I’ve had to come to terms with not having any time to play, really, except for maybe an hour or two here and there with my partner. It does feel awesome to at least have that going, but it sucks a lot that I don’t get to play for extended periods of time if I want to. Not even taking advantage of any sales right now, even though I might want to, just because I know that I won’t have any time to play.
I used to be with “it,” then they went and changed what was “it.” Now what used to be “it” is lame, and what is “it” is new and scary. And it will happen to you too!!!
Except this skull is unusable now because skulls are not closed at the bottom and someone seems to have cut off the top.
Also the “skulls of your enemies” industry usually doesn’t use the whole body. Quite wasteful if you ask me.
See, you’re only looking at one part of the skeletal recycling economy. Sure, the skull companies only want the skulls, but the rest can be easily sold off to other parts of the industry.
Even within the skull industry, it’s a constant drip down. If a skull isn’t good for the Skull Throne, you send it out to the Cup people, who might send it to Goblet to decide, and so on.
The rest of the body, not even just the skeleton, is dispersed amongst these different branches as needed, and whatever isn’t usable directly can always get shipped off to the pig farm.
It’s quiet a nice, clean system. Wouldn’t you love to be part of such a economic feat?
I’d think the skull is unusable without any processing anyways. Coffee is slightly acidic and bones will dissolve over time. Plus, bones are porous not unlike terra cotta pots. You’d need to glaze the interior or something after you seal the major holes
Non-ethical could mean without ethics not in violation of ethics?
I guess that would mean the relationship has not or could not be defined by petty human rules of conduct. Like telling a supernova or a black hole to clean up it’s mess.
“situationships” I think is the key operator. Where there’s probably a power dynamic, one person is being led on/getting played, and the other person is the player.
It’s a piss take of the ethical non-monogamy apps.
But if we’re being a bit real - nonconsentual arranged marriages, 50 year age gaps, marriage for money, marriage for convenience etc etc would fit the bill
Capitalism instead made food absurdly abundant and gave everyone air conditioned boxes.
Edit: to address all of the nonsense responses below all at once: China’s embrace of capitalism has lifted hundreds of millions of people out of poverty.
Capitalism didn’t give us shit. We had to trade 1/3 of our lives for that “abundance”. Don’t make money because you’re disabled? Doesn’t seem so abundant anymore. Also, growing food isn’t a byproduct of capitalism. The agricultural revolution began before capitalism existed. Imagine how much better your life would be if you didn’t parrot ruling class talking points. You aren’t ruling class so stop LARPing as a member of it.
“But you inspire 6 people to work at peak capacity so that the team is as effective as 9 people, and they all say you give a shit about them, their growth, and doing the work that actually matters with guidance and appropriate comp adjustment. Be a manager.”
If you work with incompetent middle management, move. When you work for a great manager in a great team, you feel bulletproof.
I’m a manager, and this strip nicely brought out my main insecurities about the role. Thanks for pointing out that there are other things one may contribute with, despite losing (or never having) abilities in the three mentioned aspects. It’s not easy to let go of depth, and exchange it for width and longer term thinking.
So one way of reading this is that you’re surrounded by incompetents. Early in my career I thought this. As a corollary to Chesterton’s Fence, it turns out I wasn’t so special and most weren’t so dumb. In a high-density area, being truly surrounded by bozos is just unlikely. So my advice here wouldn’t seem to be folly. If one tries several roles and every one is just full of bozos, it suggests that the one is in error.
Another way of reading this is that you are not in a high density area and perhaps the monopoly-oligopoly players who offer the work to which you are called are so few that the incompetent middle management is entrenched in these few spots and you’d love to leave but burning bridges / no proof the grass is greener suggest stay put. But with so few businesses, theoretically they have their pick of market and would not hire bozos. So, again, moving seems viable and not folly.
Lastly perhaps the factor is life/circumstances/education for you. Like if these desired roles require retraining or expensive certification. I feel for you if this is the case. But since you see those skills’ value, perhaps current-job learning/practice opportunities on-the-job could level you up to be able to hop to greener pastures. Most companies etc of even meager size have some tuition assistance program. Maybe that’s your way.
Regardless, this is your one precious life. I hope you’ll find access to your truest calling. It might be harder than what I said: “move” (such dismissive tone probably resultant from the ignorant perspective of the comic), but I’m confident your creativity and capability can point you in a path toward your flourishing.
The bible actually says there are other gods beside the main one; he’s the king of kings, god of gods. But maybe there’s an emperor of emperors, God of gods of gods? It’s gods all the way up.
Look at your eyes in the mirror and rotate your head, look on the veins in your eye and you will see that your eye tries to stay parallel to the ground.
In humans it is just much less obvious due to our round pupils.
And the brain adjusts visual image with other information like our sense of gravity and equilibrium. So if you tilt your head, you don’t lose sense of up and down - unless you’re in zero-g.
It's always seemed like such a weak take to just say Batman is a rich guy punching bad guys and nothing else.
He invests in infrastructure, supports the community, promotes people bettering themselves... it's just not nearly as exciting as battling a Joker who's sliced his own face off or a giant crocodile man or a guy who's theme is kites.
Batman’s nuts. Like everybody else in Gotham. He’s pathologically obsessed with beating the crap out of criminals with his bare hands because he needs to emotionally. The fact that he’s saving the world is incidental.
That actually makes his “no killing” rule make more sense. A person doing this for moral reasons would grapple with the continuous living trolley problem embodied by The Joker, and would likely eventually do what needs to be done. An otherwise-decent person feeding addiction to violence would draw a hard line in the sand that he will never ever cross no matter the cost. Which sounds more like Bats?
It also makes his choice of weapons make more sense – tazers don’t satisfy him the way his fists do.
Yes he might also do philanthropic things but that’s not what drives him.
A hero driven by dark needs is way more interesting than a boring paragon of virtue.
It also gives his emotional divide from Nightwing a more coherent moral centre than just “Nightwing didn’t like how Batman’s mean”.
Somewhere between (where he actually sits) is more interesting than both. He's clearly dealing with emotional trauma, but that doesn't mean he's not also still human. And trying to be more so.
We all got trauma. Trauma isn’t what makes Batman interesting. Obsession is. The maniacal motivation to make himself into the greatest DCU superhero by sheer force of will.
I keep trying to read the webcomic but I don’t have a good device for it so I make it a few issues past wherever the show is and lose patience with my failing eyes. But if we’re doing that game, Damien Darkblood vs Batman as worlds’ greatest detectives
I don’t really like the take that it is solely Batman’s responsibility to kill the Joker. Batman acts as a vigilante, and in order to not take actions that one cannot provide restitution for, he has a strict rule that he cannot kill. He enforces the law but he doesn’t act like he’s the judge, jury, or the executioner. He stops them and he lets the judicial system sentence them. The people he hands over the Joker to every single time has far more ample opportunity to kill him. The police, the judge deciding on capital punishment, prison guards, a random bystander with a gun. None of them carry the same extrajudicial responsibility that the Batman imposes on himself in order to remain accountable or at least not start taking charge of life and death.
The problem wouldn’t be that the Batman kills the Joker. The problem would be when he starts deciding whether others are better off dead than alive.
Both are interesting and both are generally how Batman is. It depends on the run. Sometimes he’s dark and grows into a paragon, and sometimes the reverse is true. Totally depends on the author.
comicstrips
Top
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.