Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
Problems? Is your data what you think it is?
 
PerlMonks  

Re^9: How many man-hours would you estimate you have invested in learning Perl?

by ysth (Canon)
on Apr 17, 2013 at 06:37 UTC ( #1029079=note: print w/ replies, xml ) Need Help??


in reply to Re^8: How many man-hours would you estimate you have invested in learning Perl?
in thread How many man-hours would you estimate you have invested in learning Perl?

That wasn't me, but FWIW, it seemed clear to me that the original joke was against feminists, and I am both amused and offended by the sexism shown by some complaining about it here in seemingly assuming it was against females.


Comment on Re^9: How many man-hours would you estimate you have invested in learning Perl?
Re^10: How many man-hours would you estimate you have invested in learning Perl?
by BrowserUk (Pope) on Apr 17, 2013 at 09:21 UTC
    it seemed clear to me that the original joke was against feminists

    1. Do all feminists make that mistake about gender-specific terminology?

      Obviously not.

    2. Have some non-feminists -- civil government and corporate Public Relations bods with no particular feminist sympathies or antagonism - ever been guilty of trying to 'gender-wash' their public communications for the (mostly undue) fear of antagonising 50% of the voting public.

      I'm sure a well-crafted search could turn up numerous examples.

    3. Have some people, purporting to be 'feminist', so completely misunderstood the issues around gender specificity in everyday language that they do the movement a disservice by rendering the real issue 'faintly ludicrous' by their misapplications.

      You bet your sweet bippy.

    Three possible targets; one can't be, the other two could.

    The rest of your post is so ambiguous that I cannot decide which posts you are targeting as trollism; and which you are 'supporting'; but either way, over-simplified, and ill-thought through 'conclusions' are what started this mess in the first place.


    With the rise and rise of 'Social' network sites: 'Computers are making people easier to use everyday'
    Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error.
    "Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority".
    In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice.

      I'm not sure if you are agreeing or disagreeing with my basic point that the target of the humor (and yes, there is a problem with humor that has a target) being feminists (I didn't say 'all' and was intending to be general enough in my wording to include '"feminists"'), of whatever gender, not females.

      I didn't say anything about trollism??

        The point is that a target of just "feminists" is ambiguous.

        1. It could be intended to target of 'all feminists', which is sexist because it is nondiscriminatory, thus cannot ever be justified.
        2. It could be intended to target 'some feminists', which isn't sexist unless you can conclude that all feminists are perfect and could therefore never exhibit the lampooned behaviour.

          But if one or more persons claiming feminist ethics, are or have exhibited that behaviour, they are legitimate targets of humour.

        3. But as the term 'feminist' is not mentioned in the joke at all, it could equally be applied to non-feminists exhibiting the lampooned behaviour.

          Which would again be legitimate targets and not sexist.

        It is the behaviour that is being lampooned -- after the same fashion jobworth jokes -- not the person.

        Thus conclusions drawn about exactly who is the target are inferred, not implied and reflect the reader not the writer.


        With the rise and rise of 'Social' network sites: 'Computers are making people easier to use everyday'
        Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error.
        "Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority".
        In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice.

Log In?
Username:
Password:

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://1029079]
help
Chatterbox?
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others wandering the Monastery: (10)
As of 2014-12-25 17:10 GMT
Sections?
Information?
Find Nodes?
Leftovers?
    Voting Booth?

    Is guessing a good strategy for surviving in the IT business?





    Results (161 votes), past polls