Like, I seriously can't tell if you're lampooning the misogyny of the comic drawing a character as a misogynistic caricature of a "typical woman" or if you're sincerely using the "typical woman" line yourself as a descriptor.
Seconded.
BadBeast, I am trying to think the best of you, but without context that quote is very disturbing.
On reflection, taken out of it's context the original quote does seem a bit baffling. I know this, because my memory of even making it got mis-filed, which makes it pretty much impossible to dredge up the original spirit in which it was made. So in the interests of . . . Historical accuracy (needs citation) I just got back from Whitechapel, (the forum in question) and refreshed my brain's post history for there. Which involved a nostalgic refresher going back through the Avatar webcomic in question (Disenchanted) Then back through my Whitechapel history, and how I wound up in their comic threads in the first place.
I traced my association back to the time I discovered "FreakAngels" on Avatar's site. Then followed the link to Whitechapel for the discussion threads, where I picked up on the (then, ongoing) "Crossed WYWH". I like the format of having a thread for each web episode where you can offer the writers your own thoughts on their creative (Or not) process. To stop threads just going on and on and on for ever with gushy fanboi titwank, if no-one makes a post for five days the thread is capped. Anyway, during "Crossed", I made regular posts there where I kinda gently trolled Spurrier with td;lr posts, speculating on where his plots were about to take us, or how consistent / believable / credible / or true to character (or not) his plots and their people were.
Originally I wanted to correctly predict where the next few episodes were going, so I could call Spurrier out for drawing on MY ideas to keep HIS OWN career as an "A List" writer from foundering
. . . (I'm a troll, of course I wouldn't miss such a juicy bone to run with, if it was thrown down!) Then when my incredible insights and uncharacteristic generosity with my own creative process were evidently too "edgy"
for him to touch with a big shitty stick, did I become bitter? No. Did I start to disparage his own (quite obviously, of a magnitude far in excess of my own) skills as a writer? Of course I didn't.
Did I begin bitterly sniping at his "unrealistic" stories? (It's a post apocalyptic nightmare World of brain-blown rape zombies ffs
), or his character's sociopathic lack of empathy, his ego-centrism or the way his rare acts of altruistic or selfless generosity, were in fact, blatantly motivated by self centred narcissism? Well, yeah, I kind of did that a bit, but no more than I ever did, and only proportionally to the plot / story arc. And of course, my own trollish sense of where the boundaries might lie. (for which I make no apologies) When Spurrier wound up WYWH, he began his latest Avatar webcomic, "Disenchanted", which I followed with the same level of interest and "helpfulness".
Which brings us full circle, and to the point raised regarding my motivation or reasons for making "that"comment in the first place. Without going into a long, interminably boring and un-necessary critique on the plot dynamics of "Disenchanted" or how you had to "be there" to get it, my reason for the subjective context and the barbed sentiment I used to aggregate it, are simple. Trollish hyperbole. The satisfaction I got from Spurrier's response, was a petty and and purely personal one, and one that I wasn't expecting to have to justify, but I don't mind. Much. Spurrier is a brilliant writer in an increasingly cut-throat and fickle industry, and (as yet) his quality of artistic content remains consistently excellent. So there's no chink in his creative process that I could even detect, invent, or comment upon. For which I'm actually quite glad, because I enjoy his work immensely. But he's not such a good forum admin.
He tends to have little input in those threads, save for starting one each week, and his sporadic forays into site moderation tend to originate in some really classic Whiteknighting when one of his favoured fangirls gets even slightly ruffled because someone said something rude to someone else, or the "spirit" of the forum has been compromised because someone doesn't agree with some wanky sense of entitlement some people have about never getting offended.
Well, I don't know about you, but I think if you have a admin like that, with such a wide open vulnerability for WKing, it would be churlish, and a betrayal of trolling traditions NOT to give the fucker a bit of a poke. Not enough to actually get them to pre-emptively ban you, or force some arbitrary and petty punitive climbdown in light of his status as admin. To his credit, he didn't demand I that I remove the post, or even remove it himself . (Which is what he usually does) he asked me to "make an edit". Which I did. With no fuss. And even left the original post up. And that seemed to satisfy any forum protocol, and satisfied my own petty smug, confirming his admin abilities.
OK? Same old BadBeast, just not around as much as I used to be.
And for context: I tell (and laugh at) dead baby jokes.
You'd have loved our "Dead baby jokes" FB Page. I was surprised at how long it lasted. Or our short lived but hilarious "Mothers against breastfeeding" page. Funny how people will go right out of their way to hurl themselves into taking offence at the most outrageously spurious trollbait, then start foaming when they get mocked and ridiculed into making blatant death threats to the admins on a public forum, in a open page, then thinking better of it, and removing their posts. They go absolutely batshit when you re-post screencaps of what they said, that they CAN'T remove. Then they demand that you remove them immediately or "face legal action".
When you remind them that they have no legal grounds for "harassment" (or any other) lawsuit, and that no-one is forcing them to come to our pages, make complete arseholes of themselves, then demand that WE help them to pretend they never said those things at all. Or that our screencaps were taken "out of context". Of course they were. THEY removed the comment from the context! Then the inbox fills up with "I'm going to shoot you in the face" PMs.
People troll themselves on facebook. Then call you a troll, because of their own lack of self control. I nearly started a thread here, to post some of the more hilariously OTT responses we've had from people with a seemingly bottomless capacity for cunting themselves, but it doesn't look like anyone's giving FB the trolling it deserves. The Disco groups on FB have their moments of sublime idiocy, but they boot all their best trolls from the groups. Eventually.
He didn't respond to me... maybe he won't ignore just ignore you. After all, you are a man.
Nigel, my lack of response to your first post wasn't on the grounds that you're a woman. I just didn't come here to discuss misogyny, and your post obviously had an agenda suggesting that I might need to address it as a subject. I don't. But don't take it personally. If I ever do feel a need to examine any inherent misogynist issues I may find myself struggling with, I promise I'll come to one of your threads on woman stuff, and thrash it out, ok?
