Bad idea. See Arthur C. Clarke’s short story, ‘The Nine Billion Names of God’. I’d include a link, but I’m at work and most of the free downloads are blocked.
If I recall correctly, it’s been implied Carla is intersexed and lesbian or asexual but homoromantic in the DOA storyline (not sure… I think I need a chart for all of the orientations in DoA).
But as a result, her mere existence angers Mary due to all the gendered rules of her religion that Carla breaks by here mere existence, let alone actions.
Carla is a transwoman who’s orientation is unknown ATM, but likely aesexual/homoromantic or aromantic aesexual. In Shortpacked! her orientation was the former, but odd enough that aro/ace may be what it translates to here.
Side note, she’s not intersexed at all, and please try to avoid that error.
No it doesn’t – it’s perfectly possible to achieve checkmate without losing any pieces, or even with both sides losing pieces. It’s pretty difficult against an even remotely competent opponent, but Mary played right into Carla’s plans at every turn here.
That said, one could argue that Carla lost a Knight or Bishop when Mary caught her off guard with this cheap shot.
brionl
When I was in the Navy, one guy was bragging about how great a chess player he was. I played him once, and got him Fool’s Mate in 3 moves. Then I never played against him again. 🙂
TheGrammarLegionary
Knew a guy in highschool like that… a few weeks of talking himself up finally led to a showdown in the library (I had a well-earned reputation to uphold). First, I beat in ten moves. Second, I took my queen of the board at the start and still won. Finally, I sat in another room and texted him my moves. Still won.
I love the aesthetics of a chess set. My game is nonexistent, though, which keeps me from buying one.
Although my cat, I’m sure, would just LOVE for the chance to have 32 new toys to bat around…
TheGrammarLegionary
Personally, as a chess player, I would consider that cheap shot equivalent to having the board thrown at me, and Carla was simply clever enough to run with that and say, ‘Okay, let’s fucking play.’
Let that which haunts yet infuriates you most, my existence continue to do so. Allow the moment my grin burned it’s self into your memory torment your every waking moment, as my name echoes in your ear keeping you up at night, However, after your nothing more than dust upon the earth 100 years past your death, than and than do you have my permission to forget my name, but never my face. Now, what’s my Name?
Because it’s crystal clear — and any recitation of the facts of the matter will make it so — that Carla intended Mary to get that pie. What’s she going to do, sue Mary for non-payment and confess in court to planning an assault?
Moreover it’s a basic piece of contract law that it’s a meeting of minds. If that doesn’t happen — and for obvious reasons didn’t here — it’s invalid. You can’t retroactively bill someone for something they didn’t agree to in the first place. So even if Carla were to sue over non-payment, she’d lose.
And doing so at all would undercut the entire arc, which has been about Carla handling this shit on her own, without needing any authorities to do it for her.
Well, I mean, it’s her pie. She was holding onto it. Mary stole it out of her hands. Mary would owe her for a new pie seeing as how she stole and ruined the first one.
But like, this is all moot, because Carla has no intention of involving any form of authority, because she’s more than aware of how authorities of all stripes treat trans folks and especially trans folks who defend themselves in the most minor of ways.
Carla is not going to get Mary in trouble for jack shit. Because the point is more to make Mary aware that she can’t just treat Carla like a disposable pawn in her moral crusade against “The Gay”. Like some “misplaced freak” who doesn’t have a name and a right as much as Mary to be here.
To get personal revenge because the system has failed and will almost always fail those like Carla.
foamy
That’s not how theft works. Carla would have to outright lie to present this as theft, and a civil case is a non-starter for reasons I’ve already outlined.
As you say, though, it’s irrelevant because Carla won’t kick this to the authorities, for a whole pile of reasons (and not just fear of anti-trans reactions). The fact that Carla has her own room and no roommates, and is openly (if quietly) trans, suggest to me there’s at least some degree of systematic support for her being in IU.
But Carla’s very much >not< a person who defaults to complaining to someone, or getting them to do her dirty work for her. It's one of the strongest contrasts between her and Mary.
Trans people get single rooms in dorms in order to technically meet Title IX requirements while still maintaining a level of deniability if a bigot registers a complaint. A means of technically respecting her identity enough to not be breaking the law while allowing systemic denials of her rights.
A single room is a major red flag that the level of support she has within IU depends a hell of a lot more on her parents being who they are than it does show a genuine system support for Carla’s identity.
Pylgrim
So if I walk up to you, grab up your phone without your consent and in doing so it falls to the floor and breaks, am I not liable for it? I would owe you nothing at all?
foamy
Possibly. I’m curious as to if there’s any depictions prior to this that might shed light? Ruth, for example, was about to go nuclear on Mary before she got shut down via blackmail.
foamy
Pylgrim: Your analogy is flawed.
Ellegos
I was under the impression that theft was the act of someone taking the property of another person without consent or agreement. Carla may have known that Mary was going to take the pie, maybe even wanted her to take it, but she never gave permission or consent. She wouldn’t have to lie in court. She would just have to tell them that Mary took it without consent or permission, which is true. Mary literally snatched it out of her hands without Carla giving any indication that Mary may do so.
Maxy
If I put a lock on my phone that’ll self-destruct the phone’s contents, and someone steals my phone from my hand and breaks it, they’re responsible for ruining my phone. Saying that Carla was, in so many words, ‘Asking for it’ when Mary stole her pie doesn’t excuse the pie theft.
Joe Angel
I think this would be history’s first self defense argument to justify stealing.
Falcon
Theft, in civil law, is trespass to chattel. It’s a tort, which means the defendant is liable if her conduct was tortuous. Snatching someone’s property out of their hands is unquestionably tortuous, so Mary would be liable.
A good defense attorney might be able to mitigate the damages by arguing that Carla’s own conduct was tortuous for setting up a situation to exploit Mary’s paranoia. But that would require convincing the judge/jury that a reasonable person in Carla’s situation should have known that a person in Mary’s position would pie herself. Also, getting into the origins of Mary’s paranoia with regards to Carla opens a much bigger can of worms.
…not that this is ever going to make it to a small claims court, unless that pie was baked by some Michelin chef out of the most outrageously overpriced ingredients possible. But the law is strongly in Carla’s favor here.
Freemage
Foamy:
I think you’re doing a lot of confusing of terminology.
Now, let’s set aside the improbability of any of this, ever, going to any actual court of law, be it civil or criminal. We’re assuming that hurdle has somehow been leaped, and the parties are now before the bar.
Mary could be charged with theft and destruction of personal property, as she both removed the pie from Carla’s possession without permission, and (in opening the box) caused the pie to be destroyed prematurely. As even on a gratuitous case, such a minor loss would at most constitute a misdemeanor, she might be ordered to make restitution and pay a fine per the laws of Indiana on the matter.
Meanwhile, Mary could sue Carla, claiming that the pie constituted a booby-trap and thus violated the law on those grounds. However, again, the lack of real damages means that a minimal judgement would be awarded–most of it being court-costs in small claims court.
Leorale
@Cerberus, Wait, is that why trans people get single rooms? I went to a very LGBTQ+ positive college, where everyone would’ve liked a single. I don’t know whether trans people specifically got singles there. However, if I was in charge, trans people would absolutely have that option, in order to neatly sidestep the potential jackassery of roommates and/or roommates’ parents who might object to rooming with her. (Like, Carla doesn’t need that BS, the college doesn’t need that BS, let’s just offer her one of those coveted singles and avoid the potential for bigots to freak out.) If the housing department gives transfolks singles, I’d sooner assume that they’re primarily interested in avoiding a bigoted shitstorm. Am I hella naive?
Mithras
Not that I think you’re wrong – I just must have missed it, but where is it mentioned that Carly is trans?
There’s hints throughout the archives — as I discovered when I did a “wait what?” archive dive — but this is pretty damn explicit confirmation and it’s what kicked off this entire pie-to-the-face plan:
Mithras, it’s easy to miss because Carla has always been a character who happens to be trans rather than The Trans Character. Some genius has been done there…
It’s also a bit clearer if you’re familiar with Shortpacked!, as the robotic Ultra-Car (Carla’s Walkyverse counterpart) is believed to be male until they get a female humanoid chassis.
675 thoughts on “Ruttech”
Ana Chronistic
Not true! A bunch of the other residents ALSO piss off Mary…
Hmm, maybe Carla should have a whole string of machines spelling out the entire directory of the Universe?
EPILOGUE
Mr. Random
… I accept this as canon. Damn what Willis may say.
Onion
Just assume Death of the Author, and ANYTHING can be canon!
Mr. Random
… Orgies everywhere.
Also, healthy and functional people.
Rodrigo
We need a DoA doujinshi like that
Reltzik
You don’t need author death for that to be canon. Just a slipshine account.
Rowen Morland
Do you remember the guest comic about the final days of Questionable Content? (The one with the webcomic illuminati).
Charlie Spencer
Bad idea. See Arthur C. Clarke’s short story, ‘The Nine Billion Names of God’. I’d include a link, but I’m at work and most of the free downloads are blocked.
Josh
If I recall correctly, it’s been implied Carla is intersexed and lesbian or asexual but homoromantic in the DOA storyline (not sure… I think I need a chart for all of the orientations in DoA).
But as a result, her mere existence angers Mary due to all the gendered rules of her religion that Carla breaks by here mere existence, let alone actions.
Seer Of Rage
No romantic relationships with Carla are shown in DoA I believe, but she had a romantic and (rather one sided) sexual relationship with Malaya
Alyssa
I know Carla is trans, and since orientation is constant I think she’s also homoromantic ace. So yeah existence will anger Mary quite effectively.
Viktoria
Carla is a transwoman who’s orientation is unknown ATM, but likely aesexual/homoromantic or aromantic aesexual. In Shortpacked! her orientation was the former, but odd enough that aro/ace may be what it translates to here.
Side note, she’s not intersexed at all, and please try to avoid that error.
Maxine
Thank you for addressing this comment 🙂
Mr. Mendo
And that’s checkmate!
Wheelpath
Eh, maybe more like blackjack.
Checkmate implies Carla “lost” some pieces
She just had a 10 (the pie) and an ace (spelling her name)
Mr. Mendo
Jenga?
AUnicornNoOneAskedFor
Yahtzee!
Ana Chronistic
UNO
JustCheetoDust
Numberwang
Kinoko
Wangernumb!
Abel Undercity
Calvinball!
EvilMidnightLurker
Mornington Crescent!
Willoughby Chase
Gezundheidt!
Betrayer
Dabo!
Sushi
Gin!
Mordecai
King me!
Tacos
BINGO!
Deviant
Geneseepaws
Amontillado.
Annie
¡Lotería!
SonicBlueRanger
Sorry! …Wait
hedgie
Yes, please.
Osaru Sensei
Now that is jenga.
Disloyal Subject
No it doesn’t – it’s perfectly possible to achieve checkmate without losing any pieces, or even with both sides losing pieces. It’s pretty difficult against an even remotely competent opponent, but Mary played right into Carla’s plans at every turn here.
That said, one could argue that Carla lost a Knight or Bishop when Mary caught her off guard with this cheap shot.
brionl
When I was in the Navy, one guy was bragging about how great a chess player he was. I played him once, and got him Fool’s Mate in 3 moves. Then I never played against him again. 🙂
TheGrammarLegionary
Knew a guy in highschool like that… a few weeks of talking himself up finally led to a showdown in the library (I had a well-earned reputation to uphold). First, I beat in ten moves. Second, I took my queen of the board at the start and still won. Finally, I sat in another room and texted him my moves. Still won.
He didn’t play me again after that…
Abel Undercity
I love the aesthetics of a chess set. My game is nonexistent, though, which keeps me from buying one.
Although my cat, I’m sure, would just LOVE for the chance to have 32 new toys to bat around…
TheGrammarLegionary
Personally, as a chess player, I would consider that cheap shot equivalent to having the board thrown at me, and Carla was simply clever enough to run with that and say, ‘Okay, let’s fucking play.’
Doctor_Who
Mike drop.
As in Mike drops in and hands Mary a nickel, because she just got reamed.
SmilingNid
Along with a second one for also getting publicly creamed.
Gigafreak
Cream Pie is the name of a sex act and I am perfectly okay with never ever finding out what it entails.
Dreizehn
It’s fairly vanilla in that it’s the standard act of sex by which procreation happens.
Joe Angel
Well, any non-oral way of shooting semen into someone counts. So that includes the kaboodle and people on the pill.
TheAnonymousGuy
Let that which haunts yet infuriates you most, my existence continue to do so. Allow the moment my grin burned it’s self into your memory torment your every waking moment, as my name echoes in your ear keeping you up at night, However, after your nothing more than dust upon the earth 100 years past your death, than and than do you have my permission to forget my name, but never my face. Now, what’s my Name?
Mary:(silence) C-Carla!
Hollister Dixon
You’re god damn right.
Eyebrow
This. As satisfying as the machine and the humiliation has been, I want to hear Mary say Carla’s name, unwillingly.
quarktime
FRANCIS!
http://tinyurl.com/hsnm3sa
foamy
Carla hit the bullseye, causing the rest of the dominoes to fall like a house of cards.
Willoughby Chase
GOOOOAAAALLLLLLLLAZZZZZOOOOO!!!!!
Wheelpath
Super satisfied, thank you Willis
Mr. Random
Existence is the greatest “fuck you” to some people.
Dara
Indeed.
Billing her for the pie is a very nice touch.
I hope it was an expensive pie.
foamy
It’s not like Mary’d be obliged to pay, though.
Dara
Oh, of course not. It’s just the principle of the thing.
Opus the Poet
Why not? She took it and destroyed it.
foamy
Because it’s crystal clear — and any recitation of the facts of the matter will make it so — that Carla intended Mary to get that pie. What’s she going to do, sue Mary for non-payment and confess in court to planning an assault?
Moreover it’s a basic piece of contract law that it’s a meeting of minds. If that doesn’t happen — and for obvious reasons didn’t here — it’s invalid. You can’t retroactively bill someone for something they didn’t agree to in the first place. So even if Carla were to sue over non-payment, she’d lose.
And doing so at all would undercut the entire arc, which has been about Carla handling this shit on her own, without needing any authorities to do it for her.
Cerberus
Well, I mean, it’s her pie. She was holding onto it. Mary stole it out of her hands. Mary would owe her for a new pie seeing as how she stole and ruined the first one.
But like, this is all moot, because Carla has no intention of involving any form of authority, because she’s more than aware of how authorities of all stripes treat trans folks and especially trans folks who defend themselves in the most minor of ways.
Carla is not going to get Mary in trouble for jack shit. Because the point is more to make Mary aware that she can’t just treat Carla like a disposable pawn in her moral crusade against “The Gay”. Like some “misplaced freak” who doesn’t have a name and a right as much as Mary to be here.
To get personal revenge because the system has failed and will almost always fail those like Carla.
foamy
That’s not how theft works. Carla would have to outright lie to present this as theft, and a civil case is a non-starter for reasons I’ve already outlined.
As you say, though, it’s irrelevant because Carla won’t kick this to the authorities, for a whole pile of reasons (and not just fear of anti-trans reactions). The fact that Carla has her own room and no roommates, and is openly (if quietly) trans, suggest to me there’s at least some degree of systematic support for her being in IU.
But Carla’s very much >not< a person who defaults to complaining to someone, or getting them to do her dirty work for her. It's one of the strongest contrasts between her and Mary.
Cerberus
Trans people get single rooms in dorms in order to technically meet Title IX requirements while still maintaining a level of deniability if a bigot registers a complaint. A means of technically respecting her identity enough to not be breaking the law while allowing systemic denials of her rights.
A single room is a major red flag that the level of support she has within IU depends a hell of a lot more on her parents being who they are than it does show a genuine system support for Carla’s identity.
Pylgrim
So if I walk up to you, grab up your phone without your consent and in doing so it falls to the floor and breaks, am I not liable for it? I would owe you nothing at all?
foamy
Possibly. I’m curious as to if there’s any depictions prior to this that might shed light? Ruth, for example, was about to go nuclear on Mary before she got shut down via blackmail.
foamy
Pylgrim: Your analogy is flawed.
Ellegos
I was under the impression that theft was the act of someone taking the property of another person without consent or agreement. Carla may have known that Mary was going to take the pie, maybe even wanted her to take it, but she never gave permission or consent. She wouldn’t have to lie in court. She would just have to tell them that Mary took it without consent or permission, which is true. Mary literally snatched it out of her hands without Carla giving any indication that Mary may do so.
Maxy
If I put a lock on my phone that’ll self-destruct the phone’s contents, and someone steals my phone from my hand and breaks it, they’re responsible for ruining my phone. Saying that Carla was, in so many words, ‘Asking for it’ when Mary stole her pie doesn’t excuse the pie theft.
Joe Angel
I think this would be history’s first self defense argument to justify stealing.
Falcon
Theft, in civil law, is trespass to chattel. It’s a tort, which means the defendant is liable if her conduct was tortuous. Snatching someone’s property out of their hands is unquestionably tortuous, so Mary would be liable.
A good defense attorney might be able to mitigate the damages by arguing that Carla’s own conduct was tortuous for setting up a situation to exploit Mary’s paranoia. But that would require convincing the judge/jury that a reasonable person in Carla’s situation should have known that a person in Mary’s position would pie herself. Also, getting into the origins of Mary’s paranoia with regards to Carla opens a much bigger can of worms.
…not that this is ever going to make it to a small claims court, unless that pie was baked by some Michelin chef out of the most outrageously overpriced ingredients possible. But the law is strongly in Carla’s favor here.
Freemage
Foamy:
I think you’re doing a lot of confusing of terminology.
Now, let’s set aside the improbability of any of this, ever, going to any actual court of law, be it civil or criminal. We’re assuming that hurdle has somehow been leaped, and the parties are now before the bar.
Mary could be charged with theft and destruction of personal property, as she both removed the pie from Carla’s possession without permission, and (in opening the box) caused the pie to be destroyed prematurely. As even on a gratuitous case, such a minor loss would at most constitute a misdemeanor, she might be ordered to make restitution and pay a fine per the laws of Indiana on the matter.
Meanwhile, Mary could sue Carla, claiming that the pie constituted a booby-trap and thus violated the law on those grounds. However, again, the lack of real damages means that a minimal judgement would be awarded–most of it being court-costs in small claims court.
Leorale
@Cerberus, Wait, is that why trans people get single rooms? I went to a very LGBTQ+ positive college, where everyone would’ve liked a single. I don’t know whether trans people specifically got singles there. However, if I was in charge, trans people would absolutely have that option, in order to neatly sidestep the potential jackassery of roommates and/or roommates’ parents who might object to rooming with her. (Like, Carla doesn’t need that BS, the college doesn’t need that BS, let’s just offer her one of those coveted singles and avoid the potential for bigots to freak out.) If the housing department gives transfolks singles, I’d sooner assume that they’re primarily interested in avoiding a bigoted shitstorm. Am I hella naive?
Mithras
Not that I think you’re wrong – I just must have missed it, but where is it mentioned that Carly is trans?
Cerberus
It’s come up a lot as the current plotline is all about Mary’s transphobia. But it was first stated explicitly using the trans-word here:
http://www.dumbingofage.com/2016/comic/book-6/02-that-perfect-girl/antagonize/
foamy
There’s hints throughout the archives — as I discovered when I did a “wait what?” archive dive — but this is pretty damn explicit confirmation and it’s what kicked off this entire pie-to-the-face plan:
http://www.dumbingofage.com/2016/comic/book-6/02-that-perfect-girl/wrong-2/
UnfortunatePanda
also durring the “Whiteboard Dingdong Bandit” arc
http://www.dumbingofage.com/2014/comic/book-4/04-the-whiteboard-dong-bandit/permanent/
foamy
That’d be one of the hints I mentioned. I really was kicking myself by the time I got to that one for not catching it sooner. 🙁
Also, after recent comic events, seeing this one here hits a lot harder:
http://www.dumbingofage.com/2014/comic/book-4/04-the-whiteboard-dong-bandit/leads/
Steve
Mithras, it’s easy to miss because Carla has always been a character who happens to be trans rather than The Trans Character. Some genius has been done there…
Plutoniarch
It’s also a bit clearer if you’re familiar with Shortpacked!, as the robotic Ultra-Car (Carla’s Walkyverse counterpart) is believed to be male until they get a female humanoid chassis.