Robot 6

Reader scandalized by exposure to naked Zits


One of the "Zits" strips in question

One of the "Zits" strips in question

You have to hand it to readers of the incredibly shrinking comics section: Many of them have a clear vision for those pages, even if most newspaper editors don't.

The funnies largely go ignored in newsrooms, at least until word comes down that pages must be axed or, else, there's a once-in-a-blue-moon announcement that a cartoonist or syndicate is ending a strip. But those readers who turn to Cathy or Hagar or Rex Morgan each day know exactly what they want (usually that's for the page to look the same as it always has).

Take, for instance, Ted Trump of Orleans, Massachusetts. When he opens the Cape Cod Times, he expects to be entertained by Zits -- not to be confronted with the type of scandalous nudity that's been the trademark of Love Is ... for the past four decades.

As best as I can tell, the reader was offended by this three-day run (SFW!) of Jerry Scott and Jim Borgman's Zits, a nod to the long-running, single-panel comic originated by Kim Grove. If you're somehow unfamiliar with Love Is ..., it's an often-difficult-to-stomach ode to, well, love, that stars two characters who, despite their nudity, display no secondary sexual features. Except for their hair and eyelashes, they're indistinguishable from each other.

So for three days last week, Scott and Borgman adapted two of their characters to that visual style for a series of gags titled "Love Isn't ..." Harmless enough, right? Wrong.

Trump writes that he found the strips "to be inappropriate and offensive," and goes on to suggest the Times' editors "get to work monitoring such comic strip authors by not accepting this sort of deviation from enjoyable and proper comics."

What's more -- and you knew there would be more -- he asserts the cartoonists "should be penalized for submitting such inappropriate and offensive material in the future by a substantial monetary withholding."

That's right, dock their pay!

While the editors of the Cape Cod Times calculate how many pennies to deduct under Trump's plan, I'll be busy filing for reparations for a lifetime of exposure to Love Is ...


11 Comments

They can't all be Marmadukes

Trump is probably offended by the characterization of people in his demographic: folks without any visible sex organs.

That "SFW!" warning cracked me up. :)

We actually got an angry call at work the other day about that strip. Guy was claiming we were putting child porn on the funnies pages.

>> If you're somehow unfamiliar with Love Is ..., it's an often-difficult-to-stomach ode to, well, love, that stars two characters who, despite their nudity, display no secondary sexual features. Except for their hair and eyelashes, they're indistinguishable from each other.>>

Not quite!

Careful study reveals that Love Is Girl has nipples. Love Is Guy has none.

Clearly, everyone who's ever bought a newspaper with LOVE IS in it should go to jail.

kdb

I wonder what these enjoyable comics are? And isn't 'appropriate comic' an oxymoron? Humor depends on subverting the expected. That's why you can't tell the same joke to the same people twice. No surprise = no funny.

Mind you, I guess people who are still able to get a chuckle from Hi and Lois are beyond help anyway.

Steve

Ted Trump clearly wasn't reading the comics section back in 1972, when I first encountered the "Love Is" panels. I was six in 1972. Heck, even my dentist and pediatrician had the occasional "Love is..." panels taped to their doorways.

We, as a society, are clearly doomed.

Sadly, this is a situation where a Simpsons quote is unavoidable. "It's about two naked eight-year-olds who are married."

When I was a kid, I figured they were supposed to be Adam and Eve before the Fall.

My wife was baffled. Having never seen or heard of "Love is..." it was just baffling to her.

Baffling I say! (apologies for the poor diction)

Leave a Comment

 







Advertise here!

Browse the Robot 6 Archives

Subscribe to Robot 6