"Family Circus" creator Bil Keane dies at 89

Jesus, Penguin, stop looking for things to be offended about.

Cyberwulf wrote:

Jesus, Penguin, stop looking for things to be offended about.

So, it's okay for you to get riled to the point of name-calling over something as simple as an insult, but it's not okay for Penguin to get riled over someone making very encompassing statements implying they knew a comic artist was trying to oppress everyone and everything just by drawing a fairly simple one-panel comic about a family and their kids' wacky hjinks, while assigning him to a group (WASP) that he didn't belong to?

Because calling anyone a WASP is rude. There is a point behind the word, yes, but it shouldn't be thrown around on every white man in existence, especially since Keane wasn't one.

Lapin wrote:

Cyberwulf wrote:

Jesus, Penguin, stop looking for things to be offended about.

So, it's okay for you to get riled to the point of name-calling over something as simple as an insult, but it's not okay for Penguin to get riled over someone making very encompassing statements implying they knew a comic artist was trying to oppress everyone and everything just by drawing a fairly simple one-panel comic about a family and their kids' wacky hjinks, while assigning him to a group (WASP) that he didn't belong to?

I'm pretty sure that Cyberwulf was calling attention to Penguin's usual stance in threads on feminism by doing to him what he does to other people.

Sutremaine wrote:

Lapin wrote:

Cyberwulf wrote:

Jesus, Penguin, stop looking for things to be offended about.

So, it's okay for you to get riled to the point of name-calling over something as simple as an insult, but it's not okay for Penguin to get riled over someone making very encompassing statements implying they knew a comic artist was trying to oppress everyone and everything just by drawing a fairly simple one-panel comic about a family and their kids' wacky hjinks, while assigning him to a group (WASP) that he didn't belong to?

I'm pretty sure that Cyberwulf was calling attention to Penguin's usual stance in threads on feminism by doing to him what he does to other people.

Exactly. There's something wonderfully hilarious about men who constantly yawn rudely whenever any issue regarding gender or race is discussed suddenly demanding to be taken seriously when it comes to their demographic.

PS Lapin I'm pretty sure that this is all about provoking Owlish into an argument for the amusement of the board, so.

Owlish wrote:

It's about a "traditional" family, which obviously must consist of two married white people with their 3.5 kids plus pets. Dad works, mom stays at home, they all go to generic church on Sundays, and it's all about the kids. Always. Except for the fact that none of this is traditional in any sense, and yes, I do find the author's suggestion that this constitutes wholesome family entertainment rather exasperating.

So because these aren't values you aspire to have or care particularly for, you feel justified in looking down on those who do. Thanks for clearing that one up for us.

Cyberwulf wrote:

Jesus, Penguin, stop looking for things to be offended about.

Cyberwulf posting links containing rape jokes AND being the calmest person in the thread?

Proceed.

Mikey Go WOOGA wrote:

Cyberwulf wrote:

Jesus, Penguin, stop looking for things to be offended about.

Cyberwulf posting links containing rape jokes AND being the calmest person in the thread?

Proceed.

Owlish wrote:

Penguin wrote:

What you have to fucking spell out is why "this comic is as bland and inoffensive as possible" should mean "KILL WHITEY." Also, you're still wrong about the WASP thing.

No I don't, because that's not what I said...like, at all.

Owlish wrote:

^Ignorance is bliss. The most WASPish cartoon family you can imagine, illustrating conservative 1950s-era 'values.' Quite endearing.

Quote :

It's about a "traditional" family, which obviously must consist of two married white people with their 3.5 kids plus pets. Dad works, mom stays at home, they all go to generic church on Sundays, and it's all about the kids. Always.

And this is somehow espousing some sort of impossible standard?

Quote :

Except for the fact that none of this is traditional in any sense,

Quote :

and yes, I do find the author's suggestion that this constitutes wholesome family entertainment rather exasperating.

So what would be "wholesome" to you? Going by your apparent standards, Calvin and Hobbes is a terrible comic, save for the lack of siblings and live pets.

Quote :

Again, no I didn't. Sounds like you're reading more into my comment than is actually there.

Well, when you point and say "WASP! WASP WASP!" and expect that to be a statement that stands by itself...

Quote :

All I did was draw attention to the fact that it plays into the myth of the wholesome white-bread American family.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Quote :

Why does that get you so riled up?

Lapin wrote:

So, it's okay for you to get riled to the point of name-calling over something as simple as an insult, but it's not okay for Penguin to get riled over someone making very encompassing statements implying they knew a comic artist was trying to oppress everyone and everything just by drawing a fairly simple one-panel comic about a family and their kids' wacky hjinks, while assigning him to a group (WASP) that he didn't belong to?

What? At least Penguin's exaggeration of my comment could have been within the realm of possibility, but "oppressing everyone and everything"? God forbid I criticize someone's artwork for it's real-life symbolism rather than merely offending my sense of humor. Also, "wacky hijinks" is giving Family Circus far too much credit. A family with a bunch of directionally-challenged children and their speech pathologies is more like it.

Lapin wrote:

Because calling anyone a WASP is rude. There is a point behind the word, yes, but it shouldn't be thrown around on every white man in existence, especially since Keane wasn't one.

I never said Keane himself was WASPish, I said HIS COMIC was WASPish. Not even WASP, WASPish. Seriously? There's just so much fail in this comment, I can't even

KelinciHutan wrote:

So because these aren't values you aspire to have or care particularly for, you feel justified in looking down on those who do. Thanks for clearing that one up for us.

You are quite welcome, my dear! Let's not bother with pretense here. I just cannot tolerate white, functional, nuclear families. The thought of ever being trapped in such an arrangement makes me violently ill, and anyone who consents to creating such an abomination deserves to be beaten to death with their own garden hose while their snot-nosed brats are forced to watch. Because white children should have more suffering and trauma in their lives as retribution for the privilege they will eventually lord over the non-white peoples of the earth. The fact that white nuclear families are lauded as the only proper family arrangement, and media and society constantly shoving it up my ass that I'm sad and abnormal if I fail to attain that family couldn't possibly have anything to do with it. Nope. I'm just a sad, stuck-up child-hating ice queen. No use trying to hide that when I can see you're such a quick wit.

Cyberwulf wrote:

PS Lapin I'm pretty sure that this is all about provoking Owlish into an argument for the amusement of the board, so.

Is that what this is about? I just assumed it was more chauvinistic butthurting like whenever somebody dares to bring up the real world around here, but in that case

DAMN THE RACIST PATRIARCHY AND OPPRESSIVE NEWSPAPER COMICS AND LITTLE WHITE KIDS FUCK ALL YOU FUCKING SHITSTAINS WHO THINK HOMONYMS ARE FUNNY DAMN YOU ALL GRRRAAAAHHHHH

Penguin wrote:

lame misinterpretations

Yeah...almost can't believe I'm saying this, but take a hint or two from Mikey. You're missing a certain je ne sais quoi. Callousness, maybe?

Owlish, I really don't get your point. From what I understand, Keane based Family Circus on his family. One family. One family does not a sample make, nor does it become the end-all be-all display of one's values and judgements. Is it based on what Keane experienced and believed? Well, yeah, to a degree - it is based on his family. But again, one fictional representation of his family life does not make an instant all-encompassing statement of values and beliefs, especially not for society as a whole.

Add in the amount of time the strip has been running, and that these are familiar, comfortable characters, why would you have ever expected it to change? They are based on Keane's family, and it is Keane's son continuing the strip - somehow, I doubt he'll shake up the format simply because you are offended. It will continue based on their family's history and values, and that's fine. Freedom of expression, speech, blah blah blah.

Is Family Circus a decent strip? Not really. It has occasionally had its good moments, but for the most part, it's simply a bland comic on the newspaper page - more simply "there" than anything else. To get this hyped up over it seems fairly ridiculous.

Owlish wrote:

You are quite welcome, my dear! Let's not bother with pretense here. I just cannot tolerate white, functional, nuclear families. The thought of ever being trapped in such an arrangement makes me violently ill, and anyone who consents to creating such an abomination deserves to be beaten to death with their own garden hose while their snot-nosed brats are forced to watch. Because white children should have more suffering and trauma in their lives as retribution for the privilege they will eventually lord over the non-white peoples of the earth. The fact that white nuclear families are lauded as the only proper family arrangement, and media and society constantly shoving it up my ass that I'm sad and abnormal if I fail to attain that family couldn't possibly have anything to do with it. Nope. I'm just a sad, stuck-up child-hating ice queen. No use trying to hide that when I can see you're such a quick wit.

Wow, you know, I never realized how useful the sarcmark could be. O.o If you're being sarcastic to make a point, it was completely lost in the advocating of violence against people who happen to be married and have kids. If you're not being sarcastic... holy flipping fuck!

Kel might have been a touch snippy/sarcastic, but she wasn't obviously insulting. She's one of the nicer people on the boards, and even if I don't agree with her point of view all the time, I admire the way she makes her point with class and tact. AFAIK, she's never resorted to personal insults.

Also, the italicized sentence is a run on sentence fragment. I don't think I've ever seen one of those before.

I think Cy's entirely right. I think people just are poking Owlish to see how long it takes for them to spew something all over the boards.

EDIT: Edited to correct something which could have been taken in a really wrong way. LOL @ 'happen to live in a married arrangement with children'. Yeah, posted without editing. Heh.

Quote :

You are quite welcome, my dear! Let's not bother with pretense here. I just cannot tolerate white, functional, nuclear families. The thought of ever being trapped in such an arrangement makes me violently ill, and anyone who consents to creating such an abomination deserves to be beaten to death with their own garden hose while their snot-nosed brats are forced to watch. Because white children should have more suffering and trauma in their lives as retribution for the privilege they will eventually lord over the non-white peoples of the earth. The fact that white nuclear families are lauded as the only proper family arrangement, and media and society constantly shoving it up my ass that I'm sad and abnormal if I fail to attain that family couldn't possibly have anything to do with it. Nope. I'm just a sad, stuck-up child-hating ice queen. No use trying to hide that when I can see you're such a quick wit.

I'm sorry the idea of white people marrying and having kids makes your rectum throb with pain?

Owlish wrote:

You are quite welcome, my dear! Let's not bother with pretense here. I just cannot tolerate white, functional, nuclear families. The thought of ever being trapped in such an arrangement makes me violently ill, and anyone who consents to creating such an abomination deserves to be beaten to death with their own garden hose while their snot-nosed brats are forced to watch. Because white children should have more suffering and trauma in their lives as retribution for the privilege they will eventually lord over the non-white peoples of the earth. The fact that white nuclear families are lauded as the only proper family arrangement, and media and society constantly shoving it up my ass that I'm sad and abnormal if I fail to attain that family couldn't possibly have anything to do with it. Nope. I'm just a sad, stuck-up child-hating ice queen. No use trying to hide that when I can see you're such a quick wit.

Wow, it must be hard trying to get along in a world full of people that lead different lifestyles than you.

Oh wait, it's not.

Maximilia wrote:

I I think people just are poking Owlish to see how long it takes for them to spew something all over the boards.

Man, I hate that they and them are the best gender-nuetral pronouns we have.

Reepicheep-chan wrote:

Maximilia wrote:

I I think people just are poking Owlish to see how long it takes for them to spew something all over the boards.

Man, I hate that they and them are the best gender-nuetral pronouns we have.

We've got "ze/zer" and "hir/hirs" among lots of others that haven't caught on much at all.

^ I see hir sometimes, but practically no one used any of the others. Which is sort of what I meant by 'best'.

You guys are stirring up wank over family circus? The most boring, non-eventful, drama-less piece of American comic art ever?



...




I LOVE YOU GUYS.

Owlish wrote:

Lapin wrote:

So, it's okay for you to get riled to the point of name-calling over something as simple as an insult, but it's not okay for Penguin to get riled over someone making very encompassing statements implying they knew a comic artist was trying to oppress everyone and everything just by drawing a fairly simple one-panel comic about a family and their kids' wacky hjinks, while assigning him to a group (WASP) that he didn't belong to?

What? At least Penguin's exaggeration of my comment could have been within the realm of possibility, but "oppressing everyone and everything"? God forbid I criticize someone's artwork for it's real-life symbolism rather than merely offending my sense of humor.

Real-life symbolism. On the same comics page that runs "Peanuts", "Cathy", and all the others? Really? WTF are you expecting from your daily syndicated strip? It's a bland, one-panel comic about a family that's meant to make people feel good. What exactly are you even criticizing? "No child would ever run through a yard like that!" "What children could possibly misinterpret complicated and archaic words common in traditional Catholic prayers?" "How dare they show the ghost of their grandfather sitting with them in their church pew! That's not a way of showing children the people we love stay with us, that's just telling kids lies!"

Seriously, I am so confused about what your issue is here.

Quote :

Also, "wacky hijinks" is giving Family Circus far too much credit. A family with a bunch of directionally-challenged children and their speech pathologies is more like it.

It was sarcasm. I didn't like the comic because it didn't entertain me. "Wacky hijinks" is generally recognized as sarcasm by everyone who has been on the Internet longer than five minutes. It's just a comic about some toddlers.

Owlish wrote:

Lapin wrote:

Because calling anyone a WASP is rude. There is a point behind the word, yes, but it shouldn't be thrown around on every white man in existence, especially since Keane wasn't one.

I never said Keane himself was WASPish, I said HIS COMIC was WASPish. Not even WASP, WASPish. Seriously? There's just so much fail in this comment, I can't even

You can't even what? Address it properly because you realized you threw out a term you didn't actually know the meaning of and got called on it? A WASP, and the adjective you used "WASPish", means "White Anglo-Saxon Protestant". Keane was Irish and Catholic. Congratulations, 1/3 is still, oh wait, a failing grade. The comic was not "WASPish". The word you were going for was "suburban". It depicted a suburban household. They had a few kids, the kids played in the neighborhood, they went to church on Sundays. Rinse and repeat with most of middle America, replace "church" with "mosque", "temple", etc. This is not sinister. It's just a lot of people's lives.

Quote :

KelinciHutan wrote:

So because these aren't values you aspire to have or care particularly for, you feel justified in looking down on those who do. Thanks for clearing that one up for us.

You are quite welcome, my dear! Let's not bother with pretense here. I just cannot tolerate white, functional, nuclear families. The thought of ever being trapped in such an arrangement makes me violently ill, and anyone who consents to creating such an abomination deserves to be beaten to death with their own garden hose while their snot-nosed brats are forced to watch. Because white children should have more suffering and trauma in their lives as retribution for the privilege they will eventually lord over the non-white peoples of the earth. The fact that white nuclear families are lauded as the only proper family arrangement, and media and society constantly shoving it up my ass that I'm sad and abnormal if I fail to attain that family couldn't possibly have anything to do with it. Nope. I'm just a sad, stuck-up child-hating ice queen. No use trying to hide that when I can see you're such a quick wit.

Did you seriously just get nasty with Kel? Really? Of all people? Me is one thing, but Kel?

Quote :

Cyberwulf wrote:

PS Lapin I'm pretty sure that this is all about provoking Owlish into an argument for the amusement of the board, so.

Is that what this is about?

No, I'm genuinely irritated with you.

Owlish wrote:

I just cannot tolerate white, functional, nuclear families. The thought of ever being trapped in such an arrangement makes me violently ill, and anyone who consents to creating such an abomination deserves to be beaten to death with their own garden hose while their snot-nosed brats are forced to watch.

So the thought of being prosperous and happy makes you sick and violent?

Ok, wow...I did not mean a single word of what I said in response to KelinciHutan's comment seriously. I have absolutely nothing against white people starting families, more power to them. And I would never ever advocate violence against children. I was trying to make my comment so over-the-top that it would be obvious I wasn't serious, but apparently that failed.

Honestly, I fully support starting a family as a life choice; it doesn't concern me in the least what two consenting people choose to do with their lives. My issue is the expectation that everyone should find this arrangement wholesome and relatable, as opposed to any other type of family. And I resent the implication that I'm "looking down on" anyone else because I don't find that family relatable.

Like whenever I point out an instance of racism, then by gosh, I must hate white people! Whenever I point out sexism, obviously I hate all men everywhere! And when I criticize the equation of the white nuclear family as "wholesome and traditional" then I must hate white nuclear families! When nothing could be further from the truth.

Lapin wrote:

Seriously, I am so confused about what your issue is here.

That's funny, because you seemed to have a slightly better grasp of my issue in your last post (at least your exaggerations of my statements were more on point). Did you have a bout of amnesia, or did you decide that trolling was more fun?

Lapin wrote:

Rinse and repeat with most of middle America, replace "church" with "mosque", "temple", etc. This is not sinister. It's just a lot of people's lives.

But that's exactly my point. Can you imagine any comic strip about a family going to mosque running in any US newspaper? Let alone such a comic being referred to as "wholesome" or "relatable" or "good family entertainment"? I'm not saying that I personally think it's not good subject matter for a comic, I'm saying that the majority of Americans wouldn't think it was good subject matter. And I think a lot of Americans would get offended at the suggestion that a family going to mosque is relatable.

Sparrow wrote:

Freedom of expression, speech, blah blah blah.

Ahaha there it is....

Howithurts wrote:

Owlish wrote:

I just cannot tolerate white, functional, nuclear families. The thought of ever being trapped in such an arrangement makes me violently ill, and anyone who consents to creating such an abomination deserves to be beaten to death with their own garden hose while their snot-nosed brats are forced to watch.

So the thought of being prosperous and happy makes you sick and violent?

So it would seem. Even if that's not exactly how Owlish said it.

Reidmar wrote:

Howithurts wrote:

Owlish wrote:

I just cannot tolerate white, functional, nuclear families. The thought of ever being trapped in such an arrangement makes me violently ill, and anyone who consents to creating such an abomination deserves to be beaten to death with their own garden hose while their snot-nosed brats are forced to watch.

So the thought of being prosperous and happy makes you sick and violent?

So it would seem. Even if that's not exactly how Owlish said it.

Close enough.

Owlish wrote:

Lapin wrote:

Seriously, I am so confused about what your issue is here.

That's funny, because you seemed to have a slightly better grasp of my issue in your last post (at least your exaggerations of my statements were more on point). Did you have a bout of amnesia, or did you decide that trolling was more fun?

Just because someone thinks you're being an ass, doesn't make them a troll. I like to cause trouble, true, but no, this is me being completely serious. When I say I don't understand your issue with this, I mean I literally cannot wrap my head around why you have to be a jackass about some one-panel comic strip that never sought to be anything other than exactly what it was on the surface. There was no subliminal message of conformity. It was just a stupid slice of life thing.

Lapin wrote:

Rinse and repeat with most of middle America, replace "church" with "mosque", "temple", etc. This is not sinister. It's just a lot of people's lives.

But that's exactly my point. Can you imagine any comic strip about a family going to mosque running in any US newspaper? Let alone such a comic being referred to as "wholesome" or "relatable" or "good family entertainment"? I'm not saying that I personally think it's not good subject matter for a comic, I'm saying that the majority of Americans wouldn't think it was good subject matter. And I think a lot of Americans would get offended at the suggestion that a family going to mosque is relatable.[/quote]

You know, I was raised Catholic, and I'm an atheist now. I can make a few good jokes about Christians as easily as the next person. But Christians are the majority in this country, and that includes Catholics, despite some Protestants thinking they're not, and a lot of people will relate to a Catholic family celebrating Easter and Christmas, and going to church every Sunday, and their kids misunderstanding admittedly complicated subjects like communion. They'll relate to kids doing weird stuff too. Just because they're the majority and some of them are assholes doesn't mean it's suddenly Not Cool to have some in the public eye. If anything, having some Catholics in the American public eye is a rather odd thing, since the majority of American Christians are Protestants who think Catholics are idol-worshippers.

I don't remember much of Family Circus, but I'm pretty sure I would have remembered if it ever went down the "shove it down your throat" road. That tends to piss me off. There is nothing wrong with depicting a family of any religion

Peanuts also has a Christian theme, and kids doing weird stuff. (Granted, Peanuts does it considerably better than Family Circus)

Look, I'm not saying Family Circus wasn't lame. But there's nothing in it that is worth anyone caring.

If you want a target for something that actually shoved a lifestyle and ideals down your throat in the newspaper comics, the proselytizing and often rude B.C. comic should be your target, with their blatant favoritism and long list of offenses. That comic depicted a menorah turning into a crucifix, and once had a rather unsubtle joke about Islam and an outhouse. That comic was preachy.

This one offended a lot of Jews (GEE, I WONDER WHY)

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

This one offended some Muslims (He claims there was no intention, but he was kind of a dick, so...)

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

This one was just rude.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

This one pissed off a lot of Muslims, and anyone who wasn't a complete ass.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

He didn't leave out stereotypical and kind of racist depictions of First Nations either:

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

He also once made one where he defined "science fiction" as being "any scientific claim that omits God". The nerd rage was strong that day.

fapfapfap wrote:

Reepicheep-chan wrote:

Maximilia wrote:

I I think people just are poking Owlish to see how long it takes for them to spew something all over the boards.

Man, I hate that they and them are the best gender-nuetral pronouns we have.

We've got "ze/zer" and "hir/hirs" among lots of others that haven't caught on much at all.

Reepicheep-chan wrote:

^ I see hir sometimes, but practically no one used any of the others. Which is sort of what I meant by 'best'.

Arn't thon forgetting something? (also - see following few comics)

*please excuse late-to-the-party-ness... Been offline for a while*