!?

Cidu Bill on May 28th 2010

Nicole felt so strongly that this was Arlo Page material, her only question was whether she was the first to send it in.

Clearly, Luann and Momma DeGroot are referring to sex; but is this a lot more blatant than I think it is? I’m not even sure I follow the metaphor.

exclamation.gif

Filed in Arlo Page, Bill Bickel, Greg Evans, Luann, comic strips, comics, humor | 41 responses so far

41 Responses to “!?”

  1. yellojkt May 28th 2010 at 09:44 am 1

    Exclamation points would be sex. Whether you want to make that particular punctuation a phallic symbol or a metaphor for orgasmic moaning is up to your particular level of filthy-mindedness. But I immediately took the strip as Mom being relieved that Luann and Quill weren’t doing the nasty and Luann indignant that her mom would even suggest that.

  2. Rasheed May 28th 2010 at 09:56 am 2

    Not really seeing anything Arlo-worthy. Definitely too much effort on the reader’s part to get there.

  3. Elyrest May 28th 2010 at 09:57 am 3

    I guess I don’t have the right kind of dirty mind because I didn’t see anything sexual in this at all. I just thought her mother was referring to being at the age where a girl would question having a relationship rather than be all googly about being in one.

    I can now see how it would be an Arlo!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  4. lord-z May 28th 2010 at 10:51 am 4

    I don’t think it is an Arlo. I think she means that Luann shouldn’t decide on The One yet. Nothing should be definate, just yet. Luanns reaction is sort of puzzling, though it does fit the idea that mom is talking about sex.

  5. Keera May 28th 2010 at 11:11 am 5

    My interpretation was in line with Elyrest’s @3. Of course, this bunch here can Arlo anything. ;-)

  6. Pirk May 28th 2010 at 11:30 am 6

    Luann’s reaction makes it seem like her mom said something dirty.
    without that reaction, I’d agree that she just meant serious relationship or something.

  7. rain May 28th 2010 at 11:38 am 7

    > Of course, this bunch here can Arlo anything.

    Proposed subparagraph of Rule 34:

    Rule 34a - You can Arlo anything.

  8. Elyrest May 28th 2010 at 11:56 am 8

    Okay, now that I understand what an exclamation mark (!) is supposed to mean what does a question mark (?) mean? Commas? Periods?

  9. Nicole May 28th 2010 at 12:05 pm 9

    Rain @ 7
    Rule 34b - Nicole Arlos everything :-)

    As yellojkt #1 said … the exclaimation point would be an errect phallis … a question mark could be a flacid exclaimation point.

    The give away is mom’s expression and Luann’s reaction — clearly this is a reference to sex and that Luann should not be giving boys errections. Luann’s reponse has four eclamation points each growing larger telling us that Luann has had sex four times.

    Dan Brown has nothing on me :-)

  10. Scott May 28th 2010 at 12:21 pm 10

    rain#7: Tom Lehrer already wrote that rule:
    “When correctly viewed,
    Anything is lewd,
    I can tell you things about Peter Pan,
    And the Wizard of Oz, there’s a dirty old man.”

    from “Smut”.

  11. furrykef May 28th 2010 at 12:51 pm 11

    Am I the only one here who thinks Luann’s expression in the final panel is pretty weird?

  12. Nicole May 28th 2010 at 01:07 pm 12

    furrykef @11 … nope … but I suspect it is supposed to be one of playful shock

  13. Detcord May 28th 2010 at 01:22 pm 13

    I think context is important here. By that I mean this is a “family” cartoon, so interpretations are on the lighter, rather than the smutty, side. The question marks indicate that Luann is just starting to realize that a boy can be something other than simply a friend. Mom thinks that’s a good sign of her daughter growing up, but recognizes that she’s not mature enough yet for “exclamation points”, which in this comic means a “crush”, which would only end in tears as Quill, “could go back to Australia any day”.

    Definitely not an Arlo.

  14. [Fran]cisco May 28th 2010 at 01:23 pm 14

    For starters, I just don’t see the question. This strip is clearly Arlo material and Luann and her mom are referring to “the deed.” Sure, my mind may reside in the gutter, but sometimes that’s the natural place to be. ;>

    furrykef @13 — Luann is startled that her mother would so casually make a connection to an idea that clearly pleases Luann.

    Scott @10 — Gotta love Tom Lehrer.

  15. Nicole May 28th 2010 at 01:44 pm 15

    Detcord @13

    Except that Luann has known boys can be more than a friend for a long long time. She had a major thing for Aaron .. who moved to Hawaii — and she was certainly not interested in him only as a friend.

    Also your explaination does not account for Luann’s shocked reaction. If as you say this is all about Luann growing up , why whould Luann be shocked as something she herself recognized in the second panel ?

    Ahhh — Detcord and Nicole disagree again and all is right with the world :-D

  16. Detcord May 28th 2010 at 02:22 pm 16

    Nicole (15),

    Well, I guess it was worth it then, if only to reset your own sense of equilibrium. I am equally glad that all is “right” with the world, rather than … “left”. :-)

    To answer your points, Aaron was a kiddie thing that went nowhere. (He went “somewhere” instead.) Luann’s “shocked” expression is simply an early teenager expressing shock to hide her embarrassment that her mother knows what she (Luann) is thinking, even if she’s not all that clear what those thoughts mean herself.

    This is all lighthearted stuff, but there is a serious side to our modern efforts to sexualize everything in sight. Here’s a recent headline that makes my point.

    http://uk.reuters.com/article/idUKTRE64N34A20100524

  17. Mark in Boston May 28th 2010 at 03:23 pm 17

    I listen to re-runs of the old BBC radio show “My Word”, and in one of Dennis Norden’s rambling stories he was talking about his school days and how he got the first exclamation point in his diary. Apparently among public school boys in Britain it was customary to document “getting lucky” by writing nothing more than the girl’s name followed by an exclamation point in one’s diary.

  18. PeterW May 28th 2010 at 04:19 pm 18

    Exclamation points as phallic came to mind as a secondary punchline, but I shrugged it off as accidental.

  19. Soup Dragon May 28th 2010 at 04:40 pm 19

    Elyrest #9, I don’t know about commas, but periods are often thought to be bad for sex.

  20. Ooten Aboot May 28th 2010 at 05:02 pm 20

    Mark in Boston @ 17: “My Word!” (with exclamation point) for ever and ever, amen. Ditto “My Music”. Why else was radio invented?

  21. Chuck May 28th 2010 at 05:02 pm 21

    But apparently sex is great for periods. Relieves cramps.

  22. mkilby May 28th 2010 at 06:25 pm 22

    I agree with furrykef (11) - that expression doesn’t suggest indignation at all, it’s more like a blank stare. The “excitement” (if any) is conveyed by the taut fabric on the t-shirt more than anything else. Let’s be honest: why would anyone read Luann, if not for the perky tits?

  23. Elyrest May 28th 2010 at 07:56 pm 23

    Mark in Boston - Could you please give a link for the best place to listen to the BBC archives of “My Word”. I did a rudimentary search, but didn’t find it.

    Thanks.

  24. tee_eff_em May 28th 2010 at 08:48 pm 24


  25. tee_eff_em May 28th 2010 at 08:52 pm 25

    [stoopid pseudo-HTML filters washed my (24) of everything between the angle-brackets]

    [Insert your own Arlo about Colons here]

  26. Nicole May 28th 2010 at 10:02 pm 26

    Detcord # 16

    Well, if you read any of my postings on the ‘dance video’, my reputation not withstanding, I can be something of a prude when it comes to children and sex. So the article you linked to was as horrifying to me as it was to you. I think that sexualizing children is a form of child abuse.

    Why would Luann be shocked that her mother knows what she is thinking when she just spilled her guts to her mom in panel two ?

    As far as Aaron goes, Luann was totally crushing on him. Kiddie thing or not she had already realized the difference between a friend that is a boy and a boyfriend. Now, if what you are referring to is a more adult relationship, I would agree and I would also say that in this day and age (like it or not) that would mean a sexual relationship… bringing us right back to the double entendre of the exclamation point and question mark.

    What I really wanted to say is “god is in his heaven, and all is right with the world” but being an atheist , I just couldn’t bring myself to say it. :-D

  27. mitch4 May 28th 2010 at 10:14 pm 27

    Thanks for the memories, of “My Word!” and “My Music”.

  28. mitch4 May 28th 2010 at 10:23 pm 28

    This strip followed a couple of days of the same conversation Luann and Nancy were having. Luann was detailing her conflicted feelings about wanting to be nice & remain friends with Gunther — who she realizes is crushing on her — but for whom she does not experience any romantic feelings. These remarks about Quill come on the heels of that. Much as we might like to think some of the subtext from the punctuation remarks imply full sexual intent, the preceding strips say it really is mostly Feelings they’re invoking.

  29. Nicole May 28th 2010 at 10:46 pm 29

    mitch4 @28 .. I think you are missing the point. It isn’t Luann who is making the double entendre … it is her mom. What ever Luann discussed prior to this strip is moot, since Luann is not making the joke, her mom is .

  30. Detcord May 29th 2010 at 06:43 am 30

    Nicole (29)

    Correct! We can accept that Luann’s mother is fully sexualized (she has 2 kids for heavens sake). But we’re discussing the meaning of “Luann’s” exclamation points and shocked face, not her mother’s. Mom’s knowing verbal wink isn’t, or shouldn’t be, an Arlo - though I am beginning to forget just what an Arlo is anymore. Even at my age, I still tend toward the innocent, rather than the , ummm…, worldly interpretation. I think mithch4 (28) is on the same track.

    I was amused by the discussions on Rule 34 and 34b,and also dismayed at how easily they were proved true. Given that, I still think there should be a boundary on these “rules”, when it comes to children. As you know, I did read your, and many other, postings on the “dance video” and I agreed with you 100%

    Maybe preserving childhood innocence is a fool’s goal, but that dance video and my link in line 16 show how far down the alternative path we’ve gone. I can’t help but try to push back, even a little.

  31. Morris Keesan May 29th 2010 at 10:09 am 31

    Elyrest (#23), Mark probably listens to “My Word!” the same way I do, on Boston’s public radio station WBUR, which airs it on Sunday nights at 10:30PM ET (usually 5 hours earlier than British time, except for a week or two in the spring and autumn, when we switch to and from Summer Time on different dates) and which can be heard on the net at . There’s a list of other broadcast times and radio stations at .

    “My Music!’ is sometimes on BBC Radio 7, but it’s not currently in their schedule. Radio 7 plays a lot of old BBC programmes, as well as newer ones.

  32. Nicole May 29th 2010 at 11:02 am 32

    Detcord @30

    OHHHHHHHH !!!! I thought the thing about Luann’s exclamation points indicating how many sexual encounters was over the top that everyone would know I was kidding. Especially when I followed it up with the Dan Brown comment. No … I don’t think it was anything other than shock.

    So …. Just so we are clear … Luann’s mom has made a double entendre .. Luann has picked up on it and is shocked that her mom would say something something sexual to her. I do actually think mom is making a double entrendre and that is what makes this Arlo worthy.

    I thought a little more about the article you posted. I think there is a real issue today with parents not understanding what is appropriate for their children and what is not. And this does not only apply to sex. Here is an example from my own life. When the Tim Burton Batman movie came out I knew it was not appropriate for my then 8 year old son. About a year after it came out, it was on TV and he wanted to watch it. I still felt it was inappropriate for him, and said so. He responded that he had already seen it at a friend’s house. In this case the parent saw ‘Batman’ and assumed that anything with Batman was kid oriented. Parents are both overwhelmed and lazy. I am sure the boys in this story were allowed to watch things totally inappropriate for them and their age. While the result was a sexual horror story, that is not the only result of not paying attention to our children.

    As an aside, This being Memorial day weekend I am away so my posts will be sporadic at best

    Have fun stormin the castle.

  33. Mark in Boston May 29th 2010 at 02:12 pm 33

    Elyrest:

    http://www.wbur.org, click “Listen Live” at 10:30 p.m. Eastern Time every Sunday (in summer that’s 0240 GMT Monday morning). As far as I know you can only listen live; they don’t make a podcast of it.

  34. Elyrest May 29th 2010 at 02:45 pm 34

    Thanks Mark (33) & Morris (31). I, greedily, was looking for archives of the old shows. I heard a while ago that the BBC was making their archives available online, but I couldn’t find “My Word” in my, admittedly short, search. I’ll search some more. I love to listen to the BBC. When I lived in Humboldt county California there was a radio station in Bayside that played live BBC radio 24 hours a day. Somehow a woman (forget her name) had gotten the rights many years ago from the BBC to carry their feed. A few years ago she was tired and the station went NPR - over the objections of many. It was a good NPR station, but I could get four other NPR stations at the time. I really missed the BBC when it went away.

  35. Rain May 29th 2010 at 03:38 pm 35

    the mom is referring to an orgasm. I don’t buy the “phallic exclamation point” theory at all.

  36. Igelino May 30th 2010 at 03:05 pm 36

    I agree with Rain. I think mom might have been unsure whether Luann would understand, but Luann’s reaction gave her away. I do the same with my kids. A slightly ambiguous remark either goes in one ear and out the other, or it gets a emotional reaction. Heh.

    Detcord (16) jeez, 10 and 8?! How can that even be called rape? It’s just plain crazy. Does a 10 year even have a sex drive yet? I know I didn’t at that age. Ok, I had other problems, but sex wasn’t one of them. Jeez.

  37. Detcord May 30th 2010 at 07:26 pm 37

    Igelino (36)

    I don’t know how the jury came to its conclusion, but I agree with you. I doubt any of the children had the equipment necessary to make this charge, but I am guessing as I have no facts but what I’ve posted. What they (the boys) apparently did have was a cultural imperative to act out the behaviors described. I have no idea where, or in what form this cultural imperative may have been, but western society has become increasingly sexualised over the years with one boundary or taboo after another giving way to license.

    In another thread, I noted that adults should be as free as possible to pursue their own interests. I also argued that that freedom should stop, or be reined in, if children are involved. Hence my comments about the dance video. I think most who posted to that thread agreed it was way out of line.

  38. Keera May 31st 2010 at 11:40 am 38

    OK, I have to jump in here, Igelino @36 and Detcord @37. Rape is not about sex, it is about oppression and violence, about forcing someone to do something they don’t want to. To me, the two boys may have wanted to play doctor, but more to the point, they were not taught to respect girls. They were instead taught that they could and should override her sovereignty as an individual because she’s a girl. One can only imagine how their mothers or sisters are treated, or what these boys may have been allowed to see/learn via TV/PC games/internet (without parental guidance).

  39. Detcord May 31st 2010 at 01:19 pm 39

    Keera (38)

    I hear you, but I don’t agree with you. The urge for sex is a biological imperative rooted deep within our male and female genes, and many other living organisms share that drive. It is our cultural imperative that attempts to hold back and control this most basic of drives. Yes, teaching boundaries, especially sexual ones, is part of that cultural imperative - which I believe is your point - but human beings take lessons from many sources. It’s one of our greatest strengths as a species, but it also leave us vulnerable, both to malign influences, or the absence of positive influences (where one would act instinctively). Regarding the boys, I believe both aspects were at work here - which is the point I was making about sexualising everything in sight.

  40. Igelino May 31st 2010 at 03:49 pm 40

    My brain still hurts a bit from that video. And to think the girls in the video and the girl here are the same age.

    I bumped across this update last night:
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/london/8680370.stm

    which kind of nails home the question of relying entirely on prepubescent testimony. Is someone at 8 or 10 years really responsible for their own actions? Surely not to the extent that someone at 30 is.

    Wasn’t there a case in Idaho a few months ago where a prosecutor wanted to get a underage boy and girl both on a sex offender list?

  41. Igelino May 31st 2010 at 04:44 pm 41

    Here it is, Washington state:
    http://story.irishsun.com/index.php/ct/9/cid/45d771c7290844e9/id/595304/cs/1/

    Two girls and a boy, for sending kiddy porn to each other. They were 13 and 14. With kids having phones younger and younger, how long before 8 year old dancers get themselves onto sex offender lists?

Comments RSS

Leave a Reply