Wapsi Square Forum

GlytchMeister wrote: ↑Tue Feb 12, 2019 12:14 am “New teeth! That’s weird...”

<understoodthatreference.gif>

ziggy78eog wrote: ↑Tue Feb 12, 2019 3:51 am I for one am GLADD (see what I did there)

Yeah, I see what you did there. You messed up your reference.

ziggy78eog wrote: ↑Tue Feb 12, 2019 3:51 am
You point has about as much merit as those who complained about Jane Foster as Thor, or Miles Morales as Spiderman, or Kathy Kane's coming out as a Lesbian. In other words, hardly any. It is about representation, and giving a voice to groups who have been largely ignored, for decades. I for one am GLADD (see what I did there) that these groups are finally having their stories, as it enriches the genre, as a whole. Gone are the days where only one view point of world (male dominated same sex couple) is the sole voice in our media.

I'm not the one who brought it up but yeah, I wouldn't mind seeing some male focused same-sex relationship stories here too. Or did you mean something else with that last sentence?

But it's pretty clear I can't have a conversation with you given you're so quick to compare me to particularly... hateful people. You have a good one, I'll just enjoy the rest of the comic as I can.

Akeche had a point to make and I think did a good job doing it.

Not agreeing doesn't make you right, or wrong for that matter & as things got more pointed the focus was more on Storytelling Mechanics and less about trodding down underrepresented classes and groups.

I too sometimes disagree with Pablo's way, but I continue to return, most of the time on the great balance I enjoy myself- and it's not just for the sexy.

I'm going to counsel we all take the deep cleansing breath of fresh air and give our whole brain a chance to get together, not just the leap-to-defense portions.

Peace & love People...

There is so much heterosexual-only stuff out there, isn't only fair that girls who like girls get some space to play out and have some fun?

Drakkenmensch wrote: ↑Tue Feb 12, 2019 6:56 pm There is so much heterosexual-only stuff out there, isn't only fair that girls who like girls get some space to play out and have some fun?

Absolutely right. We don't have to beat each other up over the subject if we choose to notice 'things have changed'. (right?) We can talk about stuff, right?

I came across this post of mine from last year. Please keep in mind it was innocently started based on the fact that I like the Random Button so much...
'member deez Duudes?

My gripe has been that as far as alternate sexuality or gender is concerned, most publications are all-or-nothing.

In most fictional universes (or so it seems to me) either there are NO identifiable gays, transgenders, etc., or PRACTICALLY EVERYBODY - definitely including all or nearly-all major protagonists - is one, and in the latter case there'll certainly not be any conventional heterosexual relationships at center stage (and the ones off center stage are at serious risk of being on a bus).

(Heck, Rain has even had the characters talk about having a token straight-cis person in the group.)

Thor wrote: ↑Tue Feb 12, 2019 1:13 am

Akeche wrote: ↑Tue Feb 12, 2019 1:04 am
I've sort of resigned that Paul has made it clear, male main characters don't have a place in the comic and are at best a springboard for the same-sex relationships for the girls/ladies in the comic.

You make that sound like that's something other than the very best thing we all know it to be.

I think you are being just a little too inclusive, by implying that we all agree that's for the best...

I, for one, find it annoying. Seems like everywhere I turn, these days, these characters and storylines are popping up left, right, and center... They may have been underrepresented in the past, but nowadays, I think the reverse is true. And it does not, in my opinion, make for a better story.

Yes, I am still sticking around, to see what else will happen, paranormal-wise, but with a heavy sigh... This used to be a comic about the paranormal, and mysterious happenings, and so on. Now, it seems to focus more and more on female same-sex relationships of people who just happen to be paranormals...

I think I'll go reminisce by reading the archives...

(try the 'Random Button', its fun...)

lake_wrangler wrote: ↑Fri Feb 15, 2019 12:01 pm

Thor wrote: ↑Tue Feb 12, 2019 1:13 am

Akeche wrote: ↑Tue Feb 12, 2019 1:04 am
I've sort of resigned that Paul has made it clear, male main characters don't have a place in the comic and are at best a springboard for the same-sex relationships for the girls/ladies in the comic.

You make that sound like that's something other than the very best thing we all know it to be.

I think you are being just a little too inclusive, by implying that we all agree that's for the best...

I, for one, find it annoying. Seems like everywhere I turn, these days, these characters and storylines are popping up left, right, and center... They may have been underrepresented in the past, but nowadays, I think the reverse is true. And it does not, in my opinion, make for a better story.

Yes, I am still sticking around, to see what else will happen, paranormal-wise, but with a heavy sigh... This used to be a comic about the paranormal, and mysterious happenings, and so on. Now, it seems to focus more and more on female same-sex relationships of people who just happen to be paranormals...

I think I'll go reminisce by reading the archives...

Here is a little thought experiment, replace the LGBT+ community, with PoC (People of Color); replace your whole statement with "there are too many characters and story lines featuring PoC." NOW do you understand how bad it sounds? Now do you understand my frustration? If this makes you feel uncomfortable, that is on you, not the creator. And do not give me some, "but I am totally tolerant", spiel; the moment you said, "there are too many of "these people" for my liking", you have already shown who you really are.

Except this "inclusivity" is to the point that it completely sidelines straight people and males, and it comes across as "they have no place in this comic".

Alkarii wrote: ↑Sat Feb 16, 2019 6:56 pm Except this "inclusivity" is to the point that it completely sidelines straight people and males, and it comes across as "they have no place in this comic".

...and your point?

It would seem that you are so intent on proving your point, and belittling anyone who disagrees, that you are willing to misrepresent what they are saying...

ziggy78eog wrote: ↑Sat Feb 16, 2019 1:52 pmHere is a little thought experiment, replace the LGBT+ community, with PoC (People of Color);

No, I will not entertain a false logic by replacing two things which are NOT equivalent: one is a changeable behaviour (I'm Canadian, that 'u' has every right to be there! ), the other is an innate ethnicity characteristic. The thought experiment is therefore already invalid.

It is also a misappropriation of something that was done not all that far back: someone had written a post, somewhere, with statements about Jews (if I recall), which most would find inappropriate and uncalled for, not to say downright antisemitic, but which some may agree with, only to end the post with "replace 'jewish' with 'people of color', to show how antisemitic people may be without thinking about it, by comparing the original statements to what became obviously racist comments, once the substitution is made. Except that in that case, the substitution is a logically valid one: one cannot change their Jewish ancestry and heritage any more than one can change their ethnic background. I forget now where this comparison had taken place, or who had done so. Otherwise, I would link to it.

ziggy78eog wrote: ↑Sat Feb 16, 2019 1:52 pmreplace your whole statement with "there are too many characters and story lines featuring PoC."

When did I say that? You need to reread what I wrote... I stated than people are mistaken when they say that it's good to include LGBT people into storylines, because they are far underrepresented. They are not underrepresented. Not nowadays. They have been showing up more and more into stories in multiple types of media (written, drawn, small screen, big screen, stage, and whatever else I may have forgotten), so that is no longer the case.

And if you reply by saying that, well, they WERE, then you are proving my point. They may have been underrepresented in the past, but that is no longer the case.

ziggy78eog wrote: ↑Sat Feb 16, 2019 1:52 pmNOW do you understand how bad it sounds? Now do you understand my frustration?

If I had said what you inaccurately claim that I said, then perhaps that would be reason to be frustrated. But I never made such claims as you seem to think I did.

ziggy78eog wrote: ↑Sat Feb 16, 2019 1:52 pmIf this makes you feel uncomfortable, that is on you, not the creator.

Did I say it made me feel uncomfortable? No. What I did say was that it annoyed me. Because, and I won't ascribe intent on the author, as I do not know what his intent is, many people seem to think that including LGBT people into their stories makes the story more interesting (which I don't think is the case: it may appeal to a certain demographic, but it will not make the story, in and of itself, more interesting), or that it shows how "progressive" and "with it" and "cool" they are (I'm not convinced, and either way, it's a poor reason to include that kind of storyline, if that's the only reason to do so.)

I also said that the focus of the comic has shifted, over the years, and I find the new focus not as enjoyable or interesting to read, for me, as the former focus was. I guess you might say I am just not part of the demographics this new focus would appeal to.

ziggy78eog wrote: ↑Sat Feb 16, 2019 1:52 pmAnd do not give me some, "but I am totally tolerant", spiel;

Considering that the underlying basis of your argument against me is incorrect (I.e. you are claiming I said things I did not say), I do not need to resort to such tactics. Besides, just like saying "but I have black friends" neither proves nor disproves that you are, or not, racist to any degree, claiming that one is tolerant neither proves nor disproves it. You can tell a tree by its fruit, not merely by whatever the owner of the tree wrote that the tree is, on a sign in front of the tree.

Mind you, it used to be that "tolerance" used to mean "I will not deny you the right to exist or actively act in ways to impede you from doing so" (or something to that effect). Nowadays, it seems to mean "if you don't approve of what I do/say/am/whatever, then you are intolerant and a bigot". The so-called tolerant are now intolerant of those who hold a different viewpoint. I will not play into that game.

ziggy78eog wrote: ↑Sat Feb 16, 2019 1:52 pmthe moment you said, "there are too many of "these people" for my liking", you have already shown who you really are.

Except that A) I did not say that, and B)The statements I have made have merely shown that I am a human being. As such, I am someone entitled to like and dislike different things than other human beings will like and dislike (like I am sorry to see the focus of a well-loved webcomic change, over the years), and I am entitled to enjoy/find interesting different things than other human beings may enjoy/find interesting (like I happen to not enjoy/find interesting the new focus of said well-loved webcomic as much as the I enjoyed/found interesting its former focus).


I don't know if your argument was supposed to make me feel ashamed of my previous statements or opinions, or belittle me for them (It's hard to say, in a written format, without more input), but it felt like it might have been the case (given the similarity with the original thought experiment to which I referred above). Were that the case, please know that I feel no shame regarding any previous statement or opinion of mine in this matter, as I have said nothing shameful, nor have I tried to belittle anyone along the way.

AnotherFairportfan wrote: ↑Sat Feb 16, 2019 10:17 pm

Alkarii wrote: ↑Sat Feb 16, 2019 6:56 pm Except this "inclusivity" is to the point that it completely sidelines straight people and males, and it comes across as "they have no place in this comic".

...and your point?

That when inclusivity becomes exclusive, it no longer is inclusive?
(I thought the point was made just fine, in the original statement...)

lake_wrangler wrote: ↑Sun Feb 17, 2019 12:54 am

AnotherFairportfan wrote: ↑Sat Feb 16, 2019 10:17 pm

Alkarii wrote: ↑Sat Feb 16, 2019 6:56 pm Except this "inclusivity" is to the point that it completely sidelines straight people and males, and it comes across as "they have no place in this comic".

...and your point?

That when inclusivity becomes exclusive, it no longer is inclusive?
(I thought the point was made just fine, in the original statement...)

I didn't.

The only thing i have to say about this is -it's Paul's comic.

Nobody forces anyone to read it.

i don't eat brussels sprouts.

When I read the strip these days, I'm really just going through the motions. It's been said by at least a few that the comic is becoming repetitive. I wouldn't be surprised if one of those two new girls is LGBT and/or takes an interest in one of the familiar characters only for that to cause some friction in the group.

Lets see if I can nutshell what I want to say:

- There was Monica, and Dietzel.
- Monica and her friends, including the local bar scene.
- Came the Calendar Machine, the Golem Girls, and Tepoz.
- Soon it was All Para, All the Time, including Monica coming into the Jaguar Girl. <- jumping past mentioning all the 'Gods Old and New, Prophesies; Tina as a Winged Creature, etc, etc...)
- Katherine becomes a main-line player, adopts Atsali after a Grand Adventure, and Castela the tumbleweed comes along for no extra charge.
- Monica Who?, Shelly?, 'the Guy Who Ran the Bar'? <poof>
- Atsali takes Center Stage, has an interesting backstory, but...
- Castela now is coming of age, she's no longer a potted plant, let alone pre-school bundle of joy.

You click the 'First' button on the comic page and you get a initial strip that doesn't even have a proper name as such, just a date: "09/09/2001",
(Amanda, Amanda, <sigh>, Wherefore Art Thou Amanda?)

09/09/2001
Thats almost 20 years of Wapsi Square.

Stuff has Chaaaaaaanged.
I have noticed,
I'm'a gonna talk about it,
and scrap he/she/other who calls me a bigot about having done so.

I wouldn't/don't call anyone a bigot - at least no-one currently here.

I just wonder why anyone keeps reading something that they're no longer {for WHATEVER reason} enjoying, when it's. clear that the direction they're not enjoying is the way it's gonna keep on going.

We keep reading because we don't want to miss it if any mention is made of the older characters.

Is it somehow wrong to have a comic specifically about women? Focusing on women? To the exclusion of men? Especially when a majority of modern storytelling is done with focus on men to the exclusion or near-exclusion of women?

I agree with FPF’s “Don’t eat Brussels sprouts.” But I also think if it’s totally ok for a story to be entirely about men, it’s also totally ok for a story to be entirely about women.

If it’s NOT ok for a story to be entirely about women, then it should similarly be not ok for a story to be entirely about men. And, of the two, stories entirely or mostly about men are hugely prevalent, so maybe y’all got bigger and more phallic fish to fry.

If you think it’s ok for a story to be mostly about men but it’s not ok for a story to be mostly about women... you should maybe read the comic archives some more and follow Paul on FB.

And before you try to say “well why is it ok for a story to be mostly about women but it’s not ok for a story to be mostly about men”:

Of the two demographics, who gets paid more on average? Who’s reproductive organs are a political issue? Who has more bodily autonomy than a corpse? Who needs to treat the average night out with friends with the same level of preparation as your average military black ops mission? Who is told they have to dress a certain way, speak a certain way, act a certain way, and move a certain way to not be harassed, followed, attacked, assaulted, raped, and murdered? Who has to pay a tax on medically necessary items because they’re classified as luxury?

It ain’t a perfect world. It’s also not a just world. Bad things happen to good people who do all the right things, so don’t say otherwise. It is a cold and indifferent universe.

In a perfect and just world, I would happily say “ok if it’s not ok to have a story about men then it should also not be ok to have a story about women.”

It isn’t. So I won’t.

Adjust your worldview if you can’t enjoy the comic with your current worldview, or stop eating the Brussels sprouts and spitting them all over everyone else’s plates.

And if you keep reading simply for mention of characters that aren’t longer the focus... I recommend a cost/benefit analysis of that behavior. If it is so utterly displeasing all the time except during those brief cameos or offhand mentions, perhaps the once-a-year cameo appearance is no longer worth the heartburn.

I’m sure you can fill the void with something created by Robert Liefeld.