Congratulations Stu Peters

[quilp]

6 minutes ago, HeliX said:

... normalising sexism leads to more sexist behaviour in societies.

People ought to perceive that 'joke' for what it is, an example of previously accepted humour from a bygone age, not some integral and sinister stitch in the blanket of female sexual oppression. Most people will see it for what it is, a poor cartoon and forget it in an instant.

 

[HeliX]

3 minutes ago, quilp said:

People ought to perceive that 'joke' for what it is, an example of previously accepted humour from a bygone age, not some integral and sinister stitch in the blanket of female sexual oppression. Most people will see it for what it is, a poor cartoon and forget it in an instant.

 

A lot of people will, a number of people with sexist leanings will be bolstered by it. This isn't groundbreaking stuff - plenty of studies on it re: sexism, racism etc.

[The Voice of Reason]

Just now, manxman1980 said:

I don't think any of my female friends would be offended but they would not find it funny either.  A number of them would definitely speak out against it.

Personally I don't find it funny.   I do think it is ill advised for a newly elected MHK to decide to wade into a Facebook argument.  I guess though this is what we can expect from our new anti woke MHK.

No it isn’t side splitting hilarious but if one of my female friends chose to make a real issue out of it, when there are far more serious issues surrounding sexism I would be hard pressed to take them seriously.

 

[manxman1980]

3 minutes ago, The Voice of Reason said:

No it isn’t side splitting hilarious 

Its not funny at all.  Its embarrassing and pathetic. As Quilp has said its humour from a bygone era.

 

[The Voice of Reason]

13 minutes ago, manxman1980 said:

Its not funny at all.  Its embarrassing and pathetic. As Quilp has said its humour from a bygone era.

 

I really think you are making much ado about nothing.

 

Quilp also said “most people will see it for what it is, a poor cartoon and will forget it in an instant “

I agree with him

Edited September 27, 2021 by The Voice of Reason

[Gladys]

When does a bra ping off to the surprise of all the other MHKs (see Carry on Camping)?

It is not a funny cartoon, it isn't even a vaguely successful attempt at satire.

Someone on FB said it would have been funnier if it showed the male MHKs grumpily taking down Pirelli calendars.  I kind of agree.

It just isn't funny, not offensive, ( because it was really so juvenile).  But I hope it doesn't set the tone. 

[manxman34]

45 minutes ago, The Voice of Reason said:

OK , thinking through my list of female acquaintances I can’t think of one that would take offence at that “cartoon”

Some may find it funny, the others wouldn’t really bother either way.

You call it a sexist joke but is it really or does it just touch upon the differences between the sexes?
How many TV adverts show the male in a relationship as a hopeless buffoon outsmarted by his female counterpart? And who really gives a damn about that?

I think you need to lighten up

One can only speculate on the length of the list of your female acquaintances, and their average age, but I think you're slightly missing the point: many people would regard the cartoon as casually sexist, whether you regard it as such or not, and given that SP will be working with a new cohort of female colleagues he has at best shown poor judgement in describing it as 'funny'. 

[quilp]

2 hours ago, HeliX said:

A lot of people will, a number of people with sexist leanings will be bolstered by it. This isn't groundbreaking stuff - plenty of studies on it re: sexism, racism etc.

Yeah, but in reality it was also a subtle attempt to run a smear on Stu because of his personal comments, present and historical. Casting roundabout aspersions was also the intention. Like the other poster, 'Lost Login' who started a post commenting on what he thought about Stu's alleged transgressions and thought it clever to liberally use the terms homo/trans/islamophobia, BLM, diversity, white privilege, etc. in the same post. Do you see the subtlety in association there? The terms are exemplifiers and they were used to colour the post against SP. Fanning the flames. 

Edited September 27, 2021 by quilp

[Annoymouse]

1 hour ago, HeliX said:

Day 1 of a new job, do you:
A) Say that you find a cartoon that implies your new female colleagues are only there to bring flowers and biscuits funny

B) Not do that

 

It's not a hard choice.

Unfortunately it’s one of these ‘jokes’ that people can read whatever they want into it, humour is entirely subjective and only the original artist knows what was intended but as far as they’ll be concerned, if people are talking about it, then their job is complete.

As for Stu, this is the sort of stuff that bites him on the ass, if one of his constituents complains about something and Stu disagrees and fails to act because he thinks it’s to trivial to bother with, how is that going to work? 

IMO the cartoon is suggesting flowers and nibbles are more of a feminine touch, the underlying message could be it will make the HOK a nicer place as a result of more female MHKs being elected.

[HeliX]

4 minutes ago, quilp said:

Yeah, but in reality it was also a subtle attempt to run a smear on Stu because of his personal comments. Casting roundabout aspersions was also the intention. Like the other poster, 'Lost Login' who started a post commenting on what he thought about Stu's alleged transgressions and liberally used the terms homo/trans/islamophobia, BLM, diversity, white privilege, etc. Do you see the subtlety in association there? The terms are exemplifiers and they were used to colour the post against SP. 

Is it not considerably more plausible that Stu just said something ill-advised? I don't think there's some big conspiracy here every time something off-colour that Stu says gets picked up on.

[quilp]

2 minutes ago, Annoymouse said:

IMO the cartoon is suggesting flowers and nibbles are more of a feminine touch, the underlying message could be it will make the HOK a nicer place as a result of more female MHKs being elected.

Agree with all of your post, especially the above. Hopefully there'll also be an inclusion of various wicker baskets overflowing with fragrantly delightful Pot-pouri to help rid the edifice of any remaining stench which has accumulated in the last few decades.

Let there be light. 

[The Voice of Reason]

58 minutes ago, HeliX said:

Not sure when you last watched TV, but gender stereotyping has been banned in adverts for a few years now. Almost all the women I know who've seen it think the cartoon is sexist.

OK let’s turn to local radio. What about the poor chap who is screeched at by his female partner “ I told you, we/ (you) should have gone to Athol”

Or the gormless Geoffrey in the Spectrum Window ads

[Shake me up Judy]

They are flowers you numpties. Vases of flowers. Who the hell can get worked up over flowers and some daft cartoon ? Get a life. Watch T.V. any night of the week and you'll see stereotypes of dumb men being outsmarted by women all the time. 

[HeliX]

3 minutes ago, The Voice of Reason said:

OK let’s turn to local radio. What about the poor chap who is screeched at by his female partner “ I told you, we/ (you) should have gone to Athol”

Or the gormless Geoffrey in the Spectrum Window ads

No idea, I avoid local radio. Wouldn't surprise me if those adverts breach regs though.

[Roger Mexico]

17 minutes ago, quilp said:

Yeah, but in reality it was also a subtle attempt to run a smear on Stu because of his personal comments, present and historical. Casting roundabout aspersions was also the intention. Like the other poster, 'Lost Login' who started a post commenting on what he thought about Stu's alleged transgressions and thought it clever to liberally use the terms homo/trans/islamophobia, BLM, diversity, white privilege, etc. Do you see the subtlety in association there? The terms are exemplifiers and they were used to colour the post against SP. Fanning the flames. 

What does this actually mean?  Are you suggesting that this dull and slightly odd[1] cartoon was an evil attempt to trick Stu into making a dull and slightly odd comment?  Or did masked feminists break into Peters Towers and hold a gun to his head till he had written something silly on Facebook?  Apparently the poor man is never responsible for his own actions - a big boy always made him do it.

Why this is damaging to Stu is that it suggests he isn't going to spend his time as an MHK helping his constituents, examining legislation, helping reform government, finding out and explaining what has gone wrong.  He's just going to spend his time starting stupidly 'controversies', going "Look at me! Aren't I anti-Woke!" and expecting everyone to cheer him.  At best it's rather sad attention-seeking but It comes across as fabricated as a Josem photo-op and I suspect that even his fans will tire of it rather quickly.

 

[1]  Even in Sexism World are nibbles seen as a female thing?  It was men who were arguing over crisp flavours on another thread.