Search forums

Forums

Export thread

>___< "In a Woman's World"

Mar 9, 2009#1

ElJuski

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sUUbzJ3LjK0:2nuwkz1t][/youtube:2nuwkz1t]

:grrr:

Mar 9, 2009#2

Kitty Sinatra

Mar 9, 2009#3

GasBandit

On the next episode...

Mar 9, 2009#4

AshburnerX

That sound you can hear is the sound of my head banging into my desk. Way to play up every negative sterotype of a woman guys... what next, having them seduce rich husbands and then take them for all their cash to spend on SHOES?!?

Mar 9, 2009#5

Wasabi Poptart

My husband asked me if I was watching a face transplant because of the look on my face while I watched that little video. :bush:

Though I have to admit that I'd be slightly upset if my hairdresser left her salon. So far she's the only one who (a) hasn't fucked up my hair and (b) hasn't gone insane.

Mar 9, 2009#6

The Lovely Boehner

GasBandit said:
On the next episode...

for your next post, will it be a jewish person under the same sign? or a black fellow under a Fried Chicken sign?

I didn't get through the youtube, it was pretty stupid.

Mar 9, 2009#7

InfiniteShadow

*head smacks desk* oi

Mar 9, 2009#8

Chibibar

I dunno what to say.......... brain escaping my head.

Mar 9, 2009#9

GasBandit

Charlie Dont Surf said:
for your next post, will it be a jewish person under the same sign? or a black fellow under a Fried Chicken sign?

Captain Offended tooooo the rescuuuuue! :eyeroll:

Mar 9, 2009#10

Charlie Dont Surf said:
GasBandit said:

On the next episode...

Click to expand...

for your next post, will it be a jewish person under the same sign? or a black fellow under a Fried Chicken sign?

I didn't get through the youtube, it was pretty stupid.

He's commenting that the video had the stereotypes. Hence the offensive cartoon which is along the same lines as the video. GB was using humor to parody the video's content.

The more you know...

Mar 9, 2009#11

North_Ranger

Uh-huh.

I need the address of the person responsible, three frag grenades and a helicopter.

Mar 9, 2009#12

WolfOfOdin

:eyeroll: You could raise how most, if not all commercials portray men as helpless idiots who are incapable of doing anything without a woman's help.

Both are offensive, this one was just laughably stupid and outdated. They might as well call it "sex and the city animated"

Mar 9, 2009#13

quandofloo

North_Ranger said:
Uh-huh.

I need the address of the person responsible, three frag grenades and a helicopter.

That's probably going to be one long ass helicopter ride. Maybe you should take an airplane first.

Mar 9, 2009#14

The Lovely Boehner

Well, I kind of assumed GB would find that cartoon funny normally.

Mar 9, 2009#15

InfiniteShadow

I'm sure this would be a suitable means of conveyance.

Mar 9, 2009#16

Charlie Dont Surf said:
Well, I kind of assumed GB would find that cartoon funny normally.

I might, too. But under the circumstances this was an unfounded assumption.

edit: By "I might, too" I mean that I find it funny. Especially during those times when we are having trouble getting by and my wife goes shopping. Grain of truthiness and all that.

Mar 9, 2009#17

North_Ranger said:
Uh-huh.

I need the address of the person responsible, three frag grenades and a helicopter.

Got it covered. I'll be there in five minutes. Ten if I don't find an immediate good landing spot.

Mar 9, 2009#18

Iaculus

ThatNickGuy said:
North_Ranger said:

Uh-huh.

I need the address of the person responsible, three frag grenades and a helicopter.

Click to expand...

Got it covered. I'll be there in five minutes. Ten if I don't find an immediate good landing spot.

Landing spot?

Mar 9, 2009#19

Chibibar

my wife laughs... she does like the shopping one cause she is like that.

We could be discussing about how hungry we are and food and she will walk PASS the foodcourt and go shopping FIRST then food (after say... couple of hours) I kid you not!

Mar 9, 2009#20

JONJONAUG

Edrondol said:
Charlie Dont Surf said:

GasBandit said:

On the next episode...

Click to expand...

for your next post, will it be a jewish person under the same sign? or a black fellow under a Fried Chicken sign?

I didn't get through the youtube, it was pretty stupid.

Click to expand...

He's commenting that the video had the stereotypes. Hence the offensive cartoon which is along the same lines as the video. GB was using humor to parody the video's content.

The more you know...

Now you see if I had done the same thing you would've locked the topic and I'd have to PM you about me just doing the same thing and you wouldn't unlock the topic and I'd complain about you not liking fun.

Also, the OP video made me laugh because it's apparently supposed to be tailored to women...although come to think of it a lot of the stuff on Lifetime isn't any better in the stereotypical characters category and that gets enough ratings to stay in business.

Mar 9, 2009#21

Lifetime is the worst at stereotyping women. Just like Maxim and SpikeTV stereotypes men. Know why? Because these stereotypes exist for a reason.

Both cater to those who exemplify the gender in popular culture - the woman who wants equality while still getting romance and having the door held open for her; the guy who appears vulnerable but can still kick ass and get the hot chicks to take off their tops in his Camero.

I've never understood why we're trying to hard to fix the obvious and genetically built in differences between men & women instead of celebrating these differences.

Mar 9, 2009#22

Chibibar

Edrondol said:
Lifetime is the worst at stereotyping women. Just like Maxim and SpikeTV stereotypes men. Know why? Because these stereotypes exist for a reason.

Both cater to those who exemplify the gender in popular culture - the woman who wants equality while still getting romance and having the door held open for her; the guy who appears vulnerable but can still kick ass and get the hot chicks to take off their tops in his Camero.

I've never understood why we're trying to hard to fix the obvious and genetically built in differences between men & women instead of celebrating these differences.

cause the general public is generally stupid??

Mar 9, 2009#23

Chronos[Ha-G]

Chibibar said:
Edrondol said:

Lifetime is the worst at stereotyping women. Just like Maxim and SpikeTV stereotypes men. Know why? Because these stereotypes exist for a reason.

Both cater to those who exemplify the gender in popular culture - the woman who wants equality while still getting romance and having the door held open for her; the guy who appears vulnerable but can still kick * and get the hot chicks to take off their tops in his Camero.

I've never understood why we're trying to hard to fix the obvious and genetically built in differences between men & women instead of celebrating these differences.

Click to expand...

cause the general public is generally stupid??

No matter what you're arguing for/against, this always always always holds true.

Mar 9, 2009#24

The Lovely Boehner

Edrondol said:
Lifetime is the worst at stereotyping women. Just like Maxim and SpikeTV stereotypes men. Know why? Because these stereotypes exist for a reason.

Both cater to those who exemplify the gender in popular culture - the woman who wants equality while still getting romance and having the door held open for her; the guy who appears vulnerable but can still kick ass and get the hot chicks to take off their tops in his Camero.

I've never understood why we're trying to hard to fix the obvious and genetically built in differences between men & women instead of celebrating these differences.

Do you honestly think women are genetically built in to be more emotional and men are genetically disposed to be stoic and emotionally "strong"?

Mar 9, 2009#25

Fun Size

Edrondol said:
I've never understood why we're trying to hard to fix the obvious and genetically built in differences between men & women instead of celebrating these differences.

I was going to totally write up this wise and insighful response on mankind's attempts, as a species, to overcome societal flaws induced through our genetic history through knowledge and understanding, but the fact is I'm all tired out from kicking ass and getting hot chicks to take their tops off in my Camero.

Maybe tomorrow.

Mar 9, 2009#26

JONJONAUG

Charlie Dont Surf said:
Edrondol said:

Lifetime is the worst at stereotyping women. Just like Maxim and SpikeTV stereotypes men. Know why? Because these stereotypes exist for a reason.

Both cater to those who exemplify the gender in popular culture - the woman who wants equality while still getting romance and having the door held open for her; the guy who appears vulnerable but can still kick ass and get the hot chicks to take off their tops in his Camero.

I've never understood why we're trying to hard to fix the obvious and genetically built in differences between men & women instead of celebrating these differences.

Click to expand...

Do you honestly think women are genetically built in to be more emotional and men are genetically disposed to be stoic and emotionally "strong"?

That depends.

Mar 9, 2009#27

MindDetective

Charlie Dont Surf said:
Edrondol said:

Lifetime is the worst at stereotyping women. Just like Maxim and SpikeTV stereotypes men. Know why? Because these stereotypes exist for a reason.

Both cater to those who exemplify the gender in popular culture - the woman who wants equality while still getting romance and having the door held open for her; the guy who appears vulnerable but can still kick * and get the hot chicks to take off their tops in his Camero.

I've never understood why we're trying to hard to fix the obvious and genetically built in differences between men & women instead of celebrating these differences.

Click to expand...

Do you honestly think women are genetically built in to be more emotional and men are genetically disposed to be stoic and emotionally "strong"?

Tendencies that reflect a shift between two groups. There is still a lot of overlap but also a general trend that slightly separates them.

You could have a man more emotional than a woman, of course, but a randomly drawn sample would show that men tend to be less emotional than women. It isn't a dichotomy but a trend. And yes, trends can have a genetic component.

Mar 9, 2009#28

Charlie Dont Surf said:
Edrondol said:

Lifetime is the worst at stereotyping women. Just like Maxim and SpikeTV stereotypes men. Know why? Because these stereotypes exist for a reason.

Both cater to those who exemplify the gender in popular culture - the woman who wants equality while still getting romance and having the door held open for her; the guy who appears vulnerable but can still kick * and get the hot chicks to take off their tops in his Camero.

I've never understood why we're trying to hard to fix the obvious and genetically built in differences between men & women instead of celebrating these differences.

Click to expand...

Do you honestly think women are genetically built in to be more emotional and men are genetically disposed to be stoic and emotionally "strong"?

I think men & women are genetically different. I didn't go into the emotional side of it. But since you went there I do believe that there is a difference. Not necessarily on the lack or level of emotion, but I think we are wired to have our emotional responses trigger differently. Women find some things (generally) emotionally relevant where men (generally) don't and visa versa.

You can argue individual cases, but sociologically this is a truism.

Mar 9, 2009#29

Chibibar

Edrondol said:
Charlie Dont Surf said:

Edrondol said:

Lifetime is the worst at stereotyping women. Just like Maxim and SpikeTV stereotypes men. Know why? Because these stereotypes exist for a reason.

Both cater to those who exemplify the gender in popular culture - the woman who wants equality while still getting romance and having the door held open for her; the guy who appears vulnerable but can still kick * and get the hot chicks to take off their tops in his Camero.

I've never understood why we're trying to hard to fix the obvious and genetically built in differences between men & women instead of celebrating these differences.

Click to expand...

Do you honestly think women are genetically built in to be more emotional and men are genetically disposed to be stoic and emotionally "strong"?

Click to expand...

I think men & women are genetically different. I didn't go into the emotional side of it. But since you went there I do believe that there is a difference. Not necessarily on the lack or level of emotion, but I think we are wired to have our emotional responses trigger differently. Women find some things (generally) emotionally relevant where men (generally) don't and visa versa.

You can argue individual cases, but sociologically this is a truism.

is it social aspect? possible. It is interesting that most things in nature it is the male species that is "colorful" and such while the female version are plain.

Birds are good examples and most mammals and even reptiles (at least what I have learn) but the human race is one of the few exception that the female is more "glamorous" than male... is it because the social structure dictate it so? (putting women on pedestal and pretty them up?) Maybe men suppose to be vibrant and colorful, but social order and upbringing changes that and become "normal" over time...

I dunno... just a weird observation.

Mar 9, 2009#30

The Lovely Boehner

After nearly crying at something I watched earlier, I'm now going to go do the dishes before I leave for work.

This post is 100% true as well as bucking gender roles

Mar 9, 2009#31

Singularity.EXE

WolfOfOdin said:
:eyeroll: You could raise how most, if not all commercials portray men as helpless idiots who are incapable of doing anything without a woman's help.

Both are offensive, this one was just laughably stupid and outdated. They might as well call it "sex and the city animated"

No no no, see we, as males (presumably, I don't know your gender quite yet, lol) are not allowed to speak out against male stereotypes. There's no such thing as a being discriminatory against males, its all justified in that case.

Mar 9, 2009#32

GasBandit

Edrondol said:
I think men & women are genetically different.

Genetically different, baby!!!

Mar 9, 2009#33

Charlie Dont Surf said:
After nearly crying at something I watched earlier, I'm now going to go do the dishes before I leave for work.

This post is 100% true as well as bucking gender roles

Need I requote my difference between individualism & sociological differences?

I know you're not thick, Charlie. I just never understood well-meaning blindness to obvious social differentiation. How is it that we can see these differences zoologically in every species but when it comes to Humans suddenly genetics take a back seat to our supposedly rising above our millions of years of genetic imprinting with our wonderful couple of thousand years of "intelligence"?

Women & men are different. Nothing we can do about it and I for one am glad that the differences are there.

Mar 9, 2009#34

InfiniteShadow

And now for something entirely unrelated pirates.
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DXOSi39QS58:2q5jfzv8][/youtube:2q5jfzv8]

Mar 9, 2009#35

MindDetective

Charlie Dont Surf said:
After nearly crying at something I watched earlier, I'm now going to go do the dishes before I leave for work.

This post is 100% true as well as bucking gender roles

People aren't blank slates when they are born. Sorry. We come prepackaged with certain types of social programming. Once upon a time that social program helped a child survive or a caveman get laid. We may not need it as much any more but we're stuck with it.

Mar 9, 2009#36

Kitty Sinatra

InfiniteShadow said:
And now for something entirely unrelated pirates.

Yarrrr! *purrrrrr*

Mar 9, 2009#37

Steven Soderburgin

Edrondol said:
Because these stereotypes exist for a reason.

lollin @ someone seriously saying this

Edrondol said:
Need I requote my difference between individualism & sociological differences?

I know you're not thick, Charlie. I just never understood well-meaning blindness to obvious social differentiation. How is it that we can see these differences zoologically in every species but when it comes to Humans suddenly genetics take a back seat to our supposedly rising above our millions of years of genetic imprinting with our wonderful couple of thousand years of "intelligence"?

Women & men are different. Nothing we can do about it and I for one am glad that the differences are there.

Heh, as a man, I bet you're glad for those differences HEH

read this: http://www2.bc.edu/~barretli/pubs/1998/ ... etal98.pdf

here's the important bit:

Implications
These findings have several major implications. First, sex differences in emotional experience are not as pervasive as the stereotype suggests. Men and women do not differ dramatically in their immediate reports of emotional experience, even in contexts that are differentially relevant for men and women (control vs. intimacy). This finding raises the possibility that women’ s ``greater emotionality’ ’ is a culturally constructed idea, based on observed differences in emotional expression - differences which are socialised from a very early age. Second, investigators should be wary of including only global, retrospective self-descriptions of emotional experience when conducting research on affective experience. Self-report ratings of this type, although informative, may provide a skewed picture of the emotional life of a person - a picture skewed in the direction of supporting gender-based stereotypes about emotion.

PEACE

IN DA MIDDLE EAST

Mar 9, 2009#38

Singularity.EXE

GasBandit said:
Edrondol said:

I think men & women are genetically different.

Click to expand...

Genetically different, baby!!!

I am a terrible, terrible person, but Brucie was my utmost favorite character in that game.

There, I said it.

Mar 9, 2009#39

Silver Jelly

I want some crisps

Mar 9, 2009#40

ElJuski

Yeah, I'm leaning towards Kissinger and Charlie with this one, although M_D's got a point too. I want to see where this goes.

LETS MAKE IT HAPPEN GUYS

Mar 9, 2009#41

GasBandit

It "goes" to fancy lads trying to rationalize away their own mincing sissy-fication.

Mar 9, 2009#42

Iaculus

GasBandit said:
It "goes" to fancy lads trying to rationalize away their own mincing sissy-fication.

Thought we'd agreed to stop poking at people's berzerk buttons?

For the moment, at least.

Mar 9, 2009#43

Cajungal

Good thing they made this. I almost forgot that I was only allowed to care about my thighs, my hair, men, and snacks that don't make me feel --*teehee*-- guilty!

Mar 9, 2009#44

GasBandit

Iaculus said:
GasBandit said:

It "goes" to fancy lads trying to rationalize away their own mincing sissy-fication.

Click to expand...

Thought we'd agreed to stop poking at people's berzerk buttons?

For the moment, at least.

I must have been left out of that particular summit meeting. Which is just as well, as I'm not sure I could have signed that treaty in good faith.

Mar 9, 2009#45

Iaculus

GasBandit said:
Iaculus said:

GasBandit said:

It "goes" to fancy lads trying to rationalize away their own mincing sissy-fication.

Click to expand...

Thought we'd agreed to stop poking at people's berzerk buttons?

For the moment, at least.

Click to expand...

I must have been left out of that particular summit meeting. Which is just as well, as I'm not sure I could have signed that treaty in good faith.

Dagnabbit, I've really gotta get those hivemind uplinks working again. Make things so much easier.

All I'm saying is that the boards are getting a little... tenser than usual, so a quick ceasefire might be a good idea, at least until people stop looking at each other's heads like they'd make a tasty snack. Just a suggestion.

Mar 9, 2009#46

Silver Jelly

Iaculus said:
GasBandit said:

Iaculus said:

GasBandit said:

It "goes" to fancy lads trying to rationalize away their own mincing sissy-fication.

Click to expand...

Thought we'd agreed to stop poking at people's berzerk buttons?

For the moment, at least.

Click to expand...

I must have been left out of that particular summit meeting. Which is just as well, as I'm not sure I could have signed that treaty in good faith.

Click to expand...

Dagnabbit, I've really gotta get those hivemind uplinks working again. Make things so much easier.

All I'm saying is that the boards are getting a little... tenser than usual, so a quick ceasefire might be a good idea, at least until people stop looking at each other's heads like they'd make a tasty snack. Just a suggestion.

Without a Kurtz to attack, we are starting to attack each other with an unprecedented rage!!!

:aaahhh:

Mar 9, 2009#47

Steven Soderburgin

Iaculus said:
All I'm saying is that the boards are getting a little... tenser than usual

kick ass i am right on time

Mar 9, 2009#48

Iaculus

Silver Jelly said:
Iaculus said:

GasBandit said:

Iaculus said:

Thought we'd agreed to stop poking at people's berzerk buttons?

For the moment, at least.

Click to expand...

I must have been left out of that particular summit meeting. Which is just as well, as I'm not sure I could have signed that treaty in good faith.

Click to expand...

Dagnabbit, I've really gotta get those hivemind uplinks working again. Make things so much easier.

All I'm saying is that the boards are getting a little... tenser than usual, so a quick ceasefire might be a good idea, at least until people stop looking at each other's heads like they'd make a tasty snack. Just a suggestion.

Click to expand...

Without a Kurtz to attack, we are starting to attack each other with an unprecedented rage!!!

:aaahhh:

Quick! Someone post a dodgy CAD strip! WE MUST FOCUS OUR RAAAGE!

Mar 9, 2009#49

SeraRelm

Teehee, I'm so glad I found that totally true and unbiased cartoon you posted.

I'm totally gonna go eat some Ben & Jerry's while gossiping.

Then I'm gonna buy some SHOES!
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wCF3ywukQYA:1bmscfo4][/youtube:1bmscfo4]

Mar 9, 2009#50

North_Ranger

Hookay, this thread is turning really ugly really fast.

Keep a lid on it, ladies and gents.

Mar 9, 2009#51

Steven Soderburgin

Yeah, everyone calm the fuck down and respond to my post.

someone should quote what i first posted in this thread so the cowards who have me ignored can read it.

SORRY I MEANT FOE'D

Mar 9, 2009#52

Silver Jelly

Kissinger said:
someone should quote what i first posted in this thread so the cowards who have me ignored can read it.

SORRY I MEANT FOE'D

Wouldn't that be silly, considering they have foe'd you?

Mar 9, 2009#53

Iaculus

Kissinger said:
Yeah, everyone calm the boop down and respond to my post.

someone should quote what i first posted in this thread so the cowards who have me ignored can read it.

SORRY I MEANT FOE'D

Mar 9, 2009#54

Cajungal

The difference between genders is something that we discuss a lot in my major. If you area guy, you're automatically at more risk of dropping out than a girl for many reasons.

-First, since there are usually more female elementary school teachers, they tend identify more with the girls. Boys often get punished more often because people assume they are going to make more trouble--"boys will be boys", anyone?

-Second, it's been noted that boys and girls start to split off at about age 13 when it comes to preferences in literature. This is most likely a culture thing, but that's the way it is now. And these female teachers are often selecting reading material for the class that these boys find irrelevant or uninteresting.

-Third, boys are more likely to become emotionally disturbed or depressed, because they are not encouraged to share their feelings as often as girls. Girls are expected and "allowed" to let things out, while boys are expected to be tough.

Of course, these are all trends that have been noted--none are absolutes. But those are the gender-based challenges I face. There is my part, I guess... not exactly what we're talking about, I suppose, but I thought it was interesting.

Mar 9, 2009#55

ElJuski

Boys have a penis and girls have a vagina

Mar 9, 2009#56

makare

Ok what is everyone who is getting upset* getting upset about? Besides the bad animation and lousy voice acting I thought it was kind of cute. It's like an animated Cosmo.

* i am not asking kissinger and charlie because I know they are upset because their man panties are constantly in a twist anyway.

Mar 9, 2009#57

JONJONAUG

Iaculus said:
Silver Jelly said:

Without a Kurtz to attack, we are starting to attack each other with an unprecedented rage!!!

:aaahhh:

Click to expand...

Quick! Someone post a dodgy CAD strip! WE MUST FOCUS OUR RAAAGE!

This thread is now about Quiznos.

Mar 9, 2009#58

Steven Soderburgin

makare once again shows her devotion to the feminist cause by rejecting traditional gender roles. Keep on fighting, sister.

Mar 9, 2009#59

Kitty Sinatra

ElJuski said:
Boys have a penis and girls have a vagina

True. But any girl who wants my penis is free to make use of it. :smoke:

Mar 9, 2009#60

makare

Kissinger said:
makare once again shows her devotion to the feminist cause by rejecting traditional gender roles. Keep on fighting, sister.

I am so proud of YOU for sticking to the wackjob whiny liberal hippie stereotype. So very proud.

Mar 9, 2009#61

JONJONAUG

ElJuski said:
Boys have a penis and girls have a vagina

That's not what my porn says.

Mar 9, 2009#62

Chippy

InfiniteShadow said:
And now for something entirely unrelated pirates.
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DXOSi39QS58:3lpfsidi][/youtube:3lpfsidi]

Shh. The grown-ups are talking.

Mar 9, 2009#63

Shegokigo

North_Ranger said:
Uh-huh.

I need the address of the person responsible, three frag grenades and a helicopter.

Just get me the address and names and consider it dealt with. :devil:

GasBandit said:
Edrondol said:

I think men & women are genetically different.

Click to expand...

Genetically different, baby!!!

Pure gold. Absolute comedy. :rofl:

Mar 9, 2009#64

Iaculus

makare1 said:
Kissinger said:

makare once again shows her devotion to the feminist cause by rejecting traditional gender roles. Keep on fighting, sister.

Click to expand...

I am so proud of YOU for sticking to the wackjob whiny liberal hippie stereotype. So very proud.

Confession: When I see 'liberal' used as an insult in any other sense than 'overly permissive', I twitch involuntarily.

Mar 9, 2009#65

Norris

ElJuski said:
Boys have a * and girls have a *

[Ahnuld]Thanks for the tip[/ahnuld]

Mar 9, 2009#66

makare

It is not a tumuh.

Mar 9, 2009#67

Steven Soderburgin

makare1 said:
I am so proud of YOU for sticking to the wackjob whiny liberal hippie stereotype. So very proud.

- makare, An American Carol

Mar 9, 2009#68

WolfOfOdin

-_-

Don't people know that a "liberal" is someone who follows Liberalism, as laid out by John Locke? A system which is almost very very very very libertarian at it's core?

Can't we retire using Liberal and Conservative as slurs, and instead replace them with Left-leaning and Right-leaning? They make so much more sense

Mar 9, 2009#69

makare

WolfOfOdin said:
-_-

Don't people know that a "liberal" is someone who follows Liberalism, as laid out by John Locke? A system which is almost very very very very libertarian at it's core?

Can't we retire using Liberal and Conservative as slurs, and instead replace them with Left-leaning and Right-leaning? They make so much more sense

I like being called liberal. I don't see it as a slur. Just because some people use it in the negative doesn't mean we need to throw a word out.

Mar 9, 2009#70

ThatGrinningIdiot!

It's amazing how a simple joke readily turns into a political thread, with labels and insults thrown around.

CDS is a better troll than A Troll.

*Typing that last sentence, than reading it aloud makes me twitch inside. :eek:

rly:

Mar 9, 2009#71

Steven Soderburgin

BlackCrossCrusader said:
It's amazing how a simple joke readily turns into a political thread, with labels and insults thrown around.

CDS is a better troll than A Troll.

*Typing that last sentence, than reading it aloud makes me twitch inside. rly:

This post is hilarious because CDS isn't a troll, A Troll is easily one of the worst posters on the entire forum, and because you're actually surprised that a joke that exploits ignorant stereotypes might offend someone. I bet you like Jeff Dunham.

Mar 9, 2009#72

makare

Kissinger said:
BlackCrossCrusader said:

It's amazing how a simple joke readily turns into a political thread, with labels and insults thrown around.

CDS is a better troll than A Troll.

*Typing that last sentence, than reading it aloud makes me twitch inside. rly:

Click to expand...

This post is hilarious because CDS isn't a troll, A Troll is easily one of the worst posters on the entire forum, and because you're actually surprised that a joke that exploits ignorant stereotypes might offend someone. I bet you like Jeff Dunham.

oy vey, you two act like Dunham is the Antichrist, I mean I don't take you seriously for many reasons but that is a major factor. :eyeroll:

Mar 9, 2009#73

Steven Soderburgin

makare1 said:
oy vey, you two act like Dunham is the Antichrist, I mean I don't take you seriously for many reasons but that is a major factor. :eyeroll:

Nah, I just think casual bigotry is kind of a bad thing. Now I would tell you to go back to pretending you know something about feminism but I don't want to encourage you to continue undermining a movement I care deeply about with your ignorance.

Mar 9, 2009#74

Hailey Knight

Cajungal said:
The difference between genders is something that we discuss a lot in my major. If you area guy, you're automatically at more risk of dropping out than a girl for many reasons.

-First, since there are usually more female elementary school teachers, they tend identify more with the girls. Boys often get punished more often because people assume they are going to make more trouble--"boys will be boys", anyone?

-Second, it's been noted that boys and girls start to split off at about age 13 when it comes to preferences in literature. This is most likely a culture thing, but that's the way it is now. And these female teachers are often selecting reading material for the class that these boys find irrelevant or uninteresting.

-Third, boys are more likely to become emotionally disturbed or depressed, because they are not encouraged to share their feelings as often as girls. Girls are expected and "allowed" to let things out, while boys are expected to be tough.

Of course, these are all trends that have been noted--none are absolutes. But those are the gender-based challenges I face. There is my part, I guess... not exactly what we're talking about, I suppose, but I thought it was interesting.

First: Didn't hold for me, but mainly because I was a good kid. Though when I got hit, no one did shit until my dad came to the school and yelled at the principal.

Second: True for me. I don't remember half the shit we read, but I hated it. It wasn't until I hit later high school before finally getting literature I found interesting.

Third: Also true for me. It wasn't until college when I finally opened up, and then I stopped hating myself.

Also: I think half the board make better trolls than A Troll.

And on-topic: The cartoon aims at stereotypes because they're familiar. Aim for the lowest common denominator to get the most views. Next step would be something like "Humans. We sure are human, aren't we?"

Mar 9, 2009#75

ThatGrinningIdiot!

Kissinger said:
makare1 said:

oy vey, you two act like Dunham is the Antichrist, I mean I don't take you seriously for many reasons but that is a major factor. :eyeroll:

Click to expand...

Nah, I just think casual bigotry is kind of a bad thing. Now I would tell you to go back to pretending you know something about feminism but I don't want to encourage you to continue undermining a movement I care deeply about with your ignorance.

I always laugh when I hear that word. Feminism. Heh.

Mar 9, 2009#76

Green_Lantern

WildSoul said:
Though I have to admit that I'd be slightly upset if my hairdresser left her salon. So far she's the only one who (a) hasn't booped up my hair and (b) hasn't gone insane.

You hair must be pure evil.

Mar 9, 2009#77

makare

Kissinger said:
makare1 said:

oy vey, you two act like Dunham is the Antichrist, I mean I don't take you seriously for many reasons but that is a major factor. :eyeroll:

Click to expand...

Nah, I just think casual bigotry is kind of a bad thing. Now I would tell you to go back to pretending you know something about feminism but I don't want to encourage you to continue undermining a movement I care deeply about with your ignorance.

Sure, you care so much about it that you drag it through the gutter with your whiny self-indulgent indignance. You don't understand the first thing about Feminism which is painfully obvious to all those of us who do. But you just go ahead and act like the founders of Feminism, who worked hard to earn equal pay and equal rights for women, wouldn't be just a little embarrassed by the word Feminism being used to voice outrage about the lives of animated characters.

Mar 9, 2009#78

Steven Soderburgin

makare1 said:
Sure, you care so much about it that you drag it through the gutter with your whiny self-indulgent indignance. You don't understand the first thing about Feminism which is painfully obvious to all those of us who do. But you just go ahead and act like the founders of Feminism, who worked hard to earn equal pay and equal rights for women, wouldn't be just a little embarrassed by the word Feminism being used to voice outrage about the lives of animated characters.

I'm outraged because it's sexist and not only does it reveal continued acceptance of traditional gender roles and stereotypes, it contributes to the persistence of those stereotypes. I'm not really interested in getting into a discussion with you about the subject because last time I tried to, you revealed the depth of your ignorance and inability to accept ideas that differ from what you already believe.

Mar 9, 2009#79

Chippy

Kissinger said:
I'm not really interested in getting into a discussion with you about the subject because last time I tried to, you revealed the depth of your ignorance and inability to accept ideas that differ from what you already believe.

Quit being such a woman.

Mar 9, 2009#80

Hailey Knight

Chippy said:
Kissinger said:

I'm not really interested in getting into a discussion with you about the subject because last time I tried to, you revealed the depth of your ignorance and inability to accept ideas that differ from what you already believe.

Click to expand...

Quit being such a woman.

This might be a "you first" situation, followed by a possible "your mom," and maybe a "You got served!"

Mar 9, 2009#81

Chippy

escushion said:
Chippy said:

Kissinger said:

I'm not really interested in getting into a discussion with you about the subject because last time I tried to, you revealed the depth of your ignorance and inability to accept ideas that differ from what you already believe.

Click to expand...

Quit being such a woman.

Click to expand...

This might be a "you first" situation, followed by a possible "your mom," and maybe a "You got served!"

Don't forget the "Daaaaaaaaayum!"

Mar 9, 2009#82

makare

Kissinger said:
makare1 said:

Sure, you care so much about it that you drag it through the gutter with your whiny self-indulgent indignance. You don't understand the first thing about Feminism which is painfully obvious to all those of us who do. But you just go ahead and act like the founders of Feminism, who worked hard to earn equal pay and equal rights for women, wouldn't be just a little embarrassed by the word Feminism being used to voice outrage about the lives of animated characters.

Click to expand...

I'm outraged because it's sexist and not only does it reveal continued acceptance of traditional gender roles and stereotypes, it contributes to the persistence of those stereotypes. I'm not really interested in getting into a discussion with you about the subject because last time I tried to, you revealed the depth of your ignorance and inability to accept ideas that differ from what you already believe.

No, I accept your ideas. Just don't call them Feminist ideas, because they are not. A Feminist would see that a woman can be how she wants to be, that includes loving shoes and shopping and gossip. Feminism is about a woman's right to be who and what she wants to be.
You and your kind of pseudo-feminists complain about women being stereotyped and then turn around and stick women into just another mandatory role, ie the only way you can be a real woman is by not liking shoes or by not liking gossip, women in your opinion should be just as limited as they are in the world where being kaffeeklatsch queens is their only option. Only you insist they be anything but.

That is not Feminism. Feminism is about equality and choice.

Mar 9, 2009#83

Kitty Sinatra

BlackCrossCrusader said:
CDS is a better troll than A Troll.

Dude, I'm a better troll than A Troll and I suck at it. A Troll is a better poster than I am, though, so it balances out.

Mar 9, 2009#84

Steven Soderburgin

makare1 said:
No, I accept your ideas. Just don't call them Feminist ideas, because they are not. A Feminist would see that a woman can be how she wants to be, that includes loving shoes and shopping and gossip. Feminism is about a woman's right to be who and what she wants to be.
You and your kind of pseudo-feminists complain about women being stereotyped and then turn around and stick women into just another mandatory role, ie the only way you can be a real woman is by not liking shoes or by not liking gossip, women in your opinion should be just as limited as they are in the world where being kaffeeklatsch queens is their only option. Only you insist they be anything but.

That is not Feminism. Feminism is about equality and choice.

I never said a woman can't be who she wants to be. All I really said was "stereotypes are bad."

Mar 9, 2009#85

Kitty Sinatra

Kissinger said:
I never said a woman can't be who she wants to be. All I really said was "stereotypes are bad."

Except when it comes to comedy. In comedy, stereotypes are gold. What fucking world do you live in?

Mar 9, 2009#86

SeraRelm

Kissinger said:
makare1 said:

No, I accept your ideas. Just don't call them Feminist ideas, because they are not. A Feminist would see that a woman can be how she wants to be, that includes loving shoes and shopping and gossip. Feminism is about a woman's right to be who and what she wants to be.
You and your kind of pseudo-feminists complain about women being stereotyped and then turn around and stick women into just another mandatory role, ie the only way you can be a real woman is by not liking shoes or by not liking gossip, women in your opinion should be just as limited as they are in the world where being kaffeeklatsch queens is their only option. Only you insist they be anything but.

That is not Feminism. Feminism is about equality and choice.

Click to expand...

I never said a woman can't be who she wants to be. All I really said was "stereotypes are bad."

What if a woman's choices lead her to fill certain stereotypes?

Mar 9, 2009#87

HowDroll

I find it really funny that all of the men on this forum have sand in their vaginas over this.

Like makare, I thought it was cute. I also didn't take it seriously. Guess what? When my friends and I get together, we do sometimes talk about hot men, fabulous shoes, and call ourselves fat in a desperate attempt to be reassured that we're really not. Would the men of the forum be offended if someone posted a video with four guys going "huurrrr hot girls and sports" over a six-pack? I think not.

Mar 9, 2009#88

Cajungal

Gruebeard said:
Kissinger said:

I never said a woman can't be who she wants to be. All I really said was "stereotypes are bad."

Click to expand...

Except when it comes to comedy. In comedy, stereotypes are gold. What booping world do you live in?

Yeah, actually, looking at it again, I STILL don't think it's funny. But I can see where one might get a laugh out of it.

I've always found stuff like that really tired. I guess since it's not me at all I can't identify.

Mar 9, 2009#89

Iaculus

HowDroll said:
I find it really funny that all of the men on this forum have sand in their vaginas over this.

Like makare, I thought it was cute. I also didn't take it seriously. Guess what? When my friends and I get together, we do sometimes talk about hot men, fabulous shoes, and call ourselves fat in a desperate attempt to be reassured that we're really not. Would the men of the forum be offended if someone posted a video with four guys going "huurrrr hot girls and sports" over a six-pack? I think not.

Actually, the same folks probably would. Check the comments in the 'manliest town' thread.

I think that some people just need to learn that bludgeoning everyone within a five-mile radius to death with screaming outrage isn't always the best way to deal with an attitude you dislike.

Mar 9, 2009#90

Kitty Sinatra

HowDroll said:
I find it really funny that all of the men on this forum have sand in their vaginas over this.

Hey! Not all of us. Sure, I didn't find it entertaining but I've never cared for Sex and the City, either. I'm clearly not the target audience and I have no issues with that. My original, first reply in this thread - :confused:

- was actually directed at the OP's reaction. I was simply confused that he even bothered to react to it.

and CajunGal, I certainly am not saying that the use of stereotypes guarantees comedy gold. But it's the basis of so many jokes.

Mar 9, 2009#91

SeraRelm

Iaculus said:
HowDroll said:

I find it really funny that all of the men on this forum have sand in their vaginas over this.

Like makare, I thought it was cute. I also didn't take it seriously. Guess what? When my friends and I get together, we do sometimes talk about hot men, fabulous shoes, and call ourselves fat in a desperate attempt to be reassured that we're really not. Would the men of the forum be offended if someone posted a video with four guys going "huurrrr hot girls and sports" over a six-pack? I think not.

Click to expand...

Actually, the same folks probably would. Check the comments in the 'manliest town' thread.

I think that some people just need to learn that bludgeoning everyone within a five-mile radius to death with screaming outrage isn't always the best way to deal with an attitude you dislike.

SHUT UP!

Mar 9, 2009#92

Cajungal

Gruebeard said:
and CajunGal, I certainly am not saying that the use of stereotypes guarantees comedy gold. But it's the basis of so many jokes.

Yeah I hear what you're saying. I guess that, since this is part of a snack campaign, they didn't wanna invest too much in the writing.

Mar 9, 2009#93

ElJuski

I'm just saying that that I thought that commercial was fucking stupid. But, when it boils down to it, if that's your thing...do what you're gonna do. But I really hope none of you people are THAT cardboard plain. That makes me

a little bit. I don't know. Remember, I'm the guy that still cringes at the "I Love College" song, even though I've filled that stereotype plenty of times.

As for the debate, I really wish Mind Detective popped in with more psychology stuff. I'd really have enjoyed seeing a more...pleasant debate than the gooey sarcastic gunk that's all up ins. I'm actually interested in what Kissinger and Charlie gotta say beyond the snark and bile getting tossed around. Anybody else have a good education backdrop in stuff like this that wants to tackle this :popcorn:

Mar 9, 2009#94

Kitty Sinatra

Cajungal said:
Gruebeard said:

and CajunGal, I certainly am not saying that the use of stereotypes guarantees comedy gold. But it's the basis of so many jokes.

Click to expand...

Yeah I hear what you're saying. I guess that, since this is part of a snack campaign, they didn't wanna invest too much in the writing.

Yeah, when I was making that original stereotypes=comedy gold statement I had Bill Cosby comedy routines going through my head, mixed in with Seinfeld and Everybody Loves Raymond episodes, plus that black guy from Designing Women gaying up the whole process.

Mar 9, 2009#95

Kitty Sinatra

ElJuski said:
Anybody else have a good education backdrop in stuff like this that wants to tackle this

Dude, what? It's comedy, not Feminism or any shit that requires education. You either laugh at it or you don't. It's also a fucking ad. You either buy the shit or you don't.

EDIT: Should I bother to add that along with stereotypes, foul language makes a good jumpstart toward comedy gold?

Mar 9, 2009#96

Allen, who is Quiet

Gruebeard said:
foul language makes a good jumpstart toward comedy gold?

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XU_grXxvwLU:1ypf6na8][/youtube:1ypf6na8]

Mar 10, 2009#97

makare

Gruebeard said:
ElJuski said:

Anybody else have a good education backdrop in stuff like this that wants to tackle this

Click to expand...

Dude, what? It's comedy, not Feminism or any shit that requires education. You either laugh at it or you don't. It's also a fucking ad. You either buy the shit or you don't.

EDIT: Should I bother to add that along with stereotypes, foul language makes a good jumpstart toward comedy gold?

Yeah I dont understand either. Education in what Feminism? Advertisement? The tendency for people to extrapolate the behavior of four cartoon women to mean that those are the expected behaviors for all women?

I don't know.

Mar 10, 2009#98

ElJuski

Gruebeard said:
ElJuski said:

Anybody else have a good education backdrop in stuff like this that wants to tackle this

Click to expand...

Dude, what? It's comedy, not Feminism or any shit that requires education. You either laugh at it or you don't. It's also a fucking ad. You either buy the shit or you don't.

EDIT: Should I bother to add that along with stereotypes, foul language makes a good jumpstart toward comedy gold?

It jumped way beyond the piss excuse for "comedy". I was hoping that people could talk about sociological implications of gender roles versus biological implications. I don't give a shit about that stupid cartoon anymore. Haha, comedy. Stereotypes are the lowest common denominator. Good for a cheap laugh but hardly substantial. And yes, it is a fucking ad--something that people will watch and assimilate into their conscious. When we stop being critical of the media we get consumed by the media. It doesn't mean every commercial has to be a battle for the mountain, but when we become passive viewers we're all shit fucked.

Mar 10, 2009#99

MisterSteve

Now THAT's offensive.

Mar 10, 2009#100

makare

I didn't see any gender roles being represented in the cartoon, it was just four girls sitting around eating chips. But a good movie for talking about gender would be Pleasantville. That one really makes you think because you get the contrast between modern expectations of women and the "perfectly pleasant" women of the 1950's sitcom. The way the sister moves from one end to the other and finds a place in the middle is a visual representation of that change. Kind of how the women's activists in the 60's and 70's rebelled against the expectations of the 1950's, but then the pendulum swung too far and they were labeled "feminazis", now we are finding a middle ground where women are not limited to one side or the other.

Mar 10, 2009#101

ElJuski

MisterSteve said:
Now THAT's offensive.

See, now that's funny because the person who made that realizes the absurdity of the stereotype involved. What wouldn't be funny if they had a commercial for KFC where a bunch of stereotypical black people sat around stereotyping their stereotypical black asses for three minutes.

Mar 10, 2009#102

ElJuski

makare1 said:
I didn't see any gender roles being represented in the cartoon, it was just four girls sitting around eating chips. But a good movie for talking about gender would be Pleasantville. That one really makes you think because you get the contrast between modern expectations of women and the "perfectly pleasant" women of the 1950's sitcom. The way the sister moves from one end to the other and finds a place in the middle is a visual representation of that change. Kind of how the women's activists in the 60's and 70's rebelled against the expectations of the 1950's, but then the pendulum swung too far and they were labeled "feminazis", now we are finding a middle ground where women are not limited to one side or the other.

Pleasantville is a great movie. We just talked about it today during lecture (where conveniently I was busy raging over censorship). I totally see gender roles being presented in that sketch. That is an advertising company distilling what a woman is. It's vying for the least common denominator because they assume it's going to make all you people with vaginas go haywire over their chips. Now, you may have found it enjoyable, and that's fine. That's your perogative and your subjective tastes. I think the problem is is that there are people who just assume that is the face of america and of womankind and will never think outside of those lines, or if there *are* even lines.

That, and from a subjective comedy standpoint, that cartoon is fucking stupid :zoid:

Mar 10, 2009#103

makare

ElJuski said:
makare1 said:

I didn't see any gender roles being represented in the cartoon, it was just four girls sitting around eating chips. But a good movie for talking about gender would be Pleasantville. That one really makes you think because you get the contrast between modern expectations of women and the "perfectly pleasant" women of the 1950's sitcom. The way the sister moves from one end to the other and finds a place in the middle is a visual representation of that change. Kind of how the women's activists in the 60's and 70's rebelled against the expectations of the 1950's, but then the pendulum swung too far and they were labeled "feminazis", now we are finding a middle ground where women are not limited to one side or the other.

Click to expand...

Pleasantville is a great movie. We just talked about it today during lecture (where conveniently I was busy raging over censorship). I totally see gender roles being presented in that sketch. That is an advertising company distilling what a woman is. It's vying for the least common denominator because they assume it's going to make all you people with vaginas go haywire over their chips. Now, you may have found it enjoyable, and that's fine. That's your perogative and your subjective tastes. I think the problem is is that there are people who just assume that is the face of america and of womankind and will never think outside of those lines, or if there *are* even lines.

That, and from a subjective comedy standpoint, that cartoon is fucking stupid

I really don't understand how you see so much in it. If it was four guys sitting around eating chips trying to help one of them feel better about losing his favorite barista or something would that be distilling what a man is?

I mean come on, sometimes we all just sit around and talk shit and eat chips. I do not see the problem.

The cartoon is not funny. and it is of really low quality. I mean the beginning sounds... well, I didn't know what to expect after that opening.

Mar 10, 2009#104

Kitty Sinatra

yeah, Juski: There's shit out there targeted towards guys like you. Things, perhaps, like Married . . . with Children, or the rock band Rush. Stuff that's generally a "Guy thing." It doesn't appeal to women and they might find it offensive or just plain uninteresting even though you go apeshit crazy when Al sticks his hand in his pants or Neil pounds on the drums.

You gotta accept that it's a gal thing. You inherently cannot understand its appeal, whether it's good quality or not. Like Sex and the City (Man, that title pisses me off; I tuned in expecting girl on girl action but instead I get women buying shoes! Fucking pisser)

hmm, I think I might've stumbled onto the topic of conversation that you wanted.

Mar 10, 2009#105

SeraRelm

FUCK YOOOUUUUU!

I find the fire-hula-hoop girls hot...

Mar 10, 2009#106

makare

See now here is something that crosses the line from sexist to misogynistic to fuck you asshole really quick
WTF seriously

Mar 10, 2009#107

Kitty Sinatra

makare1 said:
See now here is something that crosses the line from sexist to misogynistic to fuck you asshole really quick

Like within the first word.

Mar 10, 2009#108

doomdragon6

Hehe. I thought it was funny.

But I guess I like watching people get worked up over trivial things.

Like this thread!

*rubs tummy* Mmm, so nourishing.

Mar 10, 2009#109

The Lovely Boehner

arghhh there's a lot to respond to post-work, but I'm not in the mood to do silly things like thinking now.

I do have to say in general, I am not really as worked up and offended as everyone portrays me as. but another general thought: Feminism is about women being able to be seen as equals and human beings, and not a stereotype. It's completely true that there are women that love shopping, and spend thousands of dollars on shoes, and eat ice cream after a breakup when they cry about their boyfriend. That's completely okay!

I really don't see it as any different as the fights for racial equality. There's no difference between sexism and racism in my eyes. Feminism is the same thing as not being a racist. It's absurd seeing people rage and laugh at feminism when those same people would likely condemn the KKK(I hope!).

I also concede that there are a lot of feminists that have some really stupid ideas! But everyone knows the loudest and stupidest people of a group always get noticed the most. Are all conservatives like Rush Limbaugh? Are all liberals like moveon dot org? Are all atheists like Dawkins? All Christians like the Westboro Baptist Church? No, of course not.

Another little thing - the pdf that kissinger linked is really interesting. I recommend it.

Mar 10, 2009#110

Denbrought

makare1 said:
See now here is something that crosses the line from sexist to misogynistic to fuck you asshole really quick
WTF seriously

Funny how it says "Contract of Wifely Expectations" right on the first page yet the fourth one says "This is not a contract"." :eyeroll:
This guy could have just found someone with a submissive/slave fetish, problem solved.

Mar 10, 2009#111

MindDetective

Kissinger said:
read this: http://www2.bc.edu/~barretli/pubs/1998/ ... etal98.pdf

here's the important bit:

Implications
These findings have several major implications. First, sex differences in emotional experience are not as pervasive as the stereotype suggests. Men and women do not differ dramatically in their immediate reports of emotional experience, even in contexts that are differentially relevant for men and women (control vs. intimacy). This finding raises the possibility that women’ s ``greater emotionality’ ’ is a culturally constructed idea, based on observed differences in emotional expression - differences which are socialised from a very early age. Second, investigators should be wary of including only global, retrospective self-descriptions of emotional experience when conducting research on affective experience. Self-report ratings of this type, although informative, may provide a skewed picture of the emotional life of a person - a picture skewed in the direction of supporting gender-based stereotypes about emotion.

Click to expand...

I scanned the paper real fast (it's all I had time for, sorry). I focused on the methods and statistics used to analyze their data. First of all, they had way too few subjects to be conducting regression analysis. Secondly, that implication is completely unfounded. Completely. They in absolutely no way assessed nature vs. nurture in terms of emotionality differences between the genders. They did demonstrate differences in emotionality between the genders but could not (at all!!) have shown that it was a cultural influence. The entire basis for that conclusion seems to be "the differences aren't as big as we would have expected". If anything, that article convinced me even more that men and women actually differ in emotionality (in general).

Mar 10, 2009#112

MindDetective said:
Kissinger said:

read this: http://www2.bc.edu/~barretli/pubs/1998/ ... etal98.pdf

here's the important bit:

Implications
These findings have several major implications. First, sex differences in emotional experience are not as pervasive as the stereotype suggests. Men and women do not differ dramatically in their immediate reports of emotional experience, even in contexts that are differentially relevant for men and women (control vs. intimacy). This finding raises the possibility that women’ s ``greater emotionality’ ’ is a culturally constructed idea, based on observed differences in emotional expression - differences which are socialised from a very early age. Second, investigators should be wary of including only global, retrospective self-descriptions of emotional experience when conducting research on affective experience. Self-report ratings of this type, although informative, may provide a skewed picture of the emotional life of a person - a picture skewed in the direction of supporting gender-based stereotypes about emotion.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

I scanned the paper real fast (it's all I had time for, sorry). I focused on the methods and statistics used to analyze their data. First of all, they had way too few subjects to be conducting regression analysis. Secondly, that implication is completely unfounded. Completely. They in absolutely no way assessed nature vs. nurture in terms of emotionality differences between the genders. They did demonstrate differences in emotionality between the genders but could not (at all!!) have shown that it was a cultural influence. The entire basis for that conclusion seems to be "the differences aren't as big as we would have expected". If anything, that article convinced me even more that men and women actually differ in emotionality (in general).

I didn't bother to argue. It's like running as fast as I can, slamming my head into a wall and trying to make sense of the blood spatters like some sort of medium-like tea leaves reading.

Real science is on my side, pop-culture psychology disagrees.

Mar 10, 2009#113

B

benny baloney pi

Right now the Democrats are making a big stink over Rush Limbaugh. Does that faze him? Hell no. In fact, he's saying "Bring it on!" because he knows that the attention will only benefit him. Same thing with this show. You don't like it, don't watch it and let it die on the vine.

I agree that it plays on a lot of stereotypes, but hell - I think Ally MacBeal was the stupidest show ever because of the way it portrayed women, but that managed to stick around a few seasons. The cartoon that is the topic of this thread is more entertaining than Ally was, and the cartoon wasn't very entertaining.

Mar 10, 2009#114

LordRavage

SeraRelm said:
Iaculus said:

HowDroll said:

I find it really funny that all of the men on this forum have sand in their vaginas over this.

Like makare, I thought it was cute. I also didn't take it seriously. Guess what? When my friends and I get together, we do sometimes talk about hot men, fabulous shoes, and call ourselves fat in a desperate attempt to be reassured that we're really not. Would the men of the forum be offended if someone posted a video with four guys going "huurrrr hot girls and sports" over a six-pack? I think not.

Click to expand...

Actually, the same folks probably would. Check the comments in the 'manliest town' thread.

I think that some people just need to learn that bludgeoning everyone within a five-mile radius to death with screaming outrage isn't always the best way to deal with an attitude you dislike.

Click to expand...

SHUT UP!

RRRAAAARRRRR!!!! GENDER MAKE HULK SMASH!!!!!

*On a side note....everyone knows aliens are the master race.

Mar 10, 2009#115

Kitty Sinatra

LordRavage said:
*On a side note....everyone knows aliens are the master race.

Mar 10, 2009#116

GasBandit

Ahh the sweet smell of conflict that ISN'T based on drama.

Look, the long and short of it is this - feminism shouldn't be about enforced gender androgyny, because variety is the spice of life and vive la difference and all that rot. Everybody's different, but no matter how different you are, people are going to make fun of you. It's what they do. It's a bad idea to let them know they're getting to you, but none are so pathetic as the would-be white knights who get hyper-offended on someone else's behalf who might not even be offended themselves. Not only does it insult them because you think you know what they are thinking when you don't, but it also insults them by showing you don't think they can stick up for themselves.

And for the record, my wife laughed at the sale in the desert cartoon, too.

Mar 10, 2009#117

ElJuski

Makare (and Gruebeard)-- my point would still stand were the gender roles to be switched. If they took a commercial and said, "What makes a man? Well, he likes, sports and fast cars and steaks and shit", and then decided to, say, make an ad campaign to find the "Manliest City in the World", it would be just as irritating to me.

It's not about people actually enjoying it, or connecting on some level to what's going on. Shit, you have all the right in the world to enjoy having girl-time and gossip and talking about boys and I guess even crying over your hairdresser leaving you (although if you became that cardboard cutout like in that cartoon I would probably not want to talk to you, ever, at all) and that's your perogative. If a guy loves steak and fast cars and getting his bone on while watching UFC Wrestling that's fine too. If you're good people, and you know you like it, and aren't just living in some universe assimilated by commercials and social directives, that's fantastic.

Once again, the only thing that ticks me off is that it's a really shittily written commercial that applies to the most basic of female stereotypes. And there are probably loads of women who are reading into it like "OMG this is -SO- my life" without considering *why*. I doubt that [strike:3w36o9k1]any[/strike:3w36o9k1] most of you on this forum are beyond that stage. But I can only imagine the millions that are, live their life as prescribed by cartoon advertisements, eating some shitty brand of potato chips.

And, @ GB--fuck yes diversity is the spice of life. Personally, I don't give a shit if you're a man or a woman or black or indian or chinese or moonpeople--argh moonpeople--as long as you're a competent, well-meaning, human being. We might not be friends, but it is true that diversity is the spice of life. I think the big problem though is making sure that people are aware of their individuality and of the indoctrination any American / world citizen faces with sociological baggage.

Mar 10, 2009#118

Steven Soderburgin

MindDetective said:
I scanned the paper real fast (it's all I had time for, sorry). I focused on the methods and statistics used to analyze their data. First of all, they had way too few subjects to be conducting regression analysis. Secondly, that implication is completely unfounded. Completely. They in absolutely no way assessed nature vs. nurture in terms of emotionality differences between the genders. They did demonstrate differences in emotionality between the genders but could not (at all!!) have shown that it was a cultural influence. The entire basis for that conclusion seems to be "the differences aren't as big as we would have expected". If anything, that article convinced me even more that men and women actually differ in emotionality (in general).

You didn't read enough of the study, and so you completely misinterpreted what you read to fit your preconceived world view. The study was not intended to assess nature vs. nurture, only momentary emotional response versus self-evaluation of prior emotional response. What they concluded is that while the moment-to-moment emotional response was very, very close between both genders, the self-evaluation of emotional response was very different. They determined that the stereotype is not accurate. The implication merely speculates that the discrepancy is because of cultural influence.

Edrondol said:
I didn't bother to argue. It's like running as fast as I can, slamming my head into a wall and trying to make sense of the blood spatters like some sort of medium-like tea leaves reading.

Real science is on my side, pop-culture psychology disagrees.

Please link me to some studies which both support your claims and are "real science" and explain why they qualify as such while the study I linked is "pop-culture psychology." Does it only qualify as real science if it agrees with what you already know?

Mar 10, 2009#119

Kitty Sinatra

ElJuski said:
But I can only imagine the millions that are, live their life as prescribed by cartoon advertisements, eating some shitty brand of potato chips.

Here's the thing though: If you think a bunch of us aren't influenced by those things, what makes you think everyone else is?

I've always assumed it's the reverse, though. That we are absolutely influenced by the commercials and messages we receive. I know I am. I see movies based on trailers, I tune into popular TV shows to check them out. I laugh at stereotypes and even believe in a bunch of them. But I still live my own life and ultimately make my own decisions. And I think everybody else does, too.

Mar 10, 2009#120

Steven Soderburgin

GasBandit said:
Look, the long and short of it is this - feminism shouldn't be about enforced gender androgyny

I agree! It should be about everyone, man or woman, choosing who they want to be regardless of what is expected of them by society at large! It should be about breaking down those stereotypes and - oh, you weren't done talking.

because variety is the spice of life and vive la difference and all that rot. Everybody's different, but no matter how different you are, people are going to make fun of you. It's what they do. It's a bad idea to let them know they're getting to you, but none are so pathetic as the would-be white knights who get hyper-offended on someone else's behalf who might not even be offended themselves. Not only does it insult them because you think you know what they are thinking when you don't, but it also insults them by showing you don't think they can stick up for themselves.

Oh.

Welp, I guess you're right. I guess all those non-blacks who supported the Civil Rights movement should've just stopped white (heh) knighting. I guess all those straight people who want equal rights for gays should stop insulting the gays by letting them stick up for themselves.

Mar 10, 2009#121

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/20 ... 171609.htm

First hit on my search, with about 3 million more hits for the search of "biological difference sexes". Granted, not all of these will be hard science or worthy of reading, but I'm not about to look through them all to test it out.

And my eyerolling of yours is on the small sample size as spoken to before. Regression analysis requires a pretty substantial amount of a population sample or it seriously skews the data and gives us an error margin that is unbelievable. And while a fairly useful tool, regression analysis is nothing more than a guess at what will be based on past data points, which are not necessarily an indicator of future actions. According to regression analysis done in the 1980's & 1990's, the stock market right now should be in the 20 thousand range.

And as MD stated, the study itself acknowledged that there were differences. It was one of the primary findings. It's just not as wide as the researchers thought in the areas they were testing. But it was there. Which proves ME right, not you.

Mar 10, 2009#122

ElJuski

Gruebeard said:
ElJuski said:

But I can only imagine the millions that are, live their life as prescribed by cartoon advertisements, eating some shitty brand of potato chips.

Click to expand...

Here's the thing though: If you think a bunch of us aren't influenced by those things, what makes you think everyone else is?

I've always assumed it's the reverse, though. That we are absolutely influenced by the commercials and messages we receive. I know I am. I see movies based on trailers, I tune into popular TV shows to check them out. I laugh at stereotypes and even believe in a bunch of them. But I still live my own life and ultimately make my own decisions. And I think everybody else does, too.

You live in a more optimistic (and deluded, honestly) world than I do, I'm afraid. Check the TV show ratings. Check the box office. Check the New York Times Bestseller lists. These ad people know what they are doing, and they are doing it to the masses and they are doing it /good/. Meanwhile people eat it up without thinking about it, go see Paul Blart and manage to TiVo the Hills. It's all boring and it's all opiates to make people stop thinking. Fuck the status quo.

"Hell is waking up and realizing your high school graduating class is running the country."~Kurt Vonnegut

Mar 10, 2009#123

MindDetective

Kissinger said:
MindDetective said:

I scanned the paper real fast (it's all I had time for, sorry). I focused on the methods and statistics used to analyze their data. First of all, they had way too few subjects to be conducting regression analysis. Secondly, that implication is completely unfounded. Completely. They in absolutely no way assessed nature vs. nurture in terms of emotionality differences between the genders. They did demonstrate differences in emotionality between the genders but could not (at all!!) have shown that it was a cultural influence. The entire basis for that conclusion seems to be "the differences aren't as big as we would have expected". If anything, that article convinced me even more that men and women actually differ in emotionality (in general).

Click to expand...

You didn't read enough of the study, and so you completely misinterpreted what you read to fit your preconceived world view. The study was not intended to assess nature vs. nurture, only momentary emotional response versus self-evaluation of prior emotional response. What they concluded is that while the moment-to-moment emotional response was very, very close between both genders, the self-evaluation of emotional response was very different. The implication merely speculates that the discrepancy is because of cultural influence.

Two things.

1.) Seems like you have a bit of a biased interpretation yourself.

First, sex differences in emotional experience are not as pervasive as the stereotype suggests. Men and women do not differ dramatically in the immediate reports of emotional experience, even in contexts that are differentially relevant for men and women (control vs. intimacy).

This implies there are differences, just not as dramatic as usually thought. That means this is pretty weak evidence for the position that men and women do not differ in general on emotionality. We won't even get into methodological issues here. A null result can never be taken as strong evidence for that very reason. This is especially true with complex statistical modeling and a small n (28 males and 42 females).

2.) They DID find gender specific differences for momentary emotional responses. It occurs in a crossover interaction with opposite gender partners (not terribly surprising). Missing from these findings: responses in any kind of non-social interaction.

Basically, they found that using a diary method to capture emotionality is hard. This is also not terribly surprising. That they even found the opposite partner interaction effects is amazing, really. That says more about how ingrained sex and socialization is than anything else, I think. What it certainly does not do is provide terribly strong evidence that men and women are the same emotionally or that it is culturally determined. If the argument is that it is culturally influenced, then there isn't much else to discuss. That one is a no brainer.

Mar 10, 2009#124

GasBandit

Kissinger said:
GasBandit said:

Look, the long and short of it is this - feminism shouldn't be about enforced gender androgyny

Click to expand...

I agree! It should be about everyone, man or woman, choosing who they want to be regardless of what is expected of them by society at large! It should be about breaking down those stereotypes and - oh, you weren't done talking.

because variety is the spice of life and vive la difference and all that rot. Everybody's different, but no matter how different you are, people are going to make fun of you. It's what they do. It's a bad idea to let them know they're getting to you, but none are so pathetic as the would-be white knights who get hyper-offended on someone else's behalf who might not even be offended themselves. Not only does it insult them because you think you know what they are thinking when you don't, but it also insults them by showing you don't think they can stick up for themselves.

Click to expand...

Oh.

Welp, I guess you're right. I guess all those non-blacks who supported the Civil Rights movement should've just stopped white (heh) knighting. I guess all those straight people who want equal rights for gays should stop insulting the gays by letting them stick up for themselves.

Mar 10, 2009#125

Cajungal

Gotta agree with Juski. I see exactly what he's talking about every day, and it's really sad and scary.

Mar 10, 2009#126

Steven Soderburgin

Edrondol said:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/02/080229171609.htm

First hit on my search, with about 3 million more hits for the search of "biological difference sexes". Granted, not all of these will be hard science or worthy of reading, but I'm not about to look through them all to test it out.

And my eyerolling of yours is on the small sample size as spoken to before. Regression analysis requires a pretty substantial amount of a population sample or it seriously skews the data and gives us an error margin that is unbelievable. And while a fairly useful tool, regression analysis is nothing more than a guess at what will be based on past data points, which are not necessarily an indicator of future actions. According to regression analysis done in the 1980's & 1990's, the stock market right now should be in the 20 thousand range.

And as MD stated, the study itself acknowledged that there were differences. It was one of the primary findings. It's just not as wide as the researchers thought in the areas they were testing. But it was there. Which proves ME right, not you.

That link actually tells me nothing. All it says is that scientists are studying the psychological differences between men and women in order to develop gender-specific therapies.

So what would be an appropriate sample size for the sort of study that was conducted?

Also, regression analysis of the stock market has nothing to do with psychological studies on emotional response, so I don't know why you brought that up. The language used in the study is that the response is not "dramatically different," which seems to disagree with what you were implying before and they further state that the differences are not nearly as pervasive as the stereotype would suggest. I'm did not say that men and women were exactly the same at any point. I just suggested that the stereotype to which you subscribe is inaccurate, a point which the study supports.

-- Tue Mar 10, 2009 1:51 pm --

GasBandit said:

Wow, you've read a book.

fakeedit: I don't actually believe you have read that particular book.

Mar 10, 2009#127

The Lovely Boehner

Alright, sure, I'll bite.

Gruebeard, what stereotypes do you believe in?

Mar 10, 2009#128

Kitty Sinatra

Wait, I've totally lost the train of this discussion. I've been going on about stereotypes as a basis of comedy. I strayed from that something fierce didn't I? Cause I'm not sure how we could get to Mall Cop as brainwashing from that.

Mar 10, 2009#129

Steven Soderburgin

Also, to be perfectly clear, I don't think it is fighting windmills to fight against cultural stereotypes regarding gender roles and expectations for how men and women should and shouldn't behave.

Mar 10, 2009#130

Kissinger said:
Also, to be perfectly clear, I don't think it is fighting windmills to fight against cultural stereotypes regarding gender roles and expectations for how men and women should and shouldn't behave.

I agree, but totally disregarding the genetic effect of our differences is.

Mar 10, 2009#131

GasBandit

Kissinger said:
Also, to be perfectly clear, I don't think it is fighting windmills to fight against cultural stereotypes regarding gender roles and expectations for how men and women should and shouldn't behave.

Fight on, Forum Crusaders!

Mar 10, 2009#132

Steven Soderburgin

Edrondol said:
I agree, but totally disregarding the genetic effect of our differences is.

I wasn't totally disregarding it. I was saying that the stereotype greatly overstates things, cultural factors play a large part in shaping things, and that, in general, blanket stereotypes are bad things that should not be supported.

I really don't know why so many of you have a hard time with this.

Mar 10, 2009#133

ElJuski

Gruebeard said:
Wait, I've totally lost the train of this discussion. I've been going on about stereotypes as a basis of comedy. I strayed from that something fierce didn't I? Cause I'm not sure how we could get to Mall Cop as brainwashing from that.

Because I'm talking about the media world plying for the lowest common denominator. In the Paul Blart: Mall Cop case, that a seemingly insepid movie using the "Har, fat guy" stereotype film can beat the shit out of other, more artistic, more meaningful movies. I'm talking about people learning how to seperate the wheat from the chaff and to actively deconstruct the context and aesthetic of all media forms as a way of staying as an individual and a smarter, more productive media-viewer. That, having watched that cartoon I originally linked, I could go, "Huh. That was really trite writing", and realize that millions of viewers are going to take that in face-value as an affirmation of their media-prescribed lifestyle.

The problem is is that there are people out there that don't realize how much of a stereotype that is. That's the issue. They're just living it because the world around them tells them too.

Mar 10, 2009#134

GasBandit

Kissinger said:
Edrondol said:

I agree, but totally disregarding the genetic effect of our differences is.

Click to expand...

I wasn't totally disregarding it. I was saying that the stereotype greatly overstates things, cultural factors play a large part in shaping things, and that, in general, blanket stereotypes are bad things that should not be supported.

I really don't know why so many of you have a hard time with this.

Because it's pseudointellectual bullshit.

Mar 10, 2009#135

Steven Soderburgin

GasBandit said:
Fight on, Forum Crusaders!

Ah, yes. The image macro. The last refuge of the defeated internet poster.

Mar 10, 2009#136

Kitty Sinatra

Charlie Dont Surf said:
Alright, sure, I'll bite.

Gruebeard, what stereotypes do you believe in?

Hey, back on the discussion point.

Watch a sitcom. Any sitcom. I believe in the stereotypes used to create pretty much every character on the screen.

Oh, but given Kissinger's post just now, I want to add that I'm not talking about stereotypes that set "expectations for how men and women should and shouldn't behave." I'm talking about those that create handy shortcuts to describe how a person likely behaves.

Mar 10, 2009#137

Steven Soderburgin

GasBandit said:
Because it's pseudointellectual bullshit.

Discussing the factors behind cultural stereotypes as well as the effects of those stereotypes is pseudointellectual bullshit?

No. No, I disagree.

Mar 10, 2009#138

MindDetective

Kissinger said:
Edrondol said:

I agree, but totally disregarding the genetic effect of our differences is.

Click to expand...

I wasn't totally disregarding it. I was saying that the stereotype greatly overstates things, cultural factors play a large part in shaping things, and that, in general, blanket stereotypes are bad things that should not be supported.

I really don't know why so many of you have a hard time with this.

Because you gave the impression of making a stronger statement than "culture influences stereotypes". If that is really all you are saying then it isn't terribly interesting or much of a contribution to the overall discussion, really.

Mar 10, 2009#139

Steven Soderburgin

Gruebeard said:
Charlie Dont Surf said:

Alright, sure, I'll bite.

Gruebeard, what stereotypes do you believe in?

Click to expand...

Hey, back on the discussion point.

Watch a sitcom. Any sitcom. I believe in the stereotypes used to create pretty much every character on the screen.

Oh, but given Kissinger's post just now, I want to add that I'm not talking about stereotypes that set "expectations for how men and women should and shouldn't behave." I'm talking about those that create handy shortcuts to describe how a person likely behaves.

So you use stereotypes to make judgements about people before you get to know them? You "pre-judge" people, so to speak?

Mar 10, 2009#140

Iaculus

Kissinger said:
Edrondol said:

I agree, but totally disregarding the genetic effect of our differences is.

Click to expand...

I wasn't totally disregarding it. I was saying that the stereotype greatly overstates things, cultural factors play a large part in shaping things, and that, in general, blanket stereotypes are bad things that should not be supported.

I really don't know why so many of you have a hard time with this.

Perhaps because the counterattack you assisted in started off as a bit... excessively confrontational?

This is why I prefer the milder approach - people tend to listen better when you don't come in all guns blazing, regardless of viewpoint.

Mar 10, 2009#141

Kissinger said:
GasBandit said:

Fight on, Forum Crusaders!

Click to expand...

Ah, yes. The image macro. The last refuge of the defeated internet poster.

He's not defeated. He just doesn't care enough to get involved with the discussion.

And I understand what you're saying, I just disagree. I believe that for humor's sake stereotypes are great. The differentiation of the genders/races/sexual proclivities are of immense importance to humor. And that's what this started as - humor.

Do I think stereotypes are truisms? Not all of them, but for the most part yes. Does this mean we shouldn't fight through them? Of course not. But they exist and are there for a reason.

Mar 10, 2009#142

ElJuski

Gruebeard said:
Charlie Dont Surf said:

Alright, sure, I'll bite.

Gruebeard, what stereotypes do you believe in?

Click to expand...

Hey, back on the discussion point.

Watch a sitcom. Any sitcom. I believe in the stereotypes used to create pretty much every character on the screen.

Oh, but given Kissinger's post just now, I want to add that I'm not talking about stereotypes that set "expectations for how men and women should and shouldn't behave." I'm talking about those that create handy shortcuts to describe how a person likely behaves.

And handy shortcuts = lazy writing. That's why I stay the fuck away from Two and a Half Men or ABC Family's Roomates. He's the wacky one and he's the lady's man lololol

Mar 10, 2009#143

Steven Soderburgin

MindDetective said:
Kissinger said:

Edrondol said:

I agree, but totally disregarding the genetic effect of our differences is.

Click to expand...

I wasn't totally disregarding it. I was saying that the stereotype greatly overstates things, cultural factors play a large part in shaping things, and that, in general, blanket stereotypes are bad things that should not be supported.

I really don't know why so many of you have a hard time with this.

Click to expand...

Because you gave the impression of making a stronger statement than "culture influences stereotypes". If that is really all you are saying then it isn't terribly interesting or much of a contribution to the overall discussion, really.

It was a contradiction of the attitude expressed by many people in this thread that stereotypes exist for a reason and that the differences perceived between men and women were completely based in genetics. Although if adding a dissenting opinion doesn't contribute much to a discussion, then you must have some boring discussions.

Mar 10, 2009#144

The Lovely Boehner

believing sitcoms as fact.... so... you're telling me you don't believe black people exist?

Mar 10, 2009#145

MindDetective

Kissinger said:
MindDetective said:

Kissinger said:

Edrondol said:

I agree, but totally disregarding the genetic effect of our differences is.

Click to expand...

I wasn't totally disregarding it. I was saying that the stereotype greatly overstates things, cultural factors play a large part in shaping things, and that, in general, blanket stereotypes are bad things that should not be supported.

I really don't know why so many of you have a hard time with this.

Click to expand...

Because you gave the impression of making a stronger statement than "culture influences stereotypes". If that is really all you are saying then it isn't terribly interesting or much of a contribution to the overall discussion, really.

Click to expand...

It was a contradiction of the attitude expressed by many people in this thread that stereotypes exist for a reason and that the differences perceived between men and women were completely based in genetics. Although if adding a dissenting opinion doesn't contribute much to a discussion, then you must have some boring discussions.

1.) Nobody said these differences were completely based in genetics.

2.) Culture is a reason. The opposite position would be that they exist for no reason whatsoever.

Mar 10, 2009#146

Kitty Sinatra

Kissinger said:
So you use stereotypes to make judgements about people before you get to know them? You "pre-judge" people, so to speak?

Charlie said:
believing sitcoms as fact.... so... you're telling me you don't believe black people exist?

Okay, I know there are multiple discussions going on here, so I'm gonna assume the two of you haven't read all my posts in the proper context, which would require this line: Stereotypes are a basis for comedy gold. That is, I'm talking about fictional characters, not real people.

Mar 10, 2009#147

Steven Soderburgin

Gruebeard said:
Okay, I know there are multiple discussions going on here, so I'm gonna assume the two of you haven't read all my posts in the proper context, which would require this line: Stereotypes are a basis for comedy gold. That is, I'm talking about fictional characters, not real people.

If you like lazy, boring comedy, I guess.

Mar 10, 2009#148

Kissinger said:
Gruebeard said:

Charlie Dont Surf said:

Alright, sure, I'll bite.

Gruebeard, what stereotypes do you believe in?

Click to expand...

Hey, back on the discussion point.

Watch a sitcom. Any sitcom. I believe in the stereotypes used to create pretty much every character on the screen.

Oh, but given Kissinger's post just now, I want to add that I'm not talking about stereotypes that set "expectations for how men and women should and shouldn't behave." I'm talking about those that create handy shortcuts to describe how a person likely behaves.

Click to expand...

So you use stereotypes to make judgements about people before you get to know them? You "pre-judge" people, so to speak?

EVERYONE prejudges people. Everyone. When you meet someone you instantly make a call in your brain base on several factors which include looks, smell and even touch (handshakes). We make these subconsciously. Even you, Kissinger. Or are you going to tell me that if you met these two guys in the street you'd treat them exactly the same? If you say yes you are lying to yourself as well as us.

Mar 10, 2009#149

GasBandit

Edrondol said:
Kissinger said:

GasBandit said:

Fight on, Forum Crusaders!

Click to expand...

Ah, yes. The image macro. The last refuge of the defeated internet poster.

Click to expand...

He's not defeated. He just doesn't care enough to get involved with the discussion.

The discussion is inane. You're right, I wasn't debating him, I was just mocking him.

Stereotypes form the way they do as a parody of observed tendency. Yes, they can be hurtful. Yes, they have no bearing on the actual idiosyncrasies of the individual. But to say they their comparison is groundless is silly. Otherwise, we'd have "stereotypes" of "oh those silly black people, going to Mars for 2 weeks in the summer and eating their weight in reconstituted oysters whenever baseball season rolls around." It'd be gobbledygook, and hence would have no lasting power at all.

Mar 10, 2009#150

Kitty Sinatra

Kissinger said:
If you like lazy, boring comedy, I guess.

Go watch your favorite comedy movie. Count the stereotypes and get back to me.

Mar 10, 2009#151

ElJuski

Kissinger said:
Gruebeard said:

Okay, I know there are multiple discussions going on here, so I'm gonna assume the two of you haven't read all my posts in the proper context, which would require this line: Stereotypes are a basis for comedy gold. That is, I'm talking about fictional characters, not real people.

Click to expand...

If you like lazy, boring comedy, I guess.

This is what I've been saying this whole time.

Mar 10, 2009#152

Kitty Sinatra

Gruebeard said:
Go watch your favorite comedy movie. Count the stereotypes and get back to me.

Mar 10, 2009#153

GasBandit

Kissinger said:
Gruebeard said:

Okay, I know there are multiple discussions going on here, so I'm gonna assume the two of you haven't read all my posts in the proper context, which would require this line: Stereotypes are a basis for comedy gold. That is, I'm talking about fictional characters, not real people.

Click to expand...

If you like lazy, boring comedy, I guess.

For someone who should be familiar with the laments of Jay Sherman, you certainly are naive about human nature.

"If that's what passes for entertainment, no wonder I'm getting cancelled." - Jay
"Ha ha. Toilet." -Jay's Taxi Driver.

Mar 10, 2009#154

The Lovely Boehner

Gruebeard said:
I laugh at stereotypes and even believe in a bunch of them.

The way this quote and bolded part looks is that you think they are real and not just jokes.

Mar 10, 2009#155

GasBandit said:
Kissinger said:

Gruebeard said:

Okay, I know there are multiple discussions going on here, so I'm gonna assume the two of you haven't read all my posts in the proper context, which would require this line: Stereotypes are a basis for comedy gold. That is, I'm talking about fictional characters, not real people.

Click to expand...

If you like lazy, boring comedy, I guess.

Click to expand...

For someone who should be familiar with the laments of Jay Sherman, you certainly are naive about human nature.

"If that's what passes for entertainment, no wonder I'm getting cancelled." - Jay
"Ha ha. Toilet." -Jay's Taxi Driver.

Considering the show itself is a stereotype about a Jewish critic...Lazy comedy indeed.

Mar 10, 2009#156

ElJuski

Gruebeard said:
Kissinger said:

If you like lazy, boring comedy, I guess.

Click to expand...

Go watch your favorite comedy movie. Count the stereotypes and get back to me.

I <3 Huckabees or Wet Hot American Summer? Possibly Harold and Kumar go to White Castle. Although the latter two definitely use 'stereotypes' for 'comedy gold', it is in the inversion of those stereotypes, not the boring use of old stereotypes. I honestly don't know where you're getting that "stereotypes are comedy gold". Putting in a stock character in a stock situation is boring as fuck.

So really, now I just question your tastes.

Mar 10, 2009#157

ElJuski said:
Gruebeard said:

Kissinger said:

If you like lazy, boring comedy, I guess.

Click to expand...

Go watch your favorite comedy movie. Count the stereotypes and get back to me.

Click to expand...

I <3 Huckabees or Wet Hot American Summer? Possibly Harold and Kumar go to White Castle. Although the latter two definitely use 'stereotypes' for 'comedy gold', it is in the inversion of those stereotypes, not the boring use of old stereotypes. I honestly don't know where you're getting that "stereotypes are comedy gold". Putting in a stock character in a stock situation is boring as boop.

So really, now I just question your tastes.

Your avatar is a middle aged white guy with a pipe.

Mar 10, 2009#158

ElJuski

There's a reason why a show such as News Radio is considered a masterpiece of sitcom television, where...uhh, I don't know, Reba is not. Good art comes from changing or bucking convention, not playing color by numbers. Archie Bunker could have told you that!

EDIT:

Your avatar is a middle aged white guy with a pipe.

Yeah, Clone High is pretty awesome. The whole show is a parody of teen dramadies, those really shitty shows that use stereotypes abound to try and absorb the teen demographic. That character is a wonderful parody, and ultimately, via his telling Abe to hump the shit out of Cleo, a subversion of the wonderfully tried, true and tired Sitcom Dad formula.

Mar 10, 2009#159

Kitty Sinatra

So, you've never met a flaming gay? You've never met a geek with odor issues?

Of course I believe in the stereotypes because I know what a stereotype is: An amalgam of personal traits observed among a set of people who share certain qualities.

Mar 10, 2009#160

Cajungal

I don't think there's anything wrong with acknowledging that stereotypes are there and are based a lot on truth. I've witnessed so many of them. Do I think that's GOOD? No, but denying that there is truth in them isn't bad. Facing that fact is good, because then maybe we can start moving away from those stereotypes.

A good example of this is a documentary I watched for one of my education classes called "Acting White." It was about how intelligent black students at many poorer, inner-city public schools were being harassed for their good grades and general success. They were viewed as traitors by some people in the black community. Why? Because some black people in the community considered good grades, Standard English, and setting lofty goals in general as inherently white traits. They even had a black musician give an interview. He says he is "practically bilingual." When he is with his friends he uses their slang. But any other time, he speaks standard English. He doesn't feel he can share that part of himself with the guys in the community of his youth. If we ignore this stereotype--if we are offended just by the mentioning of it--there's no way for us to examine ourselves and our communities and help to change it.

And I've laughed at stereotypes in film and TV. Sometimes they make good observations. There are people out there who prefer to adopt some safe, mass persona rather than be a complex individual with a mind of their own. And that's laughable.

Mar 10, 2009#161

Kitty Sinatra

ElJuski said:
it is in the inversion of those stereotypes, not the boring use of old stereotypes. I honestly don't know where you're getting that "stereotypes are comedy gold".

So why exactly do you think I'm not referring to the creative use of stereotypes?

Mar 10, 2009#162

Steven Soderburgin

GasBandit said:
Stereotypes form the way they do as a parody of observed tendency. Yes, they can be hurtful. Yes, they have no bearing on the actual idiosyncrasies of the individual. But to say they their comparison is groundless is silly. Otherwise, we'd have "stereotypes" of "oh those silly black people, going to Mars for 2 weeks in the summer and eating their weight in reconstituted oysters whenever baseball season rolls around." It'd be gobbledygook, and hence would have no lasting power at all.

Stereotypes certainly come from somewhere, but that doesn't automatically mean that the source is valid. Think about the stereotypical racist caricature of black people from the first half of the 20th century. Just because those are based on stereotypes doesn't make them valid or accurate, nor should the stereotype be given any credence. The same could be said for stereotypes regarding behavior. Stereotypes are self-perpetuating. I'd say it's pretty likely that behavioral stereotypes strongly establish an expectation for behavior that, upon being fulfilled and observed, reinforces that stereotype.

Mar 10, 2009#163

ElJuski

Gruebeard said:
ElJuski said:

it is in the inversion of those stereotypes, not the boring use of old stereotypes. I honestly don't know where you're getting that "stereotypes are comedy gold".

Click to expand...

So why exactly do you think I'm not referring to the creative use of stereotypes?

Because of the "flaming gay" and "geek with odor issues". If you met the inversion of stereotypes you would have said the inversion of stereotypes. But you're not. They are completely different things and it sounds like you're trying to change tack here to save face.

Mar 10, 2009#164

Steven Soderburgin

ElJuski, I'd just like to say that your posts in this thread are great. Keep up the good work.

Mar 10, 2009#165

Cajungal

Also, agree with Kissinger on stereotypes being not always based on truth and a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Seriously, all my lessons from the past 2 years are coming flowing back this week.

Mar 10, 2009#166

ElJuski

Kissinger said:
ElJuski, I'd just like to say that your posts in this thread are great. Keep up the good work.

I don't know if you're being sarcastic or not, but I'd like to hope that you're not!

Mar 10, 2009#167

Steven Soderburgin

Cajungal said:
I don't think there's anything wrong with acknowledging that stereotypes are there and are based a lot on truth. I've witnessed so many of them. Do I think that's GOOD? No, but denying that there is truth in them isn't bad. Facing that fact is good, because then maybe we can start moving away from those stereotypes.

A good example of this is a documentary I watched for one of my education classes called "Acting White." It was about how intelligent black students at many poorer, inner-city public schools were being harassed for their good grades and general success. They were viewed as traitors by some people in the black community. Why? Because some black people in the community considered good grades, Standard English, and setting lofty goals in general as inherently white traits. They even had a black musician give an interview. He says he is "practically bilingual." When he is with his friends he uses their slang. But any other time, he speaks standard English. He doesn't feel he can share that part of himself with the guys in the community of his youth. If we ignore this stereotype--if we are offended just by the mentioning of it--there's no way for us to examine ourselves and our communities and help to change it.

And I've laughed at stereotypes in film and TV. Sometimes they make good observations. There are people out there who prefer to adopt some safe, mass persona rather than be a complex individual with a mind of their own. And that's laughable.

This is essentially what I'm talking about, other that the thing about stereotypes being based in a lot of truth, which I actually think is pretty incongruous to the rest of the post.

Mar 10, 2009#168

MindDetective

Mine happen to be great too. :ugeek:

-- Tue Mar 10, 2009 3:43 pm --

Kissinger said:
This is essentially what I'm talking about, other that the thing about stereotypes being based in a lot of truth, which I actually think is pretty incongruous to the rest of the post.

If you're quibble is with "a lot" I suppose I can get on board. If it is with "a grain of", we might still disagree. I really do get the impression you are coming from a tabula rasa standpoint, which I simply do not believe is founded.

Mar 10, 2009#169

Kitty Sinatra

ElJuski said:
Gruebeard said:

ElJuski said:

it is in the inversion of those stereotypes, not the boring use of old stereotypes. I honestly don't know where you're getting that "stereotypes are comedy gold".

Click to expand...

So why exactly do you think I'm not referring to the creative use of stereotypes?

Click to expand...

Because of the "flaming gay" and "geek with odor issues". If you met the inversion of stereotypes you would have said the inversion of stereotypes. But you're not. They are completely different things and it sounds like you're trying to change tack here to save face.

hmm. Obviously the longer this goes on the more muddled my point is going to get. I provided those as examples of stereotypes that exist. I never talked about their use.

As for stereotypes in comedy: I've been calling them a "basis" with the expectation that y'all reading would fill in some blanks.That is, right from the start I expected you to think of things like the inversion of stereotypes you say is in Harold and Kumar and think "haha, awesome use of a stereotype to produce comedy gold"

Mar 10, 2009#170

ElJuski

Gruebeard said:
ElJuski said:

Gruebeard said:

ElJuski said:

it is in the inversion of those stereotypes, not the boring use of old stereotypes. I honestly don't know where you're getting that "stereotypes are comedy gold".

Click to expand...

So why exactly do you think I'm not referring to the creative use of stereotypes?

Click to expand...

Because of the "flaming gay" and "geek with odor issues". If you met the inversion of stereotypes you would have said the inversion of stereotypes. But you're not. They are completely different things and it sounds like you're trying to change tack here to save face.

Click to expand...

hmm. Obviously the longer this goes on the more muddled my point is going to get. I provided those as examples of stereotypes that exist. I never talked about their use.

As for stereotypes in comedy: I've been calling them a "basis" with the expectation that y'all reading would fill in some blanks.That is, right from the start I expected you to think of things like the inversion of stereotypes you say is in Harold and Kumar and think "haha, awesome use of a stereotype to produce comedy gold"

You know, I'm smarter than I look. Smart enough where I don't go ahead assuming what posters are thinking when they are writing something completely different. And using stereotypes and inverting stereotypes are two completely different concepts. One of them is lower level thinking and the other requires examination of the stereotype and breaking down the pieces to reach comedic effect.

That is, a stereotype does not require intelligence, just social repetition and assimilation. Black people like purple drink, haha.

Inverting a stereotype requires understanding (A) that social assimilation, and then (B) considering the absurdity of that social assimilation.

Mar 10, 2009#171

Cajungal

I should have said "some" truth, not "a lot" honestly. Because I don't believe that stereotypes are based on 100% or even 75, 50% truth... but probably bits of it here and there. Don't know why I wrote it that way, but I take it back.

Mar 10, 2009#172

Steven Soderburgin

MindDetective said:
If you're quibble is with "a lot" I suppose I can get on board. If it is with "a grain of", we might still disagree. I really do get the impression you are coming from a tabula rasa standpoint, which I simply do not believe is founded.

Not entirely tabula rasa, but I highly doubt the built in knowledge and experiences we have at birth are the same or even mostly the same across the board.

Mar 10, 2009#173

Tinwhistler

Denbrought said:
makare1 said:

See now here is something that crosses the line from sexist to misogynistic to boop you * really quick
WTF seriously

Click to expand...

Funny how it says "Contract of Wifely Expectations" right on the first page yet the fourth one says "This is not a contract"." :eyeroll:
This guy could have just found someone with a submissive/slave fetish, problem solved.

Agreed..this looks like some fairly standard Dominance/submission fare. Who's to say that's not the kind of relationship that the couple enjoyed until they broke up?

Mar 10, 2009#174

GasBandit

Kissinger said:
GasBandit said:

Stereotypes form the way they do as a parody of observed tendency. Yes, they can be hurtful. Yes, they have no bearing on the actual idiosyncrasies of the individual. But to say they their comparison is groundless is silly. Otherwise, we'd have "stereotypes" of "oh those silly black people, going to Mars for 2 weeks in the summer and eating their weight in reconstituted oysters whenever baseball season rolls around." It'd be gobbledygook, and hence would have no lasting power at all.

Click to expand...

Stereotypes certainly come from somewhere, but that doesn't automatically mean that the source is valid. Think about the stereotypical racist caricature of black people from the first half of the 20th century. Just because those are based on stereotypes doesn't make them valid or accurate, nor should the stereotype be given any credence. The same could be said for stereotypes regarding behavior. Stereotypes are self-perpetuating. I'd say it's pretty likely that behavioral stereotypes strongly establish an expectation for behavior that, upon being fulfilled and observed, reinforces that stereotype.

Your honor, every-ting dat guy just said is bullshit.
(Stereotype humor for the +1)

Except for the part maybe about where they reinforce themselves. All bad habits are self-perpetuating. But that they are doesn't make them false.

Mar 10, 2009#175

MindDetective

Kissinger said:
MindDetective said:

If you're quibble is with "a lot" I suppose I can get on board. If it is with "a grain of", we might still disagree. I really do get the impression you are coming from a tabula rasa standpoint, which I simply do not believe is founded.

Click to expand...

Not entirely tabula rasa, but I highly doubt the built in knowledge and experiences we have at birth are the same or even mostly the same across the board.

There will definitely be individual variability. We clearly are not all clones of each other. This is the fundamental notion behind believing homosexuality may have a genetic precursor. But that pesky Y chromosome produces some pretty dramatic, systematic shifts in physiology as well as neurology. It would be a bit disingenuous to suggest that there would be perfect overlap in all measures of individual differences (including emotionality, intelligence, personality characteristics, etc.) between the entire spectrum of male population and the entire spectrum of the female population when they clearly do not overlap neurologically.

Mar 10, 2009#176

The Lovely Boehner

GasBandit said:
Your honor, every-ting dat guy just said is bullshit.
(Stereotype humor for the +1)

Mar 10, 2009#177

GasBandit

Attaboy.

Mar 10, 2009#178

Steven Soderburgin

I love that movie.

Mar 10, 2009#179

ElJuski

Damnit the My Cousin Vinnie defense!

Mar 10, 2009#180

The Lovely Boehner

Academy-award winner Marisa Tomei

Mar 10, 2009#181

ElJuski

Charlie Dont Surf said:
Academy-award winner Marisa Tomei

She's awesome in that movie. Gorgeous, too.

Mar 10, 2009#182

Kitty Sinatra

ElJuski said:
You know, I'm smarter than I look. Smart enough where I don't go ahead assuming what posters are thinking when they are writing something completely different. And using stereotypes and inverting stereotypes are two completely different concepts.

Well goddammit. I really wish you would try some assumption. I don't wanna write a dissertation-length post on the uses of stereotypes in comedy. I'd rather have to though since we are talking crossways. I would totally call inverting stereotypes as using them.

Anyway. That said. You close to what I'm getting at? I'm good for about another (newspaper-sized) paragraph if that would help clarify anything. Any more than a paragraph and I'm happy to leave it muddled. Ah fuck it. I'm actually happy to leave it muddled as is if it is so. hm, oh. ha! (nine two-letter words in a row! New record . . . ox)

Mar 10, 2009#183

Steven Soderburgin

But actually the humor in that movie has very little to do with stereotypes and more to do with funny conversations. I guess I could grant that it based somewhat on the characters expectations of each other based on where they're from as well, but it's really from a more fish-out-of-water angle than anything else.

Mar 10, 2009#184

Cajungal

I can't believe how long I went without seeing that movie... so funny.

Mar 10, 2009#185

GasBandit

Kissinger said:
But actually the humor in that movie has very little to do with stereotypes and more to do with funny conversations. I guess I could grant that it based somewhat on the characters expectations of each other based on where they're from as well, but it's really from a more fish-out-of-water angle than anything else.

"I bet the chinese food around here is ter-rib-bull." -Tomei
"No self-respectin' southerner eats INSTANT grits." - Witness

Bear with me and let me just inject a little subjectivity into this discussion here for a moment. I work in a radio company. We have a Country station, a Mexican station, an Urban station, and we used to have a Rock station (but that format's all but dead now everywhere). I'm up to my armpits in stereotypes all day long. And one thing I have found is that it is possible for people to embrace their stereotype and yet still get along perfectly well with other, seemingly incompatible ones.

Mar 10, 2009#186

ElJuski

Gruebeard said:
ElJuski said:

You know, I'm smarter than I look. Smart enough where I don't go ahead assuming what posters are thinking when they are writing something completely different. And using stereotypes and inverting stereotypes are two completely different concepts.

Click to expand...

Well goddammit. I really wish you would try some assumption. I don't wanna write a dissertation-length post on the uses of stereotypes in comedy. I'd rather have to though since we are talking crossways. I would totally call inverting stereotypes as using them.

Anyway. That said. You close to what I'm getting at? I'm good for about another (newspaper-sized) paragraph if that would help clarify anything. Any more than a paragraph and I'm happy to leave it muddled. Ah fuck it. I'm actually happy to leave it muddled as is if it is so. hm, oh. ha! (nine two-letter words in a row! New record . . . ox)

Well there's no reason to be huffy about the need for clarification, especially if you're trying to have a conversation. And like I said, inverting stereotypes is a wholly different form of comedy than just plain using stereotypes. But if you're honestly saying you are talking about the inversion of stereotypes, and not just...stereotypes, then there isn't much to discuss.

Mar 10, 2009#187

Steven Soderburgin

GasBandit said:
"I bet the chinese food around here is ter-rib-bull." -Tomei
"No self-respectin' southerner eats INSTANT grits." - Witness

Those are two lines from the movie, you're right.

Urban station

Just call it a rap station, damn.

Mar 10, 2009#188

GasBandit

Kissinger said:
GasBandit said:

"I bet the chinese food around here is ter-rib-bull." -Tomei
"No self-respectin' southerner eats INSTANT grits." - Witness

Click to expand...

Those are two lines from the movie, you're right.

And further demonstration of stereotypes used successfully and accurately to comedic effect.

[quote:4he8hsd5]Urban station

Just call it a rap station, damn.[/quote:4he8hsd5]

I wish. The official industry title of the format is "CHR Urban" - short for Contemporary Hits Rhythmic - Urban." If you go around calling it a "rap station" you sound like you don't know what you're talking about to other radio people.

Mar 10, 2009#189

Cajungal

I *do* feel a little bad every time I make instant grits. But I have a lot to do, damnit!

Mar 10, 2009#190

Chibibar

Cajungal said:
I *do* feel a little bad every time I make instant grits. But I have a lot to do, damnit!

heh.. I'm Asian.. I don't care if it is Instant

Mar 10, 2009#191

Steven Soderburgin

GasBandit said:
And further demonstration of stereotypes used successfully and accurately to comedic effect.

Nah, not really.

I wish. The official industry title of the format is "CHR Urban" - short for Contemporary Hits Rhythmic - Urban." If you go around calling it a "rap station" you sound like you don't know what you're talking about to other radio people.

Ah, that's dumb.

Mar 10, 2009#192

GasBandit

Kissinger said:
GasBandit said:

And further demonstration of stereotypes used successfully and accurately to comedic effect.

Click to expand...

Nah, not really.

Now you're just in denial.

[quote:2dkt0nwe]I wish. The official industry title of the format is "CHR Urban" - short for Contemporary Hits Rhythmic - Urban." If you go around calling it a "rap station" you sound like you don't know what you're talking about to other radio people.

Ah, that's dumb.[/quote:2dkt0nwe]
You think that's dumb, wait till I tell you about the billion different flavors of "AC" (Adult Contemporary).

Mar 10, 2009#193

Cajungal

Chibibar said:
Cajungal said:

I *do* feel a little bad every time I make instant grits. But I have a lot to do, damnit!

Click to expand...

heh.. I'm Asian.. I don't care if it is Instant

There's pre-cooked microwave RICE at the Asian market down the street from my apartment. Miracle of miracles! It's this perfect little serving. I can just throw it in there and plop it down next to my chicken and voila. C'est fini.

Mar 10, 2009#194

Chibibar

Cajungal said:
Chibibar said:

Cajungal said:

I *do* feel a little bad every time I make instant grits. But I have a lot to do, damnit!

Click to expand...

heh.. I'm Asian.. I don't care if it is Instant

Click to expand...

There's pre-cooked microwave RICE at the Asian market down the street from my apartment. Miracle of miracles! It's this perfect little serving. I can just throw it in there and plop it down next to my chicken and voila. C'est fini.

no self respectin' Asian would eat Instant rice!!

Mar 10, 2009#195

Cajungal

I feel a little tinge of shame in it myself as a former culinary arts student... but on the other hand, instant stuff gives me more time with you people.... and school stuff too, of course.

Mar 10, 2009#196

Hailey Knight

GasBandit said:
Kissinger said:

GasBandit said:

Look, the long and short of it is this - feminism shouldn't be about enforced gender androgyny

Click to expand...

I agree! It should be about everyone, man or woman, choosing who they want to be regardless of what is expected of them by society at large! It should be about breaking down those stereotypes and - oh, you weren't done talking.

because variety is the spice of life and vive la difference and all that rot. Everybody's different, but no matter how different you are, people are going to make fun of you. It's what they do. It's a bad idea to let them know they're getting to you, but none are so pathetic as the would-be white knights who get hyper-offended on someone else's behalf who might not even be offended themselves. Not only does it insult them because you think you know what they are thinking when you don't, but it also insults them by showing you don't think they can stick up for themselves.

Click to expand...

Oh.

Welp, I guess you're right. I guess all those non-blacks who supported the Civil Rights movement should've just stopped white (heh) knighting. I guess all those straight people who want equal rights for gays should stop insulting the gays by letting them stick up for themselves.

Click to expand...

I don't know; he seems more like a Sancho Panza to me.

Oh wait, the argument ended while I was at work? Fuck... FUUUUUCK!

Mar 10, 2009#197

GasBandit

escushion said:
Oh wait, the argument ended while I was at work? Fuck... FUUUUUCK!

Too slow, fishie! Too slow for this cat!

Mar 10, 2009#198

Chazwozel

Charlie Dont Surf said:
Edrondol said:

Lifetime is the worst at stereotyping women. Just like Maxim and SpikeTV stereotypes men. Know why? Because these stereotypes exist for a reason.

Both cater to those who exemplify the gender in popular culture - the woman who wants equality while still getting romance and having the door held open for her; the guy who appears vulnerable but can still kick * and get the hot chicks to take off their tops in his Camero.

I've never understood why we're trying to hard to fix the obvious and genetically built in differences between men & women instead of celebrating these differences.

Click to expand...

Do you honestly think women are genetically built in to be more emotional and men are genetically disposed to be stoic and emotionally "strong"?

Here's a hint. They are.

It's quite simple. On a genetic level ( seeing as genes went to be reproduced and passed on to progeny), women are genetically inclined to have babies and take care of said babies. Emotionally, men are significantly different. Look at Chimps and Gorillas - our closest living mammals on a genetic level, strip mankind of it's culture and we're reduced to a society that mimics Chimps and Gorillas to a tea, i.e females have offspring and males breed with as many females as possible. Males compete amongst each other for harem dominance. Males protect their offspring, but in no way do they emotionally interact like females do.

Sorry chief thems be the birds and the bees, and where femnazism fails.

Mar 10, 2009#199

Kitty Sinatra

ElJuski said:
And like I said, inverting stereotypes is a wholly different form of comedy than just plain using stereotypes.

See, to me "Using stereotypes" is all about every use of them: Inverting, reverting, subverting and just plain verting.

-- Tue Mar 10, 2009 6:13 pm --

Chazwozel said:
Sorry chief thems be the birds and the bees, and where femnazism fails.

Wait, weren't you talking about Humans and Apes. Where'd these birds and bees come from?

Mar 10, 2009#200

ElJuski

Gruebeard said:
ElJuski said:

And like I said, inverting stereotypes is a wholly different form of comedy than just plain using stereotypes.

Click to expand...

See, to me "Using stereotypes" is all about every use of them: Inverting, reverting, subverting and just plain verting.

-- Tue Mar 10, 2009 6:13 pm --

Chazwozel said:

Sorry chief thems be the birds and the bees, and where femnazism fails.

Click to expand...

Wait, weren't you talking about Humans and Apes. Where'd these birds and bees come from?

So making a chink-joke is the same as calling out the absurdity of the chink-joke?

Mar 10, 2009#201

Chippy

I heard black people LOVE watermelon.

Mar 10, 2009#202

Kitty Sinatra

Yes. They both use the stereotype as the basis of the joke.

Mar 10, 2009#203

Steven Soderburgin

Gruebeard said:
Yes. They both use the stereotype as the basis of the joke.

Are you honestly saying that there is no difference between exploiting a stereotype for a joke (For example: Man, isn't it funny how Asians say "r" like "l") and satirizing a stereotype for a joke? (For example: Dave Chappelle's body of work)

Mar 10, 2009#204

Hailey Knight

You gotta misplace the stereotypes. Have nurses eat donuts, make cops slutty, have blacks eat cats, have Asians put rims on their cars, have a woman style gay guy's hair, have a gay guy die for a sale.

Mar 10, 2009#205

ElJuski

Gruebeard said:
Yes. They both use the stereotype as the basis of the joke.

For ---COMPLETELY--- different reasons. One of them is stupid and ignorant. The other points out the stupidity and ignorance.

Mar 10, 2009#206

Kitty Sinatra

I'm not exploring the differences. I'm saying that when I referred to using a stereotype, I didn't mean using it one way or another. So, yes it's the same no matter how offensive, crude, clever or subversive the joke is intended to be, or whether it's used conciously or subconciously. The stereotype is still being used.

Mar 10, 2009#207

Steven Soderburgin

Gruebeard said:
I'm not exploring the differences. I'm saying that when I referred to using a stereotype, I didn't mean using it one way or another. So, yes it's the same no matter how offensive, crude, clever or subversive the joke is intended to be, or whether it's used conciously or subconciously. The stereotype is still being used.

So you don't distinguish a joke based on intent. You see a stereotype and it is laugh city for you. Is that what you're saying? You've backpedaled so much that I am really confused what you think your original point was.

Mar 10, 2009#208

ElJuski

Kissinger said:
Gruebeard said:

I'm not exploring the differences. I'm saying that when I referred to using a stereotype, I didn't mean using it one way or another. So, yes it's the same no matter how offensive, crude, clever or subversive the joke is intended to be, or whether it's used conciously or subconciously. The stereotype is still being used.

Click to expand...

So you don't distinguish a joke based on intent. You see a stereotype and it is laugh city for you. Is that what you're saying? You've backpedaled so much that I am really confused what you think your original point was.

Yeah, what Kissinger said...

Mar 10, 2009#209

Chippy

I heard Asians can't drive very well.

Mar 10, 2009#210

Hailey Knight

I don't let white people near my watermelons.

Mar 10, 2009#211

Cajungal

Chippy said:
I heard Asians can't drive very well.

It's funny because it's true!

Mar 10, 2009#212

Kitty Sinatra

Kissinger said:
I am really confused what you think your original point was.

My point is tiny: Stereotypes form the foundation of a hell of a lot of jokes that we laugh at.

Mar 10, 2009#213

Steven Soderburgin

Gruebeard said:
My point is tiny: Stereotypes form the foundation of a * of a lot of jokes that we laugh at.

Yes, but the jokes that I laugh at that are based on stereotypes tend to subvert them or satirize them. That's entirely different from laughing at a joke that says, "Chicks sure love to shop, don't they? Loller skates!"

Mar 10, 2009#214

Chippy

I heard all Mexicans are named Callelayayayaya.

Mar 10, 2009#215

Cajungal

Cajun stereotypes that make we laugh:

We all live in the swamp.

Our primary transportation mode is boats.

We go barefoot all the time (don't know how that one came up).

Our food is always hot.<--This one is just silly, as every true Cajun knows that we're all about flavor, not heat.

Mar 10, 2009#216

Enresshou

That trailer hurt my gray thinky thing. Just...wow.

I scanned the thread, but didn't see much. It did, however, immediately make me think of this in terms of stereotypes:

Mar 10, 2009#217

Cajungal

Mar 10, 2009#218

Far

God damn, it's cold eh! If I could only find my touque, I'd get up off this chesterfield and chop myself down a big tree to make into a hockey stick. That's what I'm talking aboot eh.

Mar 10, 2009#219

Troll

Wow, I missed out on this thread. I would love to contribute further, but I think all the relevant talking points have been beaten to death. Having said that, I did want to address two things:

First,

BlackCrossCrusader said:
It's amazing how a simple joke readily turns into a political thread, with labels and insults thrown around.

CDS is a better troll than A Troll.

*Typing that last sentence, than reading it aloud makes me twitch inside. rly:

I think what's really amazing is that some people seem to think I'm actually trying to be a troll.

Second, I got a little offended initially at how much flak I was taking in a thread where I wasn't even involved... then I realized most of it came from Kissinger. If he doesn't like me, I must be doing something right.

Mar 10, 2009#220

Steven Soderburgin

A Troll said:
Second, I got a little offended initially at how much flak I was taking in a thread where I wasn't even involved... then I realized most of it came from Kissinger. If he doesn't like me, I must be doing something right.

Nah, you're just a terribly boring and bland poster.

EDIT: Let me make an addendum: You are notable in that you try too hard.

Mar 10, 2009#221

Kitty Sinatra

A Troll said:
I think what's really amazing is that some people seem to think I'm actually trying to be a troll

You're being stereotyped by your race, dude.

Mar 10, 2009#222

Troll

Kissinger said:
A Troll said:

Second, I got a little offended initially at how much flak I was taking in a thread where I wasn't even involved... then I realized most of it came from Kissinger. If he doesn't like me, I must be doing something right.

Click to expand...

Nah, you're just a terribly boring and bland poster.

EDIT: Let me make an addendum: You are notable in that you try too hard.

The "bad troll trying to be a good troll" got stale for me a long time ago, too. I haven't been playing that up for a while now. Try to keep up, kiddo. Glad to see you're still trying the "self righteous prick" persona, though. Let me know how that works out.

Asshole.

Mar 10, 2009#223

Anubinomicon

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M2SFBLOI2aQ:zehfgpg7][/youtube:zehfgpg7]

Mar 11, 2009#224

F

Futureking

A Troll said:
Kissinger said:

[quote="A Troll":1veu6f05]Second, I got a little offended initially at how much flak I was taking in a thread where I wasn't even involved... then I realized most of it came from Kissinger. If he doesn't like me, I must be doing something right.

Click to expand...

Nah, you're just a terribly boring and bland poster.

EDIT: Let me make an addendum: You are notable in that you try too hard.

The "bad troll trying to be a good troll" got stale for me a long time ago, too. I haven't been playing that up for a while now. Try to keep up, kiddo. Glad to see you're still trying the "self righteous *" persona, though. Let me know how that works out.

*.[/quote:1veu6f05]

You're still a bad troll. Bad troll. Bad.

Mar 11, 2009#225

GasBandit

Mar 11, 2009#226

Chazwozel

Kissinger said:
A Troll said:

Second, I got a little offended initially at how much flak I was taking in a thread where I wasn't even involved... then I realized most of it came from Kissinger. If he doesn't like me, I must be doing something right.

Click to expand...

Nah, you're just a terribly boring and bland poster.

EDIT: Let me make an addendum: You are notable in that you try too hard.

Hey everyone, look! It's a stereotypically self-righteous virgin!

Mar 11, 2009#227

Kitty Sinatra

GasBandit said:
[pic]Comedy Gold[/pic]

That's gold, Jerry. Gold!

Mar 11, 2009#228

Tinwhistler

Chazwozel said:
Kissinger said:

A Troll said:

Second, I got a little offended initially at how much flak I was taking in a thread where I wasn't even involved... then I realized most of it came from Kissinger. If he doesn't like me, I must be doing something right.

Click to expand...

Nah, you're just a terribly boring and bland poster.

EDIT: Let me make an addendum: You are notable in that you try too hard.

Click to expand...

Hey everyone, look! It's a stereotypically self-righteous virgin!

Mar 11, 2009#229

The Lovely Boehner

Calling people virgins: the ultimate insult? 9 out of 10 middle school seniors agree.

Mar 11, 2009#230

Far

Mar 11, 2009#231

GasBandit

Charlie Dont Surf said:
Calling people virgins: the ultimate insult? 9 out of 10 middle school seniors agree.

WTF is a "middle school senior?" They actually name the grades in middle school now? This country is going to hell faster than I thought.

Christ, like the other time I heard about somebody's "5th grade graduation" ceremony because they were leaving grade school. What's next, senior trip to mexico for passing kindergarten?

Mar 11, 2009#232

ElJuski

He probably meant high school, I'd wager. Either way the whole "virgin" thing is pretty fucking dumb and old.

Mar 11, 2009#233

Kitty Sinatra

They don't like your joke Chaz. You should've added in more stereotypes, and a smurfing curse word or seven.

Mar 11, 2009#234

Jake

You know, lately I've had that "not so fresh" feeling. I'm at a loss as to what might give me some relief...

Charlie Dont Surf said:
*the usual*

Ahhhh. That's better. :sobad:

Mar 11, 2009#235

The Sheriff

Alright, this thread has run its course.

Keep it civil, people.

Forums