![Very Happy :D](./images/smilies/icon_e_biggrin.gif)
![Mr. Green :mrgreen:](./images/smilies/icon_mrgreen.gif)
So what do you think the gold ring really is? No way a feral has a gold ring, and if they did they wouldn't trade it for food out in the forest.
Mother Teresa wrote:Being unwanted, unloved, uncared for, forgotten by everybody, I think that is a much greater hunger, a much greater poverty than the person who has nothing to eat.
Depends on whether they want to survive through the winter or not.Rikunda wrote:So what do you think the gold ring really is? No way a feral has a gold ring, and if they did they wouldn't trade it for food out in the forest.
The problem isn't what you and Howellfan are saying, it's the assumption underneath: that gay relationships are inherently more sexual than straight relationships. There's a perception that a straight relationship is about the love between a man and a woman, and can therefore be portrayed appropriately at any age level, but gay relationships are all butts and elbows and other unmentionables, and so cannot. It's nonsense.Douglas Collier wrote:We are currently in an age where people are deeply split on the subject of homosexuality. If you have more characters who are gay represented within a general population than are statistically accurate (most studies say 5% or less in America, usually less), then it could be taken that the author is setting an agenda. As it is, having a gay pair or two (the kangaroos and the K-9 couple) represents that figure pretty accurately - more than that is pushing it. I don't feel that family-friendly comics like Housepets! should be used to promote topics that are considered controversial in our day and age (including politics and religion).valerio wrote:And just why should be enough?Douglas Collier wrote:I tend to agree with you somewhat, Joel. One gay couple (two if you count the K-9 unit dogs) is quite enough
That's just my two cents on the matter. I hope I haven't offended anyone (as is often the case when discussing sensitive topics).
Just a guess, but could it be the One Ring to rule them all, One Ring to find them, One Ring to bring them all and in the darkness bind them?Rikunda wrote:Cool a new guy! I like to pretend most of the females are male, so it doesn't matter to me what their real sex is.King and Bailey are one of the only male/female relationship I acknowledge. Grape and Max = male/male.
![]()
So what do you think the gold ring really is? No way a feral has a gold ring, and if they did they wouldn't trade it for food out in the forest.
All of ricks characters are cute! Also sugarbun?rourkie wrote:Cory's cute! I can't wait to see more...
Elbows? Have I been doing it wrong this whole time?Arvetis wrote: but gay relationships are all butts and elbows and other unmentionables
*giggles uncontrollably*devils wrote:Elbows? Have I been doing it wrong this whole time?Arvetis wrote: but gay relationships are all butts and elbows and other unmentionables
I don't mind it so long as it doesn't get to said point - and I do have faith that Rick would never take it that far (especially not with Housepets!). I was being a little bit paranoid earlier and, like I said - I'm sorry if I came off as a worry-wart.Arvetis wrote:The problem isn't what you and Howellfan are saying, it's the assumption underneath: that gay relationships are inherently more sexual than straight relationships. There's a perception that a straight relationship is about the love between a man and a woman, and can therefore be portrayed appropriately at any age level, but gay relationships are all butts and elbows and other unmentionables, and so cannot. It's nonsense.
Amazee Dayzee wrote:Lets wait for Rick to confirm what gender Cori is. I think she's a girl for now.
Hard to be more clear in my opinionrickgriffin wrote:And also, I'm not sure what tragedy has befallen the strip that there happens to be a male character who is flirting uncomfortably with another male character. Surely this thing has never happened before in the history of silly cartoon fiction.
True, but it's no secret that I appreciate the heavier-set characters when they show up. ~<3matthew Wolf wrote:All of ricks characters are cute! Also sugarbun?rourkie wrote:Cory's cute! I can't wait to see more...
Just for clarification, calling someone "sugarbun" is the same as calling them a sweetie, whereas calling them "sugar buns" means you admire their buttocks.Amazee Dayzee wrote:Kind of weird to have a male calling ANYBODY sugar buns, but Cori is so cute, that I will let it pass.
This is plausible, though we've seen no evidence Cory even knows who Zach is. I'm sure we'll see Cory interact with other folks eventually.Mickey the Luxray wrote:My two cents: Cory's actions are likely sarcastic in nature. A way of showing his disdain towards Zach's status, and his way of asserting that Zach is no better than he (which ironically would be a viewpoint Zach shares). The only reason Cory is likely talking to Zach is because Zach has connections that would personally benefit him.
There are dissenters of this "religion" that the forest animals have set up for Zach, and it wouldn't be too much of a stretch to guess that Cory is one of them.
Although, really at this point all theories on Cory's personality are completely invalid for one reason: We haven't seen him interact this way with any other characters yet (or by extension any other characters at all). It's too early to assume this is how he always acts. Inevitably Rick will have him interact with another character and prove just how he really is. Maybe not now, maybe not even in this arc, but if it's already drumming up this much controversy it's going to be addressed at some point, before it blows up into a topic with as much heat behind it as the likes of the Cosmic Game.
The Great Kitsune doesn't have an avatar. You raise interesting questions, though, some of which we may well get answers for in this arc!Number9Dysonsphere wrote:Cory could be the avatar for kitsune attempting to keep Zach away from the Temple for some Pete related reason. The temple may even have the power to revive Pete's immortal self, the temple is not powerless if their are still gargoyles guarding it. What else is there to guard?
The TV Show "M*A*S*H* ( ask your parents about it, kids ) did four or five episodes with variations of that theme.RandomGeekNamedBrent wrote:it's called a chain of deals and it's common in fiction. MLP actually did one in the actual show last seasonMickey the Luxray wrote:Back when I was in the brony fandom, a friend of mine in the fandom made a story called "One Small Favor."
It started with one tiny favor- retrieve some rubies. But quickly things spiraled out of control, causing the main character to have to run all over the land doing increasingly arduous and difficult favors for everyone from the lowly farmer Dinkleberg (this story was rife with references) to the captain of the country's standing army.
I have a sneaking suspicion that this arc will be somewhat like that story. Might just be me.
Well....if tonight's installment has him saying "See...I don't have the ring on me right now...Yea I felt it wasn't safe out here in the open where any Tom, Dick or Truck could swipe it, you know what I mean, Pal? Sure you do. Then, I sees this big beautiful temple, and I says to myself, I says....dat's a good place to hide a ring! You on the same page with me? Good, good. My problem now is....I can't get in there to retrieves it, with that ferret and fox hanging around. Got the picture, Bunbun? Now you...you have it made in the shade...not only can you get in there, they want you too get in there! So whatta you say you retrieve my little bauble for me?" We may get a better idea.Argent wrote:I think the point has been thoroughly covered by now.
Moving on, what's Cilantro/Cory[1] up to?
[1] Could the name imply a split personality, is dichromacity a hint as well? Or is it just an obvious alias at work?
That reminds me of me mixing up "backside" and "back side"...Dissension wrote:Just for clarification, calling someone "sugarbun" is the same as calling them a sweetie, whereas calling them "sugar buns" means you admire their buttocks.Amazee Dayzee wrote:Kind of weird to have a male calling ANYBODY sugar buns, but Cori is so cute, that I will let it pass.
Why does Karishad have an alt account?Backlash wrote:I'm sorry, but is anyone else disappointed the first panel is so small? This arc is called Rabbit's Foot after all, so I'm gonna be upset if we don't get a better view of Zach's feet in the snow
Because KarishadArvetis wrote:Why does Karishad have an alt account?
Somehow a better reason than "because I'm Batman."Backlash wrote:Because KarishadArvetis wrote:Why does Karishad have an alt account?
Sorry, the first gay characters were Roosevelt and Bruce.furlong90 wrote:I think cory is our first outright homosexual character I say that because his build looks more male. That. Is. Awesome.......pawsome...yes I said that
I haven't ever heared the word sugarbun beforeArcWolf wrote:Is it because you're a sugarbun yourself?
That and Rick's Twitter tirade over people ignoring the gender cues he uses aren't enough for you?rickgriffin wrote: I'm not sure what tragedy has befallen the strip that there happens to be a male character who is flirting uncomfortably with another male character. Surely this thing has never happened before in the history of silly cartoon fiction.