Idk i generally agree but the joke here isn’t really rape but more the subversion of expectations, the joke couldve easily been ‘yeah i learned last week the magpie steals shit’ cut to panel of their keys getting stolen, instead of them learning it through a book. The rape part is of course to heighten the shock value, and is thus more of a prop than the actual joke imo. So it’s not like the underlying message is ‘rape is funny right guys?’, but i definitely also see the objectionable part of using such serious topics like rape as a comedic prop
Also sidenote, this is cyanide and happiness, that’s kinda their whole thing
I mean switch the character to a woman and ask yourself if rape is taking a backseat to the subversion.
not my kinda humor and I get I’m the buzzkill here but uhhh, just wanted to state my feelings on the matter to maybe help some other like-minded person feel heard.
Despite the word being used, it’s not actually a joke about rape. This is a joke on the same level as a weiner dog humping someone’s leg. The perspective of an overly amorous duck with the main characters butt in frame add to the humor of it, but it’s still only a crappy joke about an animal trying to get it on with a person.
No no i getcha, should’ve maybe stressed the ‘its still objectionable’ part a bit more. All respect for being a buzzkill btw, that shit is often needed.
that’s your interpretation of stick figures but okay. they put boobs on them when it’s important that they’re female. they put a dick on when it’s important it’s male. that’s how stick figures work. otherwise they’re genderless.
I think its the writers’ interpretations too. They really only put dicks on them when the joke is specifically about the dick. There are plenty of times when the character is the normal stick figure with no dick, but explicitly gendered male. But when the character is explicitly gendered female, they always have boobs or a feminine haircut. Also in the animations the standard stick figures are always given masculine voices.
I’ve heard nonbinary voices that are feminine as well as nonbinary voices that are masculine, but the voices of the standard stick figures in C&H are exclusively masc. And tbh, the type of humor present in C&H really makes me feel like the authors tend to go along with traditional gender norms and the longstanding trope being a man is the norm while being a woman is a special trait.
For the record, I personally hate maleness being the cultural default, but I think its good to recognize the trope when it occurs.
i understand where you’re coming from. I’ve spent too many years in legal and legal adjacent fields where everyone is male regardless of whether they are explicitly female or not. we’re still fighting those battles. it’s not really my point though:
this is art. could you identify a nonbinary voice by sound alone?
what gendered characteristics does the character have? what causes you to identify it with a specific gender when it lacks characteristics?
those are just rhetorical questions y’know. stuff to think about.
no worries, we’re just reading different things into it. that’s the fun thing about art. i see nonbinary because i’m comfortable with that existing and i don’t see gender specified in the characters. you see nonspecified gender must be male because, well you didn’t say why.
because nearly every single c&h comic and animated vid uses male pronouns/male voices for characters that haven’t got boobs, because the cis male authors have been drawing it this way since the early 00s before non-binary is where it got today.
Nothing to do with comfort of non-binary persons. Just to context of the writers.
I mean I didn’t conflate anything; the comic writer opted for the term rape. there’s a whole separate argument about how maybe rape isn’t the right word in the rest of the animal kingdom because it has weight among humans and saying it’s the same thing gets used in a rapists’ mindset that it’s natural and justified.
But that’s a whole ‘nother thread.
Anyways, yeah, I did kick off. You shared your comic with rape in it and I’m putting in my two cents. No refunds for either of us, eh? Have a good one. Moving on, as you say.
Edit: OP deleted their original comment wherein they told me to “kick off” and that I took a comic too seriously 🤷 just uuuh, discussing humor… if you’re mad for me saying jokes with rape aren’t funny to me, that’s your prerogative just as it is mine to state an opinion.
Idk i generally agree but the joke here isn’t really rape but more the subversion of expectations, the joke couldve easily been ‘yeah i learned last week the magpie steals shit’ cut to panel of their keys getting stolen, instead of them learning it through a book. The rape part is of course to heighten the shock value, and is thus more of a prop than the actual joke imo. So it’s not like the underlying message is ‘rape is funny right guys?’, but i definitely also see the objectionable part of using such serious topics like rape as a comedic prop
Also sidenote, this is cyanide and happiness, that’s kinda their whole thing
I mean switch the character to a woman and ask yourself if rape is taking a backseat to the subversion.
not my kinda humor and I get I’m the buzzkill here but uhhh, just wanted to state my feelings on the matter to maybe help some other like-minded person feel heard.
Changing genders does nothing to this comic.
Despite the word being used, it’s not actually a joke about rape. This is a joke on the same level as a weiner dog humping someone’s leg. The perspective of an overly amorous duck with the main characters butt in frame add to the humor of it, but it’s still only a crappy joke about an animal trying to get it on with a person.
‘Overly amorous’ is not a way to describe rapists.
Yes, that’s why I used it to describe a duck instead.
No no i getcha, should’ve maybe stressed the ‘its still objectionable’ part a bit more. All respect for being a buzzkill btw, that shit is often needed.
C&H characters are genderless unless specified. they’re practically stick figures dude
Nah they put boobs on ‘em if they’re women; otherwise the default’s a man.
Again I’ve moved on as OP implored me to do in their deleted comment, but uhhh, whatever drives engagement I suppose. 🤙
that’s your interpretation of stick figures but okay. they put boobs on them when it’s important that they’re female. they put a dick on when it’s important it’s male. that’s how stick figures work. otherwise they’re genderless.
I think its the writers’ interpretations too. They really only put dicks on them when the joke is specifically about the dick. There are plenty of times when the character is the normal stick figure with no dick, but explicitly gendered male. But when the character is explicitly gendered female, they always have boobs or a feminine haircut. Also in the animations the standard stick figures are always given masculine voices.
I watch very few of the animations, but for clarification: what does a nonbinary voice sound like to you?
I’ve heard nonbinary voices that are feminine as well as nonbinary voices that are masculine, but the voices of the standard stick figures in C&H are exclusively masc. And tbh, the type of humor present in C&H really makes me feel like the authors tend to go along with traditional gender norms and the longstanding trope being a man is the norm while being a woman is a special trait.
For the record, I personally hate maleness being the cultural default, but I think its good to recognize the trope when it occurs.
i understand where you’re coming from. I’ve spent too many years in legal and legal adjacent fields where everyone is male regardless of whether they are explicitly female or not. we’re still fighting those battles. it’s not really my point though:
this is art. could you identify a nonbinary voice by sound alone?
what gendered characteristics does the character have? what causes you to identify it with a specific gender when it lacks characteristics?
those are just rhetorical questions y’know. stuff to think about.
Ok, if that’s what you think is happening. 🤙 agree to disagree. have a great day bud.
no worries, we’re just reading different things into it. that’s the fun thing about art. i see nonbinary because i’m comfortable with that existing and i don’t see gender specified in the characters. you see nonspecified gender must be male because, well you didn’t say why.
because nearly every single c&h comic and animated vid uses male pronouns/male voices for characters that haven’t got boobs, because the cis male authors have been drawing it this way since the early 00s before non-binary is where it got today.
Nothing to do with comfort of non-binary persons. Just to context of the writers.
Rude not to Shaka back 🤙
that’s your sign culture not mine
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
I mean I didn’t conflate anything; the comic writer opted for the term rape. there’s a whole separate argument about how maybe rape isn’t the right word in the rest of the animal kingdom because it has weight among humans and saying it’s the same thing gets used in a rapists’ mindset that it’s natural and justified.
But that’s a whole ‘nother thread.
Anyways, yeah, I did kick off. You shared your comic with rape in it and I’m putting in my two cents. No refunds for either of us, eh? Have a good one. Moving on, as you say.
Edit: OP deleted their original comment wherein they told me to “kick off” and that I took a comic too seriously 🤷 just uuuh, discussing humor… if you’re mad for me saying jokes with rape aren’t funny to me, that’s your prerogative just as it is mine to state an opinion.