In an earlier comic Rick stated that he only knew 2 emotions "angry" and "not angry". I guess the trauma of this froggy incident sparked some new emotions in him.
I noticed it on the hood of my car as I was driving home from work one evening. It seemed to be hanging on just fine up to about 40 mph, and then suddenly, it was gone!
Which is kinda surprising, since up to that point I was technically traveling at a "snail's pace"... Ba-dum-bump. I'll be here all week until 2013 shows up in the copyright date.
You know how dopey, annoying, and unjust it is when a person takes something from you by shouting "dibs!" as if that gave them some sort of universal authority? It's exactly that unjust, annoying, and dopey to claim that women are somehow arbiters of emotional orthodoxy.
On a slightly I didn't embarassing note, I must confess that when I saw the trailer for the new Star Trek movie I didn't cry, I did feel some arousal. When I told my wife, she shook her head and (again) questioned marrying a Trekkie nerd...
Definitely a classic. I cried from laughing. And the best part is visualizing Rick going through those emotions as that short scene plays out on the road.
Every part of my being wants to believe that Rick's story is true, if only to lend credibility to the wondrous mental image of a grown man just driving along and then randomly bursting out with "Froggy!"
Is that a shout out to web comic "Freefall", or only a coincidence?
There's a paradox in respecting all animate living things and eating e.g. hot chicken wings, although you can argue that the chicken doesn't really -use- its wings anyway.
On the other hand, there's every reason to suppose that Rick doesn't often -use- some parts of his anatomy that he would be sorry to lose, nevertheless.
The point is that I'm on the side of the frog in this story, although I should also say that I've never eaten frog and I might change my opinion if I did. But I and everyone around me could eat frog if they wanted. They mostly don't, and that tells you something about frog.
There are probably a bunch of human road accident casualties caused when someone tries to not kill an animal, as well as plenty where an animal, such as a pet dog or livestock, falls into water, and one or more humans drown while rescuing the animal or each other.
But it also isn't unusual to see an animal carcase smeared into the road when you're driving. I prefer to believe that these represent the right choice made painfully in difficult circumstances, rather than emotional indifference.
"women are somehow arbiters of emotional orthodoxy"
I totally agree. How is it that those least in control of their emotions get to determine what normal emotional responses should be. That's like gathering up a bunch of drunk drivers, while they are still smashed, and having them determine the rules of the road for the rest of us.
January 8, 2013
Reader Comments (34)
Just cracked me up so much I read it out to my husband.
Also, I now have a desire to shout "Froggy!"
I blame you.
Panel 4 had me holding my sides.
That was terrible. I feel sad now :(
In an earlier comic Rick stated that he only knew 2 emotions "angry" and "not angry". I guess the trauma of this froggy incident sparked some new emotions in him.
That last line is pure comedy gold.
I had a similar experience with a small snail.
I noticed it on the hood of my car as I was driving home from work one evening.
It seemed to be hanging on just fine up to about 40 mph,
and then suddenly, it was gone!
Which is kinda surprising, since up to that point I was technically traveling at a "snail's pace"...
Ba-dum-bump. I'll be here
all weekuntil 2013 shows up in the copyright date.FROGGY!!!
Also, Rick's analogy in panel four is perfect.
@Jason - Actually I think this falls under "Not Angry"
Hey, you gave Missy some lipstick in this comic. Subtle. Also ... is she losing weight?
The second frame is an absolute gem. I identify 100% with Rick there.
I think I would have shouted "Frogger" instead. Then made the sounds.
suprise, delight, panic, horror, and regret in the space of 5 seconds. you just described me in a public restroom.
You know how dopey, annoying, and unjust it is when a person takes something from you by shouting "dibs!" as if that gave them some sort of universal authority? It's exactly that unjust, annoying, and dopey to claim that women are somehow arbiters of emotional orthodoxy.
NEW classic! LOVED IT!
On a slightly I didn't embarassing note, I must confess that when I saw the trailer for the new Star Trek movie I didn't cry, I did feel some arousal. When I told my wife, she shook her head and (again) questioned marrying a Trekkie nerd...
I'm in touch with my relatives exactly the same way. I now have something in common with Rick. Damn you.
The last line is how I do it, too.
Definitely a classic. I cried from laughing. And the best part is visualizing Rick going through those emotions as that short scene plays out on the road.
Froggy! :(
That is EXACTLY how I'd react. Oh dear, poor froggy.
Well, it looks like someone wasn't very good at playing Frogger.
D: Froggy noooo!
)':
Every part of my being wants to believe that Rick's story is true, if only to lend credibility to the wondrous mental image of a grown man just driving along and then randomly bursting out with "Froggy!"
There is no shame in crying, but there can be shame in what makes you cry."
Priceless!
But... was the frog okay?
'There's no shame in crying, but there can be shame in what makes you cry.' Brilliant.
Panel one deserves to be its own t-shirt. And panel four is as good a final punch line as you've ever had. Nicely done.
laffs on all four panels, two of them uncontrollably. way to control my emotions...
An upbeat punchline for Rick?!?
Is that a shout out to web comic "Freefall", or only a coincidence?
There's a paradox in respecting all animate living things and eating e.g. hot chicken wings, although you can argue that the chicken doesn't really -use- its wings anyway.
On the other hand, there's every reason to suppose that Rick doesn't often -use- some parts of his anatomy that he would be sorry to lose, nevertheless.
The point is that I'm on the side of the frog in this story, although I should also say that I've never eaten frog and I might change my opinion if I did. But I and everyone around me could eat frog if they wanted. They mostly don't, and that tells you something about frog.
There are probably a bunch of human road accident casualties caused when someone tries to not kill an animal, as well as plenty where an animal, such as a pet dog or livestock, falls into water, and one or more humans drown while rescuing the animal or each other.
But it also isn't unusual to see an animal carcase smeared into the road when you're driving. I prefer to believe that these represent the right choice made painfully in difficult circumstances, rather than emotional indifference.
is it a true story?
The comment by @kehereva deserves a comment
"women are somehow arbiters of emotional orthodoxy"
I totally agree. How is it that those least in control of their emotions get to determine what normal emotional responses should be. That's like gathering up a bunch of drunk drivers, while they are still smashed, and having them determine the rules of the road for the rest of us.
Note to self:
Make sure I am not standing between @John and @khereva!
;-)
@Robert Carnegie, what drugs are you on, dude? And can I get them over the counter?
I'm now picturing Rick in his car, looking at a tiny tree frog with a big smile on his face. :-D
Rick smiling...weird. But at the same time, my day is now brightened.