Which is a bit curious all things considered. They are not the only four-legged critters. All others just cool being medallioned on a lazy afternoon pub run?
Oh, yeah initially we were thinking that might be the intent of the couch seats but looking at the birds eye few before this conversation they all have arm rests that’d be especially blocking ungulates from climbing on and off.
Most quadrupeds kind of need to be using the their medallions in order to pick up their drinks.
Waldorf’s expression in the last panel is heartbreaking.
So…does the monster racism scale according to how dangerous the monster is? Abby gets basically a pass because she’s considered harmless (no magical or otherwise abilities), while Stat and Wal are actively ostracized because they (once) had venomous tails and have teeth that can bite through anything?
I know racism is neither logical or fair, but damn does it suck.
Abby also looks like a half-form where Statler and Waldorf look like they shouldn’t be able to speak. Even if logically they know that each is “monsters” Abby looks relatively normal.
It’s kinda weird. All the mythicals have been hunted for a reason or another. So why go after the Mants like this?
It’s like Jews suddenly started going to town on some other group of people…
Oh… Ooh!
The Mants in past went, killed and ate a bunch of Avalonian’s “for good reasons” and these two angel-voiced creatures are still getting axed all over as a disproportionate punishment for actions of some of them (they really liked to lure the kiddos with their voices, so juicy)?
Or are Avalonian’s plain dicks for chuckles?
Remember Jon’s rant against Ike because he is half Manticore?
When you think that Nemean lions were given medallions only because Jocasta gave the finger to the Sphinx leaders;
Sort of that. Jon being exactly almost indestructible Nemean with claws that can cut anything. Why aren’t they monsters?
Many other critters have legends of drowning folk and worse? They do it just to humans, so it’s okay? Enemy of my enemy?
What did the Manticores do to get their status? Eat everyone’s pet poodles?
The only reason Nemeans aren’t monsters is because Jocasta agreed to make medallions for a local pride. The sphinxes as a whole insisted they were too dangerous but Jocasta decided otherwise.
So. You know. Bigotry.
And still they are allowed around in half-forms, mayhaps even full-forms and no problem.
If Manticores had medallions, they probably would have rules forcing them to keep human forms at all times and wear venom-tail insignia to warn everyone around of their clearly even more dangerous nature.
At least the way the story is now portraying the apparent malice towards these guys, when they have been every bit compliant to the regime.
And this is not “well , some slave owners beat their slaves for lolz” -level of mean. This is a whole rainbow of people, who again, have themselves been viewed as monsters and nightmares of differing levels by others, being in unison: “we have been persecuted, but f*ck THOSE guys in particular!”
And even Israel has had a huge history of conflicts to fuel their mountain of hateful idiocy that got tipped over Gaza by Hamas.
So what on earth got the Avalonians, who are the epitome “we can’t be ourselves in this world that does not understand us” to go “but thank god we are not the f*gly nightmares that are those things? Why do they need to be here?” on the Manticores?
These things don’t happen in voids, no matter how much people like to thing that evilbadnaughty be just evilbadnaughty.
I’m not even saying the Manticores can’t be the greatest victims to ever exist in the mythological society, shunned even by those who themselves have been shunned.
But I do want to know how it got like that. I’m not buying the “nature just gave us poison and everyone hates us for no reason, ‘cose they dicks, woe be us”.
Poor buggers, if they’re treated like lepers here imagine what reception they’d get in wonderland…they go mad about about a bandersnatch there…
Oh that’s a sad looking little ‘sippy’…
Yeah manticores need their own medallion asap.
“How can you not be angry?”
“I am angry,” the werewolf said. “But unlike you, I don’t have the luxury of showing it without being called a monster. Without someone taking it as a sign of proof that I just need to be put down like a rabbit dog, but I’m just like what all the stories tell you.”
“But everyone gets angry… that’s human.”
“Up until the point where you’re not human.”
Tumblr post by the-modern-typewriter
There’s a reason Waldorf ‘remasked’ in that last panel. He’s a victim of systemic discrimination. If he wants to eat, he has to play to the ruling class’ expectations.
Rabid dog. Not rabbit dog
Mild dyslexic and voice to text doesn’t like my region’s accent.
can’t they eat anything since they’re manticores?
Probably hard to get away with that in a crowded city.
The remasking reminds me of something tangential, not quite on topic.
In writing, media, people tend to loathe strong female characters…
…UNLESS these characters display an emotional breakdown that shows their “sensitive side.”
Without this mandatory breakdown, viewers, readers deride them as harsh and unfeeling. This can become toxic af. “Female Thor” was one of the more toxic examples of it; until it was revealed she took on the mantle because of sacrifice, dear gods was it toxic. Way more toxic than “I dislike the character.” (Yes, the anger expressed included other reasons, but this was a strong element.)
I have so much respect for the Wednesday writers, because they gave some of the female characters their required emotional breakdowns early on and just got it over with. “It’s done, we did the socially required thing; can we talk about the character and the story, now?”
The manticores offer a parallel; now that they’ve had their breakdown, it’s easier for more readers and viewers to see behind the mask.
In this instance, I’m glad for it as it illustrates the world they are in, and what they’re dealing with.
I’m not always glad for it, though. I just wish it wasn’t so mandatory.
People don’t like Strong Female Characters (TM) because in modern writing, emphasizing their strength is usually done by belittling everybody around them. A woman isn’t allowed to be strong unless she’s a jerk and everybody around her is incompetent, because portraying a truly strong woman — who doesn’t NEED that artificial bolstering or the rest of the world to say ‘boy howdy you sure are impressive’ — is apparently very difficult.
People hate it when male characters do the same thing, too. The issue is that writers are generally more likely to make men confidently strong. If they could just trust that maybe their character really is brave and powerful without needing everybody to be shocked that they’re A WOMAN?!?11!? we’d be in a better place.
Throwing in the vulnerability is just a lazy shorthand attempt to drive sympathy for a character who is otherwise unlikable. This used to be done through a method called Saving the Cat, where even a protagonist who is supposed to be abrasive is shown at the beginning to do something simple but heroic — sometimes literally saving a cat from a tree — to communicate to the audience that they ARE a good person, even if they seem standoffish. The current method in vogue right now is to instead give them a tragic backstory to manufacture sympathy instead of just letting the character’s actions speak for themselves.
It’s very possible to have a strong female character (no trademark) who’s just a good, brave, strong person who doesn’t feel the need to talk down to everybody around them.
t’s not ‘mandatory. It’s just a symptom of hack writing.
Not only making them belittling characters, but handing them their great strengths without having them work for it makes it look like female characters can’t achieve it naturally. And it’s not remotely relatable. It’s like modern entertainment is trying to make people hate strong women in television and games the way they’re going about it.
I can absolutely see that, and would raise it’s a multifaceted issue. Part a, part b. There’s this “softer side” SFCs are expected to have–tied to an expected gender trait. I don’t say you are incorrect, only that societal expectations play into it as well.
It is disappointing any time I come across it. I can hope, being more aware of it, the next generation of writers avoids this, or at least uses it more strategically.
Oooh.. I suspect there’s some… incidents.. in their past.
The old Sphinxes did the Manticores dirty – them and every other “monster” they decided wasn’t getting a medallion, whether or not the decision was made with “good intentions.” Though I genuinely wonder why Harpies never got medallions; they’re not all that different from Satyrs, in the human-body-to-animal-parts ratio department or their mythological reputations as menaces to “civilized” society.
They were trying to get everyone medallions, remember? But the dragons destroyed every smithy making them that they could. They didn’t get a chance to.
If I recall right anyways.
I wonder. If a manticore’s teeth can eat through anything, and the nymian coulcil has a big hand in their “control” (I assume), then can their teeth harm a nymian lion?
Btw I love how the second to last panel tilts back along with Waldorf as he inhales.
I feel Waldorf with that masking. I’ve been doing it for forty years, and expect to be doing it until my dying day because RFK Junior considers me as dangerous as a Manticore.
And “Sippy…” Awwww…
I want to give the sad pink cats hugs now.
That’s it, swallow the bitterness down, like a whole goddamn melon, gotta be grateful that things aren’t as bad as they used to be……
What is the shop owner?
We’ve seen several species that are full “animal shaped” but get medalions. Is the only reason these two are treated as “monsters”/less because they don’t have medallions and therefor have no human/oid forms?
The bar is owned by Abby. She’s a harpy.
Monster refers to any sapient species that has no medallions and no natural method of shape-shifting or other ability to disguise itself.
“Ain’t like we’re ever gonna have cubs….”
…why not? Are they disallowed or do they think it’s not worth having them in their situation? Or…is there some other darker reason? Like…they weren’t sterilized, were they?
Well, several commenters have suggested that these two are a gay couple. Alternatively, since these are the two he’s talking with, they might be the only ones in the Avalon. Either way, no naturally-occurring cubs are happening.
…Probably. I mean, they are mythical creatures, the rules could be different.
A simpler possibility is just that whatever female manticores are out there are totally unknown to them. A seriously unpopular minority is likely to have extreme difficulty contacting each other, and then only by risky travel.
Or they are a couple, which was seriously hinted at in the previous pages.
Probably not going to happen but Just got this idea…
Ike: Statler! Waldorf! Look at me! I’m your cub, now!
39 Comments
Not like the tables are built for em
Which is a bit curious all things considered. They are not the only four-legged critters. All others just cool being medallioned on a lazy afternoon pub run?
Oh, yeah initially we were thinking that might be the intent of the couch seats but looking at the birds eye few before this conversation they all have arm rests that’d be especially blocking ungulates from climbing on and off.
Most quadrupeds kind of need to be using the their medallions in order to pick up their drinks.
Waldorf’s expression in the last panel is heartbreaking.
So…does the monster racism scale according to how dangerous the monster is? Abby gets basically a pass because she’s considered harmless (no magical or otherwise abilities), while Stat and Wal are actively ostracized because they (once) had venomous tails and have teeth that can bite through anything?
I know racism is neither logical or fair, but damn does it suck.
Abby also looks like a half-form where Statler and Waldorf look like they shouldn’t be able to speak. Even if logically they know that each is “monsters” Abby looks relatively normal.
It’s kinda weird. All the mythicals have been hunted for a reason or another. So why go after the Mants like this?
It’s like Jews suddenly started going to town on some other group of people…
Oh… Ooh!
The Mants in past went, killed and ate a bunch of Avalonian’s “for good reasons” and these two angel-voiced creatures are still getting axed all over as a disproportionate punishment for actions of some of them (they really liked to lure the kiddos with their voices, so juicy)?
Or are Avalonian’s plain dicks for chuckles?
Remember Jon’s rant against Ike because he is half Manticore?
https://www.skindeepcomic.com/archive/handshakes-24-sounds-racist/
When you think that Nemean lions were given medallions only because Jocasta gave the finger to the Sphinx leaders;
Sort of that. Jon being exactly almost indestructible Nemean with claws that can cut anything. Why aren’t they monsters?
Many other critters have legends of drowning folk and worse? They do it just to humans, so it’s okay? Enemy of my enemy?
What did the Manticores do to get their status? Eat everyone’s pet poodles?
The only reason Nemeans aren’t monsters is because Jocasta agreed to make medallions for a local pride. The sphinxes as a whole insisted they were too dangerous but Jocasta decided otherwise.
So. You know. Bigotry.
And still they are allowed around in half-forms, mayhaps even full-forms and no problem.
If Manticores had medallions, they probably would have rules forcing them to keep human forms at all times and wear venom-tail insignia to warn everyone around of their clearly even more dangerous nature.
At least the way the story is now portraying the apparent malice towards these guys, when they have been every bit compliant to the regime.
And this is not “well , some slave owners beat their slaves for lolz” -level of mean. This is a whole rainbow of people, who again, have themselves been viewed as monsters and nightmares of differing levels by others, being in unison: “we have been persecuted, but f*ck THOSE guys in particular!”
And even Israel has had a huge history of conflicts to fuel their mountain of hateful idiocy that got tipped over Gaza by Hamas.
So what on earth got the Avalonians, who are the epitome “we can’t be ourselves in this world that does not understand us” to go “but thank god we are not the f*gly nightmares that are those things? Why do they need to be here?” on the Manticores?
These things don’t happen in voids, no matter how much people like to thing that evilbadnaughty be just evilbadnaughty.
I’m not even saying the Manticores can’t be the greatest victims to ever exist in the mythological society, shunned even by those who themselves have been shunned.
But I do want to know how it got like that. I’m not buying the “nature just gave us poison and everyone hates us for no reason, ‘cose they dicks, woe be us”.
Poor buggers, if they’re treated like lepers here imagine what reception they’d get in wonderland…they go mad about about a bandersnatch there…
Oh that’s a sad looking little ‘sippy’…
Yeah manticores need their own medallion asap.
“How can you not be angry?”
“I am angry,” the werewolf said. “But unlike you, I don’t have the luxury of showing it without being called a monster. Without someone taking it as a sign of proof that I just need to be put down like a rabbit dog, but I’m just like what all the stories tell you.”
“But everyone gets angry… that’s human.”
“Up until the point where you’re not human.”
Tumblr post by the-modern-typewriter
There’s a reason Waldorf ‘remasked’ in that last panel. He’s a victim of systemic discrimination. If he wants to eat, he has to play to the ruling class’ expectations.
Rabid dog. Not rabbit dog
Mild dyslexic and voice to text doesn’t like my region’s accent.
can’t they eat anything since they’re manticores?
Probably hard to get away with that in a crowded city.
The remasking reminds me of something tangential, not quite on topic.
In writing, media, people tend to loathe strong female characters…
…UNLESS these characters display an emotional breakdown that shows their “sensitive side.”
Without this mandatory breakdown, viewers, readers deride them as harsh and unfeeling. This can become toxic af. “Female Thor” was one of the more toxic examples of it; until it was revealed she took on the mantle because of sacrifice, dear gods was it toxic. Way more toxic than “I dislike the character.” (Yes, the anger expressed included other reasons, but this was a strong element.)
I have so much respect for the Wednesday writers, because they gave some of the female characters their required emotional breakdowns early on and just got it over with. “It’s done, we did the socially required thing; can we talk about the character and the story, now?”
The manticores offer a parallel; now that they’ve had their breakdown, it’s easier for more readers and viewers to see behind the mask.
In this instance, I’m glad for it as it illustrates the world they are in, and what they’re dealing with.
I’m not always glad for it, though. I just wish it wasn’t so mandatory.
People don’t like Strong Female Characters (TM) because in modern writing, emphasizing their strength is usually done by belittling everybody around them. A woman isn’t allowed to be strong unless she’s a jerk and everybody around her is incompetent, because portraying a truly strong woman — who doesn’t NEED that artificial bolstering or the rest of the world to say ‘boy howdy you sure are impressive’ — is apparently very difficult.
People hate it when male characters do the same thing, too. The issue is that writers are generally more likely to make men confidently strong. If they could just trust that maybe their character really is brave and powerful without needing everybody to be shocked that they’re A WOMAN?!?11!? we’d be in a better place.
Throwing in the vulnerability is just a lazy shorthand attempt to drive sympathy for a character who is otherwise unlikable. This used to be done through a method called Saving the Cat, where even a protagonist who is supposed to be abrasive is shown at the beginning to do something simple but heroic — sometimes literally saving a cat from a tree — to communicate to the audience that they ARE a good person, even if they seem standoffish. The current method in vogue right now is to instead give them a tragic backstory to manufacture sympathy instead of just letting the character’s actions speak for themselves.
It’s very possible to have a strong female character (no trademark) who’s just a good, brave, strong person who doesn’t feel the need to talk down to everybody around them.
t’s not ‘mandatory. It’s just a symptom of hack writing.
Not only making them belittling characters, but handing them their great strengths without having them work for it makes it look like female characters can’t achieve it naturally. And it’s not remotely relatable. It’s like modern entertainment is trying to make people hate strong women in television and games the way they’re going about it.
I can absolutely see that, and would raise it’s a multifaceted issue. Part a, part b. There’s this “softer side” SFCs are expected to have–tied to an expected gender trait. I don’t say you are incorrect, only that societal expectations play into it as well.
It is disappointing any time I come across it. I can hope, being more aware of it, the next generation of writers avoids this, or at least uses it more strategically.
Oooh.. I suspect there’s some… incidents.. in their past.
The old Sphinxes did the Manticores dirty – them and every other “monster” they decided wasn’t getting a medallion, whether or not the decision was made with “good intentions.” Though I genuinely wonder why Harpies never got medallions; they’re not all that different from Satyrs, in the human-body-to-animal-parts ratio department or their mythological reputations as menaces to “civilized” society.
They were trying to get everyone medallions, remember? But the dragons destroyed every smithy making them that they could. They didn’t get a chance to.
If I recall right anyways.
I wonder. If a manticore’s teeth can eat through anything, and the nymian coulcil has a big hand in their “control” (I assume), then can their teeth harm a nymian lion?
That seems to be still unknown, but the power of modern technology’s working on it:
https://www.skindeepcomic.com/reader-questions/february-reader-question-13/
They all look like sad wet cats and I’m like
Btw I love how the second to last panel tilts back along with Waldorf as he inhales.
I feel Waldorf with that masking. I’ve been doing it for forty years, and expect to be doing it until my dying day because RFK Junior considers me as dangerous as a Manticore.
And “Sippy…” Awwww…
I want to give the sad pink cats hugs now.
That’s it, swallow the bitterness down, like a whole goddamn melon, gotta be grateful that things aren’t as bad as they used to be……
What is the shop owner?
We’ve seen several species that are full “animal shaped” but get medalions. Is the only reason these two are treated as “monsters”/less because they don’t have medallions and therefor have no human/oid forms?
The bar is owned by Abby. She’s a harpy.
Monster refers to any sapient species that has no medallions and no natural method of shape-shifting or other ability to disguise itself.
“Ain’t like we’re ever gonna have cubs….”
…why not? Are they disallowed or do they think it’s not worth having them in their situation? Or…is there some other darker reason? Like…they weren’t sterilized, were they?
Well, several commenters have suggested that these two are a gay couple. Alternatively, since these are the two he’s talking with, they might be the only ones in the Avalon. Either way, no naturally-occurring cubs are happening.
…Probably. I mean, they are mythical creatures, the rules could be different.
A simpler possibility is just that whatever female manticores are out there are totally unknown to them. A seriously unpopular minority is likely to have extreme difficulty contacting each other, and then only by risky travel.
Or they are a couple, which was seriously hinted at in the previous pages.
Probably not going to happen but Just got this idea…
Ike: Statler! Waldorf! Look at me! I’m your cub, now!