate cases hinging on whether the victim is actually black, for example.
As such, I do not think that your (otherwise fair) analogy for super power distribution being akin to that of a disease, should take precedence.
Do note the irony though, that any disease, severe enough to cause a disability (such as in a heavily autistic individual) does actually qualify that person for being a member of a protected minority. If somebody is being denied employment, the right to live where they choose, or other clear discriminatory practices, then that is very clearly a disadvantage (no matter how buff they are).
They are being persecuted because of what they are, rather than what they do. We can change our behaviours, we cannot change our genes, nor is there a way to ‘stop being a super‘.
And it would be a very morally dangerous path to tread to suggest that super powers should be cured, in order for the individual to be granted the same protection from persecution that others would expect.
“They are being persecuted because of what they are, rather than what they do. We can change our behaviours, we cannot change our genes, nor is there a way to ‘stop being a super‘.”
Again, need to repeat, superpowers would not be considered a protected class just because there is ‘no way to stop being a super.’
It’s the same as if you discriminate against somone’s height or weight – there’s no law on the books which says you can’t do that. Height is not a protected class (at least when it’s not because of something like dwarfism because that might fall under the Americans with Disabilities Act) and weight is not a protected class (again, unless there’s some medical disability reason like an actual glandular problem, rather than that you love eating the ho ho’s and triple cheeseburgers at Wendy’s, in which case it might fall under the ADA).
You can’t ‘stop being tall’ or ‘stop being short’ – and yet a theme park can prevent people of a certain height from going on a ride ( in fact, even the ADA allows this because there’s a non-discriminatory safety-based reason for it).
Apologies for the long post. But the new comic is coming up soon, so hopefully the wall of text will not inconvenience folks too much.
Pander, In quoting that line, you have ignored the context, which makes your retort pointless. My comment was being used to support my contention that super humans could contest discrimination, on racial grounds. Which is a protected category.
Your reply neither addresses nor refutes that, so adds nothing worthwhile, to the discussion. However, to try and steer the debate to the the crux of the matter, let me remind you why the various discrimination laws exist.
Without such laws, those vulnerable classes have been repeatedly persecuted, by many societies, throughout history. Whilst short people might be bullied, and in isolated instances it my result in serious injury, or death, such is considered tragic, but part of the risks of life, that we all may face for various reasons.
But, the protected classes were created because they faced particularly severe persecution. Slavery, the Holocaust, being lynched and so on. In particular, you will note that there are no other extant species of hominids on this planet. Whilst we did breed with some (the Neanderthals), and thereby some of their genes survived, the species as a whole did not.
Charitably we may simply have out-competed them. More likely, as we can see from day-to-day persecution, of anybody who looks different, it is much more likely that we killed enough, that they were driven into extinction.
In this story, we have the emergence of what looks, for all intents and purposes, to be a new race, or even species (or several). Either way, they have powers which Homo Sapiens are both envious and afraid of. And many people, rationally or not, may be afraid that it is Homo Sapiens who will be driven into extinction.
Clearly, in DaveB’s setting, the USA has taken the moral high ground and decided that Super Humans are an asset, and not a threat. So we can rule out the possibility of them all being rounded up and herded into gas chambers. But there will still be hatred, fear and discrimination, amongst certain segments of society.
Whilst it could be argued that the superior powers possessed by super humans means they can protect themselves, this is a flawed way to look at law making and policing. If you rely on that principle, it ignores the fact that many supers are not combat capable, having powers that would be useless in such circumstances (take Super-Doc as an example).
Further it would lea to a culture of vigilantism, if supers felt they were not getting protected, under law. And if lynchings, counter-violence and so on occur on a widespread basis, it could well descend into a cross species war. Homo Sapiens versus the supers. Which probably would not go well for humanity. A topic which Marvel has explored, to death, over decades.
Archon are being pro-active here, and trying to stop such a situation occurring. If they are successful, then the discrimination will remain low-key. So hopefully the comic will not have to cover this heavily.
But, that aside, they cannot police civil matters, such as a landlord denying a super a place to live. Nor can they tell a company that firing a person, because they found out she had powers, despite being a model employee, is wrong. Well, they can, but it will be ignored.
Unchecked such matters can deteriorate into ever more serious harassment, and violent persecution. As we have seen with the various existing protected groups.
So, yes, there is a strong moral basis, and legal precedent, for why they should be treated as a protected minority. They are not just tall. We all possess height. They can fly, or set people on fire, unaided by technology. Something normals cannot do.
As such, they are different. Different enough, that many will discriminate heavily against them, and some will try to kill them.
“My comment was being used to support my contention that super humans could contest discrimination, on racial grounds. Which is a protected category.”
Actually no, superhumans could not be considered a race – that IS my point. Race is based on skin color. Superhumans can be different races. Jiggawatt is black. Achilles is white. Maxima is gold. You seem to be missing the point. Superhumans are not a race. They just have different genetic abilities, just like Shaquille O’Neal is taller than most people, but his height does not make him a different race from the ‘majority’ race of the country he lives in – his skin color does. You can’t even say superhumans are a different species. They are able to interbreed with other humans. Different species can’t interbreed. And even if they could, and even if superhumans were considered another species, ‘species’ is not a protected class.
There is on legal precedent for the stuff you’re saying. And the only way anything you are saying would make sense would be if Arianna uses her lawyer super-skills to get the laws changed to include superhumans as a protected class.
Err, no it is not. It is one factor, amongst many. But, carry on.
Oookay. Being rather contradictory there. Using your initial argument you are saying it is determined by skin colour. Then conclude that it is not, having only cited skin colours to support that.
But, you did have more, so I should consider that too.
So, if he was an albino, he would cease to be a member of his racial group? Bollox. Definitions of racial groups hinge on listing a variety of characteristics common to one group and not another. All humans possess genes which grant height. No present human race possesses genes which grant flight. Nor genes which allow tanks to be melted with a gesture.
Those abilities put them outside of the existing definitions of any given race. As does Maxima’s hair and skin colour. Her skin is not even made of flesh, but some classified substance.
We do not know that. Therefore the rest of your argument has no basis. In the absence of evidence to the contrary, we must give them the benefit of the doubt, rather than assume the less favourable version, to fit our argument.
As I already stated previously, endangered species are protected by international treaties. As such this actually carries higher weight than mere national laws. Should the courts conclude that they are a different species they will gain very strong protection (and loose a hell of a lot of other rights, but that is a different argument, and one that would need urgent legislation to correct, if it did happen).
I also note that you fail to address the moral arguments I raised. Whilst lower courts can focus on the letter of the law, such an issue would doubtless progress to the Supreme Court. Where they will have to look at the broad moral issue. I often see such verdicts being made, hinging on such issues, rather than ‘letter of the law’ points.
They will consider whether it is fair for a minority group to be discriminated against, to be the primary argument. Not whether members of that group can have babies with each other or not. Fertility or infertility has little or no bearing on whether you are part of a recognisable minority group, which is being persecuted.
They may well choose to declare that super humans should be considered to be a minority, protected race, for the specific purposes of recognition under that law.
Here I draw parallel with similar verdicts which have been made as regards various minority religions. Regardless of arguments that a particular group was a ‘sect’ or a ‘cult’ or a ‘made up fantasy’. It is the prevention of persecution/ inequitable treatment that is the key issue. Not some agenda as to how to pigeon hole a person, or the group they belong to.
* By the way, I am only arguing this from the point of view of would they be eligible for protection as a protected class. I feel that the entire system of race and species categorisation is an archaic legacy with little true merit. But our laws are framed within it, so the debate must include such definitions, regardless that they are flawed.
Also, we must be mindful that many of our laws are restricted to humans only. For instance the European Convention on Human Rights. So, whilst, for the purposes of this argument, I will strongly argue their case. I will also strongly argue that they are human, when it comes to their protection under those laws.
Clearly such conventions would need to be, in due course, altered to being, for example “the European Convention on Rights of People. Something we, as a society, really should do earlier, rather than later. For we will be facing blurring definitions of ‘human’ as we get more skilled at manipulating genetic material. Let alone the prospect of artificial intelligence.
Yorp: Actually, it isnt.
You can discriminate against someone for being strong. Or for being weak. Or for being tall or short.
A possible ‘cheat’ around this would be if Arianna lobbies to get lawmakers to include ‘superhumans’ in the list of protected classes, or legislates a lawsuit on behalf of a super, upon which the judge decides that ‘superhumans’ should be included (or if they rule against it, there’s a media backlash which causes legislators to create a new protected class).
But as it stands, no – there’s no such thing as illegally discriminating against supers because of their powers.
As stated previously, they would have good grounds to contest the issue as being a racial minority. No matter how much you say they could not. Bear in mind that the court will be looking at the moral basis behind the creation of protected minorities. Not just the letter of the law. They look at the intent.
However, if the courts rule that they are not such, then, yes, it would likely require new legislation. Would that be a ‘cheat’? I think that legislating to prevent discrimination, and persecution, would be a logical act in such a story.
Or, alternatively, it could follow another logical path and explore a war of humanity versus the
mutantssupers. Oh, that has been done by some other comic.No, they would not have good grounds to contest the issue as being a racial minority. Because they are not a uniformly racial minority. Race is based on skin color. You can’t force someone to act in a certain way based on the ‘intent’ of a law – becaue the intent can be interpreted differently between multiple people, including different than the actual people who wrote the laws. Case in point – marbury vs madison, in which the Supreme Court told James Madison that the law, as written, was different than what he thought it was – even though he’s the one who wrote the law. So no, when interpreting a law, you have to based it on the LETTER of the law, not the intent, because courts can’t base their ruling an intent which might differ from person to person. The letter of the law, on the other hand, is constant. That’s why laws are WRITTEN down.
And yes, making new legislation would work. It’s the only way any of what you’re saying would work – not from judges creating new laws – judges can’t create laws. They just interpret based on the letter of the law. Judges interpret the letter of the law. Legislators write the letter of the law. Executive branch executes the letter of the law.
X-Men was awful in this respect, because it’s based on so many incorrect assumptions, which Sydney even discussed making no sense. One gene can’t give you superpowers.
I will not pursue the intent argument, as I am only familiar with UK Supreme Court deliberations, which did consult and consider Parliamentary legislation. I was remiss in assuming that similar may occur in the US, when I had not seen an example of such. I bow to your expertise, in that matter.
As regards the remainder though, judges have flexibility in interpreting laws. And our system encourages such. For instance sentencing flexibility. I will stick to citing a UK example, as I am more familiar with such.
A while back there was severe rioting in various English cities. Fearful that it would continue unchecked, the courts prioritised the cases (perfectly normal and understandable) and also declared that they would levy harsher sentences, than normal, for such cases, both because of the fright and alarm caused, to the general public, and to carry a greater deterrent.
The latter, at first glance, surprised me, as I would expect such matters to be a parliamentary issue. But, the justices were simply exercising their discretion, within the bounds already existent, under the law.
In the case where the law does not clearly define something, such as the legal status of Super Humans, then they can deploy their discretion, until such legislation is enacted.
Just as with needing to avert the potential crisis of unchecked riots, the flexibility we grant the judiciary, in such matters, is vital in preventing gross miscarriages of justice occurring, due to our slow and inefficient means of enacting laws.
See my post above, mentioning the Supreme Court, for how I could see that flexibility used under U.S. law. But am happy to be corrected, if I have made gross errors in my arguments. They are only posed as a non-resident layperson.
Superheroes can not be protected by anti-discrimination laws. Here’s several reasons why.
1) Superheroing is a profession. You are allowed to discriminate against certain professions. So even if superhumans were, themselves, somehow added as a protected class (unlikely) Sydney doesnt even fall under that protection, because her powers are from objects.
2) Superhumans in general is not a protected class. The protected classes under anti-discrimination laws are race, sex, religion, sexual orientation, nationality, and ethnicity. Also political affiliation if it’s a government-provided item (including housing) or job (but private people can discriminate about political affiliation all day long).
You can discriminate against giving a person an apartment because of their job, or because of their age (yes, age is not a protected class – major misconception by laypeople), or because of their credit history, or because of their criminal record, or because of their income level, or because of their PROFESSION (particualarly pertinent here), or because of their military history (or lack thereof), or because of their shoe size, or their physical fitness level, or weight, or scholastic achievement, or attractiveness (or lack thereof). There have been many, many, MANY lawsuits which don’t even get past the preliminaries because a judge looks at it, says ‘um.. that’s not a protected class’ and dismisses it before it even reaches a trial. All because someone thinks that if all people are not treated equally in all respects, it’s discrimination and therefore not allowed.
1) a) No one, besides you, has used that term. Besides which being a hero is not a profession. One is either heroic or not. You cannot claim your job to be “bravery” or “courageous”. Nor is a decorated hero’s job “hero”. His profession is that of a soldier, sailor, airman, mailman, schoolboy or unemployed layabout.
You may be mistaking the term for “vigilantism”, which is illegal in the Archon jurisdiction. As such, if anything, it is a criminal activity. So the tag “super villain” would be more appropriate. Those who choose to uphold the law, are employed by the military or police and are recognised as “super heroic” if they behave appropriately. But they are still cops or soldiers, by profession.
1) b) Here you use the correct term, which clearly differentiates them from other races. For those born that way, they are a different race. Possibly a race of one, but there is no requirement for minimum numbers.
Potentially they could even be recognised as a new species. In which case, their limited numbers become highly significant, as they would clearly be an endangered species. Giving them vast protections, worldwide. As such, no new laws need to be made. They are protected under the race discrimination laws, and maybe the endangered species treaties.”
1) c) Sadly, yes, you are right. Unless legislation has been enacted, granting protection to “super heroes” (and defining what is meant by that, in such a way as to incorporate her) at the same time as that already enacted, for the formation of Archon.
It is a pity that only minority groups are protected, and that there are no formal protections granted to the privacy of individuals. But, whilst the media hold such sway over our political process, I doubt whether privacy laws will be enacted. That would lessen the freedom of the press, to invade our privacy, at their whim.
2) See 1) b) above.
Of course, whether a court will recognise golden skin as being as protected as pink, brown or yellow skin would remain to be seen. But I feel that it is certainly a fair claim to put before the courts.
With regard to Sydney’s orbs, could any legal case be made for her being handicapped, or however a person with prosthetics would be regarded?
I ask because while the orbs are not part of her body in the strictest sense, they are arguably still a part of her. Finding a way to restrain one orb’s position would effectively restrain her as well, sort of like taking someone’s prosthetic leg. Granted she has many more options available to her than the average legless person, but is the comparisson still valid, at least from a purely on paper legal standpoint?
Very eloquently argued. Should case precedent be set* and Sydney happens to find herself being discriminated against too, she could well utilise your argument as a basis for action. Especially if the ruling was stipulated as being a recognition of supers as a minority population, independent of the need to prove a genetic cause.
* Presumably using some, more suitable, ‘natural born’ super. Even if the situation is fairly urgent, it is often advisable for individuals, with a more tenuous claim, to wait until the basic principles have been argued before a court.
The orbs would not be considered a prosthetic. The legal definition of a prosthetic is ‘the artificial replacement of a missing portion of the body, or an artificial part which corrects a physical deformity or malfunction.’ The orbs do not fall under that definition. They are tools. Like a hammer or a gun – the only difference is that Syndey can’t remove herself from them (as far as she currently knows).
Law girl, awaaaaaaaaaaaaay!
Your case is well made, and it would likely go that way in court. But it does not quite address All That Is Left Unsaid‘s point, so it is not an open-and-shut case. Taking the premise that Supers do get recognised as a protected racial minority, but Halo does not.
In which case, we are not comparing Sydney to a normal human, in asking if her orbs are a prosthetic. We are comparing her to the other supers. Looking at it that way, the point is actually fair question to raise. Halo is disadvantaged, compared to other supers, in that her powers derive from items.
We have already seen one consequence, of this, in Math being able to defeat her, as a result.
Your point that Sydney would not class as disabled, or in other need of a prosthetic, is perfectly valid. But if the courts have previously recognised that supers can be persecuted, and have ruled in favour of them being protected, then I still see this as being a valid route that Sydney could take, in order to ensure that she gains equal protection.
It would be a very complex ruling though. Because your comment about tools is a powerful one. Anyone could strap on body armour, a few gadgets and a cape then claim to be a super hero. And we know that, without official recognition, such ‘caped crusaders’ are simply criminal vigilantes.
In this instance I can see two factors which would weigh heavily in Halo’s favour. One is that the powers granted are far beyond what our existing technology could do. Clearly pushing her into the realm of supers. And the other being that she cannot remove them. So she has no way of reverting to being a normal human.
To all intents and purposes, she is a super. Just one with a disadvantage, where even a humble pair of mittens can block her power!
Yorp: You’re majorly misunderstanding the point of my post. There are only two ways to define ‘superhuman’ as it pertains to discrimination. Superhuman as a profession, or superhuman as a genetic factor. Both ways do not fit into the antidiscrimination laws.
“1) a) No one, besides you, has used that term. Besides which being a hero is not a profession. One is either heroic or not.”
Actually, as far as the webcomic is concerned, being a member of Archon as a superhero IS, in fact, a profession. It’s basically a cop for specialized situations, based under a law which has been created specifically about superhumans.
“You cannot claim your job to be “bravery” or “courageous”. Nor is a decorated hero’s job “hero”. His profession is that of a soldier, sailor, airman, mailman, schoolboy or unemployed layabout.”
I did not claim the job is ‘bravery’ or ‘courageous’ – I said the job was superheroing. If they have a rank from it, and I’m going to assume, based on the contract that Sydney signed, they are getting paid, and there is marketing involved, that superheroing is, in the webcomic, a PROFESSION. And professions are not covered by antidiscrimination laws. You can refuse to rent to plumbers, or cops, or lawyers, or doctors, or the unemployed, and there is no law which can prevent you from doing that. ‘Profession’ is not a protected class.
“You may be mistaking the term for “vigilantism”, which is illegal in the Archon jurisdiction.”
No, I am not mistaking the term for vigilanteism.
“As such, if anything, it is a criminal activity. So the tag “super villain” would be more appropriate.”
It would also not be illegal to discriminate against someone with a criminal record, whether superhuman or not. Criminal records are not a protected class either.
“Those who choose to uphold the law, are employed by the military or police and are recognised as “super heroic” if they behave appropriately. But they are still cops or soldiers, by profession.”
And you can legally discriminate against renting to a soldier. Or a cop. Or an ex-convict. Or ANYONE by profession as long as you do it consistently. Professions are not, and never have been, a protected class.
“Here you use the correct term, which clearly differentiates them from other races. For those born that way, they are a different race. Possibly a race of one, but there is no requirement for minimum numbers.”
Superhumans are also not a race. Race is based on skin color, NOT based on physical powers. You’ve seen superhumans of various different races (Jiggawatt is black, Mr. Amorphous is caucasian. Maxima is gold) You can NOT discriminate against Maxima for her skin color, because skin color WOULD be a protected class (race). But you can discriminate against her for her profession or her powers, because, as the laws are written, genetics are not a collected class except insofar as it relates to disabilities under the American Disabilities Act. Superpowers are not a disability under that law. You can also discriminate against someone for a height requirement. You can tell someone they can not go on a ride at the amusement park if they’re under 5 feet tall or over 7 feet tall, despite that it discriminates against people for a physical, non-disability characteristic. It has a non-discriminatory purpose (such as that they can not provide safe use of the ride for anyone over or under those height requirements). You can discriminate against obese people on a plane to force them to have to buy multiple seats, because there is a non-discriminatory purpose (such as that they would be taking two seats from their physical characteristics or making it impossible for another person to sit in their seat). You can discriminate against a superhuman – especially a superhero – from renting an apartment because there is a non-discriminatory purpose (such as that they are creating a dangerous situation for all other tenants and the property itself due to their rogues gallery).
“Of course, whether a court will recognise golden skin as being as protected as pink, brown or yellow skin would remain to be seen. But I feel that it is certainly a fair claim to put before the courts.”
And if a landlord discriminated against Maxima for her skin color, then yes – that would be illegal. But NOT because she has superpowers – they CAN discriminate against her for having superpowers. Even though it would be pretty foolish to intentionally piss off someone who can bench press a mountain. It’s just not illegal, unless Arianna manages to convince legislators to create a new law or add to the existing laws to make superhumans a protected class.
Military organization, base housing is probably available. Since she’s a private, that would be barracks so she probably won’t use it.
I’m pretty sure that ARCHON’s accomodations would be several steps above and beyond Ye Olde Style Military Barracks.
Comes to that, given ongoing recruitment problems, most Western militaries have begun considerably upgraded personnel quarters in recent years.
She’s a super hero. She’ll get a suite at ARCHON. Betcha.
They probably have guest quarters if someone like Sydney or Azarin (Jiggawatt) need to stay overnight. A place as big as Archon might have the enlisted doubled up but I doubt it. Peggy has a room plus workspace for her gunsmithing. The rooms might not be big, but private quarters are a major perk.
I hope that the Archon news briefing hand-outs, backed up by the legislation which founded Archon, would prohibit media harassment of supers, at their private residences. The heroes have waived the anonymity that popular culture would grant them. In return, they deserve their privacy respected.
Interviews by appointment only. And any paperatzi using telephoto lenses to take snaps inside their houses, or rummaging through their trash, can expect to have the book thrown at them. A very very heavy book.
Though the argument can, and the press will, be made that they have intentionally placed themselves in the public eye, made themselves by dint of actions and abilities, celebrities. And that there is extensive legal precedence for the amount of scrutiny celebrities must endure.
They are public servants, not politicians, nor Hollywood film stars. Their abilities are ones they are born with. Unique and interesting though they may be, that does not give the rest of society the right to invade their privacy. The publicity that they have consented to, is to allow the public to be informed about the existence of super powers. This is a vital public service, which should not be used as an excuse to strip them of their rights, as private citizens.
Whilst it is wholly appropriate for the media to query if the powers are abusive, dangerous, or the like, such should be focussed on the issues at large, facing the entirety of the human and super populace. Where it features the police officers, such should be limited purely to their official role.
The exception being, as with any normal citizen, if they break the law, in some way. Then there is a genuine case for public interest, overriding privacy. If they start tossing tenants out the window, and using them as target practice, CNN can film away, to their hearts content.
* For these intents and purposes, regardless of whether they manifest at puberty, or not.
That sort of thing is explicitly mentioned in some settings as an unofficial deal. The villains and press don’t go after the heroes when they’re not on the job, the heroes avoid lethal or permanent-damage force if at all possible and can’t go after known villains without a warrant. Of course, the shape of the deal varies from setting to setting, as does the degree to which everyone abides by it.
Not always an unofficial deal…
This comic playes in the US where firearms are legal, and you would need even less to kill.
Which means supers essentially are but armed and therefore not much of an exception public safety wise – safe for sensitive areas of course.
States where even knifes with more than 7cm standing blades already are illegal, will have a lot of laws turned upside down to make supers fit into society. Then concepts such as “potentially dangerous or abusive” are likely to come into play, which is an affront to the supers in questions because those would imply that possessing an ability equals ending up using it in an unlawful way – it would ignore the concept of intent.
“Unique and interesting though they may be, that does not give the rest of society the right to invade their privacy. The publicity that they have consented to, is to allow the public to be informed about the existence of super powers. This is a vital public service, which should not be used as an excuse to strip them of their rights, as private citizens.”
Legally speaking, celebrities actually do give up a significant portion of their privacy rights when they become celebrities, as opposed to non-celebrity persons. There have been many court cases where celebrities and political personalities sued the paparazzi and lost, because the paparazzi’s invasion of the celebrity’s privacy is actually protected under the first Amendment of free speech (which actually trumps the celebrity’s privacy rights to an extent). The laws to create punishments when the paparazzi do things like breaking into a celebrities home, but there is NO legal way to prevent them from invading their privacy when in public areas (ie, anywhere outside their home or someone else’s home), and even then the paparazzi can actually take pictures from OUTSIDE the property into it with a high powered lens, and that’s been actually shown to be legal. The tort of ‘intrusion’ tends to be of very limited use for celebrities against paparazzi – especially when in public places. The courts have determined it is a ‘legitimate public concern.’
However the justifications for that is that the celebrities have sought out such a role. They are inviting the public to have an interest in them. I am making the distinction that these are (for the most part) military personnel who have been ordered to speak to the press.
They have already been forced to sacrifice some of their privacy, in order to satisfy said public interest. Therefore some leniency should be respected in considering their celebrity status.
Not that I imagine, for one minute, that the U.S. press would actually do that. Nor might the U.S. courts actually agree with the same. But, heck, we can but hope for justice.
Take, for example, the instance of somebody who has performed a heroic act, and saved somebody’s life. They have had celebrity thrust upon them. But it may not be welcomed. If they ask the press to stop bothering them, but the media persist, then they are clearly violating his, or her, privacy.
The public might be interested in that person, but there is no legitimate reason for that curiosity to override their right to privacy.
By the way, try that telephoto lens argument in the UK, and you will come a cropper. We have a very different view, of what is acceptable, in privacy matters. Google has fallen foul of that, in various European countries, even using mundane cameras, for Street View. Paying large fines as a result. I hope that the US will become more enlightened, in due course.
While a “no supers” policy would probably end up in court in most countries, it would be far easier to justify a super sized security deposit to cover “potential incidents”.
Yea. Mind you, if they tried to charge that simply because somebody had powers, as opposed to them posing some clear risk,* then that would not be fair.
It would be like saying “we are going to charge redheads a larger deposit, because there may be potential anti-ginger incidents’. Even if there was ginger-bashing going on, that would be an unfair and discriminatory practice.
* Say being part of an organisation where super villains had been challenged to fight them. Although not having adequate control, over a potentially damaging power, would also be a legitimate complaint.
The latter being a reasonable angle to refuse entry/services at all. But that is due to a demonstrable risk being posed, for a specific reason. As opposed to an unsubstantiated fear that ‘something might happen’.
Only most insurances do exactly that: Calculating the coverage and rates of a person based on statistics means that a persons personal information are being categorized and matched against known cases for risk evaluation. Thats the reason no insurance lets you know what parameters and personal characteristics did flow into the evaluation, because lawyers would have themselves a party otherwise.
“Even if there was ginger-bashing going on, that would be an unfair and discriminatory practice.”
Unfair? Yes. Discriminatory? Yes. Illegally discriminatory? No. Hair color is not a protected class. :) Gingers (and Daywalkers, as we call the half gingers who can walk in the sunlight like us normal people) can be discriminated against under current anti-discrimination laws. Arguably they might be able to get put in the Americans with Disabilities Act since their pale skin burns so easily. You know… because they have no soul.
Oh god, they’ve sensed I’m writing about them and are now coming after me! Nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo….
I think Archon might run into a few problems with their community PR campaign. Arianna will have plans to send a few heroes to meet with kids at local schools, but they would be turned back at the door because it has a ‘no weapons’ policy. Technically the principal could argue that they all constitute a weapon of some kind (especially Sydney who is carrying her’s out in the open).
“Miss Scoville, you may enter as long as you leave those things behind.”
“Um, about that….”
Seriously, American schools have sent kids home who had a keychain with a one inch toy gun hanging from it. One kid was sent home because he was wearing a T-shirt with a picture of a gun on it. A first grader was sent home because he pointed his finger at another student and said ‘bang’.
Heh… Math requires a concealed-carry permit to wear socks/shoes, and to put his hands in his pockets.
Actually this is a myth.
There are no countries anywhere in the world, including the US, and no municipalities of any countries in the world, including any cities within the US, where being a martial artist requires your hands and/or feet to be registered as ‘lethal weapons.’ It’s a fiction that started up in movies and TV shows coming out of Hollywood. Honest.
Some countries DO have laws stating that you must use ‘the minimum necessary force to defend yourself’ but even then, there’s no requirement to ‘register ones body parts as lethal weapons.’
Martial prowess CAN be used to show whether your fear of imminent harm was reasonable, though. In the same way that a man being attacked by an unarmed 5 year old can’t use deadly force to defend himself.
This has been a friendly legal reminder from your friendly neighborhood legal counsel, Pander.
By german law, practicing a martial art is considered being armed. You even need your criminal record checked before joining a martial arts club. You then are issued a pass by your club.
If you get into a fight, every injury inflicted will have been by a weapon, and you`ll be held responsible accordingly.
Yup. The same is true in the UK. Barring the criminal record check. But I am out of touch, so that may be the case there now too.
Honestly, no it really isnt. It’s a common misconception because of Hollywood movies. Armed means a weapon. You can not legally register your body as a weapon. Try it – please – they will say that doesnt actually happen. Please – find the law that says a martial artist must register his hands (or feet) as lethal weapons. Tell me the name of the law. Section number. There is none. It. Is. A. Law. Myth.
You are fixating on this ‘registering as a lethal weapon’ as if it has some meaning. Nobody else has suggested that it is a requirement, anywhere in this discussion. And it is wholly irrelevant. A stick becomes a lethal weapon, when it is employed as such. You do not need to register it, for that to be the case.
A martial artist, of sufficient skill, can employ his hands and feet as lethal weapons. Killing with the same ease as a normal person can only achieve whilst armed. As such we are continually trained and have it reinforced that we must exercise even more restraint than an average member of society.
In order to practice martial arts, in the UK, I was made aware that I would thereafter be obliged to inform people, in the appropriate circumstances, that I am a martial artist. This is as much for my own legal protection, as to give them an opportunity to back down.
Without that knowledge they are assuming that I am what I appear to be, an unarmed person. Off the top of my head, I do not know if this is just a requirement of the martial arts bodies, or if it stems from a particular law, to that effect.
But, if you examine why it exists, clear parallels can be drawn with police warnings “Stop, armed police”. It is part of the protocols we must follow to minimise the need to use those lethal weapons. Whilst providing the individuals with fair knowledge that they are endangering their lives if they continue to act in a provocative manner.
Should they persist then, both the armed policeman and the martial artist, can act in self defence. Using lethal force, if it is justified.
However, outside of that scenario, if the martial artist is abusing his ability to maim and kill, with his bare hands, then he can and does, face charges of doing so with a lethal weapon. In appropriate jurisdictions, such as England, Wales, Germany and various of the American states. There can a considerable difference in sentencing.
Chronocidal alludes to the correct retort here. There are people who are classified as being lethal weapons. I had dinner with one this evening. A former national martial arts champion. If he ever gets into a fight, he is classified as doing so whilst armed with a lethal weapon. Even if he were stark naked.
But they cannot be barred from entering a bank. Just because weapons are prohibited. Nor any other location, such as a school. A thirteen year old black-belt could not be denied the right to an education.
Only if said teenager became a bully, or otherwise abused their skills, could action be taken. But such is because of their criminal behaviour, not the talents or powers they may inherently possess. They cannot be put down. Provided their weapons are controllable and not abused, then there is no justification for discrimination.
Dogs can be banned on hygiene and danger grounds. A properly trained guide dog cannot be. It is necessary to enable the blind person to function as normally as possible. And is well enough trained to pose neither health nor aggressive danger. Likewise super powers could not be removed or disabled, without killing the super. But they can choose not to turn them on, and/or to use them in a safe fashion.
+1
“A properly trained guide dog cannot be. It is necessary to enable the blind person to function as normally as possible.”
Actually the seeing-eye dog can’t be banned because of the American with Disabilities Act – a different law than the civil rights amendments.
Yorp…. there is not, and never has been, any requirement that a martial artist, MMA fighter, ex-soldier, boxer, etc is ever under a requirement to ‘register one’s body parts as a lethal weapons. If you had dinner with someone claiming that he was classified as one, he was pulling your chain.
I challenge you to find any law on the books anywhere, in any country, where this is a law. :)
357 N.Y.S.2d 735 (3d Dep’t 1974) – “People v. Rumaner” – provides precident for Section 100 of threNew York Penal Law to qualify a martial artist’s use of their limbs as use of a deadly weapon, as does 53 N.Y.2d 113 (1981) – “People v. Carter”
Then again, it also allows a handkerchief to be considered such if used to asphyxiate the victim (I believe that particular example was actually used by the court in one of those rulings…)
I actually just read that case. Nowhere in it did they say a person’s body parts are lethal weapons, or need to be registered as lethal weapons. And 53 NY 2d 113 is not a person’s body parts – it’s about a rubber boot being used as a weapon, NOT A body part.
“The issue on this appeal is whether a rubber boot used to stomp upon the head of a helpless victim is a dangerous instrument within the meaning of the Penal Law.”
I never said that the case was specifically about a body part – it’s about the application of definition of a “deadly weapon”.
Had the defendant in case 53 NY 2d 113 been barefoot, but caused similar damage, are you suggesting that they would have received a lesser sentence?
I never said anything about having to register it. And he is not a US national champion. He is a Welsh one. And the laws of England and Wales treat the matter as I have stated.
It seems your knowledge of United States Law seems to be a bit lacking too.
Actually it’s not lacking at all, and between the two of us, I’m the only one who actually took a bar exam :)
And the person who quoted 53 NY 2d 113 didnt seem to realize that they were talking about clothing items being used as lethal weapons (in People v Ruminer, it was a Rubber boot), NOT body parts.
Actually, I did. Read approximately halfway down this article.
(Hard to believe this all started because I made a joke >_<)
He he. I see you found the same article I did. Clearly you and I have similar enough Google browsing habits, that we bring up matching results. Either that, or they pay enough, to get theirs pushed up the results list.
I was focussing on countering the opposing arguments. Hence not having spotted the content of your supporting one earlier. Sorry about the duplication, below.
(Also, how do you know whether or not Yorp has taken a bar exam? Or, did you just assuming he hasn’t because his viewpoint doesn’t match yours – especially since he’d have been likely have studied UK law rather than US law if he has taken one, meaning several of his viewpoints would likely be different anyway. Such as those on gun licensing, the death penalty, etc)
Thank you for coming to my defence. Mind you, I did make rather a provocative statement myself, so I can see why Pander retorted as he did. I should have resisted the temptation though, as I would want him to feel that he is amongst friends. I am a layman, as it turns out.
But I am not completely unarmed in the battle. My former job required me to be, moderately, conversant with the laws of many jurisdictions, worldwide. Including various states in America. As pertained to my job, anyhow. Any mistake I made could lead to significant losses, potentially in the hundreds of millions of pounds. I never made such a flawed judgement call.
I do not have the specialist knowledge within any of those jurisdictions. That is what we employed lawyers for. But I was required to be able to see through such flawed arguments which they may pose.
All lawyers can do is provide the (hopefully) pertinent facts, as to the written laws, and offer their opinions. Those opinions though are not law, are fallible, and will face differing interpretations, by other lawyers.
Ultimately their arguments must be put simply, enough that the average man in the street can understand it. If they are not good enough at that, then the twelve good men and true will not be convinced. So bad lawyers will fall by the wayside, and the good ones can suitably enlighten us.
So I am not particularly intimidated. Clearly a lawyer will have a considerable advantage in such a debate mind. But, hopefully Pander will be sportsmanlike and take into account that he is debating with laymen. I am sure that, if he stumbles across something which unequivocally undermines his argument, he will not conceal it.
But, either way, he needs to be able to convince me as to the merits of his argument, before I will concede. He has not done so yet, and I do not see that he is likely to in this case. I am arguing on firm grounds, and know it.
However, it is a pleasure to have a skilled professional in the community. So I am very happy that Pander is participating. As with the various scientists, writers, artists and so on, they very much enrich the debates, with their presence.
Not that I have any fear of fighting any of them, within their speciality, if I feel that their particular arguments lack merit. Or if it amuses me, even when on shaky grounds. I am not one to roll over and play dead.
*rolls over, seeking a tummy rub*
I quote you verbatim there, because, in all that, you fail to actually acknowledge that the judge, presiding over the case covered, in the article I linked, made an unequivocal ruling. Namely
Why you should think that stating you are a member of the bar would supersede his verdict I do not know? A more appropriate reply would have been if you had discovered, perhaps that the case was overturned on appeal. Or maybe that a higher court made a subsequent verdict which superseded it?
Without such though, your comment failed to progress your side of the argument, I am afraid. As it stands, we can clearly see that a U.S. judge has made a precedent setting ruling, which supports my contention.
Further, such it is not just limited to that state. There are various others where the law is viewed in a similar fashion. You may be interested in this article, hosted by the New York law firm L’Abbate, Balkan, Colavita & Contini, L.L.P. In particular, the section on “The Hand or Foot as a “Deadly Weapon“, which concludes as follows:
Oops, sorry. I messed up that link, in my post. Linking to a general page, rather than the actual article.
so if the orbs go dormant when she sleeps do they go dormant anytime she is not consciously in control of her own mind for example straight up mind control (not aggro aura type mind control).
I think that goes into ‘wait and see’. The orbs do have some powerful safety protocols built in, so I am sure, that at a minimum, they will fail safe. Beyond that, who knows?
Mind you, they were dormant when she first tried to summon them back in Arc-SWAT’s offices. They probably have a hibernation mode, like a PC… though their de-activation WAS very sudden. Gotta wai and see, I guess…
I think most interesting thing is that the orbs made noise. I wonder if they have intelligence…..
That’s Sydney, not the orbs, in frame #5
Those three plushies on her bed look like some kind of evolution/progression.
After seeing her room I wonder what a crossover between Army of Darkness and My Little Pony would be like.
https://skulljammer.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/MLAoD-logo-FB.jpg
https://fc00.deviantart.net/fs71/f/2014/076/f/c/wwstl_my_little_army_of_darkness_by_ponygoddess-d7albrf.jpg
https://mlpforums.com/uploads/monthly_08_2013/post-16621-0-79332500-1376106967.png
And Google proves once again that there is NO combination that hungry MLP fans have not already tried… multiple times. O.O
Seeing somebody go to sleep with a tight looking pony tail like that makes my scalp hurt.
The padded headboard seems like it was a good purchase for Sydney.
She has that little Death Note guy in a chair next to her computer?? LOL That’s one of those series that you feel no native urge to watch except it keeps showing up everywhere so you keep thinking, “Maybe I should get around to it just for the references?” Haven’t managed to overcome my innate resistance yet.
Ok, I can stop looking for the pony plushy with the tight tail. I get it now.
+1 to Sydney for the good taste of having the Army of Darkness poster.
+1 to you noticing the Army of Darkness poster and giving that a +1.
Don’t know if it’s important, but did anyone else notice the Orbs are in a different order in the last panel? They were: Telepresence, Flight, Lighthook, Energy Blast, orange, Forcefield and green. Now they’re: Telepresence, Forcefield, Energy Blast, Lighthook, Flight, green; orange is indeterminate (out of the panel somewhere) – with Telepresence now in roughly the position Lighthook should have come to rest in…
the oder is the same they had just orbited further you need to remember that they constantly fly around Sidney
No, no they are not, not going to repeat the post made on page three, but BubbleOrb is in the same position but TeleSight is now in the position that Brown Unknown had had been
Looking at it again I see what you mean, it does appear the orbs have switched order at first glance, but I think that’s just due to the fact each orb appears slightly altered in coloring due to being ‘powered down.’
For example, the orb resting by her left shoulder in the last panel appears at first to be the purple orb again which would imply they switched order, but I believe it’s actually supposed to be the powered down of the blue orb, which should be right in front of the yellow one in order. So I believe it’s a combination of they rotated more as they were winding down and they look slightly off colored when powered down.
I used the handy-dandy chart DaveB provides of the Orbs in their powered-down state to render my observation. Please look at “Who’sWho”…
…Just wait until you hear about the rough day at work.
She never DID turn that money in at the bank…
with Sydney’s temper there is no deadpool poster?
still lots of wall space we haven’t seen
Dead pool got wolverines healing power. You are either a weapon X fan or a weapon XI fan. The original or the derivative abomination of himself he kills.
She has a Totoro Plushie!
Hmmmmmm I have a plate in the exact same location on my Desk… Kinda disappointed she is limiting herself to a single screen though, would have though she would have at least a 3x screen or at least a simple Data Screen (spare screen which has TS/Vent and other stuff open while gaming)
The shop has finance issues, remember? I guess she had the choice of extra monitor, or a scuba holiday off the Florida Keys.
I think she made the right call.
Tomorrow Sydney fights here greatest enemy yet. Paper Work.
Sydney has one big advantage over ALL the other members of Arc SWAT. Nobody has taught her how to do the paperwork yet. And they are all going to be too busy with their stack to show her. Some poor stenographer will be taking or transcribing Sydney’s oral statement.
That’s why she’s home @ that hour. The jobs not finished until the paperwork is done.
I keep messing up the “tags” I ment to link this: https://www.grrlpowercomic.com/archives/1585
… weren’t late up guys and diamand reps the enemy of super-heroes working in comic book shops ?
Can you imagine the festival of door-mat kissers they’ll have to deal with over the next few month ?
If the shop even survives the initual storm that is …
Her room is surprisingly clean and boring for a nerd. Only one used dish? No bag of skittles, atomic fireballs, or other candy somewhere on the desk? Just a blank background behind the clock on the screen? What is wrong with her?
Why would a nerd specificly be messy?
She’s also autistic, which may very get her to clean her room
Where does it say anywhere that Sydney is autistic? ADHD? Oh very much so. Autistic? Never saw a reference to it at all. She’s just a spaz who doesn’t have good social skills. Doesn’t mean she’s autistic.
Fine, ADHD.
As an ADHDer myself, I just classify it under Autism spectrum disorders. They usually go hand in hand anyway
Robk: She could be a nerd with an OCD need to keep her room clean. Like Sheldon Cooper. Though based on her method of eating cheese puffs …. probably not :)
More likely the part of her room with the pizza boxes and half-eaten bags of skittles and clothes on the floor are just not seen from our viewing perspective :)
She may keep her room neat and tidy, as well as not having much of a screen saver due to her reducing distractions for her ADHD. Also, strict routine may help for ADHD, so cleaning may be part of her focus routine. I’m guessing it is one of the skills that Sydney had to master before her parents were willing to release her upon the world. Also, junk carbs and sugars are not a good combo with ADHD. They reduce the mind’s ability to maintain focus. Sydney may have turned to the “hot” stuff for oral stimulation that the rest of us get from junk food.
Addendum: You will notice that her bed is not fully made. It looks like she just pulls the blankets back up on the bed, but doesn’t worry too much about hospital corners and tucking. So, I’m guessing that she has learned to relax a bit more in her own space. Of course, we have only seen half of the bedroom and none of her apartment. I’m guessing that she has a wall of comics in the bedroom, and lots of bookshelves in the apartment. I’m also guessing that the computer in teh bedroom may not be her primary computer. If she has her own place, the primary computer would be out in the common area. Of course, she may have roommates. That little fact has not been established, yet.
I believe she may have an efficiency apartment .
Unlikely. I’m pretty sure we’ve seen three walls, which do NOT include a kitchen or a window. In an efficiency apartment, the kitchen and the window are not generally on the same wall (the window would prevent over-the-counter cabinet space).
Also, it’s a small detail, but the latch-plate on the door jamb appears to be for a standard interior door, and there’s only the one latch-plate, and Sydney is not holding keys in either hand, so there’s probably no lock on that door. Which argues heavily against it being the door to her apartment (the best counter-argument being that maybe DaveB forgot a few details). Efficiency apartments don’t have bedroom doors.
On the other hand, there is no evidence for or against a shared apartment. (I’d bet against a shared bedroom.)
You know. even with all the crazy abilities and personality quirks, id still date sydney. She seems liek a cool nerd. Also im a bug fan of what her hair is doing there at the end
I like the way it normally looks like a rooster doing a display with its wings.
I rate her above every other super heroine, in this comic, or elsewhere. The only one who would be in the running is Leeloominaï Lekatariba Lamina-Tchaï Ekbat De Sebat.
Say THAT name three times fast…Without using copy/paste.
Home, at last! And we get to see Sydney’s Wolverine plushie too.
Looks like the orbs were just as tired as her!
Aww.
Haha, a “quick” raid.
Ha ha ha ha ha *sob*
Sydney is on the military now! I can just picture Harem teleporting in at dawn to wake her, ‘port her to HQ, and begin morning calesthenics.
Nah, not with that weight limit. Even with them both stripping of I can’t see them succeeding. Not that it won’t stop harem suggesting they try it.
She’ll wake her up at least. Preferably while naked.
At the rate the comic has been going, that would probably happen some time next year… Maybe just in time for the next valentine’s event drawing? (joking, please don’t hit me)
hit you? I’m here to give you a +1 on that ^^
Hey, we still have one day before the end of this comic. Still time for a morning shower scene!
*starts praying*
“Dear Lady, could you see fit to provide an age gate, before the next issue? Oh, and thanks for all the fish.”
“Lobs a whale shark towards Yorp”
Ooh, din dins. And not a cetacean, so yum!
With Sydney’s metabolism, she definitely needs food first thing in the morning, before she can do anything strenuous. I had a couple of soldiers in my unit that were like that. I had to write up specific orders for them to have something light to eat/drink before PT, or else they would simply collapse half way through the PT sessions. I also bet that Sydney only drinks one caffeinated beverage daily, and that is first thing in the morning. Hopefully she has found something that she really likes. I, personally, like a hot chai tea latte instead of morning coffee, but I have a hard time rationalizing such a daily expense, so I drink one cup of coffee every morning for my “get up and go”.
Ofcourse she would snore like Tiny Tina. (That is where i know that snoring from, i have no idea if it was ripped from somewhere else.)
Look down below. Made a comment about the snoring, but it didn’t reply correctly so it ended up at the bottom.
Great, now I’m picturing her singing “’round the Stactus plant” and working on Mushy Snugglebites’ Bodonkadonk.
So, chapter 1 was 75 pages, and chapter 2 ended up being something over 200 pages? : P
Dave can pop a chapter break page in before the press conference. And another before the fight. If he feels that splitting up the big chapter is important. It doesn’t bother me much.
Films that put the opening credits up half an hour into the movie, or more, just amuse me, by example.
I think Chapter 2 was just an excuse for a rear-facing splash page.
could you name one that does that? that seems awfully stupid of them to do what you’re describing.
First off, there is a highly pertinent comic example. The famous “The Night Gwen Stacy Died” story in The Amazing Spider-Man didn’t show its title, artist and story credit until its shocking second-to-last page.
TV Tropes warning
That being an excerpt from a pretty good list of examples in a variety of media. Including the movie ones you are requesting.
The one that stands out the most being the 50 minute delay on the titles for the Two Towers.
Not that I remember that, so I am just taking their word on it. Mind you, if that film includes the scene in the elven village, then anything could have happened and I would not be aware of it. At the cinema, and every time since, I nod off as they enter it, and only wake up, when they leave.
That is not a poke at it being boring, as I would want to see that. I just think there is a subliminal sleep spell woven into the scene!
So sometime this month we get to see Sydney in a different shirt!
Or none.
…
Sorry, I drifted off to a happy place then.
At least you’d get an idea whether or not she’s enough of a tomboy to wear a bra…
OMG, frame 3 has Sydney with Zintiel’s eyes! She’s going chaos mage on us! RUN AND HIDE!!!
For Zintiel, the 1,000 yard stare is a lifestyle choice. For Sydney, it is simple sleep deprivation and exhaustion.
So THAT is the final page of the first book then? No? DAMMIT! This is too perfect NOT to be the last page…
Also, outside of the cartoonish manner of snoring, that’s pretty much how I go to bed. I call it the “thudsnore”. You stand on the edge of the bed, fall down on top of it, pass out on your way down, and snore when you thud.
And I thought two pages ago it was the perfect ending, yet this one manages to outdo that WITHOUT an outro. ;p Begs the question of what the next page would actually look like. o.o
I will vote on alot of explotions and maybe some half nude women huging Dukes legs as he is blasting stuff off screen
So the Box-art for the game that has a character resembling Duke, but is in no way, shape or form related to him?
Wouldn’t a more appropriate version be a picture of Sydney and Max standing back to back both blasting things off screen? with a Shirtless Hero hanging off one of them (to keep things even)
Sydney and Maxima, with strategic costume damage, hanging off a half-dressed Vehemence’s legs.
Aiming a fully charged PPO and BBA crotchwards.
yeah this comic really doesn’t have nearly enough misogyny does it?
Sooo many references :)
6 posters, 3 plush toys, mouse mat and desk ornament.
I can’t get many of them.
who can name them all?
Ask Ash…He can catch them all for you.
Happy family day to any fellow Canadian reading this.
wasn’t that last week?
No, it is, as of this comment, today. And, if only for the sake of not going to work, it’s great. ;)
I hope y’all had a great time.
Never go in against a Sydney when death is on the line!
A Hah hah hah hah hah hah!
A hah hah hah hah hah!
A hah hah ha–
SNOOOORK
mimimimimi
Indeed. But, under other circumstances, if she requested it, I would gladly say:
“As you wish.”
She rests, they rest. Legit.
The store is going to be absolutely, positively, gloriously mobbed when she goes in next.
What’s Sidney’s sleep-secret, other than a crazy day? Insomnia/sleep trouble is common with ADHD–something I know from experience.
Great job with the arc! It was a looooong battle, but the story and art made it worth it.
Ouch, she’s sleeping on the bruised side of her face, she’ll feel that in the morning.
And everyone else will see it. That’s going to be swollen
That is the most adorable/scary snore i have ever seen.
Could be worse, I bet dabbler does the little nicky snore.
Oh. Thats a good one.
1. Demon dog snore
2. Satan junior snore
They are both from the same film, and the main reason I saw it trice.
looks like when sydney falls into rem-sleep the orbs go to sleep also. good to know that if shes KO’ed the orbs might not flick out (they might even go into a sort of protection mode)
I love this page, very well thought out and just funny as anything. Also, I’ve read “Please Don’t Tell My Parents I’m a Super Villain”. It’s a great book well worth reading, and the sequel is even more funny. “Please Don’t Tell My Parents I Blew Up The Moon” Which if anything is actually even funnier than the first book.
Those who want her Wolverine to have a little bow tie, say Aye!
Aye, even if Sydney had to tie it herself.
So Sydney has a poster for “The Wolverine” which was released in 2013.
And everything that has happened in this comic has been over the course of one day (except for the first 6ish strips). So are we set in 2010 when the comic started or 2015?
One of the orbs actually lets her time travel.
Well, time is more like a big ball of wibbly wobbly timey wimey stuff..
Especially in comics. ;)
It sorta looks like a golf ball after you tear the outer shell-cover off of it…But it takes up equal volume of the entire universe.
To paraphrase the Marvel continuity method. The day started ‘A few hours ago’
Those that don’t get it, Marvel keeps things mostly in continuity even though various heroes have been around for decades by just saying that the things that happened back in the 60’s or 50’s only happened ‘A few years ago.’
Geez, that’s like asking whether Spider-Man is over 60.
And King Arthur is looking good, for a man into his second millennium.
Actually, Spider-Man first appeared in 1963. I’m a bit older than that & not 60 years old…
And you do not look a day over two thousand!
It’s the modified ninja outfit that does it…”the clothes make the man,” or so it is said.
You saying that Peter Parker was only a year old in 1963? o_O
Spider-Man was born in 1963…Peter Parker was already high-school age.
;)
sydney will have to learn to put them into the tube before sleep, to avoid them falling on her when she is alseep, LOL
Not to mention one could fall on the floor and roll away, pulling her?
Such are the risks you take for combat-readyness as soon as you blink…
I don’t think the pulling thing will be an issue. Sydney is the anchor not the orbs. She Has been stopped from movement because the orbs movements were restricted but they have never moved her.
Notice how they gently settle down and avoid hitting her completely before turning off. Sydney has nothing to worry about here.
Yea, it very much looked like a controlled decent, rather than an ‘assume the crash position, and kiss your balls goodbye’.
You appear to have a redirector trojan in the javascript of your page- there’s a bunch of obfuscated javascript text between your top navigation bar and the comic proper, and avast triggers a warning for JS:Redirector-BXF [Trj] with a URL of https://www.grrlpowercomic.com/|{gzip}. This appears on the main page as well as this archive page.
Ditto. I am coming up with the same.
me too. luckily it is properly escaped, so no harm done at the moment
And it is all fixed now.
No its not
It was, in that the messages stopped. Dave managed to clear it.
Then it came back, yea.
Next page will be some sort of cliff hanger ending. If its going to be the last page in a book (with another book on the way eventually) it’s best to end with something that makes the reader want to keep going. Wasn’t it Walt Disney that said something to the effect of “leave them wanting more”? (I may be completely and totally wrong on that though.) My guess is it will be a glimpse of the next big villain to test the crew.
I’ve been watching a lot of Avengers movies lately.
Dave has really been showing through the entire thing that cliffhangers are not his thing. throwing in an odd cliffhanger only because he couldn’t do it otherwise
Bah! I am still on the edge of my seat, until I find out what condition Sydney imposed on signing her contract.
And now that we have seen her bedroom, I am certain that it is HAH, CLIFFHANGER!
Well, we have already seen another five or six potential Boss-level enemies queued up, depending on how Mr. Deus decides to roll. Plus all the ‘everyday’ stuff in between, as Sydney finds her way into the team. I think there’s plenty of future interest implied.
Huh.
We hypothesized the others orbs may power them. Perhaps this is not the case.
Also, it means she can’t put a shield up and fall asleep.
Being as we’ve established her shield is airtight, this is for the best.
Knowing how Dave is about Sydney and tropes, the final page of the chapter will have her wake up in her own room, look around and say “Well, I guess it was all just a dream.” A Harem vorps in and says “Think again sunshine. Here is your security badge to get in the front gate. Mission review is at Oh nine hundred. Don’t be late.”
Funny as the joke would be, Harem would have to have seen Sydney’s room to vorp there. So the implications of the joke are a little “big brother” creepy.
I wouldn’t put it beyond Arc-Dark to have slipped a GPS tracker into Mr. Tubey. She is still on probation after all.
She is still wearing her choker radio link. Though I don’t see the ear piece.
Nah, Max will just show up at work to pick her up since she so very late.
Alternatively, the archon super geek will call her up and tell her she needs to report in. Also, harem knowing where she lives is a given, she was a part of the general report before her interview when they did all the background research on her. So its not outside the realm of possibility for her to at least be knocking on the door.
nope, that was Gwen from ArcLight that was part of the research. Harem had never seen her before one of her bodies met her in the elevator (and got punched in the nose), and the second of her bodies first saw her in the meeting AFTER it started when Harem vorped in without knocking first.
The real problem I see with them deactivating when she is truly unconscious is that she has no way to defend herself if this was caused by an outside force. So, a real-life limitation to a near unlimited series of defenses and weapons.
All it would take is catching Sydney by surprise with a gas grenade…If she puts up her shield, she’ll be trapping gas in there with her.
That’s the whole weakness of her power in the first place. She has to activate them manually before they do anything
One person’s weakness is another’s foreplay.
I empathize with that. I’m at the age where “direct stimulation” is required more often than when I was younger.
Bah,
This was supposed to be an add-on for a person for the page 1 comments, and it somehow was shunted to a stand-alone comment on page 2.
The mimimi snoring is a common joke. Even boy meets world did it. Corey doing the loud snore, and Sean doing the mimimi’ing. Feeny told the teacher that in his class, it’s the other way around.
Can’t believe it’s been long enough that Boy Meets World has a sequal for Corey and Topanga’s children…
The origin is The Three Stooges. Both Shemp and Curly has a repertoire of snores and sleeping noises that featured it.
Oh wow, I thought the earliest was the Muppets.
A lot of comedians and toon characters had weird snores, but those two were the best.