Dangerously Chloe 1-10-18 Craving for Men

Discuss EC/MC/DC here!

Moderators: Dave Zero1, Don Alexander, Giz, midgetshrimp, Cassandra

Post Reply
Gotoh
Posts: 3965
Joined: Sat Jan 12, 2013 9:18 pm

Re: Dangerously Chloe 1-10-18 Craving for Men

Post by Gotoh » Thu Oct 04, 2018 12:51 am

Fluffy wrote:
Thu Oct 04, 2018 12:02 am
As far as I'm concerned, they're no better than Brooke.
She made one bad decision, but it was nowhere near as deplorable as what Kade and Dio were doing to Ace. If anything, she still had Ace's back. You'll notice he even agreed with her in that scene (first two panels), and no one held what she did against her.

To say she's the same as the a-hole duo is not only judging her harshly for a minor infraction, it's unjustified.

User avatar
Fluffy
Posts: 3363
Joined: Mon Oct 31, 2011 7:14 pm

Re: Dangerously Chloe 1-10-18 Craving for Men

Post by Fluffy » Thu Oct 04, 2018 2:06 am

Gotoh wrote:
Thu Oct 04, 2018 12:51 am
Fluffy wrote:
Thu Oct 04, 2018 12:02 am
As far as I'm concerned, they're no better than Brooke.
She made one bad decision, but it was nowhere near as deplorable as what Kade and Dio were doing to Ace. If anything, she still had Ace's back. You'll notice he even agreed with her in that scene (first two panels), and no one held what she did against her.

To say she's the same as the a-hole duo is not only judging her harshly for a minor infraction, it's unjustified.
Brooke had Ace's back...uh-huh, right. Because Quintessa - the same person who intended to sacrifice Kade so she could resurrect her precious killer cat - could be trusted in that moment, right?

Sorry, dude - but I wouldn't consider someone turning a blind eye to a friend who is in immediate peril (to the point of even going so far as to helping the person who intends to do the harming because that person promised sexy times if they went along with their nefarious plans) or happily tying up an ex boyfriend because the evil vampire queen promised she only planned to evict Blair from Ace's body as a minor infractions/lapse of judgement/all the fault of raging hormones, etc.

Just going to have to agree to disagree on this one.
Please, don't come to me expecting me to fix your problems.

Gotoh
Posts: 3965
Joined: Sat Jan 12, 2013 9:18 pm

Re: Dangerously Chloe 1-10-18 Craving for Men

Post by Gotoh » Thu Oct 04, 2018 2:23 am

Fluffy wrote:
Thu Oct 04, 2018 2:06 am
Brooke had Ace's back...uh-huh, right. Because Quintessa - the same person who intended to sacrifice Kade so she could resurrect her precious killer cat - could be trusted in that moment, right?

Just going to have to agree to disagree on this one.
Fine, but it's curious that you're willing to pardon Cerise after what she tried to do, yet you consider what Brooke did to be worse somehow.

dmra
Posts: 613
Joined: Wed Sep 11, 2013 7:21 pm

Re: Dangerously Chloe 1-10-18 Craving for Men

Post by dmra » Thu Oct 04, 2018 9:58 am

Gotoh wrote:
Wed Oct 03, 2018 7:10 pm

Because there's a key difference that you've overlooked: Brooke actually did feed Layla, because it was necessary. Layla was blood starved. Chloe didn't feed Nina, because it wasn't necessary. Nina wanted chocolate, not blood, which is why she didn't even notice Chloe what was offering her. Aside from that, I agree it was a compassionate gesture.
And there is evidence of what I said about you applying different standards to the two characters. Chloe was as willing as Brooke to give a hungry vampire blood even though she was clearly really upset about the idea. http://www.eeriecuties.com/strips-ec/Take_what_you_need!_ But because Nina wanted chocolate and not blood you say Chloe's deed was less than Brooke's.

I bet if the situation had been reversed and Chloe had fed Layla while Brooke had offered to feed Nina you wouldn't be saying that Chloe was a nicer kinder soul than Brooke.

User avatar
Fluffy
Posts: 3363
Joined: Mon Oct 31, 2011 7:14 pm

Re: Dangerously Chloe 1-10-18 Craving for Men

Post by Fluffy » Thu Oct 04, 2018 10:35 am

No - seeing as Gotoh is in strong defense of Brooke in this matter, they probably would have seen Chloe and Brooke's actions as equally generous.
Gotoh wrote:
Thu Oct 04, 2018 2:23 am
Fluffy wrote:
Thu Oct 04, 2018 2:06 am
Brooke had Ace's back...uh-huh, right. Because Quintessa - the same person who intended to sacrifice Kade so she could resurrect her precious killer cat - could be trusted in that moment, right?

Just going to have to agree to disagree on this one.
Fine, but it's curious that you're willing to pardon Cerise after what she tried to do, yet you consider what Brooke did to be worse somehow.
You're using something I had said three years ago to invalidate my opinion on Brooke's behavior by trying to make me look like a hypocrite? Really? 8-|

Guess what? Me saying that Cerise's behavior is little more than witch's version of a temper tantrum doesn't mean I agree/look past what she did. What Cerise did was horrible and she should have faced some serious backlash for it; just as Brooke should have faced some serious backlash for willfully putting Kade's life (as well as Ace's and Layla's, in retrospect) at risk by going along with Quintessa's plans - a vampire queen that she damned well knows is evil incarnate (she got an A on the report on her, for goodness sake!; so it's not like she doesn't know Quintessa can't be trusted.)
Please, don't come to me expecting me to fix your problems.

Gotoh
Posts: 3965
Joined: Sat Jan 12, 2013 9:18 pm

Re: Dangerously Chloe 1-10-18 Craving for Men

Post by Gotoh » Thu Oct 04, 2018 3:05 pm

dmra wrote:
Thu Oct 04, 2018 9:58 am
And there is evidence of what I said about you applying different standards to the two characters.

I bet if the situation had been reversed and Chloe had fed Layla while Brooke had offered to feed Nina you wouldn't be saying that Chloe was a nicer kinder soul than Brooke.
No one's applying a double standard. It's simple: you give someone credit based on what they do, or what they've done. You don't slip a guy a paycheck, unless they actually show up for work and do their job. The same way you wouldn't award someone a commendation for meritorious action, unless they've earned it.

Brooke responded during an actual emergency. Chloe didn't. That's why Brooke gets credit, while Chloe doesn't.
Fluffy wrote:
Thu Oct 04, 2018 10:35 am
No - seeing as Gotoh is in strong defense of Brooke in this matter, they probably would have seen Chloe and Brooke's actions as equally generous.
No, I wouldn't (see: previous response above)
Flufgy wrote:
Thu Oct 04, 2018 10:35 am
You're using something I had said three years ago to invalidate my opinion on Brooke's behavior by trying to make me look like a hypocrite? Really?
Everyone else in that thread was like 'how are they letting Cerise walk away scott-free after what she did?' and your response basically amounted to, 'I don't see what the big deal is'. If you were me, how would that look?
Fluffy wrote:
Thu Oct 04, 2018 10:35 am
Guess what? Me saying that Cerise's behavior is little more than witch's version of a temper tantrum doesn't mean I agree/look past what she did. What Cerise did was horrible and she should have faced some serious backlash for it; just as Brooke should have faced some serious backlash for willfully putting Kade's life at risk
Now that you've clarified your point, I apologize because I meant no offense.

That said, I don't see how you and dmra are convinced that Kade's life was ever at risk. EC isn't that kind of comic. No one ever died, unless it was during a past/historical event and, even then it was treated comically. What Brooke did was par for the course, given everything we had already seen happen up to that point and no harm came from it. Layla called her out on it and went back to her boyfriend so, as far as she's concerned, the matter's settled.

Taking the comic as a whole, it wasn't that big a deal.

User avatar
Fluffy
Posts: 3363
Joined: Mon Oct 31, 2011 7:14 pm

Re: Dangerously Chloe 1-10-18 Craving for Men

Post by Fluffy » Thu Oct 04, 2018 3:19 pm

Gotoh wrote:
Thu Oct 04, 2018 3:05 pm
That said, I don't see how you and dmra are convinced that Kade's life was ever at risk. EC isn't that kind of comic.
Kade was literally tied to a table, with Quintessa planning to use his body as a vessel for her dead killer cat. Do you seriously think a force of evil like her was not going to displace Kade's spirit, effectively killing him, as a result?

The fact the crisis was averted in the end doesn't change the fact it was a very likely possibility. Brooke doesn't get a pass because it was avoided - she was still an active part in the plan by willfully going along with it due to the promise of vampire nookie (by a girl - her best friend's sister, no less! - who she knew full well was possessed with an evil entity) and being briefly scolded for being an enabling twit doesn't absolve her of wrong doing (much like Melissa forgiving Cerise for almost killing her/their friends and overtaking a school doesn't absolve Cerise of her own wretched behavior).

Again, we're just going to have to agree to disagree on this topic - because I'm personally tired of arguing in circles.
Gotoh wrote:
Thu Oct 04, 2018 3:05 pm
EC isn't that kind of comic. No one ever died, unless it was during a past/historical event and, even then it was treated comically.


Yeah - I hardly see decapitation as being comedic; no matter how it's illustrated. :|
Please, don't come to me expecting me to fix your problems.

Gotoh
Posts: 3965
Joined: Sat Jan 12, 2013 9:18 pm

Re: Dangerously Chloe 1-10-18 Craving for Men

Post by Gotoh » Thu Oct 04, 2018 3:51 pm

Fluffy wrote:
Thu Oct 04, 2018 3:19 pm
Yeah - I hardly see decapitation as being comedic; no matter how it's illustrated. :|
That's 'cuz EC is comedy/horror. Just like 'The Addams Family', where one of Gomez's favorite pastimes was having his wife, Morticia, pull him apart on the rack in their torture room.
Fluffy wrote:
Sat Nov 16, 1974 8:39 pm
Kade was literally tied to a table, with Quintessa planning to use his body as a vessel for her dead killer cat. Do you seriously think a force of evil like her was not going to displace Kade's spirit, effectively killing him, as a result?
The mirror monster was also a force of evil, it displaced Nina's spirit. She didn't die. Quintessa had something similar planned for Kade, odds are, it wouldn't gave killed him either.

If we were talking some grimm dark series like 'Berserk', or 'Deadman Wonderland', that'd be different. But EC is a lighthearted PG-13 webcomic. It was never gonna go there.
Fluffy wrote:
Sat Nov 16, 1974 8:39 pm
she was still an active part in the plan by willfully going along with it due to the promise of vampire nookie (by a girl she knew full well was possessed with an evil entity) and being briefly scolded for being an enabling twit doesn't absolve her of wrong doing
No one said Brooke was absolved, the scolding and the loss of the nookie Quintessa tempted her with was her punishment.

dmra
Posts: 613
Joined: Wed Sep 11, 2013 7:21 pm

Re: Dangerously Chloe 1-10-18 Craving for Men

Post by dmra » Thu Oct 04, 2018 3:54 pm

Gotoh wrote:
Thu Oct 04, 2018 3:05 pm
dmra wrote:
Thu Oct 04, 2018 9:58 am
And there is evidence of what I said about you applying different standards to the two characters.

I bet if the situation had been reversed and Chloe had fed Layla while Brooke had offered to feed Nina you wouldn't be saying that Chloe was a nicer kinder soul than Brooke.
No one's applying a double standard. It's simple: you give someone credit based on what they do, or what they've done. You don't slip a guy a paycheck, unless they actually show up for work and do their job. The same way you wouldn't award someone a commendation for meritorious action, unless they've earned it.

Brooke responded during an actual emergency. Chloe didn't. That's why Brooke gets credit, while Chloe doesn't.
Oh for Pete's sake. So if somebody runs into a burning building to rescue somebody but there isn't anybody there that makes them less brave than somebody who runs into a burning building and finds somebody.

Chloe was willing to do the exact same thing as Brooke in what appeared to be the exact same circumstances. A hungry vampire wanted to eat and had Nina been a regular vampire she would have bitten Chloe and drunk her blood just like Layla did with Brooke.

But as it happens Nina wanted chocolate not blood but Chloe didn't know that before she offered.

So Chloe and Brooke had exactly the same instincts and feelings but as far as you're concerned only one of them deserves any kind of merit.

Like I said before if the situation had been reversed and it was Chloe who was bitten while Brooke lost her snack would you be saying that Chloe was a better person than Brooke while Brooke's was a wasted gesture?

Gotoh
Posts: 3965
Joined: Sat Jan 12, 2013 9:18 pm

Re: Dangerously Chloe 1-10-18 Craving for Men

Post by Gotoh » Thu Oct 04, 2018 4:17 pm

dmra wrote:
Thu Oct 04, 2018 3:54 pm
Oh for Pete's sake. So if somebody runs into a burning building to rescue somebody but there isn't anybody there that makes them less brave than somebody who runs into a burning building and finds somebody.
Using your own analogy: one ran into a burning building and saved someone's life (Brooke). In the other's case, there wasn't a fire. It was just a kid with a stomach ache.

It was a compassionate gesture on Chloe's part, I've already said that. But Nina's situation was entirely different from Layla's. Layla was blood starved, which we were told is life threatening for a vampire. Nina was only hungry.

dmra
Posts: 613
Joined: Wed Sep 11, 2013 7:21 pm

Re: Dangerously Chloe 1-10-18 Craving for Men

Post by dmra » Thu Oct 04, 2018 6:11 pm

Unless the kid with the stomach ache was in the burning house then no that isn't my analogy. Brooke and Chloe were both faced with a starving vampire (the burning house) but only one vampire was staving for blood. The other for chocolate. But the important point you seem to be missing is that both Chloe and Brooke thought they were facing the exact circumstances and made the exact same moral choice but you only think one of them deserves credit for doing so.

So just to clarify. If Brooke had been with Nina and Chloe with Layla you'd be giving Chloe all the credit for saving the day and saying that Brooke was compassionate but didn't deserve any recognition for what she was willing to do?

And if intentions aren't as important as results when judging character. why did you say earlier that Chloe didn't deserve any credit for saving the human race from extinction because she wasn't trying to? She succeeded where Brooke and Twiggit failed and so was the true saviour of mankind but yet somehow that doesn't count.

Gotoh
Posts: 3965
Joined: Sat Jan 12, 2013 9:18 pm

Re: Dangerously Chloe 1-10-18 Craving for Men

Post by Gotoh » Thu Oct 04, 2018 6:44 pm

dmra wrote:
Thu Oct 04, 2018 6:11 pm
Unless the kid with the stomach ache was in the burning house then no that isn't my analogy.
Which is why your analogy doesn't work, because you're trying to conflate an emergency situation with another that wasn't.
dmra wrote:
Thu Oct 04, 2018 6:11 pm
you say earlier that Chloe didn't deserve any credit for saving the human race from extinction because she wasn't trying to? She succeeded where Brooke and Twiggit failed and so was the true saviour of mankind but yet somehow that doesn't count.
Would you give someone a trophy for wandering over the finish line if they weren't actually running the race?

What Chloe did was a complete accident, she never knew the school was in peril. All she saw was a chance to make her boobs smaller. Even after the school was saved, she still had no idea why everyone else was celebrating.

dmra
Posts: 613
Joined: Wed Sep 11, 2013 7:21 pm

Re: Dangerously Chloe 1-10-18 Craving for Men

Post by dmra » Thu Oct 04, 2018 6:53 pm

And you're thinking of Nina as a kid with a stomach ache while Layla was suffering a real emergency is why you are failing to appreciate the analogy.

Chloe and Brooke found themselves in the exact same situation, Both were confronted by a hungry vampire suffering because of their need to feed.
Both agreed to feed them by being bitten. It just so happened that unknown to one of them her vampire ate chocolate rather than drinking blood. But she was still prepared to make the sacrifice because she didn't want to see the vampire suffer.

Since you don't seem to be able to grasp the burning house analogy let's try another one. There are two people who agree to be organ donors in event of their accidental death. One dies young in a car crash the other lives to a ripe old age so their organs can't be used.

According to your logic the former is a better person than the latter because their organs were used to save lives and those of the other weren't. Whereas in reality both had made exactly the same moral choice and were therefore equally virtuous.

Gotoh
Posts: 3965
Joined: Sat Jan 12, 2013 9:18 pm

Re: Dangerously Chloe 1-10-18 Craving for Men

Post by Gotoh » Thu Oct 04, 2018 7:17 pm

dmra wrote:
Thu Oct 04, 2018 6:53 pm
And you're thinking of Nina as a kid with a stomach ache while Layla was suffering a real emergency
Because that's exactly what happened. Look at Layla's condition, more importantly, look at what was said about it. Now look at Nina's situation and tell me it's even remotely the same.

dmra
Posts: 613
Joined: Wed Sep 11, 2013 7:21 pm

Re: Dangerously Chloe 1-10-18 Craving for Men

Post by dmra » Thu Oct 04, 2018 7:50 pm

Right so Nina's pain doesn't count. And when Chloe said I can't stand to see you suffer and offered up her blood she was obviously completely overreacting. Because it's not like she had more to judge the situation on by than a single panel of a comic but could hear and see Nina.

And why didn't Brooke just take Layla to the school nurse? After all you'd think that a school for monsters would be prepared for all emergencies especially ones that involved hungry vampires. .And they did have time to wander around to find a quiet spot with a seat so it shouldn't have taken that much longer to go to an infirmary.

So not only was Brooke not really being that kind - she was delaying Layla getting properly qualified help - she was also being stupid.

Post Reply