The bad aspect the meme format tends to fall into doesn’t happen here, because the woman’s idea isn’t boring, and by being about two individualised characters rather than generic wojaks or whatever it can’t really be interpreted as being about genders in general unless you’re being particularly uncharitable.
So the joke in the comic is that they each have equally interesting dreams? I don’t think that’s how it works at all. The woman’s dream is only there to highlight how wacky the man’s dream is. Imagine the comic without the third panel and you’ll see it loses a significant amount of punch, but you’re allowed your interpretation.
The joke in the comic is that one person expects one funny thing (sex is funny) but the reality is another funny thing (chicken sharks are funny). So it refers to two funny things, and also does a bait and switch, which is a third funny thing.
Imagine the comic without the third panel and you’ll see it loses a significant amount of punch
Nope, I honestly believe that there is absolutely nothing problematic about the comic, and that the criticism of the “girls with a time machine” format doesn’t apply. My previous replies are honest accounts how I feel about it.
No mention of the dream being funny is made at all.
That’s true, but I don’t understand why you’d say it. Certainly, I didn’t claim and don’t claim that it’s “mentioned”, I just claim that it is. Maybe you would wrongly accuse fewer people of bad faith if you explained things a bit more…
I can only think that you’ve misunderstood what I’ve said, so I’m going to try and explain it again. Afterwards, I’ll explain why I think you must have misunderstood and offer a final reflection.
The meme format, at least in the form criticised by your initial response, works by presenting one boring and one funny situation. It presents them with pairs of archetypical, gendered characters, rather than individual (though still gendered) ones.
This lays the meme format open to the criticism that it is stereotyping woman as boring. But it doesn’t work against the comic for two reasons:
the woman in the comic is not presented as boring. She imagines that the dream is about sex, but that’s not boring. Maybe if there were a negative stereotype that women are horny all the time and that’s a bad thing, this would be concerning, but that’s not the case. If you disagree on this, it would be worth saying what you think the comic is saying about women, and why. You said that it’s “only there to highlight how wacky the man’s dream is” without justification.
the two perspectives in the comic are not presented as typical. With just one woman and one man, it doesn’t present a false unity among multiple men and multiple women, with the perspectives contrasted by gender. Instead the contrast is between two individuals. And the characters aren’t the stock representations of gender that the “trad girl”, “doomer girl” and “chad” figures are. If you disagree on this, it would be worth saying why you think the comic is saying something about women rather than about the specific female character.
Those differences, hopefully, also explain why I don’t agree that it’s the “same joke” in the comic as in the meme format: the joke in the criticised meme is, “lol, woman are boring aren’t they? not like men who are interesting.” The joke in the comic is, “lol, this person wanted the dream to be about sex (hehe), but really it was complete nonsense (hehe) and now she’s got mental whiplash from the unexpected turn”.
And I think you must have misunderstood, because none of this can reasonably be called “reading things into the comic.” I’m explaining the joke in the comic for you, because you haven’t understood it correctly. You said “No mention of the dream being funny is made at all” which sounds to me like you think something in my explanation of the joke required that the joke was explicitly mentioned. That’s a very peculiar interpretation of how jokes work, but you’re not really explaining your thought process at all so I have no way of knowing whether I’ve misunderstood you. Presumably I must have, because your assertion that her dream is “only there to highlight how wacky the man’s dream is” is not referred to in the comic either.
Finally - and it probably is final, because my experience with this kind of conversation is that you are probably not really invested in it to the point where you’re willing to read a reply of this length, so there’s little point continuing - your first reply was a single image, with no comment from you. People reading had to infer that you were criticising the comic from OP. I asked you about it, and you replied with a scant 6 words. From there, you only made one, brief attempt to explain yourself and refused to elaborate further.
People come at discussions from different places. You offered a criticism but were never on the same page as me, and never put the effort in to get us on the same page, even though I tried, and you instead resorted quickly to unpleasant accusations. Let’s try and be better than that.
Okay, I REALLY did not mean to share this one if it was a sexist comic, so if I screwed up on that, then that’s on me, and… yeah there’s still time to delete it, I think.
That said, there’s a friggen’ load of cultural context to explain, if one really needs it, if one REALLY wants to dig in to this one.
Ball’s in your court, @schipelblorp@sh.itjust.works.
Isn’t this a criticism of a meme format? I don’t understand how it relates to the comic :(
It’s criticising the comic for being a slight variation on the same idea.
The bad aspect the meme format tends to fall into doesn’t happen here, because the woman’s idea isn’t boring, and by being about two individualised characters rather than generic wojaks or whatever it can’t really be interpreted as being about genders in general unless you’re being particularly uncharitable.
It’s the same joke, different format.
I don’t think sex dreams are boring, so I don’t think this is the same joke.
So the joke in the comic is that they each have equally interesting dreams? I don’t think that’s how it works at all. The woman’s dream is only there to highlight how wacky the man’s dream is. Imagine the comic without the third panel and you’ll see it loses a significant amount of punch, but you’re allowed your interpretation.
The joke in the comic is that one person expects one funny thing (sex is funny) but the reality is another funny thing (chicken sharks are funny). So it refers to two funny things, and also does a bait and switch, which is a third funny thing.
Delete the punchline and it loses punch, you say!
No mention of the dream being funny is made at all.
Your arguments are in bad faith.
Edit: 3 is setup, not the punchline. More bad faith.
Nope, I honestly believe that there is absolutely nothing problematic about the comic, and that the criticism of the “girls with a time machine” format doesn’t apply. My previous replies are honest accounts how I feel about it.
That’s true, but I don’t understand why you’d say it. Certainly, I didn’t claim and don’t claim that it’s “mentioned”, I just claim that it is. Maybe you would wrongly accuse fewer people of bad faith if you explained things a bit more…
You are reading things into the comic that are literally not there nor implied but support your argument. I find that bad faith.
I can only think that you’ve misunderstood what I’ve said, so I’m going to try and explain it again. Afterwards, I’ll explain why I think you must have misunderstood and offer a final reflection.
The meme format, at least in the form criticised by your initial response, works by presenting one boring and one funny situation. It presents them with pairs of archetypical, gendered characters, rather than individual (though still gendered) ones.
This lays the meme format open to the criticism that it is stereotyping woman as boring. But it doesn’t work against the comic for two reasons:
Those differences, hopefully, also explain why I don’t agree that it’s the “same joke” in the comic as in the meme format: the joke in the criticised meme is, “lol, woman are boring aren’t they? not like men who are interesting.” The joke in the comic is, “lol, this person wanted the dream to be about sex (hehe), but really it was complete nonsense (hehe) and now she’s got mental whiplash from the unexpected turn”.
And I think you must have misunderstood, because none of this can reasonably be called “reading things into the comic.” I’m explaining the joke in the comic for you, because you haven’t understood it correctly. You said “No mention of the dream being funny is made at all” which sounds to me like you think something in my explanation of the joke required that the joke was explicitly mentioned. That’s a very peculiar interpretation of how jokes work, but you’re not really explaining your thought process at all so I have no way of knowing whether I’ve misunderstood you. Presumably I must have, because your assertion that her dream is “only there to highlight how wacky the man’s dream is” is not referred to in the comic either.
Finally - and it probably is final, because my experience with this kind of conversation is that you are probably not really invested in it to the point where you’re willing to read a reply of this length, so there’s little point continuing - your first reply was a single image, with no comment from you. People reading had to infer that you were criticising the comic from OP. I asked you about it, and you replied with a scant 6 words. From there, you only made one, brief attempt to explain yourself and refused to elaborate further.
People come at discussions from different places. You offered a criticism but were never on the same page as me, and never put the effort in to get us on the same page, even though I tried, and you instead resorted quickly to unpleasant accusations. Let’s try and be better than that.
Okay, I REALLY did not mean to share this one if it was a sexist comic, so if I screwed up on that, then that’s on me, and… yeah there’s still time to delete it, I think.
That said, there’s a friggen’ load of cultural context to explain, if one really needs it, if one REALLY wants to dig in to this one.
Ball’s in your court, @schipelblorp@sh.itjust.works.
What cultural context is that? I’m familiar with several faltastical creatures, but a chicken-legged shark is new.
It’s not sexist on its own, but it could be read as one example of a sexist trope (girl boring, guy quirky).
May I ask what you were offended by, specifically?
I’ve already stated it twice.
And I’m not a mind-reader, sister.
Please spell it out exactly as you can, assuming a dumbass like me.