Please forgive me, but I’m going to answer your post in the opposite order it was given.

I completely agree about the comedy and the satire of the original comic, I’m not opposed to it being over the top to deliver it’s comedic message. I’ll also say that the message is comedic in a dark way. The issue inherent to it is when you have people giving seemingly literal agreement to satirical statements, which is what a lot of these comments have devolved into. Your own post was 659 words, 44 lines, and 14 paragraphs obviously this discussion isn’t just about visual shorthand of a comic, it has some amount of real world investment.

As to your first question, I can’t give a concrete answer. As with many psychological things I can’t tell you what is a reasonable amount of suspicion, but I can say what is an overreaction. Similarly, I can’t tell you what a reasonable amount of collecting is, but I can spot hoarding. I can’t tell you what a reasonable attention to detail is, but I can spot an obsessive compulsive behavior. I’m not a doctor, and won’t pretend to be one, so I can’t tell you in definite terms what a reasonable suspicion is, but I can certainly identify an overreaction.

If someone sees an overly dramatic comic about women being fearful of men and their reaction is to defend the over dramatic behavior then that’s an overreaction. When men call out this behavior as overly dramatic and someone defends it, and in fact doubles down on it, then it’s clearly not just satire or a dark joke.

If we’re using the example of the hotel room I would venture to say that a reasonable level of suspicion would be to lock the door, turn the deadbolt, put the swing arm on, and don’t open the door for strangers. If you start getting into hiding, configuring contraptions, barring the door with chairs, and checking the mirrors to see if they are see through, that’s an overreaction in my book.

That’s fair.

I get calling it nitpicking to split hairs about when Colbert was fired, even if justified financially (obviously firing someone when there is a contractual penalty isn’t the best business sense), but what are your thoughts on the last sentence the OP made? Yeah, Colbert was fired, whether he was fired today or two weeks ago it’s till fired, but the network also choosing to not fill other unaffiliated and vacant late night slots does seem to give credence to the idea that they might just be trying to get away from late night shows.

First off, uh no I would not blame the victim for being raped and murdered and the fact that that is what you lead with is pretty telling. Next I think it’s really telling that you are saying the over reaction is “basic precaution.”

If a woman does a normal amount of precaution, such as locking the door and not opening it for strangers, that’s normal and perfectly reasonable. If the woman literally barricades herself in that’s insane. In either case, if she is attacked or raped it’s not her fault and but that doesn’t mean overreaction isn’t overreaction.

I think the problem with your argument is the measure of paranoia. It’s 100% reasonable to be suspicious and cautious around men, strange or familiar, if you’re a woman. The issue I think most men have to this isn’t reasonable suspicion or reasonable caution, but rather the over the top reaction women online seem to have.

An example of this might be a youtube video about women checking into a hotel alone vs a man checking into a hotel alone. The man checks in and goes right to bed, the lock on the door automatically engages when the door closes. The example with the woman has her block the one way peephole, double check the deadbolt, brace a chair against the door handle, string a tight rope from the door handle to a firm anchor in the bathroom, unplug the phone, close the blinds, check that the mirror isn’t see through, and sweep the room for listening devices. You see this and think it must be satire, and it might be, but then you go into the comments and there’s a ton of women saying how true this is and how you gotta be careful of men when traveling alone. Every so often you’ll see a comment from a man about how this is insane and all the women respond how he’s privileged and doesn’t understand why women have to do all this.

No man is going to begrudge a reasonable reaction to strangers and safety, but relating to a comic about seeing a spam notification about singles in your area and locking your door is ridiculous. It’s this over the top reaction that men become offended by, not reasonable caution.

Eh, that’s not really a good example. The US already has more people incarcerated per capita than any other country. The biggest limitation is how many people they can arrest at one time, not how many people they will arrest total. You might be able to get enough people to protest at once that they can’t arrest them all at once, but they absolutely will arrest them over 1-3 years. They kept arresting Jan 6th people for 4 years under Biden, you don’t think that the current administration will be after you as long as possible?

Except there’s been no supporting evidence of that. Protests, large or small, get the people who protest to go vote. If they are the type to go to a protest then statistically they were already likely to go vote. The problem is the demographic of people who talk about issues but don’t historically go vote.

Historically conservatives go vote whether they protest, talk at work, or literally say nothing. Conversely, liberals and progressives historically do not go vote despite protesting, arguing, or anything else.

When I was in college I was still conservative leaning based on my childhood. I had a class with ~60 other people and we were given a group activity in which we could pick 2 guaranteed rights. The rights varied greatly, such as being accepted for your sexuality (as in from this day forth your sexual orientation would always be accepted without question), or you will have the right to universal healthcare, or you can move to any country you want without persecution. The premise of this question was that you would get the things you picked, but the others you would probably lose the other things. Out of that group of ~60 people only 2 chose the right to vote. The professor then pointed out that while each person had picked certain rights that couldn’t be taken away from them, two people now had 100% control of the political decisions for the rest of the group. With this they could give themselves more rights or even strip the unpicked rights from others.

I’m not sure how it happened, but conservatives instilled in their base that they need to vote no matter what while liberals don’t think it’s that important unless it’s the literal end of the world.

It’s a mixed bag in my opinion. I think the majority of people who show up to protest are likely to go vote, but the majority of people don’t protest. There is probably a small subset of people who would show up to protest and not show up to vote, but the biggest problem is people who say they dislike something, brigade it online, tell everyone at their work or school about it, but then don’t turn out to vote. The one side requires action, the other is just talk, the problem with liberals and progressives today is that they talk but don’t vote. For conservatives the majority of them vote, but don’t talk.

Except that protests that actually disrupt something get you arrested. Still doesn’t actually do much in the USA.

This is such a shit show of a post.

As an American (I know some people will scoff at that statement but that’s what we would genuinely say), but I feel like protests are effectively pointless in the modern day. The people in power don’t care and even Amy Coney Barrett has said how she has people around her house day and night and that they are wasting their time. Protests are great for the morale of the protestors, but they effectively don’t have any impact on people in office. I like the idea of protests, I support what most protestors are doing, but I don’t feel like they are making any real difference to the political stance of those they are protesting.

Maybe Trump just needs to get a BJ so he can calm the fuck down. I swear, the GOP just screams of sexual repressed energy just ready for some release. Only problem is they want those BJs from 16 year olds.