[Noisebridge-discuss] XY Combinator

Tue May 24 18:46:48 UTC 2011

(thinks more)

I think the crux of the issue is that I don't believe that jokes that rely
on stereotypes necessarily reinforce them. I know its not true because I
make all kinds of jokes based on stereotypes that I strongly disagree with.

Sure, the idea that it reinforces stereotypes *makes sense*, but since when
is something true just because it makes sense? We're all science-y and know
that's not how things work.

Maybe there's some research behind it, but it sounds to me like something
people assume because it makes sense, and I personally feel like I have
first hand experience that disproves it.
-Taylor

On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 11:28 AM, Taylor Alexander <tlalexander at gmail.com>wrote:

> Interesting reactions. While everything everyone said is intelligent and I
> generally agree with it, I think some people are taking this way too
> seriously. Yes, this implies only men do startups, which is totally untrue.
> Yes, this implies all smart men are datable, which is untrue. Yes, it
> implies several things that are untrue, and hopefully we're all smart enough
> to know that those things are untrue.
>
> To me this is the standard "nerds can't get girls" joke, and I think its an
> amusing and implementation. Especially since I follow the startup scene and
> read about Y-Combinator every day. I also think its completely harmless.
>
> All the arguments against it are arguments against politically incorrect
> humor as a whole, and I disagree with the idea that every joke has to be
> respectful of everybody. We need to be able to say things we think are funny
> without having to make sure that every part of their content and everything
> their content implies is completely factually accurate and fair. That would
> be terrible. We need to be able to ignore some of the facts of a situation
> and just laugh at it. I think that is a really important core human need.
>
> That doesn't mean I think ignoring womens/mens/blacks/whites/etc's rights
> is okay, I just think we need to hold our culture to a higher standard. We
> shouldn't expect people's thoughts to be binary and unchanging. We should
> expect people to be smart enough to know when something is a joke and when
> it isn't. I understand that that's expecting a lot. People are bad at
> filtering everything out, and there is some risk that it will get to their
> head. But when it comes time to make real decisions, they should know what
> thoughts are theirs and how they truly feel about something. I tell rape
> jokes all the time (yes, you hate me now if you didn't already), but I also
> fight strongly for women's rights and equality. I think rape is a terrible
> terrible thing and its pervasiveness is completely unacceptable. But I still
> appreciate ignoring all that stuff and just joking about it. Louis CK tells
> a joke about raping Hitler that's hilarious. I joke a lot about racism, but
> only because I think racism is so completely dumb that the people who still
> are racist just seem comically out of touch to me (though the way they
> behave obviously isn't comical).
>
> My point is, I don't want to live in a society where you can't tell a
> harmless "nerds can't get girls joke" without being accused of perpetuating
> our rape culture and objectifying women. Those issues are incredibly
> important, but finding them in a harmless joke like this, in my opinion, is
> taking things way too far. (Its also probably an ineffective way of getting
> your message out)
>
> <Steals flame suit from interpetive arson>
> -Taylor
>
>
>
> On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 10:32 AM, Ken Adler <ken.adler at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I wonder how long that picture on the home page stays there.  Anyone want
>> to start a betting pool?
>>
>> I know one of the guys in the picture and gave him the heads up about the
>> site.   He  (a) was not aware of the site,and (b) was "not amused" that his
>> picture was being used without his permission.. especially in this context.
>>
>> Ken
>>
>>
>> On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 9:46 AM, Tom Cauchois <tcauchois at gmail.com>wrote:
>>
>>> This is an example of something that's hard to pick up on for guys who
>>> have never really thought about it, because I don't think it's trying to be
>>> offensive.  It's just trying to make fun of startup founders.
>>>
>>> The part that makes it obvious, and the part that really annoys me, is
>>> again "all startup founders are guys and we need to get them dates through
>>> the internet".  That's a denial of the great women in tech and a
>>> discouragement for more women to enter tech.  Maybe low impact because it's
>>> a joke site, but it's also the pervasive thinking, which sucks because a
>>> gender balanced tech workforce would be sweet.
>>>
>>> It also implies these guys are dateable, in spite of "The Social
>>> Network".
>>>
>>> On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 3:03 AM, Christie Dudley <longobord at gmail.com>wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 12:10 AM, Griffin Boyce <griffinboyce at gmail.com
>>>> > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I would think in this case that the guys would be the "commodity" since
>>>>> they are the ones vying for the affection of those who are considered to be
>>>>> socially-superior.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> uh... no, not really. When you seek money for your startup, it's the
>>>> money that's the commodity, not the unique original idea that you have. Last
>>>> I checked, the whole point of money is that it's a commodity.
>>>>
>>>> I found the whole thing more sad than funny. It seemed a lame attempt at
>>>> humor, relying on stereotypes (thus reinforcing them) to make a joke that at
>>>> best was really childish, like laughing at a disabled kid for not being able
>>>> to play ball like normal kids. Not only do I agree with Liz about the
>>>> assumption that it's only men doing startups, but entirely found the
>>>> treatment of women on that site uncomfortable. Although I suspect they meant
>>>> it to be creepy, it is neither truly over the top, nor not-creepy, thus
>>>> failing on either side.
>>>>
>>>> They might have been able to pull it out with interesting embellishment
>>>> or even meaningful credibility, but failed there, too. I mean seriously, no
>>>> feedback form? Just an email address? You never got to know anything about
>>>> the girls, not even how they select them. They could have taken that
>>>> humorously quite a long ways, potentially making the women seem even *gasp*
>>>> desirable in any way at all other than "lovely young". But by that omission,
>>>> they so thoroughly commoditize the women, they assure that it falls flat.
>>>> (They seriously would do better with cattle!)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> To me at least, it's coded as access to romance and basic human
>>>>> affection, which (again in my experience) isn't limited to "access to a
>>>>> vagina."  In fact, it's incredibly insulting that it's so frequently assumed
>>>>> that "all men want" is sexual interaction.  And yes, I've met (and
>>>>> frequently dated!) men who were exceedingly polite and respectful, but were
>>>>> too shy in most circumstances to make a good first impression.  The same
>>>>> goes for women, come to think of it.  Something like this could be a good
>>>>> way to meet people for all genders and sexualities.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Oh, and I guess you missed the FAQ where they tell you they don't offer
>>>> boys to date. "Our model works best." was their response. It makes
>>>>
>>>> I think the biggest reason the joke here falls flat is because it's not
>>>> even outrageous enough that it's clear to people who read it through that
>>>> it's a joke. Or maybe that's the joke?
>>>>
>>>> Christie
>>>> _______
>>>> I'm the kind of person who finds and makes choices where there appear to
>>>> be none.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
>>>> Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
>>>> https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
>>> Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
>>> https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Ken Adler
>> 510-290-5806 (cell)
>> Ken at adler.net
>> ----
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
>> Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
>> https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss
>>
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.noisebridge.net/pipermail/noisebridge-discuss/attachments/20110524/1859a133/attachment-0003.html>