The daughter of the owner of the NY Jets had her hair set on fire in a catfight with her lesbian girlfriend.
Um…wow. Interesting. It’s a shame this couldn’t have happened before a Jets-Pats game just to see what the Pat’s fans could come up with for signs. Does this bode well for the resolution of the Favre situation? The upcoming draft? Good times.
This must be a fake story. Everybody knows only men commit domestic violence.
I wish this had happened during the season. It’s more interesting than Favre’s retirement waffling, and the anouncers, and listening to the TV analysts try and discuss this turmoil with euphemisms and politeness would have been high comedy.
Does everything have be turned into a political potshot- and one that’s aimed at nobody? How can you take a story like this seriously enough to try to make a political point about it?
That’s got to be some sort of new threat I haven’t heard about yet,
“Don’t make me come over there and set your hair on fire!”
Okay, I’m a nerd who doesn’t know jack about football. That’s already on record.
But I don’t get how this is supposed to be funny. Change the gender of the offender and nobody would be laughing.
Well, duh.
Also, Skald, the Jets are intrinsically funny. The humor in this situation comes at least 50% from the fact that it happened to the daughter of the Jets owner, specifically.
I would argue that 100% of the humor comes from it being the Jets. However 100% of the sexiness comes from the lesbian catfight.
Yeah. This never happens to like, the Bears or the Browns.
Question for discussion: would it have been funnier if it had happened to the daughter of the Bengals’ owner? Or not?
The Bengals are pathetic, not funny.
Yikes…now I have to cleanse the image of Virginia McCaskey having a lesbian catfight from my brain, thanks.
Clearly, if the daughter of the Bengals owner had been involved she would have been the aggressor. That would have been funnier.
Because…?
I’m not being snarky at this point. What’s so odious or humorous about them?
Catfights are only sexy in the movies. Given that this involved HAIR BEING SET ON FIRE, I’m pertty sure at no point did the fighting morph into kissing. Also, it seems less a fight than an assault.
I’m not sure I can articulate this properly, but I’ll try. The Jets are the football equivalent of Job. If some bizarre, inexplicable weirdly unpleasant thing can happen to a football team, it’s probably going to happen to the Jets. This is a team that had its head coach “retire” and hand the reins of the team over to his carefully groomed and handpicked successor, only to have said successor leave after one day on the job and coach the team’s primary rival to multiple championships. Its a team that loses in increasing improbable ways, that is snakebit.
Put simply, it’s funny because if you had said: “Team owner’s daughter involved in lesbian fighting with bonus pyromania” without naming the team or even the sport, I’d have guessed “Jets” without a second thought.
I don’t know if I can do better than that.
Maybe you can take the threadshitting over here. You know, be equitable.
It wasn’t my intent to threadshit, and all I’ve done is comment on the EXACT TOPIC of the thread. It seems odd to me to chortle over such a matter. I’ll concede that, if the incident referred to had happened in a movie or television show, it could easily be amusing. But I read the article you linked to in the OP, and it seems only to describe a criminal attack made amusing only by the fact that it seems to fit certain fantasies, and would not be thought funny if a man had done the exact same thing.
But I’m certain I’ve started more than my own share of threads that others thought questionable, so I’ll cease my implicit criticism of this own.
I’m not the only one here with a particular cause celebre, political viewpoint, or “agenda” which we take the opportunity to promote even in threads not dedicated to that particular topic. Some people can’t, or simply don’t, post without interjecting their particular pet peeve: politics, religion, taxation, whatever.
Many Dopers who think they don’t fall into this category will still take the opportunity to post off-topic replies when they find it necessary to comment on, or promote, a particular viewpoint (e.g. racism – pointing out a comment they feel to be racist, even in a thread not dedicated to racism). Is posting off-topic against the rules? (**Skald the Rhymer **is doing it here, and I wholeheartedly agree.)
My particular pet peeve is the negative portrayal of men in the mass media. Specifically, but not limited to, the portrayal of domestic violence as only being perpetrated by men. Inversely correlated is the downplaying, even making light of, domestic violence perpetrated by women.
Marley23, storyteller0910, and Omniscient – you stink. And I pit you.
[Blatently stealing from Doper MOIDALIZE]
Favre? Did somebody say something about Brett Favre? BrettFavreBrettFavreBrettFavre?
[/BsfDM]
(I’m assuming MOIDALIZE doesn’t want to overuse the bit, but I say it’s only funnier the more threads even tangentially related to football that it gets used in.)
I disagree I think that a guy setting another guy’s hair on fire in a lovers quarrel would be equally funny especially if there was no damage done other then needing a new hair style.
Reading Jimmy’s last response moves me to decide that I was threadshitting–not by bringing up the point, but by keeping at it. Sorry guys.