I simultaneously like and hate xkcd. I found the OP-linked cartoon in neither category.
Alright…so we’ve broken that one down. What the hell is going on today?
It’s part of the journal storyline.
The couple is embarrased that they’ve been seen calling each other lovey-dovey nicknames in public, so they murder the witness. The tooltip text also suggests an alternate explanation.
I think I prefer the alternate explanation. Much more fun.
:smack: I was hoping that it was another relativity joke that I wasn’t getting. Just give me the F for reading comprehension.
Unfortunately, in this case, the URL is so long that (at least for me on Firefox) it cut off before the file type. Just for future reference.
More-over, it’s the guy with the hat, who’s the strip’s resident Cynical Bastard, and his even more cynical bastardy girlfriend. Being witnessed going all goo-goo for each other is, of course, a mortal threat to their public images that must be eliminated with extreme prejudice.
Unless, of course, they set it up as an excuse to whack the guy, which is also possible, given their peronalities.
I think Jester is closest to groking this strip.
It’s not about a ‘plan’ to wear her down. No one in his or her right mind says on day one, “I know, I’ll sit around for 8 years carefully scheming to keep her single until she sleeps with me.” The narrator in the strip speaks with the omniscience of the narrator. He’s commenting on the effective consequences of choices made for much simpler reasons.
The male actor in this story wants to be needed. So badly. And, when he likes someone, and that person likes him, he becomes totally unwilling to risk losing that. Someone depends on him; he can be an emotional provider. And so, it’s kind of ok. He may pine a bit, but may not even admit to himself that he’s in love with her. The story is most likely to end with her falling in love with someone else, and the original friend is replaced over a period of time. He’ll be ‘happy’ for her, but a piece of him will be ripped out, as he’s just lost his life partner, while she’s just grown more distant from an old friend.
Eonwe freakin’ NAILED it.
I’m one of those. If I’m in a situation with a new person and the situation immediately provides a common interest base - for example, at a new job - I don’t have any trouble. The “common cause” provides the initial conversation starter, and I can go from there. But just walking up to somebody I’ve never met, it a social situation … I haven’t a clue what to say, even if “romance” isn’t the goal.
I wonder if this could possibly be some sort of cultural “hangover” from the days of arranged marriages. We’re really not that far removed from that, after all. Anybody remember that ‘90s sitcom, “Wings”? There was an episode in which Tony Shaloub’s character, Antonio, was discovered to be an illegal immigrant (or maybe he’d overstayed his visa - I can’t remember precisely) and was going to be deported. In an effort to remain in the country, he persuaded Crystal Bernard’s character, Helen, to agree to a “quickie marriage”, followed by a “quickie divorce” once Antonio obtained permanent residency. Helen backed out when she learned they would have to remain married for at least three years. That’s when it was revealed that Antonio had been carrying a torch for Helen anyway, and there was a touching scene where he described his grandparents’ arranged marriage back in his home country - how they didn’t even know each other when they got married, but over time they came to love each other deeply. He was hoping the same thing would happen between himself and Helen.
Ah, I think I see the problem. I’m using Firefox as well, and the entire link shows up just fine in the status bar (at the bottom of the window) - but the link doesn’t include any file type or even file name, so I can see why somebody might think it was cut off. Here’s the entire link in clear text:
http:// The Onion | America's Finest News Source.
Still, the word “video” is right there.
In any case, I’ll try to remember to make it clear in the future 
Oh, good! That’s how I read it, too. I was getting a little weirded out that I admitted I’ve been on both sides of this situation and suddenly it turned into this ugly mind game controlling nefarious scheme. That wasn’t what I read at all. I read a commentary on the frailty of humans and how we fool ourselves and each other about both our motivations and our “good-guy” identities. The baldy isn’t a scheming douchebag, he’s insecure and fooling himself as much as anyone else.
The narrator knows better, because in XKCDland, the narrator is baldy once removed - removed by distance, time, experience or self-awareness that the character doesn’t have.
I agree that the cynical presentation is because it is the narrator looking back, not the character looking forward. In most cases where this kind of thing happens, it starts as well meaning insecurity. You become friends with the hope that the other person will see the real you and fall in love. When that doesn’t happen and the other person dates people who actually ask them out, it leaves you three choices:
- Realize an honest approach would have been better
- Decide they are right and you are unlovable
- Decide there is something wrong with the person and you just have to work harder to show them their error.
Many people who try this don’t have the courage for number 1, and who would want to accept number 2? That leaves number 3, which is the path to douchbaggery.
Note: This does not really apply to people who honestly become friends with someone and then latter develop a romantic interest. I do not believe there is anything wrong with being friends first. The problem is when you become friends with the sole purpose of getting someone to like you romantically. The combination of insecurity and dishonesty will rarely lead to good results.
Jonathan
It’s not how I read it. The humour, I thought, came from an insincere person articulating quite honestly their insincerity, rather than a retrospective (and unsympathetic) look at an insecure person fooling themself.
Which isn’t to say that there aren’t people who fool themselves in this way - only that this cartoon wasn’t (in my read) aimed at them, but rather at the stereotypically nasty passive-aggressive “Nice Guy” (or “Nice Girl”), whose characteristic is that they are insecure and manupulative at the same time.
Though I admit one can read it either way. The difference is in how much one thinks Baldy is aware of his own motives in real time - obviously, if one is reading oneself as Baldy, the second interpretation makes most sense! (But requires much to be ‘read into’ it).
Brilliant! I wouldn’t have even thought it was a physics joke if you hadn’t told me, although now that I knew what to look for the secondary meaning sung out to me