Prog 1798: Mecha Death!

[jamesedwards]

Christ, I mangled my syntax there. Hope the intent comes across - violence can be justified, rape is always about power and humiliation and can't ever be justified.

[Proudhuff]

rape is always about power and humiliation and can't ever be justified.

On that point lets hope wwe can all agree.

[Link Prime]

'Lenny Zero' has been the highlight of the Prog in the past coupla months I'd say.
Would love to see Diggle & Willisher return for another series.
Yeah.

[TordelBack]

If drugging and blackmailing a girl who doesn't want to have sex with you/go out with you is your idea of "savagely poetic justice" then you're a scumbag and I'm glad I don't know you. Homicide and war are not inherently void of justification but sexual assault and rape never are. "losing your inhibitions" is the philosophy of a date rapist. We have a right to inhibition.

James, I'm a bit taken aback here. 

If you'd asked me I would have said that I was perhaps overly sensitive to the use of rape and/or the threat of rape in comics.  Like almost everyone you're ever likely to meet I have been both directly and indirectly affected by sexual abuse and sexual violence, and spend a fair bit of my time taking people to task over the casual use of the term 'rape' in everyday conversation.  I happen to agree entirely with your opinions on rape in the real world as expressed here.

However, I simply don't see this as an issue here, in a fantasy story featuring an imaginary comical aphrodisiac, a sentient cash machine, a talking polar bear and all the sexual-political subtlety of a Carry On movie.  Lenny, a former fascist bullyboy turned murderous criminal wreaks a horrible vengeance on another even-more fascistic bullygirl who ruined his life through a duplicitious quasi-seduction and, from his point of view, betrayal.  It's not exactly roofies down the rugby club.

Obviously our views differ, but I'd thank you and The Prodigal not to call me a scumbag unless you want to do it to my face, when I'll be happy to oblige you with a less restrained response.

[The Prodigal]

If drugging and blackmailing a girl who doesn't want to have sex with you/go out with you is your idea of "savagely poetic justice" then you're a scumbag and I'm glad I don't know you. Homicide and war are not inherently void of justification but sexual assault and rape never are. "losing your inhibitions" is the philosophy of a date rapist. We have a right to inhibition.

James, I'm a bit taken aback here. 

If you'd asked me I would have said that I was perhaps overly sensitive to the use of rape and/or the threat of rape in comics.  Like almost everyone you're ever likely to meet I have been both directly and indirectly affected by sexual abuse and sexual violence, and spend a fair bit of my time taking people to task over the casual use of the term 'rape' in everyday conversation.  I happen to agree entirely with your opinions on rape in the real world as expressed here.

However, I simply don't see this as an issue here, in a fantasy story featuring an imaginary comical aphrodisiac, a sentient cash machine, a talking polar bear and all the sexual-political subtlety of a Carry On movie.  Lenny, a former fascist bullyboy turned murderous criminal wreaks a horrible vengeance on another even-more fascistic bullygirl who ruined his life through a duplicitious quasi-seduction and, from his point of view, betrayal.  It's not exactly roofies down the rugby club.

Obviously our views differ, but I'd thank you and The Prodigal not to call me a scumbag unless you want to do it to my face, when I'll be happy to oblige you with a less restrained response.

In all honesty tordel I agreed with James' post as a better expression of my own post (hence the double quick succession post) and my post was in that context. I was genuinely focusing on the second part of his post which I felt articulated far better what I wanted to say. Maybe I should take my time in future  because as a rule I don't play internet warrior games or throw cheap shot insults at people. That was genuinely unintended and I apologise for a genuine oversight and any offence caused.

That preceding paragraph was not influenced by your last line btw. That was wasted on me. I am just making a genuine apology for offence caused because believe or not I feel that is important in itself.

Cheers tordel.

[TordelBack]

Thanks for that Prodigal, I appreciate the clarification.

[The Prodigal]

I now feel that I am beating this thing to death but should have also said that while I appreciate the fantastical aspects of the story context I am not convinced that is sufficient to obviate the issues presently being debated.

For me the poop rises to the surface of the story context however fantastical. One opinion among many.
There you go.

[a chosen rider]

I now feel that I am beating this thing to death but should have also said that while I appreciate the fantastical aspects of the story context I am not convinced that is sufficient to obviate the issues presently being debated.

For me the poop rises to the surface of the story context however fantastical. One opinion among many.

Yeah, this is about where I'm at with it really.  I think with the way the aphrodisiac was presented last week, as a non-lethal way of incapacitating the Judges shown briefly and then done with, the story succeeded in glossing past the issue without inviting too much dwelling on the darker implications.  Lenny using the same drug retributively against an ex and videotaping the result takes it to an altogether nastier level with closer real-life parallels.  And while I don't think that sort of ugliness is necessarily forbidden territory for a comic to cover or even outside the bounds of Lenny's established character, it is jarringly at odds with the light tone of the strip so far, and makes the titillating nature of that particular panel seem like very poor taste.

For me, I think, a lot is going to swing on how/if the incident is addressed in next week's wrap-up.  The light in which the script presents Lenny's actions will make all the difference to me in whether it comes off as a momentary lapse into questionable taste or something considerably more toxic.

[DrJomster]

On a different note, Dredd was brilliant. As mentioned above, wonderful to see a post-DoC story that felt post-DoC. And the art was gorgeous. The depiction of that ambitious, overly self-assured face was brilliance. The colouring was superb as ever. Really looking forward to next week!

[jamesedwards]

If drugging and blackmailing a girl who doesn't want to have sex with you/go out with you is your idea of "savagely poetic justice" then you're a scumbag and I'm glad I don't know you. Homicide and war are not inherently void of justification but sexual assault and rape never are. "losing your inhibitions" is the philosophy of a date rapist. We have a right to inhibition.

James, I'm a bit taken aback here. 

If you'd asked me I would have said that I was perhaps overly sensitive to the use of rape and/or the threat of rape in comics.  Like almost everyone you're ever likely to meet I have been both directly and indirectly affected by sexual abuse and sexual violence, and spend a fair bit of my time taking people to task over the casual use of the term 'rape' in everyday conversation.  I happen to agree entirely with your opinions on rape in the real world as expressed here.

However, I simply don't see this as an issue here, in a fantasy story featuring an imaginary comical aphrodisiac, a sentient cash machine, a talking polar bear and all the sexual-political subtlety of a Carry On movie.  Lenny, a former fascist bullyboy turned murderous criminal wreaks a horrible vengeance on another even-more fascistic bullygirl who ruined his life through a duplicitious quasi-seduction and, from his point of view, betrayal.  It's not exactly roofies down the rugby club.

Obviously our views differ, but I'd thank you and The Prodigal not to call me a scumbag unless you want to do it to my face, when I'll be happy to oblige you with a less restrained response.

Read what I wrote. I still think that anyone who believes the forceful removal of sexual integrity is a valid method of retribution holds a rather vile opinion. Maybe that's something we agree on! Maybe you haven't thought this through.

Zero's ex - who is such a cipher I can't even remember her fucking name - was acting to prevent Zero from abusing the awesome powers vested in him. She was doing her job, and upholding vows she made. Yes, the Judges are all fascists. Zero is a fascist turned freebooter. She was doing her job and she rejected him. For that she gets to be mutilated and violated on camera. It's a rapist's revenge fantasy strip now. Zero spend the whole strip planning this.

Getting someone pissed and knowingly having sex with them against their usual sober wishes is outright rape. This example - which trappings aside is really not that fantastic - simply uses sci if magic to remove the rapist from the rape and make the victims do all the  work. My initial reaction was "Jesus, they're going to wake up feeling dirty and used" which was an upsetting reaction to fiction. The one liner seals it for me - this is supposed to be funny, but it ain't. Strange Days has a sci-fi rape too, but that was never played for giggles.

Having met Diggle a few times and having hoped he'd do well in America there's absolutely nothing about this I'm not taken aback on. It's just so weird, sad and pointless.

[Jim_Campbell]

James: you're conflating what you wrote with being the only valid reading of the strip. Whilst I don't necessarily disagree with your reading of the strip, and defend your right to be offended by it, you've made your point repeatedly and at length, and I suspect that it's your assertion that anyone who disagrees is a 'scumbag' or 'vile' that's getting up people's noses.

I imagine it was Andy's intent that the drug causes the judges to shed their inhibitions and give in to their own (albeit repressed) desires in a Rocky Horror-esque orgy of liberation, rather than a grim compulsion to fuck the first thing with a pulse the victim lays eyes on. If that was Andy's intention, then I feel that the execution is somewhat wanting: the scene certainly goes too far for me. Nonetheless, I recognise that this is a text and other readings are possible, and even valid, and you may want to lay off accusing people with views other than yours of being tacit supporters of rape.

Jim

[The Prodigal]

James: you're conflating what you wrote with being the only valid reading of the strip. Whilst I don't necessarily disagree with your reading of the strip, and defend your right to be offended by it, you've made your point repeatedly and at length, and I suspect that it's your assertion that anyone who disagrees is a 'scumbag' or 'vile' that's getting up people's noses.

I imagine it was Andy's intent that the drug causes the judges to shed their inhibitions and give in to their own (albeit repressed) desires in a Rocky Horror-esque orgy of liberation, rather than a grim compulsion to fuck the first thing with a pulse the victim lays eyes on. If that was Andy's intention, then I feel that the execution is somewhat wanting: the scene certainly goes too far for me. Nonetheless, I recognise that this is a text and other readings are possible, and even valid, and you may want to lay off accusing people with views other than yours of being tacit supporters of rape.

Jim

I would like to start this post by exclaiming that I loved the rest of this prog! Can I also put my hands up and acknowledge that I am also Mr Repeatedly and At Length-I apologise if this getting tedious for people.

Jim thanks for your post-but there is something in the precise and wilful targetting of Lenny's ex and the explicit reference to a camera running during that scene that for me bears all the hallmarks of a carefully contrived sexual revenge scene-not just some generalised negation of inhibition. Arguably even if it was the latter as James said people have the right to their inhibitions, though for the reasons just stated I don't think we can confine what happened to that context.

Tbh the story-line has me on the horns of a dilemma-one in which I will gladly take the advice of this board. This may get a derisory laugh but I'll risk it. I'm an old newbie-by which i mean I am a relatively old fart who hadn't read 2000ad since the 70's after departing for all things spandex. I came back on board at Christmas and while my newsagent didn't stock it, he was kind enough to order me one. Lately i have noticed that instead of just ordering me one he orders a few more and puts them out on the shelves, right beside the rest of the comics with no distinctions made. Now just in case anyone gets the wrong idea I like a great many aspects of 2000AD's adult orientation but for a few weeks now I have felt that maybe I should say something to the newsagent in case a comic was bought in ignorance on the basis of a colourful cover and ended up in a kids hands but frankly struggled for the right formula of words to express what I wanted to say. I'm sitting here this morning more convinced than ever that I now really need to say something but really don't want my local newsagent picking up the copy reading it and viewing me as one of the smaller towns lead pervos.

Right what am i asking?? Simply this. Where do other folks newsagents place this publication and should I wear a disguise?

[Jim_Campbell]

Jim thanks for your post-but there is something in the precise and wilful targetting of Lenny's ex and the explicit reference to a camera running during that scene that for me bears all the hallmarks of a carefully contrived sexual revenge scene-not just some generalised negation of inhibition.

Forgive me, but I really, really wasn't talking to you, and I don't think you've read what I wrote properly. I'm not disagreeing with James' point about rape being horrific and unjustifiable (or yours, for that matter). I'm disagreeing with his assertion that his must be the only correct reading of the strip and therefore if you disagree then you align yourself with rape apologists.

(Without wishing to digress too far, I have long been a vocal advocate of making 2000AD all-ages appropriate again and that would be my preferred solution to your newsagent quandary. Much to everyone's relief, however, I'm not Tharg's right-hand man.)

Jim

[SmallBlueThing]

Don't worry Prodigal, youre not alone. I know for sure that if WHSmith, for example, were to be made aware of 'that panel', the comic would run the risk of being displayed right up high with the FHMs and CLiNTs. They're notoriously touchy about such things.

Currently the prog is displayed on the bottom shelf, next to DWM and The Fortean Times, alongside Empire, Batman, MWoM, etc. Well away from 'the kids comics', but down low where people dont expect nudity and raunchy prod-games.

But the prog doesnt have this kind othing regularly- in fact this panel is (ignoring last week's) only the second i can remember, after Necrophim's infamous 'fucking miss piggy, doggystyle' bit. And that was years ago.

From time to time, 2000AD has a penis in its pages (usually when simon davis is around- he's always lurking somewhere in the prog, ready to surprise you with one of his purple organs) but i think most are okay with that.

The problem we have here is an old one- yes, OF COURSE there's nothing wrong with (cont)

[The Prodigal]

Jim thanks for your post-but there is something in the precise and wilful targetting of Lenny's ex and the explicit reference to a camera running during that scene that for me bears all the hallmarks of a carefully contrived sexual revenge scene-not just some generalised negation of inhibition.

Forgive me, but I really, really wasn't talking to you, and I don't think you've read what I wrote properly. I'm not disagreeing with James' point about rape being horrific and unjustifiable (or yours, for that matter). I'm disagreeing with his assertion that his must be the only correct reading of the strip and therefore if you disagree then you align yourself with rape apologists.

(Without wishing to digress too far, I have long been a vocal advocate of making 2000AD all-ages appropriate again and that would be my preferred solution to your newsagent quandary. Much to everyone's relief, however, I'm not Tharg's right-hand man.)

Jim

Jim I know you were not talking to me specifically but its a public board and maybe some of the broader issues raised were not located entirely with James so I just weighed in. Forgive me but I thought that was ok to do so. I also did read what you wrote very carefully. I appreciate what you say-all I was saying is that I didn't think that construction maybe stood up that well in the context of what I described.

Of course people have different takes and opinions. That's a given. As long as we conduct those in a context of mutual respect then all should be good.