Page 1 of 1
Tuesday, December 29, 1998: Naughty and nice
Posted: Sun Apr 04, 2010 2:12 pm
by NonsenseWords

This one strikes me as odd, when only a few days ago Ozy and Millie were discussing whether there even is a Santa; a discussion that usually only crops up when somebody becomes skeptical...
Re: Tuesday, December 29, 1998: Naughty and nice
Posted: Sun Apr 04, 2010 5:25 pm
by Maggot Brain
Did kids ever actually talk like that?
Re: Tuesday, December 29, 1998: Naughty and nice
Posted: Sun Apr 04, 2010 5:56 pm
by osprey
I never noticed this before, but there's a lot of talk about brand name clothes in the early strip. Something DCS was teased about maybe?
Re: Tuesday, December 29, 1998: Naughty and nice
Posted: Sun Apr 04, 2010 7:07 pm
by Dr. Dos
I've always heard of being made fun of for not wearing certain kinds of clothes in media, but never knew of anybody in real life who did get insulted.
I mean, they would for an ugly shirt, but not for a certain brand of shirt.
Re: Tuesday, December 29, 1998: Naughty and nice
Posted: Sun Apr 04, 2010 11:11 pm
by Arloest
You guys weren't girls.
Re: Tuesday, December 29, 1998: Naughty and nice
Posted: Mon Apr 05, 2010 12:00 am
by Maggot Brain
You guys weren't girls.
You don't know my life.

Re: Tuesday, December 29, 1998: Naughty and nice
Posted: Mon Apr 05, 2010 1:52 am
by Tom_Radigan
OK, I'm unclear. Who among here, besides DCS, are genuine transsexuals?
Re: Tuesday, December 29, 1998: Naughty and nice
Posted: Mon Apr 05, 2010 2:48 am
by NonsenseWords
What do transsexuals have to do with it? At this point in time, I was under the impression that DCS was very most definitely a man.
You guys weren't girls.
As a matter of fact, I was. I still am.
And I can pretty safely say that I have never encountered a girl who would giggle at you for not wearing designer clothes. This is a pretty bizarre fascination. Seems that DCS had issues with designer clothes.
Re: Tuesday, December 29, 1998: Naughty and nice
Posted: Mon Apr 05, 2010 3:44 am
by Bocaj Claw
I knew some pretty horrible kids, and I can't remember a one of them being denied presents for sheer naughtiness. That's actually the least plausible part of the whole Santa thing, when you think about it.
Re: Tuesday, December 29, 1998: Naughty and nice
Posted: Mon Apr 05, 2010 5:21 am
by Arloest
You guys weren't girls.
As a matter of fact, I was. I still am.
And I can pretty safely say that I have never encountered a girl who would giggle at you for not wearing designer clothes. This is a pretty bizarre fascination. Seems that DCS had issues with designer clothes.
I knew you were; I was just referring to the guys up top who were questioning this.
Also, while designer clothes weren't a very common subject of ridicule, and never overt, I've witnessed it happen. But only once. And it was more of a "oh... that's nice... my grandma sometimes shops at the bargain bin too" condescending piece of shit comment made while flashing her Banana Republic stuff than anything.
Re: Tuesday, December 29, 1998: Naughty and nice
Posted: Tue Apr 06, 2010 8:09 pm
by Cactus Jack
I think people may rip on others for not having brand name clothes in the sense that the person without is wearing something deemed ugly or unfashionable, but a person straight up saying "Ha ha that shirt is a generic brand" seems pretty wack to me. Really, don't all clothes not made at home have some sort of brand? It might not be popular or cool but somebody had to make it, they didn't just pick it off a shirt bush.
Re: Tuesday, December 29, 1998: Naughty and nice
Posted: Thu Apr 08, 2010 3:48 am
by cougartiger
I wore generic clothes all through school and never once got ragged on for it. Heck, I'm STILL wearing generic clothes and no one cares.
That said, I always like that cat girl in Felicia's group. She disappeared after a while though.

Re: Tuesday, December 29, 1998: Naughty and nice
Posted: Tue May 18, 2010 7:39 am
by likeafox
I don't think this brand-name obsession is an obsession, but a form of laziness from having to come up with new types of scathing remarks. I think it's meant to be taken as generic ridicule in many cases, and the subject of ridicule itself is not meant to be the focus. That lazy device may come from DCS's tendency of categorizing of sheeple/bull-headed characters. The laziness of the device he uses may itself represent the simple-mindedness of such characters, its recurrence being an exaggeration, if you will. Still, not something to be taken for its face value, but reduced to its generic form. Simply ridicule.
As for brand-name ridicule, although it is hard to imagine it on a playground between 8-year-olds, I know it is rampant in some places. I have a friend who is into lolita fasion and have heard and heard of some of the nastiest things between the girls in that scene, regarding brand-names.