Hey, it’s not our fault our anatomy keeps us from getting our jollies just sitting on a washing machine on spin cycle. 
A friend and I were swapping kid stories. I was telling her about my girlfriend’s twin cousins. They’re six, a boy and a girl, and while the girl is very bright and pleasant, the boy is quite loud and clumsy. He lives through his Nintendo DS, and often tells me how to play games by “showing me” all the interesting parts himself. His sister was coloring a My Little Pony picture, and he wanted to color, so he asked if we had a picture with “boy colors” for him.
My friend says, “Wow, he’s totally going to play football and beat his wife.”
It’s snarky because it’s a proper response to, “We’re only going to ask boys, because an average boy is statistically likely to be stronger than an average girl.” The **only **reason to ask **only **boys is if their penises or testicles somehow factor in, because that is the only think you know for sure that they have that the girls don’t. (And even that might not be true if their are any intersexed kids in the mix.)
If they were going to put on a play about prison, would you be offended if the teacher told only Black students to audition for roles as convicts? After all, they’re statistically more likely to be incarcerated than their white classmates. :rolleyes:
Yeah, but you can’t tell at a glance who’s who, so saying that teenage girls have no need to carry a bunch of pads and tampons with them everywhere because they can just walk around with toilet paper in their underwear for an hour is a crap arguement.
Which has jack all to do with which students a teacher would ask to help move furniture and you know it.
I’ll be the first to claim the Patented Suzanne Sugarbaker Pinched Nerve. I’m not proud. 
No, in that I agree, and if I’m following correctly, this all came from a “no bags” rule… Which I do not understand, anyways…
But my reply was to a quote of someone saying she didn’t know of a woman who could make do with TP. I’m guessing gigi is a female, and she gave the advice. Likewise, I’m a female. Just trying to fight ignorance and brake that “never” thing.
No, it has quite a bit to do. Both situations have to do with looking at **statistical distribution **rather than individuals.
Boys are in general stronger than girls, but that doesn’t tell you anything about whether Boy A is stronger than Girl B. Similarly (although without the genetic component), Black men are more likely to end up in prison than white men, but that doesn’t tell you whether Black Boy A is more likely to be convicted of a felony as an adult than White Boy B.
Perhaps there’s a local university where you could take a course that would help you better understand the idea.
It was me, and the women I know wouldn’t walk around for an hour with nothing but TP in the underwear. I’m not saying that no women could do it, but the fact that a lot couldn’t means it’s not a viable alternative.
You are comparing picking students to move furniture based on their gender versus picking students to star in a play about criminals based on their race.
One correlates, the other does not. Can you guess which is which. If not, my friend Al Sharpton could probably give you a hand.
Uh, yes it does correlate (note: correlate, not cause). Black men are statistically overrepresented in prison populations. It doesn’t mean that having African heritage makes you more likely to be a criminal–just that there are a lot of factors that affect Black men than white in terms of predicting who’s going to end up serving prison time.
So, if you can get all up in arms because you think I’m being racist because you don’t understand statistics, how come you can’t understand that only asking boys to do something that there’s no reason to assume a girl absolutely couldn’t do is sexist?
- I never called you a racist
- I give up. If you can’t understand why they’re different, you’re fucking hopeless.
Well, you said, “One correlates, the other does not. Can you guess which is which. If not, my friend Al Sharpton could probably give you a hand.” If that’s not an implied way of calling me a racist, please explain what you did mean.
I’m not saying they’re 100% identical–**most **women are going to be weaker than **most **men, simply because of biology, whereas the causes for a larger percentage of Black men being incarcerated are sociological, not biological. However, **you **are the one who refuses to apply the same principle in both situations–selecting candidates only from the group that is statistically more likely to fit. If you don’t see a problem with, “I’m only going to ask boys, since most boys are stronger than most girls,” you shouldn’t have a problem with, “I’m only going to ask Black boys to play this role in the prison play, since Black men are more likely to be incarcerated than white men.”
If you think I’m wrong, tell me **how **I’m wrong, instead of just blustering. Come back with an argument, or I’m just going to assume you don’t have a better one than, “Because I said so.”
:sigh: I’ll try again.
On the average, boys are stronger than girls. This is directly related to who can move furniture better.
On the other hand, while black men are more likely to be in jail than white men, which one would make the better actor in a play set in a jail has nothing to do with their skin color.
And I wasn’t calling you a racist, I was merely saying that suggesting black actors would be more at home in a play set in a jail could be construed as racist (I know it was just an example and I’m sure everyone in this thread does too, sheesh).
I am really confused, too. Justin_Bailey, are you arguing that it’s ok for a teacher to say “can any boys help me move these desks” instead of “Can someone help me move these desks?”? Because I don’t see how there’s any way to read that that isn’t sexist–both towards the girls, who are being treated like they are total dependents (as most things people are asked to move in a classroom are fairly light) and to boys, who are being treated like they have a special obligation to help out because of their sex.
No, I’m saying it’s understandable if someone asks a guy over a girl to help move something because the guy will be, on the average stronger. It will also be fairly obvious just by looking at him.
But then I’m saying that saying a black actor is more qualified to act in a play set in a jail has no basis in reality because whether or not black guys go to jail more often than white guys has nothing to do with their acting ability.
No, it is directly related to which **group **can move furniture better. It does not tell you whether a **given **boy can move furniture better than a **given **girl. Automatically including the boys in the potential pool of movers and excluding the girls is sexist, because the person is judging them based on their gender rather than on their individual qualities, which correlate with but are not absolutely decided by their gender.
It makes just as much sense as assuming that all the boys in a class are going to be better at carting around a desk than all the girls in a class.
Ah, I see, you weren’t calling me racist, you were just insinuating I was racist. You could at least have the balls to stick by your insults or retract them instead of dancing around them.
But the teacher didn’t say, “Specific Strong Boy, who is stronger than the other students, including boys and girls, come help me with this.” She asked FOR ANY BOY, as opposed to ANY STUDENT. She automatically excluded any strong girls. That. Is. What. Sexism. Is. Assuming the abilities of a specific person based on general statistics about the group.
I repeat: You are hopeless.
Good job refuting my arguments there, stud. I see you’re stuck with just flingin’ ad hominems again. And **still **without the chutzpah to actually call me out as a racist or retract your slur.
What the fuck are you babbling about? You said that picking a guy at random to help move a piece of furniture is sexist. You then used an example that you know is borderline racist and say, “see, we would never think to do this, because it’s racist.” How am I calling you out as anything?
I think the cheese has done slid off your cracker.
Never did. Perhaps reading comprehension is your problem. I said that asking only the boys to help movie a piece of furniture is sexist, because while **most boys **are stronger than most girls, there is no guarantee that all of **those **boys will be stronger than all of **those **girls. Picking a person, male or female, because they look strong, would **not **be sexist, assuming that you would be selecting them based on an actually relevant criterion (strength) versus a correlated but individually irrelevant one (genitals).
What is so hard for you to understand about the difference between populations and individuals? I really do suggest taking a course in statistics so you’ll understand what they actually mean.
I used an example that was **absolutely **racist. You were calling me out because you said, and I quote yet again, “One correlates, the other does not. Can you guess which is which. If not, my friend Al Sharpton could probably give you a hand.” I.e., he would call me a racist. Unless there’s something else that Al Sharpton is well-known for calling people? Perhaps you meant that he was going to buy me an ice-cream sundae.
It was a joke. Christ, let it go. And it was your example. Are you honestly getting pissed at me for disagreeing that your joke didn’t prove you wanted it to and then making a crack about it? Come on.