165 5702

Y U NO HAVE SISTERS??

Alright, I've only gotten a response back from one of my four Patreon pledgers for the cast page. Check your email. I'm hoping to get these done this week. If not, I'll just post the one I have feedback for. :P October Drawing winners are getting mailed out today, and my drawing for November took me some time to find. I originally drew all these anticipating some far distant eBay listing, but I'm more than happy to give these seven away to one lucky winner for this month (I'll randomly pick the winner on the first of Dec.) These are each 8.5 x 11, on bristol board. Remember, if you're interested, it only takes $5.00/monthly pledge to be entered in the drawing.  The more you pledge the higher your chances get! Visit this link for more info: http://www.patreon.com/shotgunshuffle Good Luck. November Drawings12 November Drawings121 November Drawings122 November Drawings123 November Drawings124 November Drawings125 November Drawings126

165 thoughts on “Y U NO HAVE SISTERS??

    1. Also: “E” missing in “threatened” in the aforementioned speech bubble.

      And I don’t know where Kat’s got her standards from. But they seem rather illusionary when it comes to practicality. Also… a bit over the top maybe? Trying to say it in a polite way here.

    1. The fact that Kat is making blaket judgements about BOTH genders is both annoying and unsettling. I hope Pumpkin isn’t taking her seriously.

      1. Now that is suffering for your art.

        I can only assume you’ll be doing something mild and holistic to restore your peace, like injecting heroine into your tear ducts or spreading your fingers out on a table and dropping a knife between them as quickly as possible.

      2. *sniff*

        Forget first…RUSCHE is today’s reluctant hero for wading through all of that just to get us this.

        Sir, we stand in awe.

        1. What mook. I just mentioned that I wasn’t standing is all. Why, did the sotto voice imply something else that may have inadvertently been inferred in another manner?

      3. I was starting to feel some overlap from facebook posts about catcalling and what constitutes harassment. Basically it seems like if I don’t already know a girl personally then I have no business talking to them, and anything I could say could be considered harassment.

        I mean my crippling social anxieties kinda keep that from happening anyway, but I can see how some of this starts to be absurd.

        1. Anything, at any time. It’s called “creating a hostile environment,” and it’s so vague as to be almost unenforceable, except it’s CONSTANTLY enforced. Even looking in someone’s direction can qualify, and you have little defensive capability in such a situation.

        2. I think basically it comes down to if you happen to do something which is too strongly reminiscent of something, often something innocent, which was related or part of the event of some form of past trauma for an arbitrary person near you (i.e. the look in your eye or the phrase you used was just like someone who attacked them), then you can find yourself accused. How that plays out next depends on the environment/situation/authorities, which can sometimes be no win/accusation == guilt sort of things, though in practice I’ve only noticed it be that bad a few times in my personal experience.

        3. Hostile Working Environment – the King of Double Standards. My ex-manager was fired for creating a hostile work environment for telling a female employee to be at work on time. I was threatened bodily harm by a fellow male employee, and I was told, by HR, to suck it up. As a white male 50 year old employee, I’m only eligible to have complaints raised against me, not to complain myself.

        4. What is somewhat irritating, is that Kat is proving the proverb that is better to be silent and thought of as a fool, than to speak and remove all doubt.

          And the improper acceptance of the stereotypical awkward attempt to say just about anything in the realm of polite conversation bordering on complimentary is just a few degrees short of a social anxiety disorder. But, on the other hand, this kind of cap is a good example of why some people just don’t talk/converse well in social situations. They are too afraid of unknowingly pissing someone off.

    1. Kat is severely belligerent and out on the fringe HOWEVER the basic issue she’s on about is a serious one and its not really all that difficult to deal with. Do NOT Shout. Sexual. Comments. re.. Women’s. Bodies. Clothes. Walk. Etc. PERIOD. FULL STOP. & probably not men’s either. At a Con where people are cos-playing in public, you CAN call out GREAT COS, LOVE YOUR COS, or whatever — so long as you don’t add :Hurr, Hurr, Hurr OR let your tongue hang out of your mouth OR make pelvic thrusts, etc. You can try to strike up a conversation, but don’t start with “I love how your tits look like they’re about to pop out of your cos” or “are you wearing panties under that?” or … *IF* your relationship advances to the appropriate place then you’ll be able to tell someone that they/they’re COS is hot, either as a friend OR as a romantic/sexual partner. WHAT’S SO HARD/INSANE ABOUT THAT? Not all women who dress “sexy” do it because they want “complements” from every dick in the crowd AND they’re appearence/dress does not entitle you to be a dick. SO , DON’T BE A DICK.

        1. Some how I’ve managed to remain innocent of the term “Wheaton’s Law” up till now. Now I’ll have to use it in class. I once mentioned “Rule 34” during a discussion and in the succeeding minute I could follow students’ looking it up on their notebooks/tablets/phones as the giggles & guffaws jumped around the room. It was a good test of who was paying attention….

        2. My analytics for this site’s Google search terms always include:
          “Ellie Rule 34”
          “Shotgun Shuffle Rule 34”
          “Ellie nude”

        3. Ellie’s kind of a given eventuality. I shudder more about the reality of Rule 34 “Barrel and Alex shipping” or something similarly incomprehensible.

  1. Ah, now I understand this page’s title. Kat doesn’t realize how the Buckinghams roll, so it’s excusable for her to not realize that Pumpkin is quite familiar having her safety threatened by other women. And similarly threatened the safety of other women herself. The girl has a lot of bitch fights under her belt, after all.

    But the way Kat is going on about this is now making me wonder if she has a dark backstory or something.

    1. No, she’s just one of those perpetually miserable people who seek external validation by forcing everyone else to change their behavior to suit her. Odds are the only time she was really subjected to trauma was 3 minutes in the future when Pumpkin gives her a beating and a haircut.

    2. I doubt she has a personal dark back story. Possibly a female friend or family member had something seriously bad happen, but she’s acting more like she’s worried about someone else than being a victim herself (trying to police others behavior overall, not particularly worried or cautious about behavior around her). Also quite possible nothing happened to anyone she knew and just reacting to stories she’s read on the Internet.

    3. You don’t even need anything traumatic to happen to you. Being female in a (still) patriarchal society comes with thousands of tiny slights and unwanted attentions. Some women are distracted by more urgent matters and don’t care or don’t notice. Some women are able to let it roll off their backs or turn it around and use it to their advantage. And to some women it’s like a constant light tapping on their shoulder that drives them bug-f*ck crazy and makes them very sensitive to anything that is discriminatory, unwelcome, or superficially appearing to be either of those.

      Her attitude may seem like some to be unwarranted or an overreaction, but it doesn’t come from nowhere.

        1. But there’s no way to know it’s unwanted until after you start doing it. You have to have a REACTION to the attention, which means you have no choice but to start giving it, unwanted or wanted, just to find out if it is. If Kat’s life view ever caught on in a large scale, the human race would be extinct in a generation.

        2. Nah, because the small scale that considered it asinine would ignore it and out-breed the rest of the population fairly quickly.

        3. Bunk. Sorry, but this is just bull. It’s a matter of timing and context. Someone at a party is there to socialize. Go up, say hi, and gauge reactions. Someone at a convention hall is there to buy geeky shit, wear a costume without getting called a freak, and catch some panels/play some games. There is no need to approach them for socializing outside of those contexts. If they’re in costume, ask if you can take a picture and compliment on the presentation (not, “Hey, that’s hot,” but, “Hey, that’s a fantastic job–you look just like Redshirt #5 from Episode 12.”).

          I’ve got my own issues with Kat–she obviously hasn’t gotten the memo that yes, women can sexually harass people too, which most feminists past their 101 stage are fully aware of.

      1. Everyone has baggage, that’s a given. However, her attitude is expressing a requirement to magically know and be sensitive to the baggage of everyone else in the known world. That’s insane. Stating that someone should be a decent human being and not pick at someone else’s weaknesses on purpose is absolutely fine and correct, but saying that everyone should walk on eggshells trying to speculate and avoid any and all possible issues for random strangers isn’t.

    4. Also, Rusche has pointed out that Kat is interested in Pumpkin romantically. That, coupled with her comment in the last panel, suggests a double standard. She has issues with unsolicited compliments from men but not from women. Because she is apparently a lesbian, by my understanding anyway, she is applying her standards unequally. She’s trying to treat it as a threat issue but, as has been pointed out, women can be plenty dangerous.

      1. As someone on the far side of the con-costume-catcall debate than most folks here (at least, that’s what it seems like), I totally agree that Kat’s got plenty of problematic behaviors herself; depending on where she takes it, I’d even say her conduct is far more problematic than anything she’s been calling out.

        1. Yeah, my issue with Katrina isn’t that she thinks it’s important to call out and discourage harassment. Standing up for someone being victimized is quite commendable in and of itself. It’s that she isn’t picking victimization or harassment. She seems to instead pick small, marginal issues that are maybe not ideal at the worst and treats them like a capital offense. That’s counterproductive, trivializes serious harassment (by association), and is oppressive in and of itself.

  2. Lorraine Bobbit, anyone? Of course, she wasn’t threatening women… Susan Smith (the one who drowned all her kids)?

    There are definitely some scary women out there. I’m sure they don’t all make the national news, too. Maybe they don’t go to cons.

    Come to think of it, for someone who likes to go to conventions (gatherings of large groups of people), she’s pretty anti-social, isn’t she?

    1. Tokyo Rose, Mata Hari, Typhoid Mary, Hanoi Jane, Maine Nurse, Chrissy Snow, Betty, Veronica, Nanny Fine, Ashliii behind the wheel or Robert DeNiro at the movies.

    1. Well, if you just walk up to a stranger and say “Damn, girl, that Harley Quinn outfit makes your butt look out of this world,” then yeah, you might. If you compliment the Cosplay and say it respectfully because it’s another human being you’re speaking to, then you might not.

      Then again, I’ve seen both methods go both ways.

      1. The next popular convention booth and panel seminar. Couthness training: How to interact with the convention at large with prostating yourself to poor social mores.

  3. I’ve heard these kind of conversations SO many times. But I-forgot-her-name-so-I’m-calling-her-Miss-Freckles-Face kinda tells the truth here. I wonder how that conversation is gonna go…
    Quick mentioning that Pumpkin looks adorable in that creeper hoodie.

    1. Well, I suppose that someone else being taller, heavier, and likely stronger (which does describe the average man compared to the average woman) then that could be grounds for some people to feel threatened.

      Other people aren’t terribly worried about it because the majority of the population doesn’t consider it ok to attack other people and figures enough of the other taller/heavier/stronger people nearby are likely to step in and stop the wackos if they try something. We are still talking about being in the middle of a crowd in broad daylight. Not a dark, dead-end alley at 2 AM or something.

      1. Considering how many people often do jack all when someone gets robbed or assaulted, I don’t think I’d feel comfortable expecting people to jump in to help me. Especially when a major percentage of them are young and still possibly in the “I should record this on my camera” or “it’s just like high school, don’t get involved” mentality.

        1. At a con you think no one else in the crowd would step in to stop a physical assault? That’s quite pessimistic of you. As for a crowd in a big city, sure I’d imagine someone would call the cops but less likely anyone would physically intervene, but a convention or something where there’s at least some semblance of shared value/society I could see people doing nothing about something verbal, but not standing by for an attack.

          I also strongly disagree with the zero tolerance policies that make your comment about high schools make sense. I missed that ramping up by 3-5 years or so, luckily.

        2. Yeah, the idea “if you fight to defend yourself you’re suspended” or “if you fight to protect someone you’re suspended” rules are pretty ridiculous.

          However, I’ve seen the same behavior outside of high schools with people the same age. Someone big and scary looking starts beating the tar out of somebody, and all everybody else does is just stand there and stare like startled deer. The “I didn’t want to get involved” excuse is heartbreaking when you think of all the times serious crimes to people could have been prevented if people had decided to actually get involved.

        3. Actually I take that a step farther than ridiculous and consider zero tolerance policies in schools to be harmful to society. Teaching kids by example that it’s wrong and they’ll be punished for trying to stand up for someone weaker is not a good direction.

          But yes, the examples of people standing by and doing nothing in real life are quite depressing (and a bit too old to blame on zero tolerance policies as cause). However it’s still been my experience that the stronger the sense of community in the area, the more likely people are to not just stand by. Personally I think it’s a sense of community gives a person a stronger sense of responsibility, personal stake in the environment and outcomes, and more that it is their place to step in. All that’s subjective, though and I couldn’t back any of that up with formal studies.

      2. That’s got to be some kind of an ist. Maybe figurist? I can’t believe people would automatically consider me a threat because I stand 6’4 and weigh over 300 pounds. Yes, I’m a big guy, and yes, I probably could hurt you. But to automatically assume that I would because of my size? That’s some kind of prejudice.

        The man is keeping me down! I didn’t choose the genetics that determined my dimensional mass!

        1. No, but you did chose the quantities that were consumed, and the level of intensities and duration of the activities designed to assist in keeping said genetically predisposed body all svelte and such.

        2. Yeah, I’m a bit sensitive about that. I’m not that big (just under 6′, if I were in shape I’d be ~190), but even in grade school when I was still a fairly small kid I had people decide I wished them harm and actively afraid of me when I actually didn’t give the tiniest bit of a crap about them and generally didn’t notice them past being a moving object to avoid running into. I didn’t fight or hurt people and generally just wanted people to leave me alone. I found out ~6 months later freshman year of high school that one girl who sat by a window I tended to daydream out of and not notice her sitting there was afraid of me and thought I wanted her dead. Her sister was a friend of mine and thought it was hilarious and it got sorted out correctly, but these days I wonder if I would’ve gotten into serious trouble.

          All I’m saying is that I’m a very strong believer in the US tradition of innocent until proven guilty and that everyone deserves due process. If I remind someone of something too horrible in their past and they don’t want to have anything to do with me, that’s fine and I do my best to respect that as long as they recognize it’s their hangup and not a sign that I’m what the person in their past was and I deserve their accusations.

        3. Kind of surprised the girl by your daydream window didn’t think you had a crush on her. Unless you’re like my daughter; her thinking face tends to be more scowl than blank. Even I’ve occasionally done the, “Are you mad at me?” because she’s staring off into space in my direction.

        4. Yeah, no clue there myself. I do have deepset eyes and don’t tend to smile much. On the other hand, that has made me actually kinda’ appreciate glasses as I think glasses make a person look less intimidating.

  4. the absurdity of what constitutes harassment is beyond negligible by any standards really, It’s impossible to set standards that make everyone happy, and many troll previously mentioned forums specifically to stir up a heaping pile of drama. In my work place there’s a policy that states it is considered harassment if you look at someone for longer that 2 seconds. really??

    1. If sexual harassment were policed as much as it could be, as much as some want, prisons would be cram-a-jam full of the unattractive.

    2. If I was ever told that by someone in HR I think I’d try to make a practice of talking to them mainly with my eyes closed and occasionally reverse blinking if I need to see something.

  5. Kat, it seems, wants to cosplay in public, but does not want anyone to look at her, interact with her, or otherwise acknowledge her existence. And, she expects everyone else to do the same to everyone else, with everyone else, and for everyone else to feel the same way as she does about everything.

  6. Am I really the first to point out the spelling error? I would have thought the Spelling Nazis would have come out in force.

    Enforce, not inforce. Twice.

  7. My work place environment must kick ass in comparison.

    I grew tired of everyone greeting me with ‘What’s up?’. When I expressed this annoyance to the hot-ass office lesbian she paused for a second and rephrased her greeting as, ‘Wanna see my tits?’

    We’re kind of close though. Another coworked and I took her out to dinner on her birthday when her girlfriends bailed and we had a really long conversation about our respective lives. And about how I reminded her of her dead brother. She’s good people, if immature, but that often comes with being 21.

    1. The smaller environments where everyone knows everyone else are frequently much better. The larger the company, the more they worry that a complaint will result in an ambulance chaser trying to soak them for everything they’ve got in a harassment suit. My level of caution in what I say with female co-workers is based on the specific co-worker (how well we know and trust each other) and ranges from watching everything to no filter at all for my current job.

  8. I’m going to side with Kat on this one. Inappropriate compliments are a thing that exist, and if Pumpkin hasn’t been witness to at least one or been subjected to at least one, she must either be incredibly dense or goes to cons with earplugs in. Having someone tell across the room “you look hot in that” is rude on several social levels, the least of which is regular social rules state you don’t yell at strangers across rooms in public. People who say a compliment in an attempt to just hit on someone. Someone might say a compliment with a qualifier, such as “wow, that costume gives you a really nice figure…for a white girl.” Maybe you spent three months making that extremely detailed and complex costume of (insert character here) and all anybody says the whole day is that you look hot in it. It could start to bother you because you want to be recognized for something else instead of just one aspect of you that you might not be intentionally flaunting for that purpose.

    There’s a video of a woman walking around New York for ten hours and getting cat-called, whistled at, and actually stalked by several people. I don’t agree that everything in the video is harassment, but it’s undeniable that some of it is.

    1. I’m going to try to be as polite as possible with my reply, but no one has the right to live in a world where they are never offended. No person should ever have that kind of power, because aside from the insane levels of hypocracy that will be expressed (what doesn’t offend one offends another) no one gets to infringe on the freedoms of others to that level.

      One set of personal ideals should never be in forced on the rest of a population.

      If you choose to cosplay at a convention, you are by definition asking to be looked at. Even if you don’t cosplay at a con, you are still out in public where people can look at you. You do not get to set the rules on how other people can react to you. Yes, society has some rules and some laws, but there is no way to guarantee those rules and laws are adhered to. “Do what thou will is the whole of the law.”

      Kat is insane. Society doesn’t conform to her low-self-esteem driven demands, and society shouldn’t.

      And as far as the woman walking around for ten hours in a city, I challenge you to walk around in public for ten hours and not have something ‘offensive’ happen. Society isn’t perfect, but Kat’s standards would make our country worse than North Korea.

      1. I appreciate the fact you’re being polite. I will endeavor the same, though I’m not sure what it was I said that would spark the conversation to not be.

        I’m not addressing the whole matter of people being offended, I’m simply stating that if Pumpkin doesn’t believe a compliment can be inappropriate, she’s horribly mistaken, and that there are multiple ways someone could take a compliment that might not simply be “100% thankful.” But I guess the conversation’s taking that turn.

        I’m also not saying the rules and regulations have to (or even can be) 100% enforced. I don’t agree with all of Kat’s points, but Pumpkin seems to be blowing everything she says to a ridiculous level anyway. She never said “hunt down hundreds of people to get permission,” just that “every effort should be made.” That could mean anything from “wait until the person walking behind the cosplayer is done walking before you take the picture” to “get signed release forms from everybody the moment they walk in the building.” I somehow don’t think that even Kat would want the latter.

        I will disagree with the “one set of ideals should never be inforced (hee hee, fun at Chris’ expense).” It’s why we have laws against things that are considered “crimes.” One person’s ideals might not include “don’t hit your child” or “don’t take things that don’t belong to you” or “don’t stalk people outside their homes and peer in their windows.” Yes, those are more extreme than taking a picture of someone, but they’re still socially held “ideals.” Respect for other peoples’ belongings, other peoples safety, happiness, and health, and so on.

        Yes, if you go into a convention wearing a costume, people are going to look at you. People are going to look at you if you aren’t wearing a costume. However, just because you can’t /force/ people to be polite doesn’t mean you can’t call what they’re doing “rude” or “harassing.” The freedom of speech doesn’t mean you get to say whatever you want with absolutely no fear of any consequences of it. If you work for a company and exercise your free speech to say a competitor is better to the company’s customers, they have every right to bounce your butt to the curb and fire you. If a convention decides to post the rule that anybody making blatantly harassing comments will be shown the door, it’s their right to enforce it, the same way a bouncer has the right to throw out someone saying disgusting things to a stripper or even toss out the drunk guy saying obnoxious things at the bar.

        Google the article where buzzfeed had cosplayers hold up signs with the creepiest things that have been said to them. The Harley Quinn one with “With that creamy skin, I bet you taste like a vanilla cupcake” is just completely inappropriate, and she did nothing to deserve being made that uncomfortable. That’s the standard of “harassment” most people are looking at, not the extremes at the far end.

        (And as for the video, I acknowledged that I didn’t think everything in there was offensive. However, I did focus my attention on the two guys who seemed to be literally stalking her despite her showing a complete lack of interest in their attentions.)

        Society isn’t perfect. That doesn’t mean we can’t recognize the fact that it’s things people are doing that are “wrong” that are contributing to it being not perfect.

        1. Holy crap, that turned into an essay. I apologize to anybody who has to scroll past it all because tl;dr.

        2. Well, I imagine that Chris’ spell check is borken.

          However, the ability that one has to receive said compliments or cat-calls reflects upon the receivers level of couth and refinement as well as their level of self esteem.

        3. This is very true, which is usually why any harassment claim is investigated by a neutral third party. You have to look at intent, you have to look at the severity of what happened, you have to look for a history of doing the same thing to the same person. there’s so many factors involved and it’s so hard to prove “intent to harass” it’s why most charges get dropped (that, and once there’s a chance of them actually being filed, the harasser tends to go “oh, snap, sorry, I’ll just go away forever now.”)

          There’s still such a thing as inappropriate compliments. The fact that some people take things worse than they actually are does not mean there are not.

        4. Why do you think Pumpkin would think that she’s not going to hear offensive pickup attempts at a con? Do you forget the 19 May 2014 comic? He didn’t really bother saying anything complimentary and was just straight up propositioned her, but if anything that’s the same vein you’re talking and just farther. While it wasn’t in-comic, I’d also imagine if she was listening very closely at all, she heard more than a few comments in that direction in the 04 June 2014 comic when she offered to sell the Tails hoodie she was wearing for a 3x markup over the ones she was just carrying.

          Pumpkin knows that she’ll get some unwanted attention, and she know how to deal with it, in a measured fashion taking it as far as necessary.

          However, recall that in Rusche’s 7 sisters 7 sins parallel, Pumpkin is Pride. So considering that she’s confident in her ability to protect herself and keep out of serious trouble, it seems likely that Pumpkin is someone who appreciates the attention.

        5. “I’m not addressing the whole matter of people being offended, I’m simply stating that if Pumpkin doesn’t believe a compliment can be inappropriate, she’s horribly mistaken…”

          I fully agree she knows there are offensive pick-up attempts. I was actually going to reference the “Yiff” comic, except I didn’t want people to nitpick that a proposition for sex by a lonely guy in a fursuit is the same as complimenting Pumpkin on her costume. The guy could just be a complete pervert who would have sex with Urine Guy if he was wearing cat ears.

          What I’m talking about is how Pumpkin seems to be completely disbelieving of the idea that compliments might be unwanted if they’re inappropriate. Look at her response. “COMPLIMENTS?” If Pumpkin knows that there’s inappropriate things said towards people at cons, and she knows the proper channels for RESPONDING to people doing inappropriate things, why is she arguing with Kat whether there’s such a thing as inappropriate compliments?

        6. Why’s she talking to Kat at all? My suspicion is access to better cosplay equipment and more markets to sell her wares along with a dose of enjoying arguing. She does not seem to be taking this conversation to heart, and seems more like she’s trying to plumb the dimensions of Kat’s weird boundaries/beliefs. Which will probably help her avoid friction later as she likely intends some degree of business association, and right now at just meeting her is the best time to try to get some of that info for later use.

        7. Pumpkin doesn’t strike me as the kind of person who avoids friction. She didn’t apologize when Kat first found out who she was. She made the other people look worse (which, admittedly, they were).

          My real problem with Erik’s assessment is that I got the impression that Kat was bothered by ANY comment about the costume. It didn’t matter whether it was offensive. I guess it’s because she tends to phrase things so that they’re over the top every time. She says, “Every effort should be made,” as if that’s what just and right, even if it’s just an ankle in the picture (which was Pumpkin’s question at the time). No one should be blatantly harrassed, especially at a convention that’s designed to celebrate a fandom. These are people who theoretically appreciate the same kinds of things you do, and you’re going to be rude? Couthness lessons are definitely in order.

        8. I don’t think Pumpkin is worried about friction, but I think she’s pragmatic enough to not cause it unnecessarily if she can gain an advantage. That sounds a bit more cold and calculating than I mean it to sound, but what I meant was in that direction as opposed to being worried about friction.

          Yeah, Kat would seem very reasonable if she’d answered all of Pumpkin’s questions with things along the lines of, “You know what I mean,” “Sure, there’s discretion involved,” or “No, not saying take it to extremes like that.” Instead she tries to defend them and goes farther. At first I thought that was just a “stubbornness momentum” but I’m starting to wonder.

    2. Social rules and protocol vary by upbringing and are in no way universal even within a relatively small population. One of the many reasons social equality for all is a very difficult goal to achieve. What some call “catcalls” others call “icebreakers” or “jokes”. While I agree that people (women and men alike) should be free of unwanted attention trying to legislate to that effect is supremely difficult when you’re dealing with such a large pool of people as a city, nation, or god forbid the internet.

      Complications such as personal bias, racism, sexism (in both directions), and cultural differences make it very easy for any legislation with “good intentions” to become draconian bias. For examples look at the rates of “law enforcement” on white’s vs POC’s especially when relating to the “war on drugs”. Policies intended to make society better as a whole are then used to set sections of that society back generations. That’s not going to change any time soon, and it doesn’t boil down to simple things like being sexist/racist/biggoted/ etc. As long as there is a “like” there will always be a “not like” and favortism will eternally exist. The ideal would be to simply limit how much that limits your status in society, and legislating social protocol is certainly not going to achieve that.

      1. I’m not calling for major bills of legislation to be passed or for any state or federal government to declare what you can and cannot say (within reason, the whole “fire in a crowded movie theater” business aside).

        I think overall the issue I have is that many people seem to just go “oh, well,we can’t stop people from saying things legally, so let’s just pretend harassment doesn’t happen.”

        That’s not to say that people on this board have said that, but when you simply dismiss “ooooh, harassment, if I make eye contact you’re going to get mad” as the standard for it, it means that the stuff that’s serious gets ignored or downplayed.

        And again, we’re also not talking about major public areas outside. We’re talking about a private event people purchase tickets for. The convention is fully within their right to make sure people are comfortable there and use /their own judgement/ to determine what’s harassment and what isn’t. The museum will throw my butt out if I yell “You look hot!” to people in their dresses in a social event, the grocery store will have me removed if I start parading up and down the aisles talking about how great Nazis are, and a convention has every right to tell someone “sir, you’re making people/this one person a bit uncomfortable” and then have them removed if they feel they need to.

        1. Yep, private events sure do have the option to throw people out who are going too far, and they sure did at least once in the comic (Pumpkin propositioned in line).

          I agree this is absolutely an area which shouldn’t be legislated, because it can’t be. It’s an area for social norms to play the role.

          Finally, my argument is her going too far. When you support someone going too far, you don’t help your cause, you simply make yourself look more extreme. When you agree with “that person was wrong and a bad person to have said something that they thought was positive because it was received as negative” then people don’t listen as much when you talk about something more serious.

        2. How is agreeing that something someone said might be taken as a negative by someone else something that weakens my case?

          You’re in a convention center. A guy (or girl) approaches a girl (or guy) in a cosplay costume and says, say, the following: “Cool! So now can you take off your shirt?” or “Do you wear that costume when you f&@%?” or “Hey, can you open up that cape a little more?” (Again, these are ALL THINGS that cosplayers have one on record as having been said to them) The person in question feels that’s inappropriate.

          REGARDLESS of whether the person saying it thought he was just being funny or trying to make a compliment, someone can let them know “hey, that’s a pretty harassing thing to say.” Maybe they’re being oversensitive (“Wow, that’s a great looking costume.” “Go screw yourself.” “Wha-?”), or maybe it’s because it actually is a harassing/inappropriate thing to say to someone.

          If I was there, and I heard those, and the person being addressed said “Excuse me, that was inappropriate,” I’d agree with them. That makes everything else I talk about less likely to be taken seriously?

          What if we were discussing race? If someone genuinely means to compliment someone when they say “Hey, you’re pretty good at that for a black person” does it mean there isn’t a negative racial connotation to what they just said? “You throw pretty well for a girl.” “You’re pretty smart for someone from Arkansas.” (This is not to insinuate that people from Arkansas are dumb, I just really love how that word is spelled and love using it as often as possible). Things can be offensive even when you mean it as a positive.

          Does Kat go too far? Sure. Let me pull up a few things I’ve said in earlier replies on this page.

          “I don’t agree with all of Kat’s points” “I’m going to side with Kat on this one. Inappropriate compliments are a thing that exist, and if Pumpkin hasn’t been witness to at least one or been subjected to at least one, she must either be incredibly dense or goes to cons with earplugs in.”

          Maybe I needed to specifically state “oh man, Kat is so wrong about everything else she says but this point but only to a context that will keep people from laughing at it or dismissing everything I say entirely.”

          Again, Kat does go too far. But look at some of the other comments here where people’s knee-jerk reaction to hearing about sexual harassment or harassment in general is to go “oh no, here we go, it’s wrong to look at someone now” and “looks like the human race is going to be wiped out so nobody can be offended!” Sure, they might just be trying to be funny. It’s kind of hard to tell on the Internet sometimes when you can’t hear tones of voice.

          Harassment is a serious thing. The rules to prevent it can be taken too far, such as the “no looking for two seconds” deal. it can be twisted for someone’s own benefit. A girl at a college near me accused two men of sexually harassing her. It turns out one of the guys never even met her and wasn’t even in the state when she was accusing him of harassing her at her dorm. I was dragged into HR at one point in my life because a girl who I worked with’s father died and I hugged her while she was struggling to keep herself together. Someone else saw it and thought it was highly inappropriate behavior. HR asked about it, we both explained, it was dropped, but it made the area we worked uncomfortable for everybody because people knew that things could be misunderstood. And yes, people do get punished severely for things they didn’t mean to be offensive because of how people knee-jerk to it. Again, I said before:

          “Society isn’t perfect. That doesn’t mean we can’t recognize the fact that it’s things people are doing that are “wrong” that are contributing to it being not perfect.” Other parts are the overreactions, the underreactions, the way people twist things around for their own benefit, the way some people just don’t care about the well being of others, the misunderstandings, the paranoia, and so many other things.

          Please, don’t think that just because I agree with Kat that a compliment can be offensive despite Pumpkin’s protests, that I think she’s completely correct in everything she says in this whole conversation.

        3. Or, in rereading your argument, “her case” instead of “my case.” I meant “my” in the general, overall sense, not just me specifically. That comes across as defensive.

        4. Arguing views based upon a starting of things wich characters and crossing back and forth gets difficult and I can’t say that my “my” vs “her” would always be straight if I were on the other side of this either.

          I make no argument that harrassment doesn’t happen, and I make no argument that it should be overlooked when it does. My argument is that when you take a valid concern and agree and side with the “too far” side, you make people more likely to ignore the concern. When you lump “blatantly awful” in the same category as “a little over the line” then that will cause people to think of the events in that category they’ve seen more often as most likely what you’re talking about (which will generally be less serious unless you have massive problems) and get people’s responses thinking about how they’d want to be treated when they’ve been a little over the line and use that as the appropriate response for blatantly awful.

          Taking a con as an example, if staff heard someone tell a stranger, “That costume looks great, but it’d look a lot better in a heap on my bedroom floor” then they should verify if that was welcome/heard out of context and then kick the person out if it wasn’t a mistake. If they see/hear someone stutter and kinda stare a little giving a generic benign compliment (“Th-th-that’s a r-r-really great costume!” or something) and ignoring the cosplayer trying to walk away that deserves getting the person’s attention to allow the cosplayer to escape and give them a friendly, “I know you’re nervous, but that was a little too far. Let me give you a few pointers.” Kat’s argument lumps both of those types together as if they’re the same thing as opposed to a bad actor versus someone who needs to learn and still may do so if given the opportunity and THAT is what I’m arguing against.

  9. As for workplace harassment, I know every company has its own rules and paranoia surrounding it, but my company just had a guest speaker who works for the state, her job is to investigate harassment claims. She says that most of the time they are dropped (usually it’s a one time thing, or the person wasn’t intending to make things uncomfortable, and intent can be a huge qualifier of whether it’s harassment or not), but she gave examples of a few cases she’s investigating now. The best one was:

    1) A male employee walked past a female employee talking to someone. Stopped, stared at her, and then walked around her a few times, still staring. She asked if he needed something or if something was wrong, he said “no” and kept staring for another couple of minutes before walking away.

    Yeah, that’s kind of blatantly obvious, but man. To even think “this is okay to do to someone in a professional environment” is…eesh.

    1. No, that doesn’t sound acceptable. But that example is not the norm. The overreaction to that kind of situation is expressed in a post above by Anonymous where its considered harassment if one person looks at another for two seconds.

      1. I suspect Anonymous’ example is also not the norm. I’m also curious just how enforced that rule is. I suspect it’s simply a “cover your ass” management rule so they can make sure that if something DOES happen they can prove to whoever’s investigating it that “look, we try really hard to make sure everybody’s in a safe work environment.”

        Of course, for all we know Anonymous could work as one of those women in their underwear who count money for drug kingpins. Eye contact is frowned on pretty harshly there, I think.

        1. It sounds like a, “Let’s make a rule everyone will violate so if we need a rule to say you violated and don’t have anything else we can fall back to that one.” It’s an unfortunately common practice.

    2. Good for you that in your experience you’ve seen harassment be valid and punished or invalid and not punished. Not everyone has that experience, but I wish you well in your experience continuing in that trend.

      1. I have seen it go the other way as well. I simply figured that in a flood of people talking about how attempts to prevent sexual harassment are ridiculous, it would help to have a reminder that it also does good sometimes. I can’t tell a lot of people here can appreciate that with some of the things they say.

        1. My mom once told me that she didn’t think she did me any favors raising me as a little feminist. Mom was never over the top or anything, it was just understood that gender had nothing to do with ability as I grew up and shouldn’t be taken into account and when and if I ever heard the term feminism it was just talking about the premise that women are people just as much as men and it’s ridiculous to think otherwise. Seemed quite sensible and never controversial to me.

          Fast forward to my 4th year in college. A freshman nursing major in the dorm whose company I enjoyed (I wasn’t attracted to her and never got any feeling she was attracted to me, just friendly) was appalled when I said something about her being a feminist and disclaimed that at all. This was a strong, self-confident girl who never took any crap from anyone (male or female) and probably wouldn’t quite attack a man who said that he was better than her due to differences in plumbing, but there wouldn’t be any question that he’d provoked her pretty seriously. I described feminism as the premise general premise of gender equality, she responded that she agreed with that, but that wasn’t what people thought of when you say feminism. She walked away and I didn’t press to try to find out what she’d grown up hearing feminism meant, but it stuck with me as weird.

          Fast forward to now in life and I can understand her point and I still believe what my mom taught me as a kid, but I don’t use the term feminist much any more.

          I see some other people who’ve seen a few too many botched HR intervention attempts, or people for whom the stories of injustice stick in mind a bit more strongly than justice. I think I saw most of those same commenters wanting to see bad things happen to Alex or Danny and a few get indignant with other commenters about conversations on Pumpkin going too far since she’s a minor. So while I can see it as an under-represented side of the argument, and good to remind, “But people do and say horrible things too, don’t go too far in the other direction” I can’t support Kat’s exagerations.

  10. The longer this conversation goes on, the more I see of the “Ellie-Quinn” dynamic working between these two. One is very upbeat, outgoing, friendly, and doesn’t take life too seriously. The other does- to a drastic extreme. I’m gonna go ahead and say that, like Quinn, she’s also had something of an unhappy or unfair life. It’s colored her personality in such a way that it gives her this this type of personality.

    She constantly talks about what’s right and wrong, asking for permission for something as simple as a photograph, talked to Damien about how Pumpkin’s parents would look at him escorting her home, and more. It seems like she places a lot of stock in what others think, and tries to respect the rights and opinions of others, which is why she was butting heads with Pumpkin in the first place.

  11. Wow. Kat has now come off as the worst character in the comic. O.O Can anyone top her? I’m not so sure. She could be that one!

    1. Kind of amusing, considering your icon.

      How is “strongly opinionated” worse than “I’ll draw you naked out of revenge for not hooking up with me?”

      1. Oh, he was a prick for sure. That said, “Oh no! Drew me naked!” :p If anything one could say it’s someone else. Her strong opinions pretty much say never compliment anyone. He was a prick. She’s a hypocritical prick, which Pumpkin seems to see right through. Like back at the con, she was defending the two until she found out they insulted her.

      2. Oh, I read that as referring to Rushe’s comment for Wednesday’s comic (shotgunshuffle.com/comic/every-effort/#comment-199049) stating “Pumpkin is to Kat what Ellie is to Danny.” With Katrina being over 18 and Pumpkin being 15, that’s what’s known as grooming in the criminal law world. That’s where I’d see her as possibly the worst character. Her attitude is unreasonable, disagreeable, and likely to make the issues she’s talking about worse rather than better, but grooming is what takes the cake.

        1. Hmm. I hadn’t thought of it that way, I was going based on what I was seeing in the strip. That does change things a bit. I remembered his comment there as well, but for some reason my brain took that to mean “Danny sees Ellie as eye candy to sell stuff” (as well as just eye candy) so my brain went “Kat sees Pumpkin as “eye candy” (though not implicitly sexual) to help sell stuff” not “Kat wants to montage through some stuff to get to have sex with Pumpkin.”

          I guess it depends on which direction the character goes. At this -current- time I wouldn’t list her as the worst character in the series by a long shot. However, if it turns out her goal -is- something illicit (and probably illegal in that state) with Pumpkin, I’ll swing around to the other side of the argument.

        2. There’s room for that interpretation, but I really think Danny looks at Ellie more as a sexual object than a sales asset. From Ellie’s own words, his tactics don’t seem to be anything that could help his website and are just excuses to spend time with her, so that’s where my interpretation came from. Rusche didn’t clarify, though, so it’s still up for interpretation (he did mention in the comment that he was trying to avoid clarifying character motivations too much).

    2. Cinnamon let loose a plague of biological weapons in a crowded shopping mall.

      Ms. Feminist Politics wants to very indirectly cause the extinction of the human race through excessive political correctness.

      Hm. You may have a point.

  12. Is it just me or has Pumpkin gotten a lot curvier since the beginning of the Convention ark?
    I seem to remember her being about as curvy as a 2×4 not that long ago, but in that last panel it looks like she’s rapidly approaching Ellie levels of curviness.

    1. I was debating whether or not it’s intentional that she’s putting a huge lean in her hips when she’s asking another woman if she’s attracted to the same sex. It’s like she’s trying to accentuate her (still developing) womanly features.

    2. She was wearing a hoodie at the start of the arc, and it’s been a few months since we saw her before that. Ellie did mention in the 27 June strip that she and Tarra both got their first bra in 5th grade and both ended up fairly busty and the conversation and Pumpkin’s face suggests Pumpkin’s first bra was 5th grade too. Ellie didn’t mention if 15 was the age when she and Tarra both got significantly bustier, but it was before 18 and a half (or whatever age Ellie was at start of comic).

  13. If I had more money I’d up my Pledge level on Paetron but I still wouldn’t want to be entered into the drawing- souvenirs are nice but I have to much crap in my room already and I don’t need more. If I’m not careful you’ll see me end up like those people on that tv show- Hoarders.

    I do the same thing with Kickstarter- I go for whatever level gets me a digital copy an absolutely no physical stuff.

    1. I wonder if there’s a way to indicate that you’re a “no stuff” Patreon account. I’m sure if you emailed Rusche about it, he’d leave you out of the drawing (money problems are, of course, a separate issue; condolences on those).

      1. I seem to recall there was an option to choose a lower reward tier if you want. As I don’t want myself on the cast page or to have a bit part in the comic, I would’ve done that had I been in a position to do one of the top two tiers.

  14. Anyone remember that Kat only got mad at first because *other women* took unflattering pictures of her and called her names on Twitter? Before that, she was calling out Pumpkin for overreacting to comments on her appearance–which she’s doing now. The attitudes about her body she mentions in this strip are valid but based on her past behavior I’d say it’s more like sour grapes.

    1. Kat likely never gets called hot, so she doesn’t want anyone else to be called hot. She’s also likely lying about needing cosplay to feed her ego. :p

      1. It’s not uncommon to be unaware that a certain behavior is done to feed one’s own ego. I’d say it’s more likely Kat’s kidding herself than lying to Pumpkin regarding cosplay feeding her ego.

        1. Well, you could make a case for that, but “inforce” isn’t in any online dictionary that I found.

          But if things can be correct merely by a single usage, you could also champion “ynforce” as well.

  15. Oh my gosh this chick is driving me bonkers. Remember kids, walk around shunning anyone who even bothers to look at you because “harassment”.

    1. Oh definitely. These people would like everyone’s romance to be like their international business mergers: Unspontaneous, arduous, and with lawyers checking the wording on the 47-page binding document before you even approach a handshake.

      That’s why they’re so happy and have long, healthy relationships.

    2. And don’t forget, harassment can cost you everything you own in fines and legal fees, make you unhireable in the future, and damage your reputation for life! So let the human race go extinct; no one wants to be homeless!

  16. Okay I just have to say it because this bothers me so much. So in the last panel… Kat’s basically saying she doesn’t care about compliments from women because she doesn’t feel threatened and they won’t hurt you. So women complimenting other women is fine but if a guy dares compliment a women, oh no! That’s so… unfair, and that’s coming from a girl, just her double-standards annoy me so much.

    First of all, contrary to her current beliefs, women can be dangerous too. Yes, usually they have less potential physically however, what’s the difference if she uses chloroform or something?
    Secondly, you’re saying men can’t give genuine compliments just because they’re male, nothing they choose or anything just, male? That’s stupid and unfair.

    Really seems to me she’s just upset because she doesn’t get many compliments and seems to think males are inherently dangerous. Even though I have a boyfriend, compliments and such from random guys is nice, as long as they don’t try anything and I don’t play around with their feelings… what’s the harm in it? It makes my day and I have more respect for guys who can manage to get up the guts to genuinely compliment a girl, I know it’s hard to do.

    1. You might recall Damien called her out on the double standard regarding giving Pumpkin a ride home already. It’s a logical fallacy she’s quite comfortable ignoring.

  17. I need some help w/modern social mores; is referring +o ano+her person as ‘ho+’ considered ‘bad’, ‘plus bad’, or ‘doubleplus bad’?

  18. I have a feeling that the other girl is going to be making some “only men can be sexist/inappropriate/intimidating comments.

    1. Unfortunatly, you can’t place money on that – the house doesn’t take sucker bets.

      As for the argument – yes, people like that exist, and make exactly that argument (I’ve encountered one, personally (well, online) who was once a friend but became poisoned by Tumblr to the point where they held exactly this position (and the flip side of the coin, ‘men cannot be sexually harassed, this is very basic stuff’). This sort of hypocritical (and nonsensical) argument is one of the few things that seriously angers me.

      (Less enraging and more amusing is the other argument Kat made about constitutionality – the First Amendment, at least, does not give you ‘the right to free speech’ on, say, a private forum, for instance. In fact someone making a ‘free speech’ argument on Wikipedia is one of the surest ways to identify them as a troll.)

      1. But, and I have never been to a con the wife has, I would believe that a con is a public venue. Unless the Cosplayers are behind a booth selling paraphernalia pertaining to their cosplay.

        1. That’s a sticky question, really. It’s accessable (nominally) to the public – but it’s still on private property.

          There’s a reason, alas, that we can’t do as the Bard suggested and place all the barristers first against the wall, I suppose!

  19. Every time I look at this scene, where Kat is still running her mouth, my mind wanders to anything besides what she’s saying. I find myself waiting for Pumpkin to go, “Ssssssssssssssssssssttttt,” burst into smoke, and Kat to drop her inventory as she dies. Then I wonder what Kat’ll drop. (Probably stone tools and some wheat seeds.)

  20. I think what you are all missing here in regards to Pumpkins conversation here – Shes a little sister, and very intelligent, as far as young people go, and she’s shit-stirring. In my experience (not with my own as much, but with others) ‘Little Sisters’ develop this ability to play devils advocate – which is exactly what Pumpkin is doing here. If Kat was arguing a completely different point, this scene would still play out with Pumpkin taking the other side of the argument, and raising it to the same level of insanity. If Kat did nothing more than express an opinion with a realization that it was simply her own preference rather than try an state her opinion as a rule of thumb for everyone else to follow, I rather believe that Pumpkin would have responded in kind, instead of doing what little sisters do best and winding her up. The questions are all very definitively designed to allow Kat to dig her own hole, and to push the argument beyond the realm of reasonable, I believe so that Pumpkin can squash them. She’s not trying to ‘teach’ Kat anything, she is setting her up to prove a point, which of course she hasn’t made yet, though she alludes to it with her manner and the way she reflects everything Kat has said back on her.

    I would also like to point out that occasionally this happens with younger brothers as well, though ‘little brothers’ do tend to respond with something more physical than verbal. Of course, My stance that this is a ‘Little Sister’ kind of thing only stands because she is the little sister of several older women, who are all very verbal and expressive, each in their own kind of way.
    After all, this is how we see Pumpkin interacting with her sisters on several occasions, which suggests she is holding Kat up to the same light, and lets face it, this i pretty much how she would argue any point with them as well.

    1. I concur, same-faced fellow, and I’d add that Pumpkin’s pixie cut may be a tactical choice for when she’s gone too far with tweaking her older, larger, more adept-at-giving-a-haircut-in-a-fight sisters.

    2. I agree Pumpkin probably enjoys the argument and tweaking an elder, but I think she is arguing the side she believes this time. Her arguments do match her previous actions and statements fairly well. I could see her arguing a side she didn’t believe in for the fun of it, though.

  21. What bothers me is Kat’s question in panel 4. She seems incredulous that Pumpkin could feel threatened by another woman, implying (in her mind anyway) that only men can be creeps and jerks about cosplay. That’s a blanket generalization that (I think) shows she has a lot of anti-male prejudice. I think that woman needs some serious time with a good therapist.

  22. It just struck me that all Pumpkin needs to do is take Kat down into the crawlspace to look at Cinnamon’s latest line of “pets”. That’d show Kat how women can be a genuine threat to each others’ safety.

    1. Cinnamon is a real-life troll. She’d be as emotionally dangerous to someone like Kat as her pets are physically.

      1. That actually could be good. If Pumpkin is fresh out of blackmail material to get Cinn to do her bidding, she could always offer incentive with Katrina as a victim for Cinn to toy with.

        Granted, I don’t think she’ll do that as I think Pumpkin has her own uses for Kat and her and Damien’s company. Personally I tink in this comic she’s getting to equal ground with Ellie in recognizing the lever she has over Kat (as Ellie correctly assumed due to past experience with men regarding Danny probably before she even met him).

  23. Jessica, I think I found the cause of the weird time and hierarchy defying comments. I was about to reply to someone on the front page and it gives me shotgunshuffle.com/?replytocom=${NUMBER}#respond . At least one of those comments in the past was Pat obviously replying to a comment from the previous comic. Replying on a previous day’s comic inserts the comic title in the respond link. So my suspicion is if someone replies to a comment not on the comic page (by hitting reply on a front page comment and Rusche posting new comic before they hit Post Comment), then you get that occasional time and hierarchy-defying result.

    Just speculation, but it’d make sense.

    1. I reported a different thing with replying that I’ve done that’s broken the timeline. Though I used the contact page to send the report in; I don’t think we have griefers yet, but they’ll eventually show up.

      It definitely seems to be a flaw in the reply mechanism. I wouldn’t be surprised if what you spotted was another cause.

  24. this womans attitude has the potentia to have cons ban cosplay at all and sadly i know there are ppl that feel the same as her

  25. If you’ve never felt your safety was never threatened by women, you’ve never MET WOMEN. This girl– calling her a woman would imply she’d managed to achieve some sort of maturity– basically wants society to turn every public and social forum into her own personal Safe Space.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

*

*

*