Compliment or Invitation? Try Insulting and Offensive
Back in 1979, the message that Lynn Johnston reprinted on Saturday with this storyline was:
If you act single, then waiters make passes at you. If you act married, they don’t.
With today’s new-run in For Better or For Worse, Lynn Johnston takes it a step further with this message:
A pass at a married woman is a compliment. A pass at a single woman is an invitation.
In essence what has happened is the focus has changed from “Who is responsible for the waiter’s inappropriate actions (since it obviously can’t be the waiter’s fault)?” to “How do you interpret the waiter’s inappropriate actions (since he obviously can’t do something inappropriate)?” In both cases, no blame is placed on the waiter. Elly considers herself responsible for what the waiter did, because she was acting single. In other words, she thinks she brought it on herself. This is not the type of thinking which Lynn Johnston should promote. It most assuredly was not Elly's fault.
Nevertheless, Connie does not even argue this point. She is essentially saying to Elly, “It is your fault what the waiter did; but don’t feel guilty. Not only does the waiter find you attractive enough to want to solicit you for fun (sex); but he is bold enough to extend an invitation to you with the expectation you might accept, not ever having met him before or even having a conversation with him. Because you are happily married, you should think of it as a compliment.” Wow! What a compliment. “I have never met you before, but I would like to have fun (sex) with you, and I think you are so desperate you might accept.” Clearly that is not the same as complimenting a woman on her appearance.
That’s not enough. Then Connie goes to the next step where she says if the waiter had given her his phone number instead of Elly, because she is single, she would seriously consider the man’s invitation to have fun (sex) with him. Lynn Johnston really needs to stay away from this kind of subject, where she clearly does not know the difference between right and wrong. It’s not Elly’s fault, what the waiter did; it most assuredly is not a compliment; and I don’t think a woman should consider sleeping with a man she just met, just because she is single and he wants fun (sex). That goes for 1979 and for 2009.
If you act single, then waiters make passes at you. If you act married, they don’t.
With today’s new-run in For Better or For Worse, Lynn Johnston takes it a step further with this message:
A pass at a married woman is a compliment. A pass at a single woman is an invitation.
In essence what has happened is the focus has changed from “Who is responsible for the waiter’s inappropriate actions (since it obviously can’t be the waiter’s fault)?” to “How do you interpret the waiter’s inappropriate actions (since he obviously can’t do something inappropriate)?” In both cases, no blame is placed on the waiter. Elly considers herself responsible for what the waiter did, because she was acting single. In other words, she thinks she brought it on herself. This is not the type of thinking which Lynn Johnston should promote. It most assuredly was not Elly's fault.
Nevertheless, Connie does not even argue this point. She is essentially saying to Elly, “It is your fault what the waiter did; but don’t feel guilty. Not only does the waiter find you attractive enough to want to solicit you for fun (sex); but he is bold enough to extend an invitation to you with the expectation you might accept, not ever having met him before or even having a conversation with him. Because you are happily married, you should think of it as a compliment.” Wow! What a compliment. “I have never met you before, but I would like to have fun (sex) with you, and I think you are so desperate you might accept.” Clearly that is not the same as complimenting a woman on her appearance.
That’s not enough. Then Connie goes to the next step where she says if the waiter had given her his phone number instead of Elly, because she is single, she would seriously consider the man’s invitation to have fun (sex) with him. Lynn Johnston really needs to stay away from this kind of subject, where she clearly does not know the difference between right and wrong. It’s not Elly’s fault, what the waiter did; it most assuredly is not a compliment; and I don’t think a woman should consider sleeping with a man she just met, just because she is single and he wants fun (sex). That goes for 1979 and for 2009.
posted by howard at 10:45 PM
13 Comments:
The only way Elly's bug-eyed expression in the last panel makes the smallest modicum of sense is for both her and Connie to be talking about sex, and nothing but sex. But that doesn't make any sense: single people give each other "invitations" to date all the time, and it's completely normal to accept them, and it doesn't mean they're going to go do it in the bathroom (though maybe Lynn thinks it does).
The problem here starts with the way the waiter talked to Elly. It wasn't flirtation, it wasn't even really a come-on. The only way a man would overhear a married woman talking about how she needed some fun, and respond by immediately offering his services, is if he were a prostitute. Maybe the "compliment" is supposed to be that he thinks Elly has money?
It's hard to be insulted by something so weird. This whole storyline doesn't even really tap into Lynn's usual offensive stereotypes, because it's so completely out there.
I quite agree that Elly is not at fault here despite Lynn's belief otherwise; that sort of thinking is a clear artifact of the constipated belief system she was brought up to revere. It's coming from the same bizarre place that thinks that the world outside the safety of the Pattermanse's windows is a non-stop orgy; Elly clearly wants to get her fair share of sex only to have a selfish husband and annoying kids slow her down. As for being solicited by a male prostitute being anything other than offensive, well, you know how out of it Lynn is.
I find this whole thing strange, especially since Lynn, I mean Elly, never really takes the blame for anything. Why would she for this? Yup, Lynn's just totally out of the loop here.
clio_1,
But that doesn't make any sense: single people give each other "invitations" to date all the time, and it's completely normal to accept them, and it doesn't mean they're going to go do it in the bathroom (though maybe Lynn thinks it does). -
Exactly. If it had been a “Would you like to go out with me? Call me if you’re interested.” kind of invitation, it would have been a different story.
The only way a man would overhear a married woman talking about how she needed some fun, and respond by immediately offering his services, is if he were a prostitute. -
I agree completely. The idea that such a thing would be considered a compliment or an invitation makes little sense to me, but appears to be the way Lynn thinks about single life.
This whole storyline doesn't even really tap into Lynn's usual offensive stereotypes, because it's so completely out there.-
Lynn’s usual offensive stereotypes with women have to do with the idea that they need to be married, as discussed over coffee. When it comes to dating just to get to know someone, there is much less material. Even though Elizabeth, Michael and April all dated people when they were in school, we rarely saw them on the dates (that were not group dates), and usually only after the characters had fallen into solid boyfriend / girlfriend routines. There are some hints though, that Lynn feels a woman needs to respond to a guy’s initial overture. The April / Gerald relationship started with Gerald unexpectedly kissing April, with almost nothing leading into it. With Elizabeth and Paul Wright, he shows up and offers to help her take a telescope back to her place, and the next thing you know, they are a couple. With Eric Chamberlain, Elizabeth goes from a pass at a Laundromat to moving in with the guy. With Mason, the best man, he is heaving Elizabeth about like a steady boyfriend, when they have only just met. Warren Blackwood’s helicopter ride is as close as you get to an authentic first date, and that is probably because it was based on Lynn’s own experience with Rod Johnston and his plane. With the others, there is an unspoken implication that you move from invitation to relationship very quickly.
DreadedCandiru2It's coming from the same bizarre place that thinks that the world outside the safety of the Pattermanse's windows is a non-stop orgy; Elly clearly wants to get her fair share of sex only to have a selfish husband and annoying kids slow her down. -
Her Mcleans interview description of Lynn Lake does match this strip’s impression of dating.
As for being solicited by a male prostitute being anything other than offensive, well, you know how out of it Lynn is.-
The waiter’s comments are so much like a male prostitute’s would be, it makes me wonder if the strip was based on a real-life incident like this, where Lynn struggled to make sense of what happened.
Anonymous,
I find this whole thing strange, especially since Lynn, I mean Elly, never really takes the blame for anything. -
She wouldn’t. Lynn is taking great pains to paint Elly as innocent in the situation as she possibly can be, using Connie as the outside observer. I think she wants to tell a story where Elly realizes that she is still attractive to other men, but the lines about guilt and how women handle men making passes distract from it. There is an underlying message that it is not OK for a married woman to appear attractive to other men, and I suspect it comes from Lynn’s own beliefs about other women.
She has railed on for years about how attractive Rod Johnston’s staff at his dental office was. Rod usually gets the blame for hiring them, but when you get right down to it, I suspect the only way Lynn would not have complained was if Rod hired an all-male staff. The way you can tell this, is when Lynn hired her staff to work with her, they were all women. “Here’s how it should be done, Rod.”
and on a different topic - _wow_ that turtleneck has gone from "thin layer that could show your neck's shape" to "thick doughnut o' wool".
I own some turtlenecks I think I look nice in - not in a flirty or sexy way, but they're thin, you can see my shape in it, etc. I think that was wat 1979 LJ was going for with the lavender sweater. But this looks like camping gear.
InsertMonikerHere,
that turtleneck has gone from "thin layer that could show your neck's shape" to "thick doughnut o' wool". -
Moreover, it does these changes from panel to panel within the same strip. The turtleneck does not look the same 2times in a row. In fact, I could say the same about Elly's hair and face. One thing I will say for Lynn's drawings back in 1979, she was more consistent than today's Lynn Johnston, who has apparently taken some kind of vow never again to use an eraser.
There are some hints though, that Lynn feels a woman needs to respond to a guy’s initial overture.I was thinking about this, and couldn't think of any time a woman just said "no" to a man clearly, or didn't want to be with a man who did want to be with her. I'm not sure if "want" even comes into it much -- the female characters in FBofW just want a man, any man, and men can get away with being colossal jerks so long as they don't cheat. It's like a woman's sacred duty or something to not refuse a man who's willing to be in a relationship with her, just like it's a man's sacred duty to always be intending a marriage if he spends time with a woman.
clio_1,
I was thinking about this, and couldn't think of any time a woman just said "no" to a man clearly, or didn't want to be with a man who did want to be with her. -
In the new-runs, we have seen numerous women turning down Dr. Ted McCaulay, including Dr. Patterson’s unnamed April-like hygienist. As far as characters that have names, I went through the classic Who’s Who, and it was startling. Every woman had accepted the man. Even the most independent of women in Candace Halloran, went to Rudy Dodd the moment he displayed even the slightest interest in her.
Elizabeth put Warren Blackwood off for a year after they first met, but it wasn’t a clearly defined “No” since they ended up together and she was running around wearing his clothes.
I think the only clear moment was Elizabeth with Howard Bunt. He stalked her and assaulted her, and I would hate to think that Lynn’s thought was “If Liz accepted his invitation, this wouldn’t have happened.” It seemed clear to me that Howard Bunt existed only for the purpose of giving Anthony a chance to rescue Liz. And yet, there was that whole cavalier way everyone handled the assault afterwards, especially including Anthony Caine. It was almost like Lynn was saying, “If you turn a man down, then he may assault you, and although this is not acceptable behavior, it’s not that bad.”
howard,I, too, would hate to think that Lynn thinks that Liz brought the Going-After on herself by refusing Howard's advances; sadly, it sounds so plausible now that I think of it. Watching today's mess only makes it more likely that she does.
Lynn Johnston is no better at showing "girls' night out" than she is at showing casual dating.
When Elly and Connie go out for dinner, we get complete nonsense. Connie, who is in her mid-thirties, has had failed two-long term relationships, and has a young son to support, appears to live for sex. Elly, who has a decent (if occasionally bumbling) husband, two healthy children, and a comfortable standard of living, sounds *exactly* the way she does when Connie comes over for coffee. She moans, as she always does, about how unhappy she is, without any reflection about all the good things in her life or any idea about how she would make her life better. After that setup, we descend into an unbelievable story, where the waiter's *pickup line* is his telephone number.
Oddly, Johnston seems to have a much better understanding of how male friends relate when they go out together. When John and Ted had drinks, we got a story that, for all its flaws, made sense. Ted, already in his 30's, is still under his mother's foot and still hasn't learned how to flirt without coming across as a drunken boor. John realizes that he'd really rather be home with Elly (who is on vacation), but when Ted needs a helping hand, John is there for him.
Anonymous,
Connie, who is in her mid-thirties, has had failed two-long term relationships, and has a young son to support, appears to live for sex. -
True enough, but there are many fans who will not find this to be the case. Even when Elizabeth was living with Eric Chamberlain, Lynn gave them 2 different beds, to give Elizabeth the “out” of not having sex with Eric. But while she does this, Lynn also sets up situations where the physical intimacy is unmistakable if you are paying attention. We have Connie’s wry talk today, but before that we had Phil and Connie’s overly long date back in December, where Phil refused to talk about it and Connie was shown doing pirouettes. The message is clear that Connie is sexually active with more than one man.
One of the real weaknesses in the old story is the inclusion of Pablo da Silva as Lawrence’s father, and Connie’s expectation that Pablo is going to come to Canada and marry her, because he got her pregnant. There is a running theme of women who are intentionally irresponsible with birth control in this strip, which is only matched by women in soap operas. Nevertheless, you would think that after bearing Lawrence out-of-wedlock (instead of the original story where Connie was abandoned by her husband and Lawrence’s original father, Peter Landry), Connie might be a little more sensible about the use of sex to get a marriage proposal. If Peter Landry stayed as Lawrence’s father, then Connie’s attitude would be a little more understandable.
After that setup, we descend into an unbelievable story, where the waiter's *pickup line* is his telephone number.-
And it is a pickup line with no prelude. There is no flirtatious talk between Connie and Elly and the waiter. If a pickup is the outcome, then we should see a little dialogue, preferably with Connie making the move on the waiter and his moving to Elly, possibly in self-defence. Lynn’s main concern seems to be to make Elly as innocent of the waiter’s action as possible, and to gain the readers’ sympathy by making her feel guilty about it. That idea runs counter to the idea that Lynn wants to show Elly realizing she is still attractive to men. The 2 ideas conflict with each other. Elly can’t enjoy male attention, while she is wishing that she hadn’t gotten the male attention. Lynn should have gone with one story or the other, but not both. Then the story would be more believable.
When John and Ted had drinks, we got a story that, for all its flaws, made sense. -
Lynn has a totally different motivation here. She is not trying to protect either character from looking bad. In fact, she may be working in the opposite direction. My rule of thumb is: Whenever Lynn wants to make a character look bad, she makes them look good and vice-versa.
Post a Comment
<< Home