#webcomic discourse

Is there an ancient curse that strikes every webcomic artist to have the thinnest skin ever when someone criticizes their work? This wasn't even a hard comment, it was about preference towards a good character over another.

I guess that's why most of you didn't go to art college, you probably can't handle a teacher correcting you.

There's been something on my mind regarding people's rightful concerns with the excessive amount of on-screen sexual assaults in The Dragon Slayer, and how when talking about them the number I see most often is 4. This made me wonder if it's accurate when people say there's 4 assaults so far, and so I went back and sifted through the pages of the comic to find out.. and unfortunately, I discovered the number is actually a lot more than 4.

So, I've compiled a list of all the instances so far in the comic where SA occurs or is mentioned to have occurred below. Spoilers for the comic, obviously.

1.

Aaand the first assualt occurs just seven pages in, when a random stallion attempts to assault Dandy. And Dandy (our current main character at this point) hasn't even had a line of dialog yet! Oh boy.

2.

The second SA attempt happens on page 12 to 19.. and it's Crisis assaulting Dandy. His own (underage) daughter. Two SAs in less than the first 20 pages.. just 6 pages between eachother.. what an introduction.

3.

Page 60. A random stallion tries to assault Pierces' (UNDERAGE) older sister.

4?.

Page 63-64. Just a few pages after the last attempted SA.. And now we come to the first instance that may or may not count. Caly is ABOUT to try and coerce Dandy in order to SA her but is cut off. Does this count?

5.

Another few pages later, page 67. Caly is suggested to have attempted to assault/come onto the mystery mare and then chases her down/attempts to assault her when she doesn't reciprocate. That's 3 seperate instances of SA or attempted SA within 7 pages..

6+??

Dyktor mentions a few pages later that Caly has been chasing mareS PLURAL who are unwilling. Suggesting multiple previous assaults off-screen. Notably, all Dyktor has to say about that is that it's "wrong" and "messed up". Does this count?? Perhaps not as it isn't on-screen?? But it is said to have happened. So..

6??7??

Page 83. King Severe threatens to "pick off your(Dyktor's) mares one by one". Is he threatening assault?? Sexual or?? Is he just threatening to kill them?? The wording is unclear but knowing the story's world/context so far makes this seem like he's threatening SA. Does this count?? Maybe, maybe not.

6.

Page 97. S'mile's SA via coercion at the hand(hoof?) of Caly. Notably the one that Sleepy insists doesn't count as SA..

7.

And that brings us to the most recent example. Pages 129-130. Caly assaults Dandy via coercion. It should be noted that Sleepy doesn't call this what it is(rape!) just as she didn't with S'mile's assault. Because apparantly no guys, it's not rape! He just manipulated her into having sex! It's toootally different! /sar

So, if you were counting along that would mean we have at least 6 on-screen SAs minimum, or 7 if you count threats of sexual assault. 8 if you count that and the attempt at SA via coercion that was cut off before anything could happen, but later is attempted again and does happen. Or, a maximum of 9/10+ if you count the additional assaults that were said to have happened in dialog..

This would mean, if we count all of the examples up to page 130(the most recent SA), that on average there is an instance of on-screen or mentioned SA every 21.6 pages at minimum, OR one SA every 13 pages at the maximum.

That is frankly, in my opinion, insane. People really were right when they say we get an SA every 20 pages..

Will the "baby dragon," who is actually Dandy's nephew and Pierces' cousin, ever have a name? It's so confusing to me because, when Pierces was born, the very next scene is with her father immediately asking what her name is; therefore, in this universe, mares tend to name their offspring immediately. With that in mind, why was "baby dragon" never named? He was given the dignity of a burial, with flowers laid atop his grave (indicating he was loved), but was never named. He lived for almost an entire winter too... Months without a name. This really bothers me because it is an example of weak storytelling and gives off a weird vibe having a baby exist, with evidence of sentience, to live for 9 pages and be beaten by one of the main characters.

It also feels like he died as a tool to punish S'mellie for being what the author describes as "the jerk squad," who, mind you, supposedly consented to manipulative sex under false pretenses while in an impaired, strongly driven state after humans intervened with her physiology. Now, I understand S'mellie was convinced her son was a child of the Dragon, which means Pierces wouldn't see him as family either, so, why have a name? However... The mother has to interact with her son and has to call him something, a NAME, ideally. Was she never addressing him by name during his short life for nearly all of winter? It's confusingly inconsistent and the underlying implications of his existence and death rubs me the wrong way.

Honestly, same. I've always dreamed of one day making my own comic, and artists like Songdog, Sleepy, etc up until recent inspired me enough to think that yeah, maybe I could do it. If they write fun little animal comics why can't I? So seeing Sleepy go down this path has been incredibly disappointing. It's hard to believe someone in that space with several successful comics already under their belt could be so insensitive and borderline childish both in their writing of this subject matter and response to criticism. But here we are..

For comic recommendations... thinking of ones that tackle SA tastefully off the top of my head isn't the easiest, but the first thing that comes to my mind is Songdog's "I didn't know." It has a much more grounded approach and doesn't disrespect the subject of sexual assault like The Dragon Slayer does. (So far at least)

I have seen some complaints about Songdog's response to criticism too, but that doesn't seem to leak into the narrative like with TDS. And while recently pages have kind of shifted to a POV that is less interesting in my opinion than when it was focusing on Little Miss, the first three quarters are honestly pretty good. I would however warn you that it doesn't only tackle SA but also religious trauma and if you are any brand of christian religiously/spiritually speaking it may not be for you. As someone who was raised christian with some religious trauma of my own I think it is a very grounded, even realistic take on the religious themes but I can easily see a religious person taking offense with the portrayal of the darker side of christian-based religions/churches. It works so well, in fact, that it's shocking to me how Sleepy and Songdog are friends when they seemingly have such opposite levels of understanding the SA topics..

I may have to think to recall more recommendations.. but I also have heard good things about "Follow your heart" by NightTheKitten. And when I skimmed some of it, I noted that at the very least it has much clearer, more straightforward warnings/CW labels! Heavy subject matter for a warriors comic, but at least from what I heard it handles it better. Can't really confirm that though.

While her announcement is by no means taking accountability and in fact seems to be doing a lot of blaming/vaguely insinuating she only cares that some fellow comic artists on CF have blocked her.. (and by result, some yesmen are bashing said creators for daaarring to do so which is just gross) if she by chance happens to look back at some criticisms and the work as a whole for a bit, that's probably, ultimately for the better.

If, and this is a big IF she does genuinely want to reconsider her writing, that would be good! We will see if that really happens and I might be hesitant to have that much hope but hey, it very well could happen. I'll give benefit of the doubt here just one more time, and try not to assume the poor wording of the announcement is all to consider as far as intent goes. Mostly because I'm too tired to dig into it and be mad about it, despite fully being able to see and understand that there's problems with insinuations in that announcement itself as well. It should also be considered she's talking out of defense and emotion. Maybe some time to think will help her distance the impulse to be defensive from considering the writing from an objective standpoint. And additionally, could be beneficial in concerns to mental health/burnout. Because as much as we see that TDS is deserving of a critical eye, receiving criticisms constructive ir otherwise can be exhausting.

I am most interested in seeing if Sleepy WILL make an apology down the line for saying in a comment and otherwise implying that S'mile wasn't a victim and was actually consenting/consented to her sexual assault. Because with that being the one thing I feel actually has potential to be harmful in comparison to other narratuve slip-ups, actually acknowledging it and/or the other things she's flubbed will be the only thing that will redeem the comic to me personally, because at least then it would tangibly show actual change/willingness to admit and take accountability. Otherwise it just seems disingenuous.

What. The actual fuck. Again I'm tired so not going to go into my thoughts on this to the full extent but good God Sleepy, what the FUCK are you on about. "I hate doing this to poor dandy" then DONT Jesus. "Manipulating women into giving theor consent" THAT ISN'T CONSENT!! IF YOU MANIPULATE AND PRESSURE SOMEONE INTO SEX IT'S NOT CONSENTUAL!! She just won't shut up but that makes it all the clearer she doesn't know what consent is or what she's talking about. NO research was put into ANY of this subject matter and it's GLARINGLY obvious. Shameful. "Inplied dubious consent," dubcon, is NOT the proper terms to use here this is SO insensitive and awful. This is far beyond "implied" or "dubious", my god. It makes me imagine, what if one of Sleepy's viewers went through this and read this comment, seeing her basically conflate what could be a very similar trauma they experienced to "consent" in any regard. This is sick. I sincerely hope no one with similar experience to what S'mile or Dandy are portrayed to have gone through sees that.