this post was submitted on 05 Jan 2024
911 points (93.7% liked)

Comic Strips

12508 readers
2987 users here now

Comic Strips is a community for those who love comic stories.

The rules are simple:

Web of links

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] steakmeout@lemmy.world 0 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I generally like Perry Bible Fellowship comics but this one seems like it’s either pandering to or coping with conservative messaging.

[–] sus@programming.dev -5 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (5 children)

https://pbfcomics.com/comics/shocked/ clearly pandering to incels

https://pbfcomics.com/comics/puppy-wish/ clearly pandering to conservative fundamentalist christians

https://pbfcomics.com/comics/youll-be-ok/ clearly pandering to hypochondriacs

https://pbfcomics.com/comics/preserves/ incels again (and this one isn't even remotely funny, the greatest crime)

I'm starting to think this artist is a cryptofascist. Basically equivalent to rock throw

[–] Lupo@lemmy.world 4 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Who does this one pander to?

Asking for a friend

[–] sus@programming.dev 2 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

It is a message that there is no smoke without fire. The "intellectual" (note the glasses) has a seemingly convincing argument, but is shown to be a fool. The suspicion of sinful, non-procreational sex (notice the falling leaves, which do not play a reproductive role in trees) turns out to be true.

This belief in smoke without fire feeds into the conservative tenets of anti-intellectualism, the tendency to assume guilt based on prejudice and fuels paranoid conspiracy theories. It is also a meta-dog whistle confirming that yes, those other dog whistles the comic uses are really what you think and not just coincidental.

[–] BumpingFuglies@lemmy.zip 3 points 10 months ago

Remember: on the internet, nobody can hear your tone of voice. If you want your dry jokes to land, you'll likely need to use "/s" to show that you were being sarcastic, otherwise people might think you're being serious about such an obviously absurd, irrational stance, because there really are people who would believe the things you joked about.

[–] theangryseal@lemmy.world 3 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Is this one pandering to Christians?

https://pbfcomics.com/comics/lamb-of-god/

Thank you for the links though. I’ve spent hours going through these comics. I didn’t even know I could like comics this much.

[–] sus@programming.dev 3 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (2 children)

you may have heard the phrase "god works in mysterious ways". This is clearly one case of such. Clouds do not normally behave like this, it's closer to what you might think of smoke. And where do we see white smoke? That's right. When the Papal conclave has come to a decision for the new Pope.

Pandering to Catholics. QED

[–] theangryseal@lemmy.world 2 points 10 months ago

:p

You’re too much. :)

[–] AVincentInSpace@pawb.social 1 points 10 months ago

for the love of--

they are sheep. how much more heavy handed is it possible to make a metaphor

[–] Anticorp@lemmy.world 2 points 10 months ago

You don't seem very fun.

[–] ArcaneSlime@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

These are hilarious lmao. You're insane if you think the punchline of "the stick figure falls and his body spells 'OK' after the other guy says 'you'll be ok'" is pandering to hypochondriacs, btw.

[–] smeg@feddit.uk 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Can you and apparently 2/3 of the other readers of that comment (going by current votes) not detect obvious sarcasm?

[–] ArcaneSlime@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

Not as obvious as you though, apparently. Considering 2/3rds...

[–] smeg@feddit.uk 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I guess it's the point of sarcasm really, that not everyone will get it right away. I hate when people feel the need to do the "/s" though, it completely defeats the point.

[–] ArcaneSlime@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 10 months ago

That I do agree with.