Beyond the Polygons
itswalky:

rstevens:

bookoisseur:

agentsofshieldconfessions:

For me, there are two options: either May ends up with Coulson, or she ends up with some guy that they haven’t introduced yet, but with whom she will have an amazing love story. I just need May happy and in a healthy relationship.

I don’t understand why May has to end up with someone?

Option three: Agent May as the new Captain America

yes

I don’t think its that May needs to end up with someone. I think the attitude is more about “Given all the crap that went on with May and Agent Ward last season, lets not have her end up in an ugly relationship”.
I don’t think its evil and anti-feminist to want your favorite character on the show to get a happy ending…

itswalky:

rstevens:

bookoisseur:

agentsofshieldconfessions:

For me, there are two options: either May ends up with Coulson, or she ends up with some guy that they haven’t introduced yet, but with whom she will have an amazing love story. I just need May happy and in a healthy relationship.

I don’t understand why May has to end up with someone?

Option three: Agent May as the new Captain America

yes

I don’t think its that May needs to end up with someone. I think the attitude is more about “Given all the crap that went on with May and Agent Ward last season, lets not have her end up in an ugly relationship”.

I don’t think its evil and anti-feminist to want your favorite character on the show to get a happy ending…

paxamericana:

ignisambulamecum:

yungartsyandcreativewhitegirl:

un-ermite:

people who think like this are literally the most boring people.

i dont know how to analyse literature so im going to treat everybody who can like theyre the idiots

^^^

it’s cute how they signed it, like they were proud of this piece of shit

Lets be fair here: Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar, and what seems like could be infused with meaning could just be something the author threw in because.

One of my favorite bits in college was when we examining Waiting for Godot, because the question at the forefront was “Okay: Does this shit actually MEAN anything, or was Beckett just trolling everyone?”, partly because the latter’s an actually valid interpretation of the work (Beckett did not like critics), and partly because it acknowledged that, yes, sometimes there isn’t meaning in aspects of pieces.

So, yes, when analyzing any sort of art, always keep in the back of your mind: “Could this just be an arbitrary choice made because the artist needed some sort of bird in there for the story to work?”

The affect of all this is pretty simple: Godzilla (2014) doesn’t want the audience to feel sad. This is still Hollywood fare, and it feels like it. We get no real impression of any of the victims, there’s no connection to them. What we get is countless images of the brutal destruction, and it is seriously impressive… but that instills awe, not fear, not sorrow.
From my look at the latest Godzilla movie: Godzilla (2014): Good, but Needs Less Hollywood
its kinda gross that no one cares about the sexual harrasment/assault towards ken

liliza:

itswalky:

In Shortpacked!, a gay dude got the shit beat out of him every other week for nearly a decade, and folks only started speaking up about assault in my comic once a queer girl laid hands on a straight dude.  

THAT’s what’s kind of gross.

But feminists what equality!!!1!1!1!1 that means it’s ok to hit women right?!?!?!11!1!1?

I for one don’t care about the violence. Cartoon violence is cartoon violence.

What I’m unsettled by is that pretty clear sexual harassment happened, reaching a level where, if UC hadn’t intervened, it probably would have ventured into the territory of Malaya raping Ken, and… that’s being largely ignored.

I’m not saying Malaya and UC should feel bad for it. I’m not saying Malaya needs to have karmic punishment or something. Live ain’t fair, comedy doesn’t need to be fair, and it’s sadly in Malaya and UC’s characters to ignore it. I don’t think Willis realized what he was doing (scene was focused on Malaya and UC, after all, with Ken in there largely as a prop) when he made the scene.

But having the concern not only ignored, but mocked, by the creator… yeah, that’s some pretty hefty bullshit there.

its kinda gross that no one cares about the sexual harrasment/assault towards ken

itswalky:

In Shortpacked!, a gay dude got the shit beat out of him every other week for nearly a decade, and folks only started speaking up about assault in my comic once a queer girl laid hands on a straight dude.  

THAT’s what’s kind of gross.

Right, because sexual harassment is okay when it’s done to men?

Look, Ethan getting beaten up, Ken getting beaten up, that’s fine, whatever. Cartoon violence (although somewhat hampered by actual consequences for the victim) is pretty much straight comedy.

But Malaya’ actions are pretty much reprehensible. Dragging a coworker over to a significant other and talking about how you’re going to fuck that coworker out of spite? While said coworker is protesting and wanting to get out of that situation?

How is that not sexual harassment?

How do you feel about the claim that girls are overrepresented in YA? I'm not even sure whether or not that's true but I've seen people freak out about it. If it is true, why do you think that is?

lindsayetumbls:

Ugh. We have one thing. One thing, you shrieking ninnies. One thing in which we are not the underrepresented half of humanity. Can’t you let us have the one thing?!

But in all seriousness, it’s a) bullshit because boys should be expected to relate to female characters just as often as the reverse is true, and obviously this is not the expectation. B) There are plenty of YA books with male protagonists, they just aren’t as blockbuster HUGE because c) it’s a market thing. Boys that age don’t read much. The ones that do tend to read up (i.e. older than YA).

One thing. One thing.

But come on!

How are young men supposed to relate to a strong person victimized by an oppressive government, who has to learn how to defend themselves through any means available, whether with a deadly weapon, cunning manipulation or trusting their friends, if that person, like, has boobs or something!

(Poe’s Law notice: Yes, the above was sarcasm)

Also, seriously? It’s not like the good YA stories don’t have good MALE characters in them too…

itswalky:

Shortpacked!: Ultra-Car-and-Mommy-talk megapost

…being honest… not sure how I feel about the “We couldn’t change you if we wanted to” bit.

On one hand… having that as an option would give her a moral dilemma, and allow UC to say “I can change, but I am who I am: I don’t WANT to change”.

On the other… well, the allegory to asexuals on the surface, and really anyone who wishes, in a moment of desperation, that they could just magic themselves straight to better fit in, would suffer, because so much of that is that… they are who they are, and there’s nothing at all wrong with that. Being something that can be fixed could sabotage the entire perspective.

On the other, other hand, having that option and still refusing could be seen as even stronger…

…mind if I just throw my hands up in the air, say “Excellently written comic and wonderful scene between a mother and her daughter about an incredibly resonant issue”, and ask how long you thought it over before deciding if UC’s progamming could, theoretically, be changed?

itswalkyfanblog:

millere2773:

itswalkyfanblog:

Shortpacked! fandom, sit down. We’ve got to talk.

I, Wack’d, sole administrator and founding member of this blog, am asexual. More specifically, I’m a heteroromantic asexual, which basically means I’m straight but don’t really want to have sex with anyone.

Ultra-Car is…

So, apologies if I put my foot in my mouth below. I’m trying to be as respectful as I can, but some inadvertent FIM-Disease-ness is likely to pop up because… 

I’m a straight white male. Excluding religious preference, I’m about as Hollywood-Normal as you get.

So, I’ll be honest: I don’t understand a lot of the less common nuances of human sexuality, be it gender identity, orientation or even existence of a sexual drive.

I understand homosexuality and bisexuality somewhat (as in, understand the urges, but not what it’s like to actually grow up and live with those orientations). Asexuality, transgender, pansexuality, polygamy… I understand the textbook definition of those, but… that’s about it.

I imagine many of the people commenting also don’t get them, and aren’t aware of that. The reveal, as I first read it, wasn’t about Ultra-Car being asexual, but that… she’s a robot, and a sex drive and anatomical correctness on a robot is about as logical as it would be for a… well, a car.

Maybe that’s the point? An allegory to make this more clear to those like me? But saying “why doesn’t she get the parts/programming installed” is a solution if you don’t understand the allegory to asexuality.

I’m definitely looking forward to future strips, Willis, because it seems like Malaya’s in the same position as me (…you know, stripping out “Straight-White-Male” part): She genuinely doesn’t get this aspect of Ultra-Car. It seems like she’d be a good audience-avatar to help educate the readers a bit more about… well, why a reprogram/refit would be like forcing someone to change their own orientation/gender?

Or maybe I’m an asshole for bringing it up…

The problem here is two-fold. The first is that it’s pretty blatantly not an allegory at this point.

Right there. Ultra-Car is, in her own words, a “homoromantic asexual trans-chasis woman.” That really should end any argument that there’s some sort of subtle nuance being missed by the audience, and yet here we are.

But let’s play Devil’s advocate. Let’s say it’s an allegory. That doesn’t change the fact that this is a character who is repulsed by sex and doesn’t want to have it under any circumstances, only that we’ve stopped calling her “asexual”. It especially doesn’t change the fact that advocating surgery and brainwashing to “fix” this character flaw is morally reprehensible.

That she’s a robot shouldn’t change that, because for the past decade of her existence we’ve had no problem acknowledging that she’s an individual with thoughts and feelings to be respected. Somehow, her autonomy gets less respect in the comments section now than when she was a car, despite the fact that if the issue was really with her being a mechanical lifeform you’d think it’d be the reverse.

And so what we’re ultimately left with is the idea that if someone looks human, they should want sex, and if they don’t, that needs to be “fixed”—which leaves some frightening implications for some of the flesh-and-blood humans in the audience.

1: I had forgotten about the one-off mention in there. It wouldn’t surprise me if a lot of the other commenters had missed that too.

Not saying they’re any less wrong in their stance, mind you. Of course, Malaya was right there, so the comparison still more than applies.

2: Allegory might be the wrong word? Not sure.

Here’s the way it comes up in my mind: UC is a robot, and therefore her being asexual is natural, obvious and comprehensible to a mind that otherwise had difficulty fully understanding asexuality in beings that, biologically speaking, reproduce through heterosexual activity.

Her background makes it easy for otherwise ignorant minds to accept her asexuality as being real. That’s probably why the reaction in the comments are largely “UC should get a programming/hardware change”, instead of “UC just needs to try it and she’ll totally enjoy it!”

Yes, they’re wrong and pig-headed, but they’re wrong and pig-headed in a way that can lead them to better understanding how wrong and pig-headed they’re being, instead of just standard ignorance, intolerance and idiocy.

Like I said, allegory might be the wrong word, and by no means do I want to discourage you from being angry about how UC’s being treated by the comments. Your last paragraph? Dead on, absolutely correct, and if Willis is not taking this in that direction I’d be honestly surprised.

…which is what speculative fiction can be so good at illuminating, and getting across to the people who are, otherwise, good, honest people who just don’t understand what the problem is: Change the text of the dilemma to make it easier to fit into their minds, but keep the subtext, the meaning, intact, and then drive the connection home.

…again, huge apologies if I’m offending. I’m trying not to, but… well, that’s kinda the point: It can be very easy to offend if you just don’t understand where another person is coming from.

itswalkyfanblog:

Shortpacked! fandom, sit down. We’ve got to talk.

I, Wack’d, sole administrator and founding member of this blog, am asexual. More specifically, I’m a heteroromantic asexual, which basically means I’m straight but don’t really want to have sex with anyone.

Ultra-Car is…

So, apologies if I put my foot in my mouth below. I’m trying to be as respectful as I can, but some inadvertent FIM-Disease-ness is likely to pop up because… 

I’m a straight white male. Excluding religious preference, I’m about as Hollywood-Normal as you get.

So, I’ll be honest: I don’t understand a lot of the less common nuances of human sexuality, be it gender identity, orientation or even existence of a sexual drive.

I understand homosexuality and bisexuality somewhat (as in, understand the urges, but not what it’s like to actually grow up and live with those orientations). Asexuality, transgender, pansexuality, polygamy… I understand the textbook definition of those, but… that’s about it.

I imagine many of the people commenting also don’t get them, and aren’t aware of that. The reveal, as I first read it, wasn’t about Ultra-Car being asexual, but that… she’s a robot, and a sex drive and anatomical correctness on a robot is about as logical as it would be for a… well, a car.

Maybe that’s the point? An allegory to make this more clear to those like me? But saying “why doesn’t she get the parts/programming installed” is a solution if you don’t understand the allegory to asexuality.

I’m definitely looking forward to future strips, Willis, because it seems like Malaya’s in the same position as me (…you know, stripping out “Straight-White-Male” part): She genuinely doesn’t get this aspect of Ultra-Car. It seems like she’d be a good audience-avatar to help educate the readers a bit more about… well, why a reprogram/refit would be like forcing someone to change their own orientation/gender?

Or maybe I’m an asshole for bringing it up…

My look at Captain America: The Winter Soldier, and why one of the best parts of the film might end up kneecapping the MCU down the line.