All Episodes
Previous Next
Aug. 24, 2014 - Sargon of Akkad - Carl Benjamin
33:20
This Week in Stupid (24⧸08⧸2014)
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Before I start, I'd just like to plug My Name is Addiction, uh, a Depression Quest-esque sort of game done by Sexy Migtow.
Um I've played it, I've played the alpha of this, and it was very engrossing.
It's one of those It's a different point of view, and it's very interesting to get into.
It's a look into the mind of a porn addict, but it's not pornographic, it's very tastefully told, and it's done with very striking artwork.
So, if you're interested in anything like that, do give it a look.
It's on Steam now.
I've got a link in the description.
Hello, everyone.
Welcome to this week in Stupid for the 24th of August 2014.
And my goodness, hasn't it been an interesting week?
So, new Facebook satire tag helps users to understand onion style articles aren't real.
It doesn't even surprise me that this is necessary.
But Facebook are actually going to have a satire tag on articles written by parody news sites because it appears that Poe's law is now the only law.
But not if Theresa May has her way.
New domestic abuse crime considered by ministers.
A new crime of domestic abuse could be created under plans being considered by ministers.
Okay, that sounds great.
Home Secretary Theresa May and feminist is consulting on creating the offence in England and Wales as part of attempts to improve police performance.
Because she's got the numbers she wants in her head.
But existing law already covers coercive and controlling behaviour, but it does not explicitly apply to relationships.
Earlier this year, Miss May ordered chief constables to come up with domestic abuse action plans by September.
She wants to get those figures.
She's damn focused on those figures.
Last year, ministers redefined domestic abuse, telling forces and other criminal justice agencies that it included both violence and acts of psychological control that left the victims in terror.
Okay, fine.
That's great.
There are a string of laws that already cover acts of violence, stalking and harassment, but none of them refer in their wording to personal relationships or the precise terms of the official definition of domestic abuse.
Okay, because the acts of violence are presumably what men are more likely to do.
So what you're actually covering here are the acts of emotional violence that women are more likely to do.
That seems very fair.
The official definition of domestic abuse in England and Wales is any incident or pattern of incidents of controlling, coercive, threatening behaviour, violence or abuse between those aged 16 or over who are or have been intimate partners or family members regardless of gender or sexuality.
Okay.
The behaviour captured in this definition includes a pattern of acts, assaults, threats, humiliation and intimidation or other abuse that is used to harm, punish or frighten their victim.
Well, shit, that's fine.
Ministers are now asking whether a specific crime would end any ambiguity, leaving police in no doubt over their powers to intervene.
Alright.
The offence could cover not just acts of violence, but instance of psychological control, which cut off victims from friends and family, or deny them money or other means to live freely.
I could only find the American statistics for this, but it seems like it'd be fairly analogous to the UK.
But 90% of household budgets are controlled by women.
It seems baffling that Theresa May and the feminist brigade are so bothered about women in this case because these laws are more likely to benefit people who aren't women.
I never knew they cared, because they certainly don't sound like they care about anyone but women.
I mean, they do use a woman as the example of a victim of this, even though overwhelmingly it's clear it's not going to be women who are the victims of this.
He basically reprogrammed me.
Domestic abuse victim Anna Lark describes how her former partner controlled her clothing, diet and online accounts.
My god, I've never experienced a woman do that to me.
That's crazy.
I can't believe that happened.
I mean, she says she was also told what to wear and how to speak.
Every single aspect of me wanted to change.
He told me our relationship could be so much better if I changed.
And she was self-evidently perfect.
What kind of...
I mean, I don't know the ins and outs of it, but that's crazy.
You would obviously get Polly Meat of domestic abuse charity Women's Aid to uh to interview.
And, you know, she said the the consultation was a vital step forward.
Uh two women a week are killed by domestic violence, even though that's not actually what we're talking about.
But um and in our experience of working with survivors, coercive controlling behaviour is at the heart of the most dangerous abuse, she said.
It I'm sure that's true, and I'm sure it's only women who are the victims of it.
Look at that poor woman.
Poor victim.
Poor victim.
I have no idea what Duncan thinks he's doing, talking out of turn, but he says, I'm the father of four beautiful children.
I divorced my wife because she was controlling and manipulating me, controlling the money which I earned, preventing me from seeing my friends.
Now that we are divorced, she is manipulating my children to hate me.
I have not seen them in a year.
I am distraught but powerless.
I have no faith in this law.
Duncan.
Shut up.
But the thing is, there's a reason that the BBC chose to portray all of their victims of this relationship controlling emotional abuse bollocks as female.
And that's because women are the relationship terrorists.
Because study has found that women are more controlling and aggressive towards their partners than men.
Psychologists found that more women are verbally or physically abusive to their partner.
It suggests intimate partner violence may not be motivated by patriarchal values, as previously thought.
Seriously, these people are just propagandists.
Everything they say is just counter to the actual facts.
If anything, this looks more like projection, Theresa May, you fucking idiot.
God, give me some joy and sunshine from the Middle East.
US corporations boycott Glasgow over Gaza support.
Pro-Palestinian demonstrators listening to speeches holding placards while waving Palestinian flags are mass rallying support of the embattled Gaza Strip in London.
Hundreds of US business people have scrapped plans to visit Glasgow following the Scottish city's decision to fly the Palestinian flag following the Israeli military operations in Gaza.
The visitors represented major US corporations such as Walmart, ExxonMobil and Coca-Cola, and were due to visit the Glasgow the Glasgow as a reward for investing millions into its economy.
That's a weird reward.
Um the delegation of 600 CEOs and business leaders was organised by the vice president of a leading Fortune 500 company, Richard Cassini.
However, following Glasgow City Council's decision to fly the flag over at City Chambers as a sign of solidarity with Gaza, Cassini wrote to Glargo's Lord Provost Sadie Docherty, cancelling the planned event.
See, I don't really know what bothers me most about this.
I don't know whether it's the delegation of 600 CEOs and business leaders having a political influence on a British city, or that they think that the people of Glasgow are pro-terrorism, and so they don't get the reward of their presence in their city.
I'll leave a link in the description box to Skeptor's video about what Hamas is actually like, and they are fucking bad guys.
And I want to stress that Israel are also pretty bad guys.
So, you know, no one is coming out a winner here.
But the people who don't deserve any of this kind of treatment are actually the Palestinian people who are not involved.
They just happen to be at the wrong place at the wrong time.
That's right.
It's a story as old as time.
A married middle school teacher in her thirties has sex with a boy of thirteen.
This is most certainly not news, says who I presume is Chenk from the Young Turks.
At least Molly Marie here has got her head on straight.
Well done, Molly.
What happened when a student told her campus health centre she was sexually assaulted?
Well I imagine they just laughed in her face, didn't they?
Pace University, New York forced the victim of an alleged sexual assault into an investigation, against her well, this is, and found the alleged rapist not responsible without saying why, and then attempted to require both students to attend a programme on alcohol and date rape, a complaint filed with the Education Department claims.
Fucking hell.
Alright.
The student who filed the complaint, who asked to remain anonymous due to the private nature of her experience, received word in July that the Department's Office for Civil Rights would look into a grievance.
The PACE case underscores how complicated it is to investigate sex crimes on campuses and why victims might choose their own privacy over punishment of their aggressor.
Those who work with the victims argue they should have a choice.
They should have that choice.
One apparently denied the student a pace.
See, Senator Claire McCuskill had done an investigation, and she had found that 40% of schools had not conducted a single investigation of sexual assault in the last five years.
The PACE student said she had no intention of reporting the February 14th incident, but did disclose it to a doctor at the New York University's Health Centre on February 27th, when she went to get tested for sexually transmitted infections.
The doctor fetched another colleague, who agreed they needed to inform campus security, who would in turn have to start an investigation, the student said.
I said I don't want an investigation.
I don't want the police involved at all.
Don't want an in-school investigation, but they told me it had to happen.
The student said to the Huffington Post, I did not want to report my rapist because of a very miserable and tedious process in which the victim rarely gets justice, which is absolutely going to be true two weeks after the fact.
And obviously now, because of the hysteria, hookup culture at Hartford-Samford wanes amid assault alarm.
Well done, feminists.
Going to university was meant to be an awesome, awesome, fun time of people's lives.
It was supposed to be great.
You'd get to parties, you'd hook up with people.
But well done for putting an end to all that.
Can't have people having fun.
You knew you were going to get some Jessica Valenti.
Michelle Obama told a joke about men that they didn't find funny.
And since Jessica Valenti enjoys the suffering of men, that's hilarious.
Valenti goes on to babble incoherently for a bit, but then finally gets to her point that every criticism of Michelle Obama is racist or sexist.
Attacks on her body, her feminism, even her love of Beyoncé.
Actually, I wish she'd said it with the intention of mocking men.
With all that political, economic, and social power they've cornered by marginalising women.
Fucking hell, Valenti!
You are just delusional.
Just watch the beginning of this video again.
I have actually got to cover multiple times how women are in control of all the fucking finances.
Because all you feminists keep saying is women don't have any control of the finances, despite the fact women almost have total control of the fucking finances.
You maniac!
But you know what?
Michelle Obama's right.
In an article written by a man, Why Women Are Smarter Than Men.
This is not going to win me a lot of male friends, but, on the other hand, look around.
Women are becoming leaders in many fields of endeavour.
About half the students in schools of medicine, law and theological studies are female.
Women now lead large corporations.
A great many have started their own businesses and are successful entrepreneurs.
Many are recognised as experts in the field of finance and investments.
Ever heard of Dahla Moore?
All those pro-woman policies are finally paying off.
I can remember when wives were supposed to get up and leave the room when their husbands started talking about such things as money, which, it was assumed, women were just too limited to understand, or just not interested.
What the fuck are you talking about?
You patronising twat.
Let's have a look in, say, the New York Times, in July 1921.
Chicago women resent Einstein's opinions.
Men, however, seem to agree on toy dogs and dominance of wives.
Professor Einstein's opinion of America and of American women in particular, as expressed in an interview cabled from Berlin to New York Times yesterday and reprinted in Chicago this morning, brought forth indignant protests from Chicago women today.
They took particular exception to Einstein's characterisation of American men as the toy dogs of American women.
Perfectly ridiculous, said Mrs. Frederick D. Countess.
The professor must have met a bunch of movie actors who was over here.
If the American men make more money than other men spend on their wives, then that's American luck.
I think the right kind of American is the strongest character in the world.
Okay, thank you, Mrs. Frederick D. Countess.
I cannot agree with Professor Einstein, said Mrs. Jacob Bauer.
Women have the vote, men are women's equals.
Well, if we can just get their wives to shut up for a minute, maybe we can ask the men.
But they seem to be in agreement with Professor Einstein on the dominance of weary women and the toy dog charge, while professors at the University of Chicago contented themselves with a few nervous tut-tuts and the comment that the German scientist had obtained a warped view in America because of the short time he had spent here.
Maybe he would have had a more positive view of America if he hadn't visited.
Domination of women over men in America is not a national phase, but a worldwide one, believes William Reitley Jr.
It's just as true in Germany as it is here, he says.
Einstein is right on the women, and I'm proud of the fact.
Maybe the woman behind everything aren't the women behind everything man does?
Maybe not openly, but they're there just the same.
What else can a man do with his money but spend it on his wife?
Oh, the dreadful oppression.
So going back to his remembering the time when wives were supposed to get up and leave the room when their husbands started talking.
Going back to this blathering tosspot, so where do I get the idea that women are smarter than men?
Primarily because so many women both think and feel.
Men have trouble feeling and expressing feelings.
Men seem to be best at planning, analysing and problem solving.
Oh Jesus Christ.
Someone get me a white knight for this white knight.
And you thought I was joking.
That's right, white knight and beta male are the most common slurs flung at feminist allies, usually by retro-sexists who think feminism is all about poor confused chaps getting shouted at whenever they hold a door open for a woman.
Hi Laurie, it's nothing like that.
But you're an idiot, so let's have a look.
She goes on to insinuate that men are only feminists to get laid, and that Jermaine Greer may well be servicing them, which frankly I think is punishment enough for being a male feminist.
But apparently back in the real world, something fascinating is happening.
As men and boys everywhere begin to realise what a society less riddled with rape and sexual violence and lazy gender stereotypes might be better for everyone.
Less evolved men and boys have started round on them as traitors.
One common charge is that men who support feminism are trying to be white knights, sweeping in and protecting women, not knowing that we capricious females prefer the attentions of the bull-necked misogynists who holler at us in the streets.
No lazy gender stereotypes there at all.
If you're a man and you hold a door open for another man with a large box, that's just manners.
But if you hold the door open for a woman carrying the same box, that's chivalry, apparently.
Obviously, this is too complicated for them to understand.
If they're not carrying boxes, and the man holds the door open for the woman, but not the man, then it's chivalry.
If they're carrying a box, it's because they're carrying a fucking box.
She rounds up with, I'd like to put a word in for the white knights, making fun of them as how self-satisfied sexists explain away the change in social attitudes.
Idiots.
As casual sexism and recreational misogyny become less and less acceptable in mainstream culture, some people might find it reassuring to think all of these non-misogynist men out there are merely weak-willed, sex-starved baiters.
Oh no, I'm absolutely sure they're just drowning in pussy.
Desperate for a bit of sweet feminist loving.
I swear to god this picture never gets old.
One thing she's heard from women and men alike is that men fear speaking about feminism and talking about gender, power and class in case they somehow infringe on women's special territory.
And there are certainly times when this is true.
So often the best thing you could do as an ally is to understand when it's your turn to shut up and let someone else speak, especially when you don't have the direct experience of the subject being discussed, which presumably would be always.
I can hardly believe these words are being committed to virtual paper.
Men can do a great deal of good in the feminist movement simply by listening and learning, with the added bonus of being pretty easy once you have done the work of swallowing your pride.
Decades of socialization do tend to stick in the throat.
If you were to reverse this and you had a male supremacist movement, it would go along the lines of women can do a great deal of good in the masculinist movement simply by sucking my dick.
And that's got the added bonus of being pretty easy once you get it all in your mouth.
Decades of not sucking my dick do tend to stick in the throat.
Fuck me!
The lack of self-awareness here.
It's not only listening though, I would love to see even more men talking about gender.
Oh, you just told them not to!
By more men standing up for women, more men speaking out about their own experiences of living in a patriarchal society that imposes damaging stereotypes on men and boys.
That's what real courage is, apparently.
She knows what real courage is, and that's what this is.
And it has nothing to do with waving a sword around and slinging the princess over your shoulder.
No, it doesn't, but it never has.
Real courage is about doing things that are challenging and uncomfortable, because you know that's the way to make a better world.
Things such as accepting higher proportion of women in roles of power and expertise, or listening to women talking about our experiences of violence and discrimination without interrupting, or trying to make it all about you.
I feel like someone's really controlling grandmother is telling me off.
The most heroic thing you can do as a man today is risk your own social status to do what you know is right.
In recent weeks and months, I have been watching more and more men and boys take the risk without expecting any sort of rewards, sexual or otherwise.
And I think every one of them is a big swashbuckling hero, like the feminist women I know, and also happens to be the very least that anyone could possibly do.
If you do nice things for me, I'll just think a bit better of you.
Talking about the least anyone could possibly do.
Playing golf again.
Obama tees off for second time in 24 hours since he solemnly pledged justice for beheaded journalist James Foley.
So he gives this thing about James Foley, and then he's out playing golf with some NBA guy and a billionaire once again showing the link between business and government.
I don't really care how much golf Obama plays, but but there does seem to be a great deal of contempt for public opinion coming from the political and business class as a whole.
They just don't give a fuck.
They just don't care.
The guys at the very top just look at them.
They just do not give a fuck.
Which is weird considering how grey Obama's got.
Maybe he's snapped.
He's just on full-on puppet mode.
Just give me the lines, I'll read the lines, and then I'm off the clock.
Oh, thank god for something inane.
I'm starting to get seriously worried about the state of the world.
Spider-Woman's new cover sums up the problematic way female superheroes are treated.
Female superheroes aren't real.
However problematic you think it is, it's not happening to real people.
Honestly though, I don't think the feminists can tell the difference at this point, so let's carry on.
It's rough out there for a lady superhero.
None of them are getting a solo film until 2017.
Oh good god, the oppression.
And there's an extreme lack of gamora in the merchandise for Guardians of the Galaxy.
Somehow they always end up sexy posing with their butts out while their male counterparts get to kick ass.
On Monday, Marvel released a variant comic book cover for Spider-Woman number one.
So not the only one.
Set to be published in November, drawn by artist Milo Manera, known for his more risque depictions of comic book characters.
So we already know it's going to be risque, and it is an alternate cover for perhaps probably designed with the specific intention of getting more male customers.
Oh dear god, someone cover up that poor indecently clad woman.
I suppose this could actually be construed as being mildly sexually enticing in a sort of non-nudity, very implied sort of way.
No, that is not a line drawing of an apple perched atop a red-skinned thin woman's body, the author of this the evidently fat author of this article writes.
That is apparently supposed to be Jessica Drew's aka Spider-Woman's ass.
Unsurprisingly, the cover listed a collective groan amongst internet commentators, by which she means feminists.
Well, that's not surprising in the least.
At all.
She looks like she's wearing red body paint.
Yeah, yeah, she does.
That's crazy.
And that's a big no-no for an industry still trying to remember that women exist and may perhaps read comics and also don't want to feel completely gross when they do so.
So that is, the entire industry thinks that.
That is, that is the industry position on this, right?
As for the position she's in, Christ!
Yeah, she was hanging ass first off a building.
I'm sure the green goblin was gonna fly up and rape her.
Marvel did not respond to the Huffington Post request for a comment.
Good on you, Marvel.
But Tom Brevort, senior vice president of publishing for Marvel Comics, responded to a question about the controversial cover on Tumblr.
Well, I don't care because it was on Tumblr.
For some reason, they employed an artist to do a representation of what Spider-Man would look like if he was posing in the same pose as Spider-Woman.
Which is weird, as they could have done it with the actual images for free, like I've done here.
But yes, I can agree it is a mildly sexualised image.
Sorry, you fucking puritans.
You've ruined hookup culture and now you want to ruin scantily clad fictional ladies.
It's fucking pathetic.
In the latest piece of the Orwellian puzzle, the Met Police warn that viewing extremist material in the wake of Islamic State's killing of journalists may be terror offence.
This video is evidence of the killing of the journalist.
So they are saying that viewing the evidence might be a terrorist offence.
It kind of makes me think that our counter-terror legislation might be complete bullshit.
Luckily, a legal expert told the Mail Online the rest of viewing the film would be absurd.
And let's hope it remains that way.
Maybe I'm the only one who's noticed that a lot of absurd shit seems to actually be happening at the moment.
Scotland Yard said today that viewing the film showing James Foley's murder by the Islamic State extremist may be illegal.
I've got to say it gives me a huge amount of confidence in the policemen they're not even sure if their own laws apply here or not.
Makes me think that legislation was clear and easy to interpret for everyday use.
But experts believe any prosecutions for watching it would be absurd.
Yeah.
The Networks lets people not spread the gruesome video over social networks.
It's evidence.
It's the evidence of what happened.
Scotland Yard, which leads counter-terror policing in the UK, confirmed that it is investigating the video and reminded social media users that spreading extremist material is a crime.
Listen, Scotland Yard, if the extremist material includes any material that includes extremists, then any video evidence coming out of the Middle East can't be proliferated.
A, you're never going to be able to police that.
And B, I rather think such totalitarian tactics are beyond your mandate.
In theory, if you had downloaded the video to your computer, you could be in trouble.
Because possessing terrorist material is an offence, regardless of your intent, similar to possessing child pornography.
But streaming the film is unlikely to be an offence.
You would have to be streaming it for the purposes of encouraging and committing terrorism.
But merely viewing it, it is difficult to see how that could engage even the very wide terrorism laws.
There would be no public interest in prosecuting someone viewing it if they didn't intend to promote IS.
It would be absurd.
For the Met to say that viewing a video in and of itself could constitute an offence seems to me very far from reality.
This is a legal expert.
Why are the Met saying things that a legal expert considers to be very far from reality?
But I mean, Mr. Cameron returned to number 10 just two days into his family holiday in Cornwall to lead the response.
It's not leading.
Posting on Twitter, if true, the murder of James Foley is shocking and depraved.
I will today chair meetings in the situation in Iraq and Syria.
Cameron interrupts holiday to discuss James Foley murder.
Oh, that's the political class for you.
Just so giving.
And always on holiday.
Fuck's sake, politics is depressing these days.
But, um, okay, yeah, we'll round up with...
Feminists have gone out of their way to find scientific proof that women, in this case I'm going to assume we're talking about feminists, are funny.
This is a guest post by Jessica Delphine for a special Ravishly series exploring the gender gap in comedy.
Oh, the gender gap in comedy.
I'm not exactly spoiling anything if I tell you now the answer to sexism, but let's follow the twisted logic to how they got there.
So, scientific proof.
Argument.
Women are funny, but there aren't enough women doing comedy.
Case closed.
Wait, don't you mean conclusion?
I mean, I'm no scientist, but I don't think it just goes, case closed, and then you present your evidence.
But anyway, there are thousands of women doing comedy, representing basically every national heritage.
Okay, that's true.
But the argument, women are funny, but there aren't enough women doing comedy, is not true.
Because I think, on the whole, women are not funny.
We're talking in broad terms here.
Come at me in the comments.
Argument, well, Jerry Lewis, Christopher Hitchens, Martin Short, slash my drunk uncle said that women aren't funny, and I like those guys, therefore women aren't funny.
Yes, that's a fallacy that no one's espousing, but how are you going to refute it?
Let's examine the fact.
Jerry was 20 years old.
The year was 1946.
His life was dramatically different.
Blah blah but you're gonna do an ad hominem attack on him.
That doesn't disprove his point.
That disproves your own point.
Argument.
I believe women are funny.
It's just that no one else does.
Not even other women.
Case closed.
Female comedians are worth millions and billions of dollars.
Therefore they must be funny.
Kristen Wigg and Judd Appeto's Bridesmaids is just one example that women watch comedy and what they found Wig and her comedy worth watching.
You don't know that they were watching it for the comedy, but anyway.
The film grossed more than 26 million in its opening weekend alone, and 33% of that audience were made up of men.
Those poor fucking guys.
Next time the internet explodes with so-and-so says women aren't funny, the very best way to respond is by directly going to Amazon.com and buying a female-fronted comedy video or book.
Watching a female-fronted episode of something on Netflix or even YouTube.
Hell, just leave it on in the background.
Or going in person to female-fronted comedy movie show or something that evening.
Yeah, that is technically the best way to do it, I suppose.
You know, proliferate the amount of female comedy, and that will definitely translate into women being funny.
And that absolutely won't translate into, like, bad feminist comedians.
Just being everywhere.
And ruining comedy.
For the record, right?
I actually, there are a few female comedians I like, but I think on the whole, women are probably less funny than men.
I think they've got less reason to be.
Argument.
Women are funny, but when people say it, it hurts female comedians' feelings, so we have to make people stop saying it.
Wouldn't that be a compliment to a female comedian?
But case closed.
Remember the old childhood poem, Sticks and Stones May Break My Bones, but Names Will Never Hurt Me?
God, yes, I wish some other people heard it.
Over time, society's mentality has changed, and now people actually believe that names and insults can hurt us.
In truth, that's true.
I mean, but you've made that happen.
You don't say it like it's just some sort of force of nature.
The truth is, they only sting a little bit, for a little while, and only if you let them.
So why have you been propagating the names and insults can hurt us narrative?
We have choices.
We don't watch or listen to anything that upsets us.
We don't have to respond either.
If you're how is that a response?
But if you're a female comedian and you heard someone say women aren't funny, alright, maybe you meant to say women aren't funny.
You think that women are funny?
You just keep working your action and re-watches, and you nailed it.
If you're a woman or activist or feminist, or someone said women aren't funny and it pissed you off, put together a female-fronted comedy show and donated the money to charity or go for a run.
Stop at Ben and Jerry's on the way.
Back if you wish.
But don't dare let it throw you.
Also, spend less time on the internet.
Jesus babbling Christ!
Argument.
Women aren't funny.
And if I say it enough times, everyone will believe it.
Case closed.
There are a lot of misogynists out there.
First line, I'm not even making it up, right?
And not all of them are male.
Misogyny will always be present on our planet.
Oh, motherfucker.
I just...
Yeah, that one...
Just straight to misogyny for that one that no one says.
Luckily, the Huffington Post is on the case.
Why the gender gap in comedy isn't that funny?
Oh, let's not say we did.
Just the facts.
Oh, good.
I'm glad we're finally getting to facts.
That last article didn't really seem particularly scientific.
So they go on to defensively justify exactly how much money females in the media are worth.
Continuing the absolute obsession with their own genitalia, in the stand-up world, the situation is no less gender-skewed.
I don't care!
I want it to be comedy-skewed!
Last year, all ten of the highest-paid comedians, collectively netting a cool $173 million, were guys.
Oh, that means they must have been the funniest, because in comedy, that's what sells.
But is sexism afoot?
Of fucking course it is.
Jerry Lewis tells a crowd that he doesn't like female comedians.
Two male psychology researchers went as far as to argue that men are funnier than women because of straight-up biological imperative.
Of course, dubious evolutionary theory is nothing more than a theory, and a head-shaking one at best.
But research actually does show that women really do find funny men more attractive.
What a surprise!
Women weren't actually lying every time that they said, you know what, I like in a guy, I like it when a guy can make me laugh.
That's what I look for.
A sense of humour.
Feminists must have been like, no, they're lying.
They're talking absolute shit.
That's not what they want at all.
Good news for men who can make women laugh.
Researchers revealed that females are genetically hardwired to find a sense of humour attractive.
Women like to date men who make them chuckle due to evolutionary differences, claim scientists.
They found that women's brains show greater activity than men's in reward-related regions, in response to humour.
The finding is consistent with the idea that women have evolved to appreciate humour, whereas men have evolved to produce hilarity.
According to this view, women use a man's ability to make them laugh so he judges genetic fitness and suitable partner's potential father.
But you know that research must be wrong, because they say, no any funny women, what about utterly humourless men?
Case closed.
I'd like to paraphrase Margaret Thatcher.
Being funny is like being a lady.
▲
Export Selection