1190: "Time"

This forum is for the individual discussion thread that goes with each new comic.

Moderators: Moderators General, Prelates, Magistrates

portemantho
Posts: 3
Joined: Fri Nov 30, 2012 10:24 am UTC

Re: 1190: "Time"

Postby portemantho » Wed Mar 27, 2013 5:18 pm UTC

I regret this comic isn't about Joe Biden eating sandwiches.

Pencilman7
Posts: 1
Joined: Wed Mar 27, 2013 5:12 pm UTC

Re: 1190: "Time"

Postby Pencilman7 » Wed Mar 27, 2013 5:19 pm UTC

Not sure if it's related but an old comic (587) was all warbled when I was randoming through pages. I've never seen this happen on xkcd and with all the attention around this second latest comic I thought I'd point it out.

User avatar
mittfh
Posts: 40
Joined: Wed Mar 27, 2013 9:43 am UTC
Location: Kenilworth, UK

Re: 1190: "Time"

Postby mittfh » Wed Mar 27, 2013 5:19 pm UTC

Since I noticed that we've passed a significant number of pages on this thread, perhaps we're heading towards a total of 1,764 frames?

Alternatively, a multiple of 24, 60 or 1,440.

Moving away from strictly time-based numbers, others with a mathematical theme: 1,414 / 1,732 / 2,236 / 2,718 / 3,141 / 6,283 (OK, the last is perhaps overkill!)

User avatar
riverssong
Gallstone of Fury
Posts: 68
Joined: Wed Mar 27, 2013 1:52 pm UTC
Location: in a portable hobbit-hole in the Ozarks

Re: 1190: "Time"

Postby riverssong » Wed Mar 27, 2013 5:19 pm UTC

mojacardave wrote:
Wooloomooloo wrote:This is much bigger than all of us now... For the love of god, people - the ad/marketing industry MUST NEVER KNOW WHAT HAPPENED HERE, or we are all DOOMED!!! Therefore, for humanity's sake - the first rule of "Time": You don't talk about "Time"... </sarcasm>


If this was a stealth advertising campaign, it would be one of the most effective stealth advertising campaigns ever!


In my first (buried) post, I speculated that the progression would end on the 31st with the TARDIS landing on the castle.

It would be the best Doctor Who marketing EVER. Way better than that billboard in Williamsburg.
Mr Moriaty wrote:I hate it when you wake up to find everyone else joined a cult and you missed out :(

User avatar
peewee_RotA
Posts: 500
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 1:19 pm UTC

Re: 1190: "Time"

Postby peewee_RotA » Wed Mar 27, 2013 5:19 pm UTC

riverssong wrote:
Ayriannah wrote:Um...I have a very gender-specific username.


Never having heard the name Ayriannah before, could you enlighten me as to which gender it might be specific of?


I have a second cousin once removed (or something like that) named Arianna. I'm guessing it's a similar name.
"Vowels have trouble getting married in Canada. They can’t pronounce their O’s."

http://timelesstherpg.wordpress.com/about/

Magnap
Posts: 20
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 8:27 pm UTC

Re: 1190: "Time"

Postby Magnap » Wed Mar 27, 2013 5:19 pm UTC

Ayriannah wrote:
manvandmaan wrote:
Srt252 wrote:How is this so very captivating???

Anyway I think we should just complete our full transition into comic 915 now.

I think frame 97 is the best so far. "Complete" castle with head looking right totally beats frame 98 with head looking left. Although the utter chaos of 103 evokes some cosmic ponderings that are unequaled by other frames.


If we're going to do the 915 thing, I suggest we go all the way and group certain frames into periods.
I suggest the following split:

000 - 009 : the debut or what? period: when nobody really knew what was going on
010 - 023 : the dark period: the darkness in the posts of the thread reached heights during these frames
024 - 044 : the sandcastle period: as the sandcastle started to appear, most of the darkness made disappeared.
045 - 074 : the period (second dark period): Initially, this was the 'female period' but I soon realised that would be a pleonasm. Also it was a pretty dark time on the thread.
075 - 087 : the happiness period: the couple is reunited and again the darkness fades.
088 - 105 : the male period: with a climax at frame 103: "the fall of man" frame
105 - NOW : the rebuild period (second sandcastle period). Still in progress! How exciting!

My favourite is frame 26, It symbolises more hope than any of the other ones. Also frame 20, because I find woman who shake their hair sexy.

Discuss!


personally,my top ten are frames 35, 51, 68, 73, 81, 83, 88, 102, 103, and 120 (in chronological order, not order of preference.)

I doubt that any could deny the place of frame 102 and 103; the power of the castle left alone and the fall are apparent to any suitably trained eye. While many would argue that frame 52 is more deserving of praise than frame 51, the addition of text does not add to the plot nearly so much as the quiet contemplation shown in the frame before it. This contemplation is a running theme throughout the work, and far more poignant than any needless words.

Well, taking your cue about contemplation, I find frame 120 to be a far more satisfying frame than 121, as it has an air of blissful ignorance of the sorry state of the leftmost turret over it, where 121 is a more startling and sudden realization.
Helper wrote:There is a large silicate-based piece of translucent material behind me that supposedly allows one to view the Outside, although I have never cared to look through it.

Lord Cathbad
Posts: 87
Joined: Mon Oct 19, 2009 6:13 am UTC

Re: 1190: "Time"

Postby Lord Cathbad » Wed Mar 27, 2013 5:20 pm UTC

Ayriannah wrote:
Lord Cathbad wrote:I had joined the forums A LONG time ago, had to search my email to find my username.

I have read EVERY SINGLE post here since it all started, at least I think so. I may not have read some of the ninja posts.

Finally, I think I might have something to add that hasn't been said before: I now have a perfectly good use case for Google Glass. I'd be able to keep up with Time (heh!) as it happens.

:shock: ...ohmigod is that actually real? I thought that was an april fools joke? please be real? It looks real from the various googling I've just done, but...

I want one....



yes, and you can maintain a Google+ Hangout while skydiving with it.

Sighclops
Posts: 7
Joined: Tue Mar 26, 2013 2:22 am UTC

Re: 1190: "Time"

Postby Sighclops » Wed Mar 27, 2013 5:21 pm UTC

mojacardave wrote:
Sighclops wrote:
mojacardave wrote:
Sighclops wrote:
SWuh wrote:... How do I explain to him that I was meant to get ready in the past 5 half-hours but haven't been able to as I have been watching a stick man look at a sandcastle?...


The same way I explained it to my wife last night by way of a a 25 minute monologue before my cell phone battery died.


A 25 minute monologue? What a convenient period of time! And your battery just died? How suspicious...

* Apologies if that was the intentional joke! I read it straight, but now I'm not sure.


Well... the 25 minutes was approximated, so maybe 23, maybe 27. I dunno. I was on this diatribe first, reminding her what xkcd was, then was trying to explain that it was about two stick figures building a sand castle, and that there are hundreds (thousands?) of people watching the same thing, then trying to explain how this was somehow *cool.* At some point, I noticed the "elapsed time" on the call and it was at 15:XX. Then the rest of the call felt like another 5 to 10 minutes. Of course, when the battery died, I thought, "I have no idea how she puts up with me." :oops:


I was referring to the fact that 25 minutes might have been the length of your phone call intentionally, so that you could squeeze it in between comic updates.


Well... had I been in front of a computer at the time, you would have hit the nail right on the head. :)

Lord Cathbad
Posts: 87
Joined: Mon Oct 19, 2009 6:13 am UTC

Re: 1190: "Time"

Postby Lord Cathbad » Wed Mar 27, 2013 5:21 pm UTC

mittfh wrote:Since I noticed that we've passed a significant number of pages on this thread, perhaps we're heading towards a total of 1,764 frames?

Alternatively, a multiple of 24, 60 or 1,440.

Moving away from strictly time-based numbers, others with a mathematical theme: 1,414 / 1,732 / 2,236 / 2,718 / 3,141 / 6,283 (OK, the last is perhaps overkill!)


Missing 1337.

User avatar
mojacardave
Posts: 346
Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2011 1:01 pm UTC

Re: 1190: "Time"

Postby mojacardave » Wed Mar 27, 2013 5:21 pm UTC

riverssong wrote:
mojacardave wrote:
Wooloomooloo wrote:This is much bigger than all of us now... For the love of god, people - the ad/marketing industry MUST NEVER KNOW WHAT HAPPENED HERE, or we are all DOOMED!!! Therefore, for humanity's sake - the first rule of "Time": You don't talk about "Time"... </sarcasm>


If this was a stealth advertising campaign, it would be one of the most effective stealth advertising campaigns ever!


In my first (buried) post, I speculated that the progression would end on the 31st with the TARDIS landing on the castle.

It would be the best Doctor Who marketing EVER. Way better than that billboard in Williamsburg.


Though, to be fair, marketing effectiveness has to be measured by audience size, as well as by how ensnared the audience is. I can't imagine the number of fanatical page refreshers numbers much more than the low hundreds. Not the most wide-reaching advert.

I haven't done much at work today, but I'm in the office later than I normally stay. I need to leave my computer on until 5:30. And then I need to get home within 25 minutes!
Last edited by mojacardave on Wed Mar 27, 2013 5:25 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Ayriannah
Posts: 40
Joined: Wed Mar 27, 2013 2:24 pm UTC

Re: 1190: "Time"

Postby Ayriannah » Wed Mar 27, 2013 5:23 pm UTC

mojacardave wrote:
Ayriannah wrote:
Kethryes wrote:
That made me laugh :lol: (Edit: also, what the guy above said)
Got to stop reading the forums now... I'm getting very improductive :mrgreen:


Um...I have a very gender-specific username. calling a girl a guy is just as offensive as calling a guy a girl. :| I'm not massively offended, just...a bit miffed.

(there was a hole discussion about this about a dozen pages back, about Aubron's gender)


To be fair, if we'd had a hole discussion with Aubron, it'd have been less ambiguous...

...well, yes.


Also, Aubron himself wasn't involved in the discussion... I fear we may be getting off-topic, however. (does not want flamewar. Does not want)

(it is a feminine name- I kinda operate under the assumption that all geeks have read Harry Potter, though that is not where I got the name. It's actually the name of my first D&D character. It's just a re-spelling of Ariana, which is actually one of the names in the player's handbook. My point was less of the "I'm a girl, dammit" and more of the 'if you are uncertain of a gender, avoid easily avoidable pronouns")
P.S. I am not Randall. I am an initiate of Time. All is measured by the passage of the Newpix.

User avatar
Roia
Posts: 60
Joined: Wed Mar 27, 2013 4:50 pm UTC
Location: UK
Contact:

Re: 1190: "Time"

Postby Roia » Wed Mar 27, 2013 5:24 pm UTC

mojacardave wrote:
Wooloomooloo wrote:This is much bigger than all of us now... For the love of god, people - the ad/marketing industry MUST NEVER KNOW WHAT HAPPENED HERE, or we are all DOOMED!!! Therefore, for humanity's sake - the first rule of "Time": You don't talk about "Time"... </sarcasm>


If this was a stealth advertising campaign, it would be one of the most effective stealth advertising campaigns ever!


The next, and final panel will be Cueball and Megan hint "brought to you by Joe Bidens sandwich shop".

Am I the only one who doesn't want this comic to loop? To perhaps finish by the sandcastle being demolished and just a empty beach. It would seem... Wrong somehow for it to loop, like we can go back and relive the past if we want to, when that's not realistic. If that means the only way to see the entire comic is to check it out on the forum or on explainxkcd then... So be it.

User avatar
riverssong
Gallstone of Fury
Posts: 68
Joined: Wed Mar 27, 2013 1:52 pm UTC
Location: in a portable hobbit-hole in the Ozarks

Re: 1190: "Time"

Postby riverssong » Wed Mar 27, 2013 5:24 pm UTC

mojacardave wrote:
riverssong wrote:
mojacardave wrote:
Wooloomooloo wrote:This is much bigger than all of us now... For the love of god, people - the ad/marketing industry MUST NEVER KNOW WHAT HAPPENED HERE, or we are all DOOMED!!! Therefore, for humanity's sake - the first rule of "Time": You don't talk about "Time"... </sarcasm>


If this was a stealth advertising campaign, it would be one of the most effective stealth advertising campaigns ever!


In my first (buried) post, I speculated that the progression would end on the 31st with the TARDIS landing on the castle.

It would be the best Doctor Who marketing EVER. Way better than that billboard in Williamsburg.


Though, to be fair, marketing effectiveness has to be measured by audience size, as well as by how ensnared the audience is. I can't imagine the number of fanatical page refreshers numbers much more than the low hundreds. Not the most wide-reaching advert.


No, but the viral aftershocks would be pretty cool.

Not that I actually believe that's how it'll end... but it would be nearly as cool as bowties.
Mr Moriaty wrote:I hate it when you wake up to find everyone else joined a cult and you missed out :(

User avatar
Whizbang
The Best Reporter
Posts: 2238
Joined: Fri Apr 06, 2012 7:50 pm UTC
Location: New Hampshire, USA

Re: 1190: "Time"

Postby Whizbang » Wed Mar 27, 2013 5:24 pm UTC

Ayriannah wrote:
Kethryes wrote:
That made me laugh :lol: (Edit: also, what the guy above said)
Got to stop reading the forums now... I'm getting very improductive :mrgreen:


Um...I have a very gender-specific username. calling a girl a guy is just as offensive as calling a guy a girl. :| I'm not massively offended, just...a bit miffed.


I would never have guessed based on your name. To me, it is foreign enough as to give me no hint in regards to gender. If it was spelled Arianna, I would have been "Oh, that's a girl." But the spelling you have is not one I would immediately say "Oh, that's just a weird way to spell Arianna." Without you saying "I am a girl" I would have just assumed it was some foreign name (Middle-Eastern, probably) and made no guess about gender.

Doctor Bob
Posts: 3
Joined: Wed Mar 27, 2013 5:17 pm UTC

Re: 1190: "Time"

Postby Doctor Bob » Wed Mar 27, 2013 5:26 pm UTC

Somebody else may have observed this in the last gazillion postings - if so, my apologies for not reading all previous postings first.

They're building a sandcastle by a lake (as has been observed, no tide.) Largely taking turns working on it.

Why do I keep thinking of
Spoiler:
Ray Bradbury's story "The Lake"
?

Dark. Yes.

User avatar
KroniK907
Posts: 89
Joined: Tue Mar 26, 2013 12:24 am UTC
Contact:

Re: 1190: "Time"

Postby KroniK907 » Wed Mar 27, 2013 5:27 pm UTC

Whizbang wrote:
Ayriannah wrote:
Kethryes wrote:
That made me laugh :lol: (Edit: also, what the guy above said)
Got to stop reading the forums now... I'm getting very improductive :mrgreen:


Um...I have a very gender-specific username. calling a girl a guy is just as offensive as calling a guy a girl. :| I'm not massively offended, just...a bit miffed.


I would never have guessed based on your name. To me, it is foreign enough as to give me no hint in regards to gender. If it was spelled Arianna, I would have been "Oh, that's a girl." But the spelling you have is not one I would immediately say "Oh, that's just a weird way to spell Arianna." Without you saying "I am a girl" I would have just assumed it was some foreign name (Middle-Eastern, probably) and made no guess about gender.


</flamewar>
Last edited by KroniK907 on Wed Mar 27, 2013 5:28 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.
I used to miss my ex girlfriend, but my aim is slowly improving

I have been here since the beginning of Time

belliott4488
Posts: 78
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2008 8:53 pm UTC

Re: 1190: "Time"

Postby belliott4488 » Wed Mar 27, 2013 5:28 pm UTC

mojacardave wrote:
Ayriannah wrote:
Kethryes wrote:Um...I have a very gender-specific username. calling a girl a guy is just as offensive as calling a guy a girl. :| I'm not massively offended, just...a bit miffed.

(there was a hole discussion about this about a dozen pages back, about Aubron's gender)


To be fair, if we'd had a hole discussion with Aubron, it'd have been less ambiguous...

:shock: :shock:

That brings up an important point (important only in the context of conversations that take place while waiting around for events that occur twice per hour) - why is it okay to call a bunch of girls or women "you guys" but it is wrong to refer to one girl or woman as a "guy"? I don't get that.

I also don't get why it's okay to address a girl as "dude", so I'm clearly confused.

Darkfusion
Posts: 26
Joined: Tue Mar 26, 2013 7:43 pm UTC

Re: 1190: "Time"

Postby Darkfusion » Wed Mar 27, 2013 5:28 pm UTC

Maybe its just me, but frame 103, where he fell through the castle and broke it, initially looked sexual to me.

p_munny
Posts: 1
Joined: Wed Mar 27, 2013 5:26 pm UTC

Re: 1190: "Time"

Postby p_munny » Wed Mar 27, 2013 5:29 pm UTC

I kept waiting for the water level to rise up and wash away the castle.

User avatar
mojacardave
Posts: 346
Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2011 1:01 pm UTC

Re: 1190: "Time"

Postby mojacardave » Wed Mar 27, 2013 5:30 pm UTC

Image

User avatar
KroniK907
Posts: 89
Joined: Tue Mar 26, 2013 12:24 am UTC
Contact:

Re: 1190: "Time"

Postby KroniK907 » Wed Mar 27, 2013 5:30 pm UTC

Last edited by KroniK907 on Wed Mar 27, 2013 5:30 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.
I used to miss my ex girlfriend, but my aim is slowly improving

I have been here since the beginning of Time

Jorlen Corbesan
Posts: 2
Joined: Tue Mar 26, 2013 9:26 am UTC

Re: 1190: "Time"

Postby Jorlen Corbesan » Wed Mar 27, 2013 5:30 pm UTC

WHAT? NO!

User avatar
patzer
Posts: 407
Joined: Fri Mar 30, 2012 5:48 pm UTC
Contact:

Re: 1190: "Time"

Postby patzer » Wed Mar 27, 2013 5:30 pm UTC

He's going :(
If it looks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, we have at least to consider the possibility that we have a small aquatic bird of the family Anatidae on our hands. –Douglas Adams

Sarius1997
Posts: 15
Joined: Mon Mar 25, 2013 10:19 pm UTC

Re: 1190: "Time"

Postby Sarius1997 » Wed Mar 27, 2013 5:32 pm UTC

NOOO, is this the end?

User avatar
KroniK907
Posts: 89
Joined: Tue Mar 26, 2013 12:24 am UTC
Contact:

Re: 1190: "Time"

Postby KroniK907 » Wed Mar 27, 2013 5:32 pm UTC

New prediction:

Spoiler:
Will slowly erode until April 1st when BHG will jump out of it like a show girl from a cake.
I used to miss my ex girlfriend, but my aim is slowly improving

I have been here since the beginning of Time

User avatar
AussieJono
Posts: 34
Joined: Wed Mar 27, 2013 11:23 am UTC

Re: 1190: "Time"

Postby AussieJono » Wed Mar 27, 2013 5:33 pm UTC

There have been lots of theories suggesting that the end will be several frames of the castle eroding or being washed away after they leave, possibly followed by a loop back to the start. I'm beginning to ascribe more credibility to them now.

EDIT - Just thinking that without a person to provide scale that castle actually looks quite menacing now.
Last edited by AussieJono on Wed Mar 27, 2013 5:35 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.
<pretentious quote> </pretentious quote>

Wooloomooloo
Posts: 127
Joined: Wed Mar 16, 2011 8:05 am UTC

Re: 1190: "Time"

Postby Wooloomooloo » Wed Mar 27, 2013 5:33 pm UTC

I shudder to think what would happen if it were to somehow transpire that a time-machine is standing just outside the frame, and whenever Megan / Cueball leave, they go back to replace random past comics with brand new ones... :lol:

User avatar
Envelope Generator
Posts: 580
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2012 8:07 am UTC
Location: pareidolia

Re: 1190: "Time"

Postby Envelope Generator » Wed Mar 27, 2013 5:34 pm UTC

My new new new theory:

Spoiler:
Image
I'm going to step off the LEM now... here we are, Pismo Beach and all the clams we can eat

eSOANEM wrote:If Fonzie's on the order of 100 zeptokelvin, I think he has bigger problems than difracting through doors.

skuk
Posts: 6
Joined: Wed Mar 27, 2013 5:32 pm UTC

Re: 1190: "Time"

Postby skuk » Wed Mar 27, 2013 5:36 pm UTC

I'll be happy with what ever ending, even no ending, but just the last 2 frames it seems like it'd be funny if the 2 of them ran back into frame and flattened the castle, leaving the beach like it was and a natural loop

User avatar
Ayriannah
Posts: 40
Joined: Wed Mar 27, 2013 2:24 pm UTC

Re: 1190: "Time"

Postby Ayriannah » Wed Mar 27, 2013 5:38 pm UTC

belliott4488 wrote: :shock: :shock:

That brings up an important point (important only in the context of conversations that take place while waiting around for events that occur twice per hour) - why is it okay to call a bunch of girls or women "you guys" but it is wrong to refer to one girl or woman as a "guy"? I don't get that.

I also don't get why it's okay to address a girl as "dude", so I'm clearly confused.


It's all in how it's said; calling a group 'you guys has the same connotation be it mostly (or entirely) female as it does when used for an evenly mixed or male-heavy group; it's an informal way of saying 'this group of people'. 'Dude', drawing its pop-culture roots from surfers, feels very laid-back, and is nearly always meant to be non-offensive. 'Guy' and boy/man, however, are used entirely interchangeably, and have a much more definitive 'I am calling you male' connotation. Directly calling a girl a 'guy' is like calling a guy a 'girl': works in some, very specific circumstances, but causes offense in most others.

That said- I am really not offended. I was just a little put out, and didn't want the mistake to continue.
P.S. I am not Randall. I am an initiate of Time. All is measured by the passage of the Newpix.

benjaminswill
Posts: 13
Joined: Mon Mar 25, 2013 12:47 pm UTC

Re: 1190: "Time"

Postby benjaminswill » Wed Mar 27, 2013 5:40 pm UTC

It is interesting that she didn't say bye, as he did - perhaps she's not far away - building something a ways out of the frame (trebuchet?)
(Ooh, updated as I was writing - maybe he's leaving to join her - we might have to start thinking of some really wild stuff if all we get is frames of the unchanging castle for 6 half hours)

Earlier, when he said "later" I didn't necessarily think that meant he was coming back later - I often use "later" as slang for "bye"

Even if this doesn't go all the way through April 1st, it could still set up an April 1st joke if it ended on Friday - though it's unclear how big the audience that might get that joke would be.

I wonder how 1190 will appear, or be referenced, in print published edition with all the other comics chronically.

Ooo...Flip book anyone?

User avatar
riverssong
Gallstone of Fury
Posts: 68
Joined: Wed Mar 27, 2013 1:52 pm UTC
Location: in a portable hobbit-hole in the Ozarks

Re: 1190: "Time"

Postby riverssong » Wed Mar 27, 2013 5:41 pm UTC

Until such time that the English language develops a gender-neutral pronoun system, and for as long as the male form remains the accepted default in the English language, I suggest that all further debate of the topic center solely on what might be done to address the underlying linguistic cause at its root, rather than the perceived transgressions of those using an imperfect language to communicate as clearly as they are able.
Mr Moriaty wrote:I hate it when you wake up to find everyone else joined a cult and you missed out :(

something_meta
Posts: 9
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2011 6:58 pm UTC

Re: 1190: "Time"

Postby something_meta » Wed Mar 27, 2013 5:41 pm UTC

We might be in for an arbitrarily long stretch of panels with no one in them -- and so far, human activity has been the only cause of change. This might be the end.

Or maybe Megan will come back.

User avatar
peewee_RotA
Posts: 500
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 1:19 pm UTC

Re: 1190: "Time"

Postby peewee_RotA » Wed Mar 27, 2013 5:42 pm UTC

belliott4488 wrote:
mojacardave wrote:
Ayriannah wrote:
Kethryes wrote:Um...I have a very gender-specific username. calling a girl a guy is just as offensive as calling a guy a girl. :| I'm not massively offended, just...a bit miffed.

(there was a hole discussion about this about a dozen pages back, about Aubron's gender)


To be fair, if we'd had a hole discussion with Aubron, it'd have been less ambiguous...

:shock: :shock:

That brings up an important point (important only in the context of conversations that take place while waiting around for events that occur twice per hour) - why is it okay to call a bunch of girls or women "you guys" but it is wrong to refer to one girl or woman as a "guy"? I don't get that.

I also don't get why it's okay to address a girl as "dude", so I'm clearly confused.


A few things. Guy is a very Americanized thing. I think it's favored use from the fact that a guy is traditionally a raggedy undesirable. (A homage to Guy Fawkes). For a guy, that's totally cool. I'm rough and tumble. A regular guy! However it's not good to insult a woman's appearance no matter how minor. Your hat looks nice and those shoes DO NOT make you look fat.

Guys, plural, is a bit different. It's a way to help you (plural) sound less like you (singular). I think it's comparable to ya'll and yin'z.


So anyway, what about dude? Well dude is for guys and chicks is for gals. Many gals don't like to be labeled chicks, so it's not safe to use in unfamiliar company. I use it freely anyway.


Now's the time to point out that no matter what SWuh said before hand, it's the post where she showed an honest concern for sexism that proves she's a chick.
"Vowels have trouble getting married in Canada. They can’t pronounce their O’s."

http://timelesstherpg.wordpress.com/about/

kaley
Posts: 35
Joined: Wed Dec 26, 2012 10:52 pm UTC

Re: 1190: "Time"

Postby kaley » Wed Mar 27, 2013 5:42 pm UTC

Ayriannah wrote:snip

That said- I am really not offended. I was just a little put out, and didn't want the mistake to continue.


I think on this forum everyone's a gender-neutral with male pronouns until identified. I have a pretty female name (Kaylee spells it wrong, but I believe the majority here know Firefly) and I was a HE until identified as a SHE.

Which is not a big deal.

yaddayadda
Posts: 21
Joined: Wed Mar 27, 2013 3:54 am UTC

Re: 1190: "Time"

Postby yaddayadda » Wed Mar 27, 2013 5:42 pm UTC

mojacardave wrote:
Ayriannah wrote:
Kethryes wrote:
That made me laugh :lol: (Edit: also, what the guy above said)
Got to stop reading the forums now... I'm getting very improductive :mrgreen:


Um...I have a very gender-specific username. calling a girl a guy is just as offensive as calling a guy a girl. :| I'm not massively offended, just...a bit miffed.

(there was a hole discussion about this about a dozen pages back, about Aubron's gender)


To be fair, if we'd had a hole discussion with Aubron, it'd have been less ambiguous...


Coffee on keyboard! (And can't believe I missed the original typo. :? )

findx
Posts: 2
Joined: Wed Mar 27, 2013 3:56 pm UTC

Re: 1190: "Time"

Postby findx » Wed Mar 27, 2013 5:43 pm UTC

findx wrote:It would be pretty awesome if it ends up being the castle at the end of the original Super Mario Bros. levels...
Attachments
smb.jpg

Sunny
Posts: 4
Joined: Fri Sep 17, 2010 12:33 pm UTC

Re: 1190: "Time"

Postby Sunny » Wed Mar 27, 2013 5:46 pm UTC

Ayriannah wrote:
belliott4488 wrote: :shock: :shock:

That brings up an important point (important only in the context of conversations that take place while waiting around for events that occur twice per hour) - why is it okay to call a bunch of girls or women "you guys" but it is wrong to refer to one girl or woman as a "guy"? I don't get that.

I also don't get why it's okay to address a girl as "dude", so I'm clearly confused.


It's all in how it's said; calling a group 'you guys has the same connotation be it mostly (or entirely) female as it does when used for an evenly mixed or male-heavy group; it's an informal way of saying 'this group of people'. 'Dude', drawing its pop-culture roots from surfers, feels very laid-back, and is nearly always meant to be non-offensive. 'Guy' and boy/man, however, are used entirely interchangeably, and have a much more definitive 'I am calling you male' connotation. Directly calling a girl a 'guy' is like calling a guy a 'girl': works in some, very specific circumstances, but causes offense in most others.

That said- I am really not offended. I was just a little put out, and didn't want the mistake to continue.

To be honest, I think you're being a bit too sensitive about the whole thing. Your username really isn't that gender-specific - I wouldn't have known you were a girl unless you had said it, and it wasn't like he was calling you a guy in a mean and derogatory way. It really shouldn't matter at all.

User avatar
peewee_RotA
Posts: 500
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 1:19 pm UTC

Re: 1190: "Time"

Postby peewee_RotA » Wed Mar 27, 2013 5:47 pm UTC

Sunny wrote:To be honest, I think you're being a bit too sensitive about the whole thing. Your username really isn't that gender-specific - I wouldn't have known you were a girl unless you had said it, and it wasn't like he was calling you a guy in a mean and derogatory way. It really shouldn't matter at all.


I've got the best advice for this. Choose a screen name that nobody else would ever by caught dead with. That way anything insulting coming your way looks pretty minor in comparison.
"Vowels have trouble getting married in Canada. They can’t pronounce their O’s."

http://timelesstherpg.wordpress.com/about/

User avatar
peewee_RotA
Posts: 500
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 1:19 pm UTC

Re: 1190: "Time"

Postby peewee_RotA » Wed Mar 27, 2013 5:48 pm UTC

findx wrote:
findx wrote:It would be pretty awesome if it ends up being the castle at the end of the original Super Mario Bros. levels...


lol
"Vowels have trouble getting married in Canada. They can’t pronounce their O’s."

http://timelesstherpg.wordpress.com/about/


Return to “Individual XKCD Comic Threads”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: pminva and 47 guests