Comic Strips is a community for those who love comic stories.
π Be Nice!
ποΈ Community Standards
𧬠Keep it Real
π½οΈ Credit Where Credit is Due
π Post Formatting
π¬ Post Frequency/SPAM
π΄ββ οΈ Internationalization (i18n)
SΓ, por favor [Spanish/EspaΓ±ol]πΏ Moderation
The following artists are banned from the community.
It should be noted that when you make reports, it is your responsibility to provide rational reasoning why something should be removed. Saying it simply breaks community rules is not always good enough.
Note: This is not a rule, but a helpful suggestion.
When posting images, you should strive to add alt-text for screen readers to use to describe the image you're posting:
Another helpful thing to do is to provide a transcription of the text in your images, as well as brief descriptions of what's going on. (example)
If there isn't at least some non-zero amount of tin-snips and turpentine, then the protest is a parade.
Coincidentally, Lowes is having a black friday on tin snips: https://www.lowes.com/pl/hand-tools/cutting-crimping-tools/tin-snips/on-sale/4294857583-2
Turpentine I can understand having for various reasons (lighting shit on fire, removing paint/ink/pepperspray), but what is the need for tin snips? cutting the zip-tie handcuffs used by riot police?
I think they're for performing the vasectomies as alluded to in the second panel. I assumed the turps is for make-shift antiseptic.
Let's say Jewelry making.... I feel like that's plausible?
I should buy some jewelry making paraphernalia ... for reasons.
A man is being a bit sarcastic and the angry feminist protester is threatening to mutilate his genitals?
No wonder Trump and Abbott won.
Yeah, it's not cool to threaten someone's genitals and remove their agency in what happens to them. Congratulations, you are currently standing on The Point.
Random dude being sarcastic isn't doing that. Focus the anger on the actual problems.
cant you read the content?
Her sign includes "VASECTOMIES FOR ALL".
Does that include men who don't want vasectomies?
If you think it's just one man being a little sarcastic then you need to open your eyes to the stripping of bodily autonomy going on all over the place.
And that's how women feel when they can't get abortions.
I think most men would rather not be forced to get vasectomies, than women want abortions; also the woman in the cartoon is supposedly more overtly pro-choice by identity, yet in this she's anti-choice for men.
The point is in your face and you miss it. Many men advocate to control women's bodies by taking their right to autonomy away. If seeing a woman with a shirt saying something like that makes you uncomfortable, how can you say it's just "a man being a bit sarcastic?" How do you think women feel? Again, if this comic makes you uncomfortable, imagine how uncomfortable women are.
Her signs in the first and third panels are okay, as well as what's written on her T-shirt in the 2nd panel. The sign in the second panel is dumbβit's not discomforting, it's just dumb.
What he said was also dumb as well as sarcastic, but he didn't advocate violence. In the second panel she calls him "bitch" (normally a sexist term), holds him as a male collectively responsible for the actions of relatively few men, and then says that he should pray that she and others don't get more violent.
Do you think her tirade convinced him to be more sensitive and sympathetic?
What if she replied to his sarcasm with "What's wrong with Summers of Love or protests?"
I'm saying that if those things make you uncomfortable as a viewer of this comic, how do you think women feel when their rights are stripped away?
how do you think women feel when their rights are stripped away?
They probably don't like it.
So is the tactic here is to create sympathy in men by attacking them? or maybe her audience are women. Maybe as a man I shouldn't even be commenting about it, except maybe to praise it, or attack men.
I don't think there's a magically perfect way to respond to this comic, but framing the man's position as "a little sarcastic" is certainly not it.
He said 2 sentences consisting of 13 words (though 1 was a contraction of 2 words). He didn't directly insult her except for "fucking protesters" which these days is kind of mild.
e.g. Fucking Christians going to their fucking church, fucking bikers on their fucking motorcycles, fucking radio types going on about fucking Drake's fucking accomplishments: these are arguably more the words of annoyance than hate. The man's words are stupid: IIUC 1967 was the Summer of Love, 1968 was the year of protests (Paris, Prague, and Chicago (as well as MLK's and IIRC RFK's assassinations)) and anti-abortion-types also protest. Her reply was more personal and more insulting. Granted, the pronoun "you" is not specific to plurality (much like "they" is these days), but I doubt she cared about distinguishing between plural and singular use.
You're just as bad as the guy in the comic.
You seem to know a lot about me.
β
π
Your reaction to the comic is the same as the man's reaction within the comic. That's not me making some assessment of something else about you, it's simply what you're doing.
Thanks for the clarification, and I suppose I kind of agree with that. βΊ
That isn't a man, it's a conservative. Less than a bug.
There are many of them in the US and other countries, and many of them vote.
And clearly a boomer, if they remember the Summer of Love.
The cartoon is dated 2022. The youngest boomer at that time was in wt:thon late 50s. He looks younger than that.
"leave it at protests" as if they aren't already mass murdering children
Unsure is /s, but doesn't seem like it.
Reproductive health advocates are not mass murdering children. You're thinking of guns, drugs, and cars if you are in the USA, cancer and other genetic defects if in the UK.
I prefer to go by what the Bible says. Which is that abortion is just fine and God even performs them!
Source?
But if you have gone astray while married to your husband and you have made yourself impure by having sexual relations with a man other than your husbandββ 21 here the priest is to put the woman under this curseββmay the Lord cause you to become a curse[b] among your people when he makes your womb miscarry and your abdomen swell. 22 May this water that brings a curse enter your body so that your abdomen swells or your womb miscarries.β
ββThen the woman is to say, βAmen. So be it.β
23 ββThe priest is to write these curses on a scroll and then wash them off into the bitter water. 24 He shall make the woman drink the bitter water that brings a curse, and this water that brings a curse and causes bitter suffering will enter her. 25 The priest is to take from her hands the grain offering for jealousy, wave it before the Lord and bring it to the altar. 26 The priest is then to take a handful of the grain offering as a memorial[c] offering and burn it on the altar; after that, he is to have the woman drink the water. 27 If she has made herself impure and been unfaithful to her husband, this will be the result: When she is made to drink the water that brings a curse and causes bitter suffering, it will enter her, her abdomen will swell and her womb will miscarry, and she will become a curse. 28 If, however, the woman has not made herself impure, but is clean, she will be cleared of guilt and will be able to have children.
That's about infertility. The NIV isn't a very good translation and focuses less on what the text actually says and easy readability. A more accurate translation is the NRSV (although the ESV or even the KJV doesn't make this mistake- although it depends on whether you want to translate "thigh" as "womb" or literally render it, as thigh is a euphemism. However, the word "miscarry" in the sense that we understand it is not there)
[27] When he has made her drink the water, then, if she has defiled herself and has been unfaithful to her husband, the water that brings the curse shall enter into her and cause bitter pain, and her womb shall discharge, her uterus drop, and the woman shall become an execration among her people. [28] But if the woman has not defiled herself and is clean, then she shall be immune and be able to conceive children.
Verse 28 says "be able to conceive children". It's quite clear that she wasn't already pregnant at this point.
That's not up to you. All scripture is God breathed. Are you saying that God would allow his one and only true word to be mistranslated so poorly? Shame on you.
It is obviously both. A woman could be pregnant or not and the same thing would happen either forcing a miscarriage (aka an abortion) or become infertile. There is no where that indicates the woman's current state of pregnancy or lack thereof so it must be both.