nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

"UnPC" "joke" goes pear shaped

Roger Hassenforder

While his "joke" is old fare, i dont think its particulary Rabelaisian, and certainly not offensive.

But...
...when you crack a joke to a Professor of Gender studies, prepare for blowback.
While i dont think it warranted a complaint, he certainly hasnt helped himself by "adding insult to injury".

https://reason.com/blog/2018/05/08/joke-elevator-lebow-sharoni/amp?__twitter_impression=true

The old stick is now doubling down and refusing to apologise.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

ELM327

Deleted User wrote: »

He should have said he identifies as a woman.

OOOhhh nice.
Then who would the SJW support? The triggered woman or the triggered trans?

[Deleted User]

ELM327 wrote: »

OOOhhh nice.
Then who would the SJW support? The triggered woman or the triggered trans?

It would be a story about men in a lift laughing at a confused transperson who thought she was in a department store.

Misogyny Victims 101: Make shlt up.

Cantona's Collars

He should have just farted in the lift instead.
That would have been wrong on many levels.

seamus

valoren wrote: »

I wonder was his joke a self deprecating one? i.e. lemme off at the ladies lingerie, I need new knickers.

I didn't get the joke initially. It's very specific and you have to be both American and of a certain vintage to get it. So for anyone who doesn't:

It was common, in the past, in the US to have lift operators. People whose job was literally to go up and down in the lift all day, pressing the buttons, opening the doors (when they were manual open), etc etc.

Big city department stores in particular probably held onto them the longest - the lifts are big, so when they're crowded and there are twenty floors, having someone whose job it is to push the button is convenient.

When the doors began to close, the operator would ask people to call out their destinations - "Menswear", "Drapery", etc etc, and he would press the relevant buttons.

Of course, a man calling out "Ladies' lingerie" is basically a Dad joke. It's the only place in the whole store that a man wouldn't go.

But if you didn't understand any of the above context, and suddenly all of the men around you are chuckling, it's understandable that you'd get a bit uncomfortable. But that doesn't make it worthy of a complaint.

EdEd

SEPT 23 1989 wrote: »

Is she hot?

Not at all.

jimgoose

EdEd wrote: »

Not at all.

She's 57 years of age, for fuck sake - a seasoned woman who should have a bit of sense, as opposed to some half-daft youngwan.

wexie

jimgoose wrote: »

She's 57 years of age, for fuck sake - a seasoned woman who should have a bit of sense, as opposed to some half-daft youngwan.

I don't think you can manage to end up being a professor of 'gender studies' if you have a bit of sense. These are the kind of people 'inspiring' all those half-daft youngwans

jimgoose

wexie wrote: »

I don't think you can manage to end up being a professor of 'gender studies' if you have a bit of sense. These are the kind of people 'inspiring' all those half-daft youngwans

This is true enough, I suppose. :pac:

SnazzyPig

He should have just said "Lingerie".

That would take a bit more effort on her behalf to work out how she was offended.

super_furry

Well that answers my question of 'what stupid American nonsense is After Hours working itself up about today?'

[Deleted User]

super_furry wrote: »

Well that answers my question of 'what stupid American nonsense is After Hours working itself up about today?'

No one is worked up. We're just mocking retards.

SnazzyPig

super_furry wrote: »

Well that answers my question of 'what stupid American nonsense is After Hours working itself up about today?'

To-day America, to-morrow The World.

whisky_galore

super_furry wrote: »

Well that answers my question of 'what stupid American nonsense is After Hours working itself up about today?'

Don't worry, there's plenty home-grown fcukwittery to choose from.

_Dara_

Sleepy wrote: »

That someone can even find employment as a "Professor" of Gender Studies boggles the mind tbh. It rather diminishes the title imo.

Well, gender studies is a load of rot only because it’s basically women’s studies. But it’s quite anti-intellectual to say that an area of study is not worth examining. I think gender studies needs to be reformed because as of now, it focuses too much on the plight of women and looks to bend data toward showing that women are always at a disadvantage.

But gender studies has the potential to be a very interesting field if it was more interested in finding out what’s going on with both genders. The unexamined life and all that...

Pat Mustard

Hande hoche! wrote: »

He should show up to the disciplinary meeting in lingerie.

Or in this shirt:

1415980687637_Image_galleryImage_Screengrab_from_a_video_p.JPG

jimgoose

Fuaranach wrote: »

The most interesting thing about that link is the website's revealing motto: 'Reason: free minds and free markets'

Is there a special google search for dodgy rightwing reactionary websites that are focused on creating a faux sense of victimhood among marginalised males?

If you prefer, Ruth Marcus has it in the Washington Post as well, referring to the episode as "the latest exemplar in the academy of political correctness gone wild". :pac:

LINK

J Mysterio

Fuaranach wrote: »

The most interesting thing about that link is the website's revealing motto: 'Reason: free minds and free markets'

Is there a special google search for dodgy rightwing reactionary websites that are focused on creating a faux sense of victimhood among marginalised males?

Wtf?

jiltloop

ELM327 wrote: »

Is this what the world has coming to?
That joke wasn't even offensive, period.

:eek: careful now!

fatknacker

Women's Knickers!

I'm not even sure how it's supposed to be funny or offensive or both. Seems like something a 10 year old boy would say while snickering. How does an adult manage to find it amusing?

Assetbacked

The problem with people in general is that they have some sort of personal problem where they cannot actually confront the person themselves and rather require someone else to fight their battles for them.

Why not resolve this issue with the guy who made the complaint, they are both academic professionals? This episode just adds further weight to the very strong argument that a lot of academics are unnecessary (gender studies; a means of identifying differences in the genders as opposed to focusing on human rights as a whole).

TomSweeney

Roger Hassenforder wrote: »

While his "joke" is old fare, i dont think its particulary Rabelaisian, and certainly not offensive.

But...
...when you crack a joke to a Professor of Gender studies, prepare for blowback.
While i dont think it warranted a complaint, he certainly hasnt helped himself by "adding insult to injury".

https://reason.com/blog/2018/05/08/joke-elevator-lebow-sharoni/amp?__twitter_impression=true

The old stick is now doubling down and refusing to apologise.

He should refuse to apologise, the woman in question looks like an old fascist hag.

"Gender Studies" ... yeah says it all really.

TomSweeney

whisky_galore wrote: »

FFS it's becoming more and more of a po-faced society, can't even crack a joke that isn't even mildly offensive.

People need to get a fcukin life.

The problem is as long as people bow down and apologise - it gives them ammo and validity.

REFUSE to apologise, thats the only way to beat this, then others will follow.

I am offended by green ties ... I demand an apology - people would rightly tell me to go and f*ck - and thats why no one demands apologies over (so far) green ties.

jimgoose

fatknacker wrote: »

...How does an adult manage to find it amusing?

It is a very silly thing indeed, O Portly Traveller. But more to the point, how does an adult manage to find it offensive?? :pac:

Hande hoche!

Fuaranach wrote: »

The most interesting thing about that link is the website's revealing motto: 'Reason: free minds and free markets'

Is there a special google search for dodgy rightwing reactionary websites that are focused on creating a faux sense of victimhood among marginalised males?

Fairly well known Libertarian website.

TomSweeney

SEPT 23 1989 wrote: »

Is she hot?

No she looks like a frustrated angry old bint with a pathological hatred of men - you know like all "Gender Study ""PROFESSORS"" "

But in fairness, I'd say inside she is very open and broadminded - open to new ideas and experiences :rolleyes:

GreeBo

I'm missing sexism and hence the offence here...

wildlifeboy

ELM327 wrote: »

Is this what the world has coming to?
That joke wasn't even offensive, period.

so comma period period? period

Wibbs

_Dara_ wrote: »

Well, gender studies is a load of rot only because it’s basically women’s studies. But it’s quite anti-intellectual to say that an area of study is not worth examining. I think gender studies needs to be reformed because as of now, it focuses too much on the plight of women and looks to bend data toward showing that women are always at a disadvantage.

But gender studies has the potential to be a very interesting field if it was more interested in finding out what’s going on with both genders. The unexamined life and all that...

+1 It's an enormous area of scientific interest, unfortunately as you say it's become "women's studies" and with a large percentage of politicised thought attached to it. It's essentially become a feminist course/field. And it's a pity.

wildlifeboy wrote: »

so comma period period? period

I'm not a Yank so I say "full stop". Sexism averted.

cantdecide

Wibbs wrote: »

It's essentially become a feminist course/field. And it's a pity.

In the pursuit of staying relevant, it's gone intersectional so it's effectively non-white-heterosexual-male studies these days.

Sleepy

_Dara_ wrote: »

Well, gender studies is a load of rot only because it’s basically women’s studies. But it’s quite anti-intellectual to say that an area of study is not worth examining. I think gender studies needs to be reformed because as of now, it focuses too much on the plight of women and looks to bend data toward showing that women are always at a disadvantage.

But gender studies has the potential to be a very interesting field if it was more interested in finding out what’s going on with both genders. The unexamined life and all that...

Wouldn't that simply be Sociology?

From what I can see, "Gender Studies" has been elevated into a separate field of study (rather than a module of Sociology) simply because Universities were too afraid of the feminists to tell them that such a narrow field of sociological study is the intellectual equivalent of examining one's own belly-button fluff.

I'd usually be right behind your remark that it's "anti-intellectual to say that an area of study is not worth examining", however, we're not talking about an area of study that encourages any intellectual honesty. In the hard sciences or mathematical / formulaic areas of study like Accounting / Statistics / Mechanics etc, there can be right or wrong answers. In any liberal arts field of study, there isn't. Submit a paper that argues against the existence of a Gender Pay Gap to any Gender Studies Department and you'll be failed, no matter how well researched, argued or presented that paper is (I've seen plenty of examples online of guys taking such courses just to make this point over the years).

That's not an academic / intellectual environment. It's not education. It's indoctrination akin to Orwell's "re-education camps".

Reform Gender Studies? I can't see that happening tbh. The universities are too afraid of the litigious, misandrist nutcases that make up the faculty within such departments and the political environment that panders to them instead of telling them to sling their hooks and find real jobs.

For those of us in the real world, we just need to do better jobs at raising our daughters. I've had no problem so far in helping my daughter understand that the religious instruction she's received at school is codswallop and I hope I'll have similar success in helping her understand why the feminist dogma she'll no doubt be fed at secondary level (or just through our society's media in general) is bunkum too. Should I fail at that, it'll be time for tough love and a refusal to fund her if she wants to waste her third level education on such nonsense.