They don’t honestly think that you being able to look at them is some sort of actual gift, and you wouldn’t honestly respond to that notion with derisive and insulting laughter… right?
Because if not, I think you’ve invented some new usage of the word “friend” where it means the opposite of the normal usage…
Firstly, Sweetheart was startled into laughter by Tip’s non-sequitur outburst of narcissism. That’s why she laughed. One of the strongest stimuli of laughter is surprise – something that one expects is less likely to seem funny, something that takes one by surprise is more likely to seem funny. People sometimes say unexpected things that trigger involuntary laughter:- how people cope depends on their friendship.
Friends are tolerant when others are narcissistic, and friends are tolerant when other laugh. Tip is the archetypal narcissist and he does believe he is God’s gift to the eyes of those with taste, and he lets his belief slip out despite his intellect saying “nope. She won’t agree.” (A real person wouldn’t be this narcissistic, but Tip is an imaginary cartoon character who is written as being unrealistically narcissistic.) Somebody who was not Tip’s friend would laugh sarcastically or even insult them; Sweetheart is Tip’s friend, and her laughter was provoked by surprise, not by derision. And when Sweetheart says “thankyou”, she is being honest: she needed a laugh, and is grateful for it even though Tip didn’t intend it.
Similarly, Tip is Sweetheart’s friend; he doesn’t take serious offense at her reaction. If they were not friends then he would take serious offense and snap back, and/or sulk. Being her friend, he recognises that his narcissism was doomed to cause laughter, and he recognises that he managed to lighten Sweetheart’s mood, even if in a way that punctures his ego somewhat. His response implies that he is disappointed, but that he isn’t taking offense.
The funny thing is, I’m still not convinced he even is a psychologist. We’ve literally only got his word to believe.
We never see a degree, never hear what school he attended, never hear about professors who taught him, never see any sort of official documentation or other independent verification, never hear him use actual psychological terminology that couldn’t be picked up by any dumb schmuck with ten minutes and a library… for all we know he just THINKS he’s a psychologist, and is good at convincing people.
Consider that the cast page mentions his military service and CIA training, but nothing about psychological training. There’s a strip where he flat out says he’s not a therapist, despite (as others in the comments note) the fact that quite literally the only remotely psychological thing we see him do is talk therapy (which the same comments then point out suggests he has no actual credentials.) Skin Horse itself didn’t hire him to perform psych therapy – he’s literally just a file clerk.
Most of his ‘pschology’ is rubbish. He’s a terrible listener who THINKS he’s a great listener. He’s deeply self absorbed but also woefully lacks self awareness. Instead of helping people, he annoys them. His solution for nearly every problem is a makeover, ignoring the actual core of problems to pursue superficiality.
Sometimes he can convince people to change their minds about things, but only because he’s the default voice of reason in a room full of crazy people, pointing out obvious things and using basic logic. The only other thing he’s truly good at is seduction, which quite frankly is wildly inappropriate for a psychologist.
All the evidence points toward one thing:
Tip isn’t a psychologist – he’s a conman, and a potentially delusional one at that.
I would expect many nonhuman sapients to be withdrawn. Puppet therapy is likely easier for them to relate to. Even when they fail to open a dialog directly, there’s always the “Please make him stop!” effect… 😉
I never said anything about a psychiatrist, because we already know he isn’t one. He consistently calls himself a “psychologist”, he doesn’t have an “M.D.” on the end of his name, and he doesn’t prescribe medication, so clearly he’s not a psychiatrist.
Also, your arguement is self contradictory.
To the best of my knowledge, psychotherapy is a foundational element of clinical psychology. You could argue he’s a psychologist who isn’t also a therapist, but unless I’m mistaken it’s impossible to be a -clinical psychologist- who isn’t a therapist.
As for working with rodents in a lab, that’s -behavioral- psychology, not clinical. And again, the only evidence we have that he worked with lab rats is Tip’s own testimony, which may be unreliable.
Which lab? Who did he work for? Who were his colleagues? What papers did he publish? What was he researching? What conferences did he attend? Is there a single independent person who can actually verify any part of his (incredibly vague!) claims?
Why would a behavioral researcher working with rats in a lab abandon the career he spent a ton of money and time earning a degree for in order to go enlist in the army? It would be one thing if the military or the DOD contracted him or his lab to perform some sort of weird psychological warfare experiments for them, but him just up and quitting his job and becoming a grunt out of the blue?
The man is an obvious egostist with delusions of self importance and yet you’re going to accept him at his word when all the evidence paints him as an unreliable source, and his own claims are so vague and generic, almost entirely lacking in details?
One branch of Clinical Psychology focuses solely on research. That’s Tip.
You’re taking a very strong stance against Tip. But what’s the point? What do you hope to gain? What fuels this tirade of yours, other than the insatiable desire to prove that you’re right?
And FWIW, here is an excerpt from the filename story. Do with it what you will.
“Tip had often wondered over the past few months exactly what uncommon skills he possessed. Military experience. Doctorate in psychology. Few close relatives - that was probably attractive from a security standpoint. He was smart, but he’d be the first to admit he hadn’t done much with his smarts since burning out in grad school. But maybe that was what they wanted - a bright person without ambition. Someone who would do a strange specialized job without complaint.”
We egoists are always the last to know how we REALLY affect others. Difficult to be without feedback….
Aaaaaaw, dey frens
I dunno how you and your friends relate to each other, but uhh…
That’s pretty much exactly how I relate to some of my friends.
But, like… ironically, right?
They don’t honestly think that you being able to look at them is some sort of actual gift, and you wouldn’t honestly respond to that notion with derisive and insulting laughter… right?
Because if not, I think you’ve invented some new usage of the word “friend” where it means the opposite of the normal usage…
Friends help each other.
HOW they help each other is highly individualistic.
Firstly, Sweetheart was startled into laughter by Tip’s non-sequitur outburst of narcissism. That’s why she laughed. One of the strongest stimuli of laughter is surprise – something that one expects is less likely to seem funny, something that takes one by surprise is more likely to seem funny. People sometimes say unexpected things that trigger involuntary laughter:- how people cope depends on their friendship.
Friends are tolerant when others are narcissistic, and friends are tolerant when other laugh. Tip is the archetypal narcissist and he does believe he is God’s gift to the eyes of those with taste, and he lets his belief slip out despite his intellect saying “nope. She won’t agree.” (A real person wouldn’t be this narcissistic, but Tip is an imaginary cartoon character who is written as being unrealistically narcissistic.) Somebody who was not Tip’s friend would laugh sarcastically or even insult them; Sweetheart is Tip’s friend, and her laughter was provoked by surprise, not by derision. And when Sweetheart says “thankyou”, she is being honest: she needed a laugh, and is grateful for it even though Tip didn’t intend it.
Similarly, Tip is Sweetheart’s friend; he doesn’t take serious offense at her reaction. If they were not friends then he would take serious offense and snap back, and/or sulk. Being her friend, he recognises that his narcissism was doomed to cause laughter, and he recognises that he managed to lighten Sweetheart’s mood, even if in a way that punctures his ego somewhat. His response implies that he is disappointed, but that he isn’t taking offense.
If I could afford to buy a strip, this would be it. Panel 3 is the best panel ever, and 2 and 3 would be a terrific T-shirt…
That happy Sweetheart <3
Tip is an excellent psychologist.
The funny thing is, I’m still not convinced he even is a psychologist. We’ve literally only got his word to believe.
We never see a degree, never hear what school he attended, never hear about professors who taught him, never see any sort of official documentation or other independent verification, never hear him use actual psychological terminology that couldn’t be picked up by any dumb schmuck with ten minutes and a library… for all we know he just THINKS he’s a psychologist, and is good at convincing people.
Consider that the cast page mentions his military service and CIA training, but nothing about psychological training. There’s a strip where he flat out says he’s not a therapist, despite (as others in the comments note) the fact that quite literally the only remotely psychological thing we see him do is talk therapy (which the same comments then point out suggests he has no actual credentials.) Skin Horse itself didn’t hire him to perform psych therapy – he’s literally just a file clerk.
Most of his ‘pschology’ is rubbish. He’s a terrible listener who THINKS he’s a great listener. He’s deeply self absorbed but also woefully lacks self awareness. Instead of helping people, he annoys them. His solution for nearly every problem is a makeover, ignoring the actual core of problems to pursue superficiality.
Sometimes he can convince people to change their minds about things, but only because he’s the default voice of reason in a room full of crazy people, pointing out obvious things and using basic logic. The only other thing he’s truly good at is seduction, which quite frankly is wildly inappropriate for a psychologist.
All the evidence points toward one thing:
Tip isn’t a psychologist – he’s a conman, and a potentially delusional one at that.
He’s a clinical psychologist. He worked with rodents in a laboratory.
He’s not a psychiatrist, and he’s not a therapist.
So where did he pick up the hand puppet routine?
Knowing Tip, it’s probably a fetish.
After he was through with the rodents in the lab.
I would expect many nonhuman sapients to be withdrawn. Puppet therapy is likely easier for them to relate to. Even when they fail to open a dialog directly, there’s always the “Please make him stop!” effect… 😉
I never said anything about a psychiatrist, because we already know he isn’t one. He consistently calls himself a “psychologist”, he doesn’t have an “M.D.” on the end of his name, and he doesn’t prescribe medication, so clearly he’s not a psychiatrist.
Also, your arguement is self contradictory.
To the best of my knowledge, psychotherapy is a foundational element of clinical psychology. You could argue he’s a psychologist who isn’t also a therapist, but unless I’m mistaken it’s impossible to be a -clinical psychologist- who isn’t a therapist.
As for working with rodents in a lab, that’s -behavioral- psychology, not clinical. And again, the only evidence we have that he worked with lab rats is Tip’s own testimony, which may be unreliable.
Which lab? Who did he work for? Who were his colleagues? What papers did he publish? What was he researching? What conferences did he attend? Is there a single independent person who can actually verify any part of his (incredibly vague!) claims?
Why would a behavioral researcher working with rats in a lab abandon the career he spent a ton of money and time earning a degree for in order to go enlist in the army? It would be one thing if the military or the DOD contracted him or his lab to perform some sort of weird psychological warfare experiments for them, but him just up and quitting his job and becoming a grunt out of the blue?
The man is an obvious egostist with delusions of self importance and yet you’re going to accept him at his word when all the evidence paints him as an unreliable source, and his own claims are so vague and generic, almost entirely lacking in details?
A “psychologist” is someone who has a Ph.D. in psychology. A “psychiatrist” is someone with an M.D..
Whether anyone has licensed Dennis “Tip” Wilkin to practice psychology is up for grabs.
One branch of Clinical Psychology focuses solely on research. That’s Tip.
You’re taking a very strong stance against Tip. But what’s the point? What do you hope to gain? What fuels this tirade of yours, other than the insatiable desire to prove that you’re right?
And FWIW, here is an excerpt from the filename story. Do with it what you will.
“Tip had often wondered over the past few months exactly what uncommon skills he possessed. Military experience. Doctorate in psychology. Few close relatives - that was probably attractive from a security standpoint. He was smart, but he’d be the first to admit he hadn’t done much with his smarts since burning out in grad school. But maybe that was what they wanted - a bright person without ambition. Someone who would do a strange specialized job without complaint.”
Doesn’t exactly balance the scales, does it?
No, but sometimes a little lift in your mood can work wonders, and give you the strength to finish that balancing act. Every bit helps. (Shrug)
Maybe a bucket of hot tar and a pillowfull of feathers could lift their mood a little higher…