OOTS #959 - The Discussion Thread

[The Giant]

New comic is up.

[An Enemy Spy]

Do I sense some regret over past representation of female characters? Or is it just self deprecating humor?

[NotBambi]

Wow, that was quick to appear.

[redzimmer]

What was that Bechdel test rule?

[Lanaya]

I would buy every single one of those action figures.

[With a box]

It's good to look old outpits in new style

[Crazyterran]

Does her action figures bust seem bigger than her stick figures?

Just me?

[Rick_DW]

I would buy every single one of those action figures.

Seconded, though I'd get the one with the bare midriff first.

Wonder who'd win the fight between Haley and Bandanna?

[Blisstake]

Huh, for some reason I just thought that's what her outfit looked like in the new art style. This makes a lot more sense. Hopefully the armor value's just as good.

[With a box]

Seconded, though I'd get the one with the bare midriff first.

Wonder who'd win the fight between Haley and Bandanna?

I don't think that Banana has more level then 10. do Haley might win.

[ORione]

What was that Bechdel test rule?

- There must be at least two female characters...
- ... who talk to each other...
- ... about something other than a man.

[Arkhaic]

So...is this a hint at future merchandise?

Edit: The Bechdel Test makes me want to write something horrifyingly, eye-gougingly sexist with a 100% Bechdel Test pass rate for every scene.

[Morgan Wick]

So is Bandanna the first unambiguously gay named character in the comic?

[Angelalex242]

Heh. Well, they're talking about clothes, not men, so they pass.

Merchandising, huh?

Ah well. But yes, she is contractually required to get more outfits as time goes on.

[Killer Angel]

it was not... or maybe yes. (at least, from the watchers Pov :smallbiggrin:)

[Inevitability]

So is Bandanna the first unambiguously gay named character in the comic?

Guess so. I was surprised by reading that too.

[Gift Jeraff]

So is Bandanna the first unambiguously gay named character in the comic?

Phil Rodriguez the lawyer

[BeethroBudkin07]

Ooh! That a quick update! :smallbiggrin:

A bit more on the dialogue-y side this time, but that's not a bad thing! Loved the little poke at Haley's constantly changing costume. :smalltongue:

Can't wait for more!

[ORione]

So is Bandanna the first unambiguously gay named character in the comic?

She could be bi- or pansexual.

[Tris]

It's weird to see the hands on those things.

[DaggerPen]

... hahhahahhahahaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa.

Okay, not the Belkar update I was expecting, but damn if I'm not laughing here. A very nice send-up of some old tropes, with a nice little touch of self-parody. I love it.

Also, so that's where she got that armor from! I was wondering.

[Starwulf]

Wow, they've definitely acquired quite a good deal of loot over their adventures, and to think it isn't even counting the magical stuff. Though, I can't imagine they'll let any of the stuff that's really worth anything go, since it'll have to much use, especially since 3 out of 5 members can use them(bard, rogue, wizard).

[Keldon]

I´ve been a lurker around here for many years, but i simply HAD to come here and comment after the last comic. It´s amazing how you managed to deal with so many important themes in a single page: (i) homosexuality; (ii) weight/beauty issues ("curvy"); (iii) women that always dreamed to fit in positions of authority; (iv) the stereotype that tells that girls are either sister-like friends or enemies that tell each other gender-oriented offenses (you b****, etc); (v) the "chainmail bikini" stereotype ("bare midriff"). I doubt those are mere coincidences. Congrats!

[Nibelung]

Somehow, knowing Bandana's mother is a blonde, make me think if Julio giving her the captain position is not simply heritage.

And yes, I want to buy action figures of OotS as well. Will we have a kickstarter for it?


The Bechdel Test makes me want to write something horrifyingly, eye-gougingly sexist with a 100% Bechdel Test pass rate for every scene.

The Bechdel Test is not a test to see if the artwork is favorable to gender equality. Neither a test to check its quality. Or even its association on gender issues.

Just that it has women represented. The women in question can be as bad or as good as a character than any other in the work. Or the work itself.

If the test sounds to you like a pretty easy standard to meet, it is. That's the whole point: To shock you that too many loved movies and series fail on this simple test.

[Yendor]

Gods, those action figures look weird.

[Finagle]

Ah, rather sad to see modern-day politics invading a D&D comic. Oh well, I guess it had to happen eventually. As long as the characters don't start quoting Marx and engaging in contrived, inflammatory storylines carefully calculated to score points in contemporary political debates (topics that will be outdated in six months), we'll just have to live with it.

[Ruduen]

After that line, I'm reminded of the Belkar hate/lust chart.

I'm not sure if a bond/murder chart would be a whole lot better.

[Pokonic]

The fact that Low Self-Esteem Haley gets her own figure just kinda sells the whole joke for me.

[Aquillion]

Do I sense some regret over past representation of female characters? Or is it just self deprecating humor?I assume it's a touch of both, given the blushing icon for this thread and the "it seemed like a good idea at the time" bit at the end (which can be taken both in and out of character.)

[Bird]

I´ve been a lurker around here for many years, but i simply HAD to come here and comment after the last comic. It´s amazing how you managed to deal with so many important themes in a single page: (i) homosexuality; (ii) weight/beauty issues ("curvy"); (iii) women that always dreamed to fit in positions of authority; (iv) the stereotype that tells that girls are either sister-like friends or enemies that tell each other gender-oriented offenses (you b****, etc); (v) the "chainmail bikini" stereotype ("bare midriff"). I doubt those are mere coincidences. Congrats!
Plus (vi) mixed-race persons. (Though, leaving aside half-orcs, half-elves and the like, this has come up at least once before with Jiminy.)

Even if it's all self-consciously crammed into one strip, it's nice to see this stuff addressed. A lot of writers wouldn't acknowledge their own deficiencies in the representation of females, as the the Giant does here.

[turkishproverb]

Always fun to see characters talk.


- There must be at least two female characters...
- ... who talk to each other...
- ... about something other than a man.

Some people add that the two characters must be named, though whether in the credits or in dialog alone helps show potential problems with that addition, and it should be remembered that this test does not serve as a gauge sexism, feminism, or really of anything more than exactly what it says it does. Some people tend to misinterpret it.


So...is this a hint at future merchandise?

Edit: The Bechdel Test makes me want to write something horrifyingly, eye-gougingly sexist with a 100% Bechdel Test pass rate for every scene.

I'd like action figures too.



So is Bandanna the first unambiguously gay named character in the comic?

Not quite, and do we know if she's definitely not Bi?

Phil Rodriguez the lawyer

Huh.

[butterbow]

Nice comic. I always admired that the cast was ethnetically diverse from the beginning, and I'm happy to see, that now the diversity in female characters is broadened, too.
But I think that action figure bit isn't rigth, normally you're lucky, when you get even one figure of an female character (At least in a series aimed at an boys'/generals audience - and OOTS does look like it goes more this way.) Dolls (for a girls' series) on the other hand...

[Snails]

Somehow, knowing Bandana's mother is a blonde, make me think if Julio giving her the captain position is not simply heritage.

And yes, I want to buy action figures of OotS as well. Will we have a kickstarter for it?



The Bechdel Test is not a test to see if the artwork is favorable to gender equality. Neither a test to check its quality. Or even its association on gender issues.

Just that it has women represented. The women in question can be as bad or as good as a character than any other in the work. Or the work itself.

If the test sounds to you like a pretty easy standard to meet, it is. That's the whole point: To shock you that too many loved movies and series fail on this simple test.

I am probably annoying you for going with the derail, but I do thank you for the clarification.

So, in a nutshell, the Bechdel Test is purposefully an arguably stupid test, but it is designed to be a stupid test with the express purpose that the bar is so obviously low that it is mind-boggling how little material passes. Thus (more or less) proving that that any non-low bar asking female characters to be treated seriously would fail nearly everything in the popular culture.

[Porthos]

In regards to the title of today's strip, I gotta say, I never meta commentary I didn't like. :smallsmile:

[DaggerPen]

Just as an aside - the Bechdel test is an intentionally low bar. The point of it is to show that it's a really low standard, and most movies still can't pass it. Heck, the example used to pass it was Alien. It's a useful test to make a point, but anyone who thinks it's the be-all end-all of gender representation tests is misusing it.

[Astrella]

Ah, rather sad to see modern-day politics invading a D&D comic. Oh well, I guess it had to happen eventually. As long as the characters don't start quoting Marx and engaging in contrived, inflammatory storylines carefully calculated to score points in contemporary political debates (topics that will be outdated in six months), we'll just have to live with it.

Modern-day politics like what? (also you do realize this is fantasy right?)

[DaggerPen]

Ah, rather sad to see modern-day politics invading a D&D comic. Oh well, I guess it had to happen eventually. As long as the characters don't start quoting Marx and engaging in contrived, inflammatory storylines carefully calculated to score points in contemporary political debates (topics that will be outdated in six months), we'll just have to live with it.

OOTS is a story built largely on parodying, deconstructing and commenting on tropes in fantasy stories. There are a variety of tropes related to gender. If anything, OOTS not poking fun at it would be weird.

[pearl jam]

In regards to the title of today's strip, I gotta say, I never meta commentary I didn't like. :smallsmile:

Nice! :D

this message is too short

[Koo Rehtorb]

Feels a bit forced.

[Porthos]

Ah, rather sad to see modern-day politics invading a D&D comic. Oh well, I guess it had to happen eventually. As long as the characters don't start quoting Marx and engaging in contrived, inflammatory storylines carefully calculated to score points in contemporary political debates (topics that will be outdated in six months), we'll just have to live with it.

Considering what's going on in 5e right now, and Rich's approving comments therein, I'd say things like what happened into today's strip is very appropriate. And waaaaaay past due for DnD as a whole*. :smallsmile:

Really really REALLY hope Lewis's Law doesn't have to get invoked soon, but I'm doubtful. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helen_Lewis_(journalist)#Lewis.27s_law) :smallfrown:

* Not that a lot of DnD tables didn't already address this at various points along the lines. Just commenting on the current news in regards to 5e.

[137beth]

Haley failed a sense motives roll against Bandanda. Bandanda is turning out to be a good character, though:smallsmile:

[Lordchoculla]

New comic is up.

Thanks:-)

Kind regards

[137beth]

Ah, rather sad to see modern-day politics invading a D&D comic. Oh well, I guess it had to happen eventually. As long as the characters don't start quoting Marx and engaging in contrived, inflammatory storylines carefully calculated to score points in contemporary political debates (topics that will be outdated in six months), we'll just have to live with it.

There are no references to real-world politics in the strip, beyond what the reader invents for themselves. (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?158499-OOTS-732-The-Discussion-Thread/page3&p=8832107#post8832107)

[Porthos]

As for the comic proper, I loved the interaction between the Bandana and Haley. Also loved how her character was fleshed out rather quickly.

...

Alright, alright, I also loved the action figures*. Yes, I'm shallow. I admit it. There. Fine. Happy? You are? Good. :smalltongue:

* Incuding the fact that the actual action figures were cheapish knockoffs that didn't really look all that much like Haley. Great, often overlooked touch there. And so so true. :smallamused:

[Amarsir]

This episode brought to you by Tumblr.

Yeah I don't know. There's nothing I dislike about this strip individually, but it feels like Writers' Hand / Very Special Episode. A couple good jokes and character development for Bandanna, both good. But it feels inorganic, like the strip had a job to do besides letting the story play out.

[Saposhiente]

But it feels inorganic, like the strip had a job to do besides letting the story play out.

There's a quote from Rich about how comics should be relevant in the real world; "otherwise, it's just pure escapism." In other words, every strip has a job to do.

[Nibelung]

I am probably annoying you for going with the derail, but I do thank you for the clarification.

So, in a nutshell, the Bechdel Test is purposefully an arguably stupid test, but it is designed to be a stupid test with the express purpose that the bar is so obviously low that it is mind-boggling how little material passes. Thus (more or less proving) that that any non-low bar asking female characters to be treated seriously would fail nearly everything in the popular culture.

To be fair, it was designed to be the setpiece for a punchline in a comic made in 1985 (http://i62.tinypic.com/29c5r2p.jpg). It was never meant to be taken seriously by itself. It is a case of a joke making you thinking about the real world.

That is exactly the reason why the test don't mean much by itself, other than shock value. Heck, current movies (http://bechdeltest.com/) pass on the test about half the time. It is like a trivia you mention to people. Like, "Hey, did you know that Lord of the Rings never had two women talking to each other?"

[CWater]

Heh.. This strip was amusing. :smallamused:

[Porthos]

This episode brought to you by Tumblr.

A-heh. If you think this was even slightly SJW, I think you need to read more Tumblr.

...

Or not, as the case may be.* :smalltongue:

* NOTE: There is a LOT of great stuff on Tumblr. And a lot of very needed commentary. There is also, frankly, a lot of things that prove Sturgeon knew what he was talking about way back when (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sturgeon's_law).** But I think that's about all I can really say without getting too close to board rules, so I'll leave my commentary at that. :smallwink:

** Which, come to think about it, makes it just about like every other communication platform known to humankind. :smallwink:

Yeah I don't know. There's nothing I dislike about this strip individually, but it feels like Writers' Hand / Very Special Episode. A couple good jokes and character development for Bandanna, both good. But it feels inorganic, like the strip had a job to do besides letting the story play out.

Really? What felt forced? I didn't see anything particualrly Very Special Episodeish here at all. If you're referring to the last panel of the comic, Rich has self-deprecating gags/comments like this. ALL. THE. TIME.

Don't make me go trawling through the comic to point them out, coz I'd have to go to sleep eventually. :smalltongue:

[Teapot Salty]

It's been what, a day! Did you get it finished unexpectedly and ludicrously early? And it's even a longer one. Kudos for that Giant.

Little humorous banter, setting character relationship, great set up for later in the comic. :smallbiggrin:

[Socksy]

I don't think that Banana has more level then 10. do Haley might win.

Hehehe, Banana. Reminds me of that one picture which got deleted where someone had swapped Bandana out with a banana in a panel :p


So is Bandanna the first unambiguously gay named character in the comic?

Could be bi or pan, or a weird Tumblr sexuality.


-snip-

Your avatar is adorable!

-

Personally, while I also found the last bit to be really forced, I didn't think it was about feminism in general but about the Giant admitting the sexist jokes were a bad idea and mocking himself and trying to show he's changed. The thing is, I found them just as funny as everything else, and I think him limiting the insults the characters used removed quite a bit of verisimilitude. Other than the forced part at the end, though, I liked it. Bandana and Haley are adorable together!

[Porthos]

Does her action figures bust seem bigger than her stick figures?

Just me?

No, no it isn't just you. I just noticed that myself. I figure it is a subtle swipe at the how some action figures can be, shall we say, not exactly representative of the person in question. I had already noted the Uncanny Valley aspect of the action figure, but that particular little Take That (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/TakeThat), I hadn't noticed until just now.

[nonamearisto]

Seems a bit forced to me, like there was a bit too much put into one page. Otherwise, I'm not complaining here. Action figure bit was funny, too.

Still, first obviously lesbian/bi named character is a pirate? A sympathetic pirate, but still...

[Lissou]

So is Bandanna the first unambiguously gay named character in the comic?

Good to see Haley and Bandana bonding. I enjoyed the action-figures gag (you managed to make them look just fake enough for them to look like action figures. I think that's spot-on, they're not just tiny lifelike versions) and the exposition about the armour change as well as the gnomes... basically the whole page seemed like it was advancing the plot, providing character development, filling gaps from the between-books shift, and it was also pretty funny.
And a complete surprise as I didn't expect a new page to begin with :)

[Kislath]

It never occurred to me that Bandana is female.

[Porthos]

OK, I'm seeing a lot of commentary here about there being 'forced' dialogue in the strip, and I gotta say after re-reading it and re-reading it some more, I just don't see it.

Anywhere.

The only thing that looks even slightly forced is Haley talking about giving leadership advice to Bandana semi-out of the blue. But you know what? I read that has Haley being a Presumptuous PC. That is, not too long ago (for her, at any rate), she went through an experience as being a leader of a party and she hated it. But since she's seen the ropes, she figured she could tell the 'newbie' (who, of course, isn't a newbie at all) what to look out for.

In other words, she's got a good case of Roy Disease (he really can be the poster child of Presumptuous PC in the party at times). :smalltongue:

That it then (sorta) blew up in her face as the NPC told her, "Nah, it's all good" is even MORE Roy like, IMO. :smallwink:

So, yeah, just not seeing it at all. At most, it is showing a bit more of a character facet with Haley. That is, the character facet of Haley caring more about people around her and not just herself (and her immediate family).

[Psyren]

Ah, rather sad to see modern-day politics invading a D&D comic. Oh well, I guess it had to happen eventually. As long as the characters don't start quoting Marx and engaging in contrived, inflammatory storylines carefully calculated to score points in contemporary political debates (topics that will be outdated in six months), we'll just have to live with it.

Heaven forbid a few important social issues should intrude upon the petty escapism, right?

[The Succubus]

Today's strip gave me a much needed case of The Warm Fuzzies. ^_^

[turkishproverb]

Still, first obviously lesbian/bi named character is a pirate? A sympathetic pirate, but still...

I think you need to have a word with Haley's Latent Bisexuality.
(http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0382.html)

[Trurl]

Somehow, knowing Bandana's mother is a blonde, make me think if Julio giving her the captain position is not simply heritage.

Bandana is certainly of darker complexion than Julio. So I'd rather expect the steersman to be her father than Julio.

Besides, do we know her ex?

[nonamearisto]

I think you need to have a word with Haley's Latent Bisexuality.
(http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0382.html)

I forgot about that one. And she's a rogue, albeit a sympathetic one. I guess the rogue and pirate have something to relate to, sorta. Maybe. :smalleek:

[Caractacus]

Nice update. Now I am wondering how long Bandana has to live, given that we now know something more about her... :smalleek:

[Morgan Wick]

I suppose when I said "gay" I meant "LGBTQ" or "actively non-straight".

As long as the characters don't start quoting Marx
"Help, help, I'm being repressed! Come see the violence inherent in the system!"

[pikeamus]

Just as an aside - the Bechdel test is an intentionally low bar. The point of it is to show that it's a really low standard, and most movies still can't pass it. Heck, the example used to pass it was Alien. It's a useful test to make a point, but anyone who thinks it's the be-all end-all of gender representation tests is misusing it.

Actually, according to the best resource we have available on the test, most movies do pass. 56.78% pass all three tests.

http://bechdeltest.com/statistics/

Anycrap, I've got to say I loved this strip. Excellent self-aware humour.

[Lvl45DM!]

Ah, rather sad to see modern-day politics invading a D&D comic. Oh well, I guess it had to happen eventually. As long as the characters don't start quoting Marx and engaging in contrived, inflammatory storylines carefully calculated to score points in contemporary political debates (topics that will be outdated in six months), we'll just have to live with it.

Im with you, I hated it when they were all "free the slaves!". Modern day morality just doesn't fit at all in this hardcore fantasy world, with its magic and swords and coffee machines (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0081.html).

[DaggerPen]

Actually, according to the best resource we have available on the test, most movies do pass. 56.78% pass all three tests.

http://bechdeltest.com/statistics/

Anycrap, I've got to say I loved this strip. Excellent self-aware humour.

Huh, didn't know that. I'm curious if that number was much different when the original strip was written? Good to know we can meander over that low bar half the time, at any rate.


Im with you, I hated it when they were all "free the slaves!". Modern day morality just doesn't fit at all in this hardcore fantasy world, with its magic and swords and coffee machines (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0081.html).

And an internet for you.

[Yendor]

Im with you, I hated it when they were all "free the slaves!". Modern day morality just doesn't fit at all in this hardcore fantasy world, with its magic and swords and coffee machines (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0081.html).

This comic will be dragged kicking and screaming into the nineteenth century whether you like it or not.

[Amarsir]

A-heh. If you think this was even slightly SJW, I think you need to read more Tumblr.Yeah, exaggeration for comedic license. You get the point, and I'm not really trying to push it.


Really? What felt forced? I didn't see anything particualrly Very Special Episodeish here at all. If you're referring to the last panel of the comic, Rich has self-deprecating gags/comments like this. ALL. THE. TIME.
More specifically I think it was the mention of the ex that felt forced. It just didn't feel necessary to give a backstory on the armor. Bandana loaned extra cold weather gear to Haley. Relevant. Fine. But the only reason to specify it came from an ex-girlfriend is to inform us that A) Bandana is single, or B) Bandana is gay. I'm guessing it's not the former, and the latter would be fine if it was plot-relevant or in service of a joke. But at this moment it feels more like something the author wanted to check off.

(For example, remember when Lien said she had sex after prom? It was to help a joke about sacrificing virgins, and it worked. Instead, had the same information come out in a side conversation - say Therkla being frustrated and Lien going "not me, I have lots of sex" - that'd be weird, right? That's all.)

Then you follow that with specific text about being the female lead, and end with fourth-wall joke about female relationships, and the entire strip feels like The Giant was self-conscious about elements of the story thus far and wanted to correct it. Which again is fine if it happens organically, but in this case it felt more like a checklist item to be dealt with.

And I just want to reiterate so no one misunderstands: nothing wrong with anything in Bandanna's backstory nor the fact that she has one. It just to me felt a tad clunky.

[Lvl45DM!]

This comic will be dragged kicking and screaming into the nineteenth century whether you like it or not.


PAYING children to perform life threatening tasks? Harrumph!

[Amarsir]

Regarding the Bechdel test, I actually feel like this violates the spirit of it. They didn't talk about a man, but they did talk about an ex!

[snafu]

Please, please, please don't turn into Sinfest.

[Lathund]

On a completely different topic: I'm guessing Bandana is LG or LN? I'm more inclined towards LG.

[DaggerPen]

On a completely different topic: I'm guessing Bandana is LG or LN? I'm more inclined towards LG.

It's hard to picture a pirate crew member as Lawful - she aspires to leadership, certainly, but she also actively aids and abets a Chaotic Neutral pirate who thinks nothing of bombing catapults on his way back into a city after seducing several heiresses and stealing their stuff. I'm thinking probably Neutral or Chaotic, and Neutral or Good.

[Amarsir]

There's a quote from Rich about how comics should be relevant in the real world; "otherwise, it's just pure escapism." In other words, every strip has a job to do.
Absolutely. But that job is servicing the larger story. When the Star Wars rebels blow up an AT-AT, I don't need the next scene to show them cleaning up the debris because it's important not to litter.

Put whatever messages you want in a story. But do so naturally, not in a way that feels taped on. (As this did, IMHO.)

[Lvl45DM!]

On a completely different topic: I'm guessing Bandana is LG or LN? I'm more inclined towards LG.

Listen to what she said, WHY she wants to be leader.
"Better to be givin' orders than gettin' em"
Doesn't sound Lawful to me. Plus y'know...Pirate. Yar...

[Porthos]

Yeah, exaggeration for comedic license. You get the point, and I'm not really trying to push it.

More specifically I think it was the mention of the ex that felt forced.

Eh, seems perfectly, 100%, natural to me. Just the sort of dropped in comment one would drop in when talking about clothes or other items. I compare it to Elan and Julio chatting about the rapier that Julio was giving Elan. (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0392.html)

Which didn't raise a single comment about being forced, BTW. Not one. :smalltongue:


Please, please, please don't turn into Sinfest.

Yes, because this strip had SO much in common with that comic. :smallconfused: (I mean, for one thing, OOTS is in fact still funny :smalltongue:)

I get exaggeration for effect. But, to mix metaphors slightly, that's a leap even Miko couldn't make successfully. :smalltongue:

[GnomeGninjas]

Still, first obviously lesbian/bi named character is a pirate? A sympathetic pirate, but still...

Is Sympathetic Pirate a common negative misconception about homosexuals? I really don't see the problem.

[Jaycemonde]

Ah, first time I've been in any part of this forum besides the LGBTA+ stuff, the art forum or a couple other ones dealing with aliens and robots. I forgot how lovely some of the people here are.


Ah, rather sad to see modern-day politics invading a D&D comic. Oh well, I guess it had to happen eventually. As long as the characters don't start quoting Marx and engaging in contrived, inflammatory storylines carefully calculated to score points in contemporary political debates (topics that will be outdated in six months), we'll just have to live with it.

I'm a trans girl, in a relationship with another trans girl (which is gay no matter which way you look at the trans bit) and I think Marx was a ****ing idiot and a tryhard who had no grasp on economics. Checkmate.


She could be bi- or pansexual.

Thank.


This episode brought to you by Tumblr.

lul. That's at least partially true. Trust me, I live there.


A-heh. If you think this was even slightly SJW, I think you need to read more Tumblr.

...

Or not, as the case may be.* :smalltongue:

* NOTE: There is a LOT of great stuff on Tumblr. And a lot of very needed commentary. There is also, frankly, a lot of things that prove Sturgeon knew what he was talking about way back when (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sturgeon's_law).** But I think that's about all I can really say without getting too close to board rules, so I'll leave my commentary at that. :smallwink:

** Which, come to think about it, makes it just about like every other communication platform known to humankind. :smallwink:


Really? What felt forced? I didn't see anything particualrly Very Special Episodeish here at all. If you're referring to the last panel of the comic, Rich has self-deprecating gags/comments like this. ALL. THE. TIME.

Don't make me go trawling through the comic to point them out, coz I'd have to go to sleep eventually. :smalltongue:

Yes. Thank. You get it spot on, you nail it onna head, you whip it, whip it good. Thank thank thank. Many goatblessings to you, fair stranger.


Heaven forbid a few important social issues should intrude upon the petty escapism, right?

I know, right? It's not like fictional literature has, y'know, influenced the world in a lot of important ways. Wouldn't want that.


On a completely different topic: I'm guessing Bandana is LG or LN? I'm more inclined towards LG.

She's a pirate.

[snafu]

Yes, because this strip had SO much in common with that comic. :smallconfused: (I mean, for one thing, OOTS is in fact still funny :smalltongue:)

I get exaggeration for effect. But, to mix metaphors slightly, that's a leap even Miko couldn't make successfully. :smalltongue:

Sinfest wasn't always that way. It used to be good. It used to be fun. It used to be entertaining and worth reading. Then the author converted to Feminism, and published a comic repudiating the patriarchal oppression present in his past works.

http://sinfest.net/view.php?date=2012-07-22

Since then it has been the way it is today. And since then I've always had a terrible sense of foreboding whenever any author starts expressing regret or guilt over perceived past sexism: I don't want to lose another great comic!

[turkishproverb]

Actually, according to the best resource we have available on the test, most movies do pass. 56.78% pass all three tests.

http://bechdeltest.com/statistics/

Anycrap, I've got to say I loved this strip. Excellent self-aware humour.

That's just the most voluminous resource. Don't recommend that site, or it's statistics. They're woefully inaccurate. The Ghostbusters (bechdeltest.com/view/376/ghostbusters/) analysis alone, and the fact they never updated it (or, to the best of my knowledge, any of their ratings), illustrates that.

[Lissou]

Regarding the Bechdel test, I actually feel like this violates the spirit of it. They didn't talk about a man, but they did talk about an ex!

So? That's not what the spirit of the test is about. If the two women talk about a son, a father, a male teacher or a male politician or whatever, it fails the test. If it's a daughter, mother, female teacher or female politician, it passes. It's not about whether women are only portrayed as talking about romance. It's about whether females are featured prominently enough that there are enough two, they interact, and they do so for a reason other than to advance the males' plot points. A female ex is just as fine as any other female.


More specifically I think it was the mention of the ex that felt forced. It just didn't feel necessary to give a backstory on the armor.

Would you have felt the same if she had said, say "sister"? It's possible that the Giant just started writing about how the armour came from Bandana. Oh, but they're different body types and readers are nitpicky. Maybe it was someone else's armour that Bandana had. Whose armour could you have with you? Who are you close enough that you'd have some of their clothes in your closet? A partner fits fine.

Not saying this is the reasoning, or anything, but there wasn't necessarily a whole agenda where the giant went "must mention that this character is non-straight right now! Quick, how will I figure out how to wedge it into the story?"

It seemed fine and natural to me and I didn't think it was weird or noteworthy, really, until everyone started commenting on it like it was crazy that a female character may have a female ex.

[Socksy]

I forgot about that one. And she's a rogue, albeit a sympathetic one. I guess the rogue and pirate have something to relate to, sorta. Maybe. :smalleek:

I ship it.


Im with you, I hated it when they were all "free the slaves!". Modern day morality just doesn't fit at all in this hardcore fantasy world, with its magic and swords and coffee machines (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0081.html).

Coffee machine was for the sake of funny. Freeing slaves is hardly a modern issue (at least, not any more than it was an issue centuries ago). Plus there's a difference between anachronistic items and anachronistic views.
Also, the coffee machine thing and slaves thing weren't forced to try to prove a point about how the author is so pro-gay and feminist (although the bit about the ex seemed perfectly fine to me).

EDIT:
I've always had a terrible sense of foreboding whenever any author starts expressing regret or guilt over perceived past sexism: I don't want to lose another great comic!

This, so much this.

-

Also, Haley is curvy? What? Why didn't he show that when he changed the art style instead of just telling us?

[DaggerPen]

Also, Haley is curvy? What? Why didn't he show that when he changed the art style instead of just telling us?

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0531.html

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0790.html

I think there are other references, but I can't remember them.

And Haley is curvier than Bandana, compare the waists side by side.

And again, this is a comic that takes great pleasure in poking fun at tropes. This is the perfect place to poke fun at tropes regarding female character interactions. I don't consider this any more forced than Elan's "start-of-book recap" gag last strip.

Also, don't I know you from around Tumblr?

[Yendor]

It's not about whether women are only portrayed as talking about romance. It's about whether females are featured prominently enough that there are enough two, they interact, and they do so for a reason other than to advance the males' plot points. A female ex is just as fine as any other female.
And besides, one small part of the conversation shouldn't invalidate everything else they talked about.


It seemed fine and natural to me and I didn't think it was weird or noteworthy, really, until everyone started commenting on it like it was crazy that a female character may have a female ex.
I didn't even notice it the first time I read through it.

I'm reminded of a quote I read somewhere, where a writer was asked, "Why do you keep writing strong female characters?" To which the answer was, "Because you keeping asking that question." It shouldn't be controversial that female characters are portrayed as complex people, or that someone just happens to have had a same-sex relationship, yet here we are.

[Socksy]

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0531.html

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0790.html

I think there are other references, but I can't remember them.

And Haley is curvier than Bandana, compare the waists side by side.

And again, this is a comic that takes great pleasure in poking fun at tropes. This is the perfect place to poke fun at tropes regarding female character interactions. I don't consider this any more forced than Elan's "start-of-book recap" gag last strip.

Also, don't I know you from around Tumblr?

Oh, you're right. I thought Celia was just taking a subtle jab/had very thin hips, being a sylph. c:

And I do have a tumblr, and I do follow OotS fans on it (and have a canon URL *so proud*) so that's pretty likely. I don't go on it much any more though.

[Sadsharks]

Ah, rather sad to see modern-day politics invading a D&D comic. Oh well, I guess it had to happen eventually. As long as the characters don't start quoting Marx and engaging in contrived, inflammatory storylines carefully calculated to score points in contemporary political debates (topics that will be outdated in six months), we'll just have to live with it.

You realize gay people and women have always existed right? Even in medieval times. And considering that DnD is a modern game, why shouldn't its politics be modern? This isn't historical fiction.

[The Giant]

More specifically I think it was the mention of the ex that felt forced. It just didn't feel necessary to give a backstory on the armor. Bandana loaned extra cold weather gear to Haley. Relevant. Fine. But the only reason to specify it came from an ex-girlfriend is to inform us that A) Bandana is single, or B) Bandana is gay. I'm guessing it's not the former, and the latter would be fine if it was plot-relevant or in service of a joke. But at this moment it feels more like something the author wanted to check off.

Yes, of course the point of her mentioning that she had an ex-girlfriend is so that you know she is gay. That is part of how including gay people in your comic happens, short of me showing her having sex with another woman. I already waited 38 strips from her first appearance to mention it. How many more strips do I need to wait before including LGBT representation in the comic? 100? 200? How subtle do I have to be to make you, personally, comfortable? This is the first comic that explores Bandana as a character, so this is when it shows up. The alternative is deliberately keeping her "in the closet" to satisfy some arbitrary standard of "narrative smoothness." Not acceptable.

If it seems awkward to you…oh well. Sometimes, correcting a past mistake is awkward. Sometimes, in order to move forward, we have to stop waiting for the moment to be right, or the situation to arise organically, or whatever euphemism you want to put on the idea of maintaining the status quo because it's easier, and just do it. If it's "forced" now, that's only because I failed to include any obviously gay characters for 900+ strips and that is so completely uncool that I need to fix it NOW, not later. If that produces some rough edges, well, I guess we'll all just have to put on our adult pants and learn to live with that one solitary flaw in this otherwise pristine work of art* for the sake of inclusion.


Absolutely. But that job is servicing the larger story.

No. Stories exist primarily for the purpose of delivering messages to one another, whether about human nature, or the world around us, or what have you. They are how humans have communicated life lessons since the dawn of language, and probably before. Whether or not that is why you read them, that is definitely why people write them. If the story is incapable of delivering the message that the author is trying to send about how they see the world, then that is a failure of the story, and the story needs to change. The author should not leave out his or her message so as not to disrupt the delicate story. That's the cart leading the horse.

*This is sarcastic. No one quote me saying that I think OOTS is a pristine work of art. It is not.

[t209]

So Ex as in ex-spouse or ex-roommate.
First OOTS homosexual characters until we find out V's gender.
or a transexual or a cross dressing man.

[Themrys]

You realize gay people and women have always existed right? Even in medieval times. And considering that DnD is a modern game, why shouldn't its politics be modern? This isn't historical fiction.

This.

If you don't want modern politics in fantasy comics, then just imagine how horrible it is for women (and gay people, and so on) to have their REAL oppression portrayed in almost every piece of fantasy fiction EVER.
Sexism IS POLITICAL, and as such, it shouldn't be in fantasy comics, if fantasy comics are to not contain real-life political topics.

I'd prefer no sexism at all in comics, because, you know, I want to actually HAVE FUN when I read comics. Not be reminded of the bad things in my real life, you know?

But as things are, I'm grateful if a fantasy author at least realizes that he made mistakes in the past and that bikini armour is stupid.

[Jaycemonde]

I'm just gonna take these in order.


So Ex as in ex-spouse or ex-roommate.
Obviously. What else would ex mean? Ex-captain? Ex-patriate?

First OOTS homosexual characters until we find out V's gender.
Actually, no. There was a guard who was gay like four hundred strips ago, and that's only that we know about.

or a transexual or a cross dressing man.
You're supposed to put two s's in there, bub. Besides, if Bandanna were a trans woman, she'd still be gay. Not magically straight. She says she's a woman, she's a woman. Bing bang boom. Conversely, if Bandanna were a cross-dressing man, Bandanna wouldn't be using female pronouns.

gg, no re.

[Socksy]

If you don't want modern politics in fantasy comics, then just imagine how horrible it is for women (and gay people, and so on) to have their REAL oppression portrayed in almost every piece of fantasy fiction EVER.
Sexism IS POLITICAL, and as such, it shouldn't be in fantasy comics, if fantasy comics are to not contain real-life political topics.

I'd prefer no sexism at all in comics, because, you know, I want to actually HAVE FUN when I read comics. Not be reminded of the bad things in my real life, you know?

But as things are, I'm grateful if a fantasy author at least realizes that he made mistakes in the past and that bikini armour is stupid.

Are you saying all women are oppressed? In fact, are you even saying women in the earlier strips are oppressed (for being women rather than for being, say, a low-level commoner)? If you're oppressed, then I feel sorry for you, but no, it's not that big of a problem, at least not in first-world countries.

Plus, have we EVER seen a character in bikini armour? Haley had leather armour showing her midriff. Leather armour. It's MEANT to have a low AC bonus on it compared to other stuff. There aren't any female characters in medium or heavy armour which shows off... well, ANYTHING, are there (in this series)?

EDIT: @Jaycemonde, I think they were referring to V being a transsexual, not Bandana

[DaggerPen]

I'm just gonna take these in order.


Obviously. What else would ex mean? Ex-captain? Ex-patriate?

Actually, no. There was a guard who was gay like four hundred strips ago, and that's only that we know about.

You're supposed to put two s's in there, bub. Besides, if Bandanna were a trans woman, she'd still be gay. Not magically straight. She says she's a woman, she's a woman. Bing bang boom. Conversely, if Bandanna were a cross-dressing man, Bandanna wouldn't be using female pronouns.

gg, no re.

+1 to this.

When it comes to tallying up queer representation in-comic, I go back and forth on whether to include Haley. We get references to her latent bisexuality and her having kissed girls, but we don't really see much of it outside the few occasional references, but since she's in a committed relationship how much could we see? As a bisexual woman, I'm leery of writing off a bisexual character for being in a committed relationship with a man, but a casual "Haley's latent bisexuality" and a cryptogram reference to kissing some girls isn't a whole lot as making Haley's bisexuality clear goes. She doesn't need to scream it from the rooftops, but if it's something you can easily miss during a first time readthrough it's somewhat lacking. So yeah.

(Also, I believe Haleo and Julelan reveals a long-running gag character as gay, but until that's revealed in-strip it's another wobbly case.)

[JSSheridan]

Thanks Giant!

Though I will not be buying an OotS doll.

:smalltongue:

[snafu]

If we are doing action figures, can I put in a pre-order for a Darth V?

[Rodin]

Plus, have we EVER seen a character in bikini armour? Haley had leather armour showing her midriff. Leather armour. It's MEANT to have a low AC bonus on it compared to other stuff. There aren't any female characters in medium or heavy armour which shows off... well, ANYTHING, are there (in this series)?



Sabine goes into combat in a bikini. Then again, she is a literal incarnation of illicit sex. We're lucky she's wearing that much.

Everybody else tends to dress pretty appropriately.

[Storm_Of_Snow]

First OOTS homosexual characters until we find out V's gender.

And Inkyrius' as well.

Actually, aside from the Haleo and Julelan reference, the Prison Guard in Cliffport (strip #387) and possibly Haley, there's also been the two Sapphire Guard paladins from the additional strips around New Year in War and XPs.

So no, Bandana's not the first - and not even the first to appear in the on-line version.

[Khay]

Bonus points for having Haley specify "for rogue-types like us" just to make it even clearer this isn't an example of that "women in positions of authority are naturally a poor fit" trope. I also loved those cheesy action figures. :smallbiggrin: Resistance Leader Haley Starshine™ looks seriously badass in the new art style.

I feel I should mention that War and XPs has two female paladins who are dating each other. It starts out as an excuse in 313a (to get out of having to eat dinner with Miko - they claim to be a new couple and to really need some alone time) but they seem to have decided to just roll with it in 314a. Only one of them gets a name, Yunji. Miko of all people says "May the Twelve Gods bless your union", and V "fail[s] to see anything out of the ordinary", so that's nice to see, too. Though they're still throwaway characters who only show up in bonus strips.

[Jaycemonde]

EDIT: @Jaycemonde, I think they were referring to V being a transsexual, not Bandana

Either way, being transsexual doesn't magically make you gay or not based on whatever your "starting point" was.


I feel I should mention that War and XPs has two female paladins who are dating each other. It starts out as an excuse in 313a (to get out of having to eat dinner with Miko - they claim to be a new couple and really need some alone time) but they seem to have decided to just roll with it in 314a. Only one of them gets a name, Yunji. Miko of all people says "May the Twelve Gods bless your union", and V "fail[s] to see anything out of the ordinary", so that's nice to see, too. Though they're still throwaway characters who only show up in bonus strips.

Yeah, The Giant has always come off as incorporating his LGBTA+ characters in the Right Way--in other words, they exist, no excess attention is drawn to them (which might, as a matter of fact, be why people are only just noticing) and in general nobody makes a big deal about it in the comic. It's like the way Gearbox pulled it off in Borderlands 2. Axton (playable character) off-handedly remarks that he spends all his money on "guns and ladies...and sometimes dudes." Sir Hammerlock mentions he has an old boyfriend who hunted stalkers. Moxxi specifically flirts with Maya. Gaige flirts with Maya too, actually. Hell, it's even implied that the Big Bad of the game is bi, based on things that some of the male civilians say. And the Eastern European-sounding tourist lady asking if Moxxi's said anything about her. Then you've got the gay doctor explaining that she can't experiment on the two gay guys in the Evil Laboratory because one of them has the skull-shivers (not that that stops Handsome Jack from forcing her to do it anyway). Hell, even when it comes to gender, that game did things rite. The guards refer to you as Sir-slash-Ma'am, several people mention how completely irrelevant sex is, and the only thing that could really be taken as transphobic (and this is very borderline) is a quip by Handsome Jack (the Big Bad, as previously stated) that he doesn't know whether to refer to someone as a lady or not because she has a huge scar that, as he puts it, makes her look like she "headbutted a belt sander". The Giant is doing fine, honestly.

[t209]

You're supposed to put two s's in there, bub. Besides, if Bandanna were a trans woman, she'd still be gay. Not magically straight. She says she's a woman, she's a woman. Bing bang boom. Conversely, if Bandanna were a cross-dressing man, Bandanna wouldn't be using female pronouns.
I mean her "ex" might be either a transexual or a cross dressing man.
I think the latter might be an idea from WoW RP servers.

[Coidzor]

I'm not sure if there's a story here or if magic armor is just that much more common and cheaper in the OotS universe that it would be the sort of thing to just leave in a lover's closet in the first place...

Well, OK, there's probably a story here so it's more if there's a story here or there's a story here and it's more ubiquitous than I recall it being implied to be before.


I mean her "ex" might be either a transexual or a cross dressing man.
I think the latter might be an idea from WoW RP servers.

"She was curvy," would preclude the crossdressing man idea. :smalltongue:

And considering the setting and the sex changing magics already demonstrated, transsexuality probably isn't all that relevant here for filling out armor for a curvy woman. Not running around in magic armor, anyway. It would have even less to do with Bandana's sexual orientation.

[Jaycemonde]

I mean her "ex" might be either a transexual or a cross dressing man.
I think the latter might be an idea from WoW RP servers.

Well, being trans is still completely irrelevant to whether someone is gay or not. In fact, I'd say it's even more irrelevant now that I know you're talking about someone who isn't even in the strip.

And...cross-dressing guys are an idea from WoW? How does that even work?

[Jaxzan Proditor]

In regards to the title of today's strip, I gotta say, I never meta commentary I didn't like. :smallsmile:
*clap clap clap*

OK, I'm seeing a lot of commentary here about there being 'forced' dialogue in the strip, and I gotta say after re-reading it and re-reading it some more, I just don't see it.

Anywhere.

The only thing that looks even slightly forced is Haley talking about giving leadership advice to Bandana semi-out of the blue. But you know what? I read that has Haley being a Presumptuous PC. That is, not too long ago (for her, at any rate), she went through an experience as being a leader of a party and she hated it. But since she's seen the ropes, she figured she could tell the 'newbie' (who, of course, isn't a newbie at all) what to look out for.

In other words, she's got a good case of Roy Disease (he really can be the poster child of Presumptuous PC in the party at times). :smalltongue:

That it then (sorta) blew up in her face as the NPC told her, "Nah, it's all good" is even MORE Roy like, IMO. :smallwink:

So, yeah, just not seeing it at all. At most, it is showing a bit more of a character facet with Haley. That is, the character facet of Haley caring more about people around her and not just herself (and her immediate family).
Darn it Porthos, quit ninjaing me! :smalltongue:

Im with you, I hated it when they were all "free the slaves!". Modern day morality just doesn't fit at all in this hardcore fantasy world, with its magic and swords and coffee machines (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0081.html).
You win this thread.


Anyways, to talk about the strip itself, I loved it. I love how Rich seems to be apologizing for his past portrayals of some characters in the comic, I love how Haley assumes that Rogues naturally aren't good at leadership, only to have Bandana claim that she loves it. I love the little detail about how Bandana's ex was curvy (hinting pretty much only one thing), and finally I love the action figures. Thank you, Mr. Burlew.

[Xzeno]

As someone who has been particularly critical of OotS's portrayal of gender in the past, in contrast to a fairly solid take on race, I just wanted to drop by to give a curt nod of approval while keeping my arms crossed over my chest.

*nods curtly with approval*

[Kalmageddon]

Yes, of course the point of her mentioning that she had an ex-girlfriend is so that you know she is gay. That is part of how including gay people in your comic happens, short of me showing her having sex with another woman. I already waited 38 strips from her first appearance to mention it. How many more strips do I need to wait before including LGBT representation in the comic? 100? 200? How subtle do I have to be to make you, personally, comfortable? This is the first comic that explores Bandana as a character, so this is when it shows up. The alternative is deliberately keeping her "in the closet" to satisfy some arbitrary standard of "narrative smoothness." Not acceptable.

If it seems awkward to you…oh well. Sometimes, correcting a past mistake is awkward. Sometimes, in order to move forward, we have to stop waiting for the moment to be right, or the situation to arise organically, or whatever euphemism you want to put on the idea of maintaining the status quo because it's easier, and just do it. If it's "forced" now, that's only because I failed to include any obviously gay characters for 900+ strips and that is so completely uncool that I need to fix it NOW, not later. If that produces some rough edges, well, I guess we'll all just have to put on our adult pants and learn to live with that one solitary flaw in this otherwise pristine work of art* for the sake of inclusion.



No. Stories exist primarily for the purpose of delivering messages to one another, whether about human nature, or the world around us, or what have you. They are how humans have communicated life lessons since the dawn of language, and probably before. Whether or not that is why you read them, that is definitely why people write them. If the story is incapable of delivering the message that the author is trying to send about how they see the world, then that is a failure of the story, and the story needs to change. The author should not leave out his or her message so as not to disrupt the delicate story. That's the cart leading the horse.

*This is sarcastic. No one quote me saying that I think OOTS is a pristine work of art. It is not.

Between this and some of your previous statements, I have to ask: is there something inherently wrong with escapism? By being entratained by a story that might give you something emotionally while not being directly tied to real life issues?

[Trurl]

again: Have we seen her ex? I would suppose we haven't, given that Bandana has probably spent most of her time on board, and I cannot think of anyone referring to past extensive airship travel.

[The Giant]

Between this and some of your previous statements, I have to ask: is there something inherently wrong with escapism? By being entratained by a story that might give you something emotionally while not being directly tied to real life issues?

If a story gives you something emotionally, then it probably is tied to a real-life issue—the issue of how we process our emotions while making our way through the complex world in which we live. Not all messages need to be externally focused.

If a story fails to even give you that much, then it's porn. Or fanfiction. Or both, probably. Either way, I have no time for it.

[Coidzor]

again: Have we seen her ex? I would suppose we haven't, given that Bandana has probably spent most of her time on board, and I cannot think of anyone referring to past extensive airship travel.

Probably not. While the ex may have been a member of the crew at one point, as presented, it is quite unlikely that the ex is still a member of the crew.


Between this and some of your previous statements, I have to ask: is there something inherently wrong with escapism? By being entratained by a story that might give you something emotionally while not being directly tied to real life issues?

Depends, partially, upon what one is escaping into/from and why, no?

[oppyu]

Woot, very happy with this strip. We have a gay character, we have development for the gay character, we have two women getting together to have a friendly talk about plot relevant and character beat stuff, we have a lampshade/joke/casual 'I see what I did there and it wasn't great, my bad' on topics like midriff!Haley and slutshaming!Haley, and we get a comment thread which is sure to be interesting until it's inevitably locked. Good times.

[Lissou]

Between this and some of your previous statements, I have to ask: is there something inherently wrong with escapism? By being entertained by a story that might give you something emotionally while not being directly tied to real life issues?

I can't answer for anyone but myself. But it seems to me we draw emotions from real-life comparison. We relate with the characters because of the way they are similar to us or people we know. Including gay characters in the comic means that more readers have someone to relate to, among other things.

I can't think of any instance of a piece of art that drew a strong emotional reaction from me that wasn't linked to the way it would have affected me or people I know had it happened in real life.

Yes, we can project our feelings onto people who don't match up. I can relate with a male character, for instance. But I would notice and feel excluded if there were absolutely no female characters whatsoever. It would feel weird. It would take me out of it. If it wasn't explained somehow, it would seem to be weak storytelling. I can see how the same could be said for LGBT characters. For all we know, many of the characters were LGBT, but it wasn't stated clearly and as a result they were invisible, while we have plenty of examples of opposite-sex relationships. This might just be a small detail to some people (as I said, I didn't pay much attention to it to begin with) but for some people it might make the whole story easier to feel emotions about because suddenly it's more real, and all the emotions they can experience in real life can be channeled through the story.

I definitely know I enjoy the story immensely more due to the female characters being varied and relevant to the story. I don't see why it shouldn't be the same for other aspects as well.

[Ron Miel]

If it's "forced" now, that's only because I failed to include any obviously gay characters for 900+ strips and that is so completely uncool that I need to fix it NOW, not later.

Apart from Elan's experiments at band camp, and Nale's experiments with Sabine's shapeshifting, and Haley kissing a girl (more than) once, and her latent bisexuality persona, and the Cliffport cop, and Phil the lawyer, and plausibly V, and maybe Belkar's ambiguous attraction to V, that is.

[pikeamus]

That's just the most voluminous resource. Don't recommend that site, or it's statistics. They're woefully inaccurate. The Ghostbusters (bechdeltest.com/view/376/ghostbusters/) analysis alone, and the fact they never updated it (or, to the best of my knowledge, any of their ratings), illustrates that.

It's still the best resource available for making claims about the frequency with which films pass or fail. I agree that the numbers deserve whacking great error bars, but it is at least an indicator that saying "most fail" is unsupported and the reverse (most pass) is weakly supported.

Ratings are updated, it's happened on a number of films I've discussed on the site. It's not very consistent though, as to whether or not it happens. Whether any given film passes or fails is rather subjective anyway, witness the disagreement in the discussion thread over The Winter Soldier as an example, which makes it even worse, but that's unavoidable really.

[oppyu]

I was going to do a point-by-point rebuttal, but it seems kind of pointless when you're challenging the author on whether or not any of his characters have been obviously gay. Word of God doesn't win everytime, but I think it'd win here.

[Wizzardman2]

Thanks, Giant!

Excellent as always.

[The Giant]

Apart from Elan's experiments at band camp, and Nale's experiments with Sabine's shapeshifting, and Haley kissing a girl (more than) once, and her latent bisexuality persona, and the Cliffport cop, and Phil the lawyer, and plausibly V, and maybe Belkar's ambiguous attraction to V, that is.

All of that falls under either "non-obvious" or "non-characters," or both.

[CoffeeIncluded]

Seriously? This is controversial? I think it's a welcome change and a nice way to publicly declare what he's been more-privately acknowledging in various threads on the subject for the past few months. Go back and read some of the really early comics and you'll notice all the cheap shots and gags at Haley and her sexuality, or jokes about girls in general (see the trap searching wardrobe malfunction, or that gag with the orbs). A few are ok, and some are funny, but there are just so many. And while there are gags referring to men, there aren't nearly as many and those are more character based (for example, Elan's "Woo! I'm naked! You can't see me!" gag is more because he's an idiot than anything else). I'm happy to see the Giant acknowledge that this is not okay.

As for Bandana being gay, this was my reaction: "Huh? Oh, neat. Carry on." And I didn't even notice the mixed-race thing. This kind of thing shouldn't matter, and yet apparently it does, which makes talking about it even more important. Because there are gay and other non-cisgendered non-heterosexual people in real life, and this should be the same in DnD. This was explicitly acknowledged in the 5e rules (finally!), and heck I'm playing a gay mixed-race character right now. It really shouldn't be so unusual. And frankly I thought the casual admission was perfectly fine--I think we just expect there to be a bit of lead up or trepidation in our world, which again says a lot about our world.

Finally, about the offensively charged comments, sadly girls do that. I feel bad about this but I've slut-shamed one girl I really really can't stand (I try to justify it to myself by saying that she deserves the epithet by sleeping with a different guy every week, more importantly mocking me for not doing the same which is another example of offensively-charged comments, and most importantly considering sleeping with a guy more important than getting a blind drunk girl she called a friend alone in a fraternity home safely). And while I justify it to myself that's no excuse. I shouldn't have called her a slut and I shouldn't call her a slut anymore. And I'm not going to.

[Hoshi_no_senshi]

Im with you, I hated it when they were all "free the slaves!". Modern day morality just doesn't fit at all in this hardcore fantasy world, with its magic and swords and coffee machines (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0081.html).

Actually I had to read this sort of comments to understand what the point about modern politics was about. I was a bit surprised of knowing that Bandana's ex was a she, but not too much, it is in the statistics of the large number of characters in this strip. And I see very little "politics" in this, there is no reference to specific legal rights they claim, and I suspect there are very little legal rights in a pirate's relationship.

In my view this is just building up elments of a character's backstory. Now we know that Bandana is single, is gay (or bisexual), and is sympathetic with Haley. This could open several plot lines, character weakness and points of strength, possible plans to solve difficult situations.... And of course comic situations (difficult, due to the sensitivity to those themes of several people around, but still possible).

Exactly, to make some comparisons, when we knew about Julio's incredible charisma with women. Or fondness of Blackwing for baubles. Or a cat appeared on Lord Shojo lap.

[Benthesquid]

Actually I had to read this sort of comments to understand what the point about modern politics was about. I was a bit surprised of knowing that Bandana's ex was a she, but not too much, it is in the statistics of the large number of characters in this strip. And I see very little "politics" in this, there is no reference to specific legal rights they claim, and I suspect there are very little legal rights in a pirate's relationship.


On a tangent, this makes me wonder if the Mechane has a Pirate's Code they follow. I mean, probably to some degree (to sort out division of spoils and all), but I wonder how detailed it would be.

[Anarion]

Huh, this is not what I was expecting the discussion to be about. I was planning to just pop in and make a snide comment about how Haley is spending WAY too much time with Elan, but the action figure thing should happen anyway.

[The Troubadour]

I can't answer for anyone but myself. But it seems to me we draw emotions from real-life comparison. We relate with the characters because of the way they are similar to us or people we know.

Or people we would like to be - even when we actually wouldn't like to be them in the real world.
Mind you, the Giant's definition of the purpose of storytelling is still too simplistic, but in this regard, it makes sense.

Out of curiosity, to what OotS characters, specifically, can the last two panels refer? As of this moment, I can only think of Haley and Crystal.


If you're oppressed, then I feel sorry for you, but no, it's not that big of a problem, at least not in first-world countries.

Sexism is very insidious, it takes many forms, not just the obvious ones. Consider how often a woman had nude pictures of her leaked out by an ex-boyfriend, and was then treated like the person in the wrong in that situation - as if the crime there was that a woman allowed nude pictures of herself to be taken, instead of the massive violation of trust and privacy on the part of her ex. That's just one example of the myriad ways in which sexism works, and it's only one of the most obvious ones.

[ratfox]

I'm remembering right now two instances in my memories of a woman in a majorly-male group trashing another woman because of how she dressed… And also a girl I knew claiming that two girls cannot ever be really friends, because of competition for boyfriends.

But now that I think of it, those are fairly isolated events we should not construe as a general rule… :smallsigh:

[Rack]

OOTS#959. Saying the plot out loud.

[HandofShadows]

Actrion figures? :smallamused:

[Peelee]

There's a quote from Rich about how comics should be relevant in the real world; "otherwise, it's just pure escapism." In other words, every strip has a job to do.

There's nothing inherently wrong with escapism, though. That's why I read OotS. That's why I read my Star Wars novels and play KotOR and Kerbal Space Program and D&D. I'm in it for the escapism, not because I have a terrible life ir a boring life or any melancholy, but they let me in on a world where things normally impossible are possible. It's fun.

If The Giant doesn't want to write like that, that's his right, and there's nothing wrong with that either. He's a great author and able to balance the two quite well. I'd just like to see that quote not be bandied around as if escapism was a four-letter word, is all.

[Czhorat]

This is why I like Order of the Stick and, as I said in my blog post on the matter, why I keep coming back after 10 years.

The Giant has one thing absolutely right: Stories mean something. Literature is one way in which we communicate broader ideas to eachother; even something written as "simple escapism" has an inherent message (this is why I've stopped reading superhero stories and swords-and-sorcery style fantasy; too much of it has a message glorifying power and violence).

As much as we love gaming, there is much in it which is deeply problematic: casual attitudes towards violence, implied racism, implied sexism. That OoTS takes these issues on is to its credit.

On Bandanda's sexuality feeling "forced", I can't help but see that as an aspect of our heteronormative society; had Bandanda been giving a spare suit of plate to Roy and mentioned her (presumed male) ex having left it behind, nobody would have batted an eye. We've come to see "straight" as a default and view anything else as a distraction. This is the problem that inclusion of more LGBT characters can correct.

[Kish]

Out of curiosity, to what OotS characters, specifically, can the last two panels refer? As of this moment, I can only think of Haley and Crystal.
Haley and Sabine; Haley and Tsukiko.

[Czhorat]

Plus, have we EVER seen a character in bikini armour? Haley had leather armour showing her midriff. Leather armour. It's MEANT to have a low AC bonus on it compared to other stuff. There aren't any female characters in medium or heavy armour which shows off... well, ANYTHING, are there (in this series)?


See this strip: http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0675.html

Haley's leather armor was defined as "not serious armor" but fetishwear giving AC bonuses.

[Gwynfrid]

I'm reminded of a quote I read somewhere, where a writer was asked, "Why do you keep writing strong female characters?" To which the answer was, "Because you keeping asking that question." It shouldn't be controversial that female characters are portrayed as complex people, or that someone just happens to have had a same-sex relationship, yet here we are.

Right.

The Giant has been commenting on inclusion in works of fiction and the reasons he writes OOTS for a very long time, and I completely agree with him on all counts. Still, this comic felt a bit heavy-handed to me, especially the apology to readers for past gendered insults. But the reason it feels that way is because of that pre-existing debate between the Giant and some readers. We knew from that debate that a number of checkboxes had to be ticked off. So, when they get ticked off, it's no surprise, even if it's done in a nice and unexpected way (and it is). So it feels a bit on the heavy side.

Hopefully, one day the social and political debate about inclusion will have died down because inclusion has become a matter of course, then all of this will fell completely natural.

[Kish]

Also...yeah. I am pretty damn sure that when deciding that leather armor would have a lower armor class than plate armor, no one completed the thought with, "because the plate armor is actually armor while the leather armor is a midriff-baring number only euphemistically termed 'armor'."

[Murk]

About escapism: Yay, escapism. I like it. Nothin' wrong with that.
About homosexual characters: Yay, homosexuality. Nothin' wrong with that.
About people being homosexual because "a story needs to have at least one homosexual character": hm, not too sure about that. I like the intention, but not quite the execution.
About stories having meaning and societal impact: OK. Guess I can't complain about that. I would like to, though.

About the comic: Yay, comic. I like it.

[Socksy]

Sexism is very insidious, it takes many forms, not just the obvious ones. Consider how often a woman had nude pictures of her leaked out by an ex-boyfriend, and was then treated like the person in the wrong in that situation - as if the crime there was that a woman allowed nude pictures of herself to be taken, instead of the massive violation of trust and privacy on the part of her ex. That's just one example of the myriad ways in which sexism works, and it's only one of the most obvious ones.

You mean like a guy telling a girl how sexism works? :smallconfused::smalltongue:


See this strip: http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0675.html

Haley's leather armor was defined as "not serious armor" but fetishwear giving AC bonuses.

He was clearly referring to her boobs, which she CHOSE to flaunt because she was sick of being addressed as 'young man'.

Also, google "men in leather armour". A lot of it is a lot more revealing than what Haley wore.

[Keltest]

Also...yeah. I am pretty damn sure that when deciding that leather armor would have a lower armor class than plate armor, no one completed the thought with, "because the plate armor is actually armor while the leather armor is a midriff-baring number only euphemistically termed 'armor'."

If the artwork in the various D&D handbooks are anything to judge by, I would imagine their thoughts were pretty much the opposite of that.

Im just waiting for something in 5th edition that lets female characters add their charisma bonus to their AC when wearing skimpy armor.

[jidasfire]

Yeah, this strip is making a point, but as points go, it's not particularly overstated. Ultimately, it's just letting us learn more about a new character and establishing a relationship between them and one of our main cast, while being silly and self-aware as the strip often is. There's no sense that Rich is saying "THIS IS WHAT YOU MUST ALL BELIEVE OR YOU ARE EVIL" here. If the comic abandoned its story entirely to make a point, or again, was judging the readers, that would be one thing, but it does neither of those.

[snafu]

See this strip: http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0675.html

Haley's leather armor was defined as "not serious armor" but fetishwear giving AC bonuses.

Very effective AC bonuses at that. A headband can be more effective than plate armour, we're told.

If, then, Haley's choice of outfit provides adequate protection despite exposing a good deal of skin, why criticise her choice retrospectively? It's not as if she's compromising her safety by wearing it. Shall we criticise her for what she once said to that airborne skank _and_ shame her for her fashion choices? Do we demand that she cover up to spare our blushes, despite gaining no better armour class from doing so?

[Czhorat]

Very effective AC bonuses at that. A headband can be more effective than plate armour, we're told.

If, then, Haley's choice of outfit provides adequate protection despite exposing a good deal of skin, why criticise her choice retrospectively? It's not as if she's compromising her safety by wearing it. Shall we criticise her for what she once said to that airborne skank _and_ shame her for her fashion choices? Do we demand that she cover up to spare our blushes, despite gaining no better armour class from doing so?

Haley isn't a person; she's a character created by Rich Burlew. Burlew made the choice to depict women's armor as sexy rather than functional looking, giving him an excuse to "sex up" the depictions of female characters while paying lip-service to their actual role as adventurers. It's an attempt to have it both ways on which he is now commenting.

I think he's learned and grown over the years, perhaps as a person as well as an artist.

[Composer99]

My response if there are OOTS action figures:

Shut up and take my money!

[Lathund]

Listen to what she said, WHY she wants to be leader.
"Better to be givin' orders than gettin' em"
Doesn't sound Lawful to me. Plus y'know...Pirate. Yar...

Amongst my own friends, I always felt the need to explain that lawful types don't ways need to be the leaders; they can also be followers. So in that light, most of the people I know would use that quote to say that she's lawful. Myself, I find it hard to picture an effective chaotic leader.

[Composer99]

Also, great comic, Giant, loved the character development for Bandana and Haley, and the sly self-deprecation at the end.

[Kish]

Also, google "men in leather armour". A lot of it is a lot more revealing than what Haley wore.
*does so*

Okay, that's not armor...
...that covers his entire body...
...that looks like a piece someone might have actually worn; it's also completely waist-to-neckline covering...
...covers his entire body again...
...and again...
...that's some kind of plant...
...why did I get a picture of a woman wearing only ribbons with this search?...
...another full-body-covering one...
...that woman appears to be naked but is turned sideways...
...that one has her hair artfully draped to avoid showing too much while still suggesting nakedness...
...oh, hey, it's the cover of the Wonderful Wizard of Oz!...
...there's a romance novel cover! I see a man's bare chest, but he's not wearing leather armor...

Total number of men in armor that bares the midriff or more: 0.
Total number of pieces of armor that look like "sexy" wear rather than actually looking like armor: 0.
Total number of very-close-to-naked-women who came up in that search for some reason: 3.

Whatever that was supposed to prove, it didn't. And your claim that leather armor having huge holes in it, like baring the midriff, is expected and why it has a lower AC than heavy armor remains a ridiculous one.

[oppyu]

Are we debating whether or not women in fantasy fiction are generally more scantily clad than men? Because the answer is yes. Are we debating whether or not women in OOTS are generally more scantily clad than men? Because once again, it's yes.

Also, the 'men in leather armour' google search was disappointing. Taking out the 'armour' part didn't help much either.

[Peelee]

Taking out the 'armour' part didn't help much either.

You're a braver soul than I.

[Socksy]

Haley isn't a person; she's a character created by Rich Burlew. Burlew made the choice to depict women's armor as sexy rather than functional looking, giving him an excuse to "sex up" the depictions of female characters while paying lip-service to their actual role as adventurers. It's an attempt to have it both ways on which he is now commenting.

I think he's learned and grown over the years, perhaps as a person as well as an artist.

So apparently all clothing choices of female characters depict the author's views on women? Are you telling me if women are scantily-clad, it's not because it's in-character? :smallyuk:


*does so*

Total number of men in armor that bares the midriff or more: 0.
Total number of pieces of armor that look like "sexy" wear rather than actually looking like armor: 0.
Total number of very-close-to-naked-women who came up in that search for some reason: 3.


Well, I don't know what you googled.

Out of the first dozen pictures:
Total number of men in armour (or male mannequins, there are a lot of mannequins) that bares the midriff or more: 4
Total number of pieces of armour that look like "sexy" wear rather than actually looking like armour: 2
Total number of very-close-to-naked-women who came up in that search for some reason: 0

Have a screenshot (http://imgur.com/IcDxxXi) to prove it.

[Keltest]

So apparently all clothing choices of female characters depict the author's views on women? Are you telling me if women are scantily-clad, it's not because it's in-character? :smallyuk:



Well, I don't know what you googled.

Out of the first dozen pictures:
Total number of men in armour (or male mannequins, there are a lot of mannequins) that bares the midriff or more: 4
Total number of pieces of armour that look like "sexy" wear rather than actually looking like armour: 2
Total number of very-close-to-naked-women who came up in that search for some reason: 0

Have a screenshot (http://imgur.com/IcDxxXi) to prove it.

I see a couple of gladiator-type pieces which, while cool looking, weren't actually designed to be armor. Leather jackets are more armor than gladiator wear. Everything else is either full (or parts of) armor, or clothes.

[Socksy]

I see a couple of gladiator-type pieces which, while cool looking, weren't actually designed to be armor. Leather jackets are more armor than gladiator wear. Everything else is either full (or parts of) armor, or clothes.

My original point was that women in the OOTS series do not and have never worn ridiculously impractical armour. As someone else mentioned, obviously Sabine is an exception. I showed that there were male armours with a LOT less fabric to them than Haley's old outfit.

I still want to know what Kish googled, and hopefully get a screenshot of it, if it isn't too much trouble, because I can't see why googling the same thing multiple times would get different results :smallconfused::smallyuk:

[elros]

It took me a while to realize that Bandana was a female character. Really, the gender of most of the supporting characters could be male or female without changing the story (in my opinion).

[Czhorat]

So apparently all clothing choices of female characters depict the author's views on women? Are you telling me if women are scantily-clad, it's not because it's in-character? :smallyuk:



I'm saying that the fantasy-world mechanic (scanty armor is protection for female) and the character's personality (and, therefore, choices) are entirely the author's decision.


I still want to know what Kish googled, and hopefully get a screenshot of it, if it isn't too much trouble, because I can't see why googling the same thing multiple times would get different results :smallconfused::smallyuk:

Google results are personalized; your Google results and mine will be different based on whatever information Google has on our history and demographics.

[Lathund]

We've come to see "straight" as a default and view anything else as a distraction.

Well... that's probably because straight *is* nature's default. Straight gets you babies. Straight gets your genes passed on to new generations. Gay etc. happens throughout nature, but it's less than useful if you want offspring.

[Czhorat]

Well... that's probably because straight *is* nature's default. Straight gets you babies. Straight gets your genes passed on to new generations. Gay etc. happens throughout nature, but it's less than useful if you want offspring.

As we don't know if Bandana has a baby, "straight gets you babies" is irrelevant, as is anything about "nature's default". Some people are straight. Some aren't. If a characters orientation doesn't matter then it is as legitimate for them to be gay as to be straight.

[The Giant]

So apparently all clothing choices of female characters depict the author's views on women? Are you telling me if women are scantily-clad, it's not because it's in-character? :smallyuk:

Yes. Because the author created those characters out of thin air, and could have chosen to create them differently if he had wanted to. The choice to create only women for whom it is "in-character" to be scantily clad is, itself, depicting the author's views on women.

or

Yes. Because when something occurs over and over across a swath of characters that have nothing in common with each other except for being female, then it becomes untenable to claim that it is, in fact, a result of the character's innate personality traits and not a reflection of the author's views on the one unifying trait: their gender.

Pick one.

[Wou]

I found this one a bit too preachy.
Yes, sexism is bad, racism is bad, general intolerance and stereotyping are bad. So is giving drugs to kids, but that does not make Cartoon All-Stars to the Rescue any less awful, you know?
We're not nearly there, it's miles and light years away, but this strip still felt off. For me that is, I do realize it's a matter of personal opinion.

[notthephonz]

Amongst my own friends, I always felt the need to explain that lawful types don't ways need to be the leaders; they can also be followers. So in that light, most of the people I know would use that quote to say that she's lawful. Myself, I find it hard to picture an effective chaotic leader.

What about Shojo?

[CarpeGuitarrem]

AhahahahahBAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

That punchline was the best. And I love how it showcases Haley's growing-up and sense of perspective. In fact, this whole comic was that, for Haley. Even the "action figures" panel? Pure GENIUS way to remind us that Haley's been through a lot. It's not just a one-off gag: we got to see three places Haley's been in the comics with those three action figures.

Nice, nuanced, strong page, with a cheeky punchline at the end. One of the best pages of OOTS thus far.


I'm reminded of a quote I read somewhere, where a writer was asked, "Why do you keep writing strong female characters?" To which the answer was, "Because you keeping asking that question." It shouldn't be controversial that female characters are portrayed as complex people, or that someone just happens to have had a same-sex relationship, yet here we are.
Side note: if you want to cite it, that was Joss Whedon. :smallsmile: It's a fairly well-known speech (http://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/josswhedonequalitynow.htm) he gave.

[Socksy]

I'm saying that the fantasy-world mechanic (scanty armor is protection for female) and the character's personality (and, therefore, choices) are entirely the author's decision.



Google results are personalized; your Google results and mine will be different based on whatever information Google has on our history and demographics.

I thought Google just found the most-viewed images/links, did not know that.:smalltongue::smallbiggrin:

Andthe way you phrased it before made it sound a bit like "Scantily-clad woman means author is a perv", so thanks for clarifying.:smallsmile::smallsmile:

[Keltest]

What about Shojo?

That didn't exactly work out well for him did it. Its quite possible that had he been more up front with his paladins, then Miko would have been on the side of the defenders, and Azure City would not have fallen.

[Morty]

I see a couple of gladiator-type pieces which, while cool looking, weren't actually designed to be armor. Leather jackets are more armor than gladiator wear. Everything else is either full (or parts of) armor, or clothes.

'Leather armour' as fantasy gaming uses the term is fiction, anyway. Nobody ever wore what's essentially a leather jacket or coat for protection. Leather bikini 'armour' just drops a healthy dose of sexism and objectification on top of it all.

[Shining Wrath]

I believe this makes Bandanna the OotS's first openly gay major character. As opposed to Vaarsuuvius who is quite clearly the OotS's first openly closed unknown sexuality main character of deep confusion on the part of readers.

It will be interesting to see what sub-plot ensues to obtain the necessary coin.

[Keltest]

My original point was that women in the OOTS series do not and have never worn ridiculously impractical armour. As someone else mentioned, obviously Sabine is an exception. I showed that there were male armours with a LOT less fabric to them than Haley's old outfit.

Like I said, that wasn't "armor" so much as "decorative leather."

It was deliberately designed not to be protective. You can tell on account of how they don't cover much of anything, especially the parts important to keeping you alive.

Even Haley's desert armor is rather impractical for defense without magic, although the degree of protection just plain leather armor gives you is already pretty small.

[Shining Wrath]

So apparently all clothing choices of female characters depict the author's views on women? Are you telling me if women are scantily-clad, it's not because it's in-character? :smallyuk:



Well, I don't know what you googled.

Out of the first dozen pictures:
Total number of men in armour (or male mannequins, there are a lot of mannequins) that bares the midriff or more: 4
Total number of pieces of armour that look like "sexy" wear rather than actually looking like armour: 2
Total number of very-close-to-naked-women who came up in that search for some reason: 0

Have a screenshot (http://imgur.com/IcDxxXi) to prove it.

My results:
First 9 look functional.
Next 3 after that look like fetish wear.

[Shining Wrath]

Somehow, knowing Bandana's mother is a blonde, make me think if Julio giving her the captain position is not simply heritage.

And yes, I want to buy action figures of OotS as well. Will we have a kickstarter for it?



The Bechdel Test is not a test to see if the artwork is favorable to gender equality. Neither a test to check its quality. Or even its association on gender issues.

Just that it has women represented. The women in question can be as bad or as good as a character than any other in the work. Or the work itself.

If the test sounds to you like a pretty easy standard to meet, it is. That's the whole point: To shock you that too many loved movies and series fail on this simple test.

I took the dark-skinned male at the wheel who is receiving orders from Julio to be her father.

[Socksy]

Yes. Because the author created those characters out of thin air, and could have chosen to create them differently if he had wanted to. The choice to create only women for whom it is "in-character" to be scantily clad is, itself, depicting the author's views on women.

or

Yes. Because when something occurs over and over across a swath of characters that have nothing in common with each other except for being female, then it becomes untenable to claim that it is, in fact, a result of the character's innate personality traits and not a reflection of the author's views on the one unifying trait: their gender.

Pick one.

If it was all the women in a series (and none of the men), then yeah, that would be true. But I didn't say ALL women were scantily clad. I meant SOME women in a series. I can't remember if the person I was arguing against said 'some' or 'all'. I can't really check, because my laptop hates posting on the forums for some reason.

[137beth]

I believe this makes Bandanna the OotS's first openly gay major character. As opposed to Vaarsuuvius who is quite clearly the OotS's first openly closed unknown sexuality main character of deep confusion on the part of readers.

It will be interesting to see what sub-plot ensues to obtain the necessary coin.

It is quite possible V is also gay (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?279142-Gender-and-Sexuality-Representation-in-OOTS/page15&p=15057433#post15057433).

[Zea mays]

In the flashback panel of Bandana's childhood, should Julio look younger? Maybe not quite so grizzled?

(Eta, apart from that inconsequential detail, loved the comic)

[Keltest]

It is quite possible V is also gay (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?279142-Gender-and-Sexuality-Representation-in-OOTS/page15&p=15057433#post15057433).

but not confirmed, and V certainly isn't very open about it if that's the case.

[SlyJohnny]

Oh, new strip. Hey guys, what'd I miss? Sexual representation, female characters indicative of author's views on women, blah blah blah...

Urgh. The two chicks are alone in the same room together for like a single strip and they start having an extended discussion about clothes. This is why a mostly male party is important, people.

*flees*

[Peelee]

That didn't exactly work out well for him did it. Its quite possible that had he been more up front with his paladins, then Miko would have been on the side of the defenders, and Azure City would not have fallen.

How long did he rule before it fell apart? I mean, the Galactic Republic fell, but it spanned 25 millennia, so I'd say that system worked out pretty darn well. I think Shojo's tenure went quite well.

[Keltest]

How long did he rule before it fell apart? I mean, the Galactic Republic fell, but it spanned 25 millennia, so I'd say that system worked out pretty darn well. I think Shojo's tenure went quite well.

Do you perhaps not recall Meatloaf Day? The only reason he wasn't killed was because he basically spent the rest of his life letting the nobles think he wasn't doing anything.

[Socksy]

How long did he rule before it fell apart? I mean, the Galactic Republic fell, but it spanned 25 millennia, so I'd say that system worked out pretty darn well. I think Shojo's tenure went quite well.

So... Shojo is Palpatine? :smallconfused::smallbiggrin::smallbiggrin: Well, I don't think that's the right era for Palpatine, but still.

[Shining Wrath]

It is quite possible V is also gay (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?279142-Gender-and-Sexuality-Representation-in-OOTS/page15&p=15057433#post15057433).

And also quite possible that V is not. And quite possible that V is male. And quite possible that V is female. And quite possible that V's divorced spouse is male. And quite possible that V's divorced spouse is female. The Giant has been quite clear that he has been deliberately ambiguous about this.

So with equal probability:

V is male formerly married to female
V is female formerly married to female
V is male formerly married to male
V is male formerly married to female



In choices (2) and (3) the children are either adopted or the result of sex-changing magic used by the couple in order to conceive.

[Kaytara]

Oh my god. So many things this comic does right:
1) lampshading the outfit thing
2) lampshading past issues with the depiction of women in the comic in a funny, self-aware way that fits the medium because the characters ALWAYS lampshade earlier comic bits at any rate
3) giving a female character visibility as a lesbian without fetishising her or making her story ENTIRELY about her queerness and nothing else

Thank you, Rich, I am genuinely impressed and touched in addition to the usual state of being entertained by your comic. Please keep this up, you quality human being, you.

[BenjCano]

No. Stories exist primarily for the purpose of delivering messages to one another, whether about human nature, or the world around us, or what have you.

Gotta disagree with you there. Stories primarily exist for entertainment The purpose of delivering messages or morals or information is always secondary. A story that delivers a solid message but in a boring fashion fails as a story and is usually forgotten very quickly.

But an entertaining story with a horrible message can still be enjoyed for itself. Hell, the moral of the movie version of The Little Mermaid seems to be "it’s okay to change who you are and give up your identity for love." The Iliad boils down to: "It's worthwhile to start a war to kidnap an adulterous woman, but afterwards, you should kill her for letting you fight a war over her." Fight Club: "Reactionary masculinity is the only cure for the consumerist malaise. No girls allowed." The Lord of the Rings even contains this gem: "Progress is bad."

[Socksy]

And also quite possible that V is not. And quite possible that V is male. And quite possible that V is female. And quite possible that V's divorced spouse is male. And quite possible that V's divorced spouse is female. The Giant has been quite clear that he has been deliberately ambiguous about this.

So with equal probability:

V is male formerly married to female
V is female formerly married to female
V is male formerly married to male
V is male formerly married to female



In choices (2) and (3) the children are either adopted or the result of sex-changing magic used by the couple in order to conceive.

Isn't it stated the kids are adopted?
And their skin tone is very different to that of their parents, too, making it more obvious. I thought it was done like that to make it so that they could be any gender combination.

[rodneyAnonymous]

The only part I dislike is that the "desert armor" action figure doesn't bare her midriff. Changing her armor now so it doesn't show is fine, but the retcon is weird.

[BenjCano]

And also quite possible that V is not. And quite possible that V is male. And quite possible that V is female. And quite possible that V's divorced spouse is male. And quite possible that V's divorced spouse is female. The Giant has been quite clear that he has been deliberately ambiguous about this.

So with equal probability:

V is male formerly married to female
V is female formerly married to female
V is male formerly married to male
V is male formerly married to female



In choices (2) and (3) the children are either adopted or the result of sex-changing magic used by the couple in order to conceive.

Heterosexual couples can adopt too, you know.

[Peelee]

Do you perhaps not recall Meatloaf Day? The only reason he wasn't killed was because he basically spent the rest of his life letting the nobles think he wasn't doing anything.

Hiccups in the system, man. It's not smooth sailing 100% of the time.

[Cactuar_Tamer]

Between this and some of your previous statements, I have to ask: is there something inherently wrong with escapism? By being entertained by a story that might give you something emotionally while not being directly tied to real life issues?

Could I ask you, by the same token: is there something inherently wrong with escapism for people who aren't you? Personally, I'm pretty damn pleased by this strip. Having people who reflect me and identities I have makes it easier, not harder to enjoy escapism. I wish people could enjoy the abundant representation they already have instead of complaining whenever other people aren't actively excluded from seeing themselves in media. People like Bandana exist, and a casual mention of a girlfriend isn't anymore "forced" than a casual mention of a boyfriend, which, I suspect, you wouldn't even have noticed.

[The Troubadour]

Haley and Sabine; Haley and Tsukiko.

Thanks!


You mean like a guy telling a girl how sexism works? :smallconfused::smalltongue:

Do you think our genders automatically determine what we can or can't know about sexism? ;-)

[Gift Jeraff]

The only part I dislike is that the "desert armor" action figure doesn't bare her midriff. Changing her armor now so it doesn't show is fine, but the retcon is weird.
Her desert outfit never bore her midriff. That was her original one.


There's a quote from Rich about how comics should be relevant in the real world; "otherwise, it's just pure escapism." In other words, every strip has a job to do.
That doesn't invalidate their criticism if they feel the execution--not the message itself--was inorganic.

[CarpeGuitarrem]

The only part I dislike is that the "desert armor" action figure doesn't bare her midriff. Changing her armor now so it doesn't show is fine, but the retcon is weird.
I didn't think it did. The sleeves are a bit wider than I expected, but I was pretty sure it went straight down to her pants. Sample reference comic. (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0772.html) I don't see a midriff there. (I mean, there is one, but it's very clothed.)

[Socksy]

Do you think our genders automatically determine what we can or can't know about sexism? ;-)

Well, obviously. That's how it works!

[Ajadea]

I didn't notice anything forced about the comic until I came here, actually. It tells us that they've got enough loot (barely) to fix the Mechane, Haley is wearing new armor, not the old stuff with a shirt under it, Bandana likes being in charge but is fully expecting Julio to show up and take his ship back at some point, and Haley's picked up some tendencies from Roy during her stint as leader in DStP. And a self-aware reference to previous comics that made me grin.

I just glazed over Bandana's girlfriend completely. Bandana's been given a thin body type, Haley has a busty/curvy one, so Bandana's armor doesn't fit Haley. Solution: insert female character connected to Bandana so Bandana has spare armor set to give Haley. An ex-girlfriend is a completely viable option. Visibility without making the character revolve around her sexuality. I liked it, anyways.

[Storm_Of_Snow]

Or, of course, you can do what Carl Critchlow did with Lymara in Thrud, and have the "leather bikini" played fully for distraction purposes - it's protective capabilities are near enough 100% if the wearer is never attacked because their opponents are too busy gawping at the amount of exposed flesh. :smallwink:

Another possible real world example are Gladiatrix's - I know Gladiators had the various forms of arms and armour, but did their female counterparts do so as well? Or did they just fight in less ritualised attitre? Did they even have their own forms? (Seriously, does anyone know of a good book on the subject?)

And given that different cultures have different views on what's acceptable or not, did Gladiatrix's wear the same amount as the men, did they cover up more, or even have more on show to play to the crowd?

[Kalmageddon]

Gotta disagree with you there. Stories primarily exist for entertainment The purpose of delivering messages or morals or information is always secondary. A story that delivers a solid message but in a boring fashion fails as a story and is usually forgotten very quickly.

But an entertaining story with a horrible message can still be enjoyed for itself. Hell, the moral of the movie version of The Little Mermaid seems to be "it’s okay to change who you are and give up your identity for love." The Iliad boils down to: "It's worthwhile to start a war to kidnap an adulterous woman, but afterwards, you should kill her for letting you fight a war over her." Fight Club: "Reactionary masculinity is the only cure for the consumerist malaise. No girls allowed." The Lord of the Rings even contains this gem: "Progress is bad."

I agree.
It's true that some stories are made worthwile by the message alone, while others are ruined by it, but in general a story can be about nothing at all and still be entrataining and emotionally involving, especially when it's comedy.


Could I ask you, by the same token: is there something inherently wrong with escapism for people who aren't you? Personally, I'm pretty damn pleased by this strip. Having people who reflect me and identities I have makes it easier, not harder to enjoy escapism. I wish people could enjoy the abundant representation they already have instead of complaining whenever other people aren't actively excluded from seeing themselves in media. People like Bandana exist, and a casual mention of a girlfriend isn't anymore "forced" than a casual mention of a boyfriend, which, I suspect, you wouldn't even have noticed.

Uhm... I don't understand what you mean by this. :smallconfused:
You are talking as if I complained about the subject of the strip, which I clearly didn't. I simply asked the Giant a question after reading his comment.
Care to clarify?

[Keltest]

I agree.
It's true that some stories are made worthwile by the message alone, while others are ruined by it, but in general a story can be about nothing at all and still be entrataining and emotionally involving, especially when it's comedy.

I agree as well. Stories are about getting people's attention. What you do with that attention once you have it is up to you as the author, and Rich is more than welcome to use that attention to get a message across, but that is his choice, not something that stories themselves do.

[Lathund]

What about Shojo?

Oof, was he chaotic? I do recall him being an aristocrat instead of a paladin, but that's about as far as my memory goes.

Still, Shojo is far from an archetypical leader. There are far more lawful, successful leaders to be found in the OotSiverse imho than chaotic ones. Both when it comes to leading something big (a country, a adventurers party) and in leading something small (like Celia usually getting what she wants). But I may have missed more counterexamples.

[Sikon]

Hell, the moral of the movie version of The Little Mermaid seems to be "it’s okay to change who you are and give up your identity for love."

Nitpicking here, but wrong. I'm tired of hearing that argument. In fact, it's Anderson's original Little Mermaid who's driven solely by love. Ariel is obsessed with the human world before even meeting the prince, and her father did not accept that until the very end of the movie. For her, it was about escaping into the world where she belonged.

[Gnome Alone]

This is such a good comic; it's so low-key and character development-y. I loved Bandana right away; I even did one of those "something something chairman of the Bandana fanclub things" signatures for about two seconds. Glad she's sticking around so far.

Y'know, sometimes Haley almost seems more like the leader than Roy. The way these two are poring over logisitics here... Of course, that may have something to do with how Roy's been mainly just holding a rope for the majority of his time in this book so far.

[rodneyAnonymous]

I didn't think it did...

You are right, I was confusing her desert armor for the armor she wore before that. Complaint withdrawn. (Here is a strip that shows both.) (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0675.html)

The Message here was a little hamfisted but Rich makes a good point: a lot of the reason why it comes across that way is that it's different from the years of strips before it. Also, us forum readers have seen the author denounce (say) the gendered insults Haley and Crystal threw at each other, but AFAIK this is the first in-strip denunciation of it. We've "heard it before" because of Rich's commentary, but most readers probably won't feel that way, because they won't have read those comments.

[Doug Lampert]

Sinfest wasn't always that way. It used to be good. It used to be fun. It used to be entertaining and worth reading. Then the author converted to Feminism, and published a comic repudiating the patriarchal oppression present in his past works.

http://sinfest.net/view.php?date=2012-07-22

Since then it has been the way it is today. And since then I've always had a terrible sense of foreboding whenever any author starts expressing regret or guilt over perceived past sexism: I don't want to lose another great comic!

I don't read Sinfest, so I don't know how exact the parallels are, but Rich expressed regret on the forum over his treatment of women in the comic MONTHS ago, maybe over a year (I don't feel like searching for it). He then didn't bother to squeeze it into the comic for months till he had a logical and reasonable time for two women to be talking about stuff like costumes.

So I don't feel any real foreboding from this. Rich wanted to say it, but he saved it till he could fit it in the plot rather than forcing it in immediately.

Yeah, on first reading hitting the "she's gay" and "costume regret" and "slut slamming insults regret" buttons all in one comic felt to me like Rich was forcing it some and going down a checklist on gender issues. But I have to admit that I'd have no trouble with any two of them in one comic and that I can't point to which one I think doesn't belong.

And others have pointed out other known to be gay characters, so it isn't like Rich really NEEDED to include Bandana being gay as part of a gender issue regret checklist. I conclude that no such checklist existed and it was all in my head.

The comic still has plenty of humor, the action figures, the title in relation to the final panel, the self depreciating humor about the historical need to bond or murder each other.

[Cactuar_Tamer]

Uhm... I don't understand what you mean by this. :smallconfused:
You are talking as if I complained about the subject of the strip, which I clearly didn't. I simply asked the Giant a question after reading his comment.
Care to clarify?

Sure. Apologies if I misunderstood you.

I read your comment as another "Why can't comics just be comics" kind of comments, of which the had already been a couple, and going by that reading, I was annoyed by the phrasing because I don't think anything in the strip negated escapism. Buuuuut. It looks like I may have interpreted you totally wrong, so, again, apologies if that is the case.

[Doug Lampert]

Another possible real world example are Gladiatrix's - I know Gladiators had the various forms of arms and armour, but did their female counterparts do so as well? Or did they just fight in less ritualised attitre? Did they even have their own forms? (Seriously, does anyone know of a good book on the subject?)

There is fairly little known about female gladiators, little enough that I'd wager any such book would need to be original research or made up. (You can do original research on this sort of subject, mostly by looking at burial inscriptions which often give information about someone's life and which exist in very large numbers.)

Wikipedia matches my memory and indicates that there are fairly few references, but that those references don't seem to treat them as some strange novelty. I've encountered at least one historical reference not mentioned on Wikipedia, but that doesn't make the subject common or well covered.

There is some evidence mentioned on Wikipedia that the women fought bare breasted, but with helmets and limb armor. Unfortunately the evidence they go into is from a relief, so I'm dubious, as Roman military reliefs and statues often showed gear known to be incorrect or anachronistic as the artist wanted something more artistic than the actual functional gear.

Note that gladiatorial combat was a show first, and a fight second. Ties were fairly common and losers often allowed to live if they put on a good show, so torso armor wasn't all that necessary as protection, your foe was presumably largely going for limb shots as part of the "try not to kill the valuable gladiator" part of the show.

[zimmerwald1915]

And others have pointed out other known to be gay characters
Nah, according to the Giant, those characters didn't count.

[TheMiningDwarf]

Ya know I read this comic and I had no problem with it. The character development for Bandana was nice. Bandana's gay, pan, bi? W/e. The self mockery and the action figures got a laugh out of me. And then the forums had to get all Tumblr on me and start arguing over gender representation or something. :smallannoyed:

[Shining Wrath]

Heterosexual couples can adopt too, you know.

Yes, I know. But same-sex couples don't conceive, except in D&D, where various sorts of polymorph exist. In fact, I recall Sabine revealing that she'd switched over to being a man sometimes for Nale's entertainment - which means we need to add Nale to the list of possibly bisexual major characters.

Is Sabine, polymorphed into a male body, transgendered?

[rodneyAnonymous]

The children were made adopted precisely to obfuscate Vaarsuvius's sexual orientation. Assuming that adopted children means homosexual parents doesn't make sense whether or not you consider authorial intent, which was explicitly to "answer" that question with a shrug.

And although Sabine's "real" form is a female humanoid, demons don't exactly have a sex. In a general sense, sure she is a girl, but in a technical sense, she can't be trans, any more than disguising herself as a paladin affects her alignment.

[TheMiningDwarf]

Yes, I know. But same-sex couples don't conceive, except in D&D, where various sorts of polymorph exist. In fact, I recall Sabine revealing that she'd switched over to being a man sometimes for Nale's entertainment - which means we need to add Nale to the list of possibly bisexual major characters.

Is Sabine, polymorphed into a male body, transgendered?

That would depend if you think shapeshifters have any true gender from which to be trans. Personally I like the idea that incubi and sucubi are really just a demon that can change between the two sexes at will.

[Jormengand]

Although her "real" form is a female humanoid, demons don't exactly have a gender. In a general sense, sure she is a girl, but in a technical sense, Sabine can't be transgendered, any more than disguising herself as a paladin affects her alignment.

Demons are intelligent, so they should have a gender identity. If they don't, then they're still under the trans umbrella, so to speak, by virtue of not even having a gender.

Though, given that she can swap sexes at will, calling her trans when she becomes male-bodied would be both entirely correct and entirely pointless.

[runeghost]

New comic is eight kinds of awesome. Thank you, Giant.

[Shining Wrath]

Demons are intelligent, so they should have a gender identity. If they don't, then they're still under the trans umbrella, so to speak, by virtue of not even having a gender.

Though, given that she can swap sexes at will, calling her trans when she becomes male-bodied would be both entirely correct and entirely pointless.

Which gets to the point I was trying to off-handedly make; in a D&D world sexual identity and gender don't line up, exactly, with our world. There's more possibilities. There's also inter-species sex (Nale and Sabine; Roy and Celia) which is considered pretty odd in this world.

In summary, projecting our mores into OotS world poses difficulties. And vice-versa.

Which in turn means that Mr. Burlew's attempt to tell a story that means something to our world will occasionally hit a snag.

[runeghost]

Sinfest wasn't always that way. It used to be good. It used to be fun. It used to be entertaining and worth reading. Then the author converted to Feminism, and published a comic repudiating the patriarchal oppression present in his past works.



You're certainly free to have that opinion. Personally, I found the "old" Sinfest to be occasionally amusing, while the "new" Sinfest is reliably good to excellent and one of my must-reads.

[BenjCano]

Nitpicking here, but wrong. I'm tired of hearing that argument. In fact, it's Anderson's original Little Mermaid who's driven solely by love. Ariel is obsessed with the human world before even meeting the prince, and her father did not accept that until the very end of the movie. For her, it was about escaping into the world where she belonged.

I'm more than happy to replace the "sell your soul and voice in exchange for a chance to be with a man you've never spoken to" moral of the Little Mermaid for the "love your abuser" message of Beauty and the Beast, if you'd rather.

[Sikon]

I'm more than happy to replace the "sell your soul and voice in exchange for a chance to be with a man you've never spoken to" moral of the Little Mermaid for the "love your abuser" message of Beauty and the Beast, if you'd rather.

Point taken. At least Disney is improving recently, if a certain insanely popular animated movie is any indication :)

[rodneyAnonymous]

Demons are intelligent, so they should have a gender identity.

Yes, Sabine's gender identity is female. Her sex is none. Shapeshifting into a man doesn't affect her sex or gender, just like shapeshifting into a paladin doesn't affect her class or alignment.

You could make a case for something like cross-dressing, but that'd be a pretty weak point. Who cares?

[endoperez]

Yeah, on first reading hitting the "she's gay" and "costume regret" and "slut slamming insults regret" buttons all in one comic felt to me like Rich was forcing it some and going down a checklist on gender issues. But I have to admit that I'd have no trouble with any two of them in one comic and that I can't point to which one I think doesn't belong.

And others have pointed out other known to be gay characters, so it isn't like Rich really NEEDED to include Bandana being gay as part of a gender issue regret checklist. I conclude that no such checklist existed and it was all in my head.

The comic still has plenty of humor, the action figures, the title in relation to the final panel, the self depreciating humor about the historical need to bond or murder each other.

It seemed to me that this comic was both funny, filled with jokes, yet another tongue-in-cheek explanation of a clothes change...

and also a way to point out various ways a comic could include social issues without detracting from the story. I think it was artfully done. Imagine this in a book - not a whole update you'd ruminate on for a long time, but a page you pass by. None of the things here are something you'd bat an eye at, individually. You only notice that there's dots to connect it if you're familiar with this stuff, so the page needed lots of dots to work even in print. I like it!

[rodneyAnonymous]

Imagine this in a book...

Furthermore, imagine it being read by someone who hasn't read Rich's forum posts on those subjects. Those sentiments would all be news.

[Porthos]

Nice! :D


*clap clap clap*

Gracias. :smallsmile:


Darn it Porthos, quit ninjaing me! :smalltongue:

Danke. :smallsmile:



Yes. Thank. You get it spot on, you nail it onna head, you whip it, whip it good. Thank thank thank. Many goatblessings to you, fair stranger.

Many thanks in return for your response. :smallsmile:

Sinfest wasn't always that way. It used to be good. It used to be fun. It used to be entertaining and worth reading. Then the author converted to Feminism, and published a comic repudiating the patriarchal oppression present in his past works.

http://sinfest.net/view.php?date=2012-07-22

Since then it has been the way it is today. And since then I've always had a terrible sense of foreboding whenever any author starts expressing regret or guilt over perceived past sexism: I don't want to lose another great comic!

I can't really comment on Sinfest as much as I would like to for a couple of reasons.

A) The last thread (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?281621-Sinfest) we had about Sinfest had to be locked because it descended into unholy union of flamewars and personal attacks. So, yeah.

B) It's pretty much Off Topic to this thread any way.

But what I can say is that, IMO, Rich Burlew has more understanding of how characters work and writing believable people (with both positive and negative traits) in his little finger than the creator of Sinfest has in his entire body.

Summarizing what I've said before, and what I think would be allowable in the present context, it wasn't the plot lines that made Sinfest Terribad, it was the how the plot lines were executed and the characterizations that occurred. Ironically, what made me quit Sinfest wasn't the infamous plot line that everyone talks about, but one of the secondary ones that didn't as get much attention. When I stopped to think about them, I realized that not only was I hoping in vain that Sinfest would ever get better, but that it was becoming apparent that he just couldn't pull off the types of stories he wanted to tell.

In short, the stories weren't bad on their face, the writing was. That, again, is the difference between OOTS and Sinfest.

...

Well, that and the fact that this isn't even remotely close to anything Sinfest put out. And I say that as a person who read that comic for years before going away, never looking back*.

* Well, not quite true. I tried to give it another chance last year to see if it got better.

...

Haven't looked back since then tho. :smalltongue:

=======



Really really REALLY hope Lewis's Law doesn't have to get invoked soon, but I'm doubtful. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helen_Lewis_(journalist)#Lewis.27s_law) :smallfrown:

:smallsigh:

Sometimes I hate being right. :smallannoyed:

[Doug Lampert]

Nah, according to the Giant, those characters didn't count.

His comment doesn't count. :)

Seriously, the question here isn't actually "is Rich going down a checklist", I don't care if he is. The question is, "is Rich going down a checklist in a way that distracts ME from the story?"

And for that the question of "is this something I think Rich might reasonably think he needs to cover in a gender identity checklist" is more relevant than "is this something Rich himself thinks he needs to cover in a gender identity checklist".

I think Rich has covered adequately that there are gay and bi characters in this world in the past. That it wasn't all that noticeable makes it, IMAO, BETTER for his intended purpose of including such characters, if it's a major facet that you have to be explicit about then it isn't just being treated as part of the world. So IMAO he's covered it already, so it isn't evidence of a checklist, I don't actually care if Rich says in a forum post that he has such a checklist beside him and checked the box next to "include lesbian character" when he had Bandana make her comment. (I lie, I would care about such a comment, because it would start the foreboding of what else might be on the checklist given that it was specific enough to have an "include lesbian character" box.)

[Jormengand]

Yes, Sabine's gender identity is female. Her sex is none. Shapeshifting into a man doesn't affect her sex or gender, just like shapeshifting into a paladin doesn't affect her class or alignment.

You could make a case for something like cross-dressing, but that'd be a pretty weak point. Who cares?

Shapeshifting into a man makes her sex male, the same way that having sex reassignment surgery can change people's sex. "Paladin" and "Lawful good" are purely mental constructs, so I don't see how shape-shifting is supposed to make her either of those, but sex is physical, so surely that should change when she shifts into the shape of a male?

[thereaper]

You know, looking at those action figures, the proportions feel a little off. Is Haley's chest really supposed to be that big, or is that supposed to be another joke about female characters being sexualized?

And I just realized, I had no idea what sex Bandana was. It never even occurred to me that I didn't know or care.

[Porthos]

Nah, according to the Giant, those characters didn't count.


His comment doesn't count. :)

Seriously, the question here isn't actually "is Rich going down a checklist", I don't care if he is. The question is, "is Rich going down a checklist in a way that distracts ME from the story?"

And for that the question of "is this something I think Rich might reasonably think he needs to cover in a gender identity checklist" is more relevant than "is this something Rich himself thinks he needs to cover in a gender identity checklist".

I think Rich has covered adequately that there are gay and bi characters in this world in the past. That it wasn't all that noticeable makes it, IMAO, BETTER for his intended purpose of including such characters, if it's a major facet that you have to be explicit about then it isn't just being treated as part of the world. So IMAO he's covered it already, so it isn't evidence of a checklist, I don't actually care if Rich says in a forum post that he has such a checklist beside him and checked the box next to "include lesbian character" when he had Bandana make her comment. (I lie, I would care about such a comment, because it would start the foreboding of what else might be on the checklist given that it was specific enough to have an "include lesbian character" box.)

Before we get too far down this rabbit hole, I would remind that Conversational English is Conversational.

Rich is already on record as saying that he often speaks conversationally in forum posts and doesn't pour over every word he types to make sure they couldn't be misconstrued, especially when they are taken out of context.

Like I said, Conversational English.

When he said he hadn't included any 'obviously' LGBTQ characters in his comic and that it was about damn time he did (my phrasing, not his), he was talking, IMO, about Spotlight Characters and Not Spear Carriers. It's all well and good to dust a work of art with representative Spear Carriers. It does make it more real and believable. But when there is a noticeable gap when looking at the totality of the 'major characters', I think it is a good thing if someone decides that it's time to address the imbalance.

That Rich did it, IMO, in a fluid and natural way speaks to his talents as a writer. But, as this very thread proves, that's a subjective opinion and I fully realize that.

[Jasdoif]

...Rich expressed regret on the forum over his treatment of women in the comic MONTHS ago, maybe over a year (I don't feel like searching for it).Let me save you the trouble, then; looks like eight months and a week ago.


That Rich did it, IMO, in a fluid and natural way speaks to his talents as a writer.Yeah, I love exposition that doesn't feel like exposition. I'm not sure what part of this comic is supposed to be "forced", it all looks like natural conversation and standard-for-OOTS fourth-wall jokes to me.

Frankly, seeing Bandana's name misspelled in this thread is more jarring than anything in the comic. (Especially "Banana", I get confused for a split second each time :smalltongue: )

[Socksy]

You know, looking at those action figures, the proportions feel a little off. Is Haley's chest really supposed to be that big, or is that supposed to be another joke about female characters being sexualized?

And I just realized, I have no idea what sex Bandana is. It never even occurred to me that I didn't know or care.

I think it's a dig at how different action figures look from the actual characters (compare the hair strand too).

EDIT: Completely irrelevant, but I'm glad the giant comes into the discussion threads, despite me disagreeing with a LOT of his views. I suspect the forums might have gone deep, deep into English teacher style interpretations of the comic (or just plain mischaracterisation, especially about alignments) without him doing so.

[Porthos]

(Especially "Banana", I get confused for a split

I see what you did there. :smallamused: :smalltongue:

[rodneyAnonymous]

I suppose shapeshifting into a form that has testicles makes her sex male; no effect on gender identity though. Also, paladin is not merely a mental construct; Sabine does not gain any class abilities by shapeshifting into a paladin. The analogy between class mechanics and physical sex is imperfect, however.

[Jasdoif]

(Especially "Banana", I get confused for a splitI see what you did there. :smallamused: :smalltongue:Huh. I didn't until just now. I'm a poet and didn't know it!

Wait, that's not right. I'm a pun-ist and don't shun...it...st? :smallconfused:

[BungleBee]

I would buy every single one of those action figures.

Yup! I'd have bunches! :biggrin:

[sengmeng]

There the Giant goes again with his gay non-agenda. Tasteful representation of alternate sexualities without those people's entire identities wrapped up in who they sleep with? Who ever heard of such a thing? Why, he didn't even dwell on any lurid details or have the homosexual character express her ravenous lust for all members of her gender. This kind of propaganda could lead to a more egalitarian mode of thinking in the real world. The nerve of some people.

pleas don't think this is serious

[Kalmageddon]

Sure. Apologies if I misunderstood you.

I read your comment as another "Why can't comics just be comics" kind of comments, of which the had already been a couple, and going by that reading, I was annoyed by the phrasing because I don't think anything in the strip negated escapism. Buuuuut. It looks like I may have interpreted you totally wrong, so, again, apologies if that is the case.

You did yes, but that's probably due to the general tone of this thread, where a lot of users expressed concerns. It was just a misunderstanding, I won't hold it against you.

On this topic, I personally feel quite neutral.
The only thing that perplexed me in this strip was that Bandana is a female. I literally had no idea, being that the characters are stick figures and she's quite thin. But of course this isn't a problem, it simply made me say "oh so this character was female all along?" and that's it.
So basically, the fact that Bandana is a lesbian/bi didn't even registered as a big deal and I was surprised to find out how many people think it was a heavy handed way to let us know. I disagree on this point, it was literally a passing mention.

Now, I do understand that to some people, this whole strip could appear as existing only to fill some kind of imaginary quota of inclusiveness. That's not how I personally see it, but it could very well be the reason the Giant wrote it. I obviously don't know and honestly I don't care.
As I said, it wasn't a big deal in my eyes, it's starting to be somewhat common for a lot of writers to include characters of different sexualities in their works, so I hardly find it revolutionary even in the context of this webcomic.

With that said, if people liked it and some users felt represented by it, cool, I'm happy for you. It doesn't bother me and if it makes you happy, I can't see any reason why it would be bad.

[Jormengand]

I suppose shapeshifting into a form that has testicles makes her sex male; no effect on gender identity though.

And that is exactly why she would be trans if she shape-shifted into a male. She would be male-sexed and female-gendered, and therefore definitively trans.

[Amphiox]

Demons are intelligent, so they should have a gender identity. If they don't, then they're still under the trans umbrella, so to speak, by virtue of not even having a gender.

This doesn't follow! It is entirely possible that Demons are intelligent and simply don't have gender identity at all because they flat out don't have gender (it is in fact just an assumption that Sabine's female form counts as her "default")

And why should intelligent creatures that innately have no gender be considered under the trans umbrella, when the trans term was invented by and for an intelligent species, humans, that do have gender and have no contact with or experience about intelligent creatures that don't have gender?

[lio45]

His comment doesn't count. :)

Seriously, the question here isn't actually "is Rich going down a checklist", I don't care if he is. The question is, "is Rich going down a checklist in a way that distracts ME from the story?"

The answer to that is clearly "no".

It sure feels forced, but obviously the story can still go on, even though the checklist ended up getting priority over the story. It's not like the story can't co-exist with the passing of various other author messages.

[Ivrytwr]

Didn't figure Bandana for a lady. Not sure why ...
Nice to see Haley be all mentor-ish!

Thanks Giant.

[Amphiox]

Gotta disagree with you there. Stories primarily exist for entertainment The purpose of delivering messages or morals or information is always secondary. A story that delivers a solid message but in a boring fashion fails as a story and is usually forgotten very quickly.


The one word you can never accurately use when talking about literature is "always ".

Stories primarily exist because someone saw value in telling it and someone else saw value in receiving it. The primary, secondary, and tertiary values themselves can and have been darn near everything. Entertainment is not always the primary one.

[Porthos]

Didn't figure Bandana for a lady. Not sure why ...[

This is like the fifth or sixth time I've seen this comment here in the thread, and it baffles me each and every time I see it. :smallconfused:

Bandana was, to me, obviously female from the moment she stepped onto the screen. Yes, we have limitation of art form, but c'mon now.

...

Then again, I maintain that Inkyrius was obviously male, so what do I know? :smalltongue:

PS: But, no, jokes aside. Bandana was clearly female from the second she first appeared. All IMO, of course.

[Sadsharks]

Gotta disagree with you there. Stories primarily exist for entertainment The purpose of delivering messages or morals or information is always secondary. A story that delivers a solid message but in a boring fashion fails as a story and is usually forgotten very quickly.

But an entertaining story with a horrible message can still be enjoyed for itself. Hell, the moral of the movie version of The Little Mermaid seems to be "it’s okay to change who you are and give up your identity for love." The Iliad boils down to: "It's worthwhile to start a war to kidnap an adulterous woman, but afterwards, you should kill her for letting you fight a war over her." Fight Club: "Reactionary masculinity is the only cure for the consumerist malaise. No girls allowed." The Lord of the Rings even contains this gem: "Progress is bad."

I have a feeling that wasn't Palahniuk or Fincher's intention with Fight Club.

[Socksy]

This doesn't follow! It is entirely possible that Demons are intelligent and simply don't have gender identity at all because they flat out don't have gender (it is in fact just an assumption that Sabine's female form counts as her "default")

And why should intelligent creatures that innately have no gender be considered under the trans umbrella, when the trans term was invented by and for an intelligent species, humans, that do have gender and have no contact with or experience about intelligent creatures that don't have gender?

This. Sooooooo much this. Her gender is probably "demon" in much the same way as a lot of people think V's gender is "elf".

[Keltest]

This is like the fifth or sixth time I've seen this comment here in the thread, and it baffles me each and every time I see it. :smallconfused:

Bandana was, to me, obviously female from the moment she stepped onto the screen. Yes, we have limitation of art form, but c'mon now.

...

Then again, I maintain that Inkyrius was obviously male, so what do I know? :smalltongue:

PS: But, no, jokes aside. Bandana was clearly female from the second she first appeared. All IMO, of course.

Bandana is visibly female, moreso with the new art, but it is quite subtle compared to other characters, as her female figure is not nearly so pronounced compared to most of the other ones we have seen.

[Porthos]

as her female figure is not nearly so pronounced compared to most of the other ones we have seen.

Well, yes. And that's a good thing, IMO. Representative of different body types and all that. :smallsmile:

[Momoka]

I think people are just freaking out because most times when a comic starts having a strip about being inclusive (and this is very much a strip about being inclusive), it tends to coincide with a nosedive in quality where the comic stops telling a story and starts just being a guy repeating his political beliefs. OotS is better than those comics, though, so even though this comic is kind of running down a checklist of political points, I don't think it'll lead to a downgrade in quality.

People aren't, I think, freaking out over this one strip, but the idea that the new norm will be strips like this and not an adventure story. Which seems pretty absurd a thing to worry about, but it's happened to a lot of other comics that decided to get some politics in.


The alternative is deliberately keeping her "in the closet" to satisfy some arbitrary standard of "narrative smoothness." Not acceptable.

If it seems awkward to you…oh well. Sometimes, correcting a past mistake is awkward. Sometimes, in order to move forward, we have to stop waiting for the moment to be right, or the situation to arise organically, or whatever euphemism you want to put on the idea of maintaining the status quo because it's easier, and just do it. If it's "forced" now, that's only because I failed to include any obviously gay characters for 900+ strips and that is so completely uncool that I need to fix it NOW, not later. If that produces some rough edges, well, I guess we'll all just have to put on our adult pants and learn to live with that one solitary flaw in this otherwise pristine work of art* for the sake of inclusion.

But I sincerely hope that this "I don't care if it's not good storytelling, I want to include an [X] character" mentality does not become a long-term trend. That kind of thing is a big part of the reason people are getting up in arms now, because we've been trained by other webcomics to associate "I want to be more inclusive" with "This is now a comic where a white male author will lecture you about issues he has a vague understanding of from Tumblr and has several misunderstandings on". Most of those comics were honestly kind of mediocre to start with, so I'm hoping OotS breaks the trend and manages to maintain its quality.



No. Stories exist primarily for the purpose of delivering messages to one another, whether about human nature, or the world around us, or what have you. They are how humans have communicated life lessons since the dawn of language, and probably before. Whether or not that is why you read them, that is definitely why people write them. If the story is incapable of delivering the message that the author is trying to send about how they see the world, then that is a failure of the story, and the story needs to change. The author should not leave out his or her message so as not to disrupt the delicate story. That's the cart leading the horse.

A good story will have a message regardless of author intention.

[Jormengand]

And why should intelligent creatures that innately have no gender be considered under the trans umbrella

Because agender is under the trans umbrella. Don't look at me, I didn't design it.

Again, saying she's trans when shifted into a guy is most likely entirely true and entirely useless.

[Degnared]

I took the dark-skinned male at the wheel who is receiving orders from Julio to be her father.

Good catch, especially as he's wearing a conspicuous red bandana.

I'm tickled at people in this thread misspelling Bandana as Bandanna to the point that I wish that had been her name, for the pun-play on Anna. Though, until writing this post I hadn't realized that bandanna was an acceptable (and perhaps even preferred) spelling of bandana.

[rodneyAnonymous]

Because agender is under the trans umbrella. Don't look at me, I didn't design it.

You're using it wrong though. The umbrella is only over humans. Sabine is not human.

Also transsexual (biological sex) and transgender (personal identity) are different. She is absolutely not transgender under any circumstances, whatever her gender identity is, it's not affected by shapeshifting; I guess she could maybe be described as transsexual in some forms, but it's weird using that word to refer to a shapeshifting demon.

[Socksy]

Because agender is under the trans umbrella. Don't look at me, I didn't design it.

Yes, for humans, as the human norm is either male or female. If the species in question usually had no gender, or more than two genders, that would be different.

EDIT: Ninja'd.

[Jormengand]

You're using it wrong though. The umbrella is only over humans. Sabine is not human.

Well, until someone comes up with a better system for demons, we're stuck on "Entirely true and entirely useless." Anyway, who says demons don't have genders the same way that humans do?

[Eldest]

I liked the comic, Giant, and I'm glad you managed to get it out so quickly compared to the last two.

Edit:

Well... that's probably because straight *is* nature's default. Straight gets you babies. Straight gets your genes passed on to new generations. Gay etc. happens throughout nature, but it's less than useful if you want offspring.

My understanding is it is not the default, it is the majority. There is a difference.

[rodneyAnonymous]

Well, until someone comes up with a better system for demons, we're stuck on "Entirely true and entirely useless."

Um, several people have said "no that's not true" and nobody has said "yes it is". By what authority are you declaring it "entirely true"? It's false and useless IMO :P


Anyway, who says demons don't have genders the same way that humans do?

The D&D rules, actually. First edition established that succubi and incubi are literally the same kind of demon, in different forms. Though I think you mean "sex"; anything self-aware might (or might not) have a gender. Those two words are not perfectly synonymous.

[Nightsbridge]

Objectively, Bandana's sexuality is not at the center of this strip, it's barely visible along the fringes, and justifies why she owns a piece of armor that fits Haley while not being shaped like Haley herself. Even with that not included, it may foreshadow elements of the plot that have yet to be revealed. Therefore, Bandana's sexuality has a narrative place. Still, there are people who find this particular explanation beyond their comfort zone, in their opinion.

Opinions do not spring from the heads of those who have them fully formed with a sword and shield, like Athena leaping from Zeus' forehead. They are made, formed by the world around us and the media we consume. The simple acknowledgment of Bandana's sexuality feels wrong, even when it is backed with a hard story purpose. If Bandana has told us that it was her sister's armor, it would have taken just as much space in the panels, but I am confident no one would have been upset about that. What does it say about us as a society, that this explanation in particular gets us riled? Is the fact that we have been trained to see the plainly stated presence of a LGBT character as a sign of extremism really okay?

I have nothing against escapism. The world is a pretty nasty place, and sometimes it's nice to get away from that once and a while. But what are we escaping to that we find an LGBT character plainly stating their preference as a straight character might offputting? Isn't that interesting? Doesn't that warrant a closer look at the mad chaos that's storming between our ears? And maybe it's worth reevaluating some of the opinions that seem to have their roots in dark waters?

[Emanick]

I'm glad The Giant is finally taking steps to make this comic more inclusive. That being said, the strip still comes across as a bit forced. Not the part where Bandana mentions that she isn't straight - that part isn't awkward at all. It's just that, when reading the strip as a whole, it reads less as a segment of a story than as a strip where the author uses his characters as mouthpieces to express positive messages. I don't know why the dialogue comes across as less natural than usual - it just does.

I get that Rich can't wait any longer to make the comic more inclusive. I get that it's more important to him to be inclusive than to have as perfectly-flowing a story as possible, and that's fine. It's just a bit jarring to read an OOTS strip that reads imperfectly, which I suppose is, if anything, a testament to how good a writer he generally is.

[Keltest]

Objectively, Bandana's sexuality is not at the center of this strip, it's barely visible along the fringes, and justifies why she owns a piece of armor that fits Haley while not being shaped like Haley herself. Even with that not included, it may foreshadow elements of the plot that have yet to be revealed. Therefore, Bandana's sexuality has a narrative place. Still, there are people who find this particular explanation beyond their comfort zone, in their opinion.

Opinions do not spring from the heads of those who have them fully formed with a sword and shield, like Athena leaping from Zeus' forehead. They are made, formed by the world around us and the media we consume. The simple acknowledgment of Bandana's sexuality feels wrong, even when it is backed with a hard story purpose. If Bandana has told us that it was her sister's armor, it would have taken just as much space in the panels, but I am confident no one would have been upset about that. What does it say about us as a society, that this explanation in particular gets us riled? Is the fact that we have been trained to see the plainly stated presence of a LGBT character as a sign of extremism really okay?

I have nothing against escapism. The world is a pretty nasty place, and sometimes it's nice to get away from that once and a while. But what are we escaping to that we find an LGBT character plainly stating their preference as a straight character might offputting? Isn't that interesting? Doesn't that warrant a closer look at the mad chaos that's storming between our ears? And maybe it's worth reevaluating some of the opinions that seem to have their roots in dark waters?

I think its less "Rich put a gay person in the strip" and more "Rich put a gay person in the strip while also pushing X Y and Z values at the same time." If feels forced to many people, and it certainly seems like he put it in there not because his message needed it, or the story needed it, but because he wanted it in there. Rich has always been pushing an agenda, but this strip seems to be the first step in a path several authors have taken where the story comes secondary to their agenda, rather than Rich putting them equally and harmoniously up til now.

[Jormengand]

The D&D rules, actually. First edition established that succubi and incubi are literally the same kind of demon, in different forms.

I ask again, who says demons don't have genders in the same way humans do?

Sabine clearly thinks of herself and refers to herself as female. Isn't it entirely possible and entirely likely that she identifies as female?

[Keltest]

I ask again, who says demons don't have genders in the same way humans do?

Sabine clearly thinks of herself and refers to herself as female. Isn't it entirely possible and entirely likely that she identifies as female?

Does it matter? At all?

[Ridureyu]

Social problems fixed.

Comic is perfect now.

[Lord Raziere]

Does it matter? At all?

Yes, because you can still have a fixed gender even if your shapeshifter, and a non-fixed fluid gender even if you only have one form.

[Jormengand]

Does it matter? At all?

Well, no more than my or your or anyone else's gender.

So, "Yes," basically.

[Sadsharks]

I think its less "Rich put a gay person in the strip" and more "Rich put a gay person in the strip while also pushing X Y and Z values at the same time." If feels forced to many people, and it certainly seems like he put it in there not because his message needed it, or the story needed it, but because he wanted it in there. Rich has always been pushing an agenda, but this strip seems to be the first step in a path several authors have taken where the story comes secondary to their agenda, rather than Rich putting them equally and harmoniously up til now.

Why is it inherently wrong for him to simply "want it in there"? Why does absolutely everything have to relate to and advance the main plot/message?

[Aquillion]

And that is exactly why she would be trans if she shape-shifted into a male. She would be male-sexed and female-gendered, and therefore definitively trans.
Maybe. It's magic, and she herself is a magical being; there's no reason to think that those things correspond to what we're familiar with and the way we divide things up conceptually, and it's also possible shapeshifting includes mental effects to reduce or eliminate dysphoria associated with the new form.

Even in the real world, there are people with more complicated gender identities than 'male' and 'female'; it's not a stretch to assume that a shapeshifter who was raised in an entirely alien culture might not really think about our gender binary the way we typically do. She probably identifies as female given that she's a member of an always-female race and normally presents that way, but on the other hand the whole concept of an always-female race implies a take on gender that probably won't conform entirely to our norms.

I suspect from what we saw that she presents as female by default but doesn't actually put much of her identity in it the way most humans would and feels fundamentally natural in any form; she seemed completely casual about the idea of experimenting as a male, whereas Nale seemed squicked to recall it, so we can assume he was the one who it didn't work for.

(We don't even, strictly speaking, know that her female form is her default -- we've seen her in it most often, but it's possible that that's just because she has a fluid gender and decided to change physically in order to be compatible with Nale. She could have spent her time largely in a male form before meeting him. Wearing it after his death could be in memory of him or something similar.)

[Jaxzan Proditor]

:smallsigh:

Sometimes I hate being right. :smallannoyed:
I'm not entirely sure I get what that is; the Wikipedia article didn't really help. Care to explain?



Frankly, seeing Bandana's name misspelled in this thread is more jarring than anything in the comic. (Especially "Banana", I get confused for a split second each time :smalltongue: )
I kept noticing that too. You of all people should know that misspelling has happened before, though. :smalltongue:

Another thing that jarred me (that Porthos already commented on) was that Bandana didn't strike them as female until recently.

[Czhorat]

I think its less "Rich put a gay person in the strip" and more "Rich put a gay person in the strip while also pushing X Y and Z values at the same time." If feels forced to many people, and it certainly seems like he put it in there not because his message needed it, or the story needed it, but because he wanted it in there. Rich has always been pushing an agenda, but this strip seems to be the first step in a path several authors have taken where the story comes secondary to their agenda, rather than Rich putting them equally and harmoniously up til now.

Haley's tone strikes me as very similar to the way she (and other characters) discuss other tropes. If people feel uncomfortable with it, I think it says more about what they think of these particular ideas than it does about the story.

[Keltest]

Why is it inherently wrong for him to simply "want it in there"? Why does absolutely everything have to relate to and advance the main plot/message?

its not explicitly wrong, but as has been mentioned a few times when an author starts seriously pushing a political or social message through their comic, it often marks a serious downturn in the quality of the comic. And regardless of what Rich may write for, a lot of us come here for the comic first, and the message, well... not.

[Vinsfeld]

I'd definitely buy the action figures.

[Gryndel]

Some demons, daemons, and devils are typically depicted as male or female in their natural form. Many are so alien in form that their gender seems ambiguous at best.

So does that mean that dretch and lemure, quasits and imps are asexual? :smalltongue:

[Jormengand]

its not explicitly wrong, but as has been mentioned a few times when an author starts seriously pushing a political or social message through their comic, it often marks a serious downturn in the quality of the comic. And regardless of what Rich may write for, a lot of us come here for the comic first, and the message, well... not.

You know, it's funny how many people are so upset that Rich isn't leaving these silly real-world issues out of the comic, and instead are wondering what happened to good old-fashioned escapism. Does it not occur to any of these people, I wonder, that perhaps some female or LGBT people might also want to escape, say, into a world where they aren't marginalised?

But then, who are we to ask anything of a story other than straight males? Oh, and perhaps the odd woman here and there, but let's not do a Belkar (Go overboard? No?) here; they all have to be supporting characters so that the straight males can get on with the all-important storyline events of the comic.