Inactive Andrew Dobson / Tom Preston / CattyN - STOP DOING SEXIST CRAP

[Adolf_Ash]

If Dobson could learn to just laugh at himself, that already would be an improvement.

Whomp! has already been brought up before, and it still stands as the perfect Anti version of SYAC in terms of "Miserable sad man shenanigans"

Sadly I think that would mean the end of him, with his psyche.
Like if he cant keep convincing himself that he's some paragon of virtue, he'd have to face the fact that he's just a nobody. Seems to be a common theme among lolcows...

 

[Jewelsmakerguy]

I used to feel pity for Dobson and believed him when he claimed he was depressed. Now though, not so much.

Also I like the edited comic that triggered him. It's actually kind of sweet and uplifting. He's never gonna get out of his rut if he keeps stewing in negative emotions, but fuck it let him continue his self-destructive spiral

At this point, It's best to just leave him alone. There's no way in hell he's going to improve. And even if he does, he'll simply go back to being "I am depressed because everything scares me!" again after a short while.

At this point, I just want to see where this goes.

 

[stress sighs]

At this point, It's best to just leave him alone. There's no way in hell he's going to improve. And even if he does, he'll simply go back to being "I am depressed because everything scares me!" again after a short while.

At this point, I just want to see where this goes.

Yeah even if none of us interact with him I'm pretty sure he's gonna invent some sort of oppression just to keep claiming victimhood.

The dobtrain will never stop~

 

[Jigglyjogglers]

If Dobson could learn to just laugh at himself, that already would be an improvement.

Whomp! has already been brought up before, and it still stands as the perfect Anti version of SYAC in terms of "Miserable sad man shenanigans"

It's the differences that really highlight how pathetic Dobson is.

Whomp!'s whole joke is that it's Ronnie who's pathetic... he's the problem. Moreover he almost always knows it... even if comic!Ronnie doesn't acknowledge that he's the problem, artist!Ronnie clearly does. Artist!Ronnie is clearly aware of his own flaws, and exaggerates and lampoons them in his comics for others to laugh at. That's actually kind of a necessity if you're going to be doing comedy involving yourself... you've got to make yourself vulnerable and let people laugh at you. It's like a standup routine where the comic tells you about a terrible date he had (because he screwed it up)... everyone laughs, including him.

SYAC and all the rest of Dobson's work's "joke" is that it's the world that's pathetic and Dobson who's sad because of it... he's got problems, and those problems are everyone else. Any attempt to show himself even vaguely in the wrong always comes off as a pity play, not an admission... "I know I shouldn't have done it, but I had to because of reasons beyond my control!" Comic!Dobson and artist!Dobson are both in agreement... this is an outside problem. Most of the punchlines of his comics are essentially seeking 'clapter'... agreement and reinforcement rather than actual entertainment. It's like a bad knockoff of the Daily Show where the host says "And isn't that politician an ASSHOLE?!" and then stares at the audience faux-incredulously waiting for applause. (Otherwise known as the Daily Show.)

 

[UglyOldJafar]

Oh boy...

Okay, lets get through the bullet points:

1. Dobson, if you are not willing to let your characters go through any hardships at all, you are only going to create a Rumiko Takahashi version of the Get along Gang. At best.

2. Your stories are deader than Osama Bin Laden, so your characters will never go through anything

3. Your characters deserve to be put through a shredder

4. Saying your stories is the kind of stuff the gay movement deserves is more insulting than me holding up a sign that says "kill all fags" at the next Christopher Street Day.

5. What trans characters? I think Chris Chan has already inserted more trans characters than you ever did.

6. what about hetero characters?
Does that mean poor Sam is going to be killed sooner than later? Not really surprising, as Alex does everything to kill him already.

Jesus Christ, Dobson. Your characters would not even be worth to look at for porn.

 

[Jigglyjogglers]

7. Dobson's character most deserving of death is the pirate lesbian, because she's a sexual predator and violent maniac

 

[HU 096]

Oh boy...
View attachment 77400

Because your walking stereotypes are a great portrayal of the LGBT community.

Dobson thinks fictional shit makes a difference with LGBT only to justify and defend something others criticize (e.g. the apparently rushed execution of Korrasami--never actually seen the show myself). He piles in LGBT to justify his lesbian fetish. It's absolutely disgusting.

 

[Replicant Sasquatch]

I do love how the twitter SJWs have turned on their own. Now it's not enough to include LGBT characters. You also can't let anything bad happen to them ever. It further reinforces the idea these people don't care about any of these shows or movies at all. They just want their diversity quotas and "role models".

 

[UglyOldJafar]

I do love how the twitter SJWs have turned on their own. Now it's not enough to include LGBT characters. You also can't let anything bad happen to them ever. It further reinforces the idea these people don't care about any of these shows or movies at all. They just want their diversity quotas and "role models".

They are just 12 year old yaoi fangirls... sorry, fantransvestites, in mind, who try to make their ship look legit in the eyes of adults who tell them to get a real job.

 

[Replicant Sasquatch]

I think it's a mixture of fangirls and Twitter knights who just like the moral high you get when you call something problematic.

Now I can't speak for the LGBT community. But I imagine most if them would rather see an interesting character die tragically than be patronized with this "I take the Pledge to never ever kill a gay character" bullshit.

 

[MysticMisty]

I do love how the twitter SJWs have turned on their own. Now it's not enough to include LGBT characters. You also can't let anything bad happen to them ever. It further reinforces the idea these people don't care about any of these shows or movies at all. They just want their diversity quotas and "role models".

I can't say it's really surprising considering back in the day Silence of the Lambs and Basic Instinct were controversial due to the fact both move's villains displayed trans and bisexual characteristics. You'd think it'd actually be interesting departures from your standard cis-hetero characters, but no. LGBT characters can do no bad ever.

 

[CrimsonKnight]

Oh boy...
View attachment 77400
Okay, lets get through the bullet points:

1. Dobson, if you are not willing to let your characters go through any hardships at all, you are only going to create a Rumiko Takahashi version of the Get along Gang. At best.

2. Your stories are deader than Osama Bin Laden, so your characters will never go through anything

3. Your characters deserve to be put through a shredder

4. Saying your stories is the kind of stuff the gay movement deserves is more insulting than me holding up a sign that says "kill all fags" at the next Christopher Street Day.

5. What tranny characters? I think Chris Chan has already inserted more tranny characters than you ever did.

6. what about hetero characters?
Does that mean poor Sam is going to be killed sooner than later? Not really surprising, as Alex does everything to kill him already.

Jesus Christ, Dobson. Your characters would not even be worth to look at for porn.

Right, because death of a character is one of the ultimate sins of storytelling. It's never about the struggles or hardships the characters go through, but the hanky panky and sexual harassment by Dobson's one dimensional characters. Yeah, I don't recall any trans characters in Dobson's work. I do remember Patty, Dobson's look into a realistic lesbian relationship. It's just as hackneyed.

 

[Jigglyjogglers]

You'd think it'd actually be interesting departures from your standard cis-hetero characters, but no. LGBT characters can do no bad ever.

And have no bad done to them.

It's why Joss Whedon will be forever a shitlord in their eyes, despite the fact that he is one of them. He makes everyone in his stories suffer (and often die) horribly. Straight, gay, heteroflexible... to be a Joss Whedon character is to be tortured by your creator. But SJWs never care that he was one of the first people to portray a lesbian relationship on network TV in primetime, they just care that he made the relationship have problems and then one half of it died. Thus, he's a misogynist.

 

[Checkered Spotlight]

If you're not going to let your characters go through ANYTHING BAD EVER, you're not going to let your characters grow. He doesn't mean to, but it kind of comes off as really condescending, like he thinks people of those identities can't take a character dying without being triggered or some shit.

 

[Replicant Sasquatch]

Right, because death of a character is one of the ultimate sins of storytelling. It's never about the struggles or hardships the characters go through, but the hanky panky and sexual harassment by Dobson's one dimensional characters. Yeah, I don't recall any tranny characters in Dobson's work. I do remember Patty, Dobson's look into a realistic lesbian relationship. It's just as hackneyed.

The bear retweeted this:

Apparently, killing off a character automatically means they're not treated as people. I've never even heard of whatever show Dobby is protesting, though I'm pretty certain he's never watched it. Just as I'm sure most of the people outraged never watched it either.

But SJWs never care that he was one of the first people to portray a lesbian relationship on network TV in primetime, they just care that he made the relationship have problems and then one half of it died. Thus, he's a misogynist.

One of Dobbers retweets compared this current brouhaha to when Willow's girlfriend was killed in Buffy. Joss Whedon really is a TV writer example of die a hero or live long enough to see yourself become the villain.

If you're not going to let your characters go through ANYTHING BAD EVER, you're not going to let your characters grow. He doesn't mean to, but it kind of comes off as really condescending, like he thinks people of those identities can't take a character dying without being triggered or some shit.

But don't you know? LGBTIA viewers "deserve better".

 

[VLAD]

And have no bad done to them.

It's why Joss Whedon will be forever a shitlord in their eyes, despite the fact that he is one of them. He makes everyone in his stories suffer (and often die) horribly. Straight, gay, heteroflexible... to be a Joss Whedon character is to be tortured by your creator. But SJWs never care that he was one of the first people to portray a lesbian relationship on network TV in primetime, they just care that he made the relationship have problems and then one half of it died. Thus, he's a misogynist.

I have my issues with Joss Whedon, but he understands that one of the cardinal rules of storytelling is to be a merciless sadist to your characters. Put them through hell, so the audience can see what kind of stuff they're really made of when they finally make it through to the other side. And giving someone protected status because they're part of a special demographic is one of the most transparently pandering things you can possibly do. When there's no threat, there's no stakes. And when there's no stakes, there's no reason to care.

 

[Checkered Spotlight]

But don't you know? LGBTIA viewers "deserve better".

What's he going to do if LGBTIA+ viewers feel really offended by him coddling characters because of their identity? What then?

 

[Replicant Sasquatch]

What's he going to do if LGBTIA+ viewers feel really offended by him coddling characters because of their identity? What then?

They won't be. As far as Dobson is aware, the only members of the LGBTIABBQ whatever are the people on twitter who care more about representation than narrative.

 

[Jigglyjogglers]

If you're not going to let your characters go through ANYTHING BAD EVER, you're not going to let your characters grow. He doesn't mean to, but it kind of comes off as really condescending, like he thinks people of those identities can't take a character dying without being triggered or some shit.

You're right, to real people it would come off as condescending. But considering that his intended audience of SJWs absolutely lost their shit over Sansa Stark (a straight cis white female) being raped offscreen, he's probably right. They can't take it.

The hilarious thing is, they can't take the opposite either. If you have a minority (or "minority") character suffer realistic problems associated with whatever they are, you're triggering everyone and using their pain for your story or whatever. If you have them living perfect, happy lives, you're ignoring the problem and not engaging in activism (which is exactly as bad as participating in a gang beating of that minority).

From what I've seen, the only way they're happy is if the villain is directing some sort of generalized bigotry out towards the world with no specific target, and then the hero leaps in to attack them and deliver a speech. Y'know... like Dobson's comic where his psychotic lesbian wannabe-rapist commits felony assault on another woman.

 

[Jewelsmakerguy]

Oh boy...
View attachment 77400

You know Dobson, people would take that statement more seriously if:
1. You weren't such an arrogant asshole
2. Had the balls to kill of any of your characters to begin with. Blue bear included.
3. Had the balls, period.