1534: Beer

|< < Prev Comic #1534 (June 5, 2015) Next > >|

Beer

Title text: Mmmm, this is such a positive experience! I feel no social pressure to enjoy it at all!

Explanation

Hairy offers Cueball some beer from his fridge, and Cueball takes the opportunity to suggest that people should admit that beer tastes bad and stop pretending to like it. Hairy berates Cueball for making such an affirmation, and Cueball admits defeat, deciding to drink the beer anyway and pretend to like it to play his part in what he perceives to be a mass delusion.

There are two possible interpretations of this comic. One is that Cueball is right and that no one really likes beer, and everyone is just pretending in order to fit in. The other is that Hairy actually likes beer, but Cueball fails to recognize that possibility, assumes Hairy is faking it, and plays along.

In the case where Cueball is correct, the comic would imply that beer doesn't actually taste good, and instead fits the definition of an acquired taste, with most people initially pretending to like beer to conform to social norms, and later internalizing this belief to prevent cognitive dissonance. The theory is that this dissonance is perpetuated by advertising and peer pressure, which present beer as a naturally pleasant beverage. In this interpretation, Cueball, having failed to break the mutual knowledge barrier, admits defeat and joins Hairy in pretending to enjoy beer.

The second case would mean that Cueball mistaken in assuming that nobody likes beer, either because he fails to empathize with those who have a different experience than his, or because he's heard from other people who also admitted not to like beer, and extrapolated that opinion to everyone (perhaps assuming that such admissions are underrepresented due to the cultural bias in favor of drinking).

The title text expands on Cueball's perspective, stating (sarcastically) that he feels no peer pressure to like beer. The pressure to drink beer or other alcoholic drinks is a well-known phenomenon, especially among adolescents and young adults.

Transcript

[Cueball and Hairy standing in front of a fridge.]

Hairy: What do you drink? Stouts? Lagers?

Cueball: Uh, anything's fine.

[Cueball and Hairy holding beers and Hairy is drinking.]

Cueball: ...do you ever think maybe we should just admit that all beer tastes kind of bad and everyone's just pretending?

[Now Cueball drinks.]

Hairy: Man, you are no fun at all.

Cueball: Ok, got it. Not a word.

Hairy: Dude, if you don't like it, don't drink it.

Cueball: No, no, gotta do my part! Mmmmm!!!

Trivia

• The like or dislike of certain tastes, such as beer, may have a genetic background.

 add a comment! ⋅  add a topic (use sparingly)! ⋅  refresh comments!

Discussion

I hate the taste and smell and associations (such as urine and vomit where they shouldn't be). A friend used to freely admit he didn't like the taste and only drank to get drunk. 108.162.249.161 06:24, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

This is why there are so many different styles of beers, or wines, or other alcoholic beverages.  I personally don't care for IPAs, but will rarely pass up a good Pilsner.108.162.238.189 07:37, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

LOL, that's exactly what Cueball is talking about. Beer is a canonical example of acquired taste. But even after having done so, all hoppy beers (including most IPAs and Pilsners) still taste pretty similar to me. - Frankie (talk) 11:39, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

Like of beer is actually a really bad example of acquired taste. I was stealing sips of beer from my dad at age 3-4, if he had an unattended open beer. Liking of beer is primarily generics, and secondary acquired taste. Now talk about Marmite and discuss acquired taste. Spongebog (talk) 16:21, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

And? Most things are an acquired taste, when it comes down to it. No need to sneer about acquired preferences. 162.158.239.38 04:38, 1 October 2023 (UTC)

Similarly, I don't like most beers but like scotch ales a lot, because scotch ales are some of the least bitter beers I've ever had. I've actually had quite a lot of individual sips of beer, and other alcohol, but I've never been drunk. --162.158.75.184 01:02, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

And you, sir, are a canonical example of an outlier. 😜 Seriously though, go to http://google.com and type "is an acquired taste". Google's very first autocomplete suggestion is beer. I'm not saying it's necessarily a good example, but it is about as canonical as you can get. - Frankie (talk) 03:09, 6 June 2015 (UTC)

Is it possible that the characters, being American, have only ever tasted American beer? So when Cueball says that "all beer tastes kind of bad" hat he really means is "all American beer tastes kind of bad"? That would make a lot more sense (especially if you assume that they only buy from the major brands, and haven't yet tried beer from microbreweries.) --PeR (talk) 09:30, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

Well the other character mentions "Stouts", which the major American brands don't really produce (or at least don't heavily market). I think from that it's safe to assume that these characters are basing their opinions on American Craft brews, and not just Budweiser. 173.245.52.87 14:02, 6 June 2015 (UTC)

entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem. I think too many people forget Occam's Razor here, and are too eager to engage in deeper analysis than the content can really support without help from, say, an interview with Randall. No offense intended; this is a trend on this wiki in general. 108.162.221.201 13:18, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

I'm kind of tired of people automatically assuming is someone doesn't like beer, it's because the person saying so has only been exposed to bad ones due to their locality. I don't like beer at all because it tastes like a mouthful of yeast and medicine. Alcohol in general is an acquired taste for most people, who usually only start drinking it due to social pressure or as a recreational drug. Yeasty foods are as well, especially yeasty breads, and beer is basically fermented bread juice when you get down to it. There's also a genetic link behind whether or not someone will like alcohol, and it's usually he effect rather than the taste that makes it appealing. --188.114.111.209 14:45, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

You need to read the research -- it is actually linked to genetic differences in taste-buds. You may not like it, which is not unlikely, but that does not say that is the same for others who may be genetically disposed otherwise Spongebog (talk) 18:54, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

...people are too eager to engage in deeper analysis than he content can support... - Isn't overanalyzing every minute detail the entire point of this wiki? Of course the explanations should be concise, but that doesn't apply to the wild mass guessing happening in the discussion. - 108.162.254.96 14:25, 9 June 2015 (UTC)

It is also possible that (from my perspective as an American) most people grow up thinking only certain flavors taste good, and anything outside of that is bad. For example, food that has spoiled taste bad, however both sour cream and buttermilk (both which have a flavor similar to spoiled food) taste pleasant once you associate that taste with good. And people that like "simple" beer (such as pilsners) may initially have trouble with a stout, or IPA, or anything that has a bitter taste in it, because "bitter" is associate with being "bad". On the other hand, some cultures can't stand overly-sweet foods, since that wasn't part of their upbringing.162.158.75.42 00:13, 9 October 2016 (UTC)

Speaking from personal experience, I've never tried any form of alcohol that I've liked. And if you must know my experience is mainly centered around beer that's highly recommended by friends and family. The last case was at a tour of a local microbrewery that seems to be doing extremely well. I'm sure if I pulled a large scale taste test I'd aquire enough of a taste to delude myself into thinking that something or other is actually worth drinking but I don't see why I should go through the effort just to conform to a social norm. --not the mama108.162.238.180 14:30, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

You should NOT conform to social norm but drink what YOU feel taste good -- 10.000 years ago, humanity needed portable water -- west of the Urals, humans stared to use fermentation as a method to keep bacteria out of the drinking water, where east they started to brew tea -- their descendant responded genetically over the next 10.000 years with European developing genetic traits to be tolerant and liking the fermented brew. Beer is predominantly limited to north Europe as it has lower alcohol levels compared to wine -- the higher alcohol volume is needed to keep bacteria out in the warmer southern Europe -- HENCE unless you are of northen european decent you may not genetically be programmed to like (or tolerate) the taste of beer -- just don't drink beer if you don't like it !!! Spongebog (talk) 19:06, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

I'm 1/16th northern European (Dutch), 1/4th southern European, Native American too. Guess I didn't get the North Europe beer gene. Why'd the even northerner Europeans like the Russians and Scottish become distilled spirit drinkers? Did their beer freeze too easily so they made vodka and whiskey? If this is why the north developed a beer culture then why'd Egyptians and Mesopotamians drink beer? It's very hot there. 108.162.215.59 20:08, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

Wait. Alcohol was a method of keeping drinking water clean? That's a terrible way to stay hydrated. Alcohol makes you pee more. What is this I don't even. 108.162.215.169 11:17, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

In the past they drank something called small beer for the water which was at least as low alcohol as lite beer today. Google it to see if it's lighter than lite beer, I don't care enough to check. They drank the full-strength beer when they wanted to party. Children drank a lower alcohol version of small beer (well they *did* die so disproportionately from germs anyway before we even get to the water germs). Similarly, nobody drank wine for thirst, they mixed it with water. Since water hydrates and full-strength beer dehydrates maybe they put enough water that they could live without drinking gallons of weak booze per day. I don't know how Islam survived with a Prohibition like that though. I think anything that makes you slightly "buzzed" if you drink as much as humanly possible is illegal. Even now the Saudi oil monopoly's "Western-style walled-off city" is under uncodified sharia law and a wine cooler would only be legal if you watered down with 1 or 19 parts water (I don't know if they have a statutory limit but if you can manage to drink 15 US gallons of 50% diluted wine cooler within 15 hours then you would get a little "buzzed" (= 12 US oz of beer). (They do sell beer dealcoholized to under 0.05% for the Islamic market (10% of Prohibition-legal "near-beer", and 5% of a wine cooler) so people can enjoy the horrible flavor without any possibility of getting "buzzed" (about 1/10th of a beer "drunk" if you drink a US gallon an hour *without stopping for 15 hours*, the importance of not stopping cannot be overstressed. If you stop for even 6 minutes near the end you will "sober up" 100% and you'll have to do this a whole nother 15 hours again) 108.162.238.155 19:04, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

About the "buzzed" rule, the emirs tried to ban coffee, but every one loved it so much they eventually realized they weren't going to squash the habit and decided, hey, at least it's a stimulant, those who drink it can a lot more of God's work done than they could without. 173.245.54.23 (talk) (please sign your comments with ~~~~)

The idea that alcohol in small beer safeguarded it from germs has been debunked (low enough alcohol content to hydrate you well is too low to kill germs well). Instead, it's much simpler: you have to BOIL water to make beer! (And I assume it won over tea, boiled water, etc by some combination of calorie content and positive associations with taste) 172.68.138.57 06:05, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Well (unless you subscribe to the Asterix In Britain view of history!), it was rather that tea was the thing that had to win over beer. Brewing is ancient (6th M. BC), tea only very old (3rd-1st M. BC, depending upon if you believe legends) and didn't reach Europe properly until 'fairly old' times (late 1500s, becoming popular by 1700s), though of course in time for the people of Boston to try the "very weak, barely any milk, somewhat salty" variation of impromptu cold-brewed cuppa.

But both types of 'brew' probably won over "boiled water" for both taste reasons and because boiled-and-cooled water is practically indistinguishable from "raw water", where you run the risk of skipping the whole making-it-safe bit (can you be sure your host has bothered? ...can you remember which jug you prepared yourself?) and thus getting the microbes (that you don't yet even know about) in bad water. But beer, and tea, has to have gone through rather obvious processes to become so. Not perfect, but a good indicator that the water wasn't just slightly (insufficiently) warmed, to save time/fuel, or the boiled water was topped up with untreated 'fresh' water (again, to save bother in a process that wasn't really understood as to what it was doing). Tea, and later coffee, switched different stimulants for beer/wine/gin/etc and allowed "tea-total" movements to develop that eschewed alchol without the problem of securing a pure source of water, and/or desperately hoping that your drink did not taste strongly of anything.

Or you can say that Asterix apparently did discover the Britons drinking boiled water (then, for various reasons, got them to put tealike herbs in it), early AD. But there are remarkably few reliable corroborating historical sources for that. ;) 172.69.195.155 14:42, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

(1) "predominantly" and "exclusively" are to different words; they are also brewing wine in England. (2) Distilled alcohol for mass consumption is relatively new (~500 years), before that the process was known but not used for this purpose. (3) Many Europeans drink tea these days -- culture and fashion travels. Spongebog (talk) 00:55, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

Ooh, English cuisine is a byword, but I don't think even they brew their wine. 162.158.38.166 16:41, 3 June 2019 (UTC)

Global warming has the power to make England the best place to grow champagne. Chalky. Kent. Soil. Mmmmmm. Bordeaux will have to make whatever wine they now make in Spain. 108.162.215.94 16:53, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

Nope. Champagne is from the region of the same name in France. So it is impossible to label it champagne legally when growing it in England. wikipediasource. --Lupo (talk) 12:36, 3 January 2020 (UTC)

"English sparkling wine"... An old joke meme, mostly, but I've heard it said that it might actually be getting rather good at 'champagne method' products. Maybe they can work something similar as with "Somerset brie", for cheese, which gets around any geographic restrictions and makes a feature of its 'new' origin. Noting that Britain used to have many, many good cheeses, until WW2 effectively closed down most of the non-hard varieties for practical supply/demand reasons, somehow making "cheddar" hypernym for much of the hard-and-uncrumbly remainder. But over the last few decades there have been more 'rediscovered' and otherwise-artisan cheeses like even the french-style soft cheeses.

But that's an issue more for turophiles, like me, than oenophiles. Or whatever the term is for those that favour champagnes (or perhaps equivalent cavas, spumantis, proseccos, etc). 141.101.99.46 15:12, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Agreed. Major brands suck, but probably in most countries, even Germany, where people usually have very high opinion about German beer. There are thousands of small breweries, though, some with a very old tradition (like in monasteries), and many just popping up recently. At some microbreweries you have to order weeks in advance, but the brew you get is really exceptional, and you'll drink it at room temperature from wine glasses. Absolutely not meant for getting drunk. 108.162.254.107 10:47, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

I am disliking to indifferent to most of brands of beer, but I like a few specific ones, like Ginger's Beer, or gingerbread beer from local brewery. --JakubNarebski (talk) 11:34, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

I know that beer is generally considered to be an acquired taste, but some people acquire that taste really quickly. The first beer I ever drank was a Miller that I stole from a case that my dad had left sitting in the kitchen for months. I was 12, and it is still probably the worst thing I've ever tasted. I decided I didn't like beer, and from ages 12 to 17 the only alcohol I drank was wine. At 17, I tried keg beer and was utterly indifferent to it. By the time I turned 19 I was into good local beers, but if I've been in the heat for a long time, I'll drink watery mediocre beer and it will be divine. And then there's shower beer...oh, shower beer!12:27, 5 June 2015 (UTC) 108.162.225.36 (talk) (please sign your comments with ~~~~)

The only thing worse than a pilsner is an IPA... which is just a stronger version of a pilsner. Most beer just has way too high of an IBU rating. At least malts aren't entirely awful and oatmeal malts are somewhat palatable. 162.158.255.83 14:25, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

Culturally, for me, the common booze is 'a pint of bitter' (or 'best'). I apparently had my first sip when a toddler. I 'sneakily' took a sip from the top of a glass sat in front of my father, before screwing my face up most amusingly, I am told. I then went straight back in for another... it's not obvious to me if I was being influenced to 'want to like it'. Perhaps it was just the novelty. Anyway, I will admit I don't love the taste of bitter, but at least it's got an significant taste that all the seemingly anonymous mass-produced lagers can't match. (OTOH, cider's quite stimulating, but I take against the overly fizzy ones.) When it comes to non-alcoholic beverages, I will actively refuse a cup of tea (the social norm for adults, especially someone like me in their fifth decade), however socially awkward and unexpected, and politely turn down the offer of a coffee, if possible, on the basis that I might not be staying long. (I don't like teas at all, even fruit ones, but I can stand coffee if sweetened.) But it's amazing what we tend to eat and drink, just because it's expected. 141.101.99.59 14:26, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

Great comic. This is just for me. I do not like beer. Any kind. And I do rarely drink them. Same with cofee ans tee which I never drink. It is not always easy - so nice to see this comic. :) --Kynde (talk) 14:33, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

I'm a stout man (will drink stout alone, if it is dark enough and if the hop content is small enough), but will admit that any beer is better after the fifth glass of it.Seebert (talk) 14:40, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

"Acquired Taste"

Part of the explanation refers to acquired tastes as being a response to social pressures and to avoid cognitive dissonance. This doesn't match the description of what the linked to wikipedia page for acquired tastes, as that page distinguishes authentic acquired tastes from those meeting the author's description.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acquired_taste#Intentional_acquisition_of_tastes

108.162.238.190 15:08, 5 June 2015 (UTC)Aaron E

Budweiser tastes like urine. It's the most popular beer in the US. Immediately after trying it I tasted a drop of my urine to see if the urine was still worse and that wasn't enough urine to decide. Anyone care to put a larger amount of urine in their mouth for science? This is the crap they make Bud..Weis..Er and Wassuuuuuuup! commercials about? They actually make a Lite version of this so people can enjoy it while getting less drunk or fat? Extroverts are weird. Also, out of the legion of OKcupid questions the best predictor of the promiscuity question is "I like the taste of beer, true or false". So if you want to have sex quick, you want to hear "Beer tastes awesome! Woo! [Burp] [Vomit] Ooh!Ooh!" [drinks vodka from bottle] 108.162.215.59 16:55, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

Strangely, many animals acquire a taste for alcohol, and they must do it quickly because they don't live long enough to do it slowly. Case in point-- robins and other birds, gobbling up fermented fallen fruit, and then stumbling around like human novice drinkers do. They only live 2-3 years, and they only have access to the stuff for a couple of weeks in the autumn, and yet, there they go, staggering down the sidewalk and tripping over imaginary twigs. And then there's my puppy, who was begging droplets of strong beer and black coffee off my fingertips from eight weeks old. (Good Canadian beer, by the way.) I wonder if a taste for bitterness might be adaptive, as many bitter plants are also medicinal? NoniMausa (talk) 22:46, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

Okay, some people don't like beer. That doesn't mean everyone who does is faking it. I gravitate towards IPAs, stouts, rye IPAs and barrel-aged strong beers. I also like scotch, rye, and some bourbons. I fucking love dark roasted black coffee. I savor all of these in company and alone. Stop being so solipsic.173.245.48.163 03:32, 6 June 2015 (UTC)

I actively dislike the taste of every beer that I have tried. That includes Guiness on tap in Dublin. I sort of got into trouble for it the few days I was there agus ag labhairt na Gaeilge. But this discussion is one of the most amusing and enjoyable arguments I have seen yet on this website. Go ahead on, folks! Taibhse (talk) 03:48, 6 June 2015 (UTC)

Ach bhí and ceart agat. Tá an blas Guinness uafásach! (Is fearr liom Malibu ná Southern Comfort :) ) 162.158.38.166 16:41, 3 June 2019 (UTC)

I've been scratching my head over this one since I saw it come out, and I still can't tell what Randall is trying to say. Are we meant to take it at face value, where Cueball is right on and Hairy is simply unwilling to admit that deep down he (just like apparently every other beer drinker everywhere) dislikes beer, and everyone is pretending because of social pressure? Or is this a subversion of the expected, and meant as a dig at the kind of person who would so arrogantly think that their personal dislike of something popular simply means everyone who claims to like it is pretending to do so out of social pressures or internalized expectations (no pun intended)? In this comic, Cueball comes across to me as kind of a passive-aggressive jerk (which is normally Hairy's role) as he openly derides something that someone else may genuinely enjoy by claiming everyone is pretending, and when reminded that it's fine for him to not drink it, he responds with bitter sarcasm. So who's the butt of the joke here? Hairy because he can't see that he's only doing something from social pressure? Or Cueball for assuming that Hairy (as well as the other millions of people who regularly enjoy beer around the world) is only doing something and pretending to like it because of social pressure. 173.245.52.118 06:20, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

+1 above comment. I'm on the side of the second interpretation, but my (possibly prejudiced guess) is that Randall may dislike beer!

108.162.238.186 13:00, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

Maybe both interpretations are valid, and this helps us see the problem of empathy here. The same way cueball can't be objectively sure about hairy faking it or not, we can't be absolutely sure about it either, not knowing if cueball is exposing harsh truths or being an unempathetic jerk. Our interpretation will be based on our own biases on the subject.188.114.99.29 13:28, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

Well said! --Waldir (talk) 18:42, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

I think this is a wildly fascinating conversation! First, it's interesting we all care so much about a beverage. Clearly, we view our own preference for beer as much more than a taste, but rather a statement of identity. Second, the popularity of objectively terrible and tasteless beers (originally from the US, but now mindlessly copied by practically every country on the planet) shows that it is possible that we beer lovers are deluding ourselves (and also that beer-avoiders are deluding themselves as well). The identity statement of preferring or avoiding beer may be so strong that we may not really know if we like beer or not.

Beer is diverse, and indeed if someone truly dislikes all of it for flavor reasons, they would be expected to also dislike either bread, bitter herbs, other alcohols, or all of the above. From the comments here, it seems that those who dislike beer also dislike other alcohol, so perhaps it is alcohol itself that can be highly distasteful. Ethanol doesn't have a flavor, so let's assume it's either the somewhat burny mouthfeel, or perhaps the mental effects of alcohol that are disliked.

It also seems that those who dislike beer have indeed not tried very much of it "I...dislike...every beer that I have tried. That includes Guiness..." provides fodder for those who would suggest, "Well, if Guiness is your idea of a beer, then you haven't nearly tried enough to know you dislike it!" However, as some have pointed out here, it is highly unfair to expect that someone who truly dislikes beer will try all of the thousands of varieties of it, presumably disliking every one, until we accept that the dislike is genuine.

Even the comic shows that Randall rejects beer without knowing much about it. That Hairy suggests two categories of beer to be "stouts" and "lagers" is telling. Stout is a specific style of beer, while lager is a giant category that includes beers as dissimilar as light american lager and Baltic Porter. Someone who likes and is interested in beer would not ask the question Hairy does. Yet Randall's beer ignorance may stem from avoidance due to a true dislike, and it would be unfair to expect him to gain competence in everything he finds offensive before we allow him his opinion. Drummstikk (talk) (please sign your comments with ~~~~)

Lots to think about here! Drummstikk (talk) 19:21, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

Drinking alcoholic drinks of any description is just a stupid idea from the start. "Oh yeah, lets drink this thing that hampers our ability to think clearly and undermines several important inhibitions that stop us from hurling ourselves into traffic while puking! Clearly nothing can go wrong with this!". -Pennpenn 162.158.2.221 23:48, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

I don't know if you've actually been drunk to see what it's like or are thinking of others. When I was drunk, I bounced off of buildings cause home was so far and I realized that since square root of two is 141%, I could shorten my zig zag trip over 10% if I aim somewhat towards the wall and get pulled by the alcohol every few steps. (also, it was fun, like an amusement ride or a holodeck program I'd like to write). If I helped the drunk pull slightly (except fighting it near the sides to keep from slamming into the wall or breaking a tempered glass bus shelter) I could carom at least 8 feet off the bus shelters and buildings like a zig-zag billiard ball before it didn't feel like real artificial gravity was doing most of the work. I could say hey baby to every woman I passed and not attract a single one which is crazy. I still never lost the ability to add up the 12 and 18oz cans and fractions of cans of Bud I drunk, in ounces, subtract 12oz for each hour and fraction since I drunk those ounces and try to get halfway to 120 which is unconscious, except multiply by 125lbs/175lbs for a margin of safety because I do *not* want to black out, and estimate how many times over 0.08 DUI I was, all in my head. I held onto the banister with both hands for dear life. I even had the good judgement to switch to crawling the last flight or two. But I (and maybe you) have lots of IQ to spare. Since your average party/party "DUDE yeah!" dumbass is about 85 *sober*, they need all the IQ they can spare and must be literally retarded (= <70) when drunk. My dumbass father actually wanted me to go back down 5 flights of stairs, climb 8 ft down a fucking air shaft ladder and retrieve the keys I dropped. I don't care if you're mad I dropped my keys, I'm not leaving home till tomorrow. My father almost died several times. Once waded to floating depth with no lifeguard and can't swim (waves exist idiot), once crossed a cliff and could've drowned if he fell, once walked miles up a double-track funicular and didn't die cause he was never trapped. For more stupidity, a flight instructor c. 1950 died cause he got out and shut his door on clothing. Dad saw the pilot flying a human being like a flag until they ran out of time and he went off to land. He did not survive the taking off and landing while tied to the plane. Scarves kill. 108.162.238.155 06:21, 9 June 2015 (UTC)

I've never been drunk. A lifetime of seeing otherwise intelligent people act like complete idiots under the influence and an almost neurotic need to maintain as much self control I can muster makes it an entirely undesirable state to be in. I'm glad you enjoy it, I guess, but the rest of your words don't inspire any more confidence in me regarding being drunk. -Pennpenn 162.158.2.221 23:47, 9 June 2015 (UTC)

I didn't say it was worth it. The hangover's horrible. Nor do I enjoy it. I enjoy*ed* it, that night in 2010. It was cool that there is a drug that lets you play with the gravity and time and doesn't hurt your body just to try once or is illegal or addictive to many like most drugs (I wouldn't have done it if there was an alcoholic in my family but I guess I took a risk there that I had a hidden alcoholism gene, probably not now I know). When I sat down I saw time alteration, lol. I didn't feel it till a remarkable number of milliseconds after my eyes told me I sat. I said "whee!" while experiencing the "artificial gravity" but I allowed myself to see how far I could go. Clearly I wouldn't have done that if someone could hear. Artifical gravity strong enough to hurt you but weak enough to fight: That's what the muscle instructions that cause straight walking when sober feel like when you mildly augment the oscillating left-right pull you feel therefore adding a little extra m/s^2 to the fictitious oscillating sideways force you're already feeling. If I knew the level of hangover I was getting into and how little alcohol it takes my genes to get drunk I would've never done that. Trust me, doing the crazy thing of saying "hey baby" to every female barhopper that passed was the most I could do. I did that to find out what alcohol can do and it wouldn't make me lose my virginity to a barhopper even if I felt obliged to. You are probably more inhibited than me if that's possible (maybe you're also conscientious and not open to experience so that explains it). I'm not conscientious at all and open to experience though not at the extremes. You would be a great candidate for keeping your inhibitions. But if you're very conscientious or very uncurious or especially both then you should keep on not drinking. It's more like having children, not so inherently wonderful that everyone should do it (like falling in love is). But I would never recommend getting anywhere near vomiting, hangovers can make you feel absolutely terrible for 4 hours and continue the headache till the next evening. I haven't drunk since then. It's just not as fun since you know what it's like already and probably can't reach artifical gravity time alteration mildly psychoactive levels cause you'll take it easy once you had that level of hangover once. 108.162.215.59 02:24, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

There are whole different levels of being drunk. There's nothing wrong with having a drink or two, more so because you lose part of your inhibitions. Dismissing something as a stupid idea just leads to never investigating those stupid ideas which may have their own strong points. It's actually beneficial for your EQ to have a drink or two, just to lose the natural inhibitions. But yeah, to each their own. 173.245.53.147 08:10, 10 June 2015 (UTC)

How would it benefit your EQ? What is EQ anyway, it seems like it means almost whatever the speaker wants it to mean. 108.162.215.59 02:24, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

Less social inhibitions to talk to people. A high social skill is in any definition I've seen important to EQ... Not easy if you're afraid to talk to people. 173.245.53.147 07:49, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

Ah, you see you're trying to mix up social skills, extroversion, empathy, the autism spectrum (from Kim Kardashian to someone who can't learn language, emotion reading ability and I don't know, not being an unfeeling person when we've already determined the traits with the most informative power and non-imaginaryness (compare clutch batting) which is the big 5 and IQ. If you have 120 EQ and 80 IQ you might not be able to get a job. One that's any good anyway. You'd be the loser that does manual labor and goes to Insane Clown Posse concerts and might live in a trailer park. You'd make a good prostitute if you're uninhibited enough, though. If you have 120 IQ and 80 EQ you'd be as smart as many lawyers and could easily get a job writing software or something and own a home. Which do you think is more useful? And some woman will marry you because she's lazy and doesn't like work or something. And a person that's hard working with 120 EQ can compensate enough with EQ and connections to be a rich executive or lawyer but a person of mundane work ethic with 140 IQ and low EQ could be any kind of doctorate he wants and has a good chance of making $200K+. That's because high IQ people will always enjoy something and find it easy even if they're otherwise lazy. What do you think is more useful? Would hard work and stupidity and mundane social skills get you $200+K/year? Would great social skills, stupidity, and mundane work ethic get you $200+K/year? Face it, social skills are common as dirt and will get you jack shit wages if the social person is not unusual in also being able to stand books enough to get a masters degree or is really, really sexy or unrealistically extreme goodness at something (model, prostitute, porn star, singing, acting, sports). Frankly, even in sports you don't need the social skills, only if you're almost too bad to get on a professional team. IQ is the only one of the three that you can be mundane in the other two and and still make millions (even diplomats can't be stupid). That's why they pay some people with high EQ so much, it's hard to find one with IQ much above average. Gifted social-er than average children are 1 in 4 (of the gifted children). 108.162.215.94 14:53, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

Okay, some people have social anxiety but others just don't feel like talking that moment. We're self-reliant. We don't need a whole web of connections with connected people because we write good software (or design planes well or..). That is a natural urge I think, it's called reserved. Men don't want to ask for directions. Men don't want to ask where X is. As long as the things that come out of your mouth are interesting or helpful I don't see why you must talk before you have something good or adds anything at all. You can help social anxiety. But you can't cure stupid. I totally agree that empathy for your lover, kids and close family and some for the rest of humanity and ability to feel is good to have but you're conflating this with extroversion. Traits shouldn't have little correlation between their subtraits, that's why we have the big 5. It's also good to not be handiness clueless and poor at math, have no common sense, and be too dim to learn to set a VCR clock. When I see social people I think of people that can't stand to be alone and converse with volleyballs from day 1 (rent Cast-Away), only have an astrology book in their house, can't know it's 6 cans in two triangles without counting (every one!) and counted out loud from the *first* Saturday when they need to know how many days Saturday to Wednesday in a week and a half is (11). I actually saw the last three and could tell the the first and last ones' EQ was through the roof. If EQ was a car the last group would make a sonic boom. But the last group was just nurses, the first person moved *into* a ghetto cause $600 a month in roommate rent became not enough to pay for their entertainment "needs", big TV, and useless crap which covers the wall. The woman who used her finger to count two triangles of cans out loud scans supermarket goods for a living. I have a cousin who got a bachelor's in chemistry from a semi-third world country through high conscientiousness, was allowed to try for a U.S. degree since 1986, is socialer than average, and cleaned strangers' clothes for a living for 2 decades. Boxers, panties, socks, anything that goes in the laundromat's let the employee do your laundry for you counter. He's lived in the US 43 years, just retired, will be a miser till death (never had kids to save money?), stole any gold chains or cash in the clothes and said someone else must've did it (I'm serious) yet only has about $100K gross worth (and net, too). Also cleaned out cupfuls of lint. I don't need more EQ than is needed to get by.

Sorry for the B minus C minus essay skill. I never was great at that and am too lazy to put as much effort into this as the SATs. 108.162.215.94 14:53, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

"I don't like A, therefore everyone that does like A is wrong." This is the first xkcd I've seen that is just dumb. --173.245.52.164 19:30, 9 June 2015 (UTC)

You are making the assumption that Cueball is expressing Randall's sentiment. But consider Hairy's last statement. I think there is intentional ambiguity over which one of them is misguided. 103.22.200.180 01:15, 10 June 2015 (UTC)

I wouldn't know, the title text states the same sentiment as Cueball. I also agree it's a bit too easy to claim that everyone drinking beer does it because of peer pressure. I brew beer, and it certainly has to do with cultural backgrounds (I'm Belgian) but I enjoy doing it and I enjoy the taste of several different kinds of beer without peer pressure. Doesn't mean I like all beers though. 173.245.53.147 08:18, 10 June 2015 (UTC)

Yes, that's the way I feel about beer; except I don't pretend and then just I don't drink beer, so they think I'm weird. I'm cool with that :P 108.162.214.239 08:14, 10 June 2015 (UTC)

It has been a long time since a comic has created so much debate ;-) I have now changed the explanation to incorporate the two possible interpretations. Either that Cueball is right about beer or that he is just a jerk about other peoples pleasures, that he do not share. Feel free to improve. --Kynde (talk) 09:45, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

Good job. I tried to edit the text a bit to make it more coherent and less opinionated, let me know what you think :) --Waldir (talk) 18:42, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

Should the actual article mention that Cyanide and Happiness ran a very similar comic (or at least one with a similar theme) a few years ago? http://explosm.net/comics/3111/ Regarding the discussion going on above... I've tried several varieties of beer, both in the States and abroad, and I haven't come across one I could unabashedly say I like. Wheat beer did seem to be the least offensive, but the taste of the alcohol overpowered that of the drink in all of them. At least it doesn't taste much like it smells; if it did I think I would gag. I guess I'm just more the type for margaritas. 173.245.50.93 05:48, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

A coworker points out that the tone of this comic is the opposite of 1480: Super Bowl, in which Cueball advocates for people to prioritize friendship over differences in tastes. It's also worth noting that both beer drinking and interest in sports have class inflections; looking down on them can be seen as "punching up" against a majority opinion, but can also be seen as "punching down" towards the lower socioeconomic status correlated with these preferences -- so it's a bit complicated. -- Phyzome (talk) 03:10, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

Beer does not always taste the same. It depends on what you are eating with it or what you are doing. I love the Negra Modelo when having enchiladas at Mariachi's. But with Pizza? Nope. I cannot imagine anything finer than an IPA after coming inside from a hot day on the farm, the first bottle disappears in 10 seconds and I'm already on to the second. But with dinner? Well, maybe, but I'd prefer red wine. 162.158.255.97 (talk) (please sign your comments with ~~~~)

Salut to Cueball in this comic!! 162.158.83.216 (talk) (please sign your comments with ~~~~)

Actually kind of convenient to see that people don't like beer (despite the fact that it sells very well), since I'm a mormon and I'm always kind of curious to see what it tastes like, despite the fact that it's against our religion to drink something like that. Kind of helpful to see that it tastes bad, because it's been something that's been in my mind for a while. --JayRulesXKCD (talk) 13:00, 10 October 2016 (UTC)

Amazing how much tension that a statement like this creates. Yes, there are plenty of people who legitimately enjoy beer--I'm definitely one of them. No, not all American beer tastes like piss--there are tons of great craft breweries in this country. Yes, there is a tradition of social pressure surrounding alcohol consumption--many of my close friends feel pressure to drink even though they do not enjoy alcohol. Yes, overconsumption of alcohol can have negative effects on your physical and mental health. No, not everybody who enjoys a drink (or even getting drunk occasionally) turns into a bumbling fool or destroys their brain cells--I've consumed a lot of alcohol in my lifetime and have definitely gone overboard on occasion, but I still managed to get a BS in math and land a somewhat lucrative IT job.

Randall does make a fair point about social pressure, and the comic is amusing overall, but I feel that Cueball's statement is pretty ignorant if taken literally. I find tomatoes to be absolutely disgusting, but that certainly doesn't mean that everybody who likes tomatoes is just pretending. Of course I understand that my example isn't directly analagous (I don't really feel any social pressure to eat tomatoes), but to me it's a pretty big stretch to say that nobody actually likes beer just because Cueball (or Randall, presumably) doesn't like it. 162.158.214.230

Beer is an acquired taste, and few are actually bad, but 90% of what people get served as "coffee" outside of Italy can only be tolerated with enough milk and/or sugar. --172.68.193.203 22:28, 28 May 2024 (UTC)