User:Borednewb

Aussie here. Feel free to ignore this page, I'm just trying to understand the ballsed up mindset that is Chris, at least a little. If this is inappropriate, feel free to delete it. I'm just putting some theories down to see what people think.

Unified theory of Chris

Chris is an autistic sociopath with a thin grasp of the differentiation between fantasy and reality.

Because of the autism Chris is unable to understand in depth social cues and finds it far easier to relate to (note, not empathise) more one dimensional figures than real life offering, and so turns to characters from childrens shows and simple movies (and when watching shows with more depths, he only picks up on the simplest of understandings). From this he picks up what he understands as the 'rules' of the game, such as the third date rule, his poor understanding of the friend zone, and things such as 'heart level'. The way social interaction (in fact, everything) in the real world works is too complex for Chris so he abstracts it down to what he believes the rules are, rules he has picked up from ficticious media. And so Chris believes things like 'the hero always ends up with the girl', are not literary conceits but the way the real world works.

But the idea of his world being based on the conceits of writing a simplistic story may not be entirely correct. He may not be basing reality on fantasy, he may be getting the two confused. Chris seems to believe he is the hero/narrator of his own story, and as such cannot really differentiate between statement and fact. Chris best understands simplistic stories, and it is mentioned elsewhere his writing style is incredibly reliant upon exposition, where the narrator's job is to stand in for actions. "Meanwhile, the dastardly villains have finished building their superweapon", that sort of thing. Because it is stated by the narrator, it is a fact that the people who are making a superweapon are dastardly and villains. And so, with Chris confusing his world with a story with him as the narrator, he seems to think that by making statements, they become true. By describing himself as loyal, true and honest he IS loyal, true and honest. For more information on this, go down to the part about 'Chris' Categorial imperative'.

Bob, as a 'southern gentleman' probably imparted onto Chris nuggets of wisdom such as his dislike of homosexuals and general distrust of black people, and within Chris' mind these took on the properties of fact. This is probably why Chris finds it so distasteful to make statements like "I am gay", seeming revulsed by them. In his mind by making those statements, he is BECOMING gay, and why he put such pathetic imagery in the videos to deny any homosexuality.

Chris is a Sociopath. He is unable to empathise with others, and in fact views them as characters in his story. Working on the idea that this is 'his' story, Chris doesn't view the 'characters' as people, he views them as a means to an end. That end is twofold, firstly in becoming a man (which in his mind will happen primarily when he finds himself a 'sweetheart' and has sex) and secondly in having adolescent fun with his games.

So as a Sociopath Chris views all interactions under a simple means/end equation. "What means will get me the desired end" is the sentence that dictates all of Chris' interactions with others. He wants to avoid Alec's calls (or more exactly, thinking about the issues Alec raises), so he'll just ignore what's being said, putting the minimum amount of effort into the conversation to get what he wants (Alec to agree with him and/or go away). He wants a Girlfriend so he'll do whatever he believes is necessary to make it happen.

As proof, view the videos to Kacey when he thinks she's leaving him. These are obvious attempts at sympathy, considering he'd known her for all of a couple of weeks at this stage. He is doing this because in his mind if he seems pitiful, she will be sorry for him (probably the only way he avoided getting beaten up in school). Then in the next video he's on top of the world. His ingenuine emotions shows they were an attempt to manipulate Kasey, suggesting further he has no ability to empathise with her or her desires.

If Chris is so manipulative socially, the obvious question is why is he not more successful socially then? The simple answer is because he is a socially inept social manipulator. He only understands the most basic aspects of social interaction, and so his attempts to influence the social realm fail in ways that can only be greeted with equal amounts of mirth and amazement.

The real nail in the coffin that backs up all of these claims comes in the most recent video. In this he shows all of the above aspects.

1. Autistic: Chris proves his inability to understand social cues in the statement:

“

I mean, you aren't even ready for a boyfriend! You told me so yourself, multiple times!

”

This shows he is unable to understand simple social conventions, such as "When a girl tells you she is not interested in a boyfriend, do not keep following that one thought", but the fact he had to be told multiple times suggests that he kept on asking.

2. Sociopathic: In all the statements he shows a complete inability to understand any of her thoughts on the matter, all that matters in his mind is that HE gets the girl. He has no thoughts for how she understands matters, only for the fact that he has decided that she will be his girlfriend, yet she is not.

3. Manipulator: The first thing he does when things are not going his way, he attempts to manipulate the situation in his own socially inept way. He plays the pity card, attempting to sway her decision not to be with him because he has autism and is a virgin.

4. Confuses reality with story: Chris obviously believes he is the main character. Just look at this statement:

“

you don't need that new boyfriend, because... I need you.

”

His proof to her that SHE does not need her current (questionable) boyfriend is that HE needs her. That is like saying "You don't need that sandwich because I am hungry", there is no cause and effect there as understood by the real world, only in Christian's warped understanding of reality.

tl;dr version: Chris is a sociopath who doesn't give a fuck about anyone and will say/do whatever he thinks will get the result he wants. He's a socially inept wanna-be-manipulative sociopath autistic.

Past writing

This is kept up here while I'm working through what I can see.

Chris' limited understanding

Reading this and watching the Monty Python video may explain a bit about Chris' mindset. Chris adores Monty Python, that much is obvious (and tragic). He loves it in the same way a child would ("That man has a silly walk!", "He's slapping the guy with fish!" would be the depth of his understanding) and understands that it is 'funny', and it is similar with his love of family guy. He loves the shows and understands that they are funny and so his own attempts at humour (as evident in his list of 'jokes' in Random-access humor) are based entirely around what he understands of the series.

He recognises that they are funny, he recognises that a lot of the humour in both shows are based on the non-sequitor nature of the jokes, and so in his mind he equates 'randomness' with 'funny'. In a normal person, they recognise the vast amount of work that goes into making something funny, it requires timing, relevance to the audience, risqué nature, and a host of other variables, all coming together in varied amounts (some being left out completely in particular types of humour) to create an entire form of communication. Chris only sees limited aspects and automatically equates them. To him risqué = joke, and random = joke.

Look at his 'joke' as an example. It lacks any form of pacing, no misleading statements about where the joke is going, nothing confronting, in fact the closest it gets to a joke is using milk and eggs as a metaphor for sperm and the female egg, an attempt at a double entendre that fails enormously. He then goes on to butcher whatever humour may (but doesn't) exist by showing a complete lack of timing and carrying the joke on past any humourous stage.

He believes that by including a risque attempt at a double entendre in what is otherwise a children's fable level of writing (all it's missing is a wicked witch trying to stop the husband getting home and the phrase "Happily ever after" at the end, and it would be a poor fable) it becomes a joke. Similarly, he knows the Junkions are meant to be comic relief in the original Transformers movie, and so he thinks that by making random statements he is funny. He doesn't understand context, or 'get' any second level to things.

Let's take this and apply it to his pride and joy, Sonichu. Chris likes Sonic and Pokemon, and Chris realises they are for children. By putting them together he thinks that makes his comic automatically for children. He doesn't comprehend the amazing requirements on a story to make it an effective children's story, he simply assumes "Sonic is for children, therefore anything with Sonic in it is for children". He can throw in hardcore gore, sex scenes, huge romance plots that really are inappropriate for children (kids don't read romance novels for a reason, they're not interested in a lot of that), and in his mind it is still a comic appropriate for children.

tl;dr version: Chris doesn't understand context, and believes correlation = causation. Sonic is in a show for children, therefore anything Sonic is in is for children, he doesn't understand that it was the stories in the children's show that made it appropriate for children, not by virtue of it being about a blue hedgehog.

Chris' Categorical Imperative

I wrote a bit about this on the page Chris and his Ego, but I just want to expand. There I said that Chris had a child like method of debating, he decides on the facts and then twist the evidence to support it (look at his use of parody to talk down about Asperchu, while at the same time legitimising Sonichu by claiming it to be a parody). But I think there may be something more to it than this. In philosophy there is the term in discussing morality called 'Moral Absolutism', that is where there is an absolute truth about what is moral and what is not. I will call Chris' view on the world 'Chris Absolutism'. That is, there is an absolute truth about the world, and when people disagree with him (his view being factual in his eyes) it is because they do not understand it.

Look at Megan and his end result with that. Chris believes that Megan is his sweetheart and therefore in his mind, according to reality she is. When the fiasco happened, she is upset with the picture Chris posted, and everyone jokes that he thinks she's upset because she doesn't understand the sexual act in question, but that is a sign of something far scarier.

Chris thinks he is a gentleman, therefore everything he does is the act of a gentleman, and if she's upset with him acting inappropriately well obviously he didn't act inappropriately because gentlemen do not do that, so instead she just didn't understand his action. So he explains it, thinking "My action is the action of a gentleman, if she understands it as I do, she will have to agree".

Chris gets confused when people disagree with him not because he's slow (well, he is, but that's not the only reason) but because he knows his belief is fact and so he just needs to work out what evidence he has to back it up, often evidence that doesn't exist. He does not understand the differentiation between perception and truth. It is why he is unable to learn, time after time, that all his sweethearts are trolls, because in his heart he loves (I think his conception of love needs analysis, too) them and so that means in reality they are his true love. Similarly, Chris honestly believes he is young, thin, handsome, honest and a gentleman because he states these to be facts. Any proof to the contrary does not fit with his self image and so it is ignored, and anyone who says he is not any of these things is obviously incorrect in his mind.

A search for the term "I was wrong" on this -pedia reveals that it is only used 10 times, and only 3 of those are Chris. Every one of those 3 times are him either apologising because he thinks it will get him something or... actually that's it. It's him talking to Kacey's father thinking apologising will get him out of trouble, apologising for the coke adds in an incredibly passive aggressive way thinking it'll get him out of trouble, and apologising to Kacey thinking it'll get her back. Chris is never wrong unless 'admitting' it gets him something.

tl;dr version: Chris does not understand the difference between his perspective and absolute truth. He has no conception of being wrong not because he is arrogant, but because he honestly doesn't differentiate between his perception and reality. And so anyone who disagrees with him is trolling or ignorant. Look at the white knights trying to save him from trolling sweet hearts (every one of them being ignored in favour of his perspective, that his sweethearts are 'true and loyal' to him). Or the Megan saga, where when Megan was angry with him he assumed explaining himself would make her understand that he was right.

Chris and 'love'

Like many things, Chris seems to understand love in terms best compared to a computer game (see his respect meter), that is to say it is a goal driven enterprise, not a mutual attraction. Falling in love and having sex are stepping stones in maturity and leaving childhood to enter into mature adulthood, and so to Chris it is the 'goal' he attains. In Pokemon and other games there is ALWAYS a pre-scripted way through the puzzles to the solution, so Chris assumes there is here. Rather than allowing it naturally to happen (assuming it would naturally happen in Chris' case) he seems determined to go through the steps as quickly as possible. Even in calling it a 'Girlfriend quest' or 'Love quest' it makes it sound like some bullshit dating simulator "Collect twenty panties and I'll sleep with you" game. In his desire for 'dating classes' he doesn't actually want to learn how to talk to women effectively, he wants a walkthrough he can finish the game with.

But that is not to say he is attempting to rush it, he merely assumes it can be done that quickly. From hordes of fables and romantic tales Chris 'learns' how love works (he assumes it is a magical 'eyes meet across the room and happily ever after affair), and from comic stereotypes and bad teen comedies he learns how dating works (the good guy meets with the girl, they have chemistry, fuck by the third date). Considering he seems to blur the lines between fantasy and reality in most things, it is no surprise he seems to view these as documentaries rather than stories and believes that relationships should move this quickly and always work out.

Put this together and there's one obvious conclusion. Chris does not love any of his 'girlfriends' (none of which are really friends, most of which aren't really girls), instead he loves the idea of a girlfriend. Chris has NEVER spoken of meeting someone and not really having a 'spark' with them, a situation most people experience fairly regularly, he just assumes if they are interested in him and meet his physical requirements, than they must be 'the one'. He loves none of them, instead he loves the idea of having a girlfriend, the loveydoveyness is a combination of the belief this is how people in relationships act, a desire to keep his girlfriend by telling her he loves her, and an expression of the feeling of accomplishment he has.

This is why Chris is able to move on so quickly when the relationship invariably falls apart. Follow the Chris Logic:

Man and woman fall in love -> Happy Ending.

If I settle down with a woman -> I will have a happy ending and be an adult.

If I settle down with a woman -> I will be in love with her.

If a girl is with me -> She is my true love.

If a girl leaves me -> She is not my true love.

In an ideal relationship, you're with your partner because you both love each other. In a Chris relationship whoever you're with, you love. When they leave him he's sad because they're not with him, not because his heart is broken.

And now, onto his fear of breaking up couples in relationships in his comics. Because he views the relationship as the end goal (the 'winning point', so to speak), having a relationship break up in his comic would be like depowering the characters (I.E. Utterly alien to him) or willingly trying to lose a game.

Additional: A theory on Chris and sex. Chris never reached any degree of maturity, but he still sexually matured enough to enjoy the act of sex (although in Chris' case it is a solo act, perhaps with props). But since he is not emotionally mature enough to truly have a sexuality, he falls back on accepted knowledge. Chris dislikes homosexuals and likes women because he has accepted from birth that this is what men like. A couple of times he's mentioned that in the past he's been called homosexual before his encounter with the trolls (I recall reading this, not sure where. Any help would be appreciated), so his homophobia is probably a backlash from that ("I'm being called homosexual as an insult. I don't like being insulted, so being called a homosexual is bad. So homosexuality is bad, so I hate homosexuals"). So without a genuine sexuality he feels he must force himself to be straight to fit in, hence his use of the Sailor Moon poster as a reminder to 'keep (him) straight'. This also explains why he uses things such as vibrators, since Chris never developed a true sexuality, he enjoys anything that causes sexual stimulation. In the same way a rat with a pleasure button does, Chris will keep pressing whatever buttons help him enjoy himself. He used vibrators until people said "That is homosexual", and so he 'publically' stops. It's possible (or even likely) he privately continues, because his hatred of being called homosexual may not be the fear of being called homosexual, it may be lingering fear of the social insult of being called gay in school.