Rolling 'this is sexist' thread

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
Not all messages are displayed: show all messages (2018 of them)

in case anybody missed it, ty phil d.

unlistenable in philly (underrated aerosmith bootlegs I have owned), Tuesday, 28 February 2012 04:10 (four years ago) Permalink

All you need to know about that "sportcaster" guy is right there on his head. He has smug, arrogant hair.

Aimless, Tuesday, 28 February 2012 04:17 (four years ago) Permalink

The number of women responding with comments attacking Patrick or saying 'no big deal' is so fucking depressing.

Kiarostami bag (milo z), Tuesday, 28 February 2012 04:20 (four years ago) Permalink

It's depressing, but not surprising.

Nicole, Tuesday, 28 February 2012 04:26 (four years ago) Permalink

she probably lives in the suburbs too!

buzza, Tuesday, 28 February 2012 04:32 (four years ago) Permalink

iatee is stepping his game up lately

Gonjasufjanstephen O'Malley (jon /via/ chi 2.0), Tuesday, 28 February 2012 04:44 (four years ago) Permalink

don't you have some friends you can go hang out with or something

iatee, Tuesday, 28 February 2012 04:45 (four years ago) Permalink

Mordy, Tuesday, 28 February 2012 04:45 (four years ago) Permalink

Whiney G. Weingarten, Tuesday, 28 February 2012 04:49 (four years ago) Permalink

Rolling 'this is popcorn' thread

Mordy, Tuesday, 28 February 2012 04:50 (four years ago) Permalink

bag is a more stylish move at this point

anyway, i understand why her "sexyness" has become a part of the narrative. i understand that she fed into it. i understand, at the same time, how such things snowball and how women are effectively punished (and sure, rewarded) for their supposed sexiness in ways that men just aren't. as a result of all that, i understand how frustrating and demeaning the whole thing must be for her at times.

what i don't get is why assholes like him are paid good money to talk about shit on the air.

Little GTFO (contenderizer), Tuesday, 28 February 2012 07:11 (four years ago) Permalink

sincere question, cause i don't watch sports news: is this something male athletes have gotten asked anytime recently?

sarahell, Tuesday, 28 February 2012 07:15 (four years ago) Permalink

The closest I can think of is David Beckham taking shit for seeming to be more about modeling than soccer, but that's about dedication to his craft, not a sexiness narrative in the same way.
So I'd say no.

Kiarostami bag (milo z), Tuesday, 28 February 2012 07:21 (four years ago) Permalink

like there were some beefcake-y ads/fashion shots in the local paper (not sure if they were national ads, or just local ones), and at least one sexy-romantic one featuring that SF Giants pitcher after they won the World Series -- the guy that looks a little like Nirvana-era Dave Grohl. Dunno his name.

sarahell, Tuesday, 28 February 2012 07:28 (four years ago) Permalink

Tim Lincecum, probably. He is popular with the ladies. And stoners.

He mostly just gets asked why his fastball has dropped 4mph over the last two seasons.

Kiarostami bag (milo z), Tuesday, 28 February 2012 07:30 (four years ago) Permalink

"David Beckham sexiness narrative"

mac and me (Ówen P.), Tuesday, 28 February 2012 08:39 (four years ago) Permalink

Jonathan Ross' Becks interview a few weeks back was all about the sexiness narrative iirc.

Also unknown as Zora (Surfing At Work), Tuesday, 28 February 2012 08:51 (four years ago) Permalink

On another board I visit, someone posted this to a "Funny pictures" thread:

Sure, you can be critical of the "Myspace pose", but how does anyone think this is a good or funny way of doing that?

Tuomas, Tuesday, 28 February 2012 09:07 (four years ago) Permalink

why is elmer fudd doing the deed here?

Big Mr. Guess U.S.A. Champion (crüt), Tuesday, 28 February 2012 09:13 (four years ago) Permalink

it's duck season

Little GTFO (contenderizer), Tuesday, 28 February 2012 09:14 (four years ago) Permalink

i suppose it's not that sexy is sometimes part of the narrative for attractive women athletes, it's that it's almost never not part of the narrative. beckham, i assume they focus on it sometimes but other times not at all.

i dunno how to even parse this dr. pepper thing. it seems like it's satirizing the "man food" approach like in those burger king ads or whatnot while still conveying the same message? those bk ads seemed self-parodying anyway so how do you clown a clown? the "it's not for women" approach only makes me more aware that diet sodas are considered unmanly and that objectively there's no difference between dr. pepper 10 and a tab or whatever in regards to soft-drink genderedness.

i don't how many layers of irony or mock irony you need to pack your message in but i'll willingly drink a diet soda w/out fear of developing an auxiliary vagina so that's probably too many unnecessary layers right there.

slugbuggy, Tuesday, 28 February 2012 09:28 (four years ago) Permalink

why is elmer fudd doing the deed here?

― Big Mr. Guess U.S.A. Champion (crüt), Tuesday, February 28, 2012 4:13 AM (14 minutes ago) Bookmark

its an old gag where he fires the shotgun in daffy duck's face, and it spins his bill around to face the other side of his head

its a comment on the 'duckface' that young women make in photos

RudolfHitlerFtw (Hungry4Ass), Tuesday, 28 February 2012 09:35 (four years ago) Permalink

Re: Dr. Pepper Ten

naus, Tuesday, 28 February 2012 11:15 (four years ago) Permalink

why is elmer fudd doing the deed here?

― Big Mr. Guess U.S.A. Champion (crüt), Tuesday, February 28, 2012 4:13 AM (2 hours ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

it's duck season

― Little GTFO (contenderizer), Tuesday, February 28, 2012 4:14 AM (2 hours ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

Rabbit season.

A Full Torgo Apparition (Phil D.), Tuesday, 28 February 2012 11:23 (four years ago) Permalink

xp

Tuesday, 31 March 1998 12:00AM Be the first to comment

- Worthington has returned to television advertising with a new campaign that ditches comedian Harry Enfield in favour of 'real lads' exploits.

The commercial aims to make Worthington the 'lads beer for the 90s'. To achieve this Worthington has chosen a laddish creative treatment that pokes fun at men who engage in unladdish activities.

Created by agency WCRS, the ad start by posing a question about laddish behaviour. The narrator asks: 'why do lads always take the mickey?' In answering the question, the commercial then enters a surreal world where we see what would happen if lads didn't take the mickey: they would compliment each other on their appearance and, as a consequence, become interested in hand cream. This would have the disastrous result of smoothing the lads' palms to such a degree that their pint glasses slip straight through and smash on the floor.

The ad closes with the tag line "Worthington. It's a Man Thing'. The campaign was written by WCRS creatives Andy Brittain and Yu Kung and was director by Traktor.

According to WCRS account director Jonathan Rigby: "Our objective is clear - to make Worthington the lads beer brand for the 90s. The campaign marks a welcome return to classic beer advertising - simple, well observed and infectiously funny."

Sylv_ebanks (DJ Mencap), Tuesday, 28 February 2012 11:46 (four years ago) Permalink

feel like the Yorkie ads might have 'worked', as much as they're cretinous, but Worthington just seems desperate and reaching

Sylv_ebanks (DJ Mencap), Tuesday, 28 February 2012 11:49 (four years ago) Permalink

"Yorkie" sounds like such a girl thing though.

beachville, Tuesday, 28 February 2012 11:53 (four years ago) Permalink

Is that part of the joke?

beachville, Tuesday, 28 February 2012 11:55 (four years ago) Permalink

No. Don't know why they were called Yorkie though, because Yorkshiremen are all like tough and rugged, 'appen?

Charles Kennedy Jumped Up, He Called 'Oh No'. (Tom D.), Tuesday, 28 February 2012 11:56 (four years ago) Permalink

"David Beckham sexiness narrative"

I'll do the libretto for this opera fyi

unlistenable in philly (underrated aerosmith bootlegs I have owned), Tuesday, 28 February 2012 14:12 (four years ago) Permalink

Speaking of Danica Patrick...

Nicole, Tuesday, 28 February 2012 14:15 (four years ago) Permalink

^^Was just coming to post that.

A Full Torgo Apparition (Phil D.), Tuesday, 28 February 2012 14:20 (four years ago) Permalink

ha

asshole

wolf kabob (ENBB), Tuesday, 28 February 2012 14:40 (four years ago) Permalink

Also the idea of a manly candy bar is hilarious to me and I've bought Yorkies specifically because of their stupid marketing campaign.

wolf kabob (ENBB), Tuesday, 28 February 2012 14:42 (four years ago) Permalink

Which is probably what they wanted all along but whatever.

wolf kabob (ENBB), Tuesday, 28 February 2012 14:42 (four years ago) Permalink

yorkies are pretty good but they could have used smaller gauge nail chunks, also motor oil that wasn't loaded with transfats

flagp∞st (dayo), Tuesday, 28 February 2012 14:44 (four years ago) Permalink

the idea of a manly candy bar is hilarious to me

If you think that's stupid, try this...

Charles Kennedy Jumped Up, He Called 'Oh No'. (Tom D.), Tuesday, 28 February 2012 14:53 (four years ago) Permalink

Are they still using that slogan?

Charles Kennedy Jumped Up, He Called 'Oh No'. (Tom D.), Tuesday, 28 February 2012 14:54 (four years ago) Permalink

...

robbery by sudden snatching (DJP), Tuesday, 28 February 2012 14:55 (four years ago) Permalink

I really don't understand society sometimes

robbery by sudden snatching (DJP), Tuesday, 28 February 2012 14:55 (four years ago) Permalink

"You'll never put a better bit of butter on your wife"

^ old joke that will make no sense to anyone outside the UK

Charles Kennedy Jumped Up, He Called 'Oh No'. (Tom D.), Tuesday, 28 February 2012 14:56 (four years ago) Permalink

Arr, that be Cuntry Loife buttr.

Mark G, Tuesday, 28 February 2012 15:02 (four years ago) Permalink

Cuntry Crock

beachville, Tuesday, 28 February 2012 15:08 (four years ago) Permalink

good thing they put pictures of flowers all over my man margarine now i am transexual

lag∞n, Tuesday, 28 February 2012 15:14 (four years ago) Permalink

lag∞n, Tuesday, 28 February 2012 15:16 (four years ago) Permalink

i think we need a thread of this stuff

lag∞n, Tuesday, 28 February 2012 15:16 (four years ago) Permalink

".. and the ladies that love them!"

(soz)

Mark G, Tuesday, 28 February 2012 15:16 (four years ago) Permalink

To be fair, those really only have one use.

(xpost)

stan this sick bunt (jon /via/ chi 2.0), Tuesday, 28 February 2012 15:17 (four years ago) Permalink

brands for MENS

lag∞n, Tuesday, 28 February 2012 15:17 (four years ago) Permalink

we had the dockers thread didn't we

flagp∞st (dayo), Tuesday, 28 February 2012 15:30 (four years ago) Permalink

Julia Wertz has some thoughts: http://www.juliawertz.com/2015/10/05/on-sexual-harassment-and-public-discussion/

I was bummed when I saw the initial exchange on her twitter feed and didn't know what to say besides maybe apologizing on behalf of my gender but ugh

Οὖτις, Tuesday, 6 October 2015 17:44 (one year ago) Permalink

her site is up and down like crazy but it's worth a read on tumblr
http://juliawertz.tumblr.com/post/130623852724/on-sexual-harassment-and-public-discussion

a literal scarecrow on a quaint porch (forksclovetofu), Tuesday, 6 October 2015 18:32 (one year ago) Permalink

i kinda don't want to take the creator of a book called FART PARTY seriously, but it's a solid article

Nhex, Tuesday, 6 October 2015 18:37 (one year ago) Permalink

welp, funny you should mention it
http://narrative.ly/stories/the-fart-party-really-stinks/

a literal scarecrow on a quaint porch (forksclovetofu), Tuesday, 6 October 2015 18:39 (one year ago) Permalink

tl; dr: hard life, self-sabotaging, she kinda hates the title too.

a literal scarecrow on a quaint porch (forksclovetofu), Tuesday, 6 October 2015 18:45 (one year ago) Permalink

She is a great cartoonist, her stuff is v funny

Οὖτις, Tuesday, 6 October 2015 18:59 (one year ago) Permalink

....so she gave up cartooning m/l to explore abandoned buildings? huh. ok. she sounds happier!

Nhex, Tuesday, 6 October 2015 19:38 (one year ago) Permalink

sort of. she returned to cartooning (in the NYer, among other things)

Οὖτις, Tuesday, 6 October 2015 19:42 (one year ago) Permalink

from FART PARTY to the New Yorker, what a world. good for her though. i do wonder what that Lizzy Kaplan TV series would've been like, also probably would have never watched it because of the title

Nhex, Wednesday, 7 October 2015 01:02 (one year ago) Permalink

Oh it would've been terrible

Just like a Joe Matt Peepshow show would've been terrible

Οὖτις, Wednesday, 7 October 2015 02:02 (one year ago) Permalink

For real? Am I missing something here, that you can read that piece, all about the harassment and abuse this woman has been facing, and your main takeaway and point of discussion is the title "Fart Party"? You don't think that's a bit of an odd priority?

Dröhn Rock (Branwell with an N), Wednesday, 7 October 2015 06:35 (one year ago) Permalink

I don't think that's anyone's main takeaway and point of discussion (though of course as Shakey says sometimes an article can be great and not lead to much discussion)?

Andrew Farrell, Wednesday, 7 October 2015 09:49 (one year ago) Permalink

Andrew, remember when I asked you at lunch last month, please not to explain "What Is Going On In A Thread On ILX To Me"? This is exactly the behaviour I was talking about.

I have formed, rightly or wrongly, an impression that this poster nhex is somehow implying that writing a comic with a scatological title is somehow a mitigating or justifying factor in experiencing harassment and stalking. Rather than say, flat out, "hey, that sounds a little too close to victim blaming" I am taking the time to ask if there is some other reason why they picked out that particular detail to dwell on, because it seemed weird and off to single out. So maybe there is another reason! Hence why I'm asking THAT poster. Not Andrew.

Dröhn Rock (Branwell with an N), Wednesday, 7 October 2015 10:29 (one year ago) Permalink

Er, I don't actually. We had a very pleasant lunch, because you (and me! and as far as I know everyone on ILX!) is actually perfectly socially nice in real-life, and then a little while later you texted me to not do something that I wasn't doing.

However, I remember that your text mentioned "if you have questions for/about me, please ask them directly" - it's not bad advice, all things considered.

Andrew Farrell, Wednesday, 7 October 2015 10:38 (one year ago) Permalink

Andrew, clearly I did not express myself well in that conversation/text exchange, but this is the thing, that I would prefer if you did not do.

I asked nhex a question. I'd like nhex to answer that question, so I can put my mind at rest.

Not have you explain to me what they meant, or tell me that I didn't need to ask the question. This is something that really bothers me, and I'd like if you didn't do it any more.

Now I consider this discussion over. Have a good day.

Dröhn Rock (Branwell with an N), Wednesday, 7 October 2015 10:41 (one year ago) Permalink

Then ask them privately! This is a public forum.

Andrew Farrell, Wednesday, 7 October 2015 10:43 (one year ago) Permalink

uh, no, i did not mean to imply that Wertz somehow deserved the harassment because of the title FART PARTY. thought it was obvious from my posts that i sympathized.
do i pass muster?

Nhex, Wednesday, 7 October 2015 14:18 (one year ago) Permalink

Wertz is a good writer, excellent cartoonist, obviously doesn't deserve the online and in person harassment. glad to see her career doing so well.

a literal scarecrow on a quaint porch (forksclovetofu), Wednesday, 7 October 2015 14:54 (one year ago) Permalink

and fart party was a regrettable name. but hey, i am not one to talk.

a literal scarecrow on a quaint porch (forksclovetofu), Wednesday, 7 October 2015 14:55 (one year ago) Permalink

she's posted an addendum. it is interesting to me that she's actively encouraging dialogue with her fans, soliciting/responding to emails, instead of holing up in a defensive "don't contact me!" way

Οὖτις, Wednesday, 7 October 2015 15:31 (one year ago) Permalink

Addendum: I tried to address questions I received within this post, but if you have any others, or just general feedback, you can email me at juliajwertz(at)gmail(dot)com.

Second Addendum: I had no idea this post was going to blow up the way it did. I’d like to thank everyone who shared and supported it. I have received a lot of encouraging emails, for which I am very grateful. I’ve also received a lot of criticism, some of which was clearly overly defensive, and some that has been very insightful for me. People who criticized my repeated use of the words men and women have a good point, and I’ve adjusted some things accordingly. Those who pointed out the incompleteness of my post are right in that I was working with just one blog post and I didn’t want to write a novel. The topic is much more broad, of course, but this is just my small input. There is no shortage of other information online and in books about this issue, in no way did I mean to present my point of view as comprehensive, or to speak for anyone but myself and the women in my life with whom I’ve spent years discussing this with. And while I appreciated some of the criticism, I found it interesting that the emails which veered toward unnecessary semantic nitpicking all came from men. Not a single woman took me to task for my word choices. I am not going to get into that for sake of time, but I will leave it up to you to interpret that as you wish. And for the record, many of the emails I received were from men who were very supportive, some of whom even brought to my attention certain things I should elaborate on, which I might do at a later time. But for now, thank you to everyone who supported this piece.

Οὖτις, Wednesday, 7 October 2015 15:32 (one year ago) Permalink

aaand even more:

http://www.juliawertz.com/2015/10/05/addendum/

Οὖτις, Thursday, 8 October 2015 19:04 (one year ago) Permalink

one month passes...
one month passes...

Is this sexist?

"
"'Tokyo' is the story of a man who loses interest in his wife and fantasizes about leaving her. His loss of interest is not merely a reflection of his feelings, but rather his unwillingness to grow old and the challenge age puts to his ego. His experience illuminates our societal obsession with youth culture and our ingrained fear of aging and loss of power. We value women only in the virgin ideal, often because they are thought to be conquerable and and a vessel for validating dominance. We would prefer to live in the fantasy of young skin rather than face our growth and relinquish control to our inevitable death.
"

calstars, Wednesday, 6 January 2016 18:55 (eleven months ago) Permalink


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.