miss_s_b | Bitter Irony

Is it just me that gets annoyed when something feminists have been saying for years gets trumpeted by Science Daily once a MALE scientist does some research (with a sample of THREE FFS) into it?

Bloody women, we're never happy, are we? We complain when the menz ignore us, and then when they ~~shamelessly steal female research ideas and get all the credit for it~~ listen, we complain about that too. Tch! We should all just get back in the kitchen...

This blog is proudly sponsored by

I am feeling: annoyed

From:

ginasketch

More from the No Shit, Sherlock "Science" files.

I'm sick of seeing studies like these. The fact that decency and respect for another human being has to be studied in order for it to be confirmed. It's good that they're looking into the problem, yes. But it bugs me that it's being touted as some new discovery.

Tomorrow: If you throw rocks at people's head, it hurts.

We must take a study sample though. Your word isn't good enough.

From:

bagfish

Totally agree. And this study is especially useless as the sample size is so small. So three men who are studied by other men suddenly validate what women have been saying for so long, that a sexist work environment undermines us and creates a discriminatory environment where women are treated as second class citizens.

From:

ginasketch

Yeah but obviously they had to test the theory because these silly, emotional women weren't being logical about the whole thing.

From:

bagfish

Women aren't actually capable of being logical, didn't you get the message? These silly air-headed creatures are too busy looking at fluffy kittens and clothes and shoes and babies and .....oooh, shiny.

/sarcasm

From:

ginasketch

It really does bug me that whenever I'm in a debate with men, they throw the old "you're being too emotional and I'm cold and logical and thus a better debater than you!" card at me.

I think some people have a hard time grasping that being completely logical or completely emotional are not healthy. I appreciate emotional intelligence in a conversation. I fail to see how someone's anger invalidates their argument.

From:

bagfish

I think you have hit the nail on the head there regarding cold logicality. It is seen in the mainstream as the superior characteristic, but really, the only place that logic is superior and argument winning is in mathematics and physics. Everywhere else, there should be a healthy balance between logic and emotion.

I find it hard to debate or put my point across without coming across as "emotional", and have been criticised at work for this which makes me angry. Why is my point (which is valid, well made and a point of law in the most recent case I'm thinking of) less valid because I'm apparently "emotional" and "passionate" about it?

And as for men being the "logical" and therefore superior sex, well the banking crisis is a prime example of illogicality in action, mainly precipitated by male bankers.

From:

caramel-betty.livejournal.com

(with a sample of THREE FFS)

Samples of 73 (for the first experiment) and 30 (for the second). All male undergraduates who were given course credit for participating.

I think you've misread "*Ford, who conducted research into sexist humor with three graduate students." The paper has four authors - Ford and, presumably, three graduate students.

From:

gominokouhai

These feminists who've been saying it for years. Were they scientists performing science or, as I suspect, were they non-scientists making claims of the form everybody knows that these jokes aren't funny because I don't think they are?

Now you've got some REAL SCIENCE to back up your claims. The SCIENCE was performed by a man. The man is a person, just like you! Except that he does actual SCIENCE to provide evidence to support obvious generalities made by other people.

From:

ginasketch

The point. You missed it.

From:

gominokouhai

The opportunity to enlighten me and/or to contribute usefully to the discussion. You missed it.

From:

ginasketch

I don't try to educate people who clearly aren't going to listen.

I've noticed everytime Jennie posts about something feminist related you get butthurt. Even going as far as moaning about the "fucking feminists" in your LJ.

Find another teacher who is more willing to bang their head against a brick wall. In the mean time don't write condescending, capitalized shit directed at Jennie. I'm sure she knows what the word science is without it being CAPITALIZED for her benefit.

From:

gominokouhai

Fucksakes.

Jennie, condescension was patently not my intent: if you've read it that way then I'll be happy to apologize.

Gina, I'm willing to listen to anyone who has a point, and you clearly don't.

From:

ginasketch

The SCIENCE was performed by a man. The man is a person, just like you!

Yeah. Not condescending at all.

From:

ms_daisy_cutter

Aw, that's so sweet of you, to come in and try to MANsplain all this hard, mathy guy-science to our feeble li'l girlybrainz!! Teeheeheeheee, you're soooooooo smart!!! /tweets, flips hair coyly

Feel better now?

From:

miss_s_b

* hug *

I know. Tis a touchy subject for many is all

From: (Anonymous)

As a SCIENTIST I find your repeated capitalization of SCIENCE to be pretty damn PRETENTIOUS given that SCIENCE is simply a method for testing hypotheses, and does not make MORAL CLAIMS or DEMAND SUPERIORITY over other METHODS for establishing non-physical truths.

Wait, ought I to bold SCIENCE too to make it more SPECIAL?

From:

ginasketch

Well see, women can't read properly and stuff. And need big letters.

From:

djm4

As far as I can tell, the science didn't say anything about whether or not the jokes were funny. Which bit of the science are you looking at? Or did you not read past the headline?

From:

miss_s_b

Were they scientists performing science

In many cases, yes. For thirty-odd years. I would cite, but I'm rat-arsed.

From:

bagfish

This study reminds me of the article in the Onion "Man finally put in charge of struggling feminist movement" http://www.theonion.com/content/news/man_finally_put_in_charge_of

i.e. feminism/women are only validated by stuff done by teh menz

From:

andrewhickey.info

Now don't you worry your pretty little head about this. The scientists have got it all figured out now...

From:

addyit.livejournal.com

what an irritating article. i guess i should say it's good that some scientists are recognizing it.... but COME ON!

From:

pmoodie

I'd have thought his findings were fairly obvious to anyone with a grain of common sense. I'd say the same also applies to racist humour, so maybe he'll apply for a grant to look into that next?

Of course, common sense is something that's hard to quantify scientifically, so maybe it's useful to put an official stamp on these things. Still, it's hard to see what practical use this can be put to. Proving that it has a negative effect is hardly likely to stop sexists and racists from making sexist and racist jokes.

From:

bagpuss

What I basically took from that study is that humour that denigrates a particular section of society makes is more acceptable to denigrate that section outside of humour, again hardly surprising but sometimes some people do need to be beaten about the head with such studies to make them understand

From:

pmoodie

Indeed. When the "jokers" come under fire, their defense is invariably, "Oh, I was only joking! You have no sense of humour!" It's an age-old tactic for making the offended party look foolish, and allows the prejudice to trundle happily on.

From:

lonemagpie.livejournal.com

Tch! We should all just get back in the kitchen...

Which actually brings up something I've never really got about 70s domestic sitcom sexist humour - why is there always the thing that the guy insists his wife do the cooking, but also always goes on about how bad her cooking is.

WTF?

If she's that bad at it why do you let her do it, let alone insist upon it...?

Mind you, there was a thing in the news the other week about some football manager getting into trouble because of a gag about "lock your girlfriend and your dog in a car boot for an hour and see who's happy to see you" - but the thing that gets me about that is that it only really works for people who have (or have had) a dog... In that context it works, otherwise it comes off not so much as just sexist but as making light of some pretty unpleasant criminal behaviour overall...

From:

pmoodie

If she's that bad at it why do you let her do it, let alone insist upon it...?

Because cooking is woman's work!

And complaining constantly about the standard of the cooking helps to keep undermining the woman, which is very important. If women start to develop some sense of self-worth, who knows where it'll end? They'll want the bloody vote next!