yeah, it’d really be more of a play-see-joe effect
Ed Callahan
Maybe more of a doe-se-doe effect…
Harmony
Now, if Dina’s heightened by additional males left watching, they could grab some random guy off the street named Ben. Then maybe both will be squeaked out by watching with another guy, but they’d still do it.
At this point, it would be a Ben/Joe’s-ew-eh-watch
Then they could follow up by all watching DUNE together in the afterglow.
Harmony
…Okay, maybe I worked too hard for that one, in retrospect.
I know what the Placebo effect is, and I still don’t get the joke. Autism! ?
Tan
It is being pronounced like placebo but with a J in place of the B, and that is pretty much the entirety of the joke.
Taellosse
You say that like it WASN’T a brilliant pun.
Meagan
It was good, but would have benefited from a dash here imo to clarify pronunciation: pla-ce-joe…I don’t know, that’s still maybe not clear.
merbrat
Pla-SEE-Joe?
Hilen
That’s actually quite useful for me, since not being a native English speaker has somehow made me “deaf” for most puns. But explain like this,the “sound and writting” of the two words becomes more clear.
Meagan
That is good to know, thank you for sharing that!
Tan
I do not mean to minimize the amazing/terrible pun, only emphasize that there is not some other hidden reference or meaning that one might be missing
[Sarcasm] The whole point of labels like “autism” is so people can put everybody who fits in one little box with complete homogeneity! [/Sarcasm]
One might suppose that there could be section dividers in that box so outsiders can recognise that e.g. women with autism and men with autism, who typically present differently, get diagnosed at different points in life, etc, do in fact not all display the exact same traits but that apparently defeats the point of putting people in boxes for most… The only group that the majority of people are willing to ascribe heterogeneity to is apparently the one they belong to ?
So do I. It’s called “not knowing how people will react and overcompensating” (in my case, at least).
Really, I’d prefer to be as honest as Dina is being here (because an ideal relationship (romantic or otherwise) wouldn’t require falsehood), but there’s no one I’m close enough to to take that risk.
Daibhid C
Yep. There was a thing on Twitter a while ago that I really identified with but can’t locate now, which was something like:
Autistic Person on TV: I care not for the meaningless conventions of so-called polite conversation.
Autistic Person in Reality: Oh God, I said “Have a nice day” and they said “Same to you” instead of “Thanks, you too”. Is there a difference? HAVE I BEEN GETTING THE DIFFERENCE WRONG??
Daibhid C
(I should add that I’m 90% sure the original had a much better example of conversational uncertainty, but I can’t remember what it was.)
Uly
I gotta say, I actually *don’t* care for the meaningless conventions of polite conversation, except insasmuch as I find them interesting on a sociolinguistic level, but I still play along.
It’s really no different from headbutting my cat. It keeps her happy, which makes me happy, even if objectively it’s just not doing much for me.
I have a chronic problem of understating things, which ends up both understating things affecting me and also things affecting society. I wouldn’t say i have tact though
Honesty and not inherently understanding all social cues is common, brutal honesty is not, as autistic people do not typically say things intending to be brutal or often word things to be brutal.
Dina is also not being brutal here. She just didn’t instantly pick up the social cue that Becky wanted comfort rather than analysis.
I see most people are clashing with your assertment, so let me be one who supports it!
While I don’t always use the 100% open honesty with everyone, the closer one is to me intimately, the less I mask. Thus my close friends will be on the receiving end of my honesty near constantly
Should I be dating someone, I would anticipate that I am close enough to them that they would be getting none of my mask, and therefore the only things they aren’t getting is birthday/christmas gift spoilers
Following the data may find correlations but doesn’t mean there is a causal link she needs to employ the scientific method to see if there is a causal link.
The correlation so far is every time Dina had “pants euphoria” it was after a conversation with Joe. The hypothesis is talking with Joe is needed for Dina to experience said “pants euphoria”. The actual conversation doesn’t seem to matter, except they were talking science when Dina got her “Pants Euphoria”. The experiment to confirm they hypothesis requires talking about science with a random male, a random female, and Joe, then seeing if talking science is the catalyst, or if talking science with a male is the catalyst, or if the combination of Joe and talking science is the catalyst. I call it a catalyst because the person talking doesn’t actually take part in the “Pants Euphoria”, but is required for the reaction that creates “Pants Euphoria” which is a textbook definition of a catalyst.
I find that level of honesty deeply refreshing. While troublesome in this moment, it also makes positive assertions 100% trustworthy.
And I envy Dina for being able to express these thoughts. I’m also rather autistic, but learned at some point that I shouldn’t say certain things out loud – but not WHICH things are off limits. So often I end up saying nothing and people make (completely off) assumptions about me instead and it sucks.
I’m sorry to hear that. I deal with some hallucinations on a daily basis which make it much harder to understand what people are saying. It also makes me hard to understand in general because I talk way too fast when I’m dealing with a hallucination and so logic goes out the window.
maybe in a group of friends/casual acquaintainces, you could wear a tshirt htat’s like “i have no filter” though i suppose unless it’s like a hostile insult, i’d think most things being said could probably be forgiven if they understood versus you like violating someone’s personal boundaries physically
Lesbian as in “woman who’s romantically or sexually attracted to women”, presumably, rather than “lesbian who’s exclusively romantically or sexually attracted to women.”
eh, whatever
“Bi” rather than “lesbian”, then.
eh, whatever
or “pan” obvs
Wack'd
It’s not an either/or. Plenty of wlw who’re also into other genders call themselves lesbians. Language isn’t proscriptive–queer people pick the word that works for them.
GholaHalleck
Yeah, not to throw a wrench into that, but I have seen/experienced the circus that happens when an ill-informed bisexual pops out the bisexual when they were perceived as homosexual. It is not pretty.
Nor fair really, but humans gonna human.
Wack'd
I would not argue that bi lesbians are not ill-informed. They just don’t give gatekeepers that power over them.
One way to differentiate I’ve heard is to use the term Sapphic.
As noted, Lesbian often implies that a woman is exclusively into women and is a label that must be chosen by an individual for themselves.
Sapphic, meanwhile, is a term that includes all women into women, regardless of whom else they might be into.
As such, based on evidence in the comic, Becky is a lesbian (because she self-identified as such) while Dina qualifies as Sapphic (because she’s into Becky and potentially an unknown quantity of other individuals) until she chooses to use a more specific term to identify herself.
Wack'd
Sapphic is a good word. That said, if wlw want to call themselves lesbians while also being into other people, I don’t think that’s a problem that needs fixing.
189 thoughts on “Troubled”
Ana Chronistic
could be a place-joe effect?
David M Willis
NO
King Daniel
yeah, it’d really be more of a play-see-joe effect
Ed Callahan
Maybe more of a doe-se-doe effect…
Harmony
Now, if Dina’s heightened by additional males left watching, they could grab some random guy off the street named Ben. Then maybe both will be squeaked out by watching with another guy, but they’d still do it.
At this point, it would be a Ben/Joe’s-ew-eh-watch
Then they could follow up by all watching DUNE together in the afterglow.
Harmony
…Okay, maybe I worked too hard for that one, in retrospect.
Rowan
What were you going for? I do not understand
shadowcell
but yes
Schpoonman
Perfection.
Jess
“word of god”, everyone! it could not, in fact, be a place-joe effect.
Kyrik Michalowski
I have to be honest, it took me an extra 30 seconds to figure out what you were going for.
The Wellerman
I know what the Placebo effect is, and I still don’t get the joke. Autism! ?
Tan
It is being pronounced like placebo but with a J in place of the B, and that is pretty much the entirety of the joke.
Taellosse
You say that like it WASN’T a brilliant pun.
Meagan
It was good, but would have benefited from a dash here imo to clarify pronunciation: pla-ce-joe…I don’t know, that’s still maybe not clear.
merbrat
Pla-SEE-Joe?
Hilen
That’s actually quite useful for me, since not being a native English speaker has somehow made me “deaf” for most puns. But explain like this,the “sound and writting” of the two words becomes more clear.
Meagan
That is good to know, thank you for sharing that!
Tan
I do not mean to minimize the amazing/terrible pun, only emphasize that there is not some other hidden reference or meaning that one might be missing
butts
fuck, that’s really awful. well done
Clif
So say we all.
Or we should.
Owlmirror
pherjoemones.
Casi
pherojoes flows better i think
Andrews
Lovely piece of work
Rose by Any Other Name
Ana, I would like to congratulate you on a job well done.
That pun… **chef kiss** Truly terrible.
Raja
boos while also slow clapping
Roborat
A pun so bad Sir Willis himself felt the need to comment. You have my admiration.
Sneakystorms
😮
The Wellerman
“Science shows no mercy.”
— Land of the Lost
Steve C.
Nice! Original Saturday morning series, or Will Ferrell comedy?
Wack'd
there is no will ferrel comedy version of land of the lost
comedies are funny
thakoru
This is what you sign up for when you date an autistic person. Brutal honesty.
UrsulaDavina
Not always
G127
That’s just a stereotype.
The Wellerman
Yeah our autisms all look different. We’re very diverse, not only from neurotypicals but from each other, hence, neuro-diversity. ?
Miri
[Sarcasm] The whole point of labels like “autism” is so people can put everybody who fits in one little box with complete homogeneity! [/Sarcasm]
One might suppose that there could be section dividers in that box so outsiders can recognise that e.g. women with autism and men with autism, who typically present differently, get diagnosed at different points in life, etc, do in fact not all display the exact same traits but that apparently defeats the point of putting people in boxes for most… The only group that the majority of people are willing to ascribe heterogeneity to is apparently the one they belong to ?
People are kinda rubbish like that.
Taffy
Are you kidding? I sugarcoat shit constantly. It’s called tact.
deliverything
So do I. It’s called “not knowing how people will react and overcompensating” (in my case, at least).
Really, I’d prefer to be as honest as Dina is being here (because an ideal relationship (romantic or otherwise) wouldn’t require falsehood), but there’s no one I’m close enough to to take that risk.
Daibhid C
Yep. There was a thing on Twitter a while ago that I really identified with but can’t locate now, which was something like:
Autistic Person on TV: I care not for the meaningless conventions of so-called polite conversation.
Autistic Person in Reality: Oh God, I said “Have a nice day” and they said “Same to you” instead of “Thanks, you too”. Is there a difference? HAVE I BEEN GETTING THE DIFFERENCE WRONG??
Daibhid C
(I should add that I’m 90% sure the original had a much better example of conversational uncertainty, but I can’t remember what it was.)
Uly
I gotta say, I actually *don’t* care for the meaningless conventions of polite conversation, except insasmuch as I find them interesting on a sociolinguistic level, but I still play along.
It’s really no different from headbutting my cat. It keeps her happy, which makes me happy, even if objectively it’s just not doing much for me.
FlamestAndLight
I have a chronic problem of understating things, which ends up both understating things affecting me and also things affecting society. I wouldn’t say i have tact though
Keulen
Depends on the autistic person. Some of us have long ago realized that most neurotypical folks rarely actually want to hear brutal honesty.
Sam
Honesty and not inherently understanding all social cues is common, brutal honesty is not, as autistic people do not typically say things intending to be brutal or often word things to be brutal.
Dina is also not being brutal here. She just didn’t instantly pick up the social cue that Becky wanted comfort rather than analysis.
The Wellerman
Don’t I be saying it?
Kazuma Taichi
I see most people are clashing with your assertment, so let me be one who supports it!
While I don’t always use the 100% open honesty with everyone, the closer one is to me intimately, the less I mask. Thus my close friends will be on the receiving end of my honesty near constantly
Should I be dating someone, I would anticipate that I am close enough to them that they would be getting none of my mask, and therefore the only things they aren’t getting is birthday/christmas gift spoilers
Steve C.
Becky, Dina is a scientist. She follows the data where ever it leads.
UrsulaDavina
Following the data may find correlations but doesn’t mean there is a causal link she needs to employ the scientific method to see if there is a causal link.
Opus the Poet
The correlation so far is every time Dina had “pants euphoria” it was after a conversation with Joe. The hypothesis is talking with Joe is needed for Dina to experience said “pants euphoria”. The actual conversation doesn’t seem to matter, except they were talking science when Dina got her “Pants Euphoria”. The experiment to confirm they hypothesis requires talking about science with a random male, a random female, and Joe, then seeing if talking science is the catalyst, or if talking science with a male is the catalyst, or if the combination of Joe and talking science is the catalyst. I call it a catalyst because the person talking doesn’t actually take part in the “Pants Euphoria”, but is required for the reaction that creates “Pants Euphoria” which is a textbook definition of a catalyst.
Kyrik Michalowski
Becky looks defeated, I can’t imagine what she’ll do about it. Although Dina probably could have kept the Joe thing to herself.
Would you prefer a significant other tell you about something like that? Or not?
Masumi
I find that level of honesty deeply refreshing. While troublesome in this moment, it also makes positive assertions 100% trustworthy.
And I envy Dina for being able to express these thoughts. I’m also rather autistic, but learned at some point that I shouldn’t say certain things out loud – but not WHICH things are off limits. So often I end up saying nothing and people make (completely off) assumptions about me instead and it sucks.
Laura
Wow, that does suck. I’m so sorry that happens to you.
The Wellerman
Yeah this shit happens to a lot of autistics out there, and I’m no exception ?
Mr D
Wellerman, I gotta say, this is a much healthier outlook than the last few times I saw you talking about Autism, proud of ya for it.
Kyrik Michalowski
I’m sorry to hear that. I deal with some hallucinations on a daily basis which make it much harder to understand what people are saying. It also makes me hard to understand in general because I talk way too fast when I’m dealing with a hallucination and so logic goes out the window.
anon
maybe in a group of friends/casual acquaintainces, you could wear a tshirt htat’s like “i have no filter” though i suppose unless it’s like a hostile insult, i’d think most things being said could probably be forgiven if they understood versus you like violating someone’s personal boundaries physically
GholaHalleck
This is Pants Science to Dina. A puzzle to be solved, not to be hindered by emotion.
michaelinasmeal
becky gonna accept the NTR situation and the comment section is gonna cry at a “bad ending”
Nono
I feel like Joe would both be happy that he was indirectly responsible for lesbian sex, and also unhappy that he caused a rift between lesbians.
Mike
I don’t think Dina is a lesbian, though you’re point stands if you’re in Joe’s POV.
Wack'd
Lesbian as in “woman who’s romantically or sexually attracted to women”, presumably, rather than “lesbian who’s exclusively romantically or sexually attracted to women.”
eh, whatever
“Bi” rather than “lesbian”, then.
eh, whatever
or “pan” obvs
Wack'd
It’s not an either/or. Plenty of wlw who’re also into other genders call themselves lesbians. Language isn’t proscriptive–queer people pick the word that works for them.
GholaHalleck
Yeah, not to throw a wrench into that, but I have seen/experienced the circus that happens when an ill-informed bisexual pops out the bisexual when they were perceived as homosexual. It is not pretty.
Nor fair really, but humans gonna human.
Wack'd
I would not argue that bi lesbians are not ill-informed. They just don’t give gatekeepers that power over them.
Rose by Any Other Name
One way to differentiate I’ve heard is to use the term Sapphic.
As noted, Lesbian often implies that a woman is exclusively into women and is a label that must be chosen by an individual for themselves.
Sapphic, meanwhile, is a term that includes all women into women, regardless of whom else they might be into.
As such, based on evidence in the comic, Becky is a lesbian (because she self-identified as such) while Dina qualifies as Sapphic (because she’s into Becky and potentially an unknown quantity of other individuals) until she chooses to use a more specific term to identify herself.
Wack'd
Sapphic is a good word. That said, if wlw want to call themselves lesbians while also being into other people, I don’t think that’s a problem that needs fixing.
The Wellerman
Hey now Becky, this could very well be what you humans call a blessing in disguise.
Perhaps it is not Joe himself, but something about Joe, or happening to him, that elicits Dina’s arousal.
Doctor_Who
And that’s how Becky ends up wearing loud Hawaiian shirts from now on.
Meagan
She would in a heartbeat, too.
Chrysalis