Rolling 'this is sexist' thread

I'm sure a jezebel blogger will respond, and then a male slate blogger will take a "middle ground" approach, and then gawker will do a smug, keeping a distance, not-taking-sides piece, and then a (surprise) male blogger will write for XX about how he actually does relate to the male characters.

not only is that article a screechingly sarcastic whinge but i'm now aware of salon's "popular on reddit" widget

yeesh

Why does Lena Dunham reduce men to walking hard-ons? Because dudes are "simple," as she tells Refinery29 in an interview published this week.

wow, writer reduces opposite sex to one-dimensional sex objects, I had certainly never encountered this until someone gave a woman some crayons

I mean I am totally stating the obvious to the point that I wasn't entirely sure if the whole article was a pisstake, but... it didn't seem to be

plus that's clearly not what Dunham said or meant!

relentless technosexuality (DJP)

curse you Dan I was this close from making my very first display name

tbf men are actually walking hard-ons

reduce men to walking hard-ons; remove from heat and fold in batter. Bake for 25 minutes at 375 and serve with creme fraiche

curse you Dan I was this close from making my very first display name

haha oops

all I keep thinking of is the PSB Relentless CD

http://pds.exblog.jp/pds/1/201209/06/57/a0201157_141647.jpg

sry hueg

NO HALF MEASURES

50% juice

100% FLAVOUR

NO HALF MEASURES

― relentless technosexuality (DJP), Wednesday, April 3, 2013 5:14 PM (2 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

50% juice

― --808 542137 (Hurting 2), Wednesday, April 3, 2013 5:15 PM (2 minutes ago) Bookmark

haha this killed me

Without wishing to be needlessly argumentative, when the issue is unintentionally offensive language making women feel uncomfortable in male-dominated spaces, does it matter if the context is professional or personal? Is there not a case for saying that if there's a chance that female posters will disengage with a board as male-dominated as ILX because of the number of dick jokes it's better to err on the side of caution and not make them?

Pole

There's definitely a case to be made there, but there is more focus and higher stakes when the context that makes you uncomfortable is your career rather than a message board.

xp thanks to darragh for clarifying it's the dicks rather than the jokes.

The first time you're ever right about anything, and you spoil it by a lazy gendered swipe at me in a 67th minute xp beef. Gutted for you.

Without wishing to be needlessly argumentative, when the issue is unintentionally offensive language making women feel uncomfortable in male-dominated spaces, does it matter if the context is professional or personal? Is there not a case for saying that if there's a chance that female posters will disengage with a board as male-dominated as ILX because of the number of dick jokes it's better to err on the side of caution and not make them?

There absolutely is.

For example, the reduction joke I made upthread could be off putting to people who would like to participate in this thread despite my intent, which was to lampoon the ridiculousness of the guy complaining about Lena Dunham by putting his absurd words in a more absurd context. I don't want that to happen regardless of how clever/funny I think the joke I'm making is. So, from this point forward, I'll refrain from making those types of comments, especially here.

apologies for the jokes I made on this thread. I'm trying to be a better person.

I thought yr joek was funny, Dan, but I appreciate that we can all self-reflect a bit more esp in places that are supposed to be chill for everyone.

tbf men are actually walking hard-ons

Actually, at present I am seated.

I thought it was too, but....oh well.

xp

A funny joke can still make someone uncomfortable. Sometimes the funniest jokes are ones that make people uncomfortable (hi dere, Chris Rock's standup career). I don't think my pathological need to make jokes is more important than having an inclusive, welcoming message board, particularly on a thread where we are talking through issues of sexism.

Admitting you have a problem is the first step

It wasn't really a "dick joke" anyway, the language that might have made anyone uncomfortable had already been used & yr joke was more around the word "reduced" so I doubt there's cause to worry although yr point is well-taken otherwise

A funny joke can still make someone uncomfortable. Sometimes the funniest jokes are ones that make people uncomfortable (hi dere, Chris Rock's standup career). I don't think my pathological need to make jokes is more important than having an inclusive, welcoming message board, particularly on a thread where we are talking through issues of sexism.

― relentless technosexuality (DJP), Thursday, April 4, 2013 9:36 AM (4 days ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

Read this as a speech balloon over a cartoon of a walking hard-on.

John "ROTTEN" Lydon on Aussie TV recently, being an arse.

http://youtu.be/N4ZmopI-GUQ?t=3m26s

Yeah, not surprised. I saw some awful interview where he confirmed my worst fears about The Body.

He's obviously a prick and no doubt sexist (e.g. use of "birds" in this very clip) but I think where it looks like he is telling the woman "Do not interrupt A MAN" he is just using one of the inflexibly pompous locutions that make up what is left of the poor fella. What a waste.

He was pretty fucking nasty to Welsh pop singer Duffy (who is TERRIBLE but that's not really important) at an awards show I was at a few years ago.

Would Ian Curtis have been nicer to duffy, do you think?

Many punk/post-punk musicians fail "The Duffy Test"

Would Ian Curtis have been nicer to duffy, do you think?

It's hard to be unpleasant to someone when you're dead, I don't think I understand your point?

nm, dumb joke based on already-fading meme "what if john lydon died in 1980 &c". Have to say I'm not at all surprised to learn johnny's a sexist though.

Ah, I gotcha...

http://www.vice.com/read/fucking-hysterical-a-timeline-of-vintage-vibrators

you've come a long way, baby

should have known better than to click through the warning for that at work

ha yes just about every element of that url screams nsfw except for "http" and "read"

lol that page

tbf, the illustration of the crotch fire hose is pretty hilaious

stop that pain

http://www.thefrisky.com/2013-04-12/marvel-sells-i-need-a-hero-t-just-for-women/

Something about the tone of this article, in which two male economists criticize the arguments of a female treasury under secretary, immediately rubbed me the wrong way. One thing that kept jumping out at me was the use of "Ms. Miller." Would a male undersecretary be referred to as "Mr. ____" in this sort of article? I wasn't sure if maybe it was just because of the direct approach of this article (whereas a reporter speaking in a distant third person might just say "Miller")

http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/04/25/the-treasurys-mistaken-view-on-too-big-to-fail/?ref=business

Use of titles is mandatory per NYT style guide.

Well I really dislike it in any case. It sounds vaguely condescending.

Like "Ms. Miller" doesn't make me think of a treasury undersecretary, it makes me think of a student in an econ seminar or something.

http://testdb.msmagazine.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/154222_146559575391775_107530515961348_233555_2363153_n4.jpeg