Based on your post (and other posts you have written) I get the idea that you are a “Cliff Claven” type guy – really pedantic, a know-it-all, love to argue, always think you are right (ESPECIALLY when you don’t know what the hell you are talking about), are utterly blind to your privilege and are an all around obnoxious person.

People like you really push my buttons and I avoid guys like you in real life.

Because, if we were in RL I’d probably be yelling at you right now, just to get you to shut the hell up – and a minute later feeling horribly guilty because talking to you put me in that bad emotional place where I felt compelled to lash out like that.

So let’s drop it here.

Because, if I have to explain to you about the gender politics of a man yelling “fuck you” at a woman who disagrees with him, then you are pretty hopeless.

Be careful what you assume about people’s “lived experiences.” Just a few ticks below, you extrapolated that I was both British and ignorant of British politics based on a very short remark about the mayor of London. On both counts, you were wrong. Now, you’ve proposed a stereotype-heavy narrative around what other people “really” mean in a discussion based on the gender you perceive from their screen names.

In all fairness, the commentor that Paul attacked (in a way I absolutely don’t condone) was named Andrea. For what it’s worth, this is a very common male name (especially among Italians) as well as female. For an alleged threat of rape, Paul’s rabid reply was curiously devoid of any gender-specific taunts (“fuck you” is more often a dismissive exit from an argument than an escalation). Had he likened Andrea to a female dog or prostitute, I think we’d have a really obvious example of a (supposed) man abusively and reductively using aggression and dominance (hence the arguably dubious term “rape culture,” which renders a very specific act of violence as theoretical as these abhorrent ads). But in reality, that behavior didn’t unequivocally manifest – it’s just so common that we expected it to.

As for my comments on the rude dysphemism, they have a lot more to do with being a language geek than any feelings I might have about gender (the role of which in my life you actually have not the slightest clue about). Now, my lived experience might result in reading a cute pseudoword like “mansplaining” as a threat of rape, but that doesn’t permit me to invent a personal etymology for this word that paints my personal reactions over your intentions.

Furthermore, my assumption that you are male is certainly no reason to assert that your insights into the word “mansplaining” are of any more or less value than they would be if you posted under the name Jennifer. Which is, perhaps, why I take your use of it as a needless ad hominem argument and feel no more convinced of the veracity of your or Maxine’s accusations.

Do you know what the word “mansplaining” means?

Basically, that’s what you just did.

A woman, Maxine, called Paul on his clear sexism and cited the clear rape culture implications of the phrase “fuck you” – especially in the context of this thread and Paul’s getting enraged that a mere woman disagreed with him.

And here you come mansplaining to Maxine about what “fuck you” allegedly really means and trying to negate her lived experience with Paul’s use of the phrase fuck you in his post.

I picked up on the rape cultureish vibe quite clearly from Paul – who seems to have issues with women disagreeing with him, major issues.

Do you not realize just how wrong you are here?

However, your equally justified anger is no reason to casually invent an etymology for a common dysphemism (god, that was a mouthful). The term “fuck you” appropriates the impropriety of the word “fuck” – not its sexual connotations – to render it an intensifier, just as in all the various uses of “fucking” as an adjective. Unless you really will yourself to take it that way, it does not mean “rape you,” any more than “this paragraph is too fucking verbose” means “this verbose paragraph should be raped with a dry dildo.”

Strangely enough, just this morning I heard a Brit ranting (in German) about how the Anglo expletive “bloody” was a misogynistic invocation of the menstrual cycle. I wondered why, with all the gender baggage embedded in plain sight in both languages, people feel a need to make this stuff up.

Now, as for calling someone a “sack of shit”…well, that skips past targeted misogyny and straight into looking like an all-purpose asswipe. But for a more positive spin on the term, try this amusing article about eco-friendly sacks of shit: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/02/science/02bag.html

Firstly, as Greg has already noted, you lost a large chunk of your ‘nice guy’ status instantly as soon as you started being verbally agressive.

Secondly, had you for a moment considered what you were saying in the terms of this blog, you might have realised that ‘fuck you’ is a threat of non-consensual sex. Read those words again, Paul. Fuck you. Fuck you with a massive unlubricated dildo, and let’s see how you like hearing that phrase again afterwards. The way you casually use those words is a clear demonstration of how ingrained the idea of rape is in (y)our culture – because it’s deemed normal to use a phrase like that. Not appropriate here, and not appropriate anywhere.

I have the whole sentiment behind most of these ads. But it seems like there is nothing we can do about it, besides complain and kick up a fuss. I would like some of the ‘dont blame the victim’ stickers someone mentioned above!

Jen

You may not know this, but you are fulfilling a stereotype here – the “nice guy” who’s really not so “nice” once you get to know him!

Of course I do, fuck you you fucking bag of shit, and I don’t need some random website you just googled to help me do it

The “rape happens” bit is the wrong message on other levels too. As one of the billions of men who are not rapists, I’m rather irked by the propagation of the subtext that there’s something innate in male sexuality and behavior that makes us naturally predisposed toward rape (whether it’s true or not is probably beside the point). I come away with the impression that any urges I might feel toward sexual violence are perfectly normal and acceptable, and that potential victims bear the responsibility for preventing me from acting on them.

Also…the more I thought about these taxi ads, the more I realized what a perfect illustration they are of the sheer absurdity of trying to impose conservative, free-market solutions on deeper societal ills. In other words, if attacks by unlicensed cab drivers are the problem, then surely it’s the consumer demand for their competitors that will solve it! No doubt this notion seems completely logical to the likes of Boris Johnson. Expect worse.

I was so angry I emailed the advertsing board who basically told me I was being overly sensitive.

Jen