I’m as cool as ice cream! I’m so hip, I can’t see over my own pelvis! 😎

When you capitalize Nice Guy like that, I think of Nice Guy syndrome, where, as it turns out, the “nice guy” is actually a selfish dick with little to offer aside from obedience.

This is different from the movie trope you’re trying to describe, which I think I understand, but I haven’t seen any like Clevin. Usually they’re present a lot more than just “hey, want to go to a movie?” and are even often the best friend of the protagonist, and they don’t “secretly” (not that it’s secret, it just hadn’t been shown) have a huge group of friends and lead a band.

They may have drawn that comparison. But it’s not like there was anything showing that one of them was clearly the “wrong” option she was taking because she’s incapable of making the right decision immediately.

The narrative of Max explicitly asking her out first, her discovering that this person she didn’t know at all has fundamentally different and incompatible world views from her, and then immediately dumping him for it? After dumping him she possibly goes out with someone who has been shown to at least share her view that people in need should be helped and that possibly working out? That narrative?

What’s sexist about dating people until you find one that you actually like? And if it happens to be a nerd, big whoop.

You can’t even claim that there’s the implication that she shouldn’t have ever gone out with Max. Since then she wouldn’t have been able to help Feral. And while that’s a highly debated action here in the comments, I don’t think Alison would trade her friend’s well being for not experiencing that jerk.

It does matter. The fact that it’s not just a fictional construct written to insult women means that you can include it in your story as long as it’s not written to imply that. And this comic does nothing of the sort. Heck, Clevin isn’t even all that big of a nerd.

Honestly, the Feralidin ship has way more similarities to this trope (Feral literally torturing herself for the sake of a jock that doesn’t even like her that way. And as soon as she stops torturing herself she falls for the first nerd she sees?). But no one complained about it being sexist or homophobic. Why? Because it’s a cute ship that doesn’t have any of your projected negative framing on it.

I’m sort of appalled that you took my comparison of Feralidin seriously. But Lisa is a literal genius who spends so much time on her chosen subject that she often doesn’t sleep, and who doesn’t appear to have any friends outside of Ali/her robots… I’m not sure how you define nerd, but Lisa definitely is in my book.

I don’t see how you’re automatically assuming that Alison will be “robbed of her agency”. The only way this could follow that trope is if she immediately, and with little reason, fell in love with him and they lived happily ever after with no consequences or hardships whatsoever. And given the nature of this comic, I don’t see that even remotely being a possibility.

On the other hand, if they go on a few dates, find that they work well together and have a mutual like/love for each other, support each other through their hardships, and Ali never says anything liie “why didn’t I go out with you sooner?”, then I don’t see anything wrong with their relationship.

We just don’t have enough to go on to make judgements. And I don’t see the need to start bashing the possible ship because of the implications if it’s written poorly (something which this comic hasn’t done so far). Honestly, I just want Alison to be happy. If Clevin does that for her (and it’s written well which I assume is a given), then I’m all for it.

I think our disagreement about Lisa comes from how we’re using the word nerd. You mean the stereotypical teenage nerd, and I mean the actual definition (someone who has extensive knowledge of a subject most don’t and is, to some degree, anti-social). And I agree she is not a nerd by your definition. Although characters can (and do) have multiple traits. The mentor figure just has to be someone the protagonist looks up to and goes to for advice. They can be quirky, serious, confident, etc. while still fulfilling that role. Just look at Doc Brown and Obi-Wan; both mentors, vastly different.

As far as the potential Clevin relationship, why would you feel the need to judge them unless it was due to the message it sends about real life? You mentioned in a different comment that the large presence of this trope is what gave rise (in part), to the many men who feel entitled to a girlfriend because they’re a Nice Guy.

So you can see how you saying that: if a narrative ever has a girl wind up with a nerd after rejecting someone more attractive than him – no matter how well written it is or if there was no reason to reject the attractive person before getting to know them or if she uses her agency to decide to date the nerd for completely reasonable decisions. Then it’s bad.” Would feel like you condemning (nice choice of word btw) people who made a similar choice in real life.

Anyway, I wasn’t telling you not to judge it. I was saying wait to judge it until there’s actually something to judge. And that depending on how it plays out, there may be nothing misogynistic about it.

But by objecting to her even possibly choosing Clevin, you’re denying her the right to make that choice. And sending the attitude that no matter the circumstances, choosing a “nerd” over someone more attractive/assertive is just a male fantasy rather than a possible choice a woman could make. Unless at some point they say it was bad of her to ever consider Max, then the trope you object to won’t ever happen.

It’s the same as criticizing any media portraying a stay at home mom but without any consideration of whether she wanted to or if other women who aren’t exist in that media. As long as it’s the fictional character’s choice (and not for unrealistic or bad reasons), then it’s perfectly fine.

You claim that it’s only relevant if it supports your attitude towards a potential way this plays out. That’s terribly narrow-minded. I’m saying it’s relevant because it’s an example of a perfectly healthy behavior that can result from a different attitude pulled from a well written version of the events. One where nerds aren’t inherently un-date-able (something they were often portrayed as in the past), and that if both parties agree to a relationship, then it can be a good one regardless of the “nerdiness” of either person.

I agree that if she ‘settled’ for him or suddenly ‘realized her love for him since he was nice to her and likes her which automatically means she now likes him too,’ that would be problematic. But that’s just a possibility. And considering how well written this comic has been, one that seems unlikely.

If she decides to date him and legitimately likes him (after spending time with him and not instantly), then there shouldn’t be anything problematic at all.

No, no, no to all of those things. Alison is not a real person. An author is writing what’s happening to her.

Are you saying there comes a point when the message conveyed by the text is out of the author’s responsibility?

I’m not saying it doesn’t happen, but insofar as it’s not a fallacy authors put onto themselves, I don’t feel that it disenfranchises them from the responsibility of the meaning and impact of their work.
What I have been arguing for all along.

Depends. Does that genius/person with a small circle of friends know even the most obscure details about their subject? Do they desire to know everything they possibly can about it? Do they have that small circle of friends because they’re at least somewhat socially inept/anti-social? Then yes.

For example: Pint-sized? Definitely a nerd. Patrick? Not really since he doesn’t obsess about a subject to a detail that others would find insignificant (although if we’d spent more time with his character, he probably would be a total Looney Tunes nerd).

Hey I just don’t have any particularly strong feelings about Clevin beyond his eyewear for me to get my shackles up in arms yet 🙂

I’m always inspired by Daryl Davis in these cases.

He is a black musician and he managed to dismantle an entire KKK sect in Maryland by talking to them and becoming friends with them.

He is really one of my personal heroes because he showed the value of engaging your opponents in a way that makes you see each other viewpoint and see each other as human beings. No matter how much you might think each other of as monsters.

But it isn’t just pacifism. It is going out there and talking to people. And it did work. Daryl Davis took down an entire KKK sect. On his own, while being what these people despise the most.

Shouldn’t that prove the merrit of his method?

This isn’t about punishing. If a member of the KKK does something wrong or commits a hate crime, they of course should be punished. I never said they shouldn’t be.

This is about stopping organisations like the KKK. Davis showed how to do this in an incredible effect way that I have not often seen. He did not merely aknowledge that their way of thinking is awful, he went out and explained it to them. He showed them that their way of thinking was wrong by engaging them and befriending them if they showed to be open to his friendship.

It is about finding a way to stop people from being divided and hating each other. I think the left and right can learn a lot from Davis and what he has done.

Why are these hate crimes located in areas that voted heavily for Hillary?

I’m not treating it as an omnipresent boogeyman, I’m just disputing the idea that it was somehow convinced to pack up and go home thanks to a single jazz musician.

Shouldn’t that prove the merrit of his method?

Not really. All that proves is that not all bigots hate with the same degree of intensity. That “turn the other cheek” jive might work on the least intolerant, but it’s not going to work on most bigots.

And it still sends the problematic message of the oppressors tasking the oppressed to end their oppression.

It’s still turning the other cheek, in the sense that it sends the message that you can “talk” your way out of racism. That might work with a minority, it won’t work with the rest. With the rest, the oppression won’t end until you take away their power to oppress.

Plenty of non-oppressed groups do indeed agree that the KKK is awful. Many of them will also be eating with their bigoted relatives on Thursday, and not checking them on their bigoted, racist, sexist, homophobic, transphobic, Islamaphobic beliefs. Some of them will even have the audacity to wear safety pins at work, but not to Thanksgiving dinner. So, what is that worth?

Alright then, you got me. Keep believing that all the world needs is “a little more understanding,” and that it’s the burden of POC to end racism by changing the hearts of the racists*. By all means, don’t let me stop you.

*(As long as they do it in a manner that is approved by the moderate majority, of course).

Daryl Davis didn’t passively sit by and let their beliefs go unchallenged. He also claims to have dismantled the KKK in Maryland but the evidence to back up his claim is sketchy.

You’re criticizing people who are pointing out that the KKK and neo-Nazis are a heinous and intolerant bunch and telling them that they should just go out an make friends instead. That’s tone trolling, dude.

I’m sorry, I thought you were reffering to many of the people on the right as Nazies. I misread you on that part.

Sam, i didn’t call anyone person out directly. Definitely not SJ! I really dig his/her comments. I was talking about the never-ending thread back when everyone was condemning Alison’s actions and comparing that line of thinking to the election. Yes, I thought it was childish and self-righteous, and yeah, I think there’s some connection there– that I can’t put my finger on–to the way people voted third-party. To those who turned away from Clinton and led us to this current political moment because they couldn’t deal with any pragmatism or moral compromise. And this administration–with its neo-nazis and racists in the cabinet–is the result of that. That’s part of how we got to a Trump presidency. I think that’s the type of illogical thinking that third-party voters were using as well. I think there’s something there. And yeah, i think those were moral and intellectual failures. Now if I’m afraid to articulate any of that because someone will call me hateful for it, I think that’s kind of screwed up.

Yeah, i can’t keep track of who said what, but you’re saying that questioning anyone’s particular view is insulting? Even in a webcomic that’s fully about effecting change and questioning moral choices? So if someone on here makes makes what they think is a reasonable argument against, I dunno, interracial marriage and I question and judge their morals and logic, I’m just being insulting? I just shouldn’t say anything? So if I question or condemn any particular view–even if I believe that view leads to enormous pain in its indulgence–like with the third-party voters– I’m somehow being insulting by pointing it out? To hell with that!
That’s not okay, Sam. Just as an example, and this might be going down the rabbit hole, the that last time I commented on here, some guy on here actually compared calling someone “stereotypically fat”–just to describe her socioeconomically–to being the same as having a nazi tattoo. Let that sink in for a moment. Even though the person being described as “stereotypically fat” WAS the person with the nazi tattoo! Someone actually commented that these two things were on the same level. That is a disgusting and immoral response. Full stop, as Allison would say.
There! I’m fully judging that false equivalency. Because of the way it defends and normalizes the fucking nazi tat. That was bullshit and it was probably done by someone who thinks of themselves as liberal and enlightened. And that response deserves to be judged. Because sometimes things should be judged. People are accountable. That’s how things get better.
Jesus, I’m in for it now….I’ll check back later. Gotta work.