Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
NOTE: use Perl; is on undef hiatus. You can read content, but you can't post it. More info will be forthcoming forthcomingly.

All the Perl that's Practical to Extract and Report

The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More | Login | Reply
Loading... please wait.
  • by Matts (1087) on 2007.08.02 8:29 (#56673) Journal
    I thought it was funny.

    Every geek knows the stereotypical "no girlfriend" label that we have, and it's just a play on that. I think you're trying too hard to be offended.
    • Dude, you're *so* getting flamed...

      For what it's worth, I agree that if people are offended by this, they should probably grow thicker skins. While the stereotypes aren't the same, I don't think a version of this ad with a handsome guy (even shirtless) would offend me. Interestingly, the phrase "to go down on" is used for both, and seems to usually apply to the male-goes-down version; see e.g. here [urbandictionary.com]. So someone with photoshop skillz could easily test this hypothesis.

    • I'm not trying that hard to be offended. I heard about this ad from several people at OSCON who didn't like it and I thought it was a bad joke. I found the real ad, thought it was crass and don't want to quietly stand by while people continue to treat women like this, and I made this post.

      Perhaps you disagree, and that's fine. You can disagree without an ad hominen attack, though.
      • I wasn't trying to attack you. I prefixed it with "I think" because that was just a thought. I'm open to being wrong, and apologize if I offended you.
        • The problem in these cases is that people don't realize the effect of the things they support or say. You say that didn't realize that your post was an attack on me. Is it possible that you also didn't think about the effect of the ad on other people? These things are problems precisely because people do them without considering what harm they might do.

          Without thinking, you accepted the stereotype, endorsed its use, and then tried to undercut the person pointing it out. That is, of course, the exact proces
          • I see far too much political correctness in the world - fuck that. Stereotypes can be funny. See for example the comedy of David Chappelle.

            I thought the ad was funny - poking fun at the geek stereotype. I believe it's *far* better to think the stereotype is funny than to worry about it being hurtful to either sex.

            So I do accept the stereotype. And yes I did think about it, but feel free to throw ad-hominem attacks back at me - way to go.
            • I thought the ad was funny - poking fun at the geek stereotype. I believe it's *far* better to think the stereotype is funny than to worry about it being hurtful to either sex.

              The problem is, worrying or not, it IS hurtful. It's beyond mere political correctness. Getting respect as a woman, in this business in particular, is hard. And this sort of thing palpably makes it harder. It's a shame, but there it is.

              What really makes me boggle is that if there had been some ad geared toward Christians in the magazine, we'd be seeing a huge outcry about it. How dare they alienate atheists! But alienating women? Eh, that's funny!

    • I don't have to try. I don't conform to the stereotype. I'm female. Female geeks are invisible enough as it is. It is beyond the pale for a tech company to run an ad that implies strongly that every member of my sex is only good for fucking and sucking. Absolutely unacceptable.
      • If I thought that were the case I'd vehemently agree. But I see nothing in the ad that implies such a strong correlation.
        • Hello Matts, You may not see it, but that doesn't mean it's not there. When you set this little gem in its larger cultural setting, and view it through a woman's eyes, it seems a great deal more ominous. Certainly the fact that this ad completely ignored the existence of women geeks is insulting, to say the least.
          • (It's just Matt btw - Matts is just a hangover from my slashdot login)

            The ad is aimed at geeks with a sense of humour, male or female. Most female geeks I've met have a damn good one (you have to have one working with in such an environment). As such it doesn't ignore the presence of female geeks at all.

            That's like saying that David Chappelle's humour insults "white trash" because it ignores their presence in the ghetto.

            The ad is crass, there's no denying that. I just don't find it insultingly so.
            • The ad is aimed at geeks with a sense of humour, male or female. Most female geeks I've met have a damn good one (you have to have one working with in such an environment).

              It is a given that this ad offended a lot of people. They shouldn't not be offended (/me counts the negatives to make sure he got that right) just because it wasn't "aimed" at them. It's the other way around: the companies in question (both LJ and QSOL) should be prepared to accept the vitriol they caused by running the ad.

              That's like saying that David Chappelle's humour insults "white trash" because it ignores their presence in the ghetto.

              What you are saying is like saying the KKK can say whatever it wants to and no one should complain because their message is targetted at white supremacists, and not people who are off

              • Chris, the KKK produce a message of hate. Please lets not lower it to that level.
                • Chris, the KKK produce a message of hate. Please lets not lower it to that level.
                  Let's make a deal: I won't make the message of this ad out to be more serious than you think, if you won't trivialize it to be less harmful than others think.

      • Tell me about it. Let’s see: it assumes that…

        • Straight male geeks never get laid.
        • Female or gay male geeks do not exist.
        • Sexualises women in general.

        Basically the only group it does not directly insult are male non-geeks, which aren’t even the company’s clientele.

        Quite a feat.

    • Sorry Matt, I was going to side with you, but SWMBO tells me I should be offended, so I guess I'm offended. Though she didn't say if I should be offended myself, or on her behalf. I went checking through the local magazine racks to do some research on other things that should offend me, and I'm not sure if I should be offended at the skateboard magazine with an add that says "You know you want it" or the add in the gun magazine that says "Can you handle this big boy?", or the ad in the motorcycle magazine t