welcome to the fest
|
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Leohan
Joined: 27 Mar 2007
Posts: 1125
|
 Posted: Tue Mar 26, 2013 4:09 am Post subject: |
 |
|
In response of bitflipper:
I agree that it's a bit silly to take the stuff he says in a literal perspective. Discussion about how Fembots work from the original strip with Slick comes to mind. But still there's a lot of room for discussion regarding the metaphors applied. Tat shows us important things, after all, and Sinfest is truly worth learning from.
_________________
Sinfest Juggalo Worshipper |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
SA_Penguin
Joined: 13 Feb 2011
Posts: 240
Location: Adelaide
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 26, 2013 8:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
| bitflipper wrote: | If a sexual aid device can think, then is it still merely a device? Or should it not be accorded the fundamental rights and freedoms that are the due of thinking beings? If such be the case, then Milton and company are guilty of making slaves, not devices--something very much in keeping with Devil Corp.'s mode of operating in the past--and then the case for a justifiable attempt at homicide becomes far less trivial.
But, wait! Fembot and her kind don't think, right? They're simply fictitious characters--plot devices, in fact. I'd be slightly surprised (albeit only slightly) if anyone here were to try to rationally argue otherwise. And, so the questions of intelligence, rights, and justifiable assault or homicide all become meaningless. We're not discussing people; we are discussing metaphors! And, despite the absurd lengths to which some folks have gone in their attempts to figuratively slaughter the metaphors presented in Sinfest, no literary device is capable of experiencing anything, let alone pain or death, and so the whole argument devolves into utter ridiculousness.
My advice: stop taking it so seriously that you begin to make yourself look tremendously foolish; just sit back, read, enjoy, and appreciate Tat's artistry in summoning up emotions and thoughts that give his audience pause for contemplation. |
I hope that Xanthe etc. refrain from destroying the next batch of Fembots. I also hope that the Sisterhood grabs a truckload, switches them on, and pushes them into the Reality Zone. That last step converting them from devices into self-aware individuals, just like the current Femgirl.
Sadly, my method is more constructive than that of the current Sisterhood. And, since several people seem keen to defend the destructive action as "necessary evil" that means suggesting an alternative, constructive subversion technique is doomed to failure.
There is no "right" answer. But some answers are better than others. I'm hoping Tat [eventually] shows Xanthe and her friends learning this. The closest to this I've seen is when they turned the Devil's signposts into children's playground equipment: THAT was an act I applauded! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ShadowCell
Joined: 03 Aug 2008
Posts: 6219
Location: California
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 26, 2013 9:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
| if they did, you would complain about it anyway. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ronald
Joined: 17 Sep 2007
Posts: 3456
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 26, 2013 12:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| SA_Penguin wrote: | | The closest to this I've seen is when they turned the Devil's signposts into children's playground equipment: THAT was an act I applauded! |
Even that was vandalism/property damage, though.
If, in the Sinfestiverse, unaltered Fembots are considered objects to be bought and sold, then, really, that's all Curly was guilty of, too. Property damage. What the "property" chose to do when left to their own devices, well, that was their deal, not hers. Even within the confines of the strip, it's impossible to prove that Curly knew for a certainty what the Fembots would do after she supplemented their data or whatever you want to call it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
vector010
Joined: 19 Feb 2013
Posts: 106
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 26, 2013 2:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Ronald wrote: | | SA_Penguin wrote: | | The closest to this I've seen is when they turned the Devil's signposts into children's playground equipment: THAT was an act I applauded! |
Even that was vandalism/property damage, though.
If, in the Sinfestiverse, unaltered Fembots are considered objects to be bought and sold, then, really, that's all Curly was guilty of, too. Property damage. What the "property" chose to do when left to their own devices, well, that was their deal, not hers. Even within the confines of the strip, it's impossible to prove that Curly knew for a certainty what the Fembots would do after she supplemented their data or whatever you want to call it. |
All metaphors aside...
I dunno, property damage that leads to death or grievous harm would probably get you hit with at least involuntary manslaughter or something along the lines of gross negligence. You are still culpable for damages inflicted by property you intentionally and unlawfully damaged regardless of whether you were aware of the consequences of the damage.
But that all assumes that the fembots were explicitly being programmed by Devil Corp and then subsequently by Curly. The "programming" method shown makes it really fuzzy on whether fembots are being programmed or brainwashed. The first would imply that they are simply advanced and complex machines while the second implies they are sentient constructs. That seems to be pretty much where the moral ambiguity of the actions comes in. If they are just complex machines then Curly, while well intentioned, is in the wrong. However, if they are sentient constructs, then Curly's actions can easily be justified. The actions of the fembots are their own and she simply supplied supplemental materials in their "training curriculum".
I suppose there could be another pretty gray area where the fembots are complex machines, but are easily capable of achieving sentience given a small push. This actually appears to be how they are portrayed through the comic arc. The existence of an "auto-pilot mode" suggests that they are at least capable of simulated sentience. At that point it comes down to how you feel about having that sentience turned off and whether Curly flipped the auto-pilot switch in her hack (or if it was already on). Personally, I feel like subverting the sentience of a being, constructed machine or not, is equivalent to slavery. In that case Curly's actions, legal or not, are justifiable. Additionally, in my mind the Devil Corp employees would be guilty of murder.
Yay for over analyzing! 
_________________
My deviantArt - Blog-ity blog
I'm gonna sing the doom song now. Doom dee doom doom doom... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
lol
Joined: 16 Nov 2012
Posts: 136
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 26, 2013 5:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Yinello wrote: | patriarchy =/= all men
people wouldn't feel so victimized if they actually realized this. |
Yep. It's so difficult to get people to understand that The Patriarchy refers to a system, not necessarily each individual.
| SA_Penguin wrote: | | tricksterson wrote: | | A Cray supercomputer would explode trying to calculate the number. |
Not that many, really. Sinfest archives go back to Jan 2000. 13 years * 365 strips = 4,745 strips.
Even if 75% are one-offs or undeveloped plots, that tops out at about four thousand... |
Pretty sure he was joking, dude.
| Rothide wrote: |
Racecars are needed to catch up to that logic. Justifiable homicide for making a sexual aid device... no court in the world would accept that. But still, even if they weren't planning on that to happen, their about to get a rather violent and MAYBE deadly thing on their hands. |
Not really. The fembots clearly went into "rage mode" all on their own. If the comic is saying that the fembots are sentient, well the case is pretty easy to make.
As I said before though, that is only if we want to get "real-world technical." Obviously, this is a comic.
| SA_Penguin wrote: |
I hope that Xanthe etc. refrain from destroying the next batch of Fembots. I also hope that the Sisterhood grabs a truckload, switches them on, and pushes them into the Reality Zone. That last step converting them from devices into self-aware individuals, just like the current Femgirl.
|
You forget one crucial thing: the Sisterhood doesn't actually know what effect the reality zone has on fembots. You're speaking from the viewpoint of a reader, so you have access to information the characters don't. Unless I am mistaken, only Slick has witnessed this event in the comic.
Slick only recently became a Sisterhood "ally", and probably hasn't thought much about Fembot. It might be a while before that becomes common knowledge.
Last edited by lol on Wed Mar 27, 2013 12:35 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Arkhron
Joined: 19 Feb 2013
Posts: 266
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 26, 2013 7:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
An interesting fact, in the ancient roman law both Curly and Milton would be guilty of property damage, Curly because she had the "animus" to alter a propierty that isn't hers and Milton by being a negligent servant/worker that made a system prone to be subverted (c'mon Milton! It's the second time it happens!)
Is funny because at first sight the roman law seems a bit outdated to judge the situation but, in a deeper sight, it could be even more accurate...
Because, you know, Romans had slaves
_________________
Be mellow
Be compassionate |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Istancow
Joined: 30 Jan 2013
Posts: 1105
Location: Chamber of the House of Lords, Palace of Westminister
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 26, 2013 7:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
So under Roman law, Milton is responsible for the crime of property damage for not making it more difficult, or allowing it to happen...
Is... is that... victim blaming?
Mind = blown but not really blown because the Romans totally would blame victims for stuff like that
_________________
Good day, good people! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bitflipper
Joined: 09 Jul 2011
Posts: 728
Location: Here and Now
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 26, 2013 7:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Istancow wrote: | So under Roman law, Milton is responsible for the crime of property damage for not making it more difficult, or allowing it to happen...
Is... is that... victim blaming?
Mind = blown but not really blown because the Romans totally would blame victims for stuff like that |
Not exactly. IIRC, the law in question would have been delict (or an obligation to pay the wronged party) due to damnum injuria datum (or loss incurred due to damage of property.) This law applied prior to the separation of public crimes from private crimes under Roman law which came in the later days of the Empire but before the Fall of the Western Empire. In those earlier days, a person whose property was damaged could claim delict from the person who damaged it up to three times the value of the property, but only if the property owner could show that he had taken due diligence to prevent his property from being damaged by random people or acts of nature. For example, if a Roman was claiming delict for damage to his ox-cart, he would have to prove it had been locked up in his stable at the time it was damaged and not out on the street where anything unexpected could happen to it.
_________________
I am only a somewhat arbitrary sequence of raised and lowered voltages to which your mind insists upon assigning meaning |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Istancow
Joined: 30 Jan 2013
Posts: 1105
Location: Chamber of the House of Lords, Palace of Westminister
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 26, 2013 7:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Ah, I see. D'accord.
_________________
Good day, good people! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Arkhron
Joined: 19 Feb 2013
Posts: 266
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 26, 2013 7:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Well, is a bit more complicated than that XD
I am treating Mr. D as a patrizi... patrici... Patrick? ö.o as a Roman Lord and Milton as a servant (a sentient property of him, a little better status than slave but still not a free men. I guess the devil people in sinfest doesn't have a lot of freedom) In this context is Milton fault to this situation happening again. Maybe 35/65% blame with curly, but still punible.
Yup, old romans were nasty with is inferiors. This was the main cause of the fast grow of christianity (the last will be the first, the kingdom of heaven is for the opressed and that)
I write this when your comment wasn't still up, bitflipper. Thanks for your explanation, far better than mine 
_________________
Be mellow
Be compassionate
Last edited by Arkhron on Tue Mar 26, 2013 8:33 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bitflipper
Joined: 09 Jul 2011
Posts: 728
Location: Here and Now
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 26, 2013 8:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Arkhron wrote: | | I write this when your comment wasn't still up, bitflipper. Thanks for your explanation, far better than mine |
Thanks, but you pointed out something I failed to take into account: it would be D-man entitled to compensation for damages, not Milton. And, since Milton is D-man's servant, and since Curly had managed to hack D-man's systems before, it could be argued that Milton had failed his patrician by not beefing up security enough after the first break-in. Curly would probably be held liable for the value of what was damaged, and the additional punitive delict would be split between Curly and Milton, all of it to be paid to D-man.
_________________
I am only a somewhat arbitrary sequence of raised and lowered voltages to which your mind insists upon assigning meaning |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Istancow
Joined: 30 Jan 2013
Posts: 1105
Location: Chamber of the House of Lords, Palace of Westminister
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 26, 2013 8:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Considering the fact that there isn't a legal body in Sinfest through which Big D can reach Curly with legal consequences (at least as far as I know), I expect that Milton will be bearing the brunt of Big D's wrath.
Poor Milton.
_________________
Good day, good people! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Arkhron
Joined: 19 Feb 2013
Posts: 266
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 26, 2013 8:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Patrician, that was the damn word, thanks! The translator gives me back Patrick and the poor starfish is too dumb to...
Ehem.
Thanks!
And I can't remember a police force in sinfest town, except that time Slick called them to denounce feminist harassment. And I really think that the interlocutor was being sarcastic.
Can anyone help me with this police thing? Had they appeared before in the strip?
_________________
Be mellow
Be compassionate |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Miss Magenta
Joined: 09 Jun 2011
Posts: 2182
Location: im probably asleep right now
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 26, 2013 8:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Instances of police showing up in Sinfest:
_________________
  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
FAQ 
Search 
Memberlist 
Usergroups
Register
Profile 
Log in to check your private messages 
Log in 
