I live in a country where carrying weapons isn’t a thing. But being that it’s lawfull in the country where this comic is supposedly happening can you imagine walking into a bar and some random chick starts screaming at you like that?
Imagine if instead of a chick screaming about the guy it would be a guy screaming about a chick with purple hair?
And comic strips aren’t meant to be taken literally as situations with nuance and reversibility. It’s an artist sharing a message of their own, you can take it or leave it, to “both sides” it makes me deeply puzzled.
If it were any other period in history I would be astonished that anyone could take the actions of an artistic device as literal interpretations of events, real or hypothetical… but then I remind myself that millions of men have just explained to women why bears are more dangerous when presented with the question which was feared more, so I am now convinced that nobody can see outside their own bubble-universes anymore.
Regarding your last point: With the various engagement-increasing algorithms driving what information you actually see, it can be a challenge to see outside your own bubble. It takes active effort to not just see your own perspective reflected back at you and that’s by design.
A lot of people won’t engage with content they disagree with and engagement drives ad revenue so it behooves companies that only care about revenue to not challenge a user’s beliefs unless it’s something extreme enough for the user to engage out of rage and disgust (which is how chuds like Andrew Tate get promoted). It’s hard to see the otherside’s genuine viewpoint when it’s constantly filtered through the lens of your own side (or what the algorithm thinks your side is).
Neither does the act of putting a gun in a holster, does it? It’s not like she’s screaming at a guy brandishing a gun around, was she? Now that would be something worthy of screaming about.
Neither does the act of putting a gun in a holster, does it?
Lol look up accidental deaths from guns in the US. Having a gun in any situation ups the chance someone will be shot or die. We hear about it on the news all the time. People left their gun in a bathroom, people didn’t use their holster right and shot themselves/someone else, a child got their parent’s gun and harmed themselves or someone else. I’ve literally watched people drop their gun out of the shitty holsters they buy.
And which of those situations are improved by you screaming at a person walking around with a holstered gun? Does it make them more likely to conceal carry or not bring a gun at all? I would say in most situations, people who already open carry will be more encouraged to do so by your actions.
I consider actions like these as being more damaging to the anti-gun movement than anything.
Ok, being that I am on the spectrum myself I really hope this doesn’t come across offensive: are you autistic?
Because that’s the only way I can fathom you taking this literally. It’s a comic. I can assure you the artist never did this in real life. They are using art as an expression to point out that this dude’s entire bearing - the way he carries himself, the fact that he chooses to aggressively display his firearm, the clothing that he wears - is accomplishing the exact same thing that the woman in the comic is doing. It is intended to obnoxious, as it is pointing out that he is obnoxious for portraying himself that way.
Metaphor, allegory, art, my friend. It’s not literal.
When judging the action presented in the comics, who really cares whether it happened or not. I’m not judging the author for something he did, but something that a lot of people in this thread seems to be cheering for, which is to scream at people for doing something they disagree with and think as pathetic. You know, the type of behaviour that the American Conservative like to do to people they don’t like. Those kinds of behaviour are just horrible, imo, regardless of how good your intention for doing it is.
As for whether I’m autistic, I don’t know. I’ve never tried getting a diagnosis.
Art is catharsis. People who are “cheering” for it are doing so because it resonates with them, because seeing a jackass get ridiculed and made uncomfortable is a reversal of the usual state of things, not because they think it’s actually a good idea. The juxtaposition of a woman loudly narrating the exact thing that the guy is already wordlessly broadcasting is not to paint the action as anyone’s goal but to give those of us who feel terrorized by someone trying to show off how “badass” they are a bit of a laugh. It’s not a vote or endorsement for that kind of behavior; it’s more like an expression of schadenfreude or an acknowledgement of intrusive thoughts.
With your reasoning there isn’t a problem either with bringing a nuclear bomb into a bar. What? I’m not setting it off! I’m just sitting here enjoying my drink with my nuke right next to me. I’m not bothering anyone, so why is the entire town running in fear? Pussies! That’s what I say. It’s not like I’m going to use this…
My first thought as well. But that’s a deeply sensitive topic in American election campaigns, so it’s safest for us outsiders to not express an opinion about it whatsoever.
Honestly I’ll take the down votes over keeping to myself, some things just need to be said.
I’m not defending the people who open carry, I’m just pointing out how promoting hate and outrage can’t be justified just because you agree with this particular case
Imagine if instead of a chick screaming about the guy it would be a guy screaming about a chick with purple hair?
I’m going to blow your mind here, but this was a comic strip and the character was drawn to be announcing things as a representation of what’s happening inside the mind of the subject walking. It’s an artistic/comedic effect and to take it literally or even remotely as a “both sides” issue is peak… something I can’t say without getting banned most likely.
I live in a country where carrying weapons isn’t a thing. But being that it’s lawfull in the country where this comic is supposedly happening can you imagine walking into a bar and some random chick starts screaming at you like that?
Imagine if instead of a chick screaming about the guy it would be a guy screaming about a chick with purple hair?
Purple hair doesn’t kill people.
And comic strips aren’t meant to be taken literally as situations with nuance and reversibility. It’s an artist sharing a message of their own, you can take it or leave it, to “both sides” it makes me deeply puzzled.
If it were any other period in history I would be astonished that anyone could take the actions of an artistic device as literal interpretations of events, real or hypothetical… but then I remind myself that millions of men have just explained to women why bears are more dangerous when presented with the question which was feared more, so I am now convinced that nobody can see outside their own bubble-universes anymore.
Regarding your last point: With the various engagement-increasing algorithms driving what information you actually see, it can be a challenge to see outside your own bubble. It takes active effort to not just see your own perspective reflected back at you and that’s by design.
A lot of people won’t engage with content they disagree with and engagement drives ad revenue so it behooves companies that only care about revenue to not challenge a user’s beliefs unless it’s something extreme enough for the user to engage out of rage and disgust (which is how chuds like Andrew Tate get promoted). It’s hard to see the otherside’s genuine viewpoint when it’s constantly filtered through the lens of your own side (or what the algorithm thinks your side is).
Neither does the act of putting a gun in a holster, does it? It’s not like she’s screaming at a guy brandishing a gun around, was she? Now that would be something worthy of screaming about.
Lol look up accidental deaths from guns in the US. Having a gun in any situation ups the chance someone will be shot or die. We hear about it on the news all the time. People left their gun in a bathroom, people didn’t use their holster right and shot themselves/someone else, a child got their parent’s gun and harmed themselves or someone else. I’ve literally watched people drop their gun out of the shitty holsters they buy.
So yes. Yes it does actually.
And which of those situations are improved by you screaming at a person walking around with a holstered gun? Does it make them more likely to conceal carry or not bring a gun at all? I would say in most situations, people who already open carry will be more encouraged to do so by your actions.
I consider actions like these as being more damaging to the anti-gun movement than anything.
Ok, being that I am on the spectrum myself I really hope this doesn’t come across offensive: are you autistic?
Because that’s the only way I can fathom you taking this literally. It’s a comic. I can assure you the artist never did this in real life. They are using art as an expression to point out that this dude’s entire bearing - the way he carries himself, the fact that he chooses to aggressively display his firearm, the clothing that he wears - is accomplishing the exact same thing that the woman in the comic is doing. It is intended to obnoxious, as it is pointing out that he is obnoxious for portraying himself that way.
Metaphor, allegory, art, my friend. It’s not literal.
When judging the action presented in the comics, who really cares whether it happened or not. I’m not judging the author for something he did, but something that a lot of people in this thread seems to be cheering for, which is to scream at people for doing something they disagree with and think as pathetic. You know, the type of behaviour that the American Conservative like to do to people they don’t like. Those kinds of behaviour are just horrible, imo, regardless of how good your intention for doing it is.
As for whether I’m autistic, I don’t know. I’ve never tried getting a diagnosis.
Art is catharsis. People who are “cheering” for it are doing so because it resonates with them, because seeing a jackass get ridiculed and made uncomfortable is a reversal of the usual state of things, not because they think it’s actually a good idea. The juxtaposition of a woman loudly narrating the exact thing that the guy is already wordlessly broadcasting is not to paint the action as anyone’s goal but to give those of us who feel terrorized by someone trying to show off how “badass” they are a bit of a laugh. It’s not a vote or endorsement for that kind of behavior; it’s more like an expression of schadenfreude or an acknowledgement of intrusive thoughts.
With your reasoning there isn’t a problem either with bringing a nuclear bomb into a bar. What? I’m not setting it off! I’m just sitting here enjoying my drink with my nuke right next to me. I’m not bothering anyone, so why is the entire town running in fear? Pussies! That’s what I say. It’s not like I’m going to use this…
Purple hair doesn’t kill at distance, not as much as people claim it does.
My first thought as well. But that’s a deeply sensitive topic in American election campaigns, so it’s safest for us outsiders to not express an opinion about it whatsoever.
Honestly I’ll take the down votes over keeping to myself, some things just need to be said.
I’m not defending the people who open carry, I’m just pointing out how promoting hate and outrage can’t be justified just because you agree with this particular case
I’m going to blow your mind here, but this was a comic strip and the character was drawn to be announcing things as a representation of what’s happening inside the mind of the subject walking. It’s an artistic/comedic effect and to take it literally or even remotely as a “both sides” issue is peak… something I can’t say without getting banned most likely.
Imagine not knowing how comic strips work.
It’s actually not legal to carry them in bars