Agreed on both accounts. It was a simple enough request to stop, so not seeing the need to keep at it.
I would just add that, in kayaker’s defense, his “There’s the little girl” comment really was about his thread Where’s the little girl from just a few days ago where many of the posters were commenting on how they didn’t get the joke. A joke about cops acting in ridiculously over-the-top stereotypical cop fashion, in which the punch line is “there’s the little girl”. I don’t think he meant to call Sunny Daze a “little girl”. If you hadn’t see that thread, I can see where you might have thought otherwise, though.
Yeah, could be meta, but there is more to it than meets the eye if you knew nothing about that other thread. Just filling in the blank spaces since I was one of the folks who saw that other thread but also didn’t “get it”.
OK, I’ll be honest and say that it wouldn’t have occurred to me that the original “sharing” joke would be offensive. I could just as easily see women making the same joke, and I understand that’s different since men haven’t traditionally been reduced to object status.
So, if I boneheadedly made the same joke and, say Sunny Daze posted that it’s a pretty sexist or offensive joke, and I replied with, “Yeah, I could see that. Sorry, I won’t do that again,” would that be OK?
Sure. I earlier said that these guys are reinforcing the societal attitude that uppity women ought to be smacked down. This is the basic attitude underlying all of western civ for thousands of years. The difference is that I don’t see any reason to assume that they have good intentions while continuing to reinforce it.
I mean - why should we? Can you imagine any other subject were you see these jerks acting out - whether it’s racism or antisemitism or whatever - and rush in to defend him of the suspicion of having bad intentions?
If kayaker called a black member of this board, “Aunt Jemima”, would you be in a huge hurry to insist that he has “good intentions”.
If Morgenstern told a Jewish poster to “keep his big nose to himself” would you shrug and say, “well, it’s just so easy to be bigot but he probably doesn’t have bad intentions”.
No. Of course you wouldn’t. It’s ridiculous even to type it out.
So when a sexist barges into a thread where a woman is complaining about sexism and calls her a little girl - why are you here whining about how hard it is to avoid sexism, and telling us we should assumes the sexist has good intentions.
Richard, sexists do not have good intentions.
People who insist that we should give sexists the benefit of the doubt - also, do not have good intentions.
The people with good intentions are the ones standing up for the women, not the sexists. Even when it’s hard. Even when it goes against thousands of years of ingrained tradition that white boys get the benefit of the doubt.
If you have actual good intentions - stand up for the victims of sexism, not the sexists.
Rittersport Yes, that’s the point. If I’m offended by something you say, I consider if it’s worth mentioning or not. If so, then I tell you. You hear me out, then decide if you’re going to apologize, file the information away, or, as in the case elsewhere on this thread, double down.
If you decide you can see my point of view, and you say, “sorry won’t do that again”, then boom, apology accepted.
OK, thanks. I really don’t understand why someone would double down, like they are here. If you make a joke that falls flat or offends, just apologize and move on.
I thought the sexism in the original joke was pretty mild, but I’m not a woman so I’m not about to tell you what to be offended about. I was obviously wrong.
This is hilarious. It’s the classic shipwreck farce where the menfolk start talking about sharing the womenfolk and the womenfolk don’t like the way the menfolk are treating them so they let the menfolk know about it in no uncertain terms and the menfolk shuffle their feet and mumble an apology and then start minding their manners.
Doubling down is almost always the wrong way to go. Learn that.
If you find yourself using the phrase “snowflake”, you are an asshole. You should stick to “cuck”, it makes your assholery much more apparent, which seems to be your intention.
And just to be sure no one is taking this the wrong way, I’m not calling this thread and its predecessor a farce. I saying I am amused at how readily the menfolk have made this farcical mistake.
My perspective is that I do not wish to be discussed like a possession and I reserve the right to say so. Saying so does not mean I lack a sense of humor. Grow up.
I don’t have anything to apologize for. I didn’t making any sharing jokes in that thread or defend anyone who did in this one. And I made clear what my remarks were about because I felt certain at least one person wouldn’t bother to read them and consider what I said.