Grrl Power #333 – My (golden) angel (of destruction) is the centerfold
Trying something out with the panel layout here. Trying fit a lot of dialog in (also known as “my usual amount of dialog”) with fewer panels. Usually I prefer having more back and forth panels so you can see people’s expressions as they talk, but this obviously takes less time to draw and it helps to mix it up the layouts as well.
Maxima’s rejection of Candace’s offer was initially a bit more curt, but as I was drawing the page I was thinking about what her actual position would be on the subject. She’s not a fan of skanky stuff and it doesn’t help her opinion of you if you are, but she’s not against artistic nudes. Her qualm is people viewing her that way first and foremost. She understands there will be or already are a lot of really bad nude photoshops of her (or other nude models with some lazily applied filters) online, and even a few really good ones, but she’d rather not provide a primary source if she can avoid it.
In case Candace’s Everest reference isn’t clear, especially for the English as a second or third language readers, “(blank) is my Everest” is an idiom meaning that (blank) represents a singular and personal challenge for someone. So “Running a Triathalon is my Everest.” or “Eating the 3 pound burger at Crazy Ray’s is my Everest.” Candace is implying that getting to shoot Maxima in the buff would be something of a highlight in a photographer’s career.
Joe Manganiello for those of you who don’t know is the lumberjack looking werewolfy love interest for the main character in True Blood, and more recently he shows up in Magic Mike XXL. He’s basically the male equivalent of a slutty nurse, sexy librarian and enemy spy lady in the PVC catsuit all rolled into one. I mean, I assume. I’m not a straight lady or a gay guy, but he seems pretty ok looking to me. I could have gone with any of a number of hot actor guys, but he just seems like the sort ladies might have on their freebie list of guys they can nail and not get in trouble with their boyfriend. As soon as he showed up in True Blood my first thought was “no doubt about it, this is definitely written either by an earnest woman or a cynical guy.” I know the novels were written by a woman though I have no idea how closely the show followed them.
Thanks for all the vote incentive votes! I know those pencils are a little light, I will try and get that colored the first chance I have, and will attempt to stream it while I do.
This page colored by Keith.
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.
She wouldn’t happen to have a long-lost sister named Katie?
And I love that Maxima isn’t discounting the pictures because of anything other than prudent thinking rather than being a prude :p
So prudent rather than prudish? :p
I think what she’s getting at is that Max isn’t objecting to the idea of doing something sexy and risque, she’s just aware that if it exists, it could get somewhere she doesn’t want it.
Is Maxi blushing at the thought of a naked Hiro? o_O
Well she did certainly appreciate his shirtlessness after the restaurant fight.
Hey DaveB Could you post somewhere when your are about to stream? Please…?
Just imagining one extremely likely outcome of ARC-SWAT “going public” and, most especially, Max’s photoshoot.
At some convention in the near future, there will be Max cosplayers. Amusing to think of Max and/or her teammates being unexpectedly confronted by that.
I though there was already at least one scene of Sydney losing a cosplay contest to other “Halos”? Not sure where I saw it though…
An early invotive (she even lost to Master Chief :P)
Nah MC was there because he thought it was the “Other” Halo
Empowered?
You can check out various previous vote incentives on DaveBarrack’s Devieant Art gallery.
As a friendly reminder attaching to Yorp’s comment, just make sure you’re registered yourself there & log in, otherwise you won’t be able to see the NSFW versions.
She only lost because her ‘orbs’ weren’t large enough.
Odds that Maxima just put everything into superspeed and ransacked the “Stud nudes” section?
Zero odds, since real super-speed is not a sneaky thing. It would be a hypersonic boom, that nobody would miss.
No one ever said she would be quiet about it.
I’m sorry, did you just say “real super-speed”?
1,000 times, really fast. You probably just heard white noise.
I think he probably means this wording:
Real superspeed = “Superspeed which, if taken to use real life physics and repercussions for going faster than the speed of sound,”
Although if you want to get into comic book reasoning for some superspeed users – a fair deal of them have powers which specifically bypass the ‘sonic boom’ result. Flash speedsters have the speed force, which allow them to bypass normal physics. And while a bullet can, on average, travel 1700 mph, that speed does not necessarily mean there will always be a ‘high powered’ sonic boom from it. (despite travelling about 2 1/2 times faster than the speed of sound – 761 mph). It usually does a far weaker effect called the bullet bow shockwave (I’m not a gun expert but I’m guessing it has something to do with the small size of the object going at supersonic speeds).
It’s because of the size and the design of the bullet. The size/power of a sonic boom is dependent on how much air is being forced out of the way and how quickly. Since most bullets are less than a half-inch in diameter and fairly cone-shaped, the amount of air being displaced tends to be fairly small. Most bullets’ sonic booms are also further reduced by the gun’s rifling, which not only spins the ball, but creates a certain amount of turbulence behind the bullet which further disrupts the sonic boom effect. There are a number of gorgeous photos of this process, but the one here Bullet Picture
That said, small rounds have a much quieter crack than than large rounds, and target rounds (which are basically shaped like a hole punch) have a much more noticeable crack than normal rounds. .50 caliber rounds tend to start to get a very noticeable sonic boom, thanks to their diameter, size, and the gun’s rifling patterns. Some .50 rounds, like the .50 BMG, have such a noticeable sonic boom that it actually affects their flight characteristics, which is why most sniper rifles today are chambered in the .50 or 12.7mm calibers–the bullet is somehow made more aerodynamically stable than is the norm, which leads to longer ranged shots being possible. Truly large rounds, such as artillery shells from a 155mm gun, have a VERY noticeable sonic boom, which has been described in literature as “sounding like a freight train overhead.”
Interestingly, sonic booms don’t have to be very large or powerful to be dangerous. The best example I can think of for this principle is the bullwhip (the one Indianna Jones uses), which can actually cut things with just the sonic boom alone. Which, when you think about it, is both kind of cool, and somewhat terrifying.
The effect is actually weaker _because_ the bullet is a lot faster than the speed of sound. A sonic boom occurs when an object moves approximately at the speed of sound, which causes the shock waves to pile up and reinforce themselves.
Lol. A friend of mine used to call himself a “photographist” when making his pitch for racy stuff.
I had a friend that had the last name of Caine he wanted to name is kids Co, Lida, Nova and Candy. This was nixed sadly.
On occasion, I’ve teased that if my firstborn was a girl, then I’d want to change my last name to “Handbasket”…
…& then name her “Helena”…
:P
…for some reason, I’m getting slapped a lot…?
Careful with that, she would probably end up a stripper, or a bit part in a sitcom.
Also, whether male-or-female, they should get their kids into some sport that centers on speed…
…just picture their kid as a track-&-field star…
…the press would call them “Hurry”-Caine!
My dad wanted to name me Hannibal. My mother told him that the only way that was happening was if I came out of the womb with elephants.
And even then I think your mum would morally still retain all naming rights. Because that would have to smart, big-time. Unless they were really teeny elephants.
He tried to slip the doctor a twenty to get some toy elephants and claim they were in there too.
A female red-head in a Parker photography studio…
…my “Spiderman Homage” -sense is tingling.
Hey, good catch!
By the way, you have a grammar error in this strip. When Candace says “I probably should have lead with that”, it should be “I probably should have led with that” to match tense.
That’s not a grammar error, but a typo
Inconceivable! That would imply DaveB made an error. The problem must be at your end. Just press CTRL-F5 (or whatever your browser uses to refresh the cache). That will fix your problem.
It does not work to undo conducting a land war in Asia though. So best not do that.
How do you know? Have you ever tried it?
I certainly have. The world did not revert to a peaceful state in Asia.
I find it ironic how Maxima was going on about knocking out a skeevy photographer if he asked to shoot nudes, but now that it’s a woman asking to shoot her nude, she’s okay with it. Seems to me to be a double standard, but that’s Maxima for ya.
And yes, technology is often advanced for/by porn. Also war.
Difference being, the male is a skeeve and would have attempted to ‘pressure’ Maxi into doing it, and Candace asked if it would be okay first, and entirely up to Maxi
Yeah, just as long as she take “No thanks” for an answer and moves on to the scheduled shoot, I think she’ll be fine.
So, a male offering a racy shoot is a skeeve, but a woman isn’t? I see how that makes a difference.. No, wait, I don’t. What are you smoking?
Implying that a photographer would be unprofessional based on his gender is gender discrimination at its finest. That Candy Kane is a sexist down to the roots. She’s exactly the type of person nobody should ever trust with anything.
The distinction is “a skeevy photographer”, rather than the gender. If Candace had come onto Maxima, she would probably have walked out the building and told Arianna to forget her doing any other photo shoot. As it was she handled the matter tastefully enough, to avoid giving offence. Let alone implying anything sexual.
Think back and you will remember Maxima getting very riled every time Dabbler has tried it on with her. Being a feminist does not mean that someone is restricted to just disapproving of bad behaviour in males.
Plus do note that Maxima was using hyperbole, when talking about what she would do if a photographer behaved inappropriately. Or were you expecting her to actually murder somebody for being skeevy?
Arianna will have set up this photo-shoot only after very carefully checking her reputation. She is a public relations officer, so would be very aware of such issues. No photographer, who had acquired that level of reputation, would loose risking it, and the capability of ever working with A list celebrities (or even B, C or D list ones), by behaving in an unprofessional manner.
Be very wary of sleazy local photographers, or ‘a bloke you met in a pub’. But that paranoia does not need to extend to the true professionals, at the top of the industry. Once you have confirmed their reputation, that is.
It is sexist because of the implication that picking a woman would negate or lower the chance of encountering a sleazy person. If you wish to try again, do it with a better counter-argument.
Neither my comment, nor the comic made that implication. You are reading things into them that do not exist, in order to maintain your own agenda. As such, my argument stands unshaken. I have no intention of changing it.
Of note, Maxima came to the studio despite expecting it to be a male. She was wary, because of her past experience with sleazy men. But that did not stop her from proceeding, and judging the photographer on his own merits.
By the way, purely going my own experience,* the overwhelming majority of sleazy photographers are male.
Not that I would judge any random photographer on that basis. I take them as they come. But if I needed to find a sleazy photographer, for some reason, I would start looking amongst male photographers first. They would be a lot easier to find.
Incidentally, the vast majority of professional photographers are upright, decent people. Including my dad.
* But this includes people I have spoken to, and interviews or the like I have seen on TV, and read in news stories, rounded out by, in the last few years, by checking out art and photography on Deviant Art. Along with reading the comments by the photographers, artists and models in that community. Plus conversations with the same.
You think there is no misandric attitude present and tolerated in this strip? I don’t have any kind of “agenda” as you are assuming. Even if I had, there are better places to discuss it than a webcomic.
I only comment on what can easily be observed:
Maxima feels more comfortable with a woman. I don’t recall the mention of any experiences with sleazy male photographers, so if you aren’t making that up, feel free to link to it. It fits in perfectly with Maxima’s general anti-male attitude. Although, even if there were past experiences, projecting them onto the whole male gender is the very definition of sexist.
This photographer then proceeds to try to get on her good side, comforting her by justifying her sexist tendencies. She does so by coming up with how many sleazy males there are, and that to show she understands why Maxima wanted a woman.
There are some places where you are trying to put words in my mouth. That proves your points weak. For example, I have never said that I believe Maxima would murder over a sleazy offer. That is just a poor straw man argument you came up with to discredit the actual points and support your personal agenda of turning the blind eye.
• sexual discrimination – not present. The studio were not ordered to use a female photographer. Arianna simply advised them it may make Maxima more comfortable.
• – denigration of men – not present. “… most people are on the level, of course, but there are some skeevy guys out there” is very clearly directed at a small minority and not the entire gender.
• – violence against men – not present.
• – sexual objectification of men – not present. The extra service is demonstrably offered to males and females alike. Further is a private service, where the individual retains full custody of all the materials.
That does not equate to hatred or discrimination. It is not sexism.
As requested the hyperbolic imagining I referred to.
Which has not happened here. You are making it up.
See now at this point you are purposely distorting the truth. Because you have turned her words “… some skeevy guys” into “…how many sleazy males”. Emphasis added on both. Her statement emphases that they are in a minority, whereas you have structured your sentence to imply that she said there were many.
Kudos on only imply it, without actually saying it. It does not fool me, mind. But you are certainly trying to make a convincing argument. I wonder if you are fooling yourself?
No, I asked a rhetorical question.
The intent was not to put words in your mouth, but to both head off one direction you may choose to take the argument, and to generally make light of your weak arguments.
You did not link to a source showing her past experiences, but to a scene showing her stereotypical expectations. Good job arguing my point for me, because you just proved that you are making things up.
You may fool some by focusing on details as the difference between many and some, but the case was already lost with the mention of “guys” in contrast to “a Lady”. By excluding females from the problem, she is making a jab at the male gender, and it does not matter one bit which percentage of that gender she is discrediting.
Don’t bother replying, you will not manage to change my mind by twisting words, building straw men and making up things that didn’t really happen. It is also horribly rude to claim someone is fooling themselves. However, maybe you should consider that possibility too. Consider it honestly. Seriously.
Let me give you one last advice though: Exempting women from any fault is a horribly sexist and degrading thing to do to both men and women alike. If you expect less responsibility from a woman, you are not respecting her as a person.
I do not exempt women from fault. I judge individuals by their actions. If you care to look back through the comments you will see that I have picked up various females for errors they have made. Characters and commentators alike.
More than that, I have argued against other feminists, if they make a poor point, such as unjustly accusing another commentator of being misogynistic.
The gender of the individual being scrutinised has nothing to do with whether their acts, or arguments, have merit or not. It is their words and actions that count.
So no matter how much you may wish to bring that agenda to this page, it will not stick. But it does clearly go to show what your underlying agenda has been from the outset. The page got your nose out of joint, because it did not fit your view of how women are meant to behave.
I am not arguing that Maxima is right because she is a woman. I am arguing that she is not being sexist because she is not being sexist.
A point that you have failed to counter. Repeatedly.
Note that we have not seen all of Maxima’s life to date. But, if you check out her cast details, you will see that she has suffered from sexual harassment. This is what I was alluding to, in my earlier comment (her visualisation of the sleazy photographer being drawn from her experiences in general).
Note that being cynical about the motivations of men, based on life experiences, is not sexist. It only becomes sexist if an individual (or group) is pre-judged, based on that. Maxima’s comments were joking about what she would do IF he turned out to be sleazy. It was not predicting that he WOULD turn out to be so. She reserved judgement to be based on their actions.
A person trying to coerce or convince a subject to strip to make a shoot sexual that had not previously been sexual is skeevy.
That’s not what Candace did. What Candace did was OFFER to do a sexual shoot, and thoroughly describe the policies and controls she would take to protect Maxima’s confidentials. That’s not skeevy, just forward. You can tell because Maxima turning it down was respected, and also because Candace straight up said it, rather than trying to convince Maxima to be okay with doing it. There is no effort on her part to ‘get around’ or influence Maxima’s choices.
NO, the hypothetical Skeevy Photographer was asking “is it HOT in here?” as he was simultaneously taking off his jacket, which would then have proceeded to having her strip some, and then him more, etc, etc… Candy flat out ASKING if she would want to do any OTHER photos is practically the definition of a NON-Perverted Photographer, and that’s also something a “skeevy pervert” would never even think of doing…
also, as Yorp said the Photographer was probably researched out the kazoo before getting offered this contract, and anyone with a lick of sense would know that getting access to Supers on this type of an access level does NOT come around everyday, and they wouldn’t risk the professional body-slam that would occur if they acted inappropriately, especially after a model has turned DOWN the offer for further photos.
I feel everyone has made some good points here, particularly the fact that, yes, Maxima is often put off by Dabbler’s sexuality. Thank you, Yorp.
Candace doesn’t seem to be skeevy, and did approach the topic professionally, but I’m curious how Maxima would have reacted if Candace were a man instead.
Possibly it could have tipped the balance. Maxima is very sensitive on the sexism front, and even above, she is clearly well outside of her comfort zone. Just look at her expression in panel 3. But, whilst that is partially a reflection on her attitudes, it is mostly about how she is uncomfortable about her own sexuality.
Maxima does have a chip on her shoulder, but one based on first hand experience of sexism. So she is less likely to give the benefit of the doubt to a man. It is a character flaw, but both very realistic and reasonable.
Wait, are you saying she’s sexist towards men, or women?
Neither. It is possible for a bias to exist, but not to manifest in untoward behaviour. Which is the distinction which elevates something to being sexist.
Let us take, for example, a visit to the doctors. If an intimate physical examination is required, a reputable organisation will allow the patient options, to accommodate their personal preferences. For instance offering to have a chaperone present. Or switching to the services of a doctor of the same gender, if that is requested.
For myself, I have never felt the need to avail myself of that. But I could see a circumstance under which I might potentially. And that would be if I were to face the prospect of a prostate examination, and the doctor turned out to be an overly camp male doctor.
Not that I would have an issue with having a ‘regular’ gay GP, for example. In fact I would be surprised if I had not been examined, probably by more than one homosexual, down through the years. But they did not do anything that made me feel uncomfortable. Whereas the situation I described might well do that.
That is a bias, but if I were to take the option of requesting an alternative doctor, that is not being sexist. A heterosexual male not wishing to be examined by a homosexual male, is no different to the principle of a heterosexual woman refusing examination by a heterosexual male.
Whilst the issue is one of a sexual nature, and to do with individual’s preferences on the matter, that in itself is not sexist.
It only becomes sexist if a different principle is applied in analogous situations. So if I were refused the right to change doctors, I would challenge that as being the sexist act. Regardless of the fact that it was a man involved.
LGBT issues cut both ways. I acknowledge that we have more than two genders now. And I detach sexual preference from gender, when analysing equality issues.
Both the above examples equate to an individual expressing a desire not to be examined by someone who could be gaining sexual gratification from the act. Which is a perfectly reasonable objection to make.
When you get right down to it, a bias is a preference, nothing more. If you are a male who prefers redheaded woman, you’ve got a bias for redheads. If a man has a very strong bias towards women, as opposed to men, he is very firmly straight. Even approaching things with a prejudice isn’t actually a bad thing–it just means that you are approaching the situation with certain assumptions that will affect how you respond to a given situation. The word literally means “pre-judged,” and it is one of the survival techniques that we use to process information in a time-effective manner. For instance, when a cop comes up to somebody who has just been caught robbing a store at gunpoint, his prejudiced assumption will be that the man is armed and dangerous, whether he can see a gun on the man or not. Why? Because he knows the man WAS armed, in the recent past, and he has to work on that assumption lest he become…well…an ex-cop.
Where prejudice–and bias–become a problem is when they refuse to admit evidence that the initial assumption or preference may be in error. When that happens, you get one of the dreaded -isms: racism, sexism, ageism, etc. And it’s not just a one-way problem, either. Whites aren’t the only ones who can be racist, for instance–if you don’t believe me, just try joining a black church when you’re white. If you weren’t invited to join, they WILL shut you out of any church affairs, whether you’re a good person or not. It’s not fun, it’s not pleasant, and it’s not good, but it’s a fact of life, and it’s a fact of life because it’s an extension of a very old, very necessary human survival trait–namely, the urge people have to form communities. We form communities because it lets us specialize, and we can trust the others in our community to help is in areas where we are weak, but the reason why we do this is because we are always competing, all the time, to prove that we are the strongest, fastest, smartest, best-looking, funniest…the list goes on. We are trying to prove that we are the only people in the world that this other person wants to mate with, and to do that, we are willing to join forces with hundreds, thousands, or even millions of other people…provided that they are just like us, and can therefore be trusted to not e.g. kill us, sling our wives over their shoulders like a sack of potatoes, and carry her off to their cave to have their wicked way with her (feel free to reverse the genders here if you’re female). The other tribes–whether they look like us or not–are trying to compete for the same food sources, the same limited pool of genetic traits, and so forth and so on, and because humans have substituted memetic mutation for genetic mutation, the competition is truly intense. Everybody is trying to learn how to do something that nobody else can do, and trying to expand their advantages into something that their neighbors can’t match, and must bow before.
It says a lot, I think, that it seems that the chief determinant of sentience seems to be not intelligence, but religion. Religion, I believe, is one of the three great inventions that made man more than just another species of animal grubbing in the dirt. Almost any other basic invention or evolution that I can think of is found somewhere else in the animal world. Only fire, religion, and shopping (yes, shopping) are not, and I think that it is those three things that let us develop into what we are today. The discovery of fire allowed us to cook our food, meaning that we got more energy per pound of food provided, and, eventually, that we could consume foods that other species could not. The discovery of shopping let us find food more efficiently (this, by the way, may be why males and females shop differently–the different roles played by each in early tribes made for different priorities and search patterns when shopping). And religion lets us pass along information whose use and importance is not immediately obvious and often seems counter-productive…such as the need to not pick ALL the berries off a bush, or the rule that says you can’t kill somebody for garnering the attractions of the mate YOU wanted to snag.
For this reason, the fact that religion seems to be fading in many Western countries is a matter of some concern to me. Atheism has been tried, and has been tried on numerous occasions, and it has always failed to pass along critical information, eventually resulting in a lot of blood having to be spilled to try to get things back on track. Russia is the most glaring example today, but it is not the first. Not by a long shot. The fact that so many people seem to think that, contrary to three million years of human experience, religion is not necessary to pass along the important concepts that make a society work is…illogical.
Or perhaps I’ve simply missed something?
Okay, a lot of food for thought.
I also saw it as a kind of preference. Arianna knew that Maxima would prefer a female photographer, and found one specifically that the staff would get along with. Candace is the utmost professional.
I still don’t like Maxima as a fictional person. That’s my preference, but this isn’t new territory.
Her first thought was of a very skeevy man. I feel this is a gender stereotype thata lot of men have to deal with. I feel men, generally, are all assumed to be potential sexual predators, and have to prove they aren’t. They are all guilty until proven innocent.
For example, there was that, “Teach boys not to rape,” campaign. That builds up one group of people as victimizers, and the other as victims. I feel this sort of standard damages men emotionally.
And speaking from personal experience: I’m an asexual. I’m not interested in sex, nor am I sexually attracted to women. Yet I get reactions like, “But you’re a guy!” Or, “So you’re gay/bi/pan?”
My favorite? “You’re just faking being asexual so you can pick up women!”
This is by far the most moronic sentiment I have received, and only reinforces my previous point that society assumes guilt on all men until proven innocent.
And it doesn’t even make sense! I’m apparently not showing interest in women, nor expressing any attraction towards such, because I’m actually trying to sleep with them? What?
So that’s my personal experience. I feel we’ve touched on some very sensitive topics. The internet can be a very polarizing place, but this discussion here has been rational and eloquently handled ^_^
“Fire, religion, and shopping”, you say. Hmm. I’d say communication, first. Then something about the scientific method and technology. To each, his or her own.
Sorry about the delay in replying. I have difficulty in reading text, if a paragraph goes too long, without something distinctive, to break it up. It is why I put in so many paragraph breaks myself. Otherwise I cannot keep track of where I got up to, even re-reading my own posts!
There is some good news for you then. Provided a) I get around to publishing it and b) I can publicise it enough for it to get widespread recognition. But I have come up with a philosophy which can reverse that trend.
And, in case that causes alarm to folks who have the opinion that “most of the world’s conflicts are caused by religion and religious differences”, there is even more good news, n that it has a mechanism which would significantly reduce that. Amongst peoples who took my philosophy to heart that is.
The weirdest part though, is that the philosophy was not designed with either of those aims in mind. In fact, it was not created with any objective in mind. It stemmed from a simple observation about the world, and all the rest just fell into place!
The bad news though, if you are only concerned about Western religion, is that it would not just apply to that. It would aid all religions. But, to cheer you up, the philosophy does work extremely well with Christianity. I think it would do with others too, but that would be up to the theologians in each religion to decide its merits.
On the plus side, because it is a philosophy, it does not have to be applied to religion, so it of just as much use when considering the world from a secular point of view. Likewise it can be applied separately to any theological beliefs.
For example realism can be accepted by religious and non-religious people alike. However, for people who fall in the ‘I would like to believe in God, but…” camp, that “but” can be the tipping point that prevents belief.
Whereas my philosophy would not have that effect. It allows things to be accepted on their merits and their potentials, with less of a burden from pre-conceived notions which might interfere with that.
I get the feeling Ms Kane will have those photos one way or another. In a world with superheroes XXX-Ray Camera’s are possible.
X-ray camera wouldn’t produce nudes. This has been established.
https://www.grrlpowercomic.com/archives/868
Yeah but that’s not what he said. XXX-Rays go through everything except porn.
Best superpower EVER.
yup, an xxx-ray camera that is able to render clothing invisible by ignoring its reflective properties, however only a few super evil villains have figured out create a working prototype. Some lucrative villains have taken to the nanoprobe camera system to take over and under pictures.
Yea, but that is rather a science fiction concept. Unlike the type they have installed in shopping mall CCTV.
Yeah, well…That’s a little too nude for me. But for those who actually like that sort of thing, here’s a few real life examples:
https://heavy.com/comedy/2011/11/the-sexiest-x-ray-photos/
BTW, I’d already posted this link once before, way back
<– there somewhere.
Actually, I’ve seen a news report when I was a kid about scanners they have in airports that remove your clothes. Bizarre, but true.
angel of destruction…Abaddon?
Max now has the image of a mostly naked and professionally presented Hiro in her head. Score one for the photographer!
Of course the photographer actually got to *see* it, so she’s one up on Maxima.
Oh God. Whatever you do don’t tell Sydney there are racy pics of Hugh Jackman out there. Especially if you took them!
she would quickly find out what those other two orbs do if it helped her get to the pics
So one of Candace’s clients is Hugh Jackman? If she drops that name around Sydney, she will be able to get her to do any kind of photo work she wants. Just by promising an introduction.
Don’t worry about photos getting on the internet girl. This is your shot for Sydney Scoville the third!
Err you do know he is married right wife to kids both adopted she had two miscarriages and they are really happy together Sydney wouldn’t want to mess that up. Besides she wants Wolverine not the guy that played him he did an excellent job as well thank goodness Mission Impossible 2 ran two months over or it would have been Dougray Scott think on that for a minute good actor not right for the role though.
This doesn’t mean she wouldn’t want to meet the man or find the idea of seeing some pictures of him in little to no clothing very appealing.
Don’t be silly, Wolverine is fictional!
How could we ship Sydney with somebody who was not real? She would end up in a straitjacket.
You forget Sydney’s wedding picture to Wolvie in The List?
Of course not! Such a sweet little sketch.
Everybody has their fantasies, and many of those will be fictional characters. Personally I have always been rather taken with Willow, from Buffy the Vampire Slayer. Now Alyson Hannigan, the actress who plays her, does lack the red hair, bisexual nature and, of course, the magic.* So has a number of shortcomings, compare to the ideal. But that would not stop me from sounding her out.
The fact that I know she was happily married, with children, would not stop me from making a discreet enquiry. I do not ever follow celebrity gossip, so I do not know her current status. Plus I am adept at subtly determining that, from much practice.
Neither I, nor, I am sure, Sydney, would want to break up a marriage. But celebrity marriages come under more pressure than most, and many do break down. Plus everyone is entitled to take their shot at their dream, not matter how unrealistic it is.
Interestingly, I know more than one couple who have a ‘go for it’ understanding with their spouse. They know that there is little chance of either ever meeting their favourite celebrity. And, even less chance that they will be in the slightest interested. But would not deny their loved one the opportunity of fulfilling their dream!
* Mind you the latter is probably for the best, given the potential for an apocolype
Sydney would probably just fangrrlgasm all over him (discreetly of course), and like to believe she wouldn’t dream of breaking up Hugh’s marriage
Likewise! Unless they had already separated, even a broken down marriage might be repaired. It was not my intention to imply that accelerating the process, if it had not already happened, would be acceptable.
In fact the one time I have been in a (non-celebrity) situation similar to that, I did my utmost to help get them back together. When you factor in that he was making a hash of doing that, himself, it is ironic that their marriage was, quite literally, safer when she was in my company, than his.
Sydney is a super hero so I totally agree she should exemplify good behaviour. And I have every confidence she will.
I doubt there would be anything discreet about it. One of the things ADHD does is make the whole concept of “discreet” more than a little hard to handle–if something gets our attention, odds are REALLY good that it’s not discreet. And, likewise, when it DOES get our attention, we tend to focus so much that either it’s there and then gone, or we can’t stop thinking about it long enough to BE discreet.
I don’t know about the American tabloids, but the UK’s Daily Mail just can’t get enough of
Willow and WesleyAlyson Hannigan and her family.Well, we were talking about creeps with cameras…
Every time I see tabloids, including the Mirror being punished for violating privacy I have a little cheer. I do not believe that ‘being famous’ is justification for invading privacy. If a couple wish to make an announcement about an engagement, fine. Or if they make on the record statements about their affairs, then that is legit.
I hope. someday., that our society will overcome its selfishness in putting the desire for gossip above the rights to privacy, and actually enact proper privacy laws. Ones that allow legitimate public interest journalism, but disallow ruining peoples lives just for a profit.
Of course it would require taking action against the stranglehold the media have on our politics. Still I notice that the BBC are now getting into the habit of very clearly separating out analysis and commentary from the reporting. Making it that much easier to just pick out the news, and then make a choice whether to expose yourself to what their opinion is on the implications.
I wish that the Western nations would properly regulate all news companies (TV, paper and even the various internet media, such as news-related blogs). Individuals in our society should not be subjected to the bullying of the media. Nor should we all have to put up with being politically indoctrinated by them.
Heh. It is annoying, isn’t it? But no, Western nations will not regulate the press and say “no, you can’t do that sort of thing,” because allowing the press to be that invasive is a very important part of what makes democracy work. The press can go to almost any lengths to find a good story, and they will naturally concentrate on those that most of us find to be important, because that is what they’re paid to do. And if you make four or five billion dollars off of your face and your manner and your message to the world, people will want–need might not be too strong a word–to know that the message being sent is in fact the right message. Sometimes, this goes too far, yes, but the cost of those times when it goes too far is substantially less than the times when it does not go far enough.
true enough. but if for example i found some tabloid photographer camping out on my lawn i would take a moment to remind them that freedom of the press only protects them from the government.
I don’t think Maxima should have anything to do with this woman until she sees her work and/or her credentials. She’s garrulous, tawdry and indiscreet. She mentions celebrity names and then quickly states that she can’t say anything else because of “confidentiality”. Sheesh!
Celebrity photographs get credited when under contract, so she mentioned parts of her professional history that could be independently verified, while implying but not outright stating that they may have chosen to avail themselves of the extra service she offered Maxima.
Being garrulous may be a result of being in the presence of an actual team of publicly acknowledged supers, similar to the way someone may babble when actually encountering a celebrity of whom they’re a fan.
Though I’ll admit to agreeing that she seems tawdry, and less than outstandingly professional, though for come artistic professions, professional appearance may not be what it normally expected.
She is stating she OFFERED her “special service” to those names. She is NOT saying those people specifically took her up on it.
Yup, she is being very up-front about this. It is easy to have a bad take on situations like this, and I have every sympathy if people are cynical about Candice’s motives. For instance, it is entirely possible that she has been drawn into this line for the voyeuristic thrills it gives her. It does not strike me as likely, but that could be the case.
Regardless though, she is maintaining a professional attitude, and her statements show forthright ethics. In those terms she is saying the following:
“I am a celebrity photographer. If you choose to do this photo-shoot, it will enhance my reputation and, as such, I will drop your name to all and sundry. Further everybody knows that I offer a ‘special service’ to all my customers.”
This is letting Maxima know that people might make assumptions, that she chose to take up that service, and gossip accordingly. By doing so, at the very outset, Candice is giving her the option to back out gracefully, before the photo-shoot, if Maxima is not comfortable with that prospect.
Combined with all the other assurances (which, from her doubtless solid reputation, we can take as being genuine), it shows Candice in a very good light. Something which does not appear to have escaped Maxima, despite her initial reservations.
I know a photographer who is the preferred photographer for about half the celebrities that come through my home town. He’s an amazingly good photographer, but because he won’t name-drop, he has to work three part-time jobs just to get enough money to feed himself. The only reason I know he can compete at that level of skill is because we accidentally got him drunk one night, and he turns out to be extremely talkative when drunk. I have seen some of the pictures, though, and he wasn’t bull-s***ing me. So…yeah. Candice is going to name-drop. She’s trying to convince her clients (in this case, Max) that she is all that, so that Max won’t get too tense, and make it impossible to get a good picture. Sydney, she would probably approach very differently, because Sydney’s brain works differently from Max’s For example, the photographer for my high-school graduation photo bribed me with kittens to get me to sit still and relax, while my brother was given a White Russian and told a filthy joke (these were not taken on school grounds, in case you were wondering).
“bribed me with kittens to get me to sit still and relax, while my brother was given a White Russian”
So, how did the kittens taste?
Ahh, a common misunderstanding. Drinking of whiter russian is an accompaniment to what you actually do with kittens.
“Boudoir Photography” is not what I would term a special service, more like an alternate service. After all, it’s just a different setting like a wedding, birthday, bar mitzva, or what have you. Many, if not most, professional photography studios offer such, so it’s not really “special”, except to the recipient of the shoot.
How did you do that? I can totally hear her voice in my head!
What accent does she have?
And is she telling you to kill anyone? If so, don’t trust that voice. It is a bad voice!
What if she’s telling me to photograph people?
Totally a valley girl. I mean totally.
I guess you if it is saying “you need to shoot people” you will find out soon enough, if you go to a camera shop and they are satisfied. If they start up again when you pass the sporting goods aisle, in your supermarket though, be suspicious.
I assume that is how it works in the U.S., right?
Shopping list: Toothpaste, 9mm ammo, Vodka, Tia Maria, cream, Uzi, kittie litter.
Sadly no, at least in California- way too many uptight freakazoids that will have a panic attack to leave such things out in the open like that(you can tell my opinion on it, I’m sure ;) )
Yorp modify that shoppinglist a bit and that would be about right for my trips to the store around deer season.all the spices and seasonings for the venison bacon, the deer tag and a box of ammo for my rifle. and yes i did say venison bacon.
Personally I love petting bambis. And would much rather do that, than shoot them. But, if I got the opportunity to go on a sustainable hunting trip, I would happily do that. I enjoy smoked meats of all sorts, and venison too. Plus get my biltong fix at every available opportunity. Venison bacon sounds lovely!
But I would need to ensure that it was not some genetically spliced pig-deer. And, once I was sure that it did not go ‘oink’ I would also need enough training to ensure my aim was up to the job.
I have an extremely high accuracy (regional champion level) with laser weapons, even under intensive gaming combat conditions and would be interested to see if that translated well to using firearms, for hunting.
My experience with paintball would imply that it may, but I called a halt to paintballing when my collar bone ended up just below ear-height, after a major fire-fight. So I cannot say for sure if I would be good enough at judging influences of wind, balistic trajectory and the like.
Let alone all the stalking skills. I used to be as quiet as a mouse, as a cub scout, but somehow I gradually deteriorated, down through the years. I guess that was down to a lack of practice.
But I am quite happy to take up an Uzi and give it a go. Or a rifle, if full-auto is considered ‘not sporting’.
Okay, Dave, have to say, I’m a little disappointed.
I mean, for fucks sake, I’m asexual and I think Joe Manganiello is drop dead sexy.
Okay I just gotta say that because of your profile pick I imagined you saying that as Alucard from Helsing Abridged.
I do cosplay as him sometimes.
EVERYTHING sounds cooler said by Abridged Alucard.
I’m thinking the world’s first wormhole will open up to Maxima’s shower, now. . .
Followed by Maxi’s fist coming back through the hole, with her finger loaded and ready
That’s why you open TWO of them. The first is a decoy.
Maxi is fast enough to fill both of them, almost at the same time
That sounded better in your head, right? :P
Alas, not even Maxima is fast enough to keep the live HD stream from being broadcast to the Internet, and the villain Driller gets an unceremonial burial with the epitaph “Worth it” on his headstone.
Why, what do you mean? o_O
nah, Stargates are one-way only that’s why they have to dial BACK to Earth to get back even if they try to go back before the time limit… i would assume the same thing will happen here as well…
Am I the only one to read the photographer as a hyperactive type? speed talking?
Nope. There have been various comments, along those lines, already. But check out DaveB‘s blog, above. He is experimenting with a new style of showing dialogue. Personally I rather liked it. And, if Maxima had more lines, it would probably work fine, to convey a more balanced conversation.
But, yea, Candace does come across as rather breathless, the way it plays out, in this instance.
Yeah, take into account the dialog style along with the body language as she is drawn, and she seems like the type that would start talking and 5 minutes later breath.
Only if someone reminds her to breathe :D
Guy asks for nudes = Skeevy.
Girl asks for nudes = A-okay.
Love dem double standards.
The human body male or female form fat or skin is a beautiful thing one of my favorite pieces of art reflects this. Fallen Caryatid by Rodin the statue is honestly for most is ugly as sin but when you actually start to look at it you fall in love with her, she is a beautiful woman that has lived a full and honest life.
She mentioned that the option was available if desired, with assurances via technique (pure optic camera with her doing the developing, possibly with the client as a witness) that no copies would not straying toward publishers, fans, or anyone not chosen by the client, and making sure to emphasize that it would be Maxima’s decision “… If that’s something that would interest you.” She also didn’t seem to be pressing for that interest or agreement.
This is not the same as asking or expecting Maxima to model for anything less than professional work.
Check out the original scene Maxima was imagining. That guy WAS coming across as skeevy. You are the one betraying double standards, by ignoring that aspect, and only considering the gender.
It’s how they ask, or not ask, that makes them ‘skeevy’
Skeevy would be having her wearing a robe, then gently pressuring her to show one shoulder, then both shoulders, then turn around and lower the robe more, then drop it entirely, then say something like “If you don’t let me take photo’s of you nude, I will release these to the dirtiest tabloid magazines there are”
Like hell she would offer that service to Super Hiro in a heartbeat..
Im pretty sure those pictures would be an even more sought after object than any potential pictures of Maxima.. or at least would be if not because i dont think they are quite as rare :P
Fitting that we have the reason phone screens increased in size after the Nokia model was made as comic #333.
In my headcanon,
Maxima’s “…” = Maxima Picturing It
Joking about the hypocrisy doesn’t make writing it any less hypocritical or sexist.
Sometimes I almost forget you’re friends with the maker of Gynostar. Thank you for the reminder.
I am genuinely curious here, what do you see as being sexist here? And versus which gender? Because sexism pretty much, by definition, requires a bias to one or another. Is Maxima being sexist for not wanting to take her clothes off? Or was it Super Hiro, for possibly taking his clothes off, or possibly not? Either way Maxima did not seem to be bothered.
Or is it that there was a male voyeur villain? Or the female one? Or is it the implication that had Maxima taken up the offer it would be her pictures they were looking at? Or was it the possibility that they were looking at Super Hiro’s pictures? Or Hugh Jackman’s?
Oh, hang on, there was that line “… there are some Skeevy Guys out there”. Now that does mention one particular gender. By qualifying it with “some”, that prevents it from being a dig at the male gender, in general. Further it is both a very true comment and perfectly reasonable thing to say, to set a woman at ease. Especially one who she had been told might be uncomfortable around a male photographer.
But, Candace even makes it clear that most are on the level. So is ensuring that Maxima does not get a false impression that it is widespread or that there is a problem with male photographers, in the profession.
Then there is the hypocrisy dig. You seem very passionate about it. But again, I really am coming up blank about who is being hypocritical about what? See that definition requires someone saying one thing, but meaning another. In other words lying. I have gone through the above page, panel by panel and can’t see that going on.
In fact I see precisely the opposite. A very open and frank discussion.
What did you say about feeding trolls? ;P
* Sorry, couldn’t help it :)
He he.
That was specifically cited against the use of a particular term, which has its roots in a cyber-bullying campaign, directed at one person. That alone has permanently alienated me from it. Let alone the fact that it really is not fit for the purpose, of constructive criticism. I will do everything in my capacity to discourage its use.
But you know my general attitude towards trolls, I just grab hold of my flaming sword, prise open their jaws and climb down their throat. Heedless of any choking risk I might present to them!
Using my sword to bring light to darkness, I can strike at the very heart of the matter. Ok it may require standing in s**t, but my paws can resist harm. And sometimes you can pick out an interesting smell if you analyse it carefully enough.
Besides which, we should always start from the default assumption that someone is being genuine and expressing an honest opinion. In which case, by shedding light, I might change a false impression, and even win Emma‘s heart!
Snuggles are much nicer than conflict.
I’ve thought about it carefully, and I can’t even figure out what Emma here is trying to argue. Is the post taking a stand for or against Gynostar? Being friends with Gynostar? Forgetting that David Barrack is friends with Gynostar? Could be any of those six things or some combination thereof.
But I guess it’s a testament to the comic’s strong potential if its critics can’t yet figure out if it’s too sexist or not sexist enough.
So, what I’m taking away from this is that we need MUCH better Trolls here. The ones we have are pretty sad. ;)
Oh thank you for giving me a nice hearty laugh.
But please do not go poking our resident trolls! They very kindly put up with our tolerant behaviour here. But they are simply passive, not tame.
Look they have huge claws, and ferocious teeth!!!
*cowers behind 7thsealord, quivering and staring at the mighty monsters*
RAWRRRR!!!!
hehehehee!
lol Yorp please read the sign and read it out loud for the class lol
PLEASE DO NOT FEED THE TROLLS!!
Heheheh. Trolls usually don’t worry me. I’m Australian, and have way worse things living in my backyard.
“which has its roots in a cyber-bullying campaign, directed at one person”
Who was that?
She is directly named in the Wikipedia article. I will not repeat it, or link it here, as I have no intentions of adding to the ongoing persecution of her, caused by that campaign, every time the term is used, debated and referenced.
Nor would I be interested in her current status. Other than being sympathetic if she were suffering from it. Living or dead the campaign against her continues, thanks to trolls perpetrating similar bullying on others.
Should she still be alive, and even if she has come to terms with it, the continuing nature of the cyberbullying may yet wear her down. Should she no longer be living, be that through suicide, or by other means, then her loved ones will be the ones suffering.
It is hate speech and I will have no party to aiding and abetting that, nor condone the use of such.
Yorp, to paraphrase the last time you dismissed, I mean responded to, one of my comments:
“Troll” a term used by lazy people who wish to dismiss people with opinions they disagree with. Being of such a nebulous definition that it prohibits constructive use.
It’s also a word you personally use very often it seems.
As for the your two questions:
Sexism:The photographer is female because Maxima would be more “comfortable” with a female, IE it would be less creepy. Said female photographer is a creep offering “boudoir” shots and this is treated as a joke.
Gynostar: Frankly Gynostar is completely full of s***. I can go into detail but the result will be a short friggin essay on what a horrible hypocrite Gynostar is and her sexist, dismissive, trolling (the real meaning, not “I disagree with this person) racist, homophobic (which is weird since the writer is gay afaik), even more hypocritical writer.
Ah, thanks for clearing that up. You don’t know what any of the words you use mean, and especially “hypocritical”. Everything makes sense now!
Nicely put.
Despite that though, I should respond. I would not wish “Emma” to think that it was being dismissed again.
Your impressions are mistaken. I respond to a great many rude, prejudiced or provocative comments without using that term. Thus, by proportion to the number of threads I comment in, I use the word extremely rarely.
I work on the assumption that, no matter what the appearance is, if there is any possibility of a more favourable alternative, I will be charitable. Often doing it as a pretence, to steer a thread into a more productive debate.
Sadly your postings were so inept that there was no wiggle room to even do that.
• Being comfortable in the presence of one gender, in preference to another, is not sexism, it is an aspect of someone’s personality and, as such is simply human nature.
• A woman who has been raped by a man is uncomfortable in the presence of men. It is standard practice of police forces to ensure that, where possible, female officers conduct interviews about such. This is not sexist. It is done to reduce the discomfort of the victim.
• Maxima is the victim of sexual harassment, resulting in her being uncomfortable around men. It is not inappropriate for Arianna to pass this information on (subject to MAXIMA being ok with that), under exactly the same principles as the previous point. This is not sexist.
• Photographic studios need to know the things that make their subjects comfortable or uncomfortable. Parents with young children will be asked to bring their favourite toys along. Studios can be a very disconcerting place, so being able to set the subject at ease is vital. Fail to do that and a photo-shoot can be a costly waste of time.
Telling the studio that Maxima may be more comfortable with a female photographer (in what we can infer is a multi-gender organisation) is not sexist. They need to know that so they can do their job. Either choosing a male photographer who is good at setting wary female subjects at ease, or a female.
Note that Arianna did NOT say that a female photographer MUST be used. That WOULD be sexist. How they handled the information about Maxima’s discomfort was at the studios discretion.
That is YOUR interpretation. Which is a reflection of the creepy state of YOUR mind.
Again, this is a reflection of YOUR repressed upbringing where you feel that the human body is something to be ashamed of. If you are from a culture where risqué photography is considered unnatural, then I sympathise with your feelings on the matter.
Note however that, when commenting on the comic, you should separate your bias from the matter, and examine the comic in the context of its setting.
They are in a modern American celebrity glamour studio. These do come in two types. Those who also do nude photography (to some degree or another) and those who do not. It is a necessary part of a photographer’s job to indicate which services they provide. Candace did this in a forthright, professional manner.
Note that despite this Maxima was out of her comfort zone, and had an uncomfortable expression on her face, when listening to it, in panel 3. But she realised that this is a professional making a candid offer, in good faith. As opposed to somebody trying to trick her into removing her clothes ‘because it is hot’ or some other disreputable ploy.
Candice was not being creepy. She was doing her job honestly and openly.
No, Maxima declined the offer in all seriousness.
The subsequent joke was about the creepy nature of super-villains, it was not about Candice.
The issues you have with other webcomics really are irrelevant here. Other than to show your biases. Please judge this comic by its own merits, rather than bringing in your prejudices from another comic to do that.
Just to clarify, I was puzzled because as far as I know the term have its roots in the 70s and its main evolution through the 80s so not cyberbully possible at the time.
I never heard before about it as originated against one person in particular but a style. If it was used that way later in Internet age in such an intensity as you are suggesting, I didn’t hear about that either. Nobody is specifically referenced as a victim in the Wikipedia article about the term itself, and a very quick research on all the names in it didn’t give me any hint.
You are describing not a minor thing and I’m really interested in knowing more about it, I will try to further research but if you, or anybody else here, could give me some clue I would be very grateful.
As you are seriously looking into it, in a constructive manner, I am more than happy to help, despite my own reservations. If doing so may discourage its use in future, that compensates for perpetuating it, by keeping this thread going.
From the things you are saying I am assuming you are referring to “Troll”. Whereas I was referring to the subject of our prior discussion (which you quoted me from in your first reply). Namely “Mary Sue“.
In that article it is hard to miss as it starts with the following, under the heading Origins.
The cyberbullies have appropriated her intellectual property and have turned it into a weapon that they use to harass both her and others.
The term covers so many issues that it is essentially a ‘Gish Gallop‘ where you have to counter multiple ill-defined concepts, and if it is impossible to address them all, without an extremely lengthy reply, that will probably be ignored as a wall of text.
Debating the term gives masturbation fodder for trolls. If I am required to do so again, I will simply do one big post, and hotlink to it each time. It will be headed with a notification that the perpetrator is conducting a hate crime.
Sadly it will then be necessary to investigate if any jurisdictions require that to be notified by law. If it is then I shall proceed to do so. If the prosecutors agree with me, the plus side of the hassle, for me, is it will allow them to take legal action against the criminals.
Fortunately it would only come to that if they persisted. An isolated use is unlikely to result in a jail term. Especially if the user can prove they were only attempting constructive criticism, and were unaware of the hate speech nature of the term. Of course informing them removes the possibility of that defence.
Whereas if they persist in a campaign of harassment, especially one using hate speech, then it becomes actionable.
As a point of interest, I do know that America is one of the jurisdictions where it would not fall under the category of ‘hate speech’, as that is only outlawed against named protected groups. Fortunately that restriction does not apply under European legislations, and the USA does have extradition treaties with jurisdictions which do prosecute for such.
Nor do I think that such a prosecution would be likely, in anything other than the most extreme case. But the legal framework is in place to do that, if need be.
Please note none of this is intended to block constructive criticism, in any way.
Even including the various issues lumped in under the term “Mary Sue”. It is the term that is associated with harassment against writers in general, and female writers and characters in particular, and is part of the ongoing cyberbullying campaign against Paula Smith.
What I would to do however is get people to realise that the term is in the same ball park as the “N” word.
“Your character is a n**ger”
“Your character is a Mary Sue”
Thank you! :)
My apologies for the long delay, I committed myself to further check some sources which proved longer than I thought.
I know, I got you right there, so we were in the same page already :)
Here my conclusions
Regarding Paula Smith it seems that we are doing different readings of her life story.
Regarding the term “Mary Sue”, I still don’t share your opinion, at least not to the same extent. Also I don’t share a couple concept that seem implicit on your last post. As before I don’t see positive to further discuss any of that here.
I do share the overall tone of your post, as well as your opposition to hate speech and hate crimes (or any other kind) in the same grade.
Well, that’s all from my side. It do was an enlightening exchange :)
See you around.
Please feel free to substitute “bullies” for “cyberbullies” in the periods prior to them stepping up their campaign, by spreading it onto the internet.
Your name and avatar looked familiar and it’s pretty much what I figured.
A frequent Gynostar commenter and said comments come in one of three forms “looking for a pat on the head”, “self loathing”, and “you must be a troll because you’re not doing the previous two”
We will never be able to have a constructive conversation because anything I say will be taken as trolling and/or misandry. I can’t stop you, and you’ll likely take this as a challenge, but please don’t waste both our time by responding to anything I write.
(and it you’re wondering why I responded to the above comment instead of your previous dismissal, for some reason this site crashes my browser if I reply to anything but the last comment)
*misandry
before you jump all over it, I meant misogyny.
I rarely judge people to be a troll, but if I do it is not for the inane reason you state. Rather when individuals are being rude, provocative and/or prejudiced. Further if they cease behaving in such a manner, I cease considering them to be such. So the choice is entirely in your hands. Be civilised and I will treat you civilly.
Note a further troll like behaviour is to completely ignore the merits of an argument. Which you have done. Another identifier is to resort to denigrating the opponent. Which you have likewise done.
Currently you are not exhibiting civilised debating etiquette.
Not at all. Only your trolling and misogyny will be taken as such. Everything else will be judged on its own merits.
Actually I won’t take it as a challenge. I have a mental condition which makes remembering names incredibly hard for me. It takes intense effort to even recall the names of friends and family. I simply cannot spare the effort to do that with all and sundry.
So there is a plus side. You get a clean slate with me. In a very short space of time I will not likely associate your name with your past comments. So I can very honestly say I will judge you purely on what you say.
Do be aware though that I do not let misinformation lie idly unchallenged. But that is nothing special against you, I do the same for comments by anyone. Even those friends I remember by name.
One final note, I am always happy to be won over by an argument. If you actually make a good case, you will get me to change my mind. Likewise various other people, who comment here, share the attitude.
If you genuinely want to sway any of us over, simply pick something of merit and then argue it well. Being dismissive or rude (to the comic, the writer/ artist, the community or individual commentators or to segments of society) will only weaken your case.
Note that we have many commentators who have found converting their style to yield much a much more enjoyable environment for themselves as well as others. Even if some of them still (otherwise or elsewhere) consider themselves to be trolls.
But I am not prejudiced against trolls. I do not consider replying to a ‘suspected troll’ to be a waste of time. Because, even if they are a troll, they are doing so in an attempt to connect with others. So am willing to make the effort to try and channel that connection into a positive path, rather than a negative one.
I love the whole idea of inventing the first wormhole just to steal hot pictures, and actually you are right, a great deal of history has been driven by sex.
It would not exist without it, after all.
So much language richness, today I learned a couple terms that I’m happy to have Googled about ;)
That central panel is pretty good, is there a chance to have it kinda wallpaper size but without text?
Candace is so realistic that I was sure you were going to say that she was a patreon cameo or something. Nice job.
I got a similar vibe, on the last, too.
We need a central place to ask for wallpaper or such requests will get lost in the flood of comments .
Somewhere, Sydney is again freaking out that she’s not in today’s comic. She’s being phased out man, phased out! *flee*
I making wormholes to nick pics of Maxi is wrong, I do not want to be right. :P
WORTH IT!!
There should be a sexist double entendre about Maxima being like mount everest, but I just can’t figure one out.
Any ideas?
I am sure that quite a few people would like to mount Everest.
But it would be a stretch to direct any double-entendre specifically towards Maxima. It does not have twin peaks, for instance. So the nearest analogy would actually be that of a phallus. Especially as men often considerably exaggerate size, by claiming that something this big..
*holds claws a couple of centimetres apart*
… is actually 12 inches.
Have you seen Everest (and his twin brother Matterhorn) in the “Too Much Information” webic?
Nope. But I have seen the Eiger sanction, K2 and K9, if that helps?
*wags tail*
Sadly, I can actually picture the last panel being realistic.
If I ever become famous, the one (and only) thing TMZ has taught me to trust no one in media.
I would not feel comfortable having nudes of myself lying around, famous or not. I would not feel safe having “artistic” semi-nudes available either, not in the age of Photoshop. A great many “innocent” pictures have been corrupted into all sorts of sleaze or compromising material and then distributed.
I don’t know if I’ve ever mentioned this, but my current theory is that Maxima’s skin is made from orichalcum, the “mountain brass” described in Plato’s Republic that was used in the construction of mythic Atlantis. This would make Maxima a literal living idol, although that would have some really weird implications for the mythology of the comic.
A lot would depend on her ‘Origin Story’, I guess Maybe one day …..
DaveB do you read all the comments because if you do you are even more my hero than before
The last panel got me thinking. After looking at the scientist and knowing a little history about covert research operations I must conclude that he could only have named his laboratory “The Skunkworks”.
Brilliantly spotted, OBJ!
For those who may be puzzled – https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skunk_Works
Nice connection. I had been trying to come up with skunk jokes for a while mind. But could not think of any that did not stink.
Much as I’d love to see Max in some taistfull nudes(And possibly untaistful ones.), I really can’t see her as a person that would want such things. Harem shore, Dabbler ovbiosly, maybe even Anvil and Jiggawatt. But not max.
I don’t see a problem with it.The right to your own body and the reclaim of your own sexuality is very feminist values, after all.
Much stranger things happen. Most of the time, and for various reasons, Max has this very specific ‘face’ she presents to the world.
Not saying she’d suddenly go Full Monty or anything, but I think most people feel an occasional need to be a little silly and/or crazy, do something “different” or ‘take a walk on the wild side’. Max is a human being, after all.
Obligatory “I’ll be in my bunk”-comment.
I’m surprised no one else has asked what is so hot to invent a wormhole in the last panel. I mean, is it shoes, or some first edition comic? Seriously, we need to know.
That’s because it has been implied it would be to steal naked photos
This page does bring up the question of where various characters, such as Max, draw the line between “nice to look at” and “sexy”.
Would removing her jacket be crossing the line? Revealing the back of her pants to the camera? Smiling?
However, my feeling is that for ARC SWAT publicity, Max will be going for “brown pants scary”, both for tactical reasons and to tweak Arianna.
Celebrity photo-shoots do not need to be glamour ones at all. If I were the photographer, I would ask her how she got to the studio. If she flew, I would ask her to demonstrate her pose, set up fans and get a series of ‘in flight’ shots, against various backgrounds.
Calling up ‘that flying camera guy’ for a few angles, on location, above Archon and the city. Being sure to get versions in both casual, leather, outfits and in uniforms.
Whereas if she drove her motorbike, I would get that into the studio, and capture a slice of her life that way, using similar techniques to the above.
Then, of course, it would be off to the firing range. I would want some spectacular angle on Maxima using her energy attack. Time will want that for their front cover.
If Maxima changed her mind about a glamour shoot, sure go for it. But just trying to convince her to show a bit of cleavage? Naa.
Did she bring the ‘bayonet-inator’ from the firing range? Just take a few photos of her slinging it at hip level. We can Photoshop in the pile of human skulls she is standing on and the charred city skyline later.
Is that Mr.Terrific in the last panel? Cross dimensional porn delivery?
I thought it was an homage to the “mad scientist” type super-villains from “Don’t Tell My Parents I’m a Super-villain!”
As a former nude model (somewhere on the net is a 30 page study of my scars) I have to say this is very familiar sounding. Not the boudoir suggestion (although I did get all the outtakes from most of my shoots), but the photographer’s talking. I swear more than half of the camera guys and gals who shot me were non-stop motormouths.
Interesting, I wonder which precedes which?
As in, do a lot of motormouths gravitate towards photography for some reason, or do keen photographers pick up this tendency?
Verbal direction is a key part of the job. Unlike TV or radio it does not interfere with the medium, in any way. So photographers who work with models (be they professional or members of the public) need to have good verbal communications skills.
Those who do not, will have a lot harder time getting them to pose, or otherwise act in the way needed. So such photographers may need to specialise in candid shots, or non-studio work, such as weddings. Therefore you probably would find a significantly higher proportion of motor-mouths, amongst successful studio photographers.
I would imagine that being a motormouth is also helpful with getting some models to pose; they are so busy listening and following direction, they don’t have time to become bored, self conscious or embarrassed.
Similarly, if you are talking all of the time, you may sound more ‘distanced/educated/professional’ than ‘uncomfortable/uncertain/pervy’. A photoshoot that was mostly silence broken by pose direction might be more likely to get awkward?
That sounds likely.