|
|
Post by wombat on Jan 26, 2019 0:56:54 GMT
Attractiveness is not something one owes others in exchange for existing as a woman, but it's often treated like it is. Muscular women frequently receive comments about how it's unattractive to look the way they do, and then people who try to "defend" the women by being like, "Actually, I think it's sexy."
Now, in this case, the comment was made about a fictional woman, so at least there's that. It's still a comment that seems divorced from the actual content of the page and overall unnecessary.
|
|
|
|
Post by Angry Individual on Jan 26, 2019 3:51:50 GMT
F!Annie looks older than C!Annie in the final panel, to me anyways. Anyone else?
edit;
I am gonna be real and say I skipped the entirety of the second page of this thread for obvious reasons.
|
|
wuwei
New Member
Posts: 8 
|
Post by wuwei on Jan 26, 2019 6:14:19 GMT
Random thoughts:
1) I agree that Parley's physique is in the story as a demonstration/representation of her power as a dragonslayer, similar to Eglamore, and it comes off as sexist to react to it as if she's just supposed to be "hot" by some conventional standard. It's important to the story that Smitty finds her attractive, and it's kind of an awkward running joke that Renard is a bit of a perv in general. But she's not by any stretch a sex symbol in the comic itself, and I don't really think that she (or anyone else in the comic) is especially intended to turn the reader on, and she shouldn't be evaluated that way.
2) I definitely also thought that Parley's pose suggests that she's just going to smoosh the two Annies together and hope they fuse. Or just do a big hug and try to force them to make up.
3) It has been implied that a lot of Parley's bulk is due to some kind of intense physical training (kind of a combination of normal exercise and more anime-ish control over one's "chi") rather than steroids or some kind of alchemy. This is still magical-ish stuff, so it's not like we know the rules, but we can view it as an extension of what bodybuilders do, in which case she's not going to have heart problems or something (as noted above bodybuilders are actually pretty healthy). Her wards are more obviously "magical", but so far they only do stuff like give her the breakfall ability, or protect her from harm when she punches through walls, neither of which seem medically harmful? The only concern would be if she has increased her height beyond what it would naturally be, which maybe could cause health problems if it was really extreme? It's not really clear how that happened, or how tall she even is, though.
4) Court Annie seems to be just as confused as Forest Annie in this scene. This has been presented as a test of whether Forest Annie is real, but maybe neither one knows what will come next?
|
|
wuwei
New Member
Posts: 8
|
Post by wuwei on Jan 26, 2019 6:37:57 GMT
5) I'm still not convinced that the two Annies are biologically different ages. Forest Annie actually noticed the time skip because she saw that her hair had grown, implying that her body aged like Court Annie's did, even though mentally she only perceived a brief conversation with Loup. Assuming that neither was somehow scarred or suffered from malnurtrition, the two Annies should be at least as similar as identical twins (really, more so).
|
|
|
|
Post by Angry Individual on Jan 26, 2019 7:56:18 GMT
At this point, I'm fairly certain that BOTH Annies are under trial now. After all, if a complete replica of a great friend of mine came crawling out of what I can only call a war zone, saying that they've been trapped there for six months, and they seem like my real friend...
Well, I'd second guess my friend I'd have been hanging out with for the past half year, too.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dvandaemon on Jan 26, 2019 11:07:17 GMT
People are allowed to be attracted to what they're attracted to. Yea, yea liking what you like is one thing, inviting a discussion about it is another You managed to cram so much wrong into so few words that it's hard to know where to start. I'm not sure what "reaffirming female identity" is supposed to mean, but saying that women have to be a certain way is obviously sexist. Not that the original poster necessarily did that (though you seem to have interpreted it as such), though they seem to only care about whether a woman is attractive or not regardless of how relevant that is to anything. And obviously you can be sexist against males, not that that has anything to do with anything that's been discussed. I have been told that you cannot be sexist against males. If that is wrong, then I will certainly own up to it. And I don't see how having certain attractions is sexist, but again, maybe I'm wrong. If you are attracted to beards, does that make you sexist for not liking men without beards? And as far the reaffirming female identity goes, the poster was saying he liked the feminine form, since the complaint was that Parley looked too masculine. 1) At first I was going to clarify the misconception on sexism but I think that interpreting a comment on Parley as a statement on men both misses the point and compounds the problem. 2) Physical attraction can be and is informed by sexist prejudices. A lot of what you find attractive is what you've been socialized to find attractive from years of just being told that it is attractive. Sexist prejudices inform attraction with unprompted, impertinent comments on how a women is too ugly because she's perceived as too masculine. To reiterate, it's sexist to discuss apropos of nothing how attractive you find a female character. 3) reaching that conclusion seems like a non sequitur because the comment directly criticizes Parley's femininity as "not enough". How is it "reaffirming" when the subject is being directly pointed out as failing to reach a standard? |
|
|
|
Post by agasa on Jan 26, 2019 12:05:35 GMT
Your comment just reminded me of something said in the comic years ago. Parley's dad predicted her birth down to the minute details but got one thing wrong: her sex! Do you think it might have something to do with her training making her more masculine, so her dad thought that the Parley he saw was a boy...hence GEORGE!!! #MINDBLOWN You might be onto something here! Bravo! |
|
|
|
Post by agasa on Jan 26, 2019 12:13:22 GMT
For future reference, such comments are completely sexist. Please do not post such things here. Not to mention a liiiiiiitle pedophilic. No well. Not really, she's implied to be about 16; in Italy - my place - that's legal. Still 'friggin sexist. |
|
|
|
Post by todd on Jan 26, 2019 12:47:09 GMT
At this point, I'm fairly certain that BOTH Annies are under trial now. After all, if a complete replica of a great friend of mine came crawling out of what I can only call a war zone, saying that they've been trapped there for six months, and they seem like my real friend... Well, I'd second guess my friend I'd have been hanging out with for the past half year, too.
I still think, though, that this situation can't last long, since the story has already indicated that they're both real, and that the problem isn't going to be "Who's the impostor and how can we expose her?" but "How are the two Annies going to manage to live together, having to share everything in their lives?" (Though one of the major reasons I think that is that the latter fits the tone of "Gunnerkrigg Court" more, and Annie's friends don't know they're in a webcomic that prefers quiet character interaction and philosophical/metaphysical discourses to slam-bang action, even if it'll include some of the latter at intervals.) |
|
|
|
Post by saardvark on Jan 26, 2019 13:35:52 GMT
5) I'm still not convinced that the two Annies are biologically different ages. Forest Annie actually noticed the time skip because she saw that her hair had grown, implying that her body aged like Court Annie's did, even though mentally she only perceived a brief conversation with Loup. Assuming that neither was somehow scarred or suffered from malnurtrition, the two Annies should be at least as similar as identical twins (really, more so). One thing to consider is that if Frannie's body actually had aged normally (along with her hair), she would have starved to death. So Loup must have either magically cancelled her metabolic processes, or (easier) her body was frozen in time like most of the rest of the forest. My wild spec guess on why her hair grew was that it was directly attached to her fire elemental, which somehow resisted the time halt completely. Basically, the fact that Frannie is part elemental allowed the rest of her to partly resist the time freeze, so that she experienced time at the same rate as the only other unfrozen thing in the Forest - she was on (slowed down relative to Court) Loup time. Just a wild spec tho.... but I do think they are different biological ages. |
|
heranje
Full Member
Oh super wow!
Posts: 175
|
Post by heranje on Jan 26, 2019 16:48:18 GMT
5) I'm still not convinced that the two Annies are biologically different ages. Forest Annie actually noticed the time skip because she saw that her hair had grown, implying that her body aged like Court Annie's did, even though mentally she only perceived a brief conversation with Loup. Assuming that neither was somehow scarred or suffered from malnurtrition, the two Annies should be at least as similar as identical twins (really, more so). One thing to consider is that if Frannie's body actually had aged normally (along with her hair), she would have starved to death. So Loup must have either magically cancelled her metabolic processes, or (easier) her body was frozen in time like most of the rest of the forest. My wild spec guess on why her hair grew was that it was directly attached to her fire elemental, which somehow resisted the time halt completely. Basically, the fact that Frannie is part elemental allowed the rest of her to partly resist the time freeze, so that she experienced time at the same rate as the only other unfrozen thing in the Forest - she was on (slowed down relative to Court) Loup time. Just a wild spec tho.... but I do think they are different biological ages. I think with discussions like this, it's also important to remember the Etheric Principle. ("It just does") Also, I just really wanna see Parley grab each Annie by the shoulder and try to smoosh em together in the next panel. Unlikely to be the actual plan, but it would be great. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 26, 2019 18:05:36 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by warrl on Jan 26, 2019 21:56:40 GMT
Unattractively so, I am afraid. Too many masculine attributes make females rather unattractive - to me at least. I prefer women soft, and round in other places than biceps  Your comment just reminded me of something said in the comic years ago. Parley's dad predicted her birth down to the minute details but got one thing wrong: her sex! Do you think it might have something to do with her training making her more masculine, so her dad thought that the Parley he saw was a boy...hence GEORGE!!! #MINDBLOWN There's this genetic condition called Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome. It's classified in three forms (in reality it's more of a continuum) - Mild, Partial, and Complete - but only the Partial form is readily diagnosed by external examination. A male (defined genetically in the normal manner for mammals: has an XY chromosome pair) with Complete Androgen Insensitivy Syndrome appears to be female, and in general will develop into a "hotter"-than-normal female... but never menstruate, which could have any of quite a number of other causes. (The next stage in diagnosis is usually an x-ray, which will reveal that the subject has undescended testicles and no uterus or ovaries.) |
|
|
|
Post by warrl on Jan 26, 2019 21:57:50 GMT
For future reference, such comments are completely sexist. Please do not post such things here. Not to mention a liiiiiiitle pedophilic. Probably not. Given what I know of British school systems, it's quite plausible that Parley is over 18. |
|
|
|
Post by warrl on Jan 26, 2019 22:03:29 GMT
5) I'm still not convinced that the two Annies are biologically different ages. Forest Annie actually noticed the time skip because she saw that her hair had grown, implying that her body aged like Court Annie's did, even though mentally she only perceived a brief conversation with Loup. Assuming that neither was somehow scarred or suffered from malnurtrition, the two Annies should be at least as similar as identical twins (really, more so). One thing to consider is that if Frannie's body actually had aged normally (along with her hair), she would have starved to death. So Loup must have either magically cancelled her metabolic processes, or (easier) her body was frozen in time like most of the rest of the forest. My wild spec guess on why her hair grew was that it was directly attached to her fire elemental, which somehow resisted the time halt completely. Basically, the fact that Frannie is part elemental allowed the rest of her to partly resist the time freeze, so that she experienced time at the same rate as the only other unfrozen thing in the Forest - she was on (slowed down relative to Court) Loup time. Just a wild spec tho.... but I do think they are different biological ages. I'll add to this: with a six-month time-skip, there should have been some seasonal changes in the forest that would be rather obvious to someone who spends as much time there as Annie does. So if the forest was not frozen in time, Annie should have noticed. And if it WAS frozen in time, observers in the Court (I'm sure they had people or robots assigned to watch the Forest from a distance) should have noticed, so the notion that someone or something would come out of the forest unaware that six months had passed would be rather less surprising. |
|
|
|
Post by Polyhymnia on Jan 27, 2019 2:15:06 GMT
One thing to consider is that if Frannie's body actually had aged normally (along with her hair), she would have starved to death. So Loup must have either magically cancelled her metabolic processes, or (easier) her body was frozen in time like most of the rest of the forest. My wild spec guess on why her hair grew was that it was directly attached to her fire elemental, which somehow resisted the time halt completely. Basically, the fact that Frannie is part elemental allowed the rest of her to partly resist the time freeze, so that she experienced time at the same rate as the only other unfrozen thing in the Forest - she was on (slowed down relative to Court) Loup time. Just a wild spec tho.... but I do think they are different biological ages. I'll add to this: with a six-month time-skip, there should have been some seasonal changes in the forest that would be rather obvious to someone who spends as much time there as Annie does. So if the forest was not frozen in time, Annie should have noticed. And if it WAS frozen in time, observers in the Court (I'm sure they had people or robots assigned to watch the Forest from a distance) should have noticed, so the notion that someone or something would come out of the forest unaware that six months had passed would be rather less surprising. But if I recall, didn’t Loup say he froze the whole forest since he couldn’t maintain the path-things Coyote did? |
|
|
|
Post by Dvandaemon on Jan 27, 2019 20:13:10 GMT
Your comment just reminded me of something said in the comic years ago. Parley's dad predicted her birth down to the minute details but got one thing wrong: her sex! Do you think it might have something to do with her training making her more masculine, so her dad thought that the Parley he saw was a boy...hence GEORGE!!! #MINDBLOWN There's this genetic condition called Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome. It's classified in three forms (in reality it's more of a continuum) - Mild, Partial, and Complete - but only the Partial form is readily diagnosed by external examination. A male (defined genetically in the normal manner for mammals: has an XY chromosome pair) with Complete Androgen Insensitivy Syndrome appears to be female, and in general will develop into a "hotter"-than-normal female... but never menstruate, which could have any of quite a number of other causes. (The next stage in diagnosis is usually an x-ray, which will reveal that the subject has undescended testicles and no uterus or ovaries.) This seems like a really belabored direction to go. |
|
|
|
Post by pyradonis on Jan 27, 2019 21:07:20 GMT
For future reference, such comments are completely sexist. Please do not post such things here. Not to mention a liiiiiiitle pedophilic. Before you accuse anyone else of being a pedophile, please take a dictionary or encyclopedia and look up what the word actually means. |
|
|
|
Post by Runningflame on Jan 27, 2019 22:16:51 GMT
Hehe... the final panel of this page feels oddly similar to the final panel of this page. |
|
|
|
Post by speedwell on Jan 27, 2019 23:59:54 GMT
Not to mention a liiiiiiitle pedophilic. Before you accuse anyone else of being a pedophile, please take a dictionary or encyclopedia and look up what the word actually means. Are you one of those creeps who insist that letching after an underage child is not pedophilia if they've hit puberty? I can spell ephebophile, too, but come on. |
|
blackouthart
New Member
Avatar drawn by Shelby Cragg!
Posts: 49
|
Post by blackouthart on Jan 28, 2019 4:02:24 GMT
Yeah, can we please just agree that Parley is a teenage girl who doesn’t owe conventional attractiveness to anyone? And yes, that the negative comments about her appearance and change are sexist? I’ve been lurking on this forum for a long time and I’ve never seen anyone ream out any male characters for not being muscular enough, for example, or saying Eglamore is unattractive because he’s too muscular or being concerned about his sudden change from a lanky boy teenager (shown in flashbacks) to how he is now.
The original comment was built on outdated gender stereotypes of what attractiveness should be. People are allowed to be attracted to what they’re attracted to, but desirability does not exist in an apolitical vacuum. There’s historical context for this. Also, comment on how Parley looked was completely uncalled for. At no point in this page or the story as a whole were the readers as a collective really thinking about whether Parley was sexy. merry76 could’ve just said, “Wow, Parley is really looming!” That’s the only context in which a comment on her would’ve been appropriate. Instead it’s “parley’s really looming, I’m sad this girl is not attractive enough for me to view her positively.” It’s not only misogynistic, it’s just a weirdly misplaced comment.
|
|
|
|
Post by Polyhymnia on Jan 28, 2019 4:37:51 GMT
Yeah, can we please just agree that Parley is a teenage girl who doesn’t owe conventional attractiveness to anyone? And yes, that the negative comments about her appearance and change are sexist? I’ve been lurking on this forum for a long time and I’ve never seen anyone ream out any male characters for not being muscular enough, for example, or saying Eglamore is unattractive because he’s too muscular or being concerned about his sudden change from a lanky boy teenager (shown in flashbacks) to how he is now. The original comment was built on outdated gender stereotypes of what attractiveness should be. People are allowed to be attracted to what they’re attracted to, but desirability does not exist in an apolitical vacuum. There’s historical context for this. Also, comment on how Parley looked was completely uncalled for. At no point in this page or the story as a whole were the readers as a collective really thinking about whether Parley was sexy. merry76 could’ve just said, “Wow, Parley is really looming!” That’s the only context in which a comment on her would’ve been appropriate. Instead it’s “parley’s really looming, I’m sad this girl is not attractive enough for me to view her positively.” It’s not only misogynistic, it’s just a weirdly misplaced comment. Yes, and in response to such comments I would add "Get back in your box." |
|
blackouthart
New Member
Avatar drawn by Shelby Cragg!
Posts: 49
|
Post by blackouthart on Jan 28, 2019 4:49:23 GMT
On-topic, I vote for the aforementioned “Parley squeezes them together” theory (OR OR STEVEN UNIVERSE STYLE FUSION DANCE) or that Andrew with his luck o’ vision has somehow discerned who is “real”. But the latter seems too easy narratively, and would be honestly be too sloppy for Tom, I think.
|
|
|
|
Post by merry76 on Jan 28, 2019 7:23:35 GMT
The original comment was built on outdated gender stereotypes of what attractiveness should be. People are allowed to be attracted to what they’re attracted to, but desirability does not exist in an apolitical vacuum. There’s historical context for this. Also, comment on how Parley looked was completely uncalled for. At no point in this page or the story as a whole were the readers as a collective really thinking about whether Parley was sexy. merry76 could’ve just said, “Wow, Parley is really looming!” That’s the only context in which a comment on her would’ve been appropriate. Instead it’s “parley’s really looming, I’m sad this girl is not attractive enough for me to view her positively.” It’s not only misogynistic, it’s just a weirdly misplaced comment.
Wow. We went from "how dare you find something unattractive" over "you are a pedophiliac if you find drawn teenagers attractive" and "looking like a real buff man is the ultimate female empowerment" to "I want to control your speech".
Weird. If you post that you particularly like a joke, drawing, reaction or where the comic is going - everything is quiet. But if you mention that you are not a fan of letting a female teenager look like a 20 something bodybuilder is a bit off to you, you get the screechers out of the woodwork. Its like you are not supposed to state opinions on a discussion board.
I dont want to talk for Tom here (he can to that on his own), but I hail from an age where an artist valued critique as much as praise. It helps you to improve and stay on your edge. Its also better if you can get it earlier, not after whatever you are doing jumped the shark (not that I think gunnerkrigg is in any danger right now of doing that).
|
|
|
|
Post by madjack on Jan 28, 2019 7:56:31 GMT
Wow. We went from "how dare you find something unattractive" over "you are a pedophiliac if you find drawn teenagers attractive" and "looking like a real buff man is the ultimate female empowerment" to "I want to control your speech". Yeah skipping over the pedophile discussion which was a bit dumb... "Empowerment" in any form for any person is about having the capacity to turn your will into action. Parley needs her physique to pursue her chosen career. Simple as that. Weird. If you post that you particularly like a joke, drawing, reaction or where the comic is going - everything is quiet. But if you mention that you are not a fan of letting a female teenager look like a 20 something bodybuilder is a bit off to you, you get the screechers out of the woodwork. Its like you are not supposed to state opinions on a discussion board.
I dont want to talk for Tom here (he can to that on his own), but I hail from an age where an artist valued critique as much as praise. It helps you to improve and stay on your edge. Its also better if you can get it earlier, not after whatever you are doing jumped the shark (not that I think gunnerkrigg is in any danger right now of doing that).
Opinion is not critique. Critique starts with observation and has both structure and vector. It goes somewhere. Opinions begin and end with the person holding them, and goes nowhere unless backed up by facts or non-faulty logic. Proper criticism is isolating and questioning aspects of a work, questioning why that direction or artstyle or whatever was chosen, comparing them both internally and to other works and experiences, both similar and different, and coming to conclusions with intent to generate perspective and unbiased feedback that attempts to add to the worldview of an author to grow the work as an entity of its own accord. Not for an audience. There is minimal value in a work that is purely built to satisfy an audience. Changing a work to fit one person's opinion optimises it for an audience of one. What's the point of that? |
|
|
|
Post by merry76 on Jan 28, 2019 8:52:57 GMT
Wow. We went from "how dare you find something unattractive" over "you are a pedophiliac if you find drawn teenagers attractive" and "looking like a real buff man is the ultimate female empowerment" to "I want to control your speech". Yeah skipping over the pedophile discussion which was a bit dumb... "Empowerment" in any form for any person is about having the capacity to turn your will into action. Parley needs her physique to pursue her chosen career. Simple as that. She does not look like "Female Empowerment" - she looks like "Female Space Marine Empowerment" (only stronger (imagine that), because she can jump a few hundred meters). Sure she will be more capable in her career, sure. But does she look like an empowered woman? She looks like a brick outhouse. She looks like lunars papa in seto no hanayome. Which is to be said, not very female - it was played there as a joke, and it comes over in this universe a bit "bitter". Well, at least her jaw line isnt full Arnold Schwarzenegger. Small blessings, eh?
I do not think that my Opinion classified as a critique by your standard btw. If I would have brought in facts (and there are facts about attraction), the answers I would have gotten would be even screechier. I do not tend to do that anymore, there is little point in it.
I also do not expect Tom to change his ways or characters because this one reader doesnt like the direction he is taking with one of the characters. I however prefer to be able to state that I am not a fan of what became of parley. This should be perfectly in line with the forum rules.
|
|
blackouthart
New Member
Avatar drawn by Shelby Cragg!
Posts: 49
|
Post by blackouthart on Jan 28, 2019 9:51:42 GMT
It was weird and sexist. You’re just digging yourself a hole here, buddy. I’m not saying you can’t say things. Freedom of speech doesn’t mean you can’t get critique on your statement which basically boiled down to “I am not attracted to Parley”.
|
|
|
|
Post by csj on Jan 28, 2019 9:55:50 GMT
Unattractively so, I am afraid. Too many masculine attributes make females rather unattractive - to me at least. I prefer women soft, and round in other places than biceps Everyone’s different. Good thing Smits doesn’t agree with you. Either that or he just likes girls who are Parley-shaped, whatever shape that may be... sorry I only date amorphous amoeboids |
|
blackouthart
New Member
Avatar drawn by Shelby Cragg!
Posts: 49
|
Post by blackouthart on Jan 28, 2019 9:58:20 GMT
Everyone’s different. Good thing Smits doesn’t agree with you. Either that or he just likes girls who are Parley-shaped, whatever shape that may be... sorry I only date amorphous amoeboids same |
|
|
|
Post by csj on Jan 28, 2019 10:04:29 GMT
((real talk, if you are arguing over what would or wouldn't be appropriate for a fictional character to look like and that the value of a female character is contingent on their aesthetic quality to your personal tastes, you're doing it wrong - it's not something you can/should necessarily critique given its subjectivity - subtext is important and while IDGAF about whatever US-centric 'free speech' arguments which actually have little relevance to the rest of the world that's making a mountain out of this molehill, yeah it has an undertone of 'it's a shame that this character can't conform to my personal tastes and therefore is less interesting to me
tl;dr
PERISH))
|
|
