I'm really offended and not entirely sure what to do.
― hmmm (hmmm), Wednesday, 21 July 2004 10:42 (twenty-one years ago)
― Andrew (enneff), Wednesday, 21 July 2004 10:44 (twenty-one years ago)
I cried myself to sleep"
The guy's diary just says
"Wallabies lost to new zealand
Had sex though"
― hmmm (hmmm), Wednesday, 21 July 2004 10:49 (twenty-one years ago)
― mark grout (mark grout), Wednesday, 21 July 2004 10:58 (twenty-one years ago)
(x-post)
Sexist or stereotypical?
― ___ (___), Wednesday, 21 July 2004 10:59 (twenty-one years ago)
xpost
― Liz :x (Liz :x), Wednesday, 21 July 2004 11:00 (twenty-one years ago)
― Ma$onic Boom (kate), Wednesday, 21 July 2004 11:00 (twenty-one years ago)
multiple x-post.
I wonder why I'm being so sensitive to this?
― hmmm (hmmm), Wednesday, 21 July 2004 11:02 (twenty-one years ago)
xpost: hmmmm, it also says that all women overanalyse and invest far too much emotionally in insignificant events.
― Liz :x (Liz :x), Wednesday, 21 July 2004 11:03 (twenty-one years ago)
― Tuomas (Tuomas), Wednesday, 21 July 2004 11:03 (twenty-one years ago)
― ___ (___), Wednesday, 21 July 2004 11:03 (twenty-one years ago)
― mark grout (mark grout), Wednesday, 21 July 2004 11:03 (twenty-one years ago)
That was an xpost to Tuomas
― Liz :x (Liz :x), Wednesday, 21 July 2004 11:04 (twenty-one years ago)
If you are offended by the joke, think about *why* you're offended by the joke: i.e. gender stereotypes are offensive.
Respond by trying to pay *less* attention to gender stereotypes, rather than responding with *more* gender stereotypes.
― Ma$onic Boom (kate), Wednesday, 21 July 2004 11:05 (twenty-one years ago)
― the neurotic awakening of s (blueski), Wednesday, 21 July 2004 11:07 (twenty-one years ago)
― j e r e m y (x Jeremy), Wednesday, 21 July 2004 11:10 (twenty-one years ago)
― Liz :x (Liz :x), Wednesday, 21 July 2004 11:10 (twenty-one years ago)
― Tuomas (Tuomas), Wednesday, 21 July 2004 11:10 (twenty-one years ago)
― hmmm (hmmm), Wednesday, 21 July 2004 11:11 (twenty-one years ago)
― j e r e m y (x Jeremy), Wednesday, 21 July 2004 11:11 (twenty-one years ago)
― Tuomas (Tuomas), Wednesday, 21 July 2004 11:12 (twenty-one years ago)
Me, I'd never send *any* questionable joke to a person in an office that I wasn't entirely comfortable with. I would address that issue with your boss, rather than sending back a nasty joke in reply. Because sending back a different sexist joke will just make your boss think it's OK to continue joking.
― Ma$onic Boom (kate), Wednesday, 21 July 2004 11:14 (twenty-one years ago)
― hmmm (hmmm), Wednesday, 21 July 2004 11:17 (twenty-one years ago)
"Discrimination based on gender, especially discrimination against women. " "Attitudes, conditions, or behaviors that promote stereotyping of social roles based on gender"
Neither of which a pointless and asinine joke about the (perceived) lack of male observancy and preoccupation with sex are doing. It's not exactly PC, nor is it the height of a pithy humor, but I'll take issue with the idea that it actively (or even passively) promotes the stereotyping of men as sex-obsessed boors. It's harmless and dumb, maybe irritating and irksome, but I'd find it a hard sell as actively sexist.
― j e r e m y (x Jeremy), Wednesday, 21 July 2004 11:25 (twenty-one years ago)
― Tuomas (Tuomas), Wednesday, 21 July 2004 11:35 (twenty-one years ago)
― Markelby (Mark C), Wednesday, 21 July 2004 11:45 (twenty-one years ago)
You're using a slang name for male genitalia as a derogatory term.
Sexist?
― Huey (Huey), Wednesday, 21 July 2004 11:46 (twenty-one years ago)
― j e r e m y (x Jeremy), Wednesday, 21 July 2004 11:50 (twenty-one years ago)
― j e r e m y (x Jeremy), Wednesday, 21 July 2004 12:01 (twenty-one years ago)
― mark grout (mark grout), Wednesday, 21 July 2004 12:04 (twenty-one years ago)
― j e r e m y (x Jeremy), Wednesday, 21 July 2004 12:08 (twenty-one years ago)
Jer, I should post those pictures on ILX!
― I CAN LEAD YOU THROUGH THE ZONE (ex machina), Wednesday, 21 July 2004 12:10 (twenty-one years ago)
― j e r e m y (x Jeremy), Wednesday, 21 July 2004 12:12 (twenty-one years ago)
Interesting point. We should not let our desire for normative positions about gender prevent us from making observations as objectively as possible. Undoubtedly, the gender continuum changes over time but surely we can acknowledge biological differences in males and females which will affect their life experiences.
In the case of this faintly amusing joke, the question would be how much interest in sport or the details of relationships is the result of some biological imperative and how much of it is the result of culture.
The sports thing, I don't know. I am a little bit of a sports fan, but I know increasing numbers of women who both participate and follow sports. The numbers do indicate more interest in men but who knows? In many primates (gorillas, baboons, chimps), females are better at communication and relationship skills than males but again does that indicate social norms or biology?
― Michael White (Hereward), Wednesday, 21 July 2004 14:51 (twenty-one years ago)
― Liz :x (Liz :x), Wednesday, 21 July 2004 14:52 (twenty-one years ago)
― Tuomas (Tuomas), Wednesday, 21 July 2004 14:55 (twenty-one years ago)
but i don't think this joke is sexist in the slightest (really, to me, it seemed to illustrate how both sexes are clueless as to what the other is thinking). but since we're on the subject i want to mention how sexist i find commercials of late. watch 30 minutes of tv and you will see a man being the butt of every-other joke come advert time. in any given commercial break you will see at least 3 ads portraying men as too stupid to cook, clean or tell the difference between a tampon and candy. this is something that has bothered me since i went into advertising in college. i have no idea if anyone else has picked up on this or if i'm being over sensitive.
― dyson (dyson), Wednesday, 21 July 2004 15:18 (twenty-one years ago)
― Alba (Alba), Wednesday, 21 July 2004 15:21 (twenty-one years ago)
― plebian plebs (plebian), Thursday, 22 July 2004 08:50 (twenty-one years ago)
i don't know, but i wonder how much relevance the behaviour of other primates has to humans
in any given commercial break you will see at least 3 ads portraying men as too stupid to cook, clean or tell the difference between a tampon and candy.
well at least everything men do in ads doesn't make them orgasm. me, i'm having an orgasm over this new kitchen cleansing product. and here i am, naked, in the shower, orgasming over shampoo. now i'm orgasming over this tim tam.
― The Lady Ms Lurex (lucylurex), Thursday, 22 July 2004 09:07 (twenty-one years ago)
― The Lady Ms Lurex (lucylurex), Thursday, 22 July 2004 09:08 (twenty-one years ago)
― The Lady Ms Lurex (lucylurex), Thursday, 22 July 2004 09:09 (twenty-one years ago)
― Liz :x (Liz :x), Thursday, 22 July 2004 09:10 (twenty-one years ago)
which it does, sorta, I think. "Men are stupid but we put up with them anyway, don't we?" (which seems to me the main message of most commercials/pop culture based around the stupid male stereotype) is a pretty deameaning message for men, but at the same time it also gives them a free pass at doing whatever stupid/macho shit they like; this goes as far back as "Bewitched" (and probably much further, but I haven't done my homework.)
― Daniel_Rf (Daniel_Rf), Thursday, 22 July 2004 09:22 (twenty-one years ago)
I've come pretty close after having a really good salad...
― latebloomer (latebloomer), Thursday, 22 July 2004 10:13 (twenty-one years ago)
but at the same time it also gives them a free pass at doing whatever stupid/macho shit they like
and that's just what the world needs.
― hmmm (hmmm), Thursday, 22 July 2004 10:23 (twenty-one years ago)
― accentmonkey (accentmonkey), Thursday, 22 July 2004 10:44 (twenty-one years ago)
― Ronan (Ronan), Thursday, 22 July 2004 10:46 (twenty-one years ago)
― dave q, Thursday, 22 July 2004 13:33 (twenty-one years ago)
"Oh no, thwarted by the fantastic brilliance of eeezee washing up liquid!!"
(wife) "You'll have to do it more often!"
(child) "Haa haa heeeee"
This one?
― mark grout (mark grout), Thursday, 22 July 2004 13:37 (twenty-one years ago)
― hmmm (hmmm), Thursday, 22 July 2004 13:38 (twenty-one years ago)
― dyson (dyson), Thursday, 22 July 2004 13:44 (twenty-one years ago)
― dyson (dyson), Thursday, 22 July 2004 13:46 (twenty-one years ago)
― ken c (ken c), Thursday, 22 July 2004 13:49 (twenty-one years ago)
different != incompatible though. i mean surely it's saying that those two people are living with the differences between them despite having different personalities (the story may or may not imply that those two personalities are respectively typical of a female and a male)
― ken c (ken c), Thursday, 22 July 2004 13:56 (twenty-one years ago)
Incidentally I don't think the sexism of this joke or the countless jokes like it -- just about every sitcom couple on American TV runs this dymanic, you know -- is at all pointed toward one side. Whichever gender you identify with becomes the reasonable one; the other becomes the butt of the joke. (Women care about relationships whereas men are strangely sports-and-sex simple vs. Woman are ridiculous touchy-feely overanalyzers whereas men are noble sensible beings.) The main slanting that goes on -- in this joke and in its countless variants -- is that identifying with the male side usually involves a certain boys-will-be-boys embracing of simplicity or stupidity as a cute, charming, manly value: see also the sitcom couple where always the man is incompetently or problem-causingly simple and the wife pretty much just works with him on it. I'm not sure whether that trope is a male privilege or stems in part from a sense of being assaulted.
All in all it tends to boil down to a single trope, which is that the male/female relationship becomes the son/mother relationship. Even in this joke, that's the dynamic. Pretty much all male/female sensibility jokes boil down to the idea that men are perpetual simple children being dragged reluctantly into what women dictate as constituting "adulthood."
― nabicothingy, Thursday, 22 July 2004 14:53 (twenty-one years ago)
― Michael White (Hereward), Thursday, 22 July 2004 17:12 (twenty-one years ago)
― Martin Skidmore (Martin Skidmore), Thursday, 22 July 2004 19:50 (twenty-one years ago)
hmmm
― napster p2ppies (wins), Saturday, 6 February 2016 23:08 (ten years ago)
Worth asking imo
― broderik f (darraghmac), Saturday, 6 February 2016 23:27 (ten years ago)
hmmm (hmmm)
― napster p2ppies (wins), Saturday, 6 February 2016 23:29 (ten years ago)
'dick move' is a highly offensive sexist term btw
― napster p2ppies (wins), Saturday, 6 February 2016 23:34 (ten years ago)
Yes, yes, hmmmmm
― broderik f (darraghmac), Saturday, 6 February 2016 23:43 (ten years ago)
"well at least everything men do in ads doesn't make them orgasm"I've come pretty close after having a really good salad...― latebloomer (latebloomer), Thursday, July 22, 2004 10:13 AM (11 years ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink
― latebloomer (latebloomer), Thursday, July 22, 2004 10:13 AM (11 years ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink
http://thehairpin.com/2011/01/women-laughing-alone-with-salad/
― kinder, Saturday, 6 February 2016 23:57 (ten years ago)