The current story arc started with this comic: Fashion Tip I.
- Sandra: AUGH
- Larisa: If Vogue is to be trusted, wearing clothes is, like, the latest rage in Paris. You should give it a try, Sandy.
|
|
Currently on hiatus :-(
 S&W in German/auf DeutschGaia (my fantasy comic) Scarlet (my science fantasy comic) |
|
| Sandra and Woo is supported by our patron zmck. Thank you very much! |
|
![[0332] Fashion Tip II](/comics/2011-12-08-0332-fashion-tip-ii.png "[0332] Fashion Tip II")
[0332] Fashion Tip II
└ posted on Thursday, 8 December 2011, by Novil
Click here to see the comments!
Sandra and Woo by Oliver Knörzer is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License. See the About page for details.
Privacy Policy | Impressum | © 2008 – 2025 Oliver Knörzer
Actually, I thought more of Charlie Brown and his tendency to lose his clothes after getting buzzed by a sizzling line drive back through the box than Calvin and Hobbes. That’s me, though.
And next week, Woo is shaved.
Seriously, my eyebrows just flew off into my hair.
@ MegaTJ:
I see what you did there…
A nod to Calvin & Hobbes? Nice… Larisa shouldn’t talk, she’s French kissing boys out of the blue…. 😀
Was this meant as “showing just enough to demonstrate you wouldn’t see anything if you saw anything”? And Sandra had been teased by girls in her class for her lack of development earlier…
I think some people are getting a little too excited here. Do you people really have to associate sexuality with every bit of exposure. I think we ought to be mature enough not belittle the story by slavering over an innocent illustration.
No Woo, don’t eat her clothing. You are not a moth.
You don’t even have wings.
@ IndigoRei:
Sandra is unnecessarily over exposed considering Woo isn’t her “imaginary friend” and she isn’t taking a bath. While I realize she currently isn’t much more developed than a five year old there really isn’t much call for this sort of thing unless your purpose was to stir up emotions or buzz using a taboo or controversial…
You know, that’s not exactly a bad idea. if your goal is to attract more N00b’s and trick them into throwing more money into the fire. Not to mention the fact that I don’t feel sorry for anyone that finds Sandra sexually attractive. Maybe that’s why I didn’t feel any sympathy for Woo back in the woods while he was sand bagging.
Cloud would not be a problem…
First panel: Cloud: !
2nd panel: Motion blur.
3rd panel: Sandra is now wearing Cloud’s tee-shirt, and his jacket is tired over her hips like a skirt. Bare-chested Cloud retreats behind a tree.
4th panel: Ye Thuza: You see! I told you it would come in useful! Did you get the note into the jacket pocket?
Cloud: Of course. “You can thank me later. C”
@ TheEsquire:
Now i actually see that happening, remember the joker comic, woo peed on Sandra 😛
K everyone, time to get your minds out of the gutter, I mean how is this fan service (pretty sure 99% of the fans aren’t pedophiles) also NOTHING IS SHOWN.
LOL, Sandra panties are love pattern.. so cute
well…if the Video of the raccoons doing a “shake a body” was enough to everyone call her “raccoon girl”….she should be praying that no one is recording this now and uploading on youtube later
Sandys wearing granny panties! Hahaha
lol
Isn’t she a little young for a fan-service pic?
This isn’t exactly how I thought you’d remind us that there are hazards in trying to keep “wild” animals as pets, but I guess it does the job.
I really love the vote incentive.
Hide Sandra! Fast!!
Before pedobear comes! U.U
Well, people, note she’s not exactly PANICKING and scrambling to cover herself. If she’s somewhat okay with how she is, who are we to criticise?
Sandra: “Wait… did I just get laid?”
@ LupisLight:
You mean ‘Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on WOO!’ right?
WOW! Stuff just got a BIT out of hand don’ ya think? O_o”
But I’m not someone to make a fuss aboot these stuff so I just agree with the others:
@ Kat:
Sandy should REALLY run before Larisa gets that camera. 😛
@ Urthdigger:
Don’ ya mean “Why don’t you have a seat over here?” XD
Man…my eyes were just like Sandra’s in panel four…i certainly didnt see this coming.
@ Cronus:
she doesnt really have those anyway.
If there’s any more complaints out there about this strip being too explicit may i just remind you of a few times it’s been so bold.
Woo looking at a national geographic on the subject of Raccoons.
Woo using youtube to see Raccoon’s mating.
Larisa taking Landon home to make out with him
That very clear play on words with Lily and Woo playing pool followed by Woo going home to tell Sandra he licked her all over.
You should expect this sort of thing by now, surely.
I applaud the artist for this particular strip. It’s like what the simpsons did in the movie by actually showing Bart’s wang. I’m not sure what the rules are but it seems to me that in most cartoons aimed at youngsters it’s ok to show a little boy or grown man nude and covering themselves, or quite often with just their booty showing but it’s another story if its a girl, if any nudity its often a very small swimsuit or they show you a reaction shot of another character. I’m not saying i would like to see more young girls get naked i’m just saying that the artist has put it online and said let the complaints fall where they may. Bravo.
@ Cronus:
She’s more cold than embarrassed.
The anatomy/positioning in panel 4 -did- seem a bit odd.. I would have expected a bit more arm or random object coverage over the chest, since it’s not clear how that -wouldn’t- be showing most of whatever may or may not be there. Even if it was Cloud sitting there, the lack of detail would look a bit off.@ Cronus:
Looked the comic and laughed, readed the comments *facepalm headdesk*
There is NO pedophilia, loli or fanservice. Take your heads from the gutter and see it like it is a comic – where is little bit nudity as in Calvin and Hobbes had.
I’m quite shocked and disturbed how people want to dig dirt and twist comics what they are not.
Yes there is nudity, but where the hell does people see some sexual content in this?
I may have aggroved too much over small thing, and aggroing them even more, but had to write my opinion on this matter.
And to artist, have readed your comics about two months and loving it – thank you so much for making me giggle and laugh and keep up the work!
– one finnish reader and fan. (:
Woo is to Blue what the Magic Bullet is to baby food.
alexander B wrote:
Or is he?
I’m not being a perv or anything, but Sandra chest in panel 4 looks as flat as a 6 year old. At 12, she should be showing a little bit of something there (at least something should be there for her to cover up….)
Almost a shot for shot reference of Calvin and Hobbes. I like.
Did Not See that comeing… 0_0
I begin to detect a pattern here… 😉
I never trust in fashion magazines myself. Clothes are in fashion? Time to do otherwise! In other news, Sandra does know how to keep her ponytail bound.
After a comment like that Sandra should sic woo on Larisa.
Woo time for CRATE training.
danm36 wrote:
Cleaver. ^_^
In the previous comic, she’s overdressed in front of Larissa. In this comic, she’s underdressed. So in the next comic, is she going to be “just right”?
hey there, long time reader first time commenting… i think….
despite what some of the other commenters said, i find these kind of situations funny, it’s alot funnier animated, especially if they don’t realize what happened at first, then when someone makes a comment they scream and cover themselves. sandra seems to know what happened, though i’d like to see the face she’s making at larisa.
While I trust Woo not to have the hots for Sandra (he even openly called her ugly), I do wonder a little about his intentions. I suppose he targets Sandra of all people because he knows that few other humans would forgive him, and the consequences could be deadly. But rambunctiousness for the sake of fun exercise is one thing; clothing destruction is superfluous to that end. It could be vengeance or displaced aggression, but he seems too happy for that. Maybe he thinks Sandra could feel better in the long run by discovering the joys of animal habits like nudity. (Leaving her underpants alone for now would then be a matter of transition.)
While I’m not blind to the fact that this is, at the end of the day, comedic entertainment, I do have to wonder about the reasoning behind it. I know that Sandra and Woo has tread into more mature areas before, but underage nudity is a little… well, awkward. Especially when you compare it to the normal tone of the comic.
I personally don’t see anything explicitly sexual about it (unless Woo is in some sort of strange Heat or something), so it doesn’t *quite* fall into that pedo area, but on that same page this IS a minor wearing next to nothing. This story line will need a pretty solid ending to keep it from treading into questionable pointlessness.
That being said I’m doing my best to reserve judgement to until the end. The authors have failed to disappoint up until now, I don’t expect them to suddenly take a turn for the worst.
To the commentors with heavy negative feedback, the nudity is handled tastefully and I highly doubt this was intended to be sexual or fanservice. Any long time reader should know Powree and Oliver well enough to know they aren’t the sort who would find that either funny or prudent.
Also Larisa’s comments are very much in keeping with her personality, heavily sarcastic. I doubt Vogue has any need to comment on burkas or nudism, nor do I think Larisa cares what Vogue actually says.
I do scratch my head at what exactly happened. I don’t think Woo would have shredded her clothes, but I’m not sure what happened in panel 3. Looks like it’s a simple tumble.
My take, especially after reading other comments, is that this strip is a nod to Calvin & Hobbes, where Calvin ends up in the same situation. It also is a bookend to the previous strip. I wouldn’t try to think too deeply about it.
Also: Good thing Sandra’s not the type to go commando.
o hai thar
Shoo bear, away! Your picnic basket is at another national park!
Come on guys, there’s nothing sexual about this. It’s just a naked girl, what’s so sexual about that?
@ Alexander:
… Um… It’s not like she really has anything there for us to see, even if the picture was anatomically correct. Seriously. Back when your parents were kids, girls around Sandy’s age would play topless and adults wouldn’t really care because the girls had nothing to show yet. It’s really only in the last few decades or so that people have been getting so bent out of shape, and that’s only because the media’s been reporting more pedophiles and kidnappings. There’s nothing wrong with ‘underage’ nudity (too young to be nude? Did you forget what you were wearing when you were born?). The only reason people are freaking out is because, as a society, we’ve become more sensitive to it, and more paranoid.
LOL that would be so embarrassing!
Let’s all pray that some beastiality website doesn’t, -ahem- you know. >_>
I Can See Woo Getting Frisky! 😀
@ …:
I don’t disagree. The way nudity in any shape or form has become a taboo today is, quite simply, laughable. I’m all for someone wanting and being able to strip down and take off running down the street. The human body isn’t something to squander and hide. Unless you’re like me and look like a fat Chewbaca, but that’s besides the point.
Thing is though that, at the end of the day, those societal norms exist now saying that it’s a bad thing to see anyone in their natural form. And unfortunately people in Powree and Oliver’s position have to be careful when they bring something like this to the table, out of risk of attracting the wrong crowds who will shun or take it the wrong way. The term “politically correct” is ruining the world, but all the same you have to smile and nod at it to keep people from rioting. It’s a sickening conundrum.
Again, I’m not condoning the author’s thought process here. I’m sure they have a witty conclusion that we’ll all giggle and laugh at before we move on with our lives, all I’m trying to say is that something like underage nudity, no matter how innocent, needs to be handled carefully.
Wait, why was my family guy joke removed? “Did I just get laid?” It was funny. I mean, low hanging fruit, yeah, but still good.
@ Nick/Tyrong:
I never heard that line in Family Guy (hardly ever watch the show). It reminded me more of a similar line from the old MTV cartoon Beavis and Butthead. There are no Beavises or Buttheads in this comic, thank goodness. And most likely no Family Guys, either.