|
|
Post by edzepp on Apr 10, 2015 9:30:13 GMT
*And if so - I need to say I've come round: this is clearly what's best for her schoolwork, and a sign of good parenting in action. 100% optimal. Being broken mentally was thoroughly deserved, and will absolutely ensure Antimony passes her classes with ease. Since that is what this is all about, natch. Man, the sarcasm was almost too subtle for me. |
|
|
|
Post by antiyonder on Apr 10, 2015 9:32:14 GMT
I know you people like to point to everything that's happening as irrefutable proof that Kim Jong Tony, Tony Mussolini, Tony Stalin, is a horrible person but I think that's probably more a kneejerk reason to Annie's ridiculously fragile ego rather than any actual wrongness in Tony's actions, of which none have been remotely unreasonable in principle, even if their delivery leaves something to be desired. Yeah, and I asked you to explain several occasions where his behavior was actually wrong without any point. |
|
|
|
Post by AnUpliftedCuttlefish on Apr 10, 2015 9:36:17 GMT
*And if so - I need to say I've come round: this is clearly what's best for her schoolwork, and a sign of good parenting in action. 100% optimal. Being broken mentally was thoroughly deserved, and will absolutely ensure Antimony passes her classes with ease. Since that is what this is all about, natch. Man, the sarcasm was almost too subtle for me. Heh, I almost fooled myself. |
|
|
|
Post by Onomatopoeia on Apr 10, 2015 9:36:24 GMT
I don't follow. If I don't think his actions are wrong, why would I explain why I think his actions are wrong?
|
|
|
|
Post by aquamafia on Apr 10, 2015 9:36:46 GMT
Isolating your children from their friends and forcing them to only study IS abuse.
Have you ever read Overachievers? There's a case where a mother forbids her children from doing anything but sitting in their room and studying. They're not allowed to socialize with friends or have extra curriculars. CPS was called on her and her actions were determined to be abuse. She was mandated to allow them to hang out with friends and decrease their study time.
It's not a 1-1 comparison, but Tony's actions so far are very much in line with common stories of narcissistic and abusive parents.
|
|
|
|
Post by aquamafia on Apr 10, 2015 9:39:18 GMT
I don't follow. If I don't think his actions are wrong, why would I explain why I think his actions are wrong? You're free to express your opinion, but if people disagree with what you said they're inclined to start a debate. You don't have to back up your opinions, but people who disagree with you want to see what you're thinking too. It's the best way to discuss ideas and expand our viewpoints  |
|
|
|
Post by Onomatopoeia on Apr 10, 2015 9:40:49 GMT
That doesn't really explain why I should gives reasons I hold a position I do not, in fact, hold.
|
|
|
|
Post by antiyonder on Apr 10, 2015 9:41:47 GMT
I don't follow. If I don't think his actions are wrong, why would I explain why I think his actions are wrong? 1. He within his rights to demand that his students follow the rules, but insults are not only juvenile, but unprofessional. 2. He's within his rights to not discuss what's wrong with his hand, but since Annie is family, how is it not her business? Even then, a simple "I prefer not to talk about it" would have been the perfect way to drop the subject. And even you said his methods could have been better. |
|
|
|
Post by aquamafia on Apr 10, 2015 9:43:29 GMT
That doesn't really explain why I should gives reasons I hold a position I do not, in fact, hold. Ack sorry, I misread your post earlier. Yeah, you don't have to explain the opposing stance. But in any case, I am still curious. Why do you think his actions are not wrong? |
|
|
|
Post by edzepp on Apr 10, 2015 9:44:25 GMT
I was joking when I designated Tony a monster. I am not joking in suggesting he did not force her to cut her hair. You can't imagine how I could think she was capable of making her own decisions, I can't imagine how anyone could uphold any of Anthony's punishments, or the threat of punishment in the case of Kat, as evidence of abuse, so I guess we're even. I know you people like to point to everything that's happening as irrefutable proof that Kim Jong Tony, Tony Mussolini, Tony Stalin, is a horrible person but I think that's probably more a kneejerk reaction to Annie's ridiculously fragile ego rather than any actual wrongness in Tony's actions, of which none have been remotely unreasonable in principle, even if their delivery leaves something to be desired. Yeah, see, I don't disagree that Anthony has somewhat of a case to be disappointed. I think we're past that point. But when you run off to do who knows what for two years and then show up abruptly again, at least act like this is a big deal to the person you left behind before you decide that you apparently want to play the stern disappointed father and put her back under your influence. Bad delivery? That's putting it mildly. |
|
|
|
Post by Onomatopoeia on Apr 10, 2015 9:46:28 GMT
I feel I've lost track of the route this conversation is taking.
Me: I don't think his actions are wrong.
Antiyonder: I've asked you to explain why you think his actions are wrong.
Me: That's literally the opposite of what I said.
Antiyonder: Examples that corroborate Ono's position.
|
|
guyy
Full Member
Posts: 113
|
Post by guyy on Apr 10, 2015 9:47:42 GMT
You can't imagine how I could think she was capable of making her own decisions No. I can't imagine not being able to put two and two together. Look, this has nothing to do with whether Tony is a jerk. He took away everything she's gained in the past few years, and now we see that she's been visually changed to match that situation (identical clothes and haircut to Hospital-Annie). After the whole makeup thing, it's not hard to imagine him going "also, cut that hair, it's wild and messy and distracting. And so are your clothes, so wear this boring blue gown." Even if she did decide to do that without being directly told to, it's clearly because she's having a mental breakdown over this whole situation, rather than because of... what, exactly? Why else would she do this to herself? |
|
|
|
Post by antiyonder on Apr 10, 2015 9:47:53 GMT
No, what I meant to ask you is why you found his actions to be in the right in those scenarios.
|
|
|
|
Post by edzepp on Apr 10, 2015 9:50:23 GMT
I feel I've lost track of the route this conversation is taking. Me: I don't think his actions are wrong. Antiyonder: I've asked you to explain why you think his actions are wrong. Me: That's literally the opposite of what I said. Antiyonder: Examples that corroborate Ono's position. Oh wait, I think I see the problem. I think it was a phrasing issue with anti's original question What antiyonder is asking is: there were several places in this chapter where his behaviour was actually wrong and didn't achieve any point, so how do you explain that? |
|
|
|
Post by fish on Apr 10, 2015 9:50:52 GMT
Oh wow, this is it. This is the worst page in the entire comic.
The scene before this I could handle just fine, simply by convincing myself that it was necessary for Annie's future character developement. She needs to learn to stand up to her father but before that can happen she need to reach a breaking point, something she won't be willing to take just because her father tells her to. Apparantly her tolerance threshold is pretty high.
But on this page it is Kat that is broken. Sweet, caring Kat looks just like she did when saying goodbye to Mort. It's like she fears her best friend is leaving her for good. This is the worst. Hopefully seeing Kat cry will snap Annie out of it but at this point she might not even really react at all...
|
|
|
|
Post by antiyonder on Apr 10, 2015 9:52:53 GMT
I feel I've lost track of the route this conversation is taking. Me: I don't think his actions are wrong. Antiyonder: I've asked you to explain why you think his actions are wrong. Me: That's literally the opposite of what I said. Antiyonder: Examples that corroborate Ono's position. Oh wait, I think I see the problem. What antiyonder is asking is: there were several places in this chapter where his behaviour was actually wrong and didn't achieve any point, so how do you explain that? Pretty much, but technically they did serve a point. A point that could have been accomplished without the rudeness. |
|
|
|
Post by carasanathema on Apr 10, 2015 9:53:59 GMT
I'm really wondering if Anthony actually sees Antimony as a real person at all. The look he gave her when she was a child walking in on his and Surma's moment of acceptance that she was going to die, to me it looked like an expression of blame, even hatred. It's possible he only agreed to have a child because Surma wanted one...it doesn't seem like he bonds with people well. And then to lose the one he does love to that child that literally stole his wife's life force. The fact that she was an innocent kid doesn't tend to matter much to people who can dehumanize a perceived enemy, and she's an ideal target for his own sense of failure to cure Surma. If he doesn't believe Antimony has the right to that fire and spirit that was Surma, I could see him feeling justified in crushing every sign of it in her. Hell, he may be getting in some way too steal it back, or just destroy the monster that he perceives his daughter to be. And how hard could a daughter fight all this when she learned that her existence is the reason her mother is dead, that she's not completely human, and the one who should have been there to love her and tell her she's not a monster seems to not be able to stand her? His actions are "proof" that this is all her fault, and there's something inherently bad about her. I don't know if I could fight that.
For the record I really hope I'm wrong.
|
|
|
|
Post by antiyonder on Apr 10, 2015 9:57:52 GMT
I was joking when I designated Tony a monster. I am not joking in suggesting he did not force her to cut her hair. You can't imagine how I could think she was capable of making her own decisions, I can't imagine how anyone could uphold any of Anthony's punishments, or the threat of punishment in the case of Kat, as evidence of abuse, so I guess we're even. I know you people like to point to everything that's happening as irrefutable proof that Kim Jong Tony, Tony Mussolini, Tony Stalin, is a horrible person but I think that's probably more a kneejerk reaction to Annie's ridiculously fragile ego rather than any actual wrongness in Tony's actions, of which none have been remotely unreasonable in principle, even if their delivery leaves something to be desired. Yeah, see, I don't disagree that Anthony has somewhat of a case to be disappointed. I think we're past that point. But when you run off to do who knows what for two years and then show up abruptly again, at least act like this is a big deal to the person you left behind before you decide that you apparently want to play the stern disappointed father and put her back under your influence. Bad delivery? That's putting it mildly. This. While it's good for a parent to actually be willing to deal with behavior problems and not deny their kids are capable of flaws, being a good parent depends on being there for your kids through the bad times and the good times. You don't neglect the latter and only focus on the former. |
|
|
|
Post by Onomatopoeia on Apr 10, 2015 10:06:36 GMT
Ack sorry, I misread your post earlier. Yeah, you don't have to explain the opposing stance. But in any case, I am still curious. Why do you think his actions are not wrong? No make-up in class. Seems perfectly reasonable. People tell me that there are other girls in the class that wear make-up, but I didn't notice any. Did he single her out? I don't think so. Maybe he did, and that's a dick move. I'll give you that one if that's true, still not a sign that he's gosh golly A HORRIBLE ABUSER KAT SHOULD MAKE THE ROBOTS MURDER HIM VIOLENTLY! Retract her grades and force her to retake a year for excessive cheating, not seeing a problem. Arranging separate living quarters, since she can't live in the next year's dorms and the current year's dorms are already reserved for new students. Still not seeing a problem. Threatening to punish Kat if Kat helped Annie cheat. Let's back up a bit. "if Kat helped Annie cheat." Let's back up one more time, because people really seem to have a problem with this one. "if Kat helped Annie cheat." Yeah, not seeing a problem. What else. Not allowed to go into the forest, with its illusionary wasps and its psychotic wolves and its insane gods. Silly, dangerous, whatever reason he gives, still not a bad idea. Taking away Renard, the murderer who everyone says is super special awesome now, but which Anthony has not witnessed and has no reason to take at face value, and who could definitely stand to be under the control of someone who was a bit more responsible than Annie (which I grant you may or may not be a criterion Anthony fits, but again, principle). Did I miss anything? Execution is, putting it lightly, less than ideal. But most, if not all, of his actions are perfectly valid. I again attribute the massive backlash against him to a kneejerk reaction to Antimony's seemingly spectacularly delicate psyche rather than any actual wrongdoing on Anthony's part. In the absence of someone to legitimately blame, Tony is the designated scapegoat for his outstandingly poor interpersonal skills. |
|
|
|
Post by scalesandfins on Apr 10, 2015 10:06:49 GMT
Wow. So I'm looking around at the acrimony in the previous five threads (iirc someone called another board member a "shit princess" or something similar in the last thread), the newly minted Anthony stans/Antimony haters who all make me wonder if they're a new incarnation of that troll who spent what I'm pretty sure was years dedicatedly spamming 4 and +4chan's /co pages with "Gunnershit Fail" posts a couple of years back, unlistened-to pleas by forum members to stay on topic, various members blocking each other to deal with incessant quoting that verges on harrassment... I gotta ask, are these boards moderated? At all?
|
|
|
|
Post by antiyonder on Apr 10, 2015 10:16:13 GMT
No make-up in class. Seems perfectly reasonable. People tell me that there are other girls in the class that wear make-up, but I didn't notice any. Did he single her out? I don't think so. Maybe he did, and that's a dick move. I'll give you that one if that's true, still not a sign that he's gosh golly A HORRIBLE ABUSER KAT SHOULD MAKE THE ROBOTS MURDER HIM VIOLENTLY! Please provide a recent post that I've doled out the death threats. And all I said is that calling the makeup ridiculous is unprofessional. Did I say this particular moment was a problem? Waiting to see if he forbids her from any form of social contact Did I say this particular moment was a problem? Waiting further on this one too. What about the fact that he left Annie at Gunnerkrigg Court without a way to contact him or a way to contact anyone he trust like Don & Anja, thus giving her abandonment issues? Now I get that some parents can't take care of their kids and are faultless, but I'm still waiting for a reason as to why he couldn't ask a trusted friend or two to look out for her and to just plain be there for her. |
|
|
|
Post by edzepp on Apr 10, 2015 10:16:46 GMT
@onomatopeia: In any other context, yes, those would be somewhat reasonable. In the context I laid out in my above post? Ye gads, if he isn't doing it on purpose he is astonishingly oblivious to context and every consequence his words and actions are having. Either way, it doesn't make him look good.
And let's be real, I'm pretty sure Tom was aiming for the reaction a lot of us are having right now. Yes, it would just be a haircut any time else, but in this context, that's our cue for "Oh god, something has gone terribly wrong in her brain."
|
|
|
|
Post by artezzatrigger on Apr 10, 2015 10:18:45 GMT
Wow. So I'm looking around at the acrimony in the previous five threads (iirc someone called another board member a "shit princess" or something similar in the last thread), the newly minted Anthony stans/Antimony haters who all make me wonder if they're a new incarnation of that troll who spent what I'm pretty sure was years dedicatedly spamming 4 and +4chan's /co pages with "Gunnershit Fail" posts a couple of years back, unlistened-to pleas by forum members to stay on topic, various members blocking each other to deal with incessant quoting that verges on harrassment... I gotta ask, are these boards moderated? At all? I'm inclined to say yes, since people have been banned before. Can't say I've noticed any trolling in the past few threads, mind. High tensions and frustration, yes, but no outright trolling. |
|
Anthony
Full Member
No, not THAT guy.
Posts: 112
|
Post by Anthony on Apr 10, 2015 10:26:41 GMT
In the absence of any evident reason that Tony would demand she cut her hair, it must be assumed that she chose to cut it herself. Why? I don't see any logical connection between the absense of the direct proof that Anthony made Annie cut her hair and the conclusion that cutting the hair was Annie's decision. |
|
Pig_catapult
Full Member
Keeper of the Devilkitty
Posts: 171
|
Post by Pig_catapult on Apr 10, 2015 10:28:30 GMT
Wow. So I'm looking around at the acrimony in the previous five threads (iirc someone called another board member a "shit princess" or something similar in the last thread), the newly minted Anthony stans/Antimony haters who all make me wonder if they're a new incarnation of that troll who spent what I'm pretty sure was years dedicatedly spamming 4 and +4chan's /co pages with "Gunnershit Fail" posts a couple of years back, unlistened-to pleas by forum members to stay on topic, various members blocking each other to deal with incessant quoting that verges on harrassment... I gotta ask, are these boards moderated? At all? Yeah, I'm having a hard time taking this brony person seriously. I mean, I know Poe's Law is a thing and all, and that my neurotype means I'm not the best at getting into other people's heads, but it very much strains my suspension of disbelief that someone actually holds that opinion, especially since they're focusing on misdirection to avoid having to argue their point. It seems much more plausible to me that they're willfully ignoring context for the purpose of riling up people and/or triggering real-life abuse survivors. So yeah. I'm calling troll in the dungeon. |
|
|
|
Post by youwiththeface on Apr 10, 2015 10:35:55 GMT
This is what humans do to other humans when they want to change them but they don't have Coyote's memory eating power.
|
|
|
|
Post by edzepp on Apr 10, 2015 10:41:09 GMT
Wow. So I'm looking around at the acrimony in the previous five threads (iirc someone called another board member a "shit princess" or something similar in the last thread), the newly minted Anthony stans/Antimony haters who all make me wonder if they're a new incarnation of that troll who spent what I'm pretty sure was years dedicatedly spamming 4 and +4chan's /co pages with "Gunnershit Fail" posts a couple of years back, unlistened-to pleas by forum members to stay on topic, various members blocking each other to deal with incessant quoting that verges on harrassment... I gotta ask, are these boards moderated? At all? Yeah, I'm having a hard time taking this brony person seriously. I mean, I know Poe's Law is a thing and all, and that my neurotype means I'm not the best at getting into other people's heads, but it very much strains my suspension of disbelief that someone actually holds that opinion, especially since they're focusing on misdirection to avoid having to argue their point. It seems much more plausible to me that they're willfully ignoring context for the purpose of riling up people and/or triggering real-life abuse survivors. So yeah. I'm calling troll in the dungeon. Come on, let's not jump to conclusions. It's a heated debate to be sure. And he did just argue his point. I am also a fan of MLP by the way, so I don't think it's fair to drag in that association. This is what humans do to other humans when they want to change them but they don't have Coyote's memory eating power. yes |
|
|
|
Post by AnUpliftedCuttlefish on Apr 10, 2015 10:53:22 GMT
Ack sorry, I misread your post earlier. Yeah, you don't have to explain the opposing stance. But in any case, I am still curious. Why do you think his actions are not wrong? No make-up in class. Seems perfectly reasonable. People tell me that there are other girls in the class that wear make-up, but I didn't notice any. Did he single her out? I don't think so. Maybe he did, and that's a dick move. I'll give you that one if that's true, still not a sign that he's gosh golly A HORRIBLE ABUSER KAT SHOULD MAKE THE ROBOTS MURDER HIM VIOLENTLY! He didn't single her out by saying "Before we can begin... Antimony. Go to the rest room to wash that ridiculous makeup from your face. Cosmetics are not allowed in my classes.The class will sit in silence till you return"? What, exactly in your view, would he have had to do to single her out? Because what he did there - he insulted a student. He insulted his daughter. The subject of the insult is the makeup that is pretty much Antimony's own personal shrine to her mother. He also did it in front of everyone. He couldn't have singled her out much more if her tried, or done so in a more hurtful manner. Plus it's worth remembering that this is the first thing he said to her - face to face - in well over two years. Justifiable perhaps, but handled poorly. Can be argued as justifiable, but could also be argued as unnecessary. Being with Kat wasn't what caused Antimony to cheat. Being with Kat, now it's in the open, might actually help her since - you know - being tutored is helpful if you're struggling. Actually he said if she had been complicit. Minor detail, but Tony is a details orientated man we've been told, so word choice are important. And no - it is the context that makes it questionable. Do you think Anthony believes Kat was complicit? Do you think Anthony is following up on whether Kat was complicit now that he has dealt with Antimony? Or ever will? If the answer to these questions is no, it was not a justified/necessary threat. It was a strategic one meant to shut Kat down. Ergo - unnecessary in the context of fixing Antimony's cheating, but not unnecessary if, say, he's trying to make Antimony distance herself from Kat. You know exactly the reason he gives - nonsense. Not connected to Antimony's schoolwork, or as a punishment for the cheating, or because he thinks it's unsafe. Because he things it's nonsense. It's closest parallel I can think of, off the top of my head would be telling someone they can't go to their church/temple/synagogue/sacred grove/ or whatever because one thinks it's "nonsense". It's denying Antimony access to something that has been a source of liberation, enlightenment, and suppot. It's where she had to go to really learn about who she is as an elemental. So Anthony has the time to scrutinize Antimony's schoolwork, but not the time to look into whether the friend she has had for over two years, who has lived in her room and who everyone from his former best friends (who helped capture Rey to begin with) to the Court has allowed to wander free is actually a threat. Or to actually go and take him away immediately, if he believed he was so dangerous. You must think Anthony is both a terrible surgeon, and scientist, since you seem to think he jumps to conclusions after prolonged periods of inaction. Since, you know - he waited over 2 years to jump to this conclusion without seeking any kind of input. Or ignoring any her got, because do you actually think Eglamore, Jones or the Donlans would be saying "yes, Rey is dangerous and needs to be taken from Antimony who is too irresponsible to control him"? |
|
|
|
Post by aquamafia on Apr 10, 2015 10:53:38 GMT
The main issue isn't the punishments themselves. It's the context and situation surrounding Anthony's actions. Anthony has not truly spoken with Annie in YEARS, which is outright neglectful of a parent. Parents are supposed to take an interest in their child's lives, and show that they care about their day to day happenings as a from of love. Love is a basic need for a human being, and parents by definition are supposed to supply their children's needs. Anthony however has not emotionally supported or shown any sign of love towards his daughter at all-during her years at Gunnerkrigg or during any of these interactions.
His punishments are excessive and in no way constructive towards building his daughter's future. Yes, Annie should be held accountable for her actions and the course material, but there are far better ways to go about it. All of Anthony's decisions are clearly geared towards breaking Annie down more than building towards her future.
Why does Annie have to move out? The trains in the court are maglev; they most likely move extremely quickly. Commuting to classes would hardly be difficult, and the students seem used to short traveling for basic activities anyway. Annie can easily commute to her older classes from her apartment while maintaining the relationships she's built with her close friends. Those relationships are extremely important for her emotional development after she was effectively abandoned for three years. And given that she's repeating a year, she needs all the emotional support she can get.
The other large issue is that Anthony is not acting as a parent. A parent cares about their child's input and responses to trying situations. It is their job to help their child along the way, while also allowing them to figure out situations for themselves to encourage independence. However, Anthony is not permitting Annie to be independent. He is controlling every aspect of her life according to his beliefs, with no regard to Annie's feelings on the matter. Annie sees her visits to the forest, her relationship with her friends, her ownership over Renard and living in an apartment to be important. Anthony shut down all of his daughter's opinions and enforced his own upon her life. This is not good parenting, and is considered abusive towards a child. It undermines their autonomy and breaks their ability to form their own decisions.
Finally, today's page implies that Anthony forced Annie to cut her hair and change her clothing style. This completely strips away a child's identity and enforces the idea that the child is nothing more than an extension of the parent. A child should have full authority with what they wish to do with their body, given it's safe and lawful. Nothing about removing a child's basic right to dress how they wish is okay.
|
|
|
|
Post by aquamafia on Apr 10, 2015 10:59:21 GMT
Yeah, I'm having a hard time taking this brony person seriously. I mean, I know Poe's Law is a thing and all, and that my neurotype means I'm not the best at getting into other people's heads, but it very much strains my suspension of disbelief that someone actually holds that opinion, especially since they're focusing on misdirection to avoid having to argue their point. It seems much more plausible to me that they're willfully ignoring context for the purpose of riling up people and/or triggering real-life abuse survivors.
So yeah. I'm calling troll in the dungeon. Just because you disagree with his opinions doesn't mean he's a troll. He brought up perfectly valid points and is right about fans getting a bit heated over some odd things. Being able to see things from a different point of view is fundamental in debating-it opens up your views to info you may not have analyzed and gives you the chance to think about it more. |
|
