“This is so nice/I just might sleep with the same girl twice/They say it’s better the second time/They say you get to do the weird stuff.” – Dr. Horrible’s Sing Along Blog
It occurs to me that if Nathan Fillion grew a beard, he’d make a damn good Richard.
All-Purpose Guru
Naah, Nathan Fillion is a nice guy.
chris2315
Please don’t jinx it. With everything going on in Hollywood right now, you never know who might turn out to be a creep.
Scots Dragon
There were rumours that he’d bullied Stana Katic on the set of Castle, but they’re unsubstantiated so take with grains of salt.
SgtWadeyWilson
So what? He still played Caleb and Captain Hammer well enough, he could play Richard. Heck, considering Caleb, he could probably play Toedad. *Shudders.*
Er, no. If I’m fucking one of my partners, it doesn’t mean I magically stop dating the rest of them. Even if it happens multiple times consecutively.
David
How unprincipled. You are not taking polygamy serious.
ruhrow
It depends on how you interpret the word ‘consecutively’. To me, the fact that it is a completely separate stipulation aside from ‘multiple times’ implies that it is intended to convey ‘multiple times without other banging events between them’. As in, of the 100 times he’s banged in the past year, 50 consecutive banging events were with the same person.
monkyvirus
Monogamy isn’t defined by sex. Your comment is a tad insulting to people in poly relationships.
Gaia
Actual it is.
Definition of monogamy
1 archaic :the practice of marrying only once during a lifetime
2 a :the state or custom of being married to only one person at a time
b :the state or practice of having only one sexual partner at a time.
c zoology :the condition or practice of having a single mate during a period of time.
Monogamy is common among birds.
rhastia
If we’re going to get technical, “banging” is slang for sexual intercourse, and intercourse is defined by penetration.
It is absolutely possible to have multiple sexual partners, while only ‘banging’ one of them.
So, while monogamy may be defined by sex, it is not defined on the terms of sexual intercourse, or ‘banging’. Shiro’s original comments hold true.
That all depends on whether you define sexual partner to mean “person I am currently engaged in sexual intercourse with, right at this moment exactly” vs “person with whom I have an established sexual (and possibly romantic) relationship”
Gaia
Erhm.
Sexual partners are people who engage in sexual activity together. The sexual partners can be of any number, sex, gender, or sexual orientation. The sexual partners may be in a committed relationship, either on an exclusive basis or not, or engage in the sexual activity on a casual basis
thejeff
Or for that matter a romantic, but not sexual relationship. Someone could easily be exclusively dating a partner, but not (yet) fucking – or other explicitly sexual activities.
Monogamy definitely implies some kind of commitment to be exclusive, not just “I had sex with this person twice without happening to have sex with someone else in between” or even “I’ve only been having sex with this person for an extended period of time, but only because I haven’t found any other willing partners”.
the final pam
That’s literally not at all how monogamy works.
If you have sex with Alice one week, then have sex with Brandon the next three weeks, you’re not automatically monogamous with Brandon just because you haven’t had sex with Alice again. Unless the relationship with Brandon is explicitly said to be exclusive, it’s not necessarily monogamous by default.
On another note, Amber is much more bold about dropping references and her own personal little verbal quirks into conversation now that she’s become more of a human shield. It’s almost a little endearing but I’m still very worried for that girl.
We saw in the Walkyverse that Joe can grow into a decent human being, and are seeing signs of him attempting to leave his less desirable traits behind here. Faz we never saw growing into a decent human being.
Here’s the upside. If you were Amber, and Joe’s dad married your mom… he would presumably be in there with you on the Faz thing. Sure he wouldn’t technically be step-anything with Faz, but I imagine he wouldn’t be any keener on Faz being himself around him than you were.
217 thoughts on “Jango”
Ana Chronistic
IT’S A SIGN
THE END OF TIMES IS NIGH
Remmington Steele
*Looks outside and there are 5 horseman* Ah, Monogamy. I see you’ve made it.
Pablo360
So I take it Monogamy stole Conquest’s horse?
Androiddreams
spoiler alert. as someone who monogamises i can tell you monogamy IS Kaos
SgtWadeyWilson
I thought he quit and became a milkman?
3oranges
Shared. They’re very close, these days.
MatthewTheLucky
Much to Galasso’s displeasure.
Doctor_Who
“As you wish.” – The Princess Bride
“The greatest thing you’ll ever learn is just to love, and be loved in return.” – Moulin Rouge
“What do you want? You want the moon? Just say the word and I’ll throw a lasso around it and pull it down.” – It’s a Wonderful Life
“Here’s looking at you, kid” – Casablanca
“Without you, today’s emotions would be the scurf of yesterday’s” – Amelie
“I love you” , “I know” – The Empire Strikes Back
“I am banging the same person more than once, consecutively” – Dumbing of Age
Meta
Next book title?
SgtWadeyWilson
“This is so nice/I just might sleep with the same girl twice/They say it’s better the second time/They say you get to do the weird stuff.” – Dr. Horrible’s Sing Along Blog
Am I doing this right?
Doctor_Who
It occurs to me that if Nathan Fillion grew a beard, he’d make a damn good Richard.
All-Purpose Guru
Naah, Nathan Fillion is a nice guy.
chris2315
Please don’t jinx it. With everything going on in Hollywood right now, you never know who might turn out to be a creep.
Scots Dragon
There were rumours that he’d bullied Stana Katic on the set of Castle, but they’re unsubstantiated so take with grains of salt.
SgtWadeyWilson
So what? He still played Caleb and Captain Hammer well enough, he could play Richard. Heck, considering Caleb, he could probably play Toedad. *Shudders.*
jeffepp
He’ll always be The Preacher.
smparadox
Testify!
Roborat
“Where the hell are we?” – Johnny Dangerously
smparadox
Great Romantic Lines from literature.
CandidCanid
MONOGAMY! DON’T YOU KNOW WHAT I’VE TOLD YOU ABOUT THAT! >:O
Shiro
Tbf, banging the same person consecutively doesn’t necessarily imply monogamy…
begbert2
Actually it does, albeit only for the span of time between the first consecutive bang and the latest one.
Shiro
Er, no. If I’m fucking one of my partners, it doesn’t mean I magically stop dating the rest of them. Even if it happens multiple times consecutively.
David
How unprincipled. You are not taking polygamy serious.
ruhrow
It depends on how you interpret the word ‘consecutively’. To me, the fact that it is a completely separate stipulation aside from ‘multiple times’ implies that it is intended to convey ‘multiple times without other banging events between them’. As in, of the 100 times he’s banged in the past year, 50 consecutive banging events were with the same person.
monkyvirus
Monogamy isn’t defined by sex. Your comment is a tad insulting to people in poly relationships.
Gaia
Actual it is.
Definition of monogamy
1 archaic :the practice of marrying only once during a lifetime
2 a :the state or custom of being married to only one person at a time
b :the state or practice of having only one sexual partner at a time.
c zoology :the condition or practice of having a single mate during a period of time.
Monogamy is common among birds.
rhastia
If we’re going to get technical, “banging” is slang for sexual intercourse, and intercourse is defined by penetration.
It is absolutely possible to have multiple sexual partners, while only ‘banging’ one of them.
So, while monogamy may be defined by sex, it is not defined on the terms of sexual intercourse, or ‘banging’. Shiro’s original comments hold true.
Shiro
That all depends on whether you define sexual partner to mean “person I am currently engaged in sexual intercourse with, right at this moment exactly” vs “person with whom I have an established sexual (and possibly romantic) relationship”
Gaia
Erhm.
Sexual partners are people who engage in sexual activity together. The sexual partners can be of any number, sex, gender, or sexual orientation. The sexual partners may be in a committed relationship, either on an exclusive basis or not, or engage in the sexual activity on a casual basis
thejeff
Or for that matter a romantic, but not sexual relationship. Someone could easily be exclusively dating a partner, but not (yet) fucking – or other explicitly sexual activities.
Monogamy definitely implies some kind of commitment to be exclusive, not just “I had sex with this person twice without happening to have sex with someone else in between” or even “I’ve only been having sex with this person for an extended period of time, but only because I haven’t found any other willing partners”.
the final pam
That’s literally not at all how monogamy works.
If you have sex with Alice one week, then have sex with Brandon the next three weeks, you’re not automatically monogamous with Brandon just because you haven’t had sex with Alice again. Unless the relationship with Brandon is explicitly said to be exclusive, it’s not necessarily monogamous by default.
Stella
It does for Dr. Rosenthal.
CandidCanid
On another note, Amber is much more bold about dropping references and her own personal little verbal quirks into conversation now that she’s become more of a human shield. It’s almost a little endearing but I’m still very worried for that girl.
Maveric1984
I LEARNED IT FROM YOU!
Reltzik
“Monogamy is Latin for one-gamey, which is just one step removed from NO GAME AT ALL!”
“Son, that’s not how-”
“THAT’S AN EXACT QUOTE! You gave me flash cards and everything!”
Chris Phoenix
Best laugh in at least a week, maybe three. Thank you!
Makkabee
It’s Greek.
Just sayin’.
Arian
I refrained with difficulty from pointing that out. Thanks for taking one for the team.
AnvilPro
Richard feels rightfully awkward for trying to help one child get along with their parents, right in front of his own child he doesn’t get along with.
Pablo360
Oh no! Richard and Stacey are… are…
FUCKBUDDIES! *dramatic kazoo noises*
Deanatay
They may even be Friends With Benefits!
Or worse… LOVERS.
*Dun dun DUUUUUN*
Dave Van Domelen
So, which is worse…having Faz as a half-brother, or Joe as a step-brother?
Clodia
Faz. Always and forever Faz.
Doctor_Who
In any hypothetical “which is worse” situation, you can stop as soon as you hear the word “Faz” and declare it the victor.
Unless the next thing was gonna be “Two Fazzes”. (Fazes? Fazii? Or is Faz its own plural, like moose?)
Techhead
Which is worse? Faz just being Faz, or Blaine/Toedad team-up?
Doctor_Who
Trick question. Blaine and Toedad would get into a fight over best child abduction techniques and mutually destroy each other, thus canceling out.
Whereas Faz just is.
Nobody
I agree, I see no interaction between those two assholes not ending in mutual destruction
Eldritch Gentleman
Not just team up. Blaine/Toedad ship! I’d ship that in a “what a beautiful trainwreck” kind of way.
SgtWadeyWilson
Obviously it’s Faz/Fez, like goose/geese. *Sarge nods.*
David
The plural of Sarge is Serge?
SgtWadeyWilson
It is now! Thanks to one of the many Devid. (In other words: it’s your fault.)
Kamino Neko
Two sergeants in the same room become a vengeful seal cub?
SgtWadeyWilson
Well, find another sergeant, and I guess we’ll find out.
Khyrin
Close.
One Faz, two Fez, three or more Fezzes.
SgtWadeyWilson
Nope. Can’t be. Fezzes are cool.
Bonnie
one faz two faz red faz blue faz
Averien
Rapey McStabbedtwice is a greater evil than Faz.
Mr. Bulbmin
What is worse? One Faz given superpowers, or a Faz equivalent of the Yugioh card Jam Breeding Machine (it makes a new Fax at the start of each day)?
SgtWadeyWilson
Depends on the superpowers, but usually the eventual horde would win worst choice.
thejeff
Definitely depends on the powers. One of powers could be duplication!
ValdVin
I still wanna see Faz tied up by Dina’s rope and returned to.sender. Joe has potential we didn’t know a few days (in-universe) ago.
Sam
Joe’s true potential is to return Faz to the sender at long last. Ruth no longer must conceal him in her closet and pretend he isn’t there.
ValdVin
We haven’t seen all of Ruth’s room. Could the still-tied-up Faz (with duct-taped mouth) be mounted on a plaque on her wall?
Mephron
Pinned there by his own femurs.
Reltzik
Murphy’s Law says, the worst scenario is whichever one we’re getting.
So, both.
JetstreamGW
Yeah I’m sorry it’s gonna be Faz forever.
hof1991
It’s Fazes all the way down.
Sionyx
We saw in the Walkyverse that Joe can grow into a decent human being, and are seeing signs of him attempting to leave his less desirable traits behind here. Faz we never saw growing into a decent human being.
So I’m going with Faz being worse.
Viktoria
That depends, is Amber dating Joe when their parents get married?
Briny
Here’s the upside. If you were Amber, and Joe’s dad married your mom… he would presumably be in there with you on the Faz thing. Sure he wouldn’t technically be step-anything with Faz, but I imagine he wouldn’t be any keener on Faz being himself around him than you were.
missilentmurmur
Actually, I wouldn’t mind Joe for a brother. And it might do him some good, too.
Jordan
Without any shred of doubt, it’s Faz. Joe’s a decent guy under his many layers of sexism etc and he’s working to be a better person. Slowly.
Faz on the other hand is all of Joe’s worst traits turned up to 12 and minus any charm.
Wolfbeckett