# Does (nearly) everything have to be qualified nowadays? **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [April 27, 2005, 2:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-nearly-everything-have-to-be-qualified-nowadays/301308 "2005-04-27T02:59:41Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Harborwolf](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/c89c15/32.png) [@Harborwolf](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Harborwolf)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2005, 12:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-nearly-everything-have-to-be-qualified-nowadays/301308/21 "2005-04-27T12:55:47Z")
> [@Balle\_M](#): > > I’d like to, but Men are from Mars and Puppies are from Pluto. IIRC, pluto is a male dog and I’m pretty sure Mickey had him fixed. ---
**Author:** ![manhattan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/manhattan/32/7_2.png) [@manhattan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/manhattan)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2005, 1:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-nearly-everything-have-to-be-qualified-nowadays/301308/22 "2005-04-27T13:11:25Z")
> [@CrankyAsAnOldMan](#): > > But I think we should strive for a community where tree-lovers and paper conservationists can feel SAFE and don’t have to endure those unpleasant surprises. Oh great. The electron abusers are here. ---
**Author:** ![Celyn](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/9dc877/32.png) [@Celyn](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Celyn)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2005, 1:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-nearly-everything-have-to-be-qualified-nowadays/301308/23 "2005-04-27T13:17:45Z")
> [@Roland Orzabal](#): > > … We’ll get books where everyone is named Pat or Kelly, and nobody has any ancestry, sexual preference, physical statistics, economic standing, or medical problems. > > Granted, it is a slightly different s… So you’re saying there would only be boook in which everybody was Irish? 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Celyn](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/9dc877/32.png) [@Celyn](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Celyn)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2005, 1:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-nearly-everything-have-to-be-qualified-nowadays/301308/24 "2005-04-27T13:19:23Z")
That would be “books”, before any evildoer makes jokes about Celyns who can’t type. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Exgineer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/a88e4f/32.png) [@Exgineer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Exgineer)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2005, 1:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-nearly-everything-have-to-be-qualified-nowadays/301308/25 "2005-04-27T13:20:43Z")
> [@matt\_mcl](#): > > I dunno… what’s wrong with me that I read that stuff and it strikes me as really skeevy and coming from a lot of really skeevy ideas about gender, when everyone else seems to consider mocking one conversational strategy as “womanspeak” and mocking another conversational strategy as “manspeak” as natural as the clouds? What’s wrong with you is that you’re in denial. Men and women _are_ different, and it’s not just in the plumbing. Our brains are actually physically different (the obvious example is the disparity in size of the corpus collosum) and multiple studies have shown that we use different parts of our brains in dealing with given situations. There’s no value judgement to be made here, but you do have to recognize the differences in the hardwiring. Just smugly saying “we’re all the same species” ignores the fact that we are two different genders, and that in the real world that has consequences. Just writing those differences off as “conversational strategies” is unbelievably fucking stupid, and you’re better than that. ---
**Author:** ![Frank](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Frank](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frank)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2005, 1:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-nearly-everything-have-to-be-qualified-nowadays/301308/26 "2005-04-27T13:21:41Z")
> [@Celyn](#): > > So you’re saying there would only be boook in which everybody was Irish? > > 🙂 Damn you! I was just thinking of something witty to say about the two Irishmen Pat and Kelly! Damn you! And you can’t spell either! ---
**Author:** ![DeadlyAccurate](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/ac91a4/32.png) [@DeadlyAccurate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DeadlyAccurate)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2005, 2:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-nearly-everything-have-to-be-qualified-nowadays/301308/27 "2005-04-27T14:38:12Z")
> [@Roland Orzabal](#): > > I can’t wait until the Cavalcade of the Offended starts applying this sort of horseshit to novelists. “Why did you need to mention that the main character was Hispanic, hmm? Oh, ‘background information’, my ass; it’s obvious from that scene where she gets mad when somebody stabs her husband that you’re saying all Hispanic women are temperamental bitches. Then, in that same scene, she _kills_ the guy! Are you implying that Hispanics are bunch of no-good killers? ARE YOU?! And for that matter, why did you even need to say that it was a woman? You’re just trying to insinuate that a MAN wouldn’t have done any of these awful things! You horrible, wretched bigot!” It’ll be a fun time. We’ll get books where everyone is named Pat or Kelly, and nobody has any ancestry, sexual preference, physical statistics, economic standing, or medical problems. I expect this to happen with my current novel. I have an important secondary character who is a lesbian television actress. Sometimes she acts irrationally or even dumb, not because she’s gay, but because she’s that particular person. Even though I set my books in the future, made gay marriage legal, and made it rather obvious that most people couldn’t care less about someone’s orientation, someone will get offended that the character and her wife have a huge fight, and make the assumption that I think all gay people are irrational. And I would like to now put out to pasture for perpetuity the phrase, “Not that there’s anything wrong with that.” I’m not gay, _not that there’s anything wrong with that._ I’m not much of a dog person, _not that there’s anything wrong with that._ I prefer dark chocolate over milk chocolate, _not that there’s anything wrong with that._ It’s an annoying phrase on par with, “Some of my best friends are .” ---
**Author:** ![Silver\_Fire](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a88e4f/32.png) [@Silver\_Fire](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Silver_Fire)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2005, 2:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-nearly-everything-have-to-be-qualified-nowadays/301308/28 "2005-04-27T14:48:56Z")
[Decoding gay-speak](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=313988) Wee! ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2005, 3:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-nearly-everything-have-to-be-qualified-nowadays/301308/29 "2005-04-27T15:29:38Z")
> [@Harimad-sol](#): > > Who will speak for the poor Republican puppies, though? They’re not Republican yet. That only happens after they get their eyes open. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![Lord\_Ashtar](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/7ea924/32.png) [@Lord\_Ashtar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lord_Ashtar)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2005, 3:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-nearly-everything-have-to-be-qualified-nowadays/301308/30 "2005-04-27T15:32:08Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > They’re not Republican yet. > > That only happens after they get their eyes open. > > Regards, > Shodan Thank you, **Shodan**. That made my day. ---
**Author:** ![Troy\_McClure\_SF](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/troy_mcclure_sf/32/4150_2.png) [@Troy\_McClure\_SF](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Troy_McClure_SF)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2005, 3:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-nearly-everything-have-to-be-qualified-nowadays/301308/31 "2005-04-27T15:45:10Z")
> [@matt\_mcl](#): > > more of the battle-of-the-sexes stuff that never leads to anything good and speaks to a lot of really antique ideas. I’m not exactly sure what you mean by “antique ideas,” but as the first part of your sentence, it led to a few giggles and a belly laugh or two, enjoyed by a group of people having some harmless fun, and few things in life are better than that, IMO. And if we want to talk about sterotypes and their role in humor, let’s point out that some of the jokes in _Decoding woman-speak_ were based on women making a huge deal over what seems to be nothing. Giggles abound, world continues revolving. And then a couple of people come into the thread and _make a huge deal over nothing_! I mean, the thread was never meant to be an in-depth analysis of how people think, but if it were a GD thread, I think the argument becomes, “see?” It’d be like if Michael Moore held a press conference and said, “I hate America, fuck you all.” Proper response from Democrats: “Hrm, I guess he does hate America.” Wrong response: “No he doesn’t! No he doesn’t! La la la la la! No he doesn’t!” I’m not saying that political correctness doesn’t have its place. I, for one, am happy to know the origins of the phrase “getting gypped,” to which I owe this board. But a band of middle Asian people from several hundred years ago doesn’t have the visibility of _women_. It’s good to have people like you, \*_matt\_mcl_, who are ready to defend against mistreatment of women without even being one yourself, but this particular instance is a battle that doesn’t need to be fought. There is no ignorance here. One can mention and extract humor from stereotypes without being ignorant of how the world really is. Sure, a few people will get offended, but that will be the case with everything, everywhere. My mom hated _Seinfeld_ because Jerry had a different girlfriend every week. Should she have started a crusade, and ran around every Thursday night handing out safe sex pamphlets to peopel watching the show? No, she realized that most people have the sense to realize that Jerry is not a role model, and just chose not to watch it herself. ---
**Author:** ![FordPrefect](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/e99b99/32.png) [@FordPrefect](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FordPrefect)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2005, 3:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-nearly-everything-have-to-be-qualified-nowadays/301308/32 "2005-04-27T15:47:10Z")
> [@matt\_mcl](#): > > Okay, yes, it was a joke, we all know it was meant as a joke. But it’s more of the battle-of-the-sexes stuff that never leads to anything good and speaks to a lot of really antique ideas. > > We’re the same species, folks. It doesn’t help anyone to think of half of the species as “the other side,” some foreign country whose language you have to decode or whose spies you have to evade. Hands up whoever is been with the same woman for more than 16 years? Woman-speak exists, my wife and I joke about it all the time. She will make some cryptic remark, lay another landmine and when I call her on it, she laughs and tries to straighten me out. I can assume that in relationships that are less open or more antagonistic than the one I am in this difference in language use could become a substantial problem. Same species or no. ---
**Author:** ![JohnT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/johnt/32/15048_2.png) [@JohnT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JohnT)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2005, 3:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-nearly-everything-have-to-be-qualified-nowadays/301308/33 "2005-04-27T15:55:28Z")
> [@](#): > > Hands up whoever is been with the same woman for more than 16 years? :smack: (Well, that’s the best smilie available for the request. 😉 ) ---
**Author:** ![Elza\_B](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/6a8cbe/32.png) [@Elza\_B](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Elza_B)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2005, 4:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-nearly-everything-have-to-be-qualified-nowadays/301308/34 "2005-04-27T16:02:44Z")
> [@Klaatu](#): > > I hear you, and I guess that’s just the nature if the SDMB. > > Where else could a thread break down like this: > > MPSIMS: “Hey everybody, my dog just had puppies today.” > Next poster: “So how do you feel about that?” > > Mods: “Moved to IMHO” > > OP: “Hey everybody, my dog just had puppies today.” > Next poster: “Cite please” > > Mods: “Moved to GD” > > OP: “Hey everybody, my dog just had puppies today.” > Next poster: “Well, they’re probably Republicans, so bite my ass!” > > Mods: Moved to the Pit." > OP: “Well, fuck ya’ll then, I just threw the puppies on the grill!” Holy shit. I’m having Dish Network installed right now and I can’t stop giggling. My installer thinks I’m nuts! E. ---
**Author:** ![JohnBckWLD](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/d6d6ee/32.png) [@JohnBckWLD](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JohnBckWLD)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2005, 5:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-nearly-everything-have-to-be-qualified-nowadays/301308/35 "2005-04-27T17:06:55Z")
In **Chefguy** ’s [Goddamn Chinese-made CRAP!](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=313857), I found this earned a nomination for a _Retort of the Day_ award: (Paraphrasing) Chefguy: I bought a pair of special order shoes, made in China, and they’re 2 different sizes, Goddamn Chinese-made CRAP! > [@Anaamika](#): > > Yeah, maybe you should be pitting the company that has low standards, not the Chinese… > **Anaamika** , girlfriend of a Chinese guy. > [@Chefguy](#): > > So I’m not supposed to pit the poor quality of Chinese-made goods because you’re fucking an Asian? What does your lovelife have to do with consumer goods? To me, that reply was more priceless than any Mastercard commercial I’ve ever seen. ---
**Author:** ![matt\_mcl](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/7ab992/32.png) [@matt\_mcl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/matt_mcl)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2005, 5:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-nearly-everything-have-to-be-qualified-nowadays/301308/36 "2005-04-27T17:15:06Z")
> [@Exgineer](#): > > What’s wrong with you is that you’re in denial. See, I considered that, and then it occurred to me that (surprise!) I hang out with women. I even speak to them occasionally. And the women I know do not behave in the ways listed in the thread, and a lot of the men I know _do._ So if in my experience, these things aren’t split by gender, and people _admit_ as much, the thing that puzzles me is why they seem so prepared to insist that there is a “womanspeak” and a “manspeak” anyway. It’s not a concept I’ve ever found helpful, and it has a lot of unfortunate implications. > [@](#): > > And then a couple of people come into the thread and make a huge deal over nothing! a) Well, obviously I don’t think it’s nothing, and neither do the other people who joined the thread. Perhaps that is some insight into the stereotype you mention. b) And look at this: you are attempting to defend the stereotype that “women make a big deal over nothing” by pointing to me, who am not a woman. You even bring this fact up. Why divide things up by gender that _don’t_ divide up by gender? > [@](#): > > One can mention and extract humor from stereotypes without being ignorant of how the world really is. I know. I do it frequently. I just don’t think that that was what was going on in the thread. For example, there’s now a thread “Decoding gayspeak.” And we’ll see how that goes; I might even participate. But nobody (I trust) is going to defend it by trying to show that these stereotypes are reality. The reason the critique of these threads even began is that people, in our experience, do _not_ treat these “menspeak” and “womenspeak” things as stereotype-mockery. They treat them as mockery of men or women, respectively. ---
**Author:** ![Harborwolf](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/c89c15/32.png) [@Harborwolf](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Harborwolf)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2005, 5:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-nearly-everything-have-to-be-qualified-nowadays/301308/37 "2005-04-27T17:28:59Z")
Seriously dude, it’s a joke. Coming in here and attempting to explain why you think it’s not a joke is stupid because it was meant to be a joke. The actual differences between men and women have nothing to do with anything becuase the threads were jokes. Just lighten up and move on. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Troy\_McClure\_SF](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/troy_mcclure_sf/32/4150_2.png) [@Troy\_McClure\_SF](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Troy_McClure_SF)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2005, 5:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-nearly-everything-have-to-be-qualified-nowadays/301308/38 "2005-04-27T17:34:18Z")
FTR, in **matt\_mcl** ’s latest post, the last two quote are from me, not **Exgineer**. ---
**Author:** ![matt\_mcl](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/7ab992/32.png) [@matt\_mcl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/matt_mcl)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2005, 5:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-nearly-everything-have-to-be-qualified-nowadays/301308/39 "2005-04-27T17:35:16Z")
But this is the thing: half the people are defending it by claiming that it’s just a joke and it’s not serious, and the other half are defending it by claiming “but women actually DO speak like that!” You’re either satirizing a stereotype, or you’re satirizing people on the basis of their gender. I know which one I saw in the thread. ---
**Author:** ![matt\_mcl](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/7ab992/32.png) [@matt\_mcl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/matt_mcl)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2005, 5:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-nearly-everything-have-to-be-qualified-nowadays/301308/40 "2005-04-27T17:37:22Z")
> [@Troy McClure SF](#): > > FTR, in **matt\_mcl** ’s latest post, the last two quote are from me, not **Exgineer**. Yes. Sorry about that. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-nearly-everything-have-to-be-qualified-nowadays/301308.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-nearly-everything-have-to-be-qualified-nowadays/301308.md?page=3)