this post was submitted on 23 Mar 2026
218 points (93.6% liked)

Comic Strips

22863 readers
1368 users here now

Comic Strips is a community for those who love comic stories.

The rules are simple:

Web of links

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] tutter@lemmy.blahaj.zone 18 points 14 hours ago* (last edited 14 hours ago) (1 children)

Idk i generally agree but the joke here isn't really rape but more the subversion of expectations, the joke couldve easily been 'yeah i learned last week the magpie steals shit' cut to panel of their keys getting stolen, instead of them learning it through a book. The rape part is of course to heighten the shock value, and is thus more of a prop than the actual joke imo. So it's not like the underlying message is 'rape is funny right guys?', but i definitely also see the objectionable part of using such serious topics like rape as a comedic prop

Also sidenote, this is cyanide and happiness, that's kinda their whole thing

[–] Doug@piefed.social 3 points 14 hours ago (5 children)

I mean switch the character to a woman and ask yourself if rape is taking a backseat to the subversion.

not my kinda humor and I get I’m the buzzkill here but uhhh, just wanted to state my feelings on the matter to maybe help some other like-minded person feel heard.

[–] DaGeek247@fedia.io 4 points 12 hours ago

Changing genders does nothing to this comic.

Despite the word being used, it's not actually a joke about rape. This is a joke on the same level as a weiner dog humping someone's leg. The perspective of an overly amorous duck with the main characters butt in frame add to the humor of it, but it's still only a crappy joke about an animal trying to get it on with a person.

[–] HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world 1 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

C&H characters are genderless unless specified. they're practically stick figures dude

[–] Doug@piefed.social 2 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

Nah they put boobs on ‘em if they’re women; otherwise the default’s a man.

Again I’ve moved on as OP implored me to do in their deleted comment, but uhhh, whatever drives engagement I suppose. 🤙

[–] HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world 1 points 7 hours ago* (last edited 7 hours ago) (2 children)

that's your interpretation of stick figures but okay. they put boobs on them when it's important that they're female. they put a dick on when it's important it's male. that's how stick figures work. otherwise they're genderless.

[–] rat@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

I think its the writers' interpretations too. They really only put dicks on them when the joke is specifically about the dick. There are plenty of times when the character is the normal stick figure with no dick, but explicitly gendered male. But when the character is explicitly gendered female, they always have boobs or a feminine haircut. Also in the animations the standard stick figures are always given masculine voices.

[–] HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world 1 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

Also in the animations the standard stick figures are always given masculine voices.

I watch very few of the animations, but for clarification: what does a nonbinary voice sound like to you?

[–] rat@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

I've heard nonbinary voices that are feminine as well as nonbinary voices that are masculine, but the voices of the standard stick figures in C&H are exclusively masc. And tbh, the type of humor present in C&H really makes me feel like the authors tend to go along with traditional gender norms and the longstanding trope being a man is the norm while being a woman is a special trait.

For the record, I personally hate maleness being the cultural default, but I think its good to recognize the trope when it occurs.

[–] HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world 0 points 6 hours ago

i understand where you're coming from. I've spent too many years in legal and legal adjacent fields where everyone is male regardless of whether they are explicitly female or not. we're still fighting those battles. it's not really my point though:

this is art. could you identify a nonbinary voice by sound alone?

what gendered characteristics does the character have? what causes you to identify it with a specific gender?

[–] Doug@piefed.social 2 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

Ok, if that’s what you think is happening. 🤙 agree to disagree. have a great day bud.

[–] HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world 1 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

no worries, we're just reading different things into it. that's the fun thing about art. i see nonbinary because i'm comfortable with that existing and i don't see gender specified in the characters. you see nonspecified gender must be male because, well you didn't say why.

[–] Doug@piefed.social 1 points 6 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago) (1 children)

because nearly every single c&h comic and animated vid uses male pronouns/male voices for characters that haven’t got boobs, because the cis male authors have been drawing it this way since the early 00s before non-binary is where it got today.

Nothing to do with comfort of non-binary persons. Just to context of the writers.

Rude not to Shaka back 🤙

[–] HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world 1 points 5 hours ago

Rude not to Shaka back 🤙

that's your sign culture not mine

[–] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 9 hours ago

I mean switch the character to a woman and ask yourself if rape is taking a backseat to the subversion.

That would COMPLETELY change the tone and connotations of the joke, making it a completely different comic than the one you're complaining about.

Changing the duck into a man (duck costume optional) would be an equivalent hypothetical to yours.

and I get I’m the buzzkill here

That's not what you're being, no. You're being contrarian with no logic basis, inventing things to castigate that simply aren't present.

maybe help some other like-minded person feel heard.

Nah, let's not help disingenuous purveyors of fallacies feel less alone about their obnoxious behavior.

[–] tutter@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 14 hours ago

No no i getcha, should've maybe stressed the 'its still objectionable' part a bit more. All respect for being a buzzkill btw, that shit is often needed.