Dumbing of Age

I think there's no need to "retroactively" have it coming since the reason he dated her in the first place was to "break her in" (his words).

edited 13th Nov '11 3:49:44 AM by Medinoc

... Which in no way deserves being beaten up, because we know he did not mean anything like forcing her into sex. It's been made pretty clear that Joe is in no way a rapist or anything like it — he's just a jerk who is inconsiderate of the feelings or emotional needs of others, which is bad, but, you know, not quite as bad as being a sexual predator. Enjoying sex with other consenting adults, even if you're a jerk about it, in no way makes you deserving of physical abuse.

In addition, Joyce had no idea of Joe's intentions, and at no point did he even say anything lewd or particularly suggestive to her during their date. In fact, he was incredibly respectful towards her, considering the (unintentionally, in that she's "innocent") horrible way she acted towards him even setting aside the violence.

Again, total victim-blaming. Is Joe a jerk? Yeah. Does this in any way whatsoever make Joyce's behaviour even remotely acceptable, or make her anything other than the one bad guy in this situation? (Setting aside Mike, who is horrible, but isn't supposed to be portrayed as anything other than horrible)

The correct answer is "no". The comic's strongly implied answer is "yes." This makes me dislike that story arc very strongly, especially in the context of the prevalence of Abuse Is Okay When It’s Female on Male in oh so many fictional works.

edited 13th Nov '11 4:26:51 AM by girlyboy

I think I may be being a bit too soft on Joe. I mean, he really is a jerk, and, well, a bit of a misogynist. It's just that I've never seen him actually do anything particularly terrible (say plenty of terrible things, sure, but even then...) I guess the main effect of that story arc for me was to make Joe a much more sympathetic character, after seeing him spend an evening being extremely tolerant and then get beaten nearly to a bloody pulp for it, and then sort-of kind-of be blamed for it. If it weren't for this situation, I'd probably dislike him strongly, but now it's, like, he already got far, far worse than he deserved, so I'm sympathetic instead.

Also, I kind of can't help liking Joyce anyway, which I find mildly disturbing.

edited 13th Nov '11 5:05:40 AM by girlyboy

Has there been any official confirmation from David Willis that he started doing Dumbing Of Age because he got inspired by Community? Because the very first thing I thought when I first saw any Community at all was "Annie is kind of like Joyce". (Yes, Joyce predates Annie's existence by some time, but Community started in 2009, Dumbing Of Age started in 2010, and David Willis is a fan of the show, so I think my theory has evidence.)

edited 13th Nov '11 5:32:57 AM by AirofMystery

In Joyce's defense, A) The way Joe was acting would be highly offensive to someone like her, and B) She is a cartoonish exaggeration and shouldn't be expected to follow normal moral rules.

If you really want to get into this, you could talk about Sarah's brutal beat-down of that would-be rapist. Did he have it coming to him? Absolutely. Was Sarah's response excessively and unnecessarily violent? Probably. But it's a comic strip, so it's ok if we just want to enjoy the show.

The first Roomies! book has him speculating on the possibility of returning to college, and that was released before Community. The final public Joyce & Walky! comic which has the duo speculating on whether or not they would've ended up together without all the alien/SEMME craziness, and one before that has Joyce saying that Twitter sounds like something she would do if she was college-age again. Both of those were about five months after Community started.

Between that and his massive back-log, he clearly had this in mind for a long time. So I doubt Community was the main impulse.

I also recall him saying—perhaps on Tumblr—that Community was more like Shortpacked!, with young people feeling their way through life with pop culture as their guide.

As for Joe—I don't think either side was supposed to be objectively wrong in that storyline. Of course Joyce would be pissed off he slept with someone else the night of their date, that doesn't mean the audience has to be.

edited 13th Nov '11 8:17:15 AM by Wackd

Did Joe do anything offensive at all, by any standard, on the actual night of their date? As I recall, he 1) asked what is bad about lust, not in a suggestive way, but as a response to Joyce's constant discussion of religion (which was incredibly offensive), and 2) he apparently glanced at Conquest's chest, which isn't even shown in the comic, I think (we have to take Mike's word for it).

I'm sorry, I think there is one person objectively wrong in this situation, and that's Joyce, and the fact that the comic suggests that there isn't one person objectively wrong in this situation is what makes me dislike that particular arc.

Also yes, it's just a comic, etc., but that particular response always seems hollow to me. You could use it to excuse any behaviour on the part of fictional characters. But at some point, then, why should we even care about their behaviour enough to read the darn thing? We read fiction because we suspend our disbelief enough to care about fictional characters' fictional actions, which comes with the need, sometimes, to question such actions — especially if there is Values Dissonance, with an action the story suggests was right, but that a reader feels was very wrong. I can't imagine enjoying a primary character- and relationship-driven work without suspending my disbelief enough to actually care about the moral values of the various characters' actions.

As for the actual rapist who got bashed with a baseball bat, the first hit was justified because he was actually physically attacking Joyce at that moment, IIRC. The second hit was not justified, since he wasn't a threat at that point, and was just brutal, and could have killed him — I'm not for capital punishment, so, yeah. But in that case, the guy was legitimately a violent attacker, and a violent outburst like that against him seems far more understandable and justifiable than the attack against Joe.

edited 13th Nov '11 9:14:24 AM by girlyboy

Actually, I don't see anything wrong with Joe immediately sleeping around after his failed date with Joyce. It's not like he was aiming for an actual relationship in the first place.

I also strongly sided with Joe during that particular arc, and I don't think anything in the comic suggested that we shouldn't. Joyce was never presented as being "right" for what she did. Yeah, she didn't learn anything from it, but was that really the point? I got the impression that the arc was meant to emphasize her less tolerable traits. I think it's a misreading to say it was condoning the violence against Joe.

edited 13th Nov '11 10:21:46 AM by Clarste

That's what I was going for. We weren't supposed to side with Joyce explicitly, even if we weren't supposed to hate her for it, either.

I think whether or not Joe was in the wrong for sleeping with Roz that last night depends on your own sexual views. Again, it'd be weird for Joyce to not have a problem with it. Besides, we did see her get a little shaken by the thought that Joe was seriously injured by her actions and that it might put her in the wrong.

Is it bad that I see more of myself in Walky with every strip he appears in?

Nothing wrong with that at all. Walky's awesome.

......butts disease?

It's a joke between Willis and Jacques. Jacques likes butt jokes so Willis wrote a guest strip for QC once where a doctor diagnosed Jacques with butts disease.

Well, the joke is just that it's something stupid for Walky to say.

...I'm really wondering why Dorothy decided to let him in. Even if she considers him a friend, surely she realizes that he has nothing meaningful to offer to this situation. Last I checked all she's seen of him is being paralyzed with shyness and shouting random phrases without context, later developing into using said random phrases in an indoor voice. Why let him in?

Because she's kind, and the alternative is for Sarah remove him?

Because Walky had to meet Joyce somehow, so the critical question◊ can be answered.

Walky met Joyce before Dorothy in this continuity, remember? They're friends already.

Oh well, replace "meet" with "get to know better", and it still works.

Because she's kind, and the alternative is for Sarah remove him?

It's not like he has a good reason to be there in the first place, and given that he's in the doorway it wouldn't take much effort to leave. Personally, I don't have a standing invitation for anyone and everyone to enter my room for no reason, so I don't really see it as being at all rude to kick him out.

Woman, ever hear the phrase "Snitches Get Stitches"?

Joyce........NO. Someone drag her ass to the cops.

I smell Its Walky parallels. This isn't the first time Joyce has deliberately forgotten about a traumatic incident, it's just roofies instead of the mind wiper this time.

And besides, Sal has a point. They're operating with too little evidence. The time for cop-calling was last night, now is too late.

Well, they do have multiple witnesses, and it's not as if nobody knows who the guy is. Most of the evidence they ever had on their side is still available.

"You haven't? Oh, right, homeschooled."

I'd like to go on record as saying that I have ridden a bus, many times, despite being homeschooled and often very Joyce-like.