No Alison, no. You don’t get to cry.

Alison… WHAT ARE YOU DOING!!!

Can we all just give Molly a big round of applause for moderating upwards of 1500 comments on the last page.
(and for the beautiful artwork as always, of course)

Those look like angry tears to me, rather than penitent tears.

This is something I don’t see very often in super hero stories. Someone who was young, incredibly powerful, and idealistic would probably make some deeply problematic choices.

I’m trying to be horrified at what’s going on, but for the moment all I can think is that the last panel is just breathtaking…

Okay, I’m back. Um, this is just bad, Alison, so bad. I don’t even understand what’s happening and there’s no way it’s not gonna backfire on you! And I still want to know what you called your doctor about.

This is actually pretty cool. She attacks him, threatens to kill him, kidnaps him, then when he won’t cooperate, she tortures him (or inflicts pain on him to get him to bow to her wishes; that might not be torture). She now has no way of deal with the fallout of this set of actions, short of authorial intervention. Forget asking if any of this is right or wrong for a moment. What is she going to do if Max tells someone? Or if the boosted people in question ask how they got boosted? Is she going to kill Max? If the government got a super after her, Max might be able to up them enough to take her down, so he’s obviously a weak link. What’s public opinion going to look like? Forget the government doing it, what happens when angry mobs show up at her parents’ house. Or start harassing the supers she knows who aren’t as powerful as her. Is she going to kill all the mobs? What about people she works with, like Lisa or her fellow firefighters? Will they want to keep working with her? Short of her killing Max and cleverly hiding the body, or the writer making a decision to just not let it happen,.there ought to be a shitstorm after this, and I am curious to see it.

Oh and by the by, if Alison could *not* rest her hands on Max while he performs on that second to last panel, that would be just– well, you can hardly make things substantially better in this scenario, but, you know

So…..most powers tend to have a downside

Is that actually the case here? The downside, if any, is usually “can’t turn it off” (Patrick can’t stop reading minds, Allison can’t be vulnerable, Feral rejects sedatives so she feels the pain even as she’s healing, Furnace doesn’t have full control, Moonshadow had that problem where she’d occasionally just blend into the background even if she WANTED to be noticed, Lisa’s boosted intelligence is always-on but that doesn’t seem to actually hurt her). Dynamorphs in general have that problem (and Brad is probably unusually sensitive to sound). Daniel/Cleaver’s power would be a lot less troublesome (and might in fact be pure upside) if it didn’t also apply to his cancer, which is less an issue with the power and more a problem with it applying where it’s not wanted.
For powers that aren’t continuously active, I don’t recall seeing much in the way of downsides. But then that category is mostly Hector and that teleporter who only showed up a few times. And it looks like Max is added to that group now.

Yes I do not actually believe SFP will henceforth veer into Manga Entertainment copyrighted property Dragon Ball, this is not actually serious

I, hm, hold on.
I’m waiting for the grand reveal to share my thoughts but something that strikes me as quite odd is that Alison “giving up” into a table-slam came, like, really easily. Couldn’t she have tried to bargain a little more? Seriously, her first argument was “you should do it because it’s morally right” and the second was “you should do it because your reasons for not are whiny”.

I give her hell but I would be very surprised if the answer to why she didn’t at least try to apologize better to him, offer him anything he wanted, try to explain a little better without being condescending (and remember: Max’s main reason out was one of pettiness against her specifically) is because she’s a terrible negotiator. I hope at the very least time was of the essence or something, *anything* that explains the means, because no matter the end, it’s always, always, always judged relative to the means.

Wouldn’t that be the icing on the cake. Next page: a flashback on the hours and hours Alison spent painstakingly convincing these people to get amped up only to table-slam Max after five minutes of berating him for not being convinced by her terrible negociation

That’s true. It’s canon that all the supers know what it’s like to be normal, but I think a lot of people are forgetting that.

The best part will be when she bumps into Patrick next week and he asks ‘So hey, did that cheque I sent you cover the bribe alright to get Max to do his thing for you?’

I bet he would have been much more cooperative (and even appreciative) if she’d given him a check for $25,000,000.

::turning on black humor mode::
a) Alison will bash in Max’s face prior to the recipient waking.
b) Alison wil gouge the eyes out of the recipient prior to them seeing Max.
c) Since we’re approaching Halloween IRL, Max gets a delightful Ghost costume made out of a hospital sheet.
::turning off black humor mode::

Again, hyperbole – at the very least, the recipient of Max’s boost is likely to see his face. I feel confident Alison meant “Nobody but the person you’re going to boost will see your face.” Which is quite doable.

3 pm Central on the Friday it was posted and we’re already at 200 posts.
Yeah, we’re hooked and Brennan and Molly are having fun reeling us in. 😀

I just went back and looked at strongfemaleprotagonist.com/issue-6/page-80-2/ again and realized something. The folder Patrick sent her says “Personal Information on Prospective Businesses Associates”.

“Associates” as in plural. If Max is one of the people in the file, who else is in there? Maybe this is somebody new from his file.

This isn’t “filled with despair” – this is “I’m going to force my will upon others. They’ll thank me when it’s all over.”

People have been saying that Alison needs this to fail. For karma to come back and bite her for taking the forceful option because she is now “unquestionably a monster”.

But consider how all her attempts at peaceful resolutions (or at least those where she tries to engage by way of the currently acceptable societal norms) so far have resulted in her repeatedly being openly mocked, emotionally torn down, rejected, thrown out of a place she once called home, having to watch someone she loves slowly and painfully withering away to nothing, having to watch someone she only just recently connected to and started to bond with as a friend be suffering the same fate, basically be told to stand to the side and shut up like a good little girl who can’t do anything by a well meaning ex-teammate who didn’t realize the implications of what he was saying, told the same by an arrogant self-absorbed scholar benefiting from institutionalized educational patriarchy, and causing her to be caught in an endlessly repeated loop of failure.

Sorry that ended up being such a run on sentence but Alison’s been put through a lot so far.

I get, through what frankly feels like a little over-the-top use of rape imagery, we’re supposed to be thinking “This is Wrong”.

But what happens if it’s Wrong and it’s now the only time where what she wants to do to change the overall world for the better actually works?

Where is the line between just quietly sitting there, trying to make the world a better place by example (by “being one of the good ones”) and when you actually HAVE do something a little forceful and uncomfortable to those who benefit from the current status quo?

Are you really a monster then? Or just someone who’s reached the limits of what “fair play” can accomplish and those limits do not allow for any meaningful change?

Disclaimer: I’m not coming down one way or the other yet until this scene has completed and we fully see what Alison wants to do with Max’s abilities. All I’m saying is, this has the potential to be not as morally clear-cut as some are making it out to be and sometimes the only difference between a terrorist and a freedom fighter is who their actions are benefiting.

“Hear, hear” is a call to have others listen to what one is saying (in effect, agreement with what they’re saying); that is the correct way to spell it. “Here, here” doesn’t exist as such, although “there, there” does (which is an expression used to comfort people).

At least, this is how I’ve always understood it as a native speaker. Interested to hear differing perspectives.

Oooo! Someone asking for Pedantry!

“Hear, Hear!” is the imperative case, asking those present to hearken to the sentiment just expressed as a means of showing approval for that statement.

“Here, Here!” Is most often used as a way of getting the beer salesman at the baseball park going up and down the steps carrying his wares to stop and make a sale to the caller. However, in this case, Pol seems to be confirming that he was one of those who posted and is expressing his gratitude for being recognized.

::sit down and looks smug as only a pedantic grey donkey can do while still demonstrating perfect cuteness::

or be willing to engage in undocumented and unplanned human experimentation…
(sooo dark…0

And in addition, as someone very astutely pointed out in the past, Max very much wants to get away from his current situation (notice all the powers he mentioned were Movement powers?) and his power failed him on that point. His dissatisfaction has a lot of potential bases, and all are likely important.

That’s Feral in that bed right? Hmm.. I have a feeling that Al is gonna hit “unintended consequences” here.. Tinkerbelling Feral to the maximum may result in her healing factor getting SO good that her skin heals the instant a scalpel cuts it, and the doctors will no longer be able to cut her organs out at all..

No…!

This is our protagonist? I’ve read this entire strip from the start, and I think this is my finish.

“One, Alison is willing to resort to actual violence here, she’s not making empty threats.”
Um… that makes it even worse, not better.

“I don’t see anyone in this scene denying that Max is being coerced.”
If this is just me reading into what Jubal is saying, I apologize in advance, but…

I think that Jubal may be referring to a similarity to people who say that, if a woman does respond physiologically to a rape, it is therefore consensual, and how wrong-headed that sort of thinking is. Because it isn’t consensual, regardless of physiological response, when the woman has said no. Especially when the woman says no many times. Double-especially if the woman is struggling to prevent it from happening and physical force is used to follow through with the act.

One of the major problems I’ve always had with utilitarianism is it quantifies human suffering and pain. I don’t think human suffering and the evils of causing that suffering is quantifiable. Is there some sort of chart somewhere that tells which is more evil? Is a 12 year old orphan girl more worthy of life than a 30 year old loving mother of three? Is your (not you in particular, you in general) 5 year old daughter more important OBJECTIVELY than a scientist working on a cure for AIDS who may very well find the cure? Is saving the life of your mother going to get you more points in the utilitarian scale of morality than saving the life of your sister? If you cut out someone’s kidney and put them in a bathtub full of ice, does that evil get nullified by the good of giving the kidney, free of charge, to a girl who would have died within a week without a kidney transplant?

It has an almost robotic, soulless mentality to it that makes it a world not worth being in, which is why so often, the most evil tyrants in history resort to using it to justify their actions.

There is a third thing that we can assume: that whomever Max’s anomaly was tested on, and Alison’s target(s) is/are not the same person(s).

Assault, kidnapping…these are laws that exist and which she is definitely violating.

Context does matter in situations like this. Hurting him to make him do a thing is wrong and wicked but so is killing another person and in our society killing can be justified depending on circumstance.

In our society, there is a system of checks and balances, and a process by which these decisions are subject to oversight and review, so that the decision makers can be held accountable for their actions. Now, we can have a conversation offline, if you like, about whether or not you think that the system works the way it’s supposed to, but we cannot have a conversation in good faith, in which one side is arguing from the premise that the system does not exist.

Alison Green is not subject to any such system. There is no one in the SFP-verse known to us as readers who has the power or the authority to hold Alison accountable for her actions, if she doesn’t feel like being held accountable. I mean, you can see how fundamentally huge a difference that is, right?

I hope it’s Feral! I think Feral is the best case for what she’s doing being explainable.

Other possibilities:
Alison’s Dad (would also explain the tears, but not saving countless lives)

Someone capable of stopping Alison (because what if the threat that needs to be stopped is Alison herself).

I am never going to understand this point of view that killing someone to save fifty million people makes someone “unambiguously the bad guy.” Being “the good guy” then means sacrificing fifty million lives to preserve one. So, I guess…sucks to be any one of those fifty million people or their loved ones, but at least I’m not “the bad guy”? I get to feel good about my non-maleficence at the expense of fifty million lives? That doesn’t seem that heroic to me.

That’s because you’re looking at this like it’s a math problem. 5×10^7 > 1, so therefore, it’s morally justified to coerce/torture/kill the 1, for the benefit of the 50M. That’s not how you do the calculus on that. And, even if I were willing to stipulate that that was a morally acceptable conclusion to come to (and I’m not), that doesn’t change the fact that Alison doesn’t have the moral authority to make those decisions autonomously!

And you still haven’t explained to me why none of the fifty million get a say in this. They are just as dead by your decision whether or not you personally kill them with your own hand.

Yes, I have. The Fifty Million™ don’t get a “say” in this, because they don’t get to decide whether I have to die so that they can live.The Fifty Million™ don’t get to vote on what my life is worth, and they don’t get to declare Eminent Domain on my life-giving phlebotinum, while still claiming the moral high ground. If they subsequently decide to do it, anyway, there is nothing ambiguous about that.

Mostly I take issue with “unambiguous,” though. This is absolutely ambiguous…

There is nothing ambiguous about torture. Torture is wrong, full stop. Evil committed in service of a greater good is still evil. You want to say that this will help the most people, and is therefore the greater good? Okay, fine, maybe it is. You want to say that the ends justifies the means? YMMV, but whatever. But there ain’t a damned thing ambiguous about it.

The other possibility that seems to fit that personal element is her father. But making him biodynamic (assuming Max’s power can work in that way, and we have no evidence to that, Max specifically said ‘other kids’ IIRC) is unlikely to cure his cancer or save countless lives,

The scary possibility is Patrick. Because if Patrick can pull off his endgame and save the kids who save the world, then enhancing him to increase his chances makes a tremendous amount of sense and will save countless lives.

But that also leaves us with an enhanced Patrick, and he’s scary enough already.

So I have to wonder about the reaction to Allison, all the statements that she’s a “monster”, “unforgivable”, “a villain”, etc. And I have to think about Superman.

You see, in Superman’s second issue, Superman took on a corrupt lobbyist working for a munitions manufacturer, who’s sponsoring a war between two South American countries. He forced the manufacturer into one of the armies, and then forced the generals of the countries to fist fight each other. And yet, for some reason, we don’t regard Superman as an unforgivable monster.

Speak for yourself, mate: I’ve been down on the Super-dick for a while, now. #LuthorWasRight

And then of course there’s Batman, who regularly dangles people off the ledges of buildings, and is lauded for being a hardcore hero. And the Punisher, Wolverine and Magneto who have tortured people and yet are regarded as being at most ambiguous antiheroes doing the necessary thing. Even Victor Von Doom gets a large amount of hero worship from fans who do believe the world would be better under his rule.

Yeah, but none of those guys labor under the delusions that they’re heroes, whether they are the recipients of hero worship or not. Well… maybe Batman: I’m not really up on his mythology.

Until Max says that he may have forgotten to mention that that pixie dust is more like faerie fire and this was actually how he caught his apartment building on fire that night they met (he was trying to boost the cleaning staff) and now Alison has to spend the rest of the evening putting out whatever building they are in. 😉

Furnace got some characterization in! See this page through issue Issue 5, page 123: http://strongfemaleprotagonist.com/issue-5/page-119/

If someone told me my niece had some horrible infection and the only cure was a blood transfusion from that guy over there but he refuses because “Meh”, my response to that person would be “Blood is coming out of you, either in a donation pouch or on the floor. Make your choice very quickly”

Are we assuming that “that guy over there” is as wimpy as Max in this scenario? What happens if he pulls out a weapon and says, “Want some, get some, bad enough, take some”?

I’m sorry, but I can’t agree with you on a couple levels. First, elevating rape to a special crime that is unlike and unrelated to any other crime seems like giving it too much credit. Rape is a crime about power and gratification; it is not as heinous as murder, from which there can never be recovery, nor is it as petty as theft. It is, essentially, on par with robbery or home invasion.

Is it awful? Absolutely. Does it deserve to be elevated beyond that, though? I am very ambivalent about this.

The other thing I think that makes this a reasonable comparison is this: from the standpoint of the offender, rape is all about exercising power over a victim that is perceived (by the rapist) as normally being more powerful. While sex is a component, it is generally the least important component in the mind of the rapist.

From the perspective of the victim, rape is mainly horrible because it renders them powerless. Again: sex is a component, but it is not the overwhelming component.

When people compare this scene with rape, generally the aspect that is being compared is the use of force and power over someone who is otherwise unable to reciprocate. What Alison is doing in these scenes is not a sexual rape, but it can absolutely be considered a spiritual rape, and that makes it every bit as wrong.

If Alison has a reason that justifies her behavior in her own mind, that’s great. It does not, however, invalidate the fact that she has violated Max in a very real way and that nothing she does will ever make it right with him.

Okay, I am super happy there’s DnD-type folks here. I love a good story and that’s one of the funnest ways to make one.

But that’s an interesting scenario in regards to what’s happening here. Admittedly, there is a part of me that would love to see Al go full supervillain, or as full a supervillain as someone with her fiber can be. And because of that fiber I’d expect her to do something along the lines of what your player did; find a way to stop herself.

…I cannot imagine the overall response to Allison’s actions being more *positive* if she were black.

“If it comes from personal experience like it sounds you have my deepest…well sympathies doesn’t seem right but no one should have to deal with an event like that. Know that nothing I say is aimed at you.”

No worries, yeah more than a little of what I said comes from personal experience but I try not to get into my personal history too much since I don’t see any reason to give it more focus on my life than it deserves. The sentiment is appreciated though, and yeah – I know it’s not aimed at me personally. 🙂

“Context does matter in situations like this.”
Yep. Context is key. But that’s why I’m so much more annoyed at the actions of Alison here than I was after the hospital. The hospital had context to excuse what happened. The date rape attempt had context to excuse what happened, regardless of whether one thinks Alison overreacted in either situation or not. This has a very NEGATIVE context for Alison – she wanted him to do something because she couldn’t do it on her own, someone who had not done her or anyone else any harm, refused to accept his repeated ‘no’s’, and forced him to do it by physical violence and death threats which she is fully capable and apparently willing to follow through on. She can’t use the excuse of shock, or of protecting another person (sorry to anyone who thinks inaction to not save a nebulous ‘countless lives’ is protecting someone else – it’s not or we’d all need to be roaming the streets right now looking for people to save or having jobs as firefighters and police officers or whatever). She has no excuses for her behavior now except the selfish need to feel personal accomplishment. The fact that her personal accomplishment need happens to be altruistic only helps when it’s her OWN time, sacrifice, and efforts that are doing it, not forcing someone else. Otherwise, she could have built that playground by simply finding a person who knew how to build it and telling them she’s twist their head off if they didn’t build a playground.

“Hurting him to make him do a thing is wrong and wicked but so is killing another person and in our society killing can be justified depending on circumstance.”
Okay I’m going to give a TINY bit of personal info about me – I have a law degree and I’ve passed the bar in a few states. I’m sure there are at least a few other attorneys or at least law students on this forum as well so they’d be able to confirm what I’m saying). There is a difference, at least legally, between murder and other killings, like during time of war or defense of others. And that second part has very specific rules to define when a killing is lawful or unlawful (ie, murder, manslaughter, etc). That’s why murder is defined as an unlawful premeditated killing of another human being. What Alison was threatening to do was to murder him. What she did to the flamethrower guy was not the same as what she was threatening to do to Max, because there was a defense of others defense involved. You could also say there was emotional shock. Neither fit here.

“The difference between what we have here and real life is that in real life when someone forces their will on another like this its nearly always for selfish or just cruel reasons.”

Very few people do bad things and think to themselves ‘I’m doing this for a cruel reason.’ People are remarkable in that they can rationalize all sorts of horrible things they do in order to try to put a positive spin on it and make themselves look noble. The worse the crime, often the worse the rationalization. This happens both in real life and in fiction, although it’s more disturbing and regularly occurring in real life. A lot of people also have a type of moral myopia. When they do something, it’s justified for whatever reason they make up – when someone else does it, it’s an atrocity.

Captain Janeway in Voyager destroying another Starfleet ship for violating the prime directive, or Captain Kirk orchastising someone about the prime directive, or Captain Picard letting an entire civilization die (the episode with Worf’s brother) for the prime directive to be upheld, even though Janeway regularly violates it, as does Kirk, as does Picard – when it suits their needs.

Batman capturing others who are vigilantes…. despite him being a vigilante.

Dean on Supernatural. Killing monsters – even ones who are going out of their way to NOT be monstrous. The fact that his brother was pretty much becoming the most dangerous monster didn’t matter, and he protects him and makes excuses (because they’re brothers). Sam’s been guilty of this too.

Laurel on Arrow – Gets angry at Ollie for lying about having a son when the boy’s mother demanded he not tell anyone about him in exchange for being allowed to visit with him. Meanwhile, Laurel has herself lied to people who are supposedly her best friend and loved ones, including hiding her sister’s death from her father and pretending to be said sister and getting Team Arrow to help cover up the death.

“You just don’t hear about a someone strong arming a doctor into performing a life saving surgery. If you did I’d wager that person goes to jail willingly and with a reduced sentence because I doubt juries like sending someone to prison for saving a life.”

Exactly my point. If there’s a doctor who’s the only one of three in the world who is skilled and intelligent enough to perform a particular operation, but he or she (or even none of the three) choose not to for whatever reason, we don’t put a gun to their heads and demand they do it or we will kill them.

“The addition of the supernatural muddies the waters so much in times like this.”

Which is why I also use examples from popular fiction so often as well 🙂

“Max has a thing that literally only he can do. The options are he does it or it doesn’t get done.”

This can be shown in a real life scenario as well – like my doctor example above.

Great talk, thanks.

I think this has to a lot with framing, here we are suppose to ask about the questions of the story as with the big two works are more simple minded.

I understand your reasoning in your scenario. However, unlike Alison, you would at least be arrested and punished for your actions, even though you did so to save your niece’s life. It’s Alison’s inability to face justice for the negative act that she’s doing, regardless of the beneficial outcome to her or someone else, which is the real problem and makes her action even worse – evil even. And not just to the guy – to society itself.

By a utilitarian logic, killing a few healthy people for their organs DOES make sense. It’s a net win of how many people will be saved vs how many will die. One person’s organs can save the lives of dozens of people.

That’s one of the many flaws in utilitarian philosophical thinking.

hehe. His comment is still upvote-worthy.

“that second to last panel,”

I read it that way the first time, too. 😀

I’m ashamed to say this made me laugh.

” No, it’s not, because only rape is just like rape.”

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XAGLpFNuM2w

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Nz8YrCC9X8

I kinda hope that’s Feral they are sprinkling fairy dust on. But Alison is taking a huge risk here. I don’t get the impression she knows the details of how Max’s power operates. What if superpowering somebody has negative consequences for them and everybody? what would Allisons next power level even be, a literal nuke? What would Ferals be? to not feel the pain? To be able to generate limbs she never had to begin with? Shapeshifting? Would superpowering Feral prevent the operation on her, ruining her wishes? What about Paladin… would she go insane with too much intelligence if there is such a thing?

This isn’t as bad as molesting your child.

And what previous things are you thinking of?

“It literally costs him nothing to do this.”

How do you know? We’ve seen biodynamics that have powers which take a toll on them both mentally or physically. And those are people with far more practice with their powers than Max is likely to have. Then there is the fact that being known to others very much does put Max in a position where he is vulnerable to exploitation by strong people with powers that want to be stronger.

Did someone say harvest people for their organs?

She could tell her targets what she plans to do without telling them how or with whom. Telling the targets “I know a guy who can [do whatever Max is doing] and wants his identity kept secret” would allow for both Max’s privacy and the targets’ informed consent.

Well I did say ALMOST everything. 😛