Tiger, Thomas and the Tampon

[Smiffy]

i am shocked that you see women as being inferior to men.

In golf, they are.
I thought this many times at Highwoods when I used to see a four-ball of women members all pull out drivers at our 152 yard par 3 10th.
Even I could make it with a 3 wood...

 

[Deleted member 25575]

Im just glad that in the whole history of humanity, no woman has ever cracked a joke at the expense of a man.

Seriously? You think this is what it’s about?

Golf has in the very recent past had a problem with treating women very differently to men, Muirfield membership for example.
Golf is still suffering from that stigma and trying to right the wrongs of the past, one of golf’s leading lights, in fact THE leading light, has made a joke, which became public, which depicts female golfers in an inferior light.
And you think the issue is a man making a joke about a woman?????

 

[Deleted member 30522]

i am shocked that you see women as being inferior to men.

I am not shocked that you took it that way. Women have had the arse end of the stick since forever, but you knew that was what was meant, so bravo bravo

 

[Swango1980]

Seriously? You think this is what it’s about?

Golf has in the very recent past had a problem with treating women very differently to men, Muirfield membership for example.
Golf is still suffering from that stigma and trying to right the wrongs of the past, one of golf’s leading lights, in fact THE leading light, has made a joke, which became public, which depicts female golfers in an inferior light.
And you think the issue is a man making a joke about a woman?????

Actually, it depicts Tigers driving distance capability in an inferior light, whilst also joking about JT's drive. That clearly seemed to be the intention.

The ones depicting women in an inferior light, ironically, are the ones complaining about Tiger's joke. Because, those that are not offended / upset about the joke, had no feeling that women were less capable than men (except that, it is a fact they hit it less far), or felt that was what Tiger was trying to say. It is the ones complaining about the joke that are the ones that keep talking about women being inferior, and it is not acceptable to suggest such a thing, even if a joke taken out of context.

 

[BridgfordBlue]

Actually, it depicts Tigers driving distance capability in an inferior light, whilst also joking about JT's drive. That clearly seemed to be the intention.

The ones depicting women in an inferior light, ironically, are the ones complaining about Tiger's joke. Because, those that are not offended / upset about the joke, had no feeling that women were less capable than men (except that, it is a fact they hit it less far), or felt that was what Tiger was trying to say. It is the ones complaining about the joke that are the ones that keep talking about women being inferior, and it is not acceptable to suggest such a thing, even if a joke taken out of context.

To be fair,if they didn’t have that feeling, what did they think he was trying to say?!

I get people saying “its crass and sexist, but I found it funny” as that’s at least owning it.

 

[r0wly86]

here is a good rule of thumb

if you are not part of a group that a "joke" is using as a punch line, then you do not get a say in how that joke should be received by that joke.

Also if a group doesn't complain, that doesn't mean the joke is okay. I have a friend from Zimbabwe and we had a great talk about these kind of jokes but when it is race, he says he doesn't bother challenging it, because it would be a full time job pointing out every single piece of casual racism, micro aggression or whatever. He also doesn't want to make himself a target by fighting back, it doesn't mean it doesn't affect him. That is the sad reality, so it actually comes down to those people like us to call it out on their behalf. It's called being an active bystander.

As an example, someone has used already, it was really prevalent not that long ago to use gay as a derogative term, show some emotion, do something perceived as weak and you get called gay. Now I know quite a few people who have come out late in life, nearing 30 or even 40, because they never felt comfortable in the environment to be honest about themselves because of these comments where being gay is a negative.

Banter or locker room talk is the single worst excuse for these type of jokes. When I was club captain at my rugby club I worked hard to get these jokes disguised as banter out of our culture. The people making them aren't deliberately trying to make offensive jokes, but it just creates an environment that excludes some people from genuinely being themselves.

Tiger's joke is just like that, I doubt it was intended to be offensive to anyone, but it just feeds into this environment that women are lesser than men, even if in general women have less physical power than men, to see someone with as much clout making this kind of joke it is a major contribution in continuing the environment where women are seen as lesser than men in everything.

I'm not going to get into societal issues and how privilege works.

 

[Canary_Yellow]

here is a good rule of thumb

if you are not part of a group that a "joke" is using as a punch line, then you do not get a say in how that joke should be received by that joke.

Also if a group doesn't complain, that doesn't mean the joke is okay. I have a friend from Zimbabwe and we had a great talk about these kind of jokes but when it is race, he says he doesn't bother challenging it, because it would be a full time job pointing out every single piece of casual racism, micro aggression or whatever. He also doesn't want to make himself a target by fighting back, it doesn't mean it doesn't affect him. That is the sad reality, so it actually comes down to those people like us to call it out on their behalf. It's called being an active bystander.

As an example, someone has used already, it was really prevalent not that long ago to use gay as a derogative term, show some emotion, do something perceived as weak and you get called gay. Now I know quite a few people who have come out late in life, nearing 30 or even 40, because they never felt comfortable in the environment to be honest about themselves because of these comments where being gay is a negative.

Banter or locker room talk is the single worst excuse for these type of jokes. When I was club captain at my rugby club I worked hard to get these jokes disguised as banter out of our culture. The people making them aren't deliberately trying to make offensive jokes, but it just creates an environment that excludes some people from genuinely being themselves.

Tiger's joke is just like that, I doubt it was intended to be offensive to anyone, but it just feeds into this environment that women are lesser than men, even if in general women have less physical power than men, to see someone with as much clout making this kind of joke it is a major contribution in continuing the environment where women are seen as lesser than men in everything.

I'm not going to get into societal issues and how privilege works.

Well said. Thank you.

 

[tugglesf239]

Seriously? You think this is what it’s about?

Golf has in the very recent past had a problem with treating women very differently to men, Muirfield membership for example.
Golf is still suffering from that stigma and trying to right the wrongs of the past, one of golf’s leading lights, in fact THE leading light, has made a joke, which became public, which depicts female golfers in an inferior light.
And you think the issue is a man making a joke about a woman?????

It’s exactly what I think it’s about. A joke

 

[Swango1980]

here is a good rule of thumb

if you are not part of a group that a "joke" is using as a punch line, then you do not get a say in how that joke should be received by that joke.

Also if a group doesn't complain, that doesn't mean the joke is okay. I have a friend from Zimbabwe and we had a great talk about these kind of jokes but when it is race, he says he doesn't bother challenging it, because it would be a full time job pointing out every single piece of casual racism, micro aggression or whatever. He also doesn't want to make himself a target by fighting back, it doesn't mean it doesn't affect him. That is the sad reality, so it actually comes down to those people like us to call it out on their behalf. It's called being an active bystander.

As an example, someone has used already, it was really prevalent not that long ago to use gay as a derogative term, show some emotion, do something perceived as weak and you get called gay. Now I know quite a few people who have come out late in life, nearing 30 or even 40, because they never felt comfortable in the environment to be honest about themselves because of these comments where being gay is a negative.

Banter or locker room talk is the single worst excuse for these type of jokes. When I was club captain at my rugby club I worked hard to get these jokes disguised as banter out of our culture. The people making them aren't deliberately trying to make offensive jokes, but it just creates an environment that excludes some people from genuinely being themselves.

Tiger's joke is just like that, I doubt it was intended to be offensive to anyone, but it just feeds into this environment that women are lesser than men, even if in general women have less physical power than men, to see someone with as much clout making this kind of joke it is a major contribution in continuing the environment where women are seen as lesser than men in everything.

I'm not going to get into societal issues and how privilege works.

Fair enough. And, that works both ways then. If you are NOT part of a group, you do not get to say how that joke should be taken, good or bad, by that group.

Furthermore, if you ARE part of a group, you do not speak on behalf of that entire group when you share your individual opinion, good or bad.

What I would say, when comparing to the time people used the work "gay" as a derogatory term, it was quite clearly that. It was a way of mocking someone, even in banter, by calling them this, with the inference that being gay was quite clearly a bad thing. Even if used for banter, the context was quite clear.

Now, when Tiger referenced JT as being a women with the shorter drive, then of course anyone looking in could suggest the context is "Tiger is saying women are not as good as men, and it would be embarrassing for JT to be a woman". And, if there was further evidence to suggest Tiger was actually a woman hater, or enjoyed making fun of women, then fair enough. I'd be critical of that. However, it is also easy to look at the context that Tiger was just making fun of JT for a short drive. He could just as easily referenced an old aged pensioner rather than a women. There is no evidence that he is actually trying to mock women. Just like I don't accuse anyone I play golf with as mocking women when they say "get your skirt on" when someone doesn't knock it past the red tees. It would be an absurd thing to think, especially if the person saying it was in a long term happy marriage and have daughters of their own.

 

[Deleted member 25575]

It’s exactly what I think it’s about. A joke

Very good.
You do you

 

[r0wly86]

Fair enough. And, that works both ways then. If you are NOT part of a group, you do not get to say how that joke should be taken, good or bad, by that group.

Furthermore, if you ARE part of a group, you do not speak on behalf of that entire group when you share your individual opinion, good or bad.

What I would say, when comparing to the time people used the work "gay" as a derogatory term, it was quite clearly that. It was a way of mocking someone, even in banter, by calling them this, with the inference that being gay was quite clearly a bad thing. Even if used for banter, the context was quite clear.

Now, when Tiger referenced JT as being a women with the shorter drive, then of course anyone looking in could suggest the context is "Tiger is saying women are not as good as men, and it would be embarrassing for JT to be a woman". And, if there was further evidence to suggest Tiger was actually a woman hater, or enjoyed making fun of women, then fair enough. I'd be critical of that. However, it is also easy to look at the context that Tiger was just making fun of JT for a short drive. He could just as easily referenced an old aged pensioner rather than a women. There is no evidence that he is actually trying to mock women. Just like I don't accuse anyone I play golf with as mocking women when they say "get your skirt on" when someone doesn't knock it past the red tees. It would be an absurd thing to think, especially if the person saying it was in a long term happy marriage and have daughters of their own.

The thing is that those people who did use gay derogatively most likely weren't homophobic or thought that being gay was a bad thing, it was just for a long time an acceptable term to use by everyone. Until that is people started calling it out for the harm that is does.

This king of joke by Tiger falls into the same category, it does not actually matter whether Tiger is a misogynist woman hater or not, the fact is he found it acceptable to make a joke at the expense of women. This is not an indictment against Tiger just the current state of the environment.

You don't have to be a spokesperson for all of one set of people to be able to call out jokes that cause larger scale issues. And like with the term gay being used derogatively, it won't change until it is called out for what it is

 

[Deleted member 25575]

Actually, it depicts Tigers driving distance capability in an inferior light, whilst also joking about JT's drive. That clearly seemed to be the intention.

The ones depicting women in an inferior light, ironically, are the ones complaining about Tiger's joke. Because, those that are not offended / upset about the joke, had no feeling that women were less capable than men (except that, it is a fact they hit it less far), or felt that was what Tiger was trying to say. It is the ones complaining about the joke that are the ones that keep talking about women being inferior, and it is not acceptable to suggest such a thing, even if a joke taken out of context.

There are some seriously short sighted opinions in here.
Tiger could have said “ha ha, I hit it past you, I’m a longer driver” if he wanted to make a point to JT about driving length.
He didn’t, instead, he chose to reference a product made solely for women, regardless of what you think of the situation, funny, crass, offensive, stupid, heroic, and you absolutely have that right, that brings women into the joke as a direct reference to JTs inferiority in this situation. It has been quite rightly seen as sexist, again, everyone is quite welcome to their personal opinion on the humour or otherwise involved, those choosing to defend or laugh at tiger are very much coming across as sexist and or misogynistic.

 

[Canary_Yellow]

Fair enough. And, that works both ways then. If you are NOT part of a group, you do not get to say how that joke should be taken, good or bad, by that group.

Furthermore, if you ARE part of a group, you do not speak on behalf of that entire group when you share your individual opinion, good or bad.

What I would say, when comparing to the time people used the work "gay" as a derogatory term, it was quite clearly that. It was a way of mocking someone, even in banter, by calling them this, with the inference that being gay was quite clearly a bad thing. Even if used for banter, the context was quite clear.

Now, when Tiger referenced JT as being a women with the shorter drive, then of course anyone looking in could suggest the context is "Tiger is saying women are not as good as men, and it would be embarrassing for JT to be a woman". And, if there was further evidence to suggest Tiger was actually a woman hater, or enjoyed making fun of women, then fair enough. I'd be critical of that. However, it is also easy to look at the context that Tiger was just making fun of JT for a short drive. He could just as easily referenced an old aged pensioner rather than a women. There is no evidence that he is actually trying to mock women. Just like I don't accuse anyone I play golf with as mocking women when they say "get your skirt on" when someone doesn't knock it past the red tees. It would be an absurd thing to think, especially if the person saying it was in a long term happy marriage and have daughters of their own.

This is textbook mansplaining.

 

[Swango1980]

There are some seriously short sighted opinions in here.
Tiger could have said “ha ha, I hit it past you, I’m a longer driver” if he wanted to make a point to JT about driving length.
He didn’t, instead, he chose to reference a product made solely for women, regardless of what you think of the situation, funny, crass, offensive, stupid, heroic, and you absolutely have that right, that brings women into the joke as a direct reference to JTs inferiority in this situation. It has been quite rightly seen as sexist, again, everyone is quite welcome to their personal opinion on the humour or otherwise involved, those choosing to defend or laugh at tiger are very much coming across as sexist and or misogynistic.

Yeah, but that is not really that funny, is it?

I'm wondering at which point in our lives, all jokes must be written / said completely literally?

However, what bugs me most is that, for those arguing he shouldn't have said it, you often simply throw the "short-sighted", "sexist" and "misogynistic" accusations to anyone that dares to say they have no issue with it, and argues that in general there is nothing wrong with it. In other words, it is not something that can be debated. You are quite happy to argue against what Tiger Woods did as it is offensive, even without truly knowing the context he made it, yet you are happy to directly offend anyone discussing the subject against you, by attributing derogatory labels towards them. Sure, it may make you feel good by thinking you have the moral high ground. And yet, in real terms, if you were to meet many of these people in real life, they'd be a long long way from being considered anything close to sexist / misogynistic.

 

[Swango1980]

This is textbook mansplaining.

And that is a textbook flippant response I'd expect from someone with your point of view.

 

[Deleted member 25575]

Yeah, but that is not really that funny, is it?

I'm wondering at which point in our lives, all jokes must be written / said completely literally?

However, what bugs me most is that, for those arguing he shouldn't have said it, you often simply throw the "short-sighted", "sexist" and "misogynistic" accusations to anyone that dares to say they have no issue with it, and argues that in general there is nothing wrong with it. In other words, it is not something that can be debated. You are quite happy to argue against what Tiger Woods did as it is offensive, even without truly knowing the context he made it, yet you are happy to directly offend anyone discussing the subject against you, by attributing derogatory labels towards them. Sure, it may make you feel good by thinking you have the moral high ground. And yet, in real terms, if you were to meet many of these people in real life, they'd be a long long way from being considered anything close to sexist / misogynistic.

Taking your points in turn;
No it’s not funny, much like what he did in this instance with JT, not funny

I’d suggest at no point do all jokes need to be written or said literally, people should, in my opinion, have a think before they write or say a joke and ensure what they are about to write or say is really what they want to write or say.

I was very careful in my last post not to call anyone sexist or misogynistic, I said people, you included, were coming across that way, as is Tiger and JT. If you don’t wish to be seen as coming across as sexist or misogynistic, you should cease defending jokes which are sexist and misogynistic

 

[BrianM]

There are some seriously short sighted opinions in here.
Tiger could have said “ha ha, I hit it past you, I’m a longer driver” if he wanted to make a point to JT about driving length.
He didn’t, instead, he chose to reference a product made solely for women, regardless of what you think of the situation, funny, crass, offensive, stupid, heroic, and you absolutely have that right, that brings women into the joke as a direct reference to JTs inferiority in this situation. It has been quite rightly seen as sexist, again, everyone is quite welcome to their personal opinion on the humour or otherwise involved, those choosing to defend or laugh at tiger are very much coming across as sexist and or misogynistic.

Your own opinion is pretty short sighted as well, I’m glad you feel it’s ok to believe other peoples opinions are inferior to your own, I’m sure there’s a joke here somewhere

 

[Deleted member 25575]

Your own opinion is pretty short sighted as well, I’m glad you feel it’s ok to believe other peoples opinions are inferior to your own, I’m sure there’s a joke here somewhere

Where have I said or inferred anyone’s opinion is inferior to mine?
I’m pretty sure I’ve said that every is entitled to their opinion on this, be that funny, offensive etc.

 

[Canary_Yellow]

And that is a textbook flippant response I'd expect from someone with your point of view.

The facts are simple though:

1. tiger’s action was sexist, even if not considered offensive or relatively mild in its degree of sexism. Equally is was still sexist even if intended to be a joke with no malicious intent. I don’t think anyone thinks it was malicious.

2. Notwithstanding point 1, it was a joke. Not all jokes are appropriate, as I mentioned above, plenty of jokes aren’t and that is also sometimes why they’re funny.

3. It’s entirely up to you and everyone else to make up their own mind on whether it’s funny and whether they are comfortable with sexist behaviour such as Tiger’s.

4. If you don’t think anything is wrong with what Tiger did, that probably means you’re a bit sexist (consciously or otherwise). But that’s ok, no one’s perfect. Plenty of people (including me) make inappropriate comments frequently that are driven off our unconscious bias, it’s human nature.

I think the key is to try and be as self aware as possible and to see things from the perspective of other people even if you don’t agree with them.

I understand where you’re coming from, I just don’t feel the attempts to explain away Tiger’s actions as not being sexist are necessary. It’s clear that they were sexist, even if that wasn’t their intent and even if the level of offence caused was very low.

 

[DPapas1982]

My final take from this is that some of the best comedians still performing make controversial jokes.

Fortunately it seems that the general population contains less fun sponges than these pages now do.

I hope the whiteknights wear earplugs at H4H this year or they'll be in a right mess.