Not signed in (Sign In)
  1.  (6340.61)
    So is this where I break out Modest Proposal references and Baby-back-rib recipes?
    Baby-eating --- or cannibalism, in general does have a historical precedent, and there are some populations that seem to carry genetic adaptations that would allow them to be better capable of dealing with consuming primate flesh (Be it from humans, chimps or whatnot), as apparently evidenced by some population's resistance to kuru and mad cow disease (If I recollect correctly).Cannibalism of related and unrelated young during times of stress and as a method of social bonding has been observed among chimps near the Gombe region for some time now.

    Also, in times of high stress, the logical problems of a babyfarm might not be on the forefront of the people's minds. If they're worried enough about basics and feeling terribly insecure about such things it might've just not occured to them that the cycle of the babyfarm could not continue. In addition to creating a supply of food, the babyfarm may have provided its operators with some social 'bonuses' in terms of feelings of power and control, in a world where they they may have felt no power. By objectifying others to an extreme point.

    I'm wondering if the survivors of the babyfarm are still around WC, and how the ones who weren't mindwiped coped versus the one who was. If you didn't remember something happening and everyone else DID, the process of simply knowing you didn't know, or not being able to trust your own memories would be severely disorienting.
    •  
      CommentAuthormister hex
    • CommentTimeJul 10th 2009
     (6340.62)
    @ doc - Roo said it best. Birds do it, bees do it and all that. (I love babies but I couldn't eat a whole one.)
  2.  (6340.63)
    I'm also wondering if the FAs sometimes screwed things up when they were learning their powers. Accidentally turning people into vegetables, things of that sort.
    •  
      CommentAuthoredward
    • CommentTimeJul 10th 2009
     (6340.64)
    FA's is just so- damn- good. Thanks.
    •  
      CommentAuthortaphead
    • CommentTimeJul 10th 2009
     (6340.65)
    Typo watch: page 1, panel 1, Alice says "Sirrka" instead of Sirkka.
    •  
      CommentAuthordiello
    • CommentTimeJul 10th 2009
     (6340.66)
    I am so in love with the first page! I want my own unconscious Luke to sit on.
    Also, Great back-story! I don't think that's what Johnathan Swift had in mind when he wrote A Modest Proposal.

    Woke up around 2:30pm... brilliant. But I can't seem to get to sleep until the sun comes to full rise.
  3.  (6340.67)
    ....Hex, you misread my point. I'm not the one saying the baby farm doesn't make sense. I'm the one saying people are silly for saying the baby farm doesn't make sense.
    •  
      CommentAuthorJay Kay
    • CommentTimeJul 10th 2009
     (6340.68)
    What had me interested was Sirkka's way of helping people deal with rape by wiping it away. I can really go either way on this--on one hand, I can see how it'd technically be better for the victim to have the trauma removed from them. Like someone else mentioned, that's a form of life kicking you in the bits that people don't really need.

    On the other hand, it does take away from the victim's ability to choose. What if the person doesn't want their mind and body tempered with even more? Shouldn't they be able to choose whether they want to forget it or not? Isn't it still violating someone's mind and body, even if it's to heal rather than destroy?

    Very, very interesting stuff. Great show, Warren, Paul and co.
  4.  (6340.69)
    I'm wondering if the survivors of the babyfarm are still around WC, and how the ones who weren't mindwiped coped versus the one who was. If you didn't remember something happening and everyone else DID, the process of simply knowing you didn't know, or not being able to trust your own memories would be severely disorienting.
    Heavily edited: I just recalled the mention that they filled in victims' blanks with depression-induced oversleeping or other faux memories, meaning no disturbing seams to unravel. And minimum tweaking on others' memories perhaps...?
    •  
      CommentAuthordiello
    • CommentTimeJul 10th 2009
     (6340.70)
    I think Sirkka should pose as a hypnotist and offer a service to "hypnotize" the experience away... that way people will have a choice. And she could give it away for free, so even the badly burned skeptics might give it a try.
    •  
      CommentAuthormister hex
    • CommentTimeJul 10th 2009
     (6340.71)
    @ doc - Sirkka only did that to one victim, the one who hadn't conceived. The rest fully remember their time imprisoned and I imagine might wish otherwise but ... best not to go around messing with people's minds.

    And as to your earlier point, doc - complaining about the baby farm doesn't make sense. Plus it's only a story, right?

    Also - "rape camps" in Bosnia were like "comfort stations" in the Pacific during the Second World War. (They didn't eat the babies but babies were an unavoidable by product. In both comfort stations and rape camps, the women usually "worked" well into the second trimester.) Also, pregnant women can do things, plenty of things. Usually involving sitting down.
    • CommentAuthorQuixotess
    • CommentTimeJul 10th 2009
     (6340.72)
    ...and to say that Jack's not a coward for his opinion. It really isn't his place to decide what's best for someone who's been violated in a way he has no experience with. He didn't say he wouldn't do everything in his power to protect or help said victim, just that it's not his place to choose the best course of action when it comes to their own memories and bodies.

    Of course it isn't his place, and it isn't Sirkka's either. Nothing about having a uterus makes Sirkka qualified to decide what's best for someone's memory and body any more than Jack is. It's not an argument for women, and it's not even about what women should do. Nothing about taking a position in this argument necessitates making a declaration on what rape survivors ought to choose.

    I'm also somewhat surprised by the person who said Jack was the most mature of the Freakangels, given his tendency to refuse to deal with problems. He can have the most mature opinion in the world, but he's avoiding working towards solutions.
    •  
      CommentAuthorjohnjones
    • CommentTimeJul 10th 2009 edited
     (6340.73)
    On the other hand, it does take away from the victim's ability to choose. What if the person doesn't want their mind and body tempered with even more? Shouldn't they be able to choose whether they want to forget it or not? Isn't it still violating someone's mind and body, even if it's to heal rather than destroy?


    And once again it's good to remember that there is a difference between doing the right thing and doing the least wrong thing. In some situations all one can do is the least wrong thing.
  5.  (6340.74)
    Hex, I'm just confused as to why you keep responding directly to me about "complaining about the baby farm" when that's entirely not what I've done. To rehash a point I've already made. Because it's apparently needed. Jesus. ETA: unless I'm just blatantly misreading things, but I've been asking for clarity and it's not really been provided.
    • CommentAuthorDee_Noir
    • CommentTimeJul 10th 2009
     (6340.75)
    I'm having a time out until I can learn some manners.
    Who would want to remember being raped? It's not like you could take something positive out of the experience. In such a traumatic situation ignorance is bliss, and I think purple was right to do what she did.
  6.  (6340.76)
    You can't always be certain that's what a person wants. Who's to say a rape victim wouldn't loathe the idea of someone messing with their mind, feeling it to be just as much a violation as the rape itself?

    The "least wrong thing" is really accurate, but there was still an even better (though not perfect) choice: approach the rape victim with the offer, which has the effect of revealing the FAs' powers, and make it clear that if they choose to not have the rape erased from their memory, the FAs will still have to erase the offer of the choice and the reveal of their powers. It still ultimately forces them to undergo mental manipulation, but it's far more defensible and allows the victim some agency in what's done to them. Even if they won't remember.
    •  
      CommentAuthorCocoBijou
    • CommentTimeJul 10th 2009 edited
     (6340.77)
    Removed: I mistakenly thought this was about episode 60 as had not realized a new Freak Angels was out.
  7.  (6340.78)
    What's being talked about that doesn't relate to the comic?
  8.  (6340.79)
    I for one welcome passionate Whitechapel discussion, but still, this thread isn't the place for "Are you trying to say something about my post?". Leave personal anger out of your words in this thread, is probably a good rule. And just leave that fucking issue to rest already.

    \\\

    "Least wrong thing" is a good way of viewing "Purple's" actions. It's not just a morality question, it's also (or mostly) practicality. Broken people aren't safe to keep around in a rebuilding community. The alternatives to mind-wipe which the Freakangels considered were: let the victims be a cancer on progress, or simply kill them.

    The Freakangels faced a tough call, made their choice, were left with questions. The virtue of this comic's treatment of big issues, as Orson mentioned, is that it is only recording the fact, not preaching to us. It certainly wasn't an invitation for fellow readers to start wondering who they'd eat first on a lost lifeboat.
  9.  (6340.80)
    Doc - Hex - shut the fuck up now, both of you.