Wack'd's Best Dumbing Of Age Character poll has completed, with..... DINA the winner, emerging victorious over Sal!
Thanks, Wack'd, for running this.
even if we always knew dina was always going to win Not
Wack'd's Best Dumbing Of Age Character poll has completed, with..... DINA the winner, emerging victorious over Sal!
Thanks, Wack'd, for running this.
even if we always knew dina was always going to win
273 thoughts on “Not”
Ana Chronistic
“You’re pretty strong for some clown who thinks she’s Amber”
“I… AM… AMBER”
next comic better be the van on its side and Ambazi-Ger standing out the open window, fists in the air and shouting, “AGAIN!!!“
Jamie
No, it’s Joyce’s turn for that.
Jon Rich
I love the Batman Beyond reference!
StClair
Same.
WikiDreamer
Legit here for the Batman Beyond reference. Noice.
Doctor_Who
Blaine: “Amber?! What are you doing here? Where did Amazi-Girl go?”
I wonder if Blaine is still fooled by peek-a-boo and got-your-nosey.
abysswatcher1993
He probably developed a mental illness.
Svata
Hey, hi. Someone with anxiety, depression, ADHD, and an ASD here. He doesn’t have a mental illness. He’s just an abusive, evil asshole. Mental illnesses don’t make you into a monster and being a bad person doesn’t mean you have a mental illness. Thanks.
Monarch Bee
yeahhh what Svata said.
missilentmurmur
There are mental illnesses that affect perception. He can have trouble recognizing faces while still being evil.
NotPiffany
We’ve gotten no reason to think he’s got prosopagnosia. He just refuses to see Amber as anything other than a weakling he can torment.
abysswatcher1993
Having mental illnesses doesnt make you evil, that is true, but he is shown as a pathological person: he can’t accept reality, seems to have borderline personality disorder, is sociopathic, is delusional, acts like a maniac, rationalizes his own crimes in a desperate attempt, etc.
This isn’t a regular abusive asshole. This is an abusive asshole disconnected from reality.
Fart Captor
What he’s doing right now is actually a very common reaction to having fucked up so bad you’ve likely ruined your life. Doubling down in panic, refusal to accept reality, etc. It’s very normal to behave irrationally, because fucking up this bad is not something the human mind is generally prepared to handle
Skeptible
You mean like a Republican? Yeah, that tracks.
Fart Captor
I mean like literally anyone
Having an intense irrational reaction to something that threatens to upend your entire life is not limited to shitty people. The kidnapping, murder and child abuse is
Xenocide
He seems to exhibit all of the symptoms required for a diagnosis of anti-social personality disorder (listed here: https://psychcentral.com/disorders/antisocial-personality-disorder/symptoms/) except for the financial one (if he didn’t honour financial obligations to mob folk he wouldn’t be in their good books very long, and he could afford to pay Ross’ bail). He seems to lack any feelings of empathy or guilt, which does seem like a not wired quite right brain thing?
Would you disagree? Genuine question, and I’m only considering Blaine specifically here – I do agree with your point that mental illness and being a bad person are not linked.
Also, his behaviour is still inexcusable and he’s still an abusive, evil asshole who needs to be locked up for everyone’s safety.
Reltzik
Yes, he (seems to be) honoring his financial obligations to the people who can kill him, though I wonder if it’s his money he used to bail Ross out or theirs. On the other hand, he’s very much not obligating his financial obligations to fund Amber’s schooling.
Can’t comment on ASD in general, though.
HeySo
“Someone with anxiety, depression, ADHD, and an ASD here.”
“He doesn’t have a mental illness. He’s just an abusive, evil asshole. Mental illnesses don’t make you into a monster and being a bad person doesn’t mean you have a mental illness.”
Hm. There’s a lot to point out, there. Okay, first off, anxiety and depression are illnesses [or, where longstanding, can be considered as disorders], ADHD is a disorder, and ASD is a subset of neurological atypicality which can also manifest as a disorder [generally, and traditionally, manifesting in conjunction with an intellectual disability]. Given your level of functioning, ASD simply doesn’t seem to belong on that list.
[Broadly speaking, it’s rare to hear ‘illness’ used at all anymore, as ‘illnesses’ are now generally considered as syptoms of a disorder or non-mental illness, but I’ll be addressing the circumstance where you do still hear it used:]
Disorders are, simply, long-standing, internalized, atypical states, rather than afflictions [as are (mental) illnesses]. Elements which present as symptoms or temporary outside influences, such as depression or anxiety [which are usually secondary to disorders] would be referenced as illnesses. As would any other temporary state, such as the delirum brought about by a fever, or the intoxicated state brought about by sleep deprivation (or by illicit drugs or lawful medications).
Putting that into a workable context, the concept of ‘temporary insanity’ in law would relate to illnesses, rather than disorders, as disorders are pervasive [and relates instead to the ‘unfit to stand trial’ aspect of law].
Of course, an action related to a disorder may not be such: For example, you could argue that it was the act of not taking one’s medication and the temporary state of mental unwellness (ie, illness) caused by that which should qualify as ‘temporary insanity’, even though the disorder itself wouldn’t classify.
That said, we’re basically nitpicking terminology there. Inherently, it’s all just a reference to “an abnormal mental state”, and is usually readily associable within any given context. So generally, no need to stress over the terminology used, regardless of context [or get defensive about it, as with this particular circumstance].
Blaine is acting insane in a manner which indicates temporary mania and delusion. This is in line with a mental illness (rather than disorder). He also manifests several characteristics which could be in line with mental disorders, namely psychopathy [which has mild indications in a substantial part of the population, somewhat similar to neuroatypicality, and which- again, similar to neuroatypicality- is indicated to have more overt representations among the populace than was initially believed (ie, individiuals who have atypical states, but are able to blend in easier, because the atypical characteristics aren’t properly recognized as atypical) ].
To reframe all that, there’s good evidence that a sizable portion of “bad people” do have some degree of mental disorder (not surprisingly, when given any strong consideration, as a lack of empathy is generally associable to mental disorders, and an easy inroad into undesirable behavior). The issue is just that such disorder is now believed to be more common than was believed in the past, which suggests that “bad people” may actually largely just be a neurological subset of humanity.
But sure, let’s skip over that bit of uncertain deliberation, or the distinctions between disorder and unwellness/illness. As abyss already noted, even without the distinctions I clarified, there’d still be no reason to believe that Blaine was anything remotely close to sane at this point in time.
Disorder and illness are used in mental health classifications as generalized terms. Same goes for neuroatypicality, even, though neuroatypicality (now that it has been branched off of disorders) indicates pure neutrality and allows for positive interpretation, while disorder still indicates that there’s some disruption to general activity (as with a learning disability secondary to a neuroatypical state, or as with some of the characteristics of ADHD), and illness emphasizes that the individual is in an unwell state.
Simply put, people using the terms aren’t attacking you, it’s just a general term of classification. This mindset you’ve presented, of “I need to have pride in the terms which define me, and those terms can’t be applied to less benign considerations than those which apply to me” is irrational. We’re not talking gender, sex, neurological typicality, or similar. These aren’t terms used to self-identify, to protect one’s weaknesses within hostile social conceptualizations, or similar. We’re defining a medical range, of which you’re at a benign (or at least relatively benign) subset of.
Regardless of whether someone is framing it as “mental illness” or “mental disorder”, and regardless of whether they’re using the correct terminology among those two, you have to give the allowance that those terms can be used for the full range of what they’re intended to be applied to.
Which is to say, there’s nothing at all wrong with your argument of “Mental illnesses don’t make you into a monster and being a bad person doesn’t mean you have a mental illness.” [Broader deliberations on the second half aside.] That’s just to say that you don’t need to jump to that argument so easily. All the other arguments aside, it isn’t even as thought the comment you were replying to was making the case you claimed it was. Noone was making statement to Blaine’s “monstrosity”. The only indication given by the person you were replying to was that Blaine’s mental state wasn’t entirely balanced at this point in time which, again, is fairly irrefutable. Likewise, intentional or not, that poster did likely utilize the most suitable terminology to reference that state (given that long-lasting aspects are still uncertain, but the immediate state of unwellness is not).
In summary, there just really wasn’t anything to argue with, there.
HeySo
(And yes, I’m decidedly awful at being succinct. My apologies.)
Raznaak
Man, I though I had wall-of-text syndrome, but you beat me…
Maxy
Heyso, hey, so:
“Level of functioning” is a shitty guideline, and you can’t actually tell the challenges someone faces based on the fact that they can type a few sentences in a comment section.
Also, generally, Blaine hasn’t displayed any signs of mental illness that can’t be chalked up to genre tropes. Not being able to tell that Amber and Amazi-Girl are the *same person has been a running joke throughout the series for many characters, despite her appearance obviously not being well disguised. please Blaine’s plan might seem irrational and bad, but… I mean, it *worked*, or at least it almost worked if not for Toedad’s meddling. He’s clearly in a panic now and not thinking clearly, but there’s no reason to attribute that to mental illness: He’s undergoing extreme circumstances that would make any person unlikely to think clearly and logically.
Twitcher
I really don’t think Blaine’s plan would have worked in any circumstance. His entire plan hinged on a drastic, willfully ignorant underestimation of his daughter’s strength and abilities, a presumption that has been disproven to his face at least twice before. I’m almost stunned as to how he’s lasted this long in the Korean mafia. We’ve gotten no hint that he’s being propped up by people who have an investment in him being there, unless Yuri has more connections than it seems.
HeySo
@Twitcher Hmm. So basically our options for explaining his present circumstances are “mental illness”, “mental disorder”, “an idiot with good fortune that finally ran out”, “a particularily unfortunate mid-life crisis”, and “sudden overwhelming desire to be a Scooby-Doo villain”? 😛
Twitcher
I tend to think that Yuri’s father has been letting him get away with shit out of respect to his daughter, and that Yuri may be an unwitting mafia princess. It’s the only thing that makes sense to me.
HeySo
Well, hopefully Willis’ll finally let us in on the background details behind Blaine and his family soon (well, soon in comic time). I mean, it’s not like Willis’d start a new chapter with noone talking about the events of this one at all for a good duration.. right?
HeySo
“Level of functioning” is a shitty guideline, and you can’t actually tell the challenges someone faces based on the fact that they can type a few sentences in a comment section.”
A fact you should keep in mind, as well.
Also a fact irrelevant to the point I was making, in that “Austistic Disorder” specifically refers to Autism Spetrum + Intellectual Disability. As the individual isn’t indicating any signs of delayed development or impaired interaction skills, Autism being considered as an illness or disorder would be inappropriate, not to mention far more insulting towards the individual in question than anything said by anyone else within this nesting. Neuroatypicality usually comes with a varied amount of pros and cons, essentially just being the brain rewiring itself in atypical ways in order to test new configurations. Which no doubt is why synesthesia is so commonly associated with the spectrum. All I indicated was that the individual was functioning above a basic minimum level, and thus their autism would be appropriately be categorized under neuroatypicality rather than disorder. A purely technical association made by way of rational judgment and proper consideration of relevant categorical labels. In other words, a factual or mechanical statement, which can be negated rather simply by offering a technical correction, where such exists. Instead, you leap into an off-topic emotional argument that can be interpreted as insulting the OP of the nesting, all while claiming I’m the one being insulting. Nevermind that you’re making value judgements towards my opinions, when.. well, that’s an arguement that, statistically speaking, you’re effectively guaranteed to make fool out of yourself on. Suffice it to say that my own, rather significant placement on the spectrum is a relatively minor consideration, insofar as elements which would make your position seem misappropriated and dubious.
As far as your second topical point, I’ve already clarified the distinction between mental illness and mental disorder. It’s entirely possible that the person who brought up the matter intended “mental disorder” [which, as I noted, we can’t be certain of yet] but, as I clarified, “mental illness” as-written is, perhaps, quite accurate. Again, the term just indicates a significantly impaired mental state. While elements such as panic attacks aren’t typically classified as illnesses/unwellness, but simply as impairments or afflictions, Blaine *isn’t* having a panic attack. He’s having significantly impaired behavior, rather resembling the characteristics of a psychotic episode.
Keep in mind also that, as I noted, “illness” has fallen out of favor within common medical use, so the common use application has become rather overfamiliar [hence my persistent association with the term ‘unwellness’]. Effectively, you now have three categorizations: [Attacks or other brief-duration afflications], [illnesses which associated to any impaired state of meaningful duration], and [long-term disorders]. As I noted, you do see still the distinction between illness and disorder covered by certain fields, such as legal distinctions. Attacks are similarly easy to understand- panic attacks, asthma attacks, etc are all rather immediate. Where they’re long term, they’re classified as disorders [eg, Panic Disorder, Anxiety Disorder]. Given Blaine’s long term state of mental unwellness (which, note, has been going on since the initial encounter with Mike and Amber/AG, which was.. last night?), it’s only right to classify it as mental illness, by the expected associations of the terms which apply to such topics. Now, is that mental illness simply based within sleep-deprivation? Possibly! Sleep deprivation, while not classifying as an illness itself [I realize now my earlier reference may have been misleading in that regard] can instigate a state of mental illness/unwellness, usually characterized by a manic state. [It can also aggravate any mental disorders that an individual has, which does support our contemplations on that side of things.] Which.. yes, seems to match well to Blaine’s current state.
Again, as I noted in the first post, it’s mostly a matter of nitpicking terminology. Mental illness is the expected term for Blaine’s present state but, even if you disregard that, there’s really no other way to refer to his present state other than “he’s mentally unwell” [which has a directly equivalent meaning to “mentally ill”] or “he’s batty like a fruitcake on acid”. Really, I’m not sure what you’re looking for here. He’s acting “crazy”, regardless of the longevity or nature of that state, and references are being made based off that impression. You either have to address the objective side of things, which means confronting medical categorizations and terminology head-on and citing sources which indicate my own knowledge and research is in some way flawed, or you have to acknowledge the subjectivity of the matter and accept that Blaine isn’t coming across as entirely “all here” for what is likely the majority of the readers.
Also, I’m unaware of the idea that tropes can act as an excuse for ignoring how an author is presenting their material. In parody or absurdist comedic works, we accept tropes that defy rationality because the framework itself lacks rational cohesion. DoA, while goofy, has been presented as a cohesive and at least minimally grounded work. Thus, there’s no reason to assume that Willis is presenting anything solely for the sake of being a trope, without intending it to also be interpreted as “real” [barring, of course, us being graced with The Word of Willis stating otherwise].
To the contrary, we’ve been given every indication that his unwillingness to accept his daughter being able to present herself with any kind of strength is intended as a parallel to Toedad being unable to accept Becky’s sexual orientation. So I suppose, if we ignore Blaine’s other.. eccentric behaviors, we could label the matter as “self-delusion”. Again, though, it’s really a subjective matter as to whether or not someone determines that to be indicative of an unwell state or not. Though Toedad certainly’d act as a great counterpart, in validating the “[overt] mental illness [or disorders] isn’t necessarily the only basis for being ‘a bad person’ ” perspective of the nesting originator.
Again, apologies for any overbearingness in my presentation.
C.T Phipps
I have long struggled with mental illness in both childhood and adulthood.
Believe me, we can be assholes too!
It’s just not BECAUSE we’re mentally ill.
random passerby
Well, actually, yes. You can be an asshole to someone as a result of a mental illness/disorder/thing. Autistic people are often callous or unthinking because of their autism. Bipolar people know very well what kind of assholes we are when we’re manic (I’ve said some VERY hurtful things when manic that I had to eat some fucking crow for – they weren’t true and I didn’t believe them, but I said them anyway).
Bad behavior isn’t excused by mental disorders, but it can be explained by them, and forgiven by people who are understanding and patient.
Ob
Being an evil asshole doesn’t exempt you from developing a mental illness though.
Jhon
What? Dang. Thought I had that covered.
Stephen Bierce
Death of a Murder Van
clif
Relax. It’s good for the clutch.
clif
Actually, it occurs to me that no-one is going to think this is funny but me.
You have to understand that back in the day when I was a newly minted adult I was sometimes invited to partys at folks houses and when this happened I usually went. As parties go they were fairly tame with the primary activities being munching on light refreshements and talking, with the occasional couple using the oportunity for public displays of affection. This was back in the time when people thought nothing of smoking indoors in close proximity and it was considered rude to object when someone puffed smoke in your face. There was this one jerk who, when the ash at the end of his cigarette got long enough, instead of looking for a random ashtray or potted plant or used glass or even, heaven forbid, taking it outside, would flick it on the floor and grind it into the rug with his foot. If he happened to notice the host or hostess looking at him, he would announce in a loud voice, “It’s good for the rug!” and keep grinding the ash into the rug extra vigorously.
Oddly enough, he eventually stopped being invited to parties. Or at least not to the parties I went to.
It’s still the case that no-one but me will think the previous comment was funny, but now I feel better, so there’s that.
Miri
Nah, after reading the explanation and going back and imagining Amber and Blaine having context (possibly because Blaine treated Amber’s mum’s carpets like that), and Amber violently assaulting the gearbox as casually, I giggled.
Geneseepaws
I mean yeah I’ve heard of killing the engine, but that was the transmission!
Michael Steamweed
A high-speed sudden down-shift in a manual is bad; it could damage the clutch a little.
Needfuldoer
It can also over-rev the engine once the clutch stops slipping.
Deanatay
I think that’s what we’re hearing in the last panel.
Needfuldoer
This kills the
crabvan.Probably the safest available means Amber had to kneecap Blaine’s getaway.
Jhon
I suspect slamming an automatic into ‘P’ is equally … authoritative.
Needfuldoer
It depends on whether the little steel pawl that engages the gears inside to lock them in place decides it’s up to the task, gets crushed, or just nopes right out when the transmission housing grenades.
At least the engine has a better chance of surviving, because there’s no direct connection between the crankshaft and wheels. (A torque converter is a fluid coupling.)
Reed
inb4 the willisverse comes full circle and someone dies in a car accident again
Rose by Any Other Name
Yeah, not gonna lie, more than a bit worried about that.
Cholma
Don’t worry. Kestrel from Queen of Wands/Something*Positive will show up in a red car and take the hit instead!
Opus the Poet
Also Penny and Aggie, all 3 exist canonically in the same universe.
Delicious Taffy
Of all things.
Cholma
Oh, wow. I had completely forgotten about Penny & Aggie!
Fred
All 4 : We saw Faye from Questionable Content here at IU, earlier (Parents Day) although the timey-wimey stuff means that this van should probably strike a younger Cosette. She’s cursed.
Cholma
DoA is an alternate universe from the other 3. Those 3 all share the same active universe. (agree about poor Cosette though)
Twitcher
Two things: Maybe Willis doesn’t want this, but I really hope we see AU versions of the rest of the Walkyverse gang in the comic, too, even as cameos. It would be nice to see all our old friends again. Second thing: My sister rarely takes my webcomic recommendations, but I said something that prompted her to marathon Penny & Aggie. When she was introduced to the Omegas, she became incensed: “You tell them to stop spying on me and stealing my face!” She was only half joking. Sis and I were b-i-zongos with a capital B in middle school, and Sis in particular was possessed of a “deep, free-floating rage, directed inward as well as outward,” as well as being a disabled person with a heavy limp and a former wheelchair user. As for the rest of us, our Tharqa did eventually turn on me (and everyone else in her life) and I was the resentful hanger-on who felt like she never belonged.
clif
Truth to tell, I would feel a little better if we could see more of the road ahead so that we knew there wasn’t an oncoming truck there.
BBCC
My only concern is someone sees her unmasked.
Otherwise, go, AG, go!
Rose by Any Other Name
Indeed. He just saw her “FAAAAAAAAAACE”
James
Honestly any kind of police statement from the others is gonna expose Amaziber’s identity anyway, that ship has probably sailed.
Twitcher
Amber: I’m Amazi-Girl.
Blaine: No! Amazi-Girl is that black girl on the motorcycle! Or Other Rachel! Or Zaph! Or Rose Pepper! I banged their mothers too, you know! (Is dragged away)
Commander Clash
Or Faz or that biy I put in the hospital or my father. Wait…it’s suddenly clear now. I’M Amazi-girl! ~insane laughter whike being dragged away~
Needfuldoer
But he’ll never be a believer.
Lots of traces of doubt in his mind.
He’s in denial.
Chris
He couldn’t believe her if he tried.
Yumi
Hover text: I’m laughing to myself imagining Blaine getting the rental insurance on the van. “I can’t be too wild about my life choices,” he thinks to himself.
Miri
Are you (and Willis) referring to the super-expensive full cover optional policies rental companies have, rather than the (minimum level, legal requirement) third party type, or is insurance literally optional in the US?
katosen27
It depends on the state. Most states require some form of insurance. But, you have those selfish few who believe they will never get into an accident (or just don’t care) and not get insurance anyway.
clif
And if you show your disregard and contempt of the law by driving uninsured they can (wait for it) make it illegal for you to drive.
Opus the Poet
Requirements vary by state, but every state requires insurance of some kind. “Rental” insurance is you covering the vehicle against damages.
Yumi
I’m referring to the optional addons that rental companies have. Insurance is legally required in the US, but legally speaking, you’re also not supposed to kill a guy, so I wouldn’t be that surprised if Blaine didn’t have car insurance either. (I definitely know more people who have driven without insurance than have killed someone.)
Michael Steamweed
Most rental companies require you to purchase the legally-required minimal insurance, before they’ll let you have the vehicle. But Blaine might not have been doing things totally legally here.
Shawn Levasseur
Most rental companies try to get you to purchase tons of other non-required insurance too.
Especially at the last second when you don’t have time to think about it or do research.
Jinx
@Yumi “(I definitely know more people who have driven without insurance than have killed someone.)”
Good to know!
Apostate
Don’t forget that insurance companies are parasites and nothing more.
Chris
A lot of the time, your insurance on your own car also extends to rentals.
Chaucer59
If only.
No, it’s not optional, but all states require liability, and most states also require uninsured motorist. Beyond those, if you have a big enough loan on the vehicle, the bank is likely to insist that you have collision insurance.
Khyrin
Super-expensive full cover insurance is fun.
I once bought it accidentally at the counter and when I returned the rental car, the attendant was confused that I actually did the paperwork for a minor collision I had and told me, “Two times out of five we just get told where to find the wreckage.”
woobie
No insurance will cover you for crime.
clif