I mean, some of my friends are a bit sleazy, but I wouldn’t call them creeps.

It’s the atomically thin concept piece which is a deconstruction of poverty. You pay $130 for it, and apparently it dissolves on your tongue. The Newyorker rated it 5 stars.

It’s made by a cartoon duck being tortured. Perfect Capitalism food.

As a more slices person I wish they were super thin… And that disney sandwich they make, I would totally eat that. Always been curious how it would taste. Like a delicacy.

But do those jobs bring the right values? Are they tasks we wish to support? Like these made up numbers:

3000 new ice agents, 5000 correctional workers, 10,000 manufacturing jobs for corrections equipment, 9000 new employees at musk related companies. 1200 new managers for outsourced workers, telling teams overseas how to answer calls. 25,000 construction workers building AI data centers.

A society, any society shows their value not in random economic numbers but in the story those numbers tell. So numbers like this could be a good thing, or could be horrible.

Everyone can be Hitler if the people aren’t real.

I initially read it and it went over my head because she absolutely has a right to dress the way she wants AND to call people out if their staring makes her uncomfortable.

Even if she were topless that’s not consent and doesn’t give people the right to make her feel leared at.

But the audience you’re calling incels are correctly angry because the comic is specifically designed to make her intentions seem at odds with the outcome.

Here is the misogynist view point: ahh she is dressing up sexy FOR PEOPLE TO LEER AT HER, in this view you’re assuming “ahh yeah, she wants it, she wants my attention/mistreatment” <---- even if that mistreatment is as small as leering or unwanted attention.

But what I think you’re overlooking is: People AREN’T complaining about her behavior, they’re complaining about the AUTHOR of the comic setting her (a flag for all women) AND US, the audience up to “read in” the idea that she wants the attention. Wants “perverts” to look.

This is because it’s a drawing of a woman. It’s woman as signifier or a flag of someone elses message. The author’s message is basically “Bitches be that way”

I implore you to understand this though: Real women, and lots of other types of people, sometimes just like to dress sexy. Sure some percent like attention or are challenging the world… But that’s for them to know. The wider set, is UNKNOWABLE. So really hear this: Lots of women do the EXACT SAME BEHAVIOR as in the comic FOR THEMSELVES. Because THEY have a complex relationship to their bodies and want to feel freer.

Sometimes they’re even trying to say “hey my body is just a body, can we stop being horny over something I live with everyday and don’t want to always be read as ‘sex object’” see how this reading gives women (even made up and imaginary/drawn ones) full agency and respect? Sometimes women feel snotty, or gross, or are lesbians, or they’re having their periods, or they want to feel free, or they themselves want to feel sexy to themselves, or they only want the kindest of attention and to feel they can be appreciated without being made to feel leared at by men they consider old enough to be their dads (eg. Inappropriate).

…and that’s their legitimate right.

So that’s why, some comic book guy being like “look at thjs dumb bitch, she fucking wants it and now she’s fucking complaining - irony bro” is a really problematic take.

It’s an UNDERSTANDABLE take, it’s given, it’s a simplified take. As explained earlier it’s a take where the authors is flattening possibilities for women to sex-object. But it should be understood as misogynist.

You don’t want that take because a de-authored view of women, or simplifying them in misogynist ways, is a real turn off. It brings “The Ick” so easily… And it makes you interact with that half of the population so poorly because they’re primarily an object, dim witted and asking for sleazy attention. That’s not good for anyone.

Women want agency and the right to have their complexity respected. It’s not you that’s the problem, you’ve just accurately interpreted the AUTHORS message. The problem is that, that message is already prevelant enough in society to do real damage to how women are treated… And to make the excuses used by the people who do the mistreatment.

Disagreeing with the author’s take, is the honourable thing to do here. But you have to see what they’re doing and what’s being robbed from you, the reader: a more complex view of women, and encouraging them to be themselves freely. That is the only path anywhere good from here. 👍

Ahh okay. I see it now. I just didn’t think about it that much. Good that people are pointing out that this is really the authors doing/set-up.

What’s the trope exactly? Straight men like tits?

I take it you just have the pup, so this tip might be for any cat owners passing by:

I’ve found to treat cats for fleas the best method is a flea comb and a tub of very bubbly soapy water.

The cat doesn’t go in the water, instead you sit the cat on your lap, comb it’s fur gently with the flea comb, and when you spot a flea on the comb, you dunk it in the bubbly soapy water.

…the slimey soapy bubbles capture the fleas, and make it a lot harder for them to escape. Turns a traumatic soggy moggy time, into a nice gentle combing kill session.

Got a rodent problem? Just wash your hands!

Would.

Such a dumb entitled white person set of assumptions being made here:

My door dasher will be from a white Christian culture, so will know Christmas songs.

My door dasher enjoys their job so much they’ll surely enjoy my extra chatter and my hilarious banter!

Mother fucker, your door dasher working Christmas is probably a hindu guy who has no clue what you’re on about. Hence the answer they gave.