balsalm

February 25, 2012 6:56 pm "He said something to Molly that spurred on THIS WHOLE THING and you are asking how I jumped to the conclusion that he doesn’t know how to talk to women!?" Uhhh, yes because apparently that one little moment is indicitive on an entire man's life. Thats essentially what you're saying, right? You practically made up a life story for the guy in two sentences, so again what type of logic was it? Wouldn't maintaining to the text at hand sustain a stronger structure for your arguements than making some giant leaps in logic? That's what you did, is it not? You're the one who brought up logic, remember? That's what my very first post was about. "And yet you have NO ISSUE with Becca’s conclusion that the guy is definitely sexist." I wasn't addressing her, I was addressing your response to her comments with your brash condescending tone which I questioned because I thought you were making some good points, but were being watered down by your method of stating them. "Would this situation happen to everyone? If you had read my posts I have said REPEATEDLY that we ALL make these stupid mistakes, ergo have some forgiveness for the guy in question." Yes, which makes me think that if you're saying that, why resort to some of the comments you've made? You're the one who made this article about "bullying" and then decide to prove your point by utilizing some bully-ish tactics to various others here. Thus questioning my ability to read and understand and ending your post with: "I give up" I'm sorry I'm not on your level, I aways thought my reading-comprehension was fine. If Becca and Molly are higher beings like you've called them and your a little under that and I'm not even on your level, then what does that make me? Yikes!! Now I'm sad. All I asked was a simple question, you're the one who decided to say I couldn't understand what you wrote which is the only reason I formulated my question to begin with. One you have yet to respond to. ...and don't leave. This comics is supposed to be about comics and enjoying them, right? Don't let something like this ruin your experience on the site; you shouldn't let articles get to you so much. You've made some good points, from what my limited reading and understanding allows me, of course.

February 25, 2012 9:47 am ...and seeing how the only details about the man in question is that he was in a comic shop and had a receding hairline, I still don't see how you came to the conclusion that the man in question is "clearly useless around women," and "Instead of being an “attractive” and intelligent person like Molly, this poor guy is socially awkward and it’s not much of a stretch to work out he probably doesn’t have the greatest life as a result of this weakness and probably doesn’t have loads of friends, let alone a girlfriend." Maybe the guy was just hesitant to speak to her in the first place and just trying to be friendly, like any person might be when approaching a stranger. Or are Mr. Smooths and confidents all like Fonzie? They never run into any trouble?Would this situation only occur with the socially akward? You say you have personal experience, but I still don't see how you came to such a descriptive conclusion. Seems like a small sample. You said you used logic, which kind? Inductive or deductive? Many guys that approach girls at comics shops are socially akward he was a guy at a comic shop therefore, he must be socially akward Was that it? Seems to me that in trying to make less of this article, you yourself have decided to deploy a stereotype usually associated with comics, which is sort of what the article is trying to dispute in the first place. Girls can't possibly read comics! This guy messed up trying to approach a girl, he's obviously a socially akward comic fan!

February 25, 2012 9:01 am Doesn't answer my question of why to respond to this article you decided to be mean spirited in much the same way you claim this article is. To me it demeans most of the weight of your claims. You're saying, why are you making a big deal out of nothing, but turn around and say obviously you're going to make a big deal about it because you're perfect aren't you! ...and now you're saying that you truly envy some of their traits in which you describe their "wonderful, perfect lives" and type things like: "We’re human, we’re flawed, we’re often useless, we regret things each and every day – well us non-higher beings anyway. Molly and @itsbecca are clearly from their comments better, they’re superior," which doesn't come off as condescending at all. I was reading through this thread and your posts stuck out mainly beacuse you weren't practicing what you were preaching. Fight fire with fire I suppose? I mean they are higher beings, right? ...and then you end your comments with this, which you've directed towards me twice, "Reading and understanding are not the same thing!" I agree.

February 25, 2012 7:51 am *your

February 25, 2012 7:49 am I did read you're comments, hence my question which you didn't answer. Your opinion is fine, what I'm wondering is how you know that "this poor guy is socially awkward and it’s not much of a stretch to work out he probably doesn’t have the greatest life as a result of this weakness and probably doesn’t have loads of friends, let alone a girlfriend" and is "a bit lame and pitiful." From what I gather, you seem to be saying that there is much ado about nothing, and the article is a "severe overreaction by someone who is dripping with confidence towards someone who struggles with it," but then you make these giant assumptions about the guy, the author and another poster. Like, "if Molly and Becca are like the guy from Limitless in that they can process every potential reaction to everything they say before they say it, then brilliant for them, they must lead wonderful, perfect lives" and "You may be able to think through every connotation of every word you say before it comes out of your mouth, in which case whoopee doo for you it must be fucking awesome" Which read to me like attempts to belittle them much in the way that you claim this article is doing to the man, unless you truly believe they're perfect and not saying it in a sarcastic manner. I don't think there is harm intended on either side.

February 25, 2012 6:03 am So you're saying that this article is disparaging towards that man, but you go ahead and state that by being condescending to the man, the author and other posters? Why? ...and oh yeah, you're the only one using profanity. itsbecca hasn't used it from what I've read. Conor and Josh have checked plenty of people getting a little too "excited." There's a Term of Service on this site.

February 15, 2012 4:26 pm What were you raised by wolves? was great, but it definitely left me feeling sad. Can't believe it's free to read, thanks so much for the link.

February 10, 2012 3:24 pm The Cerebus and Silver Surfer sketches are just...wow.

February 1, 2012 6:48 pm Great post, I especially agree with this: "That said, I won’t fault anyone for reading any of this. But I just don’t see the point. The “universe” of Watchmen was so interesting precisely because we only got a little glimpse of it, only saw little hints of the superhero history that we had to USE OUR IMAGINATIONS to fill-in while we were reading the story. The characters are great characters, but I don’t need to know everything about them." I would rather see Watchmen left alone, the fact that it is so polarizing and revered to this day shows just how significant Watchmen was and still is. I don't see the point of further exploring that world. It's happening, though. Not much else can be said. I just hope these new stories do justice to the characters and the story that so many people love.

January 30, 2012 5:31 pm As if I wasn't already waiting for this since it was announced and now this review makes it seem as good as I hoped! Really looking forward to reading new BKV.