1650 "Baby"

This forum is for the individual discussion thread that goes with each new comic.

Moderators: Moderators General, Prelates, Magistrates

User avatar
Wee Red Bird
Posts: 189
Joined: Wed Apr 24, 2013 11:50 am UTC
Location: In a tree

1650 "Baby"

Postby Wee Red Bird » Wed Mar 02, 2016 7:53 am UTC

Image

Alt: Does it get taller first and then widen, or does it reach full width before getting taller, or alternate, or what?

Its the 50 pictures per day the parents post on social media that confuses me. Some of them complain how others post too many pictures of their sprog, but go just as crazy when they pop one out.

User avatar
rhomboidal
Posts: 791
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2011 5:25 pm UTC
Contact:

Re: 1650 "Baby"

Postby rhomboidal » Wed Mar 02, 2016 8:11 am UTC

I usually say that the baby looks like one of the parents, but not the other.

Sow seeds of doubt to take the spotlight off myself.

Yu_p
Posts: 51
Joined: Wed Oct 12, 2011 9:00 am UTC

Re: 1650 "Baby"

Postby Yu_p » Wed Mar 02, 2016 8:32 am UTC

Related: http://jenniferdrawscomics.com/sprinkle ... pe-babies/

Babies are social landmines.

User avatar
da Doctah
Posts: 927
Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2012 6:27 am UTC

Re: 1650 "Baby"

Postby da Doctah » Wed Mar 02, 2016 8:33 am UTC

Not too far off on what he actually ended up saying. There's some comedian (Billy Crystal, maybe?) who said he always struggled with the right thing to say when someone showed him a really ugly kid, or risk telling the parent "it looks just like you" when it turned out to be a new adoption. He finally settled on "Say, that is a baby!" Proud parents were then free to interpret it as a suitable compliment.

User avatar
Neil_Boekend
Posts: 3220
Joined: Fri Mar 01, 2013 6:35 am UTC
Location: Yes.

Re: 1650 "Baby"

Postby Neil_Boekend » Wed Mar 02, 2016 9:21 am UTC

"Hi Stormaggedon, Dark Lord of All."
Mikeski wrote:A "What If" update is never late. Nor is it early. It is posted precisely when it should be.

patzer's signature wrote:
flicky1991 wrote:I'm being quoted too much!

he/him/his

Mikeski
Posts: 1042
Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2008 7:24 am UTC
Location: Minnesota, USA

Re: 1650 "Baby"

Postby Mikeski » Wed Mar 02, 2016 9:27 am UTC

If the word "cute" vanished from the English language, about 75% of the population would be speechless in the presence of a baby.

User avatar
Wee Red Bird
Posts: 189
Joined: Wed Apr 24, 2013 11:50 am UTC
Location: In a tree

Re: 1650 "Baby"

Postby Wee Red Bird » Wed Mar 02, 2016 10:48 am UTC

A question to the parents out there.
Do you actively seek out awkward among us just to see how we react?
Then you press us with the question "do you want to hold them?"

User avatar
Echo244
Posts: 511
Joined: Wed May 20, 2015 9:49 am UTC
Location: Ping! Ping! Ping! Ping!

Re: 1650 "Baby"

Postby Echo244 » Wed Mar 02, 2016 11:15 am UTC

Wee Red Bird wrote:Alt: Does it get taller first and then widen, or does it reach full width before getting taller, or alternate, or what?


Both at once, in a ratio that depends which pipeline you connect it to. Milk (human), mostly taller. HFCS, mostly wider.

Anyway. Yay for babies.
Unstoppable force of nature. That means she/her/hers.
Has committed an act of treason.

User avatar
da Doctah
Posts: 927
Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2012 6:27 am UTC

Re: 1650 "Baby"

Postby da Doctah » Wed Mar 02, 2016 11:50 am UTC

Mikeski wrote:If the word "cute" vanished from the English language, about 75% of the population would be speechless in the presence of a baby.

And 51% of the population would be unable to describe shoes.

User avatar
cellocgw
Posts: 1953
Joined: Sat Jun 21, 2008 7:40 pm UTC

Re: 1650 "Baby"

Postby cellocgw » Wed Mar 02, 2016 12:30 pm UTC

Mikeski wrote:If the word "cute" vanished from the English language, about 75% of the population would be speechless in the presence of a baby.


Exactly. Unless you've got DNA in the game, "Awwww, isn't he/she/xe/it cute?" is safest.
https://app.box.com/witthoftresume
Former OTTer
Vote cellocgw for President 2020. #ScienceintheWhiteHouse http://cellocgw.wordpress.com
"The Planck length is 3.81779e-33 picas." -- keithl
" Earth weighs almost exactly π milliJupiters" -- what-if #146, note 7

User avatar
Neil_Boekend
Posts: 3220
Joined: Fri Mar 01, 2013 6:35 am UTC
Location: Yes.

Re: 1650 "Baby"

Postby Neil_Boekend » Wed Mar 02, 2016 12:42 pm UTC

Somehow parents tend to dislike honesty when it is an ugly baby.
Mikeski wrote:A "What If" update is never late. Nor is it early. It is posted precisely when it should be.

patzer's signature wrote:
flicky1991 wrote:I'm being quoted too much!

he/him/his

User avatar
Echo244
Posts: 511
Joined: Wed May 20, 2015 9:49 am UTC
Location: Ping! Ping! Ping! Ping!

Re: 1650 "Baby"

Postby Echo244 » Wed Mar 02, 2016 12:45 pm UTC

So comment on other positive qualities.

"My, what a delicious-looking baby!"

Gets you put to the bottom of the emergency-childcare list. ;-P
Unstoppable force of nature. That means she/her/hers.
Has committed an act of treason.

User avatar
Neil_Boekend
Posts: 3220
Joined: Fri Mar 01, 2013 6:35 am UTC
Location: Yes.

Re: 1650 "Baby"

Postby Neil_Boekend » Wed Mar 02, 2016 1:07 pm UTC

Echo244 wrote:So comment on other positive qualities.

"My, what a delicious-looking baby!"

Gets you put to the bottom of the emergency-childcare list. ;-P

The Onion wrote:WALDEN, TN—While family members stood silently by and did nothing, visiting aunt Debbie Koeler proclaimed her desire to consume the "tiny little toesies" of her nephew Daniel, a powerless infant less than one-fifth her size, after the child's christening Sunday. "Who's my little sugar pie? I could just eat you right up," Koeler threatened as she held the vulnerable child above her cavernous mouth and simulated the impending act of cannibalism on his tiny, dangling legs. "I've gotcha! I've gotcha! Yes I do! Yes I do!" Koeler then returned the confused and speechless newborn to the bouncy seat, prodded his abdomen, and disappeared behind her own hands.
Mikeski wrote:A "What If" update is never late. Nor is it early. It is posted precisely when it should be.

patzer's signature wrote:
flicky1991 wrote:I'm being quoted too much!

he/him/his

User avatar
The Moomin
Posts: 343
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2010 6:59 am UTC
Location: Yorkshire

Re: 1650 "Baby"

Postby The Moomin » Wed Mar 02, 2016 1:10 pm UTC

You're a baby. Oh yes you are.
I possibly don't pay enough attention to what's going on.
I help make architect's dreams flesh.

dtilque
Posts: 133
Joined: Sat Oct 11, 2008 5:53 am UTC
Location: Nogero

Re: 1650 "Baby"

Postby dtilque » Wed Mar 02, 2016 1:23 pm UTC

what OS is it running?

That's a nice child process you spawned.
Whenever visually representing the universe, it's important to include a picture of Saturn!
-- Tom the Dancing Bug

User avatar
cellocgw
Posts: 1953
Joined: Sat Jun 21, 2008 7:40 pm UTC

Re: 1650 "Baby"

Postby cellocgw » Wed Mar 02, 2016 1:31 pm UTC

dtilque wrote:what OS is it running?

That's a nice child process you spawned.
.... "be a shame if something happened to its process allocation."

Or, "It's always handy to have a daemon running in the foreground of your life."
https://app.box.com/witthoftresume
Former OTTer
Vote cellocgw for President 2020. #ScienceintheWhiteHouse http://cellocgw.wordpress.com
"The Planck length is 3.81779e-33 picas." -- keithl
" Earth weighs almost exactly π milliJupiters" -- what-if #146, note 7

LtPowers
Posts: 37
Joined: Fri Sep 07, 2012 4:02 pm UTC

Re: 1650 "Baby"

Postby LtPowers » Wed Mar 02, 2016 1:48 pm UTC

Of all the options he ran through, I think Cueball landed on the best one.


Powers &8^]

Showsni
Posts: 104
Joined: Wed Sep 14, 2011 9:09 pm UTC

Re: 1650 "Baby"

Postby Showsni » Wed Mar 02, 2016 2:17 pm UTC

Do you need to say anything about it? Do you feel compelled when meeting a new person to make remarks about them?

marcosdumay
Posts: 3
Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2008 1:15 am UTC

Re: 1650 "Baby"

Postby marcosdumay » Wed Mar 02, 2016 2:19 pm UTC

In fact, it mostly alternates.

User avatar
Wee Red Bird
Posts: 189
Joined: Wed Apr 24, 2013 11:50 am UTC
Location: In a tree

Re: 1650 "Baby"

Postby Wee Red Bird » Wed Mar 02, 2016 2:21 pm UTC

Showsni wrote:Do you need to say anything about it? Do you feel compelled when meeting a new person to make remarks about them?

It's the parents fishing for complements by showing off their child by bringing it in to conversation.
Just like someone bringing up their new car hoping you'd say something positive about it.

User avatar
SDK
Posts: 675
Joined: Thu May 22, 2014 7:40 pm UTC
Location: Canada

Re: 1650 "Baby"

Postby SDK » Wed Mar 02, 2016 2:28 pm UTC

Just go for "What's his/her name?" followed by "Nice to meet you [insert name here]" with a tiny little handshake. Parents eat that stuff up, no compliments required.
The biggest number (63 quintillion googols in debt)

jewish_scientist
Posts: 953
Joined: Fri Feb 07, 2014 3:15 pm UTC

Re: 1650 "Baby"

Postby jewish_scientist » Wed Mar 02, 2016 2:37 pm UTC

Most of these statements are socially acceptable in the form of jokes. The 1st states the opposite of what is common knowledge, thereby creating verbal irony. The 2nd,4th, and 7th statements state the obvious, which is a way to create situational irony. The 3rd statement uses a rather complex form of humor called self-defamation a.k.a. playing the fool. By asking a question that is not applicable, the speaker is implying that he fundamentally does not understand babies. Like most cases of 'playing the fool', this has a more subtle meaning; that we, as a society, give significantly more importance to brands than we should. The 9th could be part of the setup for a joke. The parents will complete the punchline by asking, "What is my baby's job?". Two punchlines I came up with are:
- To be the cutest thing in the room.
- To make everyone jealous.

The 5th statement is unacceptable, because it refers to sex; a topic that should not be brought up casually. The 6th statement flat out says that the baby is flawed, which is almost never a good idea. Even if it said 5/5 stars, the speaker is passing judgement on a baby; again, this is almost never a good idea. The 8th statement, and the scroll-over text are similar to the 3rd in that they imply that the speaker does not have a fundamental understanding of babies; however, the they are too long, and complex to be humorous.


Neil_Boekend wrote:"Hi Greetings Stormaggedon, Dark Lord of All."


If you stress the words 'Stormaggedon, and 'Lord', then you may have used all three forms of irony at once.

Verbal Irony - By referring to a child, which is associated with innocence, by the title Dark Lord, which is associated with evil, you said the opposite of what you mean (unless you actually mean that the baby is evil, in which case we have other problems to deal with).
Situational Irony - If stressed correctly, the listeners' attention will be drawn to how formal you are being. It is very unusual for people to talk about babies in such a formal way.
Dramatic Irony - Listeners that had certain information would interpret this statement very differently than listeners who did not. This is commonly referred to as an inside joke.
"You are not running off with Cow-Skull Man Dracula Skeletor!"
-Socrates

dp2
Posts: 346
Joined: Wed Aug 18, 2010 3:06 pm UTC

Re: 1650 "Baby"

Postby dp2 » Wed Mar 02, 2016 2:39 pm UTC

Showsni wrote:Do you need to say anything about it? Do you feel compelled when meeting a new person to make remarks about them?

"Hi, it's nice to meet you" is arguably about the person. And generally from there, you ask questions to find out more about the person. I know a lot of us here have trouble with eye contact, but come on.
Wee Red Bird wrote:It's the parents fishing for complements by showing off their child by bringing it in to conversation.
Just like someone bringing up their new car hoping you'd say something positive about it.

Or someone introducing you to their new boyfriend. Oh, good for you, you encountered someone with complementary pheromones. Can't he just stand quietly in the corner or something?

ThemePark
Posts: 450
Joined: Fri Jun 27, 2008 5:42 pm UTC
Location: Århus, Denmark

Re: 1650 "Baby"

Postby ThemePark » Wed Mar 02, 2016 2:40 pm UTC

So I come here to post something and find myself beaten to the punch by The Moomin and Billy Crystal (assisted by da Doctah). Oh well.

Wee Red Bird wrote:Its the 50 pictures per day the parents post on social media that confuses me. Some of them complain how others post too many pictures of their sprog, but go just as crazy when they pop one out.

Now THIS I would like to see!
I have traveled from 1979 to be a member of the unofficial board Council of Elders. Phear M3

User avatar
HES
Posts: 4874
Joined: Fri May 10, 2013 7:13 pm UTC
Location: England

Re: 1650 "Baby"

Postby HES » Wed Mar 02, 2016 2:47 pm UTC

SDK wrote:Just go for "What's his/her name?" followed by "Nice to meet you [insert name here]" with a tiny little handshake.

But then you have to touch it.
He/Him/His Image

User avatar
Heimhenge
Posts: 249
Joined: Thu May 01, 2014 11:35 pm UTC

Re: 1650 "Baby"

Postby Heimhenge » Wed Mar 02, 2016 3:04 pm UTC

Oh great ... we were just starting to make some progress reducing the CBR, and now look what you've gone and done.

Zinho
Posts: 101
Joined: Fri Apr 08, 2011 3:23 pm UTC

Re: 1650 "Baby"

Postby Zinho » Wed Mar 02, 2016 3:16 pm UTC

Does it get taller first and then widen, or does it reach full width before getting taller, or alternate, or what?


We've had a couple of partial answers, I'd like to fill in the gaps a bit.

Newborns generally lose weight initially, due to the whole "figuring out how to digest their own food" thing.

Once that phase is over, growth spurts follow a generally consistent pattern:
  1. weight gain (radial growth)
  2. increased length/height (longitudinal growth)
  3. pause
  4. goto 1

For newborns the pause is short and the edges of the cycles bleed over each other, so it does kinda happen all at once. As children get older the pauses become much longer so the cycle is more noticeable.

FOARP
Posts: 84
Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2011 7:36 am UTC

Re: 1650 "Baby"

Postby FOARP » Wed Mar 02, 2016 3:28 pm UTC

Never mind. Once you actually have a kid you'll pretty much get it.

And then the weirdness that Randall engages in here will just seem strange to you.

User avatar
SDK
Posts: 675
Joined: Thu May 22, 2014 7:40 pm UTC
Location: Canada

Re: 1650 "Baby"

Postby SDK » Wed Mar 02, 2016 4:37 pm UTC

FOARP wrote:And then the weirdness that Randall engages in here will just seem strange to you.

Chemistry is great!
The biggest number (63 quintillion googols in debt)

User avatar
StClair
Posts: 405
Joined: Fri Feb 29, 2008 8:07 am UTC

Re: 1650 "Baby"

Postby StClair » Wed Mar 02, 2016 4:54 pm UTC

1. "You're a baby!" \o/

2. I have compared the process to a self-extracting archive, which takes several years and considerable resources to fully unpack itself into a functioning human.

User avatar
Soupspoon
You have done something you shouldn't. Or are about to.
Posts: 3718
Joined: Thu Jan 28, 2016 7:00 pm UTC
Location: 53-1

Re: 1650 "Baby"

Postby Soupspoon » Wed Mar 02, 2016 5:24 pm UTC

It might have been awkward to have said that the baby resembled it's father (the hair doubtless coming from the mother's side), given that this would also make it look like the primary orator of the piece...

User avatar
Quizatzhaderac
Posts: 1598
Joined: Sun Oct 19, 2008 5:28 pm UTC
Location: Space Florida

Re: 1650 "Baby"

Postby Quizatzhaderac » Wed Mar 02, 2016 5:54 pm UTC

rhomboidal wrote:I usually say that the baby looks like one of the parents, but not the other.
Are you sure you're the mother?

My mother once actually (when presented with my brother's best friend's baby) said the child looked just like my brother did as a baby. I suspect I get my awkwardness from my mrother.
da Doctah wrote: He finally settled on "Say, that is a baby!"
I first read that as "Is that a baby!" As a rhetorical question to express excitement, as opposed to an actual question to express confusion over the object's membership in the "baby" category.
Wee Red Bird wrote:A question to the parents out there.
Do you actively seek out awkward among us just to see how we react?
Then you press us with the question "do you want to hold them?"
No, I've never been asked to hold a baby (including related ones), and I'm as awkward as a, like, really awkward thing. Probably a sexism thing.
da Doctah wrote:And 51% of the population would be unable to describe shoes.
What my super-ego stops me from saying "wow! Those look over-priced and uncomfortable! And you'd still get the benefit to you appearance if you improved your posture instead!
Showsni wrote:Do you need to say anything about it? Do you feel compelled when meeting a new person to make remarks about them?
You do need to acknowledge it, but you don't need to actually say anything objectively about the baby (or new boyfriend or whatever). If fact I'd say something subjective is better (like it's nice (for me) to meet you) since they're encouraging you to begin socially bonding with the presented, and the only information the presentor can reasonably gain is about the change in relationship of the presented and presented to.

This is why gibberish and inanities work, because the relevant point is that your interacting with the baby.
The thing about recursion problems is that they tend to contain other recursion problems.

User avatar
Pfhorrest
Posts: 5005
Joined: Fri Oct 30, 2009 6:11 am UTC
Contact:

Re: 1650 "Baby"

Postby Pfhorrest » Wed Mar 02, 2016 6:08 pm UTC

jewish_scientist wrote:Verbal Irony - By referring to a child, which is associated with innocence, by the title Dark Lord, which is associated with evil, you said the opposite of what you mean (unless you actually mean that the baby is evil, in which case we have other problems to deal with).
Situational Irony - If stressed correctly, the listeners' attention will be drawn to how formal you are being. It is very unusual for people to talk about babies in such a formal way.
Dramatic Irony - Listeners that had certain information would interpret this statement very differently than listeners who did not. This is commonly referred to as an inside joke.

Which one of those is like rain on a wedding day?
Forrest Cameranesi, Geek of All Trades
"I am Sam. Sam I am. I do not like trolls, flames, or spam."
The Codex Quaerendae (my philosophy) - The Chronicles of Quelouva (my fiction)

User avatar
Quizatzhaderac
Posts: 1598
Joined: Sun Oct 19, 2008 5:28 pm UTC
Location: Space Florida

Re: 1650 "Baby"

Postby Quizatzhaderac » Wed Mar 02, 2016 7:05 pm UTC

Situational. The entire song is basically examples situational irony.
The thing about recursion problems is that they tend to contain other recursion problems.

rmsgrey
Posts: 3476
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2011 6:35 pm UTC

Re: 1650 "Baby"

Postby rmsgrey » Wed Mar 02, 2016 8:04 pm UTC

I also have trouble forming opinions about cushions...

User avatar
LaserGuy
Posts: 4558
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2009 5:33 pm UTC

Re: 1650 "Baby"

Postby LaserGuy » Wed Mar 02, 2016 9:39 pm UTC

I believe the best response is almost always "Can I tickle his/her toes?" For slightly older babies, asking for a high-five or fist bump is also acceptable.

What you should never, ever, do, is try to touch/pick up/kiss/whatever the baby without asking the parents first. Especially if it's a random stranger on the bus/train. This seems like something that should be obvious, but there's a surprisingly large number of people who seem to believe that they have every right to do this.

chompison
Posts: 11
Joined: Fri Feb 11, 2011 5:14 am UTC

Re: 1650 "Baby"

Postby chompison » Wed Mar 02, 2016 11:05 pm UTC

This happens from time to time at work. Anywhere else, I can just avoid being around people at all.

What I'd like to say: "It's noisy and it smells bad. Put it away."

What I end up with: Maybe a shrugging acknowledgement of its existence towards the people who brought it, with possibly noticeable contempt that they thought it was a good idea to bring it, then put headphones on, turn volume up and resume whatever I was doing.

Same thing when they bring pets.

Good way to get people to leave me alone in the future.

User avatar
owneroperator
Posts: 24
Joined: Tue Jul 22, 2014 6:56 am UTC

Re: 1650 "Baby"

Postby owneroperator » Wed Mar 02, 2016 11:14 pm UTC

Wee Red Bird wrote:"do you want to hold them?"


No thanks - I'm a vegetarian.

Aiwendil
Posts: 311
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2011 8:53 pm UTC
Contact:

Re: 1650 "Baby"

Postby Aiwendil » Thu Mar 03, 2016 12:24 am UTC

Wee Red Bird wrote:"do you want to hold them?"


Nah, I'm not really into Pokemon.

commodorejohn
Posts: 1129
Joined: Thu Dec 10, 2009 6:21 pm UTC
Location: Placerville, CA
Contact:

Re: 1650 "Baby"

Postby commodorejohn » Thu Mar 03, 2016 12:39 am UTC

Well now I desperately need a little onesie of this for my impending nephew.
"'Legacy code' often differs from its suggested alternative by actually working and scaling."
- Bjarne Stroustrup
www.commodorejohn.com - in case you were wondering, which you probably weren't.


Return to “Individual XKCD Comic Threads”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 28 guests