Roc Upchurch Off "Rat Queens" Following Domestic Abuse Arrest

[Don C]

If Upchurch does something in a completely different genre then perhaps people might not realize it's him. Or he may just take some time off.

[ysemaj]

Quite sad to hear. Not too sure how I feel about Rat Queens continuing without Upchurch because his art makes the comic flow so well. This makes me think of Nowhere Men where the artist, Bellagarde has some serious personal issues which stopped the comic. Obviously domestic abuse and being in a really bad and awful place in terms of Bellagarde are two separate things but I respect Stephenson so much for realising a comic series is a team effort and without a key component it can't work. I will pick up the first few issues with the new artist but not sure how far I could go with it. When 'Fables' has different artists for side-stories I never feel truly invested in them because Buckingham's art is so distinctive and I feel as if this will happen with Rat Queens. Really don't want it to because it's one of the best comics out there at the moment.

[ultimatesecurity]

Violence and abuse is never okay, no exceptions.

Glad you feel that way considering his wife attacked him. The "no hitting" lecture is not gender-specific.

[TotalSnorefest]

Glad you feel that way considering his wife attacked him. The "no hitting" lecture is not gender-specific.

Yeah agreed on that last part. That's actually partly why I included that line, so nobody could be like "oh so it's okay if a woman hits a man?" Neither is okay, ever. It's not even a gender issue, gender equality does not mean everyone can now hit everyone, it means the opposite. At first I'd written something like "no matter which party instigated it" but I didn't want it to come across as if Upchurch's response (violence) would somehow be justified as retaliation to (lesser) violence. (Assuming that's really what happened). Like I said we don't (need to) know everything, the whole thing is already sad enough for everyone involved without some idiot like me on a forum going "well I clearly have all the answers."
That's why I hope everyone involved will be able to receive any (professional) support they might need, hopefully they can soon turn their focus towards recovery and reflection.

To be honest I was kinda hesistant to responding at first because the last thing the people involved need is people like me talking about their lives on a public forum as if we know anything about the situation. If anyone involved is reading this, I'm sorry if that looks like my intent here, and I wish you good luck. But yeah wrote a comment and this second post is mostly because someone quoted me. Think I'll pull out of this thread from here on out, unless someone asks for a response or whatever. Think I've said (more than) what I wanted to say already.

[aquitaine]

This is a very sad situation all around but I think the thing that is the worst is the judgemental 'guilty until proven innocent if you're a man' crowd that has so much sway in the comics community these days. None of us know what really happened yet, but if this guy turned himself in and admitted what he did, I think that means his account of the story should be taken seriously.

A few pages back a poster said that it's never ok to hit a woman. But why are SO many of these social justice types perfectly ok with a woman hitting a man? Why is it ALWAYS the man who is arrested and almost never the woman? Why are people SO quick to blame and demonize a person because of their gender? If it comes out that he IS making things up, fine then, attack away, but none of you know so lay off the guy until the facts are out. Stop hating because of gender. If you support gender equality, and you should, then you should start treating men and women the same when it comes to untried court cases instead of automatically assuming guilt on the part of the man. Attitudes like that are why people doubt that folks really want equality. There is no special treatment if everyone is equal.

[Hero]

This is a very sad situation all around but I think the thing that is the worst is the judgemental 'guilty until proven innocent if you're a man' crowd that has so much sway in the comics community these days. None of us know what really happened yet, but if this guy turned himself in and admitted what he did, I think that means his account of the story should be taken seriously.

A few pages back a poster said that it's never ok to his a woman. But why are SO many of these social justice types perfectly ok with a woman hitting a man? Why is it ALWAYS the man who is arrested and almost never the woman? Why are people SO quick to blame and demonize a person because of their gender? If it comes out that he IS making things up, fine then, attack away, but none of you know so lay off the guy until the facts are out. Stop hating because of gender. If you support gender equality, and you should, then you should start treating men and women the same when it comes to untried court cases instead of automatically assuming guilt on the part of the man. Attitudes like that are why people doubt that folks really want equality. There is no special treatment if everyone is equal.

Applause...

[MrStatham]

Hitting a woman is never acceptable, BUT, i think there's a clear line between a serial wife-beater and someone who unfortunately lost his head in the heat of the moment. So, excuse me if i prefer to stay out of the lynching mob.

There's the implication that this is not the first time he's lost his temper, given the article mentions they were separated, so there must be reasons behind that. And, like it or not, there are more precedents for male-on-female domestic abuse than vice-versa. That's not to suggest his wife is all sweetness and light, but this sounds like an instance of a relatively common occurrence; 'Attacked' can also mean any number of things - physically, verbally or emotionally - and I don't think the vagueness of his response in contrast to what's noted down in the police report helps, since it makes his treatment of her just sound utterly disproportionate. So.. Yeah. I can understand the mentality behind any mob that might spring up here - even if I don't agree with it, and.. Well, the fact that he lost his head 'only the once' is meaningless. He could have killed her, after all, and I don't think we'd be hand-waving justifications then.

[aquitaine]

There's the implication that this is not the first time he's lost his temper, given the article mentions they were separated, so there must be reasons behind that.

I don't know where you're reading that implication. How on earth can you imply that he's done this before from the fact that they're separated? There are literally millions of possible reasons a couple can separate. Absolutely NOTHING about their separation implies, proves, or insinuates that he has struck her before. Assumptions of guilt based on a person's sex like this is exactly what I was talking about above.

And, like it or not, there are more precedents for male-on-female domestic abuse than vice-versa.

And there are numerous reasons for that, including but not limited to:
- Cops, lawyers, courts, and the public don't take battered men seriously. Men are told almost from birth that they need to 'be a man' and 'grow some balls' and 'suck it up'. Male victims are laughed at, marginalized, and shamed to the point where most male victims refuse to report anything, and the few that do are almost never taken seriously, and sometimes it even backfires, with a sexist public assuming that HE was the violent one. Right leaning folks laugh at men who report abuse, and left leaning people pretend that they don't exist or marginalize them when they come out with their stories.
- Many statistics, especially rape statistics, don't even count male victims on their charts
- People like you assuming guilt on the part of the male, even when the woman is the aggressor, sending the man to jail for the high crime of being assaulted by a woman.

the fact that he lost his head 'only the once' is meaningless.

In the eyes of the law and those who study criminal behavior there is a significant difference between a first time offender and a habitual offender. So it may be meaningless to YOU, but the law and criminal behaviourists disagree with you.

[Don C]

I don't know where you're reading that implication. How on earth can you imply that he's done this before from the fact that they're separated? There are literally millions of possible reasons a couple can separate. Absolutely NOTHING about their separation implies, proves, or insinuates that he has struck her before. Assumptions of guilt based on a person's sex like this is exactly what I was talking about above.

Excerpts from a blog post by Upchurch's wife:

"I’m in shock that I actually called the police this time anyhow."

"In these last few months my soon to be ex husband has ripped me to shreds both physically, mentally, and emotionally."

"...[A]nd though Roc likes to say my “hits” hurt too and again not justifying it I may get a face smack in compared to his hour long beat down or the time he repeatedly punched me in my face in front of his mother while holding our daughter."

The full post:

http://webcache.googleusercontent.co...&ct=clnk&gl=uk

[Daymare]

If this were a female artist would she have lost her ability to work on her own book?
Would it be the same outcome is he were in a gay relationship and he punched his husband or partner?
What if it really was a dual abusive relationship and he was also abused (I know may females that can do some damage)?
Everyone has a judgement and that is fine, and while I am not even within any right to question the veracity of any claim, I will say that if anyone posts all this personal business on the web in an attempt to spread the word and once the story breaks they remove it all when it can actually shed light on the situation or have the honestly behind it investigated you do have to somewhat question the intent.
I have seen this play out with others in my life it is is not always as black and white as it may seem. Now this plays out in the jury of public opinion and everyone has a side now save for those that lived the event.
Sad situation no matter what though for all involved.

[JaggedFel]

Excerpts from a blog post by Upchurch's wife:

"I’m in shock that I actually called the police this time anyhow."

"In these last few months my soon to be ex husband has ripped me to shreds both physically, mentally, and emotionally."

"...[A]nd though Roc likes to say my “hits” hurt too and again not justifying it I may get a face smack in compared to his hour long beat down or the time he repeatedly punched me in my face in front of his mother while holding our daughter."

The full post:

http://webcache.googleusercontent.co...&ct=clnk&gl=uk

Well that is all fine but they are in divorce proceedings and probably a custody dispute so her story may not exactly be non bias. I am not saying he did not abuse her often, I am just saying her word alone should hardly be treated as the Gospel Truth.

[ultimatesecurity]

There's the implication that this is not the first time he's lost his temper, given the article mentions they were separated, so there must be reasons behind that ... Well, the fact that he lost his head 'only the once' is meaningless.

Until convicted of a crime, let the man do his job. If he's stepping away by choice to deal with personal issues with his wife or himself, then that's admirable. The way the announcement is worded I doubt that's the case. If he's off the book for P.R. reasons and social pressure, then that's sad. This information doesn't affect my desire to read this book in the slightest, so why remove him. He's a good artist, and should be able to remain on his own book.

However, he should probably stay away from his future ex-wife. Unfortunately, that's hard to do when you have kids together. Speaking of, that's who is really going to lose here--the kid. Parents going at each other and getting divorced and an unemployed father.

Let the man do his job so he can get divorced and take care of his kid.

[JaggedFel]

Kids Plural, (1 Daughter, 2 Sons)

[mattbearpig]

I really hate it when people whose work I admire end up doing some really deplorable shit. That being said, he deserves a fair trial just like everyone else who commits a crime in this country. I'm not sure how the royalties and whatnot work out for this, but I'll still be buying the 2nd, 3rd and any of volumes of the series, provided the quality of them is still up to snuff. I don't feel it's right to cut off Mr. Wiebe financially over a situation he had zero control over as long as he's still putting out a quality product with the artists he works with from here on out.

[Dr. Cheesesteak]

A few pages back a poster said that it's never ok to hit a woman. But why are SO many of these social justice types perfectly ok with a woman hitting a man? Why is it ALWAYS the man who is arrested and almost never the woman? Why are people SO quick to blame and demonize a person because of their gender? If it comes out that he IS making things up, fine then, attack away, but none of you know so lay off the guy until the facts are out. Stop hating because of gender. If you support gender equality, and you should, then you should start treating men and women the same when it comes to untried court cases instead of automatically assuming guilt on the part of the man. Attitudes like that are why people doubt that folks really want equality. There is no special treatment if everyone is equal.

Here's the thing, ppl use "gender equality" as some catch-all term that covers every aspect of life. But let's be honest w/ ourselves folks - there will never be gender equality in regards to every aspect of life, nor should there be.

I'm all for lawful, political, economical, procedural, etc equality for everyone. Your gender/sex should not determine how much you get paid, where your application for jobX/programX sits compared to other applications, how the law sees you, etc. I truly am. I'm also against pre-judging or hastily generalizing/concluding things based on sex/gender when I'm not aware of the situation/circumstances.

But as long as one sex has high amounts of estrogen and another high amounts of testosterone, there will be no social gender equality, for good and bad.

We cannot control our physiology (can we? I'm behind on stem cell news). Men are generally better suited to "provide" physical labor/tasks - we are naturally larger, build muscle more efficiently, have stronger bones, etc. Women have a certain, I dunno, special supply/demand to them for bearing life - it takes 9 months for a women to produce a child during which time she can't bear or prime other children, while it takes 5 seconds for a man to contribute to the conception (10 minutes for me! nyuck nyuck). Basically, women are at a premium in contributing to mankind's continuance, men aren't. Women are essentially "more valuable". That will always affect how cultures/societies see women...and men.

The various physical capabilities/limitations are generally unique to each sex (I won't even get into the logical/emotional aspect). Due to this, certain cultural/social expectations will always be placed on each sex/gender. As long as the sexes are blatantly distinguishable, so too will the genders be, culturally and socially. I mean, I don't think the idea of "saving the women and children first" will ever die off, nor should it. At the same time, viewing women as an inferior "species" will probably never die off either, but that obviously should.

Now, this is all a fairly neanderthal-like view of it, sure, but how does this all relate to why it's ok for women to hit men, but not vice versa? Well, I'll just say I think it's not ok for anyone to hit their significant other (all sorts of psychological factors play in. But I mean, even 2 big buff gay men who are a couple shouldn't beat each other). hell, I'm against fighting in general unless a life is threatened, it's some official sanctioned event, or between 2 ppl of equal size. And therein lies the rub. The whole belief of why it's not ok for men to hit women really stems from that - size. Sure, it's a cultural thing, but it's from conditioning over generations that since men are generally seen as physically superior, that they should not hit the "helpless, inferior" women.

That is also why I think it is ok for women to hit men...as long as the woman is weaker and smaller! A man can always just, you know, grab her to stop her. Of course, there are other variables - training, age, etc. Honestly, for me, there's no universal rule to it for me besides "pick on someone your own size" (and of course, simply never hit your significant other). But, "size" can refer to various things (such as ability/training. even though I say "pick one someone your own size", if a capable smaller person wants to fight a larger person, then by all means).

Plus there's all sorts of cultural/social conditioning/indoctrination of how certain genders are supposed to act/feel/think towards/against each other, see themselves in respect to the other gender, etc... god, so much impossible work across generations has to be done to have both genders be seen as truly equal.

I'm w/ TotalSnorefest on this, I don't have all the answers. Domestic abuse is always wrong , regardless of who is hitting who. But the cultural/social perception of physical abuse between sexes/genders will almost certainly always be definitive to (larger) men hitting (smaller) women as being wrong, it's ok for women to hit men, etc etc.

I dunno. For me, "acceptable" inter(or even intra-)-gender fighting (not necessarily domestic abuse...let's say it's a bar fight!) is kind of like Potter Stewart and his idea of porn - I know it when I see it. Ronda Rousey beating on Bruno Mars is wrong. Ronda Rousey beating on Liam Neeson is laughable - he can do something about it. All assuming she isn't pulling off some bone-breaking maneuvers!

In regards to sexism in general, I have a kind of I'll just say this: I don't think there's anything wrong w/ me baking cookies and offering them to mostly women at work, and not just the women I'm trying to bed. I do think there's something wrong w/ women complaining about the Philae scientist's "sexist" shirt. Whatever that says about me, says about me.

I think I've probably said about all I can think of, atm...

TLDR:
in response to Aquitaine, I agree - all sexes/genders should be treated equally, legally at least. But there are reasons why they aren't seen/treated equally culturally. some of it may be justifiable.