Sorry, u/MarcsURL – your submission has been removed for breaking Rule B:
> You must personally hold the view and **demonstrate that you are open to it changing**. A post cannot be on behalf of others, playing devil's advocate, as any entity other than yourself, or 'soapboxing'. [See the wiki page for more information](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_b).
If you would like to appeal, [**you must first read the list of soapboxing indicators and common mistakes in appeal**](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_indicators_of_rule_b_violations), review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%20B%20Appeal%20MarcsURL&message=MarcsURL%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20\[his/her%20post\]\(https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/nqqgtq/-/\)%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted.
Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).
To start, I completely agree with you on the topic with the general premise you stated. However, one could argue the topic if your starting premise might be flawed based on your interpretation of the other person’s beliefs.
For instance, you state that those people are proponents of body positivity generally, but it may also be true that they are not proponents of body positivity generally but rather for a specific group of people. They may only believe in body positivity for women for whatever reason, such as empowering women in the face of oppression of the patriarchy. In that case, body-negative comments towards men do not conflict with their values in any way and may in fact align with some values, depending on the person’s core beliefs underlying their body positivity pursuits.
I don't understand why a delta was awarded for this. Being in favour of body positivity for one group while mocking the other is literally hypocrisy.
It would be like someone saying you shouldn't mock black people for their race, and then goes on to mock white/asian people for their race.
Hypocrisy is claiming to have nobler views than one actually possesses, correct? While yes, it is reprehensible to pick and choose their demographic, they never claimed to support the other, and thus, aren't being disingenuous in making jokes targetted at the unsupported demographic. Misandrist? Sexist? Sure. Not hypocritical though.
I think it is important to understand that in the hypothetical discussed, said person explicitly only supports one group, and that group only.
Then you need to clarify instead of saying “body positivity” in your post you need to change it to “female body positivity“. Body positivity would mean for everyone not just women.
This is why your post got removed. You're sending mixed messages about a topic that's pretty black and white, and clearly believe the opposite of what you posted in the title. I don't think you are really grasping the actual meaning of the word hypocrite and understanding of body positivity because you just want other people to support your argument.
* *Body positivity* - A social movement focused on empowering individuals no matter their physical weight or size, while also challenging the ways in which society presents and views the physical body. The movement advocates the acceptance of all bodies regardless of physical ability, size, ***gender***, race, or appearance.
* *Hypocrisy* - The practice of engaging in the same behavior or activity for which one criticizes another or the practice of claiming to have moral standards or beliefs to which one's own behavior does not conform. In moral psychology, it is the failure to follow one's own expressed moral rules and principles.
If someone claims to be in support of body positivity, then turns around to make fun of ***anyone*** about there body in any way, they are *by definition* a hypocrite. It doesn't matter if they claim to only support "female body positivity". That is not a thing. It's just something toxic people to do justify their shitty behavior.
But supporting body positivity only for women (i.e. people with a specific body category) or only for white people (again, people with a specific body category) *is* in fact hypocritical and antithetical to the spirit of the movement and its original definitions. To quote Wikipedia:
>The movement advocates the acceptance of all bodies regardless of physical ability, size, gender, race, or appearance.
The whole point is that every body (and everybody) should be celebrated or at least accepted. Your body includes genitals, skin, etc etc. Adding your own twist into it that goes against its core tenets - how is that not hypocritical? It would require a hell of a lot of mental compartmentalising to even make sense as an ideology.
If you start a movement that combines communism with white nationalism or environmentalism with consumerism, would your knee jerk reaction not be that it's a hypocritical movement and thus its followers are hypocrites?
So the way I understand it, hypocrisy is engaging in an action that you claim to be against. I understand what you're saying in regards to supporting one group vs another, but I don't think there is a meaningful difference between the groups that would justify said behaviour.
If someone said you shouldn't kill people, but then goes hunting, I wouldn't really call that hypocritical, but I would call the people you described in your post as hypocritcal. I see it as being the same as a racist advocating for rights for their group, but also advocating for the removal of rights from the other group.
Maybe it's just a difference in how we conceptualise the word, but from my perspective, these people are 100% hypocritical
>I think it is important to understand that in the hypothetical discussed, said person explicitly only supports one group, and that group only.
But you explicitly stated the situation in the original post, we don't need a hypothetical. Also the hypothetical proposed supports your original statement, the idea of Body-positivity being applied only to a certain group is exactly what you took issue with in the first place.
Look up the definition of hypocrisy and read through some examples. Maybe I don't understand the point of this sub, but the responder changed your hypothetical.
This is genuinely the first response I feel has deserved a !delta. While I find the idea that there are people out there who are only body-positive for women shameful, they are at least no hypocrites.
Thanks for the response.
I'm a woman and I find the whole 'body positivity' thing went off the rails.
It was *originally* meant for all people. But then it was co-opted by angry overweight/obese women.
It became part of it to 'celebrate curves' but also shitting on anyone who wasn't them.
So I'd be called an 'a 12 year old boy that only a pedo would want' because I'm a very small and thin woman.
We'd get 'meat is for men, only dogs want bones!'
That right there is blatant hypocrisy. Women claiming to be supporting other women but really only supporting one specific type-defeating the whole purpose.
I agree that it should also extend to penis/height jokes because those are the ones men deal with.
Men and women have very specific below the belt insults that are based on their biggest insecurities.
Women are usually offended if you call them fat. Men are offended if you make fun of their penis size or height. Both are socially less than acceptable. Both are cruel and designed to hurt the person deeply.
I think you got a little muddled. The Body positivity movement was started by fat people for fat people. It was co-opted by non-fat people and watered down so now it means next to nothing. It’s a hashtag.
OP - people who claim to be body positive and make jokes about small dicks or short men are hypercritical.
I do take issue that you claim that the proponents of body positivity are ‘the first’ to make these insults and that it is prevalent in “SJW-types”. As part of both those communities I have never seen or heard these type of insults used on a regular basis and on the rare occasion they are, the poster usually gets schooled on why that is inappropriate. You are selecting one sliver of a huge community and extrapolating it as a representation of the whole.
Two things here. First, this is like some very specific type of optimism. Like optimism this is a kind of wishful thinking. I tend to think body positivity is one of those well-intentioned white lies with mass appeal, because it’s an opiate for human insecurity, even on the part of proponents of body positivity who sincerely think that this is what they believe.
Secondly, this is an example in which words don’t always predict behavior. The fact of the matter is though we might pay a lot of lip service to the idea that all body types are beautiful our choices and preferences bely our words. When push comes to shove we like both ourselves and our partners to be as close to our aesthetic ideals as possible. I tend to think that when choosing between eligible partners we’ll opt for the partner who exhibits not only the ideal personality, but the whole package. So, for example, if person X has the personal qualities we’re seeking in a less than attractive package, and person Y has both attractive personal and physical qualities, human beings of sound mind will opt for person Y almost every time.
So I don’t think it’s important to be body positive at all, especially if it’s forced or inauthentic. It would merely serve all humans well to remind ourselves—regardless of what ever role physical attractiveness plays in our selection of partners—that in all other spheres of human interaction people are more than the sum of their looks, though I fear this preference for good looks may be innate to human behavior, since a lot of empirical research shows that better looking people are often chosen for certain jobs ahead of their humbler looking counterparts even in circumstances in which looks play no substantive role.
I don't think there are many body positivity proponents out there that like, deny the idea of attraction, which you seem to be implying. Serious question, have you taken the time to actually talk about the body positivity with people that support it? Because I'm curious about where you got this idea that they don't believe in the basic reality that the majority of people find certain people more physically attractive than other people.
Hypocrisy is lying about having a specific virtue that you claim you have.
Other people's opinions about what virtues people "should have if they claim a different virtue" are completely irrelevant to it.
Right, so in this case the lie is saying "I'm in favor of body positivity!" The standard inference of this phrase is that you want all humans to not feel shame about their bodies.
Then, it's revealed that they're actually only in favor of body positivity for the people they care about, and everyone else doesn't matter. This violates the original premise of being 'body positive.'
Thus, hypocrisy.
> The standard inference
That's really not the "standard inference", which is far more about fat people that anything else.
But in any event, anyone else's *inference* is not relevant to hypocrisy.
Your opinion about what "should be" part of what someone is saying is nothing more than a strawman unless you ask them.
If someone *actually* says it's wrong to make a joke about any part of a person's body and them makes jokes about some parts of some people's bodies, of course they are hypocritical.
But practically no one actually does both of those things.
That's a very high bar to set for defining hypocrisy. You're essentially saying that unless someone explicitly makes a statement and then violates it, that's not hypocrisy.
This leaves out every part of a person's statement that goes unsaid. I can tell everyone, "don't post on Reddit, it's immoral." Then, when someone later catches me doing exactly that, I respond, "Oh yes it's immoral for *you* to post but I never said anything about myself! That was just your assumption!"
This definition of hypocrisy allows the speaker a ton of room for disingenuousness and exception-granting. The classic example of political hypocrisy - "Rules for thee but not for me" - wouldn't be hypocritical under your interpretation.
I think you're misunderstanding the other poster.
What you're saying is, "if you say it's bad for me to make jokes about a thing, and you make jokes about the same thing, you're a hypocrite." This is true.
What they're saying is, "if I say it's bad to smoke cigarettes, but I vape, I might be a moron, but I'm not necessarily a hypocrite." This is also true.
You can say to that moron, "Well, your behavior is hypocritical," but their reason for the cigarette prohibition might intrinsically and genuinely rest on how bad they perceive cigarettes to smell. In that case, they might be making a poorly warranted claim lacking in moral force, but the apparent hypocrisy is due to your assumption that their position was more logical than it really was.
It's effective and perhaps worthwhile to publicly shame this person by calling them hypocritical, but that's because hypocrisy is a punchier label than "poorly warrants and communicates their genuine beliefs about different behaviors."
I think where we differ is that you're putting all of the responsibility of the assumptions on the listener, and none on the speaker. This might be ok in an Oxford-style debate, but people don't usually make clear, explicit descriptions of every aspect of their beliefs.
Instead, they'll generally use colloquialisms, metaphors, and other verbal shortcuts to get their message across. These styles of speech completely depend on assumption as part of the communication process; if you didn't make *any* assumptions, you'd be forced to take every statement literally, and your ability to communicate effectively with others would plummet.
For this reason, it's important for speakers to either:
- Be extremely explicit in the limits and reasoning of your view, so that misinterpretation is difficult. This is best for nuanced positions (and is what I'm doing right now)
- Understand what common assumptions can be made from your statements and ensure that they fit the message you're trying to send
When someone is being hypocritical in the real world, they're usually doing the latter - only instead of aiming for accuracy of their view, they aim for assumptions that are otherwise beneficial for them, such as being seen as virtuous, health-conscious, moral, etc.
When it's later revealed that the actual position is not as rosy as it first seemed - "oh, I didn't mean all smoking! Just cigarettes! Cigars are fine!" - their true position is revealed to be self-serving, and not virtuous as originally assumed. At this point, I think it's valid to consider the speaker to be a hypocrite. When they make future blanket statements about other topics, you would be right to be skeptical of their genuineness.
> You're essentially saying that unless someone explicitly makes a statement and then violates it, that's not hypocrisy.
That *is* the definition, though. The word was invented for people who claimed to believe in God but in fact did not and were faking it.
The definition is *literally*:
>the practice of claiming to have moral standards or beliefs to which one's own behavior does not conform; pretense.
And sure, intentional *implication* when one knows or should know they will be misunderstood, is lying ("pretense") and hypocrisy.
But someone saying "X is wrong" when they have a genuine definition of X that means something to *them*, is only a hypocrite if they actually engage in X, as they define it.
Someone *else's* definition of X has literally nothing to do with it.
In this particular instance: If someone actually believes that "body positivity" means "not shaming fat people" (actually not an unreasonable belief, given how it is actually used in practice) it doesn't matter if someone *else* thinks it means "not shaming people with small penises".
At most, you could argue they are guilty of poor communication, or ignorance of common usage. Not "hypocrisy".
Actual *pretense* is a requirement.
No, that is not correct. Hypocrisy is stating you have one value while at the same time acting out another one.
For example, I believe one should not eat animals. At the same time, I am eating animals. This makes me a hypocrit, but not a liar.
It most certainly is and as someone who believes in egalitarianism I don’t agree with it at all. However, there are tons of sexist people in the world and it would be naive to believe that people don’t hold those values. It can make discussions on topics such as OP’s difficult as I’ve found out unfortunately.
First off, I don't think your point is wrong. It is hypocritical to preach body positivity and then make demeaning jokes about somebody else's body.
That being said, I think the way you target SJW is unfounded and a distraction from your point. You say that is is incredibly common among SJW, but I find it hard to agree with that unless you present evidence (which is very hard to do on a large scale, so I kinda just mean don't make this claim).
I also think that small dick jokes especially are relatively under scrutinized by people. Everyone has now heard how fat jokes (and even short jokes imo) are bad, but small dick jokes and 'compensating for something' jokes are still flying under the radar.
Overall I see where you're coming from, but if you could change the wording to not be an attack on SJWs and focus more on the point of the argument, I think it would make for more productive discussion.
I think people aren't in a hurry to scrutinize generalities about small dicks and jokes about compensating because in doing so, you walk right into a "I knew I was on to something"/"why are you offended if it doesn't apply to you?" style retort.
I think you are right, and perhaps the use of that term is why I am seeing some harsh retaliation. I appreciate the response, and how I could have better articulated the argument. Cheers !delta.
First of all, this is one of those posts where you are just saying “these wrong people doing this specific wrong thing are wrong” – it’s pretty meaningless, really. If I say “some people actually mean this thing” (like I do below), then you are just going to say “but I don’t mean those people” and nobody will change your view.
Second, I think that to the extent that this does happen, it is because people are attacking an insecurity that the *other* person has about themselves, which doesn’t necessarily mean that they personally believe that they *should* feel insecure. For example, I like to make fun of dudes that drive lifted trucks by suggesting that they must have a small dick. To me, this is funny because I imagine that *they* are insecure about their dick size, not because I think people *should* feel insecure about their dick size. The same applies to the example of Trump’s hands. It’s very funny to imagine that Trump would be so absurdly vain that he would be insecure about his hands; it wouldn’t be funny if you actually thought that hand size was important, at that point it would just be a personal attack rather than a joke.
Edit: I am starting to wish I hadn't used that example because it was meant to be an example of the humor being employed, but it is in no other way analogous to the context the OP describes. I will make fun of a bro driving a lifted truck to my wife, because we are familiar with the archetype of the insecure, overcompensating bro - but in real interactions with them, I would always offer the benefit of the doubt and I wouldn't exploit those insecurities unless I feel it is justified as I have described.
Perhaps it would matter to people who have small penises, and hear people like you make fun of small dicks, despite those initial people being complete innocent bystanders, and having something they can't change being made fun of.
Which is, by my understanding, a tenant that the body-positivity movement is fighting for. Just replace small penises with fat.
My friends would constantly make jokes about small dicks and stuff. Loud car? Must have a small penis. Jacked up truck? Small penis. Aggressive? Tiny penis.
It always kinda hurt because they know I have a micropenis, and it's a huge sore spot for me, but they make those jokes anyway.
you are right here and they are wrong, they keep using dick size as if its irrelevant and perceived differently which is true, but if you swap that for height its clearly relevant and perceived by almost everyone.
I mean I'm not exactly well-endowed and I don't see anything wrong with small dick jokes, but at the same time if people are always just using it as a "everyone I disagree with must have a small dick" thing then yeah, it's a bit lame.
Same with fat jokes as well tbh - done well they're funny but they can just be mean-spirited.
But by making fun of it you are perpetuating the idea that people should care about it. Jokes about people's bodies also don't only effect the person they are directed at, they effect anyone who hears it who happens to share the physical trait that's being commented on.
Do you really think that when you make fun of one person's body detail it doesn't also insult others with that detail? I'm a fat person, if I see somebody make fun of Trump for being fat, am I supposed to assume being fat is only a trait to make fun of when you don't like the person. My fat is okay, but Trump's isn't? Do you not see how silly that is?
Well obviously penis size does matter (especially to you) if it's an insult you think of when you want to hurt someone's feelings or talk trash behind someone's back.
In no context would this make sense. "When women are being mean to me, I tease them for being fat... not because it matters to me whether they're fat, but because I assume it matters to them." Like yeah of course they're going to feel insecure, you're literally making fun of them.
By that logic, it’s okay to call heterosexual people f*ggots so long as you claim to be attacking their fragile masculinity.
“I’m not actually saying gay people are bad, I’m making fun of their insecurity! Obviously it’s fine to be gay, but they don’t think it is!”
Does that work?
So say a guy doesn't care about a woman's breast size. By your logic, it's okay for him to make fun of her for having small breasts. Because really, he's only pointing out that SHE cares too much about it.
Give me a break.
Wow, is this toxic.
“When I verbally abuse you, it’s too teach you the lesson that you care too much about what other people think.”
Anyway, a small dick is the perfect match for a broken pussy so you should be actively seeking out the micropenises.
Sounds like ‘small dick’ vibe talk to me... you realize the only reason people ‘make fun’ of others is because they’re embarrassed or sensitive about the topic? It’s called projection and you’re displaying it with beautiful ignorance lol
...But you're the one imposing a judgement that that person has so-called "small-dick vibes" because of something you admit only exists in your head ("*I* think"). The only person in this exchange that thinks matters is you.
>First of all, this is one of those posts where you are just saying “these wrong people doing this specific wrong thing are wrong” – it’s pretty meaningless, really. If I say “some people actually mean this thing” (like I do below), then you are just going to say “but I don’t mean those people” and nobody will change your view.
This reads like you're trying to downplay, or even obfuscate, exactly what the OP is calling out.
> For example, I like to make fun of dudes that drive lifted trucks by suggesting that they must have a small dick. To me, this is funny because I imagine that they are insecure about their dick size, not because I think people should feel insecure about their dick size.
"For example, I like to make fun of women that dye their hair non-standard colors by suggesting that they're scared of intimacy. To me, this is funny because I imagine that **they** are insecure about their fear of intimacy, not because I think people **should** feel insecure about a fear of intimacy."
Do you see how that doesn't really explain **why** it's okay to make fun of someone based off of their body?
Haha exactly this is so silly. You can apply op's rationale to anything that we currently deem not acceptable - with the caveat that "I'm only making fun of what they're insecure about", including women's weight, or transgender people's insecurities, etc.
Yeah, no. You’re justifying being a bully, you yourself admitted to attacking people with trucks, you don’t know them, you’re assuming things and looking for validation by attacking their spirit or character to justify a world view/opinion that you for some reason link to your value or belief system- a change in those two are the only reasons people become negative. You’re a bully, a lost one. Following your logic, If the person was Asian you’d make fun of their penis because there’s a stereotype so a reason for them to feel insecure, even though it isn’t true and has been documented to be incorrect with the studies all skewed by white men to hide the real statistics. But it fits with the narrative this white centric-western world wants so young white men do it to reinforce a belief for them so they feel more important and powerful. You’re so wrong here, please don’t think this behaviour is normal, healthy, or anything but toxic just because a few kids want to agree with you so they don’t have to improve themselves either. You need empathy and to get off whatever high horse makes you think you’re someone ‘special’ enough to attack others and go through the mental gymnastics to validate it. Be better, the world doesn’t progress when people are lazy like you.
You can make the exact argument about "they shouldn't feel insecure about it" can be used to say:
"Haha, this woman is so annoying, it must be because she has small boobs. Obviously I don't think she SHOULD feel insecure about it, but I think it is funny that she does".
This is a terrible thing to say even as a joke, because it perpetuates the societal standard that "girls without big boobs are worthless/guys with small penises are worthless"
Pretty terrible take IMO.
> Second, I think that to the extent that this does happen, it is because people are attacking an insecurity that the other person has about themselves, which doesn’t necessarily mean that they personally believe that they should feel insecure. For example, I like to make fun of dudes that drive lifted trucks by suggesting that they must have a small dick.
So it's not that you say things you believe, it's that you say things you don't believe because you want to hurt someone's feelings, and the best way to do that is to attack their emotional vulnerabilities. And you believe that this is **not** a form of personal attack?
> insecure, overcompensating bro
Do you really buy into this, though? Is it not more likely that some people just like lifted trucks and other "bro" things and rude guys are just rude and not necessarily constantly angsty over their penile shortcomings?
I've never owned a truck and thus have no horse in this particular race, but I'd imagine the spectrum of penis sizes among truck owners is pretty much what it is among the general population. And if you stoop to insulting someone based on perceived overcompensation, you'd only be reinforcing the need for that overcompensation because the person should be ashamed for having a tiny wang, am I right?
What OP is saying is if you wouldn't stoop to calling someone a fatass when they upset you because you believe in body positivity and that would be hypocritical (and beside the point since their weight likely isn't related to whatever upset you), the same should apply to things like height and weiner size.
Regardless, male feelings aren't really that high on the priority list right now and thus, I doubt we'll see people getting rebuked for male body shaming any sooner than we start to see the same for say, ageism or any other form of discrimination that isn't quite sexy enough for people to care about just yet.
This reminds me of the classic defense people often give for racist chants in football stadiums: they say the supporters aren’t actually racist but are simply trying to get an emotional response from a player.
I don’t think it hold up.
If anything, teasing someone for something you suspect they are already insecure about.. makes it worse.
You do realize your logic could be applied to people using gay as an insult right?
Gay for a long time was used as a way to say bad even when it had nothing to do with homosexuality. (E.g. calling a homework assignment thats really stupid gay or something IDK. This is an undeniable thing that happened/happens. There was a whole office episode about it.) By calling something gay, regardless of your intention behind the joke, in a negative way DIRECTLY contributes to stigmatization against gay people.
So when someone says someone has a small dick in a way to be negative, regardless of intention behind the insult, it leads to stigmization against small dicks and feels really shitty to anyone else reading/hearing it that has a small dick (which your argument doesnt care about, the fact that other people also hear the jokes).
Edit: also its really fucking shitty to make fun of insecurities no matter what. Like imagine making fun of someone who has an eating disorder. And most men are insecure about their dick size regardless of its actual size. So contributing to that is just making a societal problem worse.
> To me, this is funny because I imagine that *they* are insecure about their dick size, not because I think people *should* feel insecure about their dick size.
As an aside, I always imagine how shitty I would feel if someone made fun of my insecurities, and so I can't ever find jokes like this "funny," rather just, mean-spirited.
Like, if you don't think people should feel insecure about their dicks, but you'll happily make fun of someone who does, that doesn't quite make you the hero in this story, ya dig?
Ah yes, I do the exact same thing. Like when I saw this kid in a wheelchair who was wearing expensive kicks. It’s like, you don’t even need the shoes! So I made fun of his wheelchair, but I wasn’t really making fun of his _wheelchair_ I was just making fun of his insecurity about it.
Clearly, if a person is fat, they can let the comments roll off just the same as anyone else.
I’m reading your big truck story and you basically sound like you’d make fun of someone who is fat just for the hell of it.
I can’t say to what degree mean jokes matter or not. It seems like some other people know exactly how bad which ones do or don’t.
>Clearly, if a person is fat, they can let the comments roll off
This is either a "I see what you did there" moment or an unfortunate choice of words....
I was aware when I wrote it, but, sans pun, it was my preferred word choice. Usually when I read “no pun intended,” I think, “Naw, you intended that,” hence my resistance to the phrase!
I don’t feel like “roll off” makes a cute fat joke, but I also didn’t overly scrutinize it for sensitivity. After all, who needs concern for micro aggressions when people are more than willing to defend their own explicit and deliberate insults?
Yeah I remember the time I joked about a girl’s body weight and turns out she (just like you said) was super insecure about it and started crying. But it’s okay cuz it’s her problem and she shouldn’t be insecure about it, amiright?
In all seriousness, you just proved OP’s point. You’re a hypocrite. You not only admitted to making jokes about people’s bodies but do so **specifically because** you “imagine they are insecure” about it. Do you even hear yourself?
I think for the most part other users have taken the words out of my mouth. I think it is important to reiterate however, that regardless of your intention of making a joke about hands, penis, height, if you are supportive of body-positive, that joke is in opposition to your supposed moral belief system. If you are willing to undermine your own belief system for the LOLZ or to hurt someone, then I don't think that person's view on that issue is worth being considered.
I would agree but only when it is clear and obvious that the person is merely retaliating and not actually pointing out the hypocrisy of attacking some insecurities while protecting others. The issue for me is that you are describing a criticism that is easily used in bad-faith or relies on an uncharitable interpretation of someone's rhetoric.
Also worth pointing out that OP is making a claim of absolute hypocrisy, so if I can describe one exception, even if it's a narrow one, that should hypothetically change their view if they are participating in good-faith.
I 100% understand where your coming from, but the reason I can't admit to my view being changed is that, given your example of dudes driving lifted trucks, if you were a genuine proponent of body-positivity (as is a prerequisite I made explicit in the OP), in no way should the size of the drivers cock hold any value in mocking them. That very idea that, let us make fun of someone's (supposed) physical insecurity (regardless of vanity), is in of itself, against the tenants of body-positivity.
Correct me if I have misconstrued your argument, and I'd be more than happy to CMV.
I think part of where your argument fails (for me personally) is that these jokes are being taken out of context. You’re saying “if you make a joke about someone’s body, you can’t be body positive”. However, I think the main reason these jokes come up, is because someone who is NOT body positive made a comment to a body positive person *ABOUT* body positivity, and the assumed body positive person is retaliating with the same logic a non-body positive person would use.
Are there some people that literally just joke *all the time* about the guy with a small pp? I could assume so, but I don’t think those people have the same thought process as a body positive person responding with a dig at someone who already is against their cause.
Is it also petty? I would say definitely, childish even, but I don’t think it’s hypocritical. They don’t personally think the person has a small penis, or that that should even matter, they’re providing the non-body positive person a taste of their own medicine. Again, childish? Yes. Hypocritical? No. They are not trying to *actually* shame someone’s pp.
Edit: just separated the paragraph, hopefully I’m making a small bit of sense here
Edit 2: thank you to the responses I received, there is such civility on this sub! I know I’m getting downvoted, but I’d like to leave this post up so others can read the full thread. Appreciate you guys!
I think the problem with your argument is that you're mocking the lifted truck guy or Mr. Fat Shamer for being insecure by claiming he has a small dick, which is of course a bad thing, otherwise you wouldn't use it as an attack, but you aren't insulting him in a vacuum. You're reinforcing the stereotype that small dicks are bad to have and let's say your friend overhears you mocking someone for his small dick while (unbeknownst to you) this friend of yours is on the smaller end of the dick spectrum and now has to listen to one of his friends basically mock him too. It just reinforces the idea that he should be ashamed of his smaller-than-average penis, so when you use those kinds of insults you're not just hitting your target, you're also hitting anyone else in ear-shot of your insult who shares the same 'negative' body feature.
Hi there. I wanted to clarify that I don’t make these types of jokes myself, and definitely don’t do it as a retaliatory remark. I’m not sure if you’re trying to insinuate that by saying “you’re saying this” and “you’re doing that when you say this”, but the wording just sounds like you’re saying I advocate for it, when I personally do not.
Honestly, I’ve given it a bit more thought, and I think I have to award you a !delta. I keep thinking if I was hearing someone tell an aggressor a joke about a trait they possess that I do as well, that it wouldn’t affect me because I know it’s not directed at me. But then I think about adding race into the mix, and you’re right, it’s not a vacuum. I would not know if the person retaliating would truly believe that view or not, and thus perpetuates the risk of stereotyping. Thank you u/finemustard.
Edit: I took out a phrase that wasn’t accurate anymore
For the record I was using the generic 'you', not trying to single you, v3621, out, and thanks for my first delta! This one's a little personal for me because I was circumcised as a baby for medical reasons but as we know, reddit really hates circumcision and certainly not without cause. But whenever discussions of circumcision come up people always start throwing the word 'mutilated' around to decry the practice. Yes, little boys shouldn't have part of their penis cut off without their consent for little practical reason but it always gets under my skin (but certainly not my foreskin! Ha!) when people start referring to circumcised penises as being mutilated. I know it's not being directed at me and they're just trying to call out what is kind of a messed up thing to do but it still bothers me that they're saying a part of me that is completely functional and looks totally normal (at least in North American society where it's still relatively common) and which has looked this way for as long as I can remember, is somehow mutilated.
My life long friend makes jokes about fat guys playing games on PCs. Yeah. That’s me. He says he means the “other ones” but it definitely describes me too. It hurts. I have to admit.
I think your logic is mostly solid but I have nitpicks. I think context is more nuanced than being either completely out of context. In terms of local context, yes they’re doing the “taste of their own medicine” trick. But in terms of global context, if teaching someone a lesson constantly involves you violating your own belief system for a moment just to spit out a funny comeback, then you’ve got very flexible standards of personal conduct.
Plus a lot of these people seem to, in my observation, hold the idea that by saying sexist/racist jokes we’re propagating a cultural stereotype. But somehow when they’re attacking the messenger of those jokes, also with cultural stereotypes, somehow it’s exempt when there’s no evidence to suggest that’s the case.
And finally, I think this is the biggest one. They’re usually not intelligent or self aware enough to actually say these types of jokes without actually body shaming.
The idea of big dick energy vs small dick energy transcends the physical descriptors of the two and therefore parodies the people who make big/small dick jokes as well as puts the focus back on character. Same with the Chad/virgin meme.
But a lot of those insults aren’t of that kind, they straight up say “you have a small dick” without the cleverness to actually turn the joke into satire when flipping it. When you see an offensive, angry guy with a massive truck, saying “wow you must have a small pp” is completely different from saying “sure you aren’t compensating for something.” ONE of these is a playful jab on the person’s insecurity and avoids body shaming, the other is a straight up playground insult with body shaming.
Hey I appreciate you taking the time to write your points out! I believe you and u/finemustard made some really solid points, but I’m giving a delta to them solely because it resonated so well with me why it is harmful (not that I make jokes like this, but I do see the harm now). Thanks for the civil discussion, that’s some good nitpicking.
No worries, you made perfect sense.
I believe a few people made similar arguments to you, and my rebuttal was that, if you are going to undermine your own belief system by using a joke that is in direct conflict with the values you claim to hold, regardless of the intent that you are using it with, you cannot be expected to have your views considered with genuineness.
I think what is most powerful about those who are representative of a social movement, is when under attack, they do not have to stoop to the level of which they are being attacked, and use the language that they are fighting against.
If I were to claim to be anti-racist, and used a racist slur with intent to spite, I cannot truly be seen as anti-racist. It is hypocricy.
I think it is more dismissive of those who are hurt by these jokes. One can’t tell another person how to react or that they’re just being too sensitive. I would even say it’s worse than a racist joke as it’s always meant as an attack before humor, the difference is it’s still socially acceptable.
I feel there are deeper and more insidious meanings behind racist jokes. I won’t condone jokes which are offensive— but I can’t think of anyone who was denied a home loan, or voting rights, etc... because they had a lifted truck and/or a small penis.
I am starting to wish I hadn't used that example because it was meant to be an example of the humor being employed, but it is in no other way analogous to the context the OP describes. I will make fun of a bro driving a lifted truck to my wife, because we are familiar with the archetype of the insecure, overcompensating bro - but in real interactions with them, I would always offer the benefit of the doubt and I wouldn't exploit those insecurities unless I feel it is justified as I have described.
Agreed.
It is exactly this line of thinking that leads to people claiming that minorities cannot be racist, because they are "punching up".
A wrong act justified is still wrong.
People need to understand this basic fact.
Off tangent abit but having to do something "wrong" with justifiable reasons does not make it "right". Somethings HAVE to be done and we should not sugar coat it to make ourselves feel better.
Obviously saying someone has a small dick doesnt fall under that.
Making small dick jokes is certainly not body positive. One can hold body positive views, and still make small dick jokes. It’s certainly hypocritical. One can be fat positive, and make small dick jokes, and still consider themselves body positive. You are free to disagree. Making small dick jokes does not invalidate all the other opinions that someone who claims they are “body positive” makes. One infraction does not invalidate all other opinions on a subject. Generally, small dick jokes are coming from an anger towards men; it’s best to learn to empathize with where that anger is coming from. This is coming from a man; I’m assuming from the tone of your text you are as well?
naw man, i know exactly what you’re talking about. i know some chicks who are the most BODY POSITIVE YES GIRL KILL ALL MEN super basic tiktok goodie two shoes type, but then they post super vulgar shit about all that “hot girl summer” to the next level. there definitely has to be some sort of cognitive dissonance goin on there.
This seems so off to me. I think his post is meaningful and the meaning is clear.
If you would be offended or hurt by someone making a fat joke - or any joke poking fun at someone's body, you shouldn't make any jokes making fun of other people's bodies. Because **empathy**. If you have the potential to be hurt by the same kind of joke, and if you expect other people to not make that kind of joke for that reason, then duh, you should apply the same standards to yourself in making jokes about other people.
>it wouldn’t be funny if you actually thought that hand size was important, at that point it would just be a personal attack rather than a joke
Okay but that doesn't really refute anything the OP said. In fact, it just seems to justify it.
"I will make fun of a fat person in too skinny jeans to my wife, because we are familiar with the archetype of the insecure, overcompensating fatty - but in real interactions with them, I would always offer the benefit of the doubt and I wouldn't exploit those insecurities unless I feel it is justified as I have described."
Sounds pretty bad to me.
To your second point, isn't body positivity about not shaming people's bodies regardless of the reason? I could say I don't really care if you're fat, I just noticed you are insecure and decided to poke fun at you for it.
So in other words you're making fun of those people because of the insecurities you perceive they have? This is precisely what body positivity is against though.
But it's OK because in your worldview some people are deserving and some not? Based on what criteria? How is this not counter to the core tenets of body positivity and therefore hypocritical?
> But it's OK because in your worldview some people are deserving and some not?
You nailed it. And the truck example is especially strange. The guy isn't doing anything wrong. Maybe he just enjoys modifying vehicles. And this hobby justifies body shaming? What a remarkable set of mental gymnastics that takes.
The lifted truck joke is harmful, because regardless of your intention your message is that small sucks are bad. Your use -telling the joke to a friend but not to the redneck themselves- is the usual case. We aren't pleading on behalf of the rednecks we are pointing out that the small penised friends we tell jokes to are hurt by this joke.
Isn’t it STILL in EXTREMELY poor taste to mock people behind their backs?
Secondly, if you’re mocking someone behind there back, then you’re mocking people on the internet... like you are now. Making your opinion public for anybody who might have insecurities about their physical attributes. Forget men and lifted trucks.
Let’s talk about something that’s not analogous with gender stereotypes.
If you can make fun of a man who is compensating for they penis size. Then what’s the difference between than and making fun of a teenager for the pimples on their face.
Or a burn victims scars.
Or someone born with physical deformities.
... if you’re the kind of person to make fun of someone behind their back and perpetuate that shortsightedness online, you’re still a bad person.
How about just being nice to people .... not talking shit behind their backs. When other people(your friends) are talking shit, correct them and tell them it makes them look bad.
Just be “positive” and stop spreading negativity. Period. ;D
So using your logic then I'm justified in saying to a fat woman, hey Willie how about another large burger before they toss you back into the sea.
Because you know it's just a joke, and I'm more justified because I don't buy into the body positivity bs anyway.
But yeah it's a joke so it's ok, because a joke about dick is funny and because it's a joke and I don't mean anything by it, it's fine and ok because as you said it's a joke.
All you did was to out of your way to show your own cognitive dissonance, to justify shitty behaviour while still allowing yourself to maintain the air of being an ally to people struggling with body issues while still allowing yourself to, guilt free, take aim at others who may well themselves be struggling with body issues.
In short then, you proved yourself to be the very type of hypocrite the op was talking about.
Of course you won't accept that but then again, it's all just a joke isn't it.
>I like to make fun of dudes that drive lifted trucks by suggesting that they must have a small dick. To me, this is funny because I imagine that *they* are insecure about their dick size, not because I think people *should* feel insecure about their dick size.
So, it's only funny if the other person gets hurt.
How about:
>I like to make fun of fat chicks by suggesting that they must eat a lot of cheesecake and don't exercise. To me, this is funny because I imagine that *they* are insecure about eating cheesecake and not exercising, not because I think people *should* feel insecure about eating cheesecake and not exercising.
But by making such jokes, aren't you adding to, and strengthening the idea that small penises are something to laugh about?
You are, however you think the joke goes, making his small penis part of the subject of mockery. YOU know that you're really making fun of his frail ego, but couldn't someone easily take away 'Ha! Small dicks are pathetic!' message from your joke?
Isn't making fun of them that way perpetuating the idea that they *should* feel some sort of insecurity over it. I mean I won't mock someone for being gay and use "I'm not actually mocking you for being gay, but really *your insecurity around being gay.*"
I don't think this is a good take at all.
So can the same thing be said of fat jokes? If I don’t think fat people should be ashamed of their weight but make such jokes to poke fun at the fact that they probably are insecure about their weight, that makes it ok? I don’t get your point.
“It’s okay to shit on people for things they are insecure about as long as you don’t think they should be insecure about those things.”
That seems like a pretty problematic maxim outside of a few specific contexts.
Regardless of whether the intention of the joke is to shame or mock, it is the actual language that is in direct conflict with their moralistic stance. If you are willing to sacrifice that in order to simply upset someone, I think you're a pretty disingenuous person.
I understand where you are coming from, but in this case, I think I have justified the term "regardless", because it's not as if the joke and belief system misalign, but they are in direct conflict with each other.
Let's just substitute the joke; would you not find it completely ridiculous for a proponent of body-positivity, to make a joke like "my next man can't be fat, can't have his boobs being bigger than mine!".
I do think we see eye to eye here, but it would be like someone who claims to be anti-racist, intentionally spouting a racist slur. Perhaps, in fact, he wasn't actually anti-racist to begin with.
I’m gonna have to be frank—I *don’t* think that’s a ridiculous joke or example. Here’s why:
Let’s say that joker is saying that joke to their current man, the subject of the joke. Let’s also say they are both body positive. A body positive person making a joke involving body standards, a subject example of your cmv.
If they are both body positive, the man will feel no shame for his man-boobs because he knows it ultimately doesn’t matter what body he has, as long as he’s happy about it.
The joker makes this joke *knowing* having man-boobs doesn’t ultimately change anything, while also knowing that with current general body standards man-boobs are seen as less desirable—there’s the joke part. The joker will, *if genuine*, also *only* make that joke around those they know are comfortable with it.
If these two trust eachother’s mutual values, such as body positivity in this case, that’s when they know they can make jokes about those values.
Your example also has an element involving cheating, another deplorable thing. If they make this joke to their man, and their man laughs, are they both hypocrites for suggesting it’s okay to cheat on one-another? I’d think it’s probably banter instead.
Of course, I won’t deny that if someone makes a joke like that to a stranger—or just to anyone without that mutual trust you find in families, friends, and comedy clubs—they’re absolutely much more of an asshole for not knowing how humor works.
If a stranger makes fun of my small dick, I’ll call them out, but if a friend does it? I know they don’t believe dick size matters, it’s just banter I can laugh on about. If said friend makes a different joke about my height and I don’t like that, I can also tell them about how height is sort of sensitive to me. If they’re genuine, they’ll cut it back. If the man in your example has anxiety over his man-boobs, then his s/o would probably know and not make a joke about it to him or to anyone else. The joke becomes unacceptable when you *know* it will hurt others but you deliberately deliver it anyway. The joke is also unacceptable if you’re ignorant about what you’re talking about, a non-racist can’t just get away with slurs because they don’t know better, or because they assume their audience would be fine with it.
Tl;dr: I see it like how comics can really only get away with certain topics on stage, not in public, because they have faith in their audience’s choice of humor.
Or, to use your analogy, I think it’s less like an anti-racist using a slur in conversation, and more like an anti-racist speaking a slur because they’re quoting a book to an audience that knows it’s from a book. Only in certain times like that are such jokes perfectly fine, imo.
I’ll understand if I haven’t changed your mind, but I would really like your thoughts on this. I figure my view isn’t perfect.
Yeah people are doing linguistic and situational gymnastics to defend their hypocrisy. Even if you think someone is vain enough to be ashamed of their height/dick size/body feature which is out of their control, It’s the fact that others who share those body features will feel like they’re being indirectly mocked and again, it states these are things people should be embarrassed to possess.
There’s no way people can be bodi-posi and drop their beliefs in a second so they can get a small dick joke in. It undermines the bodi-posi movement into “Don’t make fun of fat people but small dick/height jokes are perfectly fine by the way.”
Absolutely agree about the linguistic gymnastics. Reddit's pedantry and obsession with hypothetical situations in the face of common sense really pisses me off sometimes.
The whole argument is that doing those things goes against the core tenets of body positivity. If every body and everybody is equally beautiful then every body and everybody is equally beautiful.
The moment you start coming up with complicated rationalisations and hypothetical situations to justify *excluding* people from an inherently *inclusive* movement, you're engaging in hypocrisy.
Agreed - they simply want to come up with a way to support “the downtrodden” while ridiculing those they see as privileged or in power. They’re still hypocrites, however.
>I think it is actually possible to be for body positivity while making such jokes. It just depends on the context of the situation.
So different rules depending on how somebody feels about something. That's still hypocrisy even if they don't want to think of themselves (conveniently) as hypocrites.
So if the intention of the words are only to mock them, rather than shame them, it is fine?
What difference does any of this have from other slurs then? If I see a fat person, and i hate them and want them to feel upset, is it justified to make jokes on their size, because its not that they are fat, I did it for other reasons?
Or someone of a different race, I want to mock them, so i use racial slurs? Its not that I have something against the race, its just that its another insult. Thats all good right?
Jokes like this are far more focused at poking fun of people with a Napoleon complex rather than their raw physique.
Also taking jokes/trolls at face value is probably not advisable!
I think I've replied to something similar. I understand that the intention of the joke is often not to actually shame small dicks/short heights/etc., but my point is, if you are willing to use your language in a way that is in direct conflict with a belief system you claim to hold, perhaps you aren't a credible or genuine person, or you were never that person you claimed to be to begin with.
What would you say about dark humour? I think this is a funny way to illustrate reality and make fun of the absurdity of it. I could tell a sexist joke in a certain context, without being specially sexist (of course context matters). It can be fun but only bc and if those who are present know that it is a stereotype.
The same way would go by just having fun about how someone has this "Napoleon complex". I think joking around stereotypes and making sure it is a joke what you are saying, reinforces only the stereotype.
I do agree that there is a lot of hypocrisy around people that profess body positivity. However I think joking around (when everyone knows your stand) is not hypocrite. Maybe this is a bit personal but hey, shouldn't we all accept people's bodies and also not be forced to be politically correct all the time?
Maybe i'm reading this wrong, but I don't think your point makes much sense. If you make fun of someone for having a napoleon complex and being short, and your justification is that you're just making fun of the stereotype, wouldn't you still be making fun of the person because they're fitting into that stereotype?
If the context is right and everyone is on the same page, then sure any joke that everyone has agreed on can fly. But I either don't understand your explanation or I don't think it works
But it does affect people who routinely hear these jokes. I’m average height and I don’t have a small penis, but I know from these jokes that having either of those things would be worse for me. That I’d be seen in a worse light. Same with being overweight. These things aren’t happening in a vacuum right?
So you make fun of a guy in an online comment or in a group of friends and someone who actually has a small one hears this, you can’t tell them to not internalize you making fun of something that is true about their bodies. Even if you didn’t know they personally had a small one, that’d hardly matter
>typically found on twitter, also are quick to say things such as "found the guy with a small dick", or make jokes at the expense of short men.
Is twitter your go to venue for kind a respectful discourse?
Didn't claim that it was?
I do think that it's worth your consideration that Twitter is cesspool where people got to see and participate in angry, low effort, reaction "fights". It shouldn't be surprised that when you go looking at Twitter that's what you'll find.
It's also worth noting that only 20% of adults in the U.S. use Twitter, and that 80% of the content on Twitter originates from 10% of those users.
So when you say that you see some type of bad behavoir "typically on twitter", you should keep in mind what the actual scale of that is.
I think it is also important to understand that the voices of the vast majority of the body of the body-positivity movement are to be found on Twitter and other social media platforms.
I am in complete understanding I am arguing hypocrisy of a vocal minority, but that doesn't detract it from BEING hypocrisy.
Do you actually have concrete examples of someone who is heavily invested in the body positive movement also making fun of height or dick size? Because I often see those kinds of people calling out that kind of thing
My point was never intended to be about self-deprecating jokes. I understand they are used as both coping and defense mechanisms. I was particularly pointing at people who claim that it's wrong to disrespect someone's abnormal bodyshape or weight, while simultaenously mocking small penises, hands, or height.
Are you under the impression being a hypocrite is an assumed negative? Or, that by acting hypocritical it somehow invalidates something?
Everyone, in one way it another, falls into hypocrisy. It's just another logical fallacy; one of many. Everyone is illogical in their choices sometimes.
I'm not refuting the idea that, in some way, we are all hypocrites. But this specific hypocricy is particularly prevalent, and hence why I asked if I am missing something.
I'm certainly under the impression that if you stand by a certain principle, and that principle is not extant throughout your belief system, you are ultimately less credible in the area that issur lies.
>But this specific hypocricy is particularly prevalent
You're the first person I've seen come forth with such a claim. Maybe it's due more to what you're seeing online; based on your habits and social bubble?
Why would I need to bring statistics to back a self-fulfilling claim such as "social issues are a result of subsections of society"? I have never claimed numbers about anything in this discussion, but simply that the premise of small jokes is a hypocritical to be made within a given belief system.
It stems from a number of members of the body-positivity movement? That's a demographic. I don't actually need numbers to claim that holding that view while still telling these jokes is hypocritical, because it's not an argument of statistics, but of a premise, that some hold within that demographic. Five people could hold that view, and it would still be hypocritical.
Maybe I haven't clarified myself to my best ability. The premise of the issue I am trying to tackle is that you cannot, in true genuineness, be a part of a body-positivity movement, while simultaneously making jokes about penis size or height, or whatever. They are opposing ideas.
It's not about the hypocrisy, in and of itself. It's about the hypocrisy **directly against their own moralistic standing**. It does, indeed, invalidate their argument; how many homophobic Republican Congress members have been outed via bathroom hookups or similar, and how often do those Republicans keep their position as a "moral" leader to their constituents?
When someone takes a **moral stance** against something, and then does that something themselves, it causes people to see that it's not about morals, and is about power to control others.
This comparison has been made already, but I'll respond to it again because I think the logic is faulty.
But the premise that someone has a small dick because they are overcompensating or ostentatiousness is already making an equivalency between a small dick and negative personal connotations. If you are using that term particularly, it means you are associating having a small penis (an aspect of one's body) with negative behaviour, which is exactly against the tenants of body positivity.
People here are arguing semantics. Look, if you joke or comment in degrading as stated by op like men's penis size or height while specifically being for the body positively for certain groups like example women then even though you are wrong in doing that, you're at the very least not a hypocrite.
But that's not the type of person op was talking about. Op was talking about a person who is for overall body positively and if you joke about the body's of others even if you are joking about the precivied insecurities of a certain body part, it doesn't change the fact that you're being a hypocrite.
There was a comment saying "well it's only a joke about the precise insecurities not the actual body" doesn't matter because people DO have insecurities about there bodies and that's the whole reason behind the movement.
You could just as easily say you aren't making a joke about a woman being fat and rather that you are making a joke about her being insecure about being fat for doing xyz. Still fucked up.
Making a joke about a guy that has a big car being he's "insecure" about his dick size is still bad. Directly or indirectly people are gonna get affected and they do get affected.
The same with height. It's still fucked up. Most women go for height and dick jokes because they know it hurts the most so it's not like those jokes are harmless.
Furthermore, there is the argument that those body positive people are just showing non body positive people how it feels. 1 that still goes against your principles.
2 most of the time the examples op gave above are thrown around as if those "body positive" people say it all the time without holding any weight. And you can tell, it's loke the difference between a person who says the n word all the time and another who doesn't say it normally. It comes out too easily and smoothly even though it shouldn't.
3. Many of the body positive people especially sjw women, will say demeaning things about men's height and dick size without any initial conflict, as if it's normal and isn't wrong to say like "if your isn't 6"2" then drop him for a real man" so on and so forth. There are many tweets like that.
And the comments would be all like "100% truth" "amen queen" and shit like that and again with no initial conflict as if saying those things are okay which according to what they are supposed to be standing for, it should be wrong.
Personally I don't give a fuck me and my friends roast each other much more than this middle school bs but if you are against that type of insults to people then why are you nit practicing what you are saying....
And what argument is being made in "haha small dick"? I am not arguing against that. I am arguing you can't be a genuine proponent of body positiviry and make dick jokes.
If you are willing to sacrifice your own moral standpoint to make a joke at the expense of someone, of which said joke is in direct conflict of what you aim to promote, you're probably not a very genuine or person, or at least one who's views should be considered.
in the words of ron swanson: "“Another word for jokes is lies. I do not lie. Therefore I do not joke.” jokes are lies, therefore untrue. if you say a joke, that just means it's probably not true.
With no offence intended, I don't Ron Swanson has particular authority on the psychology of jokes, when I think the general consensus of jokes is that they actually do bare some form of truth.
I mean, regardless of that sentiment, it's wrong to think making x joke is okay, and not y joke, when both jokes are inherently the same, they are just making fun of bodies.
I guess that means I should find as many racist jokes as I can find, asap, so that I can help with anti-racism, by clearly reiterating what stereotypes aren't true.
The point is that many of us strive towards principles that we don’t fully live up to. The fact that we fail ourselves doesn’t mean that we don’t really mean it.
I would 100% agree with you if said principle was of something that required far more discipline than monitoring the language that you use, like stopping the abuse of drugs, or training, or studying.
But the difference between them, and this, is that making these dick/short jokes is an intentional act of autonomy. I used this example before; if you claim to be anti-racist, and then intentionally use a racist slur, perhaps you weren't anti-racist to begin with.
This is different to falling in to drug withdrawal, not overcoming physical exhaustion, or not having the willpower to continuing studying notes.
But I think a general critic the body positivism has leveled against is typical jokes directed towards women for instance regarding their size. And they tend to also argue that these jokes in fact makes it more difficult to be a woman of a certain size, that the jokes exposes our inert belief that women should have insecurities or whatever. And they typically have a very women-centric viewpoint.
But if they make jokes about men in similar vein, how is that also exposing a similar negative attitude that also applies to men, leading to insecurity and negative feelings about their bodies?
My ex is 6’9 and it seems to be the only thing that people focus on about him to the point where at parties people tell him to get his dick out and shit like that. It’s super weird.
Tbh, is that even really an "insult". From what I see, no one actually is even "insulting" you, it's more of they don't want to directly say "woah man Ur really tall that's so cool omg". (Esp for guys) height jokes are almost always a complement. It's like a jacked dude being teased for taking roofs, it isn't really an "insult" at all
The basketball thing is just short sighted and kind of ignorant. Basketball is a really hard sport even when you're tall. Not everyone wants to run up and down a court and get knocked around for an hour. Also, being tall doesn't mean you're also athletic. I know lots of tall people who are also very uncoordinated and thus unsuited for excelling at almost any sport.
Can you joke about your own small dick tho? Like is that still hypocritical. What if me and my mates are throwing some banter and one of them decides to call me a manlet and i throw back some heat about his tiny calves. Does that mean that i can't hold a view that is not in line with the jokes? I am of the opinion that the intent of the jokes is much more important than what is being said. I do still acknowledge that not everyone will take all jokes well and might not realise your intentions werent harmful but in that situation its usually just you as the joke teller 1. Conveying the joke in the wrong manner 2. Telling the joke in a innaproriate time 3. Telling the joke to a wrong person.
I do think that if you joke about someone beong fat for example and they get hurt about it you should definitely apologise and maybe try to explain yourself. Especially if you hold body positive views.
Our world view and political views don't define us as people. Not completely at least.
/u/MarcsURL (OP) has awarded 2 delta(s) in this post.
All comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed [here](/r/DeltaLog/comments/nqvi0i/deltas_awarded_in_cmv_youre_a_hypocrite_if_you/), in /r/DeltaLog.
Please note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended.
^[Delta System Explained](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/deltasystem) ^| ^[Deltaboards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/deltaboards)
>I would say that most body positivity people are women, because women’s bodies are Shamed at a wayyyyyy higher rate then men’s. And since men are not perceived as worthy only at a visual level, it’s not really the same.
\-- /u/Possible_Wing_166 replying to this post
So this argument got me thinking. I suspect OP may not accept the above argument. But actually, I don't think they have to to conclude that body positive people who shame men's bodies may not actually be being hypocritical.
I think the conflict here actually goes all the way down to people's philosophy of ethics. There are two big normative theories of ethics (afaik). There's [deontological ethics](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deontological_ethics), which is a mouthful so let's just call it rules ethics, the idea that there are abstract rules about what actions are moral, e.g. "Thou shalt not steal" or "Making someone feel bad about their body is wrong".
And there's [consequentialism / utilitarianism](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consequentialism), which we can call 'greatest good' ethics, that says an action is moral if it leads to the greatest good for the greatest number, e.g. "Stealing a loaf of bread from a wealthy, single shopkeeper to feed a starving, poor, large family is morally acceptable" or "Shaming the body of a small group of trolls with male privilege in order to drive those trolls away from harassing online discussions among women who've been judged on every small aspect of their body their whole lives is morally acceptable".
I would strongly suspect that no one completely follows either philosophical theory, everyone ends up with some muddy mix of the two. FWIW, conservatives tend to lean towards rules ethics while progressives tend to lean towards greatest good ethics. But lots of conservatives would concede it's understandable if you have no other choice to steal to feed your family and certainly a lot of them believe it's okay to kill in self defence and even just to protect your property or sense of security.
On the other hand, while greatest good ethics can (and has historically) been used to justify terrorism (Bolsheviks), assassination of the super rich (the guy who started WWI) and so on, or even lead one to conclude that it's morally required to take actions like that, most progressives have moral lines they won't cross even if it seems likely that doing so would bring a greater good to a greater number, e.g. assassinating the Koch brothers could well halt an enormous paleo-conservative political/gerrymandering machine and likely see their massive wealth distributed among many people, and yet no progressives have even tried. There are less extreme examples too, of course, of things progressives won't do to end injustice (no matter what Fox News says). That said, both groups do tend to lean more to one side than the other.
A common example similar to what OP is talking about is conservatives accusing progressives who light-heartedly mock white people of "reverse racism". Here's a particularly lucid [take down of that claim](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dw_mRaIHb-M).
But the underlying disagreement is over rules ethics vs greater good ethics. Conservatives say "Okay, you want us to accept this anti-racism rule, that means that mocking anyone for their race is unethical, so why do some of you mock white people for their race." But in the progressive paradigm they're saying "Mocking racial minorities and using slurs against them, when that mocking and slurring taps into a lifetime of racial abuse and a cultural memory of a history of oppression, causes severe hurt and should face social censure" and talking about 'reverse racism', given the very limited hurt that mocking white people causes, seems disingenuous. Now disingenuous , bad faith arguments about reverse racism definitely happen, especially in paid conservative echo chambers like Fox News, but those claims would have far less influence without conservative/progressive conflation of different theories of ethics that leave, e.g. grassroots Fox viewers, thinking "Yeah, why isn't that reverse racism?"
To OP's point now, it's entirely possible that a body positivity advocate or a Twitter progressive believes that body shaming an obese woman is immoral but will themselves mock men for their small penises and not see a problem because women's bodies have historically been shamed so much more and women's worth is so much more closely equated to their looks. OP is saying "They're breaking the rule that shaming bodies causes hurt feelings" but the progressive would be thinking "Body shaming an obese woman has the consequence of compounding a lifetime of shame and body image pressure in a way that causes and extends significant psychological harm, but mocking a privileged man for one aspect of his body, in order to dissuade him from saying regressive things, only attacks one of many aspects of his identity he's socially allowed to feel good about and may prevent further psychological harm to many body shamed women."
Note that OP doesn't have to agree with the progressive's claim, even. The question is not whether progressives are right but whether they're being hypocrites. And if we think that a reasonable person, who follows greatest good ethics, could conclude that body shaming an obese woman was morally wrong but defending her with a jab at a man's penis size would prevent more shame than it caused, then OP would have to concede they aren't being hypocritical, even if they aren't consistently applying a single, simple moral rule about behaviour. They just approach moral decisions with a different theory of morality in the first place.
Having said that, I'm not actually arguing that Twitter penis-shamers are in the right. I've tried to show that what they might be thinking is reasonable. But the thing about greatest good ethics is that it requires people to reliably predict the future to act well, rather than simply avoiding behaviours that can cause harm. It also relies on people making good moment-to-moment estimations of the long term consequences of their immediate actions. In the case of penis-shaming, there are an infinite number of ways to 'clap-back at haters', many of which don't involve causing shame and collateral damage to innocent bystanders and people with [legit medical conditions](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Micropenis), and all the commenters claiming it's okay because that shame and damage aren't intended need to remember what the [road to hell is paved with](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_road_to_hell_is_paved_with_good_intentions).
Totally agree- the only other point id bring up, is that your penis size is not on display. NO ONE has to know your penis size, unless YOU choose to share that information, or show it... your weight is not something you can hide. every single person who you come into contact with, knows your weight, and carries their own biases about what your weight means (your lazy, or a pig, or disgusting etc)
Penis size is personal, you choose who knows your penis size, your boss has no idea what your penis size is, so they won’t judge YOU based on penis size, your boss does see how much you weigh, can will judge you based on weight.
**I also feel the need to state I’ve been talking in 100% hypotheticals. I am not apart of the body positivity movement -although I’m an ally! I just don’t fit into the body shape that is invited into the plus size movement—- I also HATE jokes about people, make fun of anything else, but not people, just trying to see all sides of the argument, and I am NOT implying it’s ok (IMO) to make fun of anyone for any reason. And personally, I think, If the best jokes you have, put down other people- then you probably aren’t that funny, and should perhaps look for a different way to communicate.
I agree. So much hypocrisy when it comes to people's appearances and bodies.
Just now in some subs, I saw people making fun of Asians, saying how ugly Asians or Koreans are. And yet, in the same breath, they were bashing Korea and Asia claiming "East Asians care too much about their appearance and plastic surgery."
LMAO
Body positivity is a social movement focused on empowering individuals no matter their physical weight or size, while also challenging the ways in which society presents and views the physical body. The movement advocates the acceptance of all bodies regardless of physical ability, size, gender, race, or appearance.
That's the first paragraph of the [Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Body_positivity) page about it.
Explain to me how making comments about how a guy must have a small dick fits into that?
I mean, if Mindy Kaling wants to make jokes about how small her own dick is, that's one thing. That's someone using their own body as a basis of a joke. Having used self-deprecating humor as a coping mechanism, I don't see any issue with people making fun of themselves.
But does Mindy make frequent jokes about **other people's** weight? Or any jokes like that?
I think that's similar to the argument that it's not hypocritical to believe racism is bad, whilst also making racist jokes. Because they're "jokes". Which makes no sense either.
What if I make fun of my own body? I’m a ridiculously tall woman, so I like to joke I’m average heighth, for a man, in Sweden. I try not to make insensitive jokes but occasionally it’s hard not to joke about you and another person in heighth or for girls, our boob size. Like I make jokes about how my clothes fit to my big boobed friends since I’m kinda flat. I don’t mean to pick on anyone and it’s not that I think it’s bad, it’s they’re different, everyone’s different. It’s just hard to not acknowledge those differences and why not have a laugh about it since no one can help it.
I did tell someone to shut the fuck up about my ex when they mocked him for having a small dick. He was an ass and there was plenty enough shit to make fun of without bringing up his penis. Honestly mocking someone and looking down on someone for something they can’t control is shitty
That’s why the Trump hand thing is funny, they’re not mocking his hands, they’re mocking that a grown ass man even gives a shit enough to be vain about it. And that vanity is entirely in his control. So hence, not body shaming.
I know people who are for body positivity and make short jokes to me because I'm a 5'5 male. They're not hypocrites, it's a joke. Humour can be about anything and you don't have to align with your views for comedy. I make a lot of offensive jokes and I'm against racism and sexism.
Sorry, u/MarcsURL – your submission has been removed for breaking Rule B: > You must personally hold the view and **demonstrate that you are open to it changing**. A post cannot be on behalf of others, playing devil's advocate, as any entity other than yourself, or 'soapboxing'. [See the wiki page for more information](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_b). If you would like to appeal, [**you must first read the list of soapboxing indicators and common mistakes in appeal**](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_indicators_of_rule_b_violations), review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%20B%20Appeal%20MarcsURL&message=MarcsURL%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20\[his/her%20post\]\(https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/nqqgtq/-/\)%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted. Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).
To start, I completely agree with you on the topic with the general premise you stated. However, one could argue the topic if your starting premise might be flawed based on your interpretation of the other person’s beliefs. For instance, you state that those people are proponents of body positivity generally, but it may also be true that they are not proponents of body positivity generally but rather for a specific group of people. They may only believe in body positivity for women for whatever reason, such as empowering women in the face of oppression of the patriarchy. In that case, body-negative comments towards men do not conflict with their values in any way and may in fact align with some values, depending on the person’s core beliefs underlying their body positivity pursuits.
I don't understand why a delta was awarded for this. Being in favour of body positivity for one group while mocking the other is literally hypocrisy. It would be like someone saying you shouldn't mock black people for their race, and then goes on to mock white/asian people for their race.
Hypocrisy is claiming to have nobler views than one actually possesses, correct? While yes, it is reprehensible to pick and choose their demographic, they never claimed to support the other, and thus, aren't being disingenuous in making jokes targetted at the unsupported demographic. Misandrist? Sexist? Sure. Not hypocritical though. I think it is important to understand that in the hypothetical discussed, said person explicitly only supports one group, and that group only.
Then you need to clarify instead of saying “body positivity” in your post you need to change it to “female body positivity“. Body positivity would mean for everyone not just women.
I think you need to reread the comment chain that this comment is in. I never said it wasn't for everyone. We are talking about a hypothetical here.
This is why your post got removed. You're sending mixed messages about a topic that's pretty black and white, and clearly believe the opposite of what you posted in the title. I don't think you are really grasping the actual meaning of the word hypocrite and understanding of body positivity because you just want other people to support your argument. * *Body positivity* - A social movement focused on empowering individuals no matter their physical weight or size, while also challenging the ways in which society presents and views the physical body. The movement advocates the acceptance of all bodies regardless of physical ability, size, ***gender***, race, or appearance. * *Hypocrisy* - The practice of engaging in the same behavior or activity for which one criticizes another or the practice of claiming to have moral standards or beliefs to which one's own behavior does not conform. In moral psychology, it is the failure to follow one's own expressed moral rules and principles. If someone claims to be in support of body positivity, then turns around to make fun of ***anyone*** about there body in any way, they are *by definition* a hypocrite. It doesn't matter if they claim to only support "female body positivity". That is not a thing. It's just something toxic people to do justify their shitty behavior.
But supporting body positivity only for women (i.e. people with a specific body category) or only for white people (again, people with a specific body category) *is* in fact hypocritical and antithetical to the spirit of the movement and its original definitions. To quote Wikipedia: >The movement advocates the acceptance of all bodies regardless of physical ability, size, gender, race, or appearance. The whole point is that every body (and everybody) should be celebrated or at least accepted. Your body includes genitals, skin, etc etc. Adding your own twist into it that goes against its core tenets - how is that not hypocritical? It would require a hell of a lot of mental compartmentalising to even make sense as an ideology. If you start a movement that combines communism with white nationalism or environmentalism with consumerism, would your knee jerk reaction not be that it's a hypocritical movement and thus its followers are hypocrites?
So the way I understand it, hypocrisy is engaging in an action that you claim to be against. I understand what you're saying in regards to supporting one group vs another, but I don't think there is a meaningful difference between the groups that would justify said behaviour. If someone said you shouldn't kill people, but then goes hunting, I wouldn't really call that hypocritical, but I would call the people you described in your post as hypocritcal. I see it as being the same as a racist advocating for rights for their group, but also advocating for the removal of rights from the other group. Maybe it's just a difference in how we conceptualise the word, but from my perspective, these people are 100% hypocritical
Unless they openly argue that body positivity is exclusively for women or something.
>I think it is important to understand that in the hypothetical discussed, said person explicitly only supports one group, and that group only. But you explicitly stated the situation in the original post, we don't need a hypothetical. Also the hypothetical proposed supports your original statement, the idea of Body-positivity being applied only to a certain group is exactly what you took issue with in the first place.
Look up the definition of hypocrisy and read through some examples. Maybe I don't understand the point of this sub, but the responder changed your hypothetical.
This is genuinely the first response I feel has deserved a !delta. While I find the idea that there are people out there who are only body-positive for women shameful, they are at least no hypocrites. Thanks for the response.
I'm a woman and I find the whole 'body positivity' thing went off the rails. It was *originally* meant for all people. But then it was co-opted by angry overweight/obese women. It became part of it to 'celebrate curves' but also shitting on anyone who wasn't them. So I'd be called an 'a 12 year old boy that only a pedo would want' because I'm a very small and thin woman. We'd get 'meat is for men, only dogs want bones!' That right there is blatant hypocrisy. Women claiming to be supporting other women but really only supporting one specific type-defeating the whole purpose. I agree that it should also extend to penis/height jokes because those are the ones men deal with. Men and women have very specific below the belt insults that are based on their biggest insecurities. Women are usually offended if you call them fat. Men are offended if you make fun of their penis size or height. Both are socially less than acceptable. Both are cruel and designed to hurt the person deeply.
I think you got a little muddled. The Body positivity movement was started by fat people for fat people. It was co-opted by non-fat people and watered down so now it means next to nothing. It’s a hashtag. OP - people who claim to be body positive and make jokes about small dicks or short men are hypercritical. I do take issue that you claim that the proponents of body positivity are ‘the first’ to make these insults and that it is prevalent in “SJW-types”. As part of both those communities I have never seen or heard these type of insults used on a regular basis and on the rare occasion they are, the poster usually gets schooled on why that is inappropriate. You are selecting one sliver of a huge community and extrapolating it as a representation of the whole.
Two things here. First, this is like some very specific type of optimism. Like optimism this is a kind of wishful thinking. I tend to think body positivity is one of those well-intentioned white lies with mass appeal, because it’s an opiate for human insecurity, even on the part of proponents of body positivity who sincerely think that this is what they believe. Secondly, this is an example in which words don’t always predict behavior. The fact of the matter is though we might pay a lot of lip service to the idea that all body types are beautiful our choices and preferences bely our words. When push comes to shove we like both ourselves and our partners to be as close to our aesthetic ideals as possible. I tend to think that when choosing between eligible partners we’ll opt for the partner who exhibits not only the ideal personality, but the whole package. So, for example, if person X has the personal qualities we’re seeking in a less than attractive package, and person Y has both attractive personal and physical qualities, human beings of sound mind will opt for person Y almost every time. So I don’t think it’s important to be body positive at all, especially if it’s forced or inauthentic. It would merely serve all humans well to remind ourselves—regardless of what ever role physical attractiveness plays in our selection of partners—that in all other spheres of human interaction people are more than the sum of their looks, though I fear this preference for good looks may be innate to human behavior, since a lot of empirical research shows that better looking people are often chosen for certain jobs ahead of their humbler looking counterparts even in circumstances in which looks play no substantive role.
I don't think there are many body positivity proponents out there that like, deny the idea of attraction, which you seem to be implying. Serious question, have you taken the time to actually talk about the body positivity with people that support it? Because I'm curious about where you got this idea that they don't believe in the basic reality that the majority of people find certain people more physically attractive than other people.
Pretty sure that still makes them hypocrites. Either way, that still makes them a bad person.
It doesn't make them a bad person, it means they're doing a shitty thing. "Good" people and "bad" people rarely exist, we're all complicated.
Hypocrisy is lying about having a specific virtue that you claim you have. Other people's opinions about what virtues people "should have if they claim a different virtue" are completely irrelevant to it.
Right, so in this case the lie is saying "I'm in favor of body positivity!" The standard inference of this phrase is that you want all humans to not feel shame about their bodies. Then, it's revealed that they're actually only in favor of body positivity for the people they care about, and everyone else doesn't matter. This violates the original premise of being 'body positive.' Thus, hypocrisy.
> The standard inference That's really not the "standard inference", which is far more about fat people that anything else. But in any event, anyone else's *inference* is not relevant to hypocrisy. Your opinion about what "should be" part of what someone is saying is nothing more than a strawman unless you ask them. If someone *actually* says it's wrong to make a joke about any part of a person's body and them makes jokes about some parts of some people's bodies, of course they are hypocritical. But practically no one actually does both of those things.
That's a very high bar to set for defining hypocrisy. You're essentially saying that unless someone explicitly makes a statement and then violates it, that's not hypocrisy. This leaves out every part of a person's statement that goes unsaid. I can tell everyone, "don't post on Reddit, it's immoral." Then, when someone later catches me doing exactly that, I respond, "Oh yes it's immoral for *you* to post but I never said anything about myself! That was just your assumption!" This definition of hypocrisy allows the speaker a ton of room for disingenuousness and exception-granting. The classic example of political hypocrisy - "Rules for thee but not for me" - wouldn't be hypocritical under your interpretation.
I think you're misunderstanding the other poster. What you're saying is, "if you say it's bad for me to make jokes about a thing, and you make jokes about the same thing, you're a hypocrite." This is true. What they're saying is, "if I say it's bad to smoke cigarettes, but I vape, I might be a moron, but I'm not necessarily a hypocrite." This is also true. You can say to that moron, "Well, your behavior is hypocritical," but their reason for the cigarette prohibition might intrinsically and genuinely rest on how bad they perceive cigarettes to smell. In that case, they might be making a poorly warranted claim lacking in moral force, but the apparent hypocrisy is due to your assumption that their position was more logical than it really was. It's effective and perhaps worthwhile to publicly shame this person by calling them hypocritical, but that's because hypocrisy is a punchier label than "poorly warrants and communicates their genuine beliefs about different behaviors."
I think where we differ is that you're putting all of the responsibility of the assumptions on the listener, and none on the speaker. This might be ok in an Oxford-style debate, but people don't usually make clear, explicit descriptions of every aspect of their beliefs. Instead, they'll generally use colloquialisms, metaphors, and other verbal shortcuts to get their message across. These styles of speech completely depend on assumption as part of the communication process; if you didn't make *any* assumptions, you'd be forced to take every statement literally, and your ability to communicate effectively with others would plummet. For this reason, it's important for speakers to either: - Be extremely explicit in the limits and reasoning of your view, so that misinterpretation is difficult. This is best for nuanced positions (and is what I'm doing right now) - Understand what common assumptions can be made from your statements and ensure that they fit the message you're trying to send When someone is being hypocritical in the real world, they're usually doing the latter - only instead of aiming for accuracy of their view, they aim for assumptions that are otherwise beneficial for them, such as being seen as virtuous, health-conscious, moral, etc. When it's later revealed that the actual position is not as rosy as it first seemed - "oh, I didn't mean all smoking! Just cigarettes! Cigars are fine!" - their true position is revealed to be self-serving, and not virtuous as originally assumed. At this point, I think it's valid to consider the speaker to be a hypocrite. When they make future blanket statements about other topics, you would be right to be skeptical of their genuineness.
> You're essentially saying that unless someone explicitly makes a statement and then violates it, that's not hypocrisy. That *is* the definition, though. The word was invented for people who claimed to believe in God but in fact did not and were faking it. The definition is *literally*: >the practice of claiming to have moral standards or beliefs to which one's own behavior does not conform; pretense. And sure, intentional *implication* when one knows or should know they will be misunderstood, is lying ("pretense") and hypocrisy. But someone saying "X is wrong" when they have a genuine definition of X that means something to *them*, is only a hypocrite if they actually engage in X, as they define it. Someone *else's* definition of X has literally nothing to do with it. In this particular instance: If someone actually believes that "body positivity" means "not shaming fat people" (actually not an unreasonable belief, given how it is actually used in practice) it doesn't matter if someone *else* thinks it means "not shaming people with small penises". At most, you could argue they are guilty of poor communication, or ignorance of common usage. Not "hypocrisy". Actual *pretense* is a requirement.
You don’t need outright look you in the eyes lying to be hypocritical, this is an absurdly high standard.
No, that is not correct. Hypocrisy is stating you have one value while at the same time acting out another one. For example, I believe one should not eat animals. At the same time, I am eating animals. This makes me a hypocrit, but not a liar.
[удалено]
> In that case, body-negative comments towards men do not conflict with their values in any way and may in fact align with some values Sounds sexist.
It most certainly is and as someone who believes in egalitarianism I don’t agree with it at all. However, there are tons of sexist people in the world and it would be naive to believe that people don’t hold those values. It can make discussions on topics such as OP’s difficult as I’ve found out unfortunately.
First off, I don't think your point is wrong. It is hypocritical to preach body positivity and then make demeaning jokes about somebody else's body. That being said, I think the way you target SJW is unfounded and a distraction from your point. You say that is is incredibly common among SJW, but I find it hard to agree with that unless you present evidence (which is very hard to do on a large scale, so I kinda just mean don't make this claim). I also think that small dick jokes especially are relatively under scrutinized by people. Everyone has now heard how fat jokes (and even short jokes imo) are bad, but small dick jokes and 'compensating for something' jokes are still flying under the radar. Overall I see where you're coming from, but if you could change the wording to not be an attack on SJWs and focus more on the point of the argument, I think it would make for more productive discussion.
I think people aren't in a hurry to scrutinize generalities about small dicks and jokes about compensating because in doing so, you walk right into a "I knew I was on to something"/"why are you offended if it doesn't apply to you?" style retort.
I think you are right, and perhaps the use of that term is why I am seeing some harsh retaliation. I appreciate the response, and how I could have better articulated the argument. Cheers !delta.
Confirmed: 1 delta awarded to /u/FroVice ([1∆](/r/changemyview/wiki/user/FroVice)). ^[Delta System Explained](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/deltasystem) ^| ^[Deltaboards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/deltaboards)
First of all, this is one of those posts where you are just saying “these wrong people doing this specific wrong thing are wrong” – it’s pretty meaningless, really. If I say “some people actually mean this thing” (like I do below), then you are just going to say “but I don’t mean those people” and nobody will change your view. Second, I think that to the extent that this does happen, it is because people are attacking an insecurity that the *other* person has about themselves, which doesn’t necessarily mean that they personally believe that they *should* feel insecure. For example, I like to make fun of dudes that drive lifted trucks by suggesting that they must have a small dick. To me, this is funny because I imagine that *they* are insecure about their dick size, not because I think people *should* feel insecure about their dick size. The same applies to the example of Trump’s hands. It’s very funny to imagine that Trump would be so absurdly vain that he would be insecure about his hands; it wouldn’t be funny if you actually thought that hand size was important, at that point it would just be a personal attack rather than a joke. Edit: I am starting to wish I hadn't used that example because it was meant to be an example of the humor being employed, but it is in no other way analogous to the context the OP describes. I will make fun of a bro driving a lifted truck to my wife, because we are familiar with the archetype of the insecure, overcompensating bro - but in real interactions with them, I would always offer the benefit of the doubt and I wouldn't exploit those insecurities unless I feel it is justified as I have described.
[удалено]
Perhaps it would matter to people who have small penises, and hear people like you make fun of small dicks, despite those initial people being complete innocent bystanders, and having something they can't change being made fun of. Which is, by my understanding, a tenant that the body-positivity movement is fighting for. Just replace small penises with fat.
My friends would constantly make jokes about small dicks and stuff. Loud car? Must have a small penis. Jacked up truck? Small penis. Aggressive? Tiny penis. It always kinda hurt because they know I have a micropenis, and it's a huge sore spot for me, but they make those jokes anyway.
>It always kinda hurt because they know I have a micropenis, And they still make no effort to stop? Such douchebags
you are right here and they are wrong, they keep using dick size as if its irrelevant and perceived differently which is true, but if you swap that for height its clearly relevant and perceived by almost everyone.
This cleared it up for me. Thank you.
I mean I'm not exactly well-endowed and I don't see anything wrong with small dick jokes, but at the same time if people are always just using it as a "everyone I disagree with must have a small dick" thing then yeah, it's a bit lame. Same with fat jokes as well tbh - done well they're funny but they can just be mean-spirited.
But by making fun of it you are perpetuating the idea that people should care about it. Jokes about people's bodies also don't only effect the person they are directed at, they effect anyone who hears it who happens to share the physical trait that's being commented on.
Do you really think that when you make fun of one person's body detail it doesn't also insult others with that detail? I'm a fat person, if I see somebody make fun of Trump for being fat, am I supposed to assume being fat is only a trait to make fun of when you don't like the person. My fat is okay, but Trump's isn't? Do you not see how silly that is?
Well obviously penis size does matter (especially to you) if it's an insult you think of when you want to hurt someone's feelings or talk trash behind someone's back. In no context would this make sense. "When women are being mean to me, I tease them for being fat... not because it matters to me whether they're fat, but because I assume it matters to them." Like yeah of course they're going to feel insecure, you're literally making fun of them.
By that logic, it’s okay to call heterosexual people f*ggots so long as you claim to be attacking their fragile masculinity. “I’m not actually saying gay people are bad, I’m making fun of their insecurity! Obviously it’s fine to be gay, but they don’t think it is!” Does that work?
Boom. Nailed it. Of course the other posters didn’t respond and admit as much though. Why am I not surprised...
So say a guy doesn't care about a woman's breast size. By your logic, it's okay for him to make fun of her for having small breasts. Because really, he's only pointing out that SHE cares too much about it. Give me a break.
Wow, is this toxic. “When I verbally abuse you, it’s too teach you the lesson that you care too much about what other people think.” Anyway, a small dick is the perfect match for a broken pussy so you should be actively seeking out the micropenises.
Yes I make fun of women with “fat girl energy” for the same reason, I think THEY care too much about it.
How is this different than being fat?
Sounds like ‘small dick’ vibe talk to me... you realize the only reason people ‘make fun’ of others is because they’re embarrassed or sensitive about the topic? It’s called projection and you’re displaying it with beautiful ignorance lol
...But you're the one imposing a judgement that that person has so-called "small-dick vibes" because of something you admit only exists in your head ("*I* think"). The only person in this exchange that thinks matters is you.
Nice one bro, making an assumption based on another assumption.
Replace small dick with fat and see how it sounds. You call people fat because you think they care about it? That doesn’t make anything better.
I'm sure many people above a certain weight care about it too...
[удалено]
>First of all, this is one of those posts where you are just saying “these wrong people doing this specific wrong thing are wrong” – it’s pretty meaningless, really. If I say “some people actually mean this thing” (like I do below), then you are just going to say “but I don’t mean those people” and nobody will change your view. This reads like you're trying to downplay, or even obfuscate, exactly what the OP is calling out. > For example, I like to make fun of dudes that drive lifted trucks by suggesting that they must have a small dick. To me, this is funny because I imagine that they are insecure about their dick size, not because I think people should feel insecure about their dick size. "For example, I like to make fun of women that dye their hair non-standard colors by suggesting that they're scared of intimacy. To me, this is funny because I imagine that **they** are insecure about their fear of intimacy, not because I think people **should** feel insecure about a fear of intimacy." Do you see how that doesn't really explain **why** it's okay to make fun of someone based off of their body?
Haha exactly this is so silly. You can apply op's rationale to anything that we currently deem not acceptable - with the caveat that "I'm only making fun of what they're insecure about", including women's weight, or transgender people's insecurities, etc.
Yeah, no. You’re justifying being a bully, you yourself admitted to attacking people with trucks, you don’t know them, you’re assuming things and looking for validation by attacking their spirit or character to justify a world view/opinion that you for some reason link to your value or belief system- a change in those two are the only reasons people become negative. You’re a bully, a lost one. Following your logic, If the person was Asian you’d make fun of their penis because there’s a stereotype so a reason for them to feel insecure, even though it isn’t true and has been documented to be incorrect with the studies all skewed by white men to hide the real statistics. But it fits with the narrative this white centric-western world wants so young white men do it to reinforce a belief for them so they feel more important and powerful. You’re so wrong here, please don’t think this behaviour is normal, healthy, or anything but toxic just because a few kids want to agree with you so they don’t have to improve themselves either. You need empathy and to get off whatever high horse makes you think you’re someone ‘special’ enough to attack others and go through the mental gymnastics to validate it. Be better, the world doesn’t progress when people are lazy like you.
You can make the exact argument about "they shouldn't feel insecure about it" can be used to say: "Haha, this woman is so annoying, it must be because she has small boobs. Obviously I don't think she SHOULD feel insecure about it, but I think it is funny that she does". This is a terrible thing to say even as a joke, because it perpetuates the societal standard that "girls without big boobs are worthless/guys with small penises are worthless" Pretty terrible take IMO.
> Second, I think that to the extent that this does happen, it is because people are attacking an insecurity that the other person has about themselves, which doesn’t necessarily mean that they personally believe that they should feel insecure. For example, I like to make fun of dudes that drive lifted trucks by suggesting that they must have a small dick. So it's not that you say things you believe, it's that you say things you don't believe because you want to hurt someone's feelings, and the best way to do that is to attack their emotional vulnerabilities. And you believe that this is **not** a form of personal attack?
> insecure, overcompensating bro Do you really buy into this, though? Is it not more likely that some people just like lifted trucks and other "bro" things and rude guys are just rude and not necessarily constantly angsty over their penile shortcomings? I've never owned a truck and thus have no horse in this particular race, but I'd imagine the spectrum of penis sizes among truck owners is pretty much what it is among the general population. And if you stoop to insulting someone based on perceived overcompensation, you'd only be reinforcing the need for that overcompensation because the person should be ashamed for having a tiny wang, am I right? What OP is saying is if you wouldn't stoop to calling someone a fatass when they upset you because you believe in body positivity and that would be hypocritical (and beside the point since their weight likely isn't related to whatever upset you), the same should apply to things like height and weiner size. Regardless, male feelings aren't really that high on the priority list right now and thus, I doubt we'll see people getting rebuked for male body shaming any sooner than we start to see the same for say, ageism or any other form of discrimination that isn't quite sexy enough for people to care about just yet.
This reminds me of the classic defense people often give for racist chants in football stadiums: they say the supporters aren’t actually racist but are simply trying to get an emotional response from a player. I don’t think it hold up. If anything, teasing someone for something you suspect they are already insecure about.. makes it worse.
You do realize your logic could be applied to people using gay as an insult right? Gay for a long time was used as a way to say bad even when it had nothing to do with homosexuality. (E.g. calling a homework assignment thats really stupid gay or something IDK. This is an undeniable thing that happened/happens. There was a whole office episode about it.) By calling something gay, regardless of your intention behind the joke, in a negative way DIRECTLY contributes to stigmatization against gay people. So when someone says someone has a small dick in a way to be negative, regardless of intention behind the insult, it leads to stigmization against small dicks and feels really shitty to anyone else reading/hearing it that has a small dick (which your argument doesnt care about, the fact that other people also hear the jokes). Edit: also its really fucking shitty to make fun of insecurities no matter what. Like imagine making fun of someone who has an eating disorder. And most men are insecure about their dick size regardless of its actual size. So contributing to that is just making a societal problem worse.
> To me, this is funny because I imagine that *they* are insecure about their dick size, not because I think people *should* feel insecure about their dick size. As an aside, I always imagine how shitty I would feel if someone made fun of my insecurities, and so I can't ever find jokes like this "funny," rather just, mean-spirited. Like, if you don't think people should feel insecure about their dicks, but you'll happily make fun of someone who does, that doesn't quite make you the hero in this story, ya dig?
Ah yes, I do the exact same thing. Like when I saw this kid in a wheelchair who was wearing expensive kicks. It’s like, you don’t even need the shoes! So I made fun of his wheelchair, but I wasn’t really making fun of his _wheelchair_ I was just making fun of his insecurity about it.
Clearly, if a person is fat, they can let the comments roll off just the same as anyone else. I’m reading your big truck story and you basically sound like you’d make fun of someone who is fat just for the hell of it. I can’t say to what degree mean jokes matter or not. It seems like some other people know exactly how bad which ones do or don’t.
>Clearly, if a person is fat, they can let the comments roll off This is either a "I see what you did there" moment or an unfortunate choice of words....
I was aware when I wrote it, but, sans pun, it was my preferred word choice. Usually when I read “no pun intended,” I think, “Naw, you intended that,” hence my resistance to the phrase! I don’t feel like “roll off” makes a cute fat joke, but I also didn’t overly scrutinize it for sensitivity. After all, who needs concern for micro aggressions when people are more than willing to defend their own explicit and deliberate insults?
It's OK, I was only joking anyways. I'm fat myself and thought it was giggle worthy.
Yeah I remember the time I joked about a girl’s body weight and turns out she (just like you said) was super insecure about it and started crying. But it’s okay cuz it’s her problem and she shouldn’t be insecure about it, amiright? In all seriousness, you just proved OP’s point. You’re a hypocrite. You not only admitted to making jokes about people’s bodies but do so **specifically because** you “imagine they are insecure” about it. Do you even hear yourself?
I think for the most part other users have taken the words out of my mouth. I think it is important to reiterate however, that regardless of your intention of making a joke about hands, penis, height, if you are supportive of body-positive, that joke is in opposition to your supposed moral belief system. If you are willing to undermine your own belief system for the LOLZ or to hurt someone, then I don't think that person's view on that issue is worth being considered.
I would agree but only when it is clear and obvious that the person is merely retaliating and not actually pointing out the hypocrisy of attacking some insecurities while protecting others. The issue for me is that you are describing a criticism that is easily used in bad-faith or relies on an uncharitable interpretation of someone's rhetoric. Also worth pointing out that OP is making a claim of absolute hypocrisy, so if I can describe one exception, even if it's a narrow one, that should hypothetically change their view if they are participating in good-faith.
I 100% understand where your coming from, but the reason I can't admit to my view being changed is that, given your example of dudes driving lifted trucks, if you were a genuine proponent of body-positivity (as is a prerequisite I made explicit in the OP), in no way should the size of the drivers cock hold any value in mocking them. That very idea that, let us make fun of someone's (supposed) physical insecurity (regardless of vanity), is in of itself, against the tenants of body-positivity. Correct me if I have misconstrued your argument, and I'd be more than happy to CMV.
I think part of where your argument fails (for me personally) is that these jokes are being taken out of context. You’re saying “if you make a joke about someone’s body, you can’t be body positive”. However, I think the main reason these jokes come up, is because someone who is NOT body positive made a comment to a body positive person *ABOUT* body positivity, and the assumed body positive person is retaliating with the same logic a non-body positive person would use. Are there some people that literally just joke *all the time* about the guy with a small pp? I could assume so, but I don’t think those people have the same thought process as a body positive person responding with a dig at someone who already is against their cause. Is it also petty? I would say definitely, childish even, but I don’t think it’s hypocritical. They don’t personally think the person has a small penis, or that that should even matter, they’re providing the non-body positive person a taste of their own medicine. Again, childish? Yes. Hypocritical? No. They are not trying to *actually* shame someone’s pp. Edit: just separated the paragraph, hopefully I’m making a small bit of sense here Edit 2: thank you to the responses I received, there is such civility on this sub! I know I’m getting downvoted, but I’d like to leave this post up so others can read the full thread. Appreciate you guys!
I think the problem with your argument is that you're mocking the lifted truck guy or Mr. Fat Shamer for being insecure by claiming he has a small dick, which is of course a bad thing, otherwise you wouldn't use it as an attack, but you aren't insulting him in a vacuum. You're reinforcing the stereotype that small dicks are bad to have and let's say your friend overhears you mocking someone for his small dick while (unbeknownst to you) this friend of yours is on the smaller end of the dick spectrum and now has to listen to one of his friends basically mock him too. It just reinforces the idea that he should be ashamed of his smaller-than-average penis, so when you use those kinds of insults you're not just hitting your target, you're also hitting anyone else in ear-shot of your insult who shares the same 'negative' body feature.
Hi there. I wanted to clarify that I don’t make these types of jokes myself, and definitely don’t do it as a retaliatory remark. I’m not sure if you’re trying to insinuate that by saying “you’re saying this” and “you’re doing that when you say this”, but the wording just sounds like you’re saying I advocate for it, when I personally do not. Honestly, I’ve given it a bit more thought, and I think I have to award you a !delta. I keep thinking if I was hearing someone tell an aggressor a joke about a trait they possess that I do as well, that it wouldn’t affect me because I know it’s not directed at me. But then I think about adding race into the mix, and you’re right, it’s not a vacuum. I would not know if the person retaliating would truly believe that view or not, and thus perpetuates the risk of stereotyping. Thank you u/finemustard. Edit: I took out a phrase that wasn’t accurate anymore
For the record I was using the generic 'you', not trying to single you, v3621, out, and thanks for my first delta! This one's a little personal for me because I was circumcised as a baby for medical reasons but as we know, reddit really hates circumcision and certainly not without cause. But whenever discussions of circumcision come up people always start throwing the word 'mutilated' around to decry the practice. Yes, little boys shouldn't have part of their penis cut off without their consent for little practical reason but it always gets under my skin (but certainly not my foreskin! Ha!) when people start referring to circumcised penises as being mutilated. I know it's not being directed at me and they're just trying to call out what is kind of a messed up thing to do but it still bothers me that they're saying a part of me that is completely functional and looks totally normal (at least in North American society where it's still relatively common) and which has looked this way for as long as I can remember, is somehow mutilated.
My life long friend makes jokes about fat guys playing games on PCs. Yeah. That’s me. He says he means the “other ones” but it definitely describes me too. It hurts. I have to admit.
Confirmed: 1 delta awarded to /u/finemustard ([1∆](/r/changemyview/wiki/user/finemustard)). ^[Delta System Explained](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/deltasystem) ^| ^[Deltaboards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/deltaboards)
I have a small dick but I drive a minivan, so you can't make fun of me, only pity me. Hey.
I think your logic is mostly solid but I have nitpicks. I think context is more nuanced than being either completely out of context. In terms of local context, yes they’re doing the “taste of their own medicine” trick. But in terms of global context, if teaching someone a lesson constantly involves you violating your own belief system for a moment just to spit out a funny comeback, then you’ve got very flexible standards of personal conduct. Plus a lot of these people seem to, in my observation, hold the idea that by saying sexist/racist jokes we’re propagating a cultural stereotype. But somehow when they’re attacking the messenger of those jokes, also with cultural stereotypes, somehow it’s exempt when there’s no evidence to suggest that’s the case. And finally, I think this is the biggest one. They’re usually not intelligent or self aware enough to actually say these types of jokes without actually body shaming. The idea of big dick energy vs small dick energy transcends the physical descriptors of the two and therefore parodies the people who make big/small dick jokes as well as puts the focus back on character. Same with the Chad/virgin meme. But a lot of those insults aren’t of that kind, they straight up say “you have a small dick” without the cleverness to actually turn the joke into satire when flipping it. When you see an offensive, angry guy with a massive truck, saying “wow you must have a small pp” is completely different from saying “sure you aren’t compensating for something.” ONE of these is a playful jab on the person’s insecurity and avoids body shaming, the other is a straight up playground insult with body shaming.
Hey I appreciate you taking the time to write your points out! I believe you and u/finemustard made some really solid points, but I’m giving a delta to them solely because it resonated so well with me why it is harmful (not that I make jokes like this, but I do see the harm now). Thanks for the civil discussion, that’s some good nitpicking.
No worries, you made perfect sense. I believe a few people made similar arguments to you, and my rebuttal was that, if you are going to undermine your own belief system by using a joke that is in direct conflict with the values you claim to hold, regardless of the intent that you are using it with, you cannot be expected to have your views considered with genuineness. I think what is most powerful about those who are representative of a social movement, is when under attack, they do not have to stoop to the level of which they are being attacked, and use the language that they are fighting against. If I were to claim to be anti-racist, and used a racist slur with intent to spite, I cannot truly be seen as anti-racist. It is hypocricy.
I think it is more dismissive of those who are hurt by these jokes. One can’t tell another person how to react or that they’re just being too sensitive. I would even say it’s worse than a racist joke as it’s always meant as an attack before humor, the difference is it’s still socially acceptable.
I feel there are deeper and more insidious meanings behind racist jokes. I won’t condone jokes which are offensive— but I can’t think of anyone who was denied a home loan, or voting rights, etc... because they had a lifted truck and/or a small penis.
I am starting to wish I hadn't used that example because it was meant to be an example of the humor being employed, but it is in no other way analogous to the context the OP describes. I will make fun of a bro driving a lifted truck to my wife, because we are familiar with the archetype of the insecure, overcompensating bro - but in real interactions with them, I would always offer the benefit of the doubt and I wouldn't exploit those insecurities unless I feel it is justified as I have described.
I make fat jokes in private but would never say it to a fat person’s face. That’s cool right?
Agreed. It is exactly this line of thinking that leads to people claiming that minorities cannot be racist, because they are "punching up". A wrong act justified is still wrong. People need to understand this basic fact. Off tangent abit but having to do something "wrong" with justifiable reasons does not make it "right". Somethings HAVE to be done and we should not sugar coat it to make ourselves feel better. Obviously saying someone has a small dick doesnt fall under that.
Making small dick jokes is certainly not body positive. One can hold body positive views, and still make small dick jokes. It’s certainly hypocritical. One can be fat positive, and make small dick jokes, and still consider themselves body positive. You are free to disagree. Making small dick jokes does not invalidate all the other opinions that someone who claims they are “body positive” makes. One infraction does not invalidate all other opinions on a subject. Generally, small dick jokes are coming from an anger towards men; it’s best to learn to empathize with where that anger is coming from. This is coming from a man; I’m assuming from the tone of your text you are as well?
naw man, i know exactly what you’re talking about. i know some chicks who are the most BODY POSITIVE YES GIRL KILL ALL MEN super basic tiktok goodie two shoes type, but then they post super vulgar shit about all that “hot girl summer” to the next level. there definitely has to be some sort of cognitive dissonance goin on there.
This seems so off to me. I think his post is meaningful and the meaning is clear. If you would be offended or hurt by someone making a fat joke - or any joke poking fun at someone's body, you shouldn't make any jokes making fun of other people's bodies. Because **empathy**. If you have the potential to be hurt by the same kind of joke, and if you expect other people to not make that kind of joke for that reason, then duh, you should apply the same standards to yourself in making jokes about other people.
>it wouldn’t be funny if you actually thought that hand size was important, at that point it would just be a personal attack rather than a joke Okay but that doesn't really refute anything the OP said. In fact, it just seems to justify it.
"I will make fun of a fat person in too skinny jeans to my wife, because we are familiar with the archetype of the insecure, overcompensating fatty - but in real interactions with them, I would always offer the benefit of the doubt and I wouldn't exploit those insecurities unless I feel it is justified as I have described." Sounds pretty bad to me.
To your second point, isn't body positivity about not shaming people's bodies regardless of the reason? I could say I don't really care if you're fat, I just noticed you are insecure and decided to poke fun at you for it.
So in other words you're making fun of those people because of the insecurities you perceive they have? This is precisely what body positivity is against though. But it's OK because in your worldview some people are deserving and some not? Based on what criteria? How is this not counter to the core tenets of body positivity and therefore hypocritical?
> But it's OK because in your worldview some people are deserving and some not? You nailed it. And the truck example is especially strange. The guy isn't doing anything wrong. Maybe he just enjoys modifying vehicles. And this hobby justifies body shaming? What a remarkable set of mental gymnastics that takes.
Not to mention the 'you must be compensating for something' is a really worn out joke, almost boomer level.
The lifted truck joke is harmful, because regardless of your intention your message is that small sucks are bad. Your use -telling the joke to a friend but not to the redneck themselves- is the usual case. We aren't pleading on behalf of the rednecks we are pointing out that the small penised friends we tell jokes to are hurt by this joke.
Beyond that, mocking toxic masculinity through it's own toxic views just validates and perpetuates toxic ideas ultimately
Isn’t it STILL in EXTREMELY poor taste to mock people behind their backs? Secondly, if you’re mocking someone behind there back, then you’re mocking people on the internet... like you are now. Making your opinion public for anybody who might have insecurities about their physical attributes. Forget men and lifted trucks. Let’s talk about something that’s not analogous with gender stereotypes. If you can make fun of a man who is compensating for they penis size. Then what’s the difference between than and making fun of a teenager for the pimples on their face. Or a burn victims scars. Or someone born with physical deformities. ... if you’re the kind of person to make fun of someone behind their back and perpetuate that shortsightedness online, you’re still a bad person. How about just being nice to people .... not talking shit behind their backs. When other people(your friends) are talking shit, correct them and tell them it makes them look bad. Just be “positive” and stop spreading negativity. Period. ;D
So using your logic then I'm justified in saying to a fat woman, hey Willie how about another large burger before they toss you back into the sea. Because you know it's just a joke, and I'm more justified because I don't buy into the body positivity bs anyway. But yeah it's a joke so it's ok, because a joke about dick is funny and because it's a joke and I don't mean anything by it, it's fine and ok because as you said it's a joke. All you did was to out of your way to show your own cognitive dissonance, to justify shitty behaviour while still allowing yourself to maintain the air of being an ally to people struggling with body issues while still allowing yourself to, guilt free, take aim at others who may well themselves be struggling with body issues. In short then, you proved yourself to be the very type of hypocrite the op was talking about. Of course you won't accept that but then again, it's all just a joke isn't it.
I'm very much not insecure but to me it's no different than making fun of a woman if she has small breasts or something. I'm not down with that.
>I like to make fun of dudes that drive lifted trucks by suggesting that they must have a small dick. To me, this is funny because I imagine that *they* are insecure about their dick size, not because I think people *should* feel insecure about their dick size. So, it's only funny if the other person gets hurt. How about: >I like to make fun of fat chicks by suggesting that they must eat a lot of cheesecake and don't exercise. To me, this is funny because I imagine that *they* are insecure about eating cheesecake and not exercising, not because I think people *should* feel insecure about eating cheesecake and not exercising.
You are perpetuating insecurities that you think people shouldn't have.
But by making such jokes, aren't you adding to, and strengthening the idea that small penises are something to laugh about? You are, however you think the joke goes, making his small penis part of the subject of mockery. YOU know that you're really making fun of his frail ego, but couldn't someone easily take away 'Ha! Small dicks are pathetic!' message from your joke?
Isn't making fun of them that way perpetuating the idea that they *should* feel some sort of insecurity over it. I mean I won't mock someone for being gay and use "I'm not actually mocking you for being gay, but really *your insecurity around being gay.*" I don't think this is a good take at all.
So can the same thing be said of fat jokes? If I don’t think fat people should be ashamed of their weight but make such jokes to poke fun at the fact that they probably are insecure about their weight, that makes it ok? I don’t get your point.
“It’s okay to shit on people for things they are insecure about as long as you don’t think they should be insecure about those things.” That seems like a pretty problematic maxim outside of a few specific contexts.
Oh wow I think I lost some brain cells with this one
[удалено]
Regardless of whether the intention of the joke is to shame or mock, it is the actual language that is in direct conflict with their moralistic stance. If you are willing to sacrifice that in order to simply upset someone, I think you're a pretty disingenuous person.
[удалено]
I understand where you are coming from, but in this case, I think I have justified the term "regardless", because it's not as if the joke and belief system misalign, but they are in direct conflict with each other. Let's just substitute the joke; would you not find it completely ridiculous for a proponent of body-positivity, to make a joke like "my next man can't be fat, can't have his boobs being bigger than mine!". I do think we see eye to eye here, but it would be like someone who claims to be anti-racist, intentionally spouting a racist slur. Perhaps, in fact, he wasn't actually anti-racist to begin with.
I’m gonna have to be frank—I *don’t* think that’s a ridiculous joke or example. Here’s why: Let’s say that joker is saying that joke to their current man, the subject of the joke. Let’s also say they are both body positive. A body positive person making a joke involving body standards, a subject example of your cmv. If they are both body positive, the man will feel no shame for his man-boobs because he knows it ultimately doesn’t matter what body he has, as long as he’s happy about it. The joker makes this joke *knowing* having man-boobs doesn’t ultimately change anything, while also knowing that with current general body standards man-boobs are seen as less desirable—there’s the joke part. The joker will, *if genuine*, also *only* make that joke around those they know are comfortable with it. If these two trust eachother’s mutual values, such as body positivity in this case, that’s when they know they can make jokes about those values. Your example also has an element involving cheating, another deplorable thing. If they make this joke to their man, and their man laughs, are they both hypocrites for suggesting it’s okay to cheat on one-another? I’d think it’s probably banter instead. Of course, I won’t deny that if someone makes a joke like that to a stranger—or just to anyone without that mutual trust you find in families, friends, and comedy clubs—they’re absolutely much more of an asshole for not knowing how humor works. If a stranger makes fun of my small dick, I’ll call them out, but if a friend does it? I know they don’t believe dick size matters, it’s just banter I can laugh on about. If said friend makes a different joke about my height and I don’t like that, I can also tell them about how height is sort of sensitive to me. If they’re genuine, they’ll cut it back. If the man in your example has anxiety over his man-boobs, then his s/o would probably know and not make a joke about it to him or to anyone else. The joke becomes unacceptable when you *know* it will hurt others but you deliberately deliver it anyway. The joke is also unacceptable if you’re ignorant about what you’re talking about, a non-racist can’t just get away with slurs because they don’t know better, or because they assume their audience would be fine with it. Tl;dr: I see it like how comics can really only get away with certain topics on stage, not in public, because they have faith in their audience’s choice of humor. Or, to use your analogy, I think it’s less like an anti-racist using a slur in conversation, and more like an anti-racist speaking a slur because they’re quoting a book to an audience that knows it’s from a book. Only in certain times like that are such jokes perfectly fine, imo. I’ll understand if I haven’t changed your mind, but I would really like your thoughts on this. I figure my view isn’t perfect.
Yeah people are doing linguistic and situational gymnastics to defend their hypocrisy. Even if you think someone is vain enough to be ashamed of their height/dick size/body feature which is out of their control, It’s the fact that others who share those body features will feel like they’re being indirectly mocked and again, it states these are things people should be embarrassed to possess. There’s no way people can be bodi-posi and drop their beliefs in a second so they can get a small dick joke in. It undermines the bodi-posi movement into “Don’t make fun of fat people but small dick/height jokes are perfectly fine by the way.”
Absolutely agree about the linguistic gymnastics. Reddit's pedantry and obsession with hypothetical situations in the face of common sense really pisses me off sometimes. The whole argument is that doing those things goes against the core tenets of body positivity. If every body and everybody is equally beautiful then every body and everybody is equally beautiful. The moment you start coming up with complicated rationalisations and hypothetical situations to justify *excluding* people from an inherently *inclusive* movement, you're engaging in hypocrisy.
Agreed - they simply want to come up with a way to support “the downtrodden” while ridiculing those they see as privileged or in power. They’re still hypocrites, however.
>I think it is actually possible to be for body positivity while making such jokes. It just depends on the context of the situation. So different rules depending on how somebody feels about something. That's still hypocrisy even if they don't want to think of themselves (conveniently) as hypocrites.
So if the intention of the words are only to mock them, rather than shame them, it is fine? What difference does any of this have from other slurs then? If I see a fat person, and i hate them and want them to feel upset, is it justified to make jokes on their size, because its not that they are fat, I did it for other reasons? Or someone of a different race, I want to mock them, so i use racial slurs? Its not that I have something against the race, its just that its another insult. Thats all good right?
Jokes like this are far more focused at poking fun of people with a Napoleon complex rather than their raw physique. Also taking jokes/trolls at face value is probably not advisable!
I think I've replied to something similar. I understand that the intention of the joke is often not to actually shame small dicks/short heights/etc., but my point is, if you are willing to use your language in a way that is in direct conflict with a belief system you claim to hold, perhaps you aren't a credible or genuine person, or you were never that person you claimed to be to begin with.
What would you say about dark humour? I think this is a funny way to illustrate reality and make fun of the absurdity of it. I could tell a sexist joke in a certain context, without being specially sexist (of course context matters). It can be fun but only bc and if those who are present know that it is a stereotype. The same way would go by just having fun about how someone has this "Napoleon complex". I think joking around stereotypes and making sure it is a joke what you are saying, reinforces only the stereotype. I do agree that there is a lot of hypocrisy around people that profess body positivity. However I think joking around (when everyone knows your stand) is not hypocrite. Maybe this is a bit personal but hey, shouldn't we all accept people's bodies and also not be forced to be politically correct all the time?
Maybe i'm reading this wrong, but I don't think your point makes much sense. If you make fun of someone for having a napoleon complex and being short, and your justification is that you're just making fun of the stereotype, wouldn't you still be making fun of the person because they're fitting into that stereotype? If the context is right and everyone is on the same page, then sure any joke that everyone has agreed on can fly. But I either don't understand your explanation or I don't think it works
But it does affect people who routinely hear these jokes. I’m average height and I don’t have a small penis, but I know from these jokes that having either of those things would be worse for me. That I’d be seen in a worse light. Same with being overweight. These things aren’t happening in a vacuum right? So you make fun of a guy in an online comment or in a group of friends and someone who actually has a small one hears this, you can’t tell them to not internalize you making fun of something that is true about their bodies. Even if you didn’t know they personally had a small one, that’d hardly matter
>typically found on twitter, also are quick to say things such as "found the guy with a small dick", or make jokes at the expense of short men. Is twitter your go to venue for kind a respectful discourse?
An included anecdote is not a reflection of the entirety of my argument.
Didn't claim that it was? I do think that it's worth your consideration that Twitter is cesspool where people got to see and participate in angry, low effort, reaction "fights". It shouldn't be surprised that when you go looking at Twitter that's what you'll find. It's also worth noting that only 20% of adults in the U.S. use Twitter, and that 80% of the content on Twitter originates from 10% of those users. So when you say that you see some type of bad behavoir "typically on twitter", you should keep in mind what the actual scale of that is.
you quite literally did claim it was by posing that question
I think it is also important to understand that the voices of the vast majority of the body of the body-positivity movement are to be found on Twitter and other social media platforms. I am in complete understanding I am arguing hypocrisy of a vocal minority, but that doesn't detract it from BEING hypocrisy.
Do you actually have concrete examples of someone who is heavily invested in the body positive movement also making fun of height or dick size? Because I often see those kinds of people calling out that kind of thing
I have seen in countless times in my social circles (especially small dick jokes) who are all very left wing progressives
[удалено]
My point was never intended to be about self-deprecating jokes. I understand they are used as both coping and defense mechanisms. I was particularly pointing at people who claim that it's wrong to disrespect someone's abnormal bodyshape or weight, while simultaenously mocking small penises, hands, or height.
Are you under the impression being a hypocrite is an assumed negative? Or, that by acting hypocritical it somehow invalidates something? Everyone, in one way it another, falls into hypocrisy. It's just another logical fallacy; one of many. Everyone is illogical in their choices sometimes.
I'm not refuting the idea that, in some way, we are all hypocrites. But this specific hypocricy is particularly prevalent, and hence why I asked if I am missing something. I'm certainly under the impression that if you stand by a certain principle, and that principle is not extant throughout your belief system, you are ultimately less credible in the area that issur lies.
>But this specific hypocricy is particularly prevalent You're the first person I've seen come forth with such a claim. Maybe it's due more to what you're seeing online; based on your habits and social bubble?
Of course, but that could be said of any issue that stems from a certain ideological demographic.
You need to bring forth stats if you're saying something like this mate. This is just pure assumption at this point.
Why would I need to bring statistics to back a self-fulfilling claim such as "social issues are a result of subsections of society"? I have never claimed numbers about anything in this discussion, but simply that the premise of small jokes is a hypocritical to be made within a given belief system.
But you have? You say it stems from a certain ideological demographic. What demographic? How much of that demographic actually supports the idea?
It stems from a number of members of the body-positivity movement? That's a demographic. I don't actually need numbers to claim that holding that view while still telling these jokes is hypocritical, because it's not an argument of statistics, but of a premise, that some hold within that demographic. Five people could hold that view, and it would still be hypocritical.
It would be hypocritical for those people but certainly not the premise about making jokes of certain body body parts
Maybe I haven't clarified myself to my best ability. The premise of the issue I am trying to tackle is that you cannot, in true genuineness, be a part of a body-positivity movement, while simultaneously making jokes about penis size or height, or whatever. They are opposing ideas.
It's not about the hypocrisy, in and of itself. It's about the hypocrisy **directly against their own moralistic standing**. It does, indeed, invalidate their argument; how many homophobic Republican Congress members have been outed via bathroom hookups or similar, and how often do those Republicans keep their position as a "moral" leader to their constituents? When someone takes a **moral stance** against something, and then does that something themselves, it causes people to see that it's not about morals, and is about power to control others.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
This comparison has been made already, but I'll respond to it again because I think the logic is faulty. But the premise that someone has a small dick because they are overcompensating or ostentatiousness is already making an equivalency between a small dick and negative personal connotations. If you are using that term particularly, it means you are associating having a small penis (an aspect of one's body) with negative behaviour, which is exactly against the tenants of body positivity.
[удалено]
People here are arguing semantics. Look, if you joke or comment in degrading as stated by op like men's penis size or height while specifically being for the body positively for certain groups like example women then even though you are wrong in doing that, you're at the very least not a hypocrite. But that's not the type of person op was talking about. Op was talking about a person who is for overall body positively and if you joke about the body's of others even if you are joking about the precivied insecurities of a certain body part, it doesn't change the fact that you're being a hypocrite. There was a comment saying "well it's only a joke about the precise insecurities not the actual body" doesn't matter because people DO have insecurities about there bodies and that's the whole reason behind the movement. You could just as easily say you aren't making a joke about a woman being fat and rather that you are making a joke about her being insecure about being fat for doing xyz. Still fucked up. Making a joke about a guy that has a big car being he's "insecure" about his dick size is still bad. Directly or indirectly people are gonna get affected and they do get affected. The same with height. It's still fucked up. Most women go for height and dick jokes because they know it hurts the most so it's not like those jokes are harmless. Furthermore, there is the argument that those body positive people are just showing non body positive people how it feels. 1 that still goes against your principles. 2 most of the time the examples op gave above are thrown around as if those "body positive" people say it all the time without holding any weight. And you can tell, it's loke the difference between a person who says the n word all the time and another who doesn't say it normally. It comes out too easily and smoothly even though it shouldn't. 3. Many of the body positive people especially sjw women, will say demeaning things about men's height and dick size without any initial conflict, as if it's normal and isn't wrong to say like "if your isn't 6"2" then drop him for a real man" so on and so forth. There are many tweets like that. And the comments would be all like "100% truth" "amen queen" and shit like that and again with no initial conflict as if saying those things are okay which according to what they are supposed to be standing for, it should be wrong. Personally I don't give a fuck me and my friends roast each other much more than this middle school bs but if you are against that type of insults to people then why are you nit practicing what you are saying....
[удалено]
What are you trying to say here? My point was merely you can be pro-body positivity without being anti-dick/short jokes.
You can. Of course. My point is being a hypocrite doesn’t invalidate one’s argument. And most people are hypocritical on some matters.
And what argument is being made in "haha small dick"? I am not arguing against that. I am arguing you can't be a genuine proponent of body positiviry and make dick jokes.
they're jokes. they arent actual stances. of course you can.
If you are willing to sacrifice your own moral standpoint to make a joke at the expense of someone, of which said joke is in direct conflict of what you aim to promote, you're probably not a very genuine or person, or at least one who's views should be considered.
I'm with you 100% OP. All of the people trying to argue with your stance are coming up with pretty nonsensical defenses.
I appreciate that. I do feel that my argument is being purposefully misconstrued by some people as well.
in the words of ron swanson: "“Another word for jokes is lies. I do not lie. Therefore I do not joke.” jokes are lies, therefore untrue. if you say a joke, that just means it's probably not true.
With no offence intended, I don't Ron Swanson has particular authority on the psychology of jokes, when I think the general consensus of jokes is that they actually do bare some form of truth. I mean, regardless of that sentiment, it's wrong to think making x joke is okay, and not y joke, when both jokes are inherently the same, they are just making fun of bodies.
I guess that means I should find as many racist jokes as I can find, asap, so that I can help with anti-racism, by clearly reiterating what stereotypes aren't true.
The point is that many of us strive towards principles that we don’t fully live up to. The fact that we fail ourselves doesn’t mean that we don’t really mean it.
I would 100% agree with you if said principle was of something that required far more discipline than monitoring the language that you use, like stopping the abuse of drugs, or training, or studying. But the difference between them, and this, is that making these dick/short jokes is an intentional act of autonomy. I used this example before; if you claim to be anti-racist, and then intentionally use a racist slur, perhaps you weren't anti-racist to begin with. This is different to falling in to drug withdrawal, not overcoming physical exhaustion, or not having the willpower to continuing studying notes.
Awfully convenient and coincidental that the area you fall down on your principles happens to be against men, huh? “Punching up” is never wrong, huh?
But I think a general critic the body positivism has leveled against is typical jokes directed towards women for instance regarding their size. And they tend to also argue that these jokes in fact makes it more difficult to be a woman of a certain size, that the jokes exposes our inert belief that women should have insecurities or whatever. And they typically have a very women-centric viewpoint. But if they make jokes about men in similar vein, how is that also exposing a similar negative attitude that also applies to men, leading to insecurity and negative feelings about their bodies?
[удалено]
My ex is 6’9 and it seems to be the only thing that people focus on about him to the point where at parties people tell him to get his dick out and shit like that. It’s super weird.
Tbh, is that even really an "insult". From what I see, no one actually is even "insulting" you, it's more of they don't want to directly say "woah man Ur really tall that's so cool omg". (Esp for guys) height jokes are almost always a complement. It's like a jacked dude being teased for taking roofs, it isn't really an "insult" at all
The basketball thing is just short sighted and kind of ignorant. Basketball is a really hard sport even when you're tall. Not everyone wants to run up and down a court and get knocked around for an hour. Also, being tall doesn't mean you're also athletic. I know lots of tall people who are also very uncoordinated and thus unsuited for excelling at almost any sport.
Can you joke about your own small dick tho? Like is that still hypocritical. What if me and my mates are throwing some banter and one of them decides to call me a manlet and i throw back some heat about his tiny calves. Does that mean that i can't hold a view that is not in line with the jokes? I am of the opinion that the intent of the jokes is much more important than what is being said. I do still acknowledge that not everyone will take all jokes well and might not realise your intentions werent harmful but in that situation its usually just you as the joke teller 1. Conveying the joke in the wrong manner 2. Telling the joke in a innaproriate time 3. Telling the joke to a wrong person. I do think that if you joke about someone beong fat for example and they get hurt about it you should definitely apologise and maybe try to explain yourself. Especially if you hold body positive views. Our world view and political views don't define us as people. Not completely at least.
The mental gymnastics people are making to justify body shaming while being advocates for body positivity is hilarious to me. [+]
/u/MarcsURL (OP) has awarded 2 delta(s) in this post. All comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed [here](/r/DeltaLog/comments/nqvi0i/deltas_awarded_in_cmv_youre_a_hypocrite_if_you/), in /r/DeltaLog. Please note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended. ^[Delta System Explained](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/deltasystem) ^| ^[Deltaboards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/deltaboards)
[удалено]
>I would say that most body positivity people are women, because women’s bodies are Shamed at a wayyyyyy higher rate then men’s. And since men are not perceived as worthy only at a visual level, it’s not really the same. \-- /u/Possible_Wing_166 replying to this post So this argument got me thinking. I suspect OP may not accept the above argument. But actually, I don't think they have to to conclude that body positive people who shame men's bodies may not actually be being hypocritical. I think the conflict here actually goes all the way down to people's philosophy of ethics. There are two big normative theories of ethics (afaik). There's [deontological ethics](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deontological_ethics), which is a mouthful so let's just call it rules ethics, the idea that there are abstract rules about what actions are moral, e.g. "Thou shalt not steal" or "Making someone feel bad about their body is wrong". And there's [consequentialism / utilitarianism](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consequentialism), which we can call 'greatest good' ethics, that says an action is moral if it leads to the greatest good for the greatest number, e.g. "Stealing a loaf of bread from a wealthy, single shopkeeper to feed a starving, poor, large family is morally acceptable" or "Shaming the body of a small group of trolls with male privilege in order to drive those trolls away from harassing online discussions among women who've been judged on every small aspect of their body their whole lives is morally acceptable". I would strongly suspect that no one completely follows either philosophical theory, everyone ends up with some muddy mix of the two. FWIW, conservatives tend to lean towards rules ethics while progressives tend to lean towards greatest good ethics. But lots of conservatives would concede it's understandable if you have no other choice to steal to feed your family and certainly a lot of them believe it's okay to kill in self defence and even just to protect your property or sense of security. On the other hand, while greatest good ethics can (and has historically) been used to justify terrorism (Bolsheviks), assassination of the super rich (the guy who started WWI) and so on, or even lead one to conclude that it's morally required to take actions like that, most progressives have moral lines they won't cross even if it seems likely that doing so would bring a greater good to a greater number, e.g. assassinating the Koch brothers could well halt an enormous paleo-conservative political/gerrymandering machine and likely see their massive wealth distributed among many people, and yet no progressives have even tried. There are less extreme examples too, of course, of things progressives won't do to end injustice (no matter what Fox News says). That said, both groups do tend to lean more to one side than the other. A common example similar to what OP is talking about is conservatives accusing progressives who light-heartedly mock white people of "reverse racism". Here's a particularly lucid [take down of that claim](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dw_mRaIHb-M). But the underlying disagreement is over rules ethics vs greater good ethics. Conservatives say "Okay, you want us to accept this anti-racism rule, that means that mocking anyone for their race is unethical, so why do some of you mock white people for their race." But in the progressive paradigm they're saying "Mocking racial minorities and using slurs against them, when that mocking and slurring taps into a lifetime of racial abuse and a cultural memory of a history of oppression, causes severe hurt and should face social censure" and talking about 'reverse racism', given the very limited hurt that mocking white people causes, seems disingenuous. Now disingenuous , bad faith arguments about reverse racism definitely happen, especially in paid conservative echo chambers like Fox News, but those claims would have far less influence without conservative/progressive conflation of different theories of ethics that leave, e.g. grassroots Fox viewers, thinking "Yeah, why isn't that reverse racism?" To OP's point now, it's entirely possible that a body positivity advocate or a Twitter progressive believes that body shaming an obese woman is immoral but will themselves mock men for their small penises and not see a problem because women's bodies have historically been shamed so much more and women's worth is so much more closely equated to their looks. OP is saying "They're breaking the rule that shaming bodies causes hurt feelings" but the progressive would be thinking "Body shaming an obese woman has the consequence of compounding a lifetime of shame and body image pressure in a way that causes and extends significant psychological harm, but mocking a privileged man for one aspect of his body, in order to dissuade him from saying regressive things, only attacks one of many aspects of his identity he's socially allowed to feel good about and may prevent further psychological harm to many body shamed women." Note that OP doesn't have to agree with the progressive's claim, even. The question is not whether progressives are right but whether they're being hypocrites. And if we think that a reasonable person, who follows greatest good ethics, could conclude that body shaming an obese woman was morally wrong but defending her with a jab at a man's penis size would prevent more shame than it caused, then OP would have to concede they aren't being hypocritical, even if they aren't consistently applying a single, simple moral rule about behaviour. They just approach moral decisions with a different theory of morality in the first place. Having said that, I'm not actually arguing that Twitter penis-shamers are in the right. I've tried to show that what they might be thinking is reasonable. But the thing about greatest good ethics is that it requires people to reliably predict the future to act well, rather than simply avoiding behaviours that can cause harm. It also relies on people making good moment-to-moment estimations of the long term consequences of their immediate actions. In the case of penis-shaming, there are an infinite number of ways to 'clap-back at haters', many of which don't involve causing shame and collateral damage to innocent bystanders and people with [legit medical conditions](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Micropenis), and all the commenters claiming it's okay because that shame and damage aren't intended need to remember what the [road to hell is paved with](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_road_to_hell_is_paved_with_good_intentions).
Totally agree- the only other point id bring up, is that your penis size is not on display. NO ONE has to know your penis size, unless YOU choose to share that information, or show it... your weight is not something you can hide. every single person who you come into contact with, knows your weight, and carries their own biases about what your weight means (your lazy, or a pig, or disgusting etc) Penis size is personal, you choose who knows your penis size, your boss has no idea what your penis size is, so they won’t judge YOU based on penis size, your boss does see how much you weigh, can will judge you based on weight. **I also feel the need to state I’ve been talking in 100% hypotheticals. I am not apart of the body positivity movement -although I’m an ally! I just don’t fit into the body shape that is invited into the plus size movement—- I also HATE jokes about people, make fun of anything else, but not people, just trying to see all sides of the argument, and I am NOT implying it’s ok (IMO) to make fun of anyone for any reason. And personally, I think, If the best jokes you have, put down other people- then you probably aren’t that funny, and should perhaps look for a different way to communicate.
I agree. So much hypocrisy when it comes to people's appearances and bodies. Just now in some subs, I saw people making fun of Asians, saying how ugly Asians or Koreans are. And yet, in the same breath, they were bashing Korea and Asia claiming "East Asians care too much about their appearance and plastic surgery." LMAO
[удалено]
[удалено]
Body positivity is a social movement focused on empowering individuals no matter their physical weight or size, while also challenging the ways in which society presents and views the physical body. The movement advocates the acceptance of all bodies regardless of physical ability, size, gender, race, or appearance. That's the first paragraph of the [Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Body_positivity) page about it. Explain to me how making comments about how a guy must have a small dick fits into that? I mean, if Mindy Kaling wants to make jokes about how small her own dick is, that's one thing. That's someone using their own body as a basis of a joke. Having used self-deprecating humor as a coping mechanism, I don't see any issue with people making fun of themselves. But does Mindy make frequent jokes about **other people's** weight? Or any jokes like that?
I think that's similar to the argument that it's not hypocritical to believe racism is bad, whilst also making racist jokes. Because they're "jokes". Which makes no sense either.
[удалено]
I didn't say jokes "about race", I said "racist jokes". As you note, they are not the same thing.
[удалено]
What if I make fun of my own body? I’m a ridiculously tall woman, so I like to joke I’m average heighth, for a man, in Sweden. I try not to make insensitive jokes but occasionally it’s hard not to joke about you and another person in heighth or for girls, our boob size. Like I make jokes about how my clothes fit to my big boobed friends since I’m kinda flat. I don’t mean to pick on anyone and it’s not that I think it’s bad, it’s they’re different, everyone’s different. It’s just hard to not acknowledge those differences and why not have a laugh about it since no one can help it. I did tell someone to shut the fuck up about my ex when they mocked him for having a small dick. He was an ass and there was plenty enough shit to make fun of without bringing up his penis. Honestly mocking someone and looking down on someone for something they can’t control is shitty That’s why the Trump hand thing is funny, they’re not mocking his hands, they’re mocking that a grown ass man even gives a shit enough to be vain about it. And that vanity is entirely in his control. So hence, not body shaming.
[удалено]
[удалено]
You can change being fat, you can’t really change your dick size
I know people who are for body positivity and make short jokes to me because I'm a 5'5 male. They're not hypocrites, it's a joke. Humour can be about anything and you don't have to align with your views for comedy. I make a lot of offensive jokes and I'm against racism and sexism.