What's going on at the last panel?Why is Kogasa wearing wedding dress?
Massive necro, but it’s actually pretty mean on kogasa. The whole strip is basically Nazrin training her to be a housewife so she can marry someone who can take care of her because that’s easier than teaching Kogasa to be scary on her own.
Agree with all of the above about the adorability of isopods. (Even the giant ones look kind of endearing to me in their oversized, chunky, bumbling way.) Frankly, I'm a little surprised that it took the artist so long to include them.
I know she's already done a millipede, but the particularly short pill millipedes are also especially adorable. Plus they look so much like isopods that you have another cricket vs. G-buri scenario. :)
I find Isopods of all sizes to be utterly fascinating. They tend to straddle the line between Insect and Crustacean, and it's really interesting how their taxonomy and biology works.
Isopods are legitimately as cute IRL (at least to me) as they are here.
chowell said:
Agree with all of the above about the adorability of isopods. (Even the giant ones look kind of endearing to me in their oversized, chunky, bumbling way.) Frankly, I'm a little surprised that it took the artist so long to include them.
I know she's already done a millipede, but the particularly short pill millipedes are also especially adorable. Plus they look so much like isopods that you have another cricket vs. G-buri scenario. :)
If you like gardening, take cafe of your pillbugs. I've heard that sometimes they're treated as pests, but I've never seen this problem.
They are considered as pests for sprouting plants, since they can chew on the roots of newly germinating plants. However, their main food is actually decaying plant matter, and if your plants get eaten by them it means those are either dying from overwatering or fungal infections.
People should still be aware of the origins of such creations, especially with creative works, as one's ideological beliefs will always have an influence over an artist/author's works. Whether intentional or not. What may be harmless in a one off gag, might not be so harmless if the gag is repeated and is actually mocking certain groups of people. Knowing who the creator is and what their beliefs are at minimum can help people recognize when something a creator does is a light hearted joke or is actually a firmly held belief by the creator to disparage certain groups of people.
That's too loose an opinion as it can be construed to the opposite side as well and you can't say for certain every single work an artist goes through is always going to contain such influences. That's why we say knowing is half the battle, the way we act on it defines people, most will view it as harmless but those that don't are people who would have been influenced either way. If a small drop like this opens up a person's inner self to become an extremist, then it's most likely any kind of influence they felt more strongly with, depending on environment and upbringing, would have done so anyway.
In the world we live in, saying liking a particular piece of art will inevitably influence you into becoming someone evil down the road, is too farfetched for either side, liking this joke will not slowly turn me into some kind of Nazi monster, nor will supporting certain stances in the LGBTQ community turn me into a bisexual trans person. The time when you should be advising against certain things is when it's clear as day doing so is just the wrong thing outright.
Sometimes, a joke is simply that, a joke, it's not trying to sell you an idea, it's just there to bring humour. When it's funny for the wrong reasons, such as propaganda or promoting an idea for others to be against something, that's when it's no longer a joke.
Don't take this as me endorsing StoneToss, but more me liking this particular joke. Like I've mentioned before in this post, you can hate the artist and like some of their jokes, it doesn't make you evil or wrong.
Several of his comics have promoted bigoted views towards queer people, blacks, Jews, and other minorities. Stonetoss may not be a true believer in Nazism, but he's definitely the kind of person who's OK with Nazis as long as they only target the people he doesn't like.
You mean like 99% of people on the internet?
Stonetoss (and people like him) are branded nazi not because they espouse nazism, but because nazism is the strongest label you can give to someone in order to ostracize them. Being racist or extremely conservative does not make you a nazi. Would you call the modern CCP a nazi party for their current persecution of the Uyghur? Fascist maybe, but nazi? By your definition most subsaharan African countries are nazi regimes.
This is exactly how actual neonazi parties end up getting elected. This kind of discourse has managed to make everyone apathetic to the label, to the point where nobody cares anymore. Ok, Stonetoss is a nazi. And? People are still going to enjoy his comics, except that now they're going to do so while thinking he's a nazi. All you've achieved is making nazis likeable.
No, 99% of people on the internet are not cool with Nazis. This whole conversation says a lot more about you than anyone else.
I'll be honest, I can't remember the last time I saw someone accused of being a Nazi and it actually mattering. It's either being used as baseless slander, or it's specifically brought up when talking about someone who's already being criticized for something. It's never, "They're bad because they're a Nazi!" (unless they've done literally nothing wrong), it's always, "They're bad and they're a Nazi!"
Sure, in theory no one likes Nazis, but in practice it's just a buzzword. It's like calling someone a simp or an incel, it carries negative connotations but no one actually takes it seriously anymore.
I'll be honest, I can't remember the last time I saw someone accused of being a Nazi and it actually mattering. It's either being used as baseless slander, or it's specifically brought up when talking about someone who's already being criticized for something. It's never, "They're bad because they're a Nazi!" (unless they've done literally nothing wrong), it's always, "They're bad and they're a Nazi!"
Sure, in theory no one likes Nazis, but in practice it's just a buzzword. It's like calling someone a simp or an incel, it carries negative connotations but no one actually takes it seriously anymore.
I think there's a difference between merely calling someone a Nazi and someone genuinely being one. Obviously the word has been used disingenuously as a generic epithet for many years, but if someone is actually revealed to have Nazi ties or sympathies, that's one of the most unambiguous moral lines you can cross. (And if you are going to cross that line, you're probably going to cross a lot of others before you get to it.)
Stonetoss was already a controversial figure for years, but him getting doxed and outed as a guest in a neo-Nazi rally last month has really done a number to his reputation. Apparently he didn't even have a Wikipedia article before that incident started getting press coverage. It makes sense that most of the comments aren't just jokes like other Stonetoss parodies, but instead reckoning with this and trying to separate the art from the artist... or artist-in-law, I suppose.
I slightly regret leaving the reference link. If the name hadn't been mentioned, we would have just enjoyed the history joke of an unfairly failed handmade artist AI(no, not a fucking AI artist shit) being blackened.
This is all your fault, Deadpool. You should have killed him for sure.
Froggy Nun: "Welcome, dear viewer. Can I interest you in RRG merchandise? Umbrella? Babana? RRG-themed clothing? The Ribbit Ribbit Gang-Flamethrowers are still in development."
