Humour airplanes and women

[Chris]

1) Airplanes usually kill you quickly - a woman takes her time.

2) Airplanes can be turned on by a flick of a switch.

3) Airplanes don't get mad if you do a 'touch and go.'

4) Airplanes don't object to a pre-flight inspection.

5) Airplanes come with manuals to explain their operation.

6) Airplanes have strict weight and balance limitations.

7) Airplanes can be flown any time of the month.

8 ) Airplanes don't come with in-laws.

9) Airplanes don't care about how many other airplanes you've flown before.

10) Airplanes and pilots both arrive at the same time .

11) Airplanes don't mind if you look at other airplanes.

12) Airplanes don't mind if you buy airplane magazines.

13) Airplanes expect to be tied down.

14) Airplanes don't comment on your piloting skills.

15) Airplanes don't whine unless something is really wrong.

16) However, when airplanes go quiet, just like women, it's usually not
good.

[Peter Duniho]

"Chris" > wrote in message
...
> [...]

And people wonder why so few women participate in aviation.

I'd like to see someone write a similar "joke" about "airplanes and men" and
post it here. Now *that* would be funny.

[Arketip]

Peter Duniho wrote:
> "Chris" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>[...]
>
>
> And people wonder why so few women participate in aviation.
>
> I'd like to see someone write a similar "joke" about "airplanes and men" and
> post it here. Now *that* would be funny.
>
>


Yes it feels so good to be politically correct.

Cool off a bit Peter it's only a joke.

[Peter Duniho]

"Arketip" > wrote in message
...
> Yes it feels so good to be politically correct.
>
> Cool off a bit Peter it's only a joke.

Ahh yes, the old "we can be as ignorant and insulting as we want, all we
have to do is accuse our detractors of being politically correct" tactic.

Well, screw you. People bitch and whine about how aviation is dying on the
vine, and yet the industry basically excludes 50% of the population, through
a variety of means but very much including this sort of sexism.

If and when pilots can author and laugh at a similar list written about
airplanes and men, then perhaps you can defend yourself against political
correctness. Until then, this is just one more example of the rampant
sexism that exists in the aviation industry.

You can take your accusation of "political correctness" and shove it up your
ass. As anyone who knows me knows, I am the last person one could
rightfully accuse of that. I'm more than happy to skewer anyone anytime,
regardless of race, gender, creed, etc.

But I'm also willing to call a spade a spade. The post wasn't even all that
funny, and it was very much representative of the prehistoric attitudes one
finds so prevalent in aviation. As long as idiots like you continue to
think there's some amusement to be found in this sort of thing, aviation
will always be one of those things that's all about the "boy's club".

So there.

[Jim]

"Peter Duniho" > wrote in message
> Well, screw you. People bitch and whine about how aviation is dying on
> the vine, and yet the industry basically excludes 50% of the population,
> through a variety of means but very much including this sort of sexism.

Ya know? You are stupid, Peter. Just plain stupid. Some things never
change.

While you're lightning up a little, let me let you in on a little secret,
Pete: Men and women are different. Women do some things better than men.
Men do some things better than women. Vive la difference.

--
Jim Fisher

[Matt Whiting]

Peter Duniho wrote:

> "Chris" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>[...]
>
>
> And people wonder why so few women participate in aviation.
>
> I'd like to see someone write a similar "joke" about "airplanes and men" and
> post it here. Now *that* would be funny.
>
>

Another joke flies over the head of the politically correct...

Matt

[Skywise]

"Peter Duniho" > wrote in
:

> "Arketip" > wrote in message
> ...
>> Yes it feels so good to be politically correct.
>>
>> Cool off a bit Peter it's only a joke.
>
> Ahh yes, the old "we can be as ignorant and insulting as we want, all we
> have to do is accuse our detractors of being politically correct"
> tactic.

Dude....is there nothing anyone can post in this group that you
don't find some way of argue about it? I swear, you are one of
the most argumentative people I've seen in my short stint in
this group.


> Well, screw you. People bitch and whine about how aviation is dying on
> the vine, and yet the industry basically excludes 50% of the population,
> through a variety of means but very much including this sort of sexism.
>
> If and when pilots can author and laugh at a similar list written about
> airplanes and men, then perhaps you can defend yourself against
> political correctness. Until then, this is just one more example of the
> rampant sexism that exists in the aviation industry.

FYI I have seen similar lists comparing both mena and women
to whatever field is common amongst whatever group the joke
is presented in. It's just a variation on a theme, like the
"how many (insert ethnic group here) does it take to (insert
common ordinary function here)?" joke.

Just so you know, women make the same derogatory sexist comments
about guys that we do about them. I used to work someplace where
I was one of the few guys. Believe me, I heard my share of "men
jokes". But you know what? I laughed, because quite honestly,
they were funny. If you can't laugh at yourself, then you've
got "issues". We all knew it was a joke, and no one was offended.


> You can take your accusation of "political correctness" and shove it up
> your ass. As anyone who knows me knows, I am the last person one could
> rightfully accuse of that. I'm more than happy to skewer anyone
> anytime, regardless of race, gender, creed, etc.

Ahhh....yes....I was right. See my first paragraph.


> But I'm also willing to call a spade a spade. The post wasn't even all
> that funny, and it was very much representative of the prehistoric
> attitudes one finds so prevalent in aviation. As long as idiots like
> you continue to think there's some amusement to be found in this sort of
> thing, aviation will always be one of those things that's all about the
> "boy's club".
>
> So there.

This reminds me very much of the typical cry of discrimination.
But when push comes to shove, you know who turns out to be doing
the most discriminating? Those who are complaining about it all
the time.

Brian
--
http://www.skywise711.com - Lasers, Seismology, Astronomy, Skepticism
Seismic FAQ: http://www.skywise711.com/SeismicFAQ/SeismicFAQ.html
Quake "predictions": http://www.skywise711.com/quakes/EQDB/index.html
Sed quis custodiet ipsos Custodes?

[Chris]

Well my wife thought it was funny when I showed her.


"Chris" > wrote in message
...
> 1) Airplanes usually kill you quickly - a woman takes her time.
>

[Peter Duniho]

"Jim" > wrote in message
. ..
> Ya know? You are stupid, Peter. Just plain stupid. Some things never
> change.

Ahh, yes...ad hominem. Now *that*'s something that always works well.

> While you're lightning up a little, let me let you in on a little secret,
> Pete: Men and women are different.

Some secret. I know they are different.

The original post does a lousy job of identifying those differences, and
what few differences it might accidently hit on, it does a lousy job of
turning them into something amusing.

[Jeff]

>
> Dude....is there nothing anyone can post in this group that you
> don't find some way of argue about it? I swear, you are one of
> the most argumentative people I've seen in my short stint in
> this group.
>

Agreed...and dare I say it?....would it be politically correct? Would I be
a sexist if I said "He sounds like a woman"?

:)

jf

[Jeff]

>............ In an environment where women are treated as equals, and
>given their due respect, that sort of joke can be very entertaining.

FYI....

Men <> Women

Men !> Women
Women !> Men

Or put simply,

Men != Women

So, don't expect me to treat each as such.

jf

[Grumman-581]

"Peter Duniho" wrote in message ...
> And people wonder why so few women participate in aviation.

"Women, can't live with 'em, can't kill 'em..."

[Jeff]

>
> "Women, can't live with 'em, can't kill 'em..."
>

Shhh, your gonna scare off all the potential women aviators in the
group....they're so sensitive to this type of "sexism" and all.

[Arketip]

Peter Duniho wrote:
> "Arketip" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>Yes it feels so good to be politically correct.
>>
>>Cool off a bit Peter it's only a joke.
>
>
> Ahh yes, the old "we can be as ignorant and insulting as we want, all we
> have to do is accuse our detractors of being politically correct" tactic.
>
> Well, screw you. People bitch and whine about how aviation is dying on the
> vine, and yet the industry basically excludes 50% of the population, through
> a variety of means but very much including this sort of sexism.
>
> If and when pilots can author and laugh at a similar list written about
> airplanes and men, then perhaps you can defend yourself against political
> correctness. Until then, this is just one more example of the rampant
> sexism that exists in the aviation industry.
>
> You can take your accusation of "political correctness" and shove it up your
> ass. As anyone who knows me knows, I am the last person one could
> rightfully accuse of that. I'm more than happy to skewer anyone anytime,
> regardless of race, gender, creed, etc.
>
> But I'm also willing to call a spade a spade. The post wasn't even all that
> funny, and it was very much representative of the prehistoric attitudes one
> finds so prevalent in aviation. As long as idiots like you continue to
> think there's some amusement to be found in this sort of thing, aviation
> will always be one of those things that's all about the "boy's club".
>
> So there.
>
>

Well glad to see that you can discuss things in a cool and restrained
manner.

The posted joke is just a variation of Beer-better-than-women,
beer-better-than-men, dogs-better-than-women, dogs-better-than-men and
so on, I'sure that if you google the net you probably can find a
planes-better-than-men.

Any joke can be found offensive by people than want to be offended.

You must have a life full of fun....

[Jay Honeck]

> And people wonder why so few women participate in aviation.

Pete, there's a thousand reasons why women don't participate in aviation.
Jokes aren't even in the top 400.

Mary thought the jokes were hilarious, and (in fact) has made a practice of
forwarding them to her family and friends. (They're not new, by any
stretch.)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[City Dweller]

Here you go.

WHY AIRPLANES ARE BETTER THAN MEN

-- An airplane NEVER leaves the toilet seat up.
-- An airplane lasts longer than seven seconds.
-- An airplane won't care if you gain five pounds.
-- Flying an airplane can't make you pregnant.

Peter, are you sure you are not a woman posting under a man's name?

Just kidding :-)

-- City Dweller


"Peter Duniho" > wrote in message
...
> "Chris" > wrote in message
> ...
>> [...]
>
> And people wonder why so few women participate in aviation.
>
> I'd like to see someone write a similar "joke" about "airplanes and men"
> and post it here. Now *that* would be funny.
>

[Arnold Sten]

Peter Duniho wrote:
> "Chris" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>[...]
>
>
> And people wonder why so few women participate in aviation.
>
> I'd like to see someone write a similar "joke" about "airplanes and men" and
> post it here. Now *that* would be funny.
>
>
Geez, this is only a bunch of jokes, so chill out. My wife laughed
almost as much as I did, and she is not particularly thrilled about
riding in my plane. I'd love to see a similar list about men and
airplanes. In fact I've got one someplace; I'll have to look around.

[Stubby]

I find complaining about other person's humor and the whole "political
correctness" area to be totally devoid of intellectual comment. It most
certainly does not belong on an aviation news group.



Peter Duniho wrote:
> "Arketip" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>Yes it feels so good to be politically correct.
>>
>>Cool off a bit Peter it's only a joke.
>
>
> Ahh yes, the old "we can be as ignorant and insulting as we want, all we
> have to do is accuse our detractors of being politically correct" tactic.
>
> Well, screw you. People bitch and whine about how aviation is dying on the
> vine, and yet the industry basically excludes 50% of the population, through
> a variety of means but very much including this sort of sexism.
>
> If and when pilots can author and laugh at a similar list written about
> airplanes and men, then perhaps you can defend yourself against political
> correctness. Until then, this is just one more example of the rampant
> sexism that exists in the aviation industry.
>
> You can take your accusation of "political correctness" and shove it up your
> ass. As anyone who knows me knows, I am the last person one could
> rightfully accuse of that. I'm more than happy to skewer anyone anytime,
> regardless of race, gender, creed, etc.
>
> But I'm also willing to call a spade a spade. The post wasn't even all that
> funny, and it was very much representative of the prehistoric attitudes one
> finds so prevalent in aviation. As long as idiots like you continue to
> think there's some amusement to be found in this sort of thing, aviation
> will always be one of those things that's all about the "boy's club".
>
> So there.
>
>

[Peter Duniho]

"Stubby" > wrote in message
...
>I find complaining about other person's humor and the whole "political
>correctness" area to be totally devoid of intellectual comment. It most
>certainly does not belong on an aviation news group.

It belongs here just as much as the original post did. It may well be that
neither belong, but if the original post belongs here, so does the
commentary on it.

[Longworth]

City Dweller,

A quick google search on "Why airplanes are better than men" gave
the followings

================================================== ====
Why airplanes are better than men:
1. They take you where you want to go and the service is better.
Maryanne kehoe


2. But everyone knows that airplanes are better than men because
they stay up longer.
Joan Bullock

3. Come to think of it, I can think of a few reasons why planes are
better then
men....
ie: Planes can keep it up longer... (ouch- my bad..hehee)
Planes can keep flying after ONE LOAD! =)
Planes... (oh this is baaaad- but all in fun guys) are much BIGGER....
LOL! O.k. I better stop.. I can see the hate email now... : )
Blue Skies,Red Eyes, and Sore Thighs! ®
Skygrly

4. AIRPLANES v. MEN
An airplane actually looks good without hair.
An airplane rarely has a problem getting up.
Airplanes don't get you pregnant.
You always know when you are getting a high preformance airplane.
Airplanes don't stand you up.
You don't have to pretend to like being with an airplane 24 hours a
day,
7 days a week.
Airplanes don't complain when you insist on being safe.
An aiplane is easier to maintain.


Rebecca Cutri-Kohart

5.Why Skydiving Is Better Than Men?"
1. Big-Way always is big
2. You can trust skydiving
3. Skydiving is safer than sex
4. Each jump is different from the other
5. Malfunction? No problem! Cuta-Way!
6. The parachute doesn't rip like a condom
7. To show how good you are is not private
8. You don't need to jump if you don't feel like it
9. You don't have to cry if you don't like your jump
10. Taking a shower before the jump is not necessary
11. You can see real paradise from the airplane door exit
12. A jump doesn't get jealous if you say: "I've had better"
13. Breaking a bone is peanuts compared to being pregnant
14. You don't have to know how to cook well to be a good skydiver
15. Women group diving is always more enjoyable than women group
therapy
by:
Mery Rose

================================================== ===================

[Bob Noel]

In article om>,
"Longworth" > wrote:

> An airplane actually looks good without hair.

that's not funny

(>-{

--
Bob Noel
New NHL? what a joke

[Michelle]

Grumman-581 wrote:
> "Peter Duniho" wrote in message ...
>
>>And people wonder why so few women participate in aviation.
>
>
> "Women, can't live with 'em, can't kill 'em..."
>
>
Men,
Can't live with them, can't kill them (legally). ;-)

Michelle

[Michelle]

Chris wrote:

Well I thought they were funny and not offensive....
Michelle

[Skywise]

"Peter Duniho" > wrote in
:

> "Stubby" > wrote in message
> ...
>>I find complaining about other person's humor and the whole "political
>>correctness" area to be totally devoid of intellectual comment. It most
>>certainly does not belong on an aviation news group.
>
> It belongs here just as much as the original post did. It may well be
> that neither belong, but if the original post belongs here, so does the
> commentary on it.

Whatever happened to "two wrongs don't make a right"?

Brian
--
http://www.skywise711.com - Lasers, Seismology, Astronomy, Skepticism
Seismic FAQ: http://www.skywise711.com/SeismicFAQ/SeismicFAQ.html
Quake "predictions": http://www.skywise711.com/quakes/EQDB/index.html
Sed quis custodiet ipsos Custodes?

[Eduardo K.]

I've always thought the best feminist joke ever is this simple one: (translated
from spanish so give me some slack :)




'What's the difference between HARD and DARK'


..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
'DARK stays that way all night'



--
Eduardo K. |
http://www.carfun.cl | Freedom's just another word
http://e.nn.cl | for nothing left to lose.
|

[Peter Duniho]

"Skywise" > wrote in message
...
> So don't you go telling me which way the discrimination is
> going, because I know better. I'm living it.

If you think you are being refused service simply because of your skin
color, then you are being discriminated against. If you actually *care*
about that, then file a lawsuit. If you don't, then why bother mentioning
it here?

It's quite simple. And, by the way, has nothing to do with the issue here.

I still think anyone who complains about the lack of participation in
aviation and insists on perpetuating the long history of sexism in aviation
is a hypocrite. In a perfect world, all jokes are equal and none are
offensive. But we don't live in that world, and as long as women continue
to be deterred from aviation, it makes no sense whatsoever to make fun of
them in an aviation context. All doing so does is add to the deterrent.

All that said, I shouldn't have been surprised at the reaction to my
objection. The reaction was far from unanimous, and mirrored previous
misogynous attitudes seen in this newsgroup in the past, with respect to the
individuals involved and the general proportion.

No, in hindsight, not surprising at all.

Pete

[Peter Duniho]

"Skywise" > wrote in message
...
> Whatever happened to "two wrongs don't make a right"?

Huh? What's that got to do with anything?

[Peter Duniho]

"Michelle" > wrote in message
ink.net...
> Well I thought they were funny and not offensive....

That's great. But you're one of the rare women who have managed to ignore
or get past the sexism in the aviation industry. That's good for you, but
means you're not exactly representative of women generally.

[Jay Honeck]

>> An airplane actually looks good without hair.
>
> that's not funny

Hey! I resemble that insult!

(Bob does, too!)

;-)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Bob Noel]

In article >,
"Peter Duniho" > wrote:

> If you think you are being refused service simply because of your skin
> color, then you are being discriminated against.

"If you think" is the standard to apply to determine discrimination?

I hope you mistyped.

--
Bob Noel
New NHL? what a joke

[Dave Stadt]

"Peter Duniho" > wrote in message
...
> "Michelle" > wrote in message
> ink.net...
>> Well I thought they were funny and not offensive....
>
> That's great. But you're one of the rare women who have managed to ignore
> or get past the sexism in the aviation industry. That's good for you, but
> means you're not exactly representative of women generally.


That's one helluva big hole you been digging here lately Pete ole boy.

[Jeff]

> In a perfect world, all jokes are equal and none are offensive.

uh, those aren't jokes. The basis of humor is generally to make light of
someone's shortcomings....sometimes it's self-deprecating and the joke
teller is the butt. Other times, it's about a person (in this case women)
and most every time hyperbole is involved......Sorry, but humor is
discriminatory by definition.

If Utopia requires me to give up my differences (the good and the bad), then
you can have it.

I've never laughed at a joke that starts "A rabbi, a rabbi and a rabbi walk
into a bar....."

jf

[Bob Noel]

In article >, "Jeff" > wrote:

> > In a perfect world, all jokes are equal and none are offensive.
>
> uh, those aren't jokes. The basis of humor is generally to make light of
> someone's shortcomings....sometimes it's self-deprecating and the joke
> teller is the butt. Other times, it's about a person (in this case women)
> and most every time hyperbole is involved......Sorry, but humor is
> discriminatory by definition.
>

Humor is not discriminatory by definition. It can be, but is
not always discriminatory.

Example:

Q. Why is Santa always so jolly???

A. Because he has the list of all the naughty girls.

--
Bob Noel
New NHL? what a joke

[Peter Duniho]

"Bob Noel" > wrote in message
...
>> If you think you are being refused service simply because of your skin
>> color, then you are being discriminated against.
>
> "If you think" is the standard to apply to determine discrimination?
>
> I hope you mistyped.

Of course. It certainly could have been better worded. Perhaps "then you
think you are being discriminated against" would have been better.

[Jeff]

>
> That's great. But you're one of the rare women who have managed to ignore
> or get past the sexism in the aviation industry. That's good for you, but
> means you're not exactly representative of women generally.

I'm sure the fact that flying usually requires interest in flying, interest
in systems and how the plane operates, interest in navigation, interest in
weather and general interest in how things work has nothing to do with the
rampant sexism you keep talking about. The reason women don't fly is that
the majority of women DON'T WANT TO FLY!!! Now, you're going to say that
women don't want to fly because we run a "he man woman haters club" in
aviation. Bull.

What most hangar flying, tire kickers have in common is the love of the
things mentioned above. And for some God-given reason, most women aren't
interested in that. Just like most mechanics aren't women and most
cartographers aren't women. Don't get me wrong. 2 of the best pilots I
know are women and have interests in all those things...but they are rare.
Hey, guess what....High School teachers are 70% women nationwide! Oh my at
the sexism!!!! And do you know what those women teachers do when they talk
to each other? They talk about stuff that interests women teachers! Someone
file a lawsuit at the heresy!

jf

[Peter Duniho]

"Jeff" > wrote in message
...
>> In a perfect world, all jokes are equal and none are offensive.
>
> uh, those aren't jokes.

We don't live in a perfect world.

Nevertheless, it's absurd to claim that ALL jokes are offensive. There are
plenty of jokes that are funny without making fun of anyone.

Furthermore, I enjoy an offensive joke (nearly) as much as the next guy.
The problem is when the joke is so blatantly out of place in a given
context.

[Jeff]

>
> Humor is not discriminatory by definition. It can be, but is
> not always discriminatory.
>
> Example:
>
> Q. Why is Santa always so jolly???
>
> A. Because he has the list of all the naughty girls.
>

Ah, but you just pointed out that "naughty girls" are different. Maybe
discriminatory isn't the right word.....segmenting might fit better?
Someone has to be segmented from everyone else for it to be funny.

[Sylvain]

Bob Noel wrote:
> Humor is not discriminatory by definition. It can be, but is
> not always discriminatory.
>
> Example:
> Q. Why is Santa always so jolly???
> A. Because he has the list of all the naughty girls.

ok, so now you have just antagonized the following
groups:
i- Santa worshipers who surely will be very offended
ii- fundamentalist Christians who have been whining the
whole season about the de-christianization of the
season and how Santa is making their lives miserables;
iii- feminists who are going to resent the whole concept
of a) using the forbidden g- word (it's 'womyn' for
you insensitive clod) and the implied notion that
sub context that equals sexuality with
naughtiness

and I probably forgot a bunch of other oppressed groups,
say, the PETRE just to name one (People for the Ethical
Treatment of Reindeer and Elves)

You can't win.

And don't get started with the road crossing chickens,
it only get worse.

--Sylvain

[Montblack]

("Dave Stadt" wrote)
> That's one helluva big hole you been digging here lately Pete ole boy.


There's a (FUNNY) South Park quip in there someplace :-)


Montblack

[Matt Whiting]

City Dweller wrote:
> Here you go.
>
> WHY AIRPLANES ARE BETTER THAN MEN
>
> -- An airplane NEVER leaves the toilet seat up.
> -- An airplane lasts longer than seven seconds.
> -- An airplane won't care if you gain five pounds.
> -- Flying an airplane can't make you pregnant.
>
> Peter, are you sure you are not a woman posting under a man's name?

That's it! How could we have missed this for so long. It explains
everything. :-)


Matt

[Matt Whiting]

Peter Duniho wrote:

> "Michelle" > wrote in message
> ink.net...
>
>>Well I thought they were funny and not offensive....
>
>
> That's great. But you're one of the rare women who have managed to ignore
> or get past the sexism in the aviation industry. That's good for you, but
> means you're not exactly representative of women generally.
>
>

And you are. :-)

Matt

[Dan Luke]

"Peter Duniho" wrote:

>> [...]
>
> And people wonder why so few women participate in aviation.
>

The jokes are tasteless and stupid and do reflect a kind of boneheaded
good-ol'-boyism that infects aviation to an excessive degree.

The howls of protest and cries of "politically correct!" that greeted
your post are illustrative.

Hang in there, Pete.

--
Dan
C172RG at BFM

[Matt Barrow]

"Skywise" > wrote in message
...
> "Peter Duniho" > wrote in
> :
>
>> "Arketip" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> Yes it feels so good to be politically correct.
>>>
>>> Cool off a bit Peter it's only a joke.
>>
>> Ahh yes, the old "we can be as ignorant and insulting as we want, all we
>> have to do is accuse our detractors of being politically correct"
>> tactic.
>
> Dude....is there nothing anyone can post in this group that you
> don't find some way of argue about it? I swear, you are one of
> the most argumentative people I've seen in my short stint in
> this group.

Peter is ALWAYS on his "time of the month".

[Grumman-581]

"Michelle" <wrote in message
ink.net...
> Men,
> Can't live with them, can't kill them (legally). ;-)

Bull****... Ya'll just claim it was "that time of the month" and no jury in
the country would convict you...

[Grumman-581]

"Peter Duniho" wrote in message ...
> That's great. But you're one of the rare women who have managed to ignore
> or get past the sexism in the aviation industry. That's good for you, but
> means you're not exactly representative of women generally.

Ahhh, so you're saying that women with a brain are not exactly
representative of women in general... Hmmm... Sounds like *you're* the one
being sexist...

[Grumman-581]

"Jeff" wrote in message ...
> What most hangar flying, tire kickers have in common is the love of the
> things mentioned above. And for some God-given reason, most women aren't
> interested in that. Just like most mechanics aren't women and most
> cartographers aren't women. Don't get me wrong. 2 of the best pilots I
> know are women and have interests in all those things...but they are rare.
> Hey, guess what....High School teachers are 70% women nationwide! Oh my
at
> the sexism!!!!

So, is it also sexism that there are no women professional football coaches?

[Grumman-581]

"Montblack" wrote in message ...
> I see that crap on cable, hear it in interviews, come across it on the
> radio - it's all crap. We either do or do not have a two drinking fountain
> society!

Of course we do... Just like we have a two urinal society... One for short
people, one for taller people...

[Grumman-581]

"Dan Luke" wrote in message ...
> Hang in there, Pete.

**** POLITICAL CORRECTNESS !!!

If you were offended by the joke, feel free to end your life... Maybe you'll
be lucky enough to be reincarnated with a sense of humor next time...

[Rachel]

Peter Duniho wrote:
> "Chris" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>[...]
>
>
> And people wonder why so few women participate in aviation.

I'm a woman and I think it's funny. Maybe so few women participate in
aviation because they are feminists with no sense of humor.

[Rachel]

Peter Duniho wrote:
> "Arketip" > wrote in message
> ...
>
<snip>

> Well, screw you. People bitch and whine about how aviation is dying on the
> vine, and yet the industry basically excludes 50% of the population, through
> a variety of means but very much including this sort of sexism.

You've got to be kidding me. The industry excludes 50% of the
population? Really. I'm a commercial pilot, flight instructor, A&P,
and have a techical job with an airline (i.e., I'm not a flight
attendant, in fact, I'm the only woman in my department). I've never
been excluded. I'm never been made to feel uncomfortable. I've never
witnessed sexism. And yes, I do stick out, at work and out flying at
the airport. No one, not my friends, coworkers, students, or employers
has treated me differently.

Aviation is dying on the vine because of unneeded regulations, not sexism.
>
> If and when pilots can author and laugh at a similar list written about
> airplanes and men, then perhaps you can defend yourself against political
> correctness. Until then, this is just one more example of the rampant
> sexism that exists in the aviation industry.

Again, what sexism? Do you work in the industry, or are you a
recreational type pilot? Until you've spent a lot of time in the
industry, please don't comment on the sexism which is largely created by
the politcally correct camp.

In fact, by saying women are not attracted to aviation because of
sexism, you're negating our abilities. It's demeaning and insulting.

[Rachel]

Peter Duniho wrote:
> "Michelle" > wrote in message
> ink.net...
<snip>
>
> That's great. But you're one of the rare women who have managed to ignore
> or get past the sexism in the aviation industry. That's good for you, but
> means you're not exactly representative of women generally.

Yes she is. Are you a woman? Then don't comment on your experiences.
Like I just posted, it's demeaning and insulting for you to say that we
are insulted and harassed.

[Newps]

Peter Duniho wrote:


>
>
> If you think you are being refused service simply because of your skin
> color, then you are being discriminated against.

Bull****.

[Skywise]

"Dan Luke" > wrote in news:11skm3qcv2cqg90
@news.supernews.com:

>
> "Peter Duniho" wrote:
>
>>> [...]
>>
>> And people wonder why so few women participate in aviation.
>>
>
> The jokes are tasteless and stupid and do reflect a kind of boneheaded
> good-ol'-boyism that infects aviation to an excessive degree.
>
> The howls of protest and cries of "politically correct!" that greeted
> your post are illustrative.
>
> Hang in there, Pete.

I forget where I heard this, but I'm pretty sure it was a
radio talk show host. He said something along the lines of,

"If I say something that offends you, that's not *my*
problem. It's *yours*. I'm not the one who is offended".

Brian
--
http://www.skywise711.com - Lasers, Seismology, Astronomy, Skepticism
Seismic FAQ: http://www.skywise711.com/SeismicFAQ/SeismicFAQ.html
Quake "predictions": http://www.skywise711.com/quakes/EQDB/index.html
Sed quis custodiet ipsos Custodes?

[Dave Stadt]

"Rachel" > wrote in message
...
> > Again, what sexism? Do you work in the industry, or are you a
> recreational type pilot? Until you've spent a lot of time in the
> industry, please don't comment on the sexism which is largely created by
> the politcally correct camp.
>
> In fact, by saying women are not attracted to aviation because of sexism,
> you're negating our abilities. It's demeaning and insulting.

You'll have to excuse Peter. He hasn't been out of the house since 1932.

[Gary Drescher]

"Skywise" > wrote in message
...
> "Dan Luke" > wrote in news:11skm3qcv2cqg90
> @news.supernews.com:
>> The jokes are tasteless and stupid and do reflect a kind of boneheaded
>> good-ol'-boyism that infects aviation to an excessive degree.
>>
>> The howls of protest and cries of "politically correct!" that greeted
>> your post are illustrative.
>>
>> Hang in there, Pete.
>
> I forget where I heard this, but I'm pretty sure it was a
> radio talk show host. He said something along the lines of,
>
> "If I say something that offends you, that's not *my*
> problem. It's *yours*. I'm not the one who is offended".

Well, by that reasoning, everyone who's offended by Pete's criticism should
understand that that's *their* problem, not Pete's.

But of course, that reasoning--like the PC label--is applied very
selectively. The anti-PC crowd seems to believe that it's ok to express
*their* opinions, but anyone who dares to question or criticize the tenets
of right-wing political orthodoxy is offensive and out of line ("feel free
to end your life" rather than voicing an objection--that's how Grumman-581
summarized it elsewhere in this thread).

--Gary

[[email protected]]

> Peter Duniho wrote:
> > That's great. But you're one of the rare women who have managed to ignore
> > or get past the sexism in the aviation industry. That's good for you, but
> > means you're not exactly representative of women generally.

Being aware of sexism in the aviation industry doesn't mean we can't
take a joke. It definitely exists, and there's a time when being
sensitive to it is appreciated; but looking for a reason to make a fuss
when there is none doesn't help the cause. The blurb was pretty funny,
especially the one about it being very bad when things get quiet! Most
of us (women) have been around long enough to know the difference
between humor and an intentional insult.

[[email protected]]

Rachel > wrote:
> Again, what sexism? Do you work in the industry, or are you a
> recreational type pilot? Until you've spent a lot of time in the
> industry, please don't comment on the sexism which is largely created by
> the politcally correct camp.

It's great that you haven't encountered it, but it *does* exist ... I
personally don't believe it stops anyone who really wants to pursue
aviation goals, though. Using that platform to make a fuss about this
funny set of comparisons is a pretty big stretch. Most of us (women in
aviation, recreational and/or professional) are smart enough to be able
to distinguish a gender joke from an actual sexist offense.

[Rachel]

wrote:
> Rachel > wrote:
>
<snip>
>
> It's great that you haven't encountered it, but it *does* exist ... I
> personally don't believe it stops anyone who really wants to pursue
> aviation goals, though. Using that platform to make a fuss about this
> funny set of comparisons is a pretty big stretch. Most of us (women in
> aviation, recreational and/or professional) are smart enough to be able
> to distinguish a gender joke from an actual sexist offense.

The point is, women aren't scared away from aviation by sexism. Plain
and simple.

[Rachel]

wrote:
> Rachel > wrote:
>
>>The point is, women aren't scared away from
>>aviation by sexism. Plain and simple.
>
>
> Maybe the ones who don't really want it that bad are. I've not seen it
> keep anyone with an ounce of determination away, tho.

Very true. If you don't really want something, you'll make up any
excuse when it gets tough.

[[email protected]]

Rachel > wrote:
> The point is, women aren't scared away from
> aviation by sexism. Plain and simple.

Maybe the ones who don't really want it that bad are. I've not seen it
keep anyone with an ounce of determination away, tho.

[Gary Drescher]

"Rachel" > wrote in message
...
> wrote:
> The point is, women aren't scared away from aviation by sexism. Plain and
> simple.

It may be plain and simple, but is it true?

If you mean that many women aren't scared away from aviation by sexism, then
that's obviously correct. But if you mean that there aren't many women who
*are* scared away (or otherwise excluded) from aviation by sexism, could you
say why you're confident of that?

Thanks,
Gary

[rotor&wing]

you're a freakin' idiot Duniho...............

"Arketip" wrote in message
...
Yes it feels so good to be politically correct.

Cool off a bit Peter it's only a joke.

Ahh yes, the old "we can be as ignorant and insulting as we want, all we
have to do is accuse our detractors of being politically correct" tactic.

Well, screw you. People bitch and whine about how aviation is dying on the
vine, and yet the industry basically excludes 50% of the population, through
a variety of means but very much including this sort of sexism.

If and when pilots can author and laugh at a similar list written about
airplanes and men, then perhaps you can defend yourself against political
correctness. Until then, this is just one more example of the rampant
sexism that exists in the aviation industry.

You can take your accusation of "political correctness" and shove it up your
ass. As anyone who knows me knows, I am the last person one could
rightfully accuse of that. I'm more than happy to skewer anyone anytime,
regardless of race, gender, creed, etc.

But I'm also willing to call a spade a spade. The post wasn't even all that
funny, and it was very much representative of the prehistoric attitudes one
finds so prevalent in aviation. As long as idiots like you continue to
think there's some amusement to be found in this sort of thing, aviation
will always be one of those things that's all about the "boy's club".

So there.

[Grumman-581]

"Rachel" wrote in message ...
> The point is, women aren't scared away from aviation by sexism. Plain
> and simple.

True, ya'll just get nervous around a bunch of bald headed white guys...
<snicker>

[Skywise]

"Gary Drescher" > wrote in
:

> "Skywise" > wrote in message
> ...
>> "Dan Luke" > wrote in news:11skm3qcv2cqg90
>> @news.supernews.com:
>>> The jokes are tasteless and stupid and do reflect a kind of boneheaded
>>> good-ol'-boyism that infects aviation to an excessive degree.
>>>
>>> The howls of protest and cries of "politically correct!" that greeted
>>> your post are illustrative.
>>>
>>> Hang in there, Pete.
>>
>> I forget where I heard this, but I'm pretty sure it was a
>> radio talk show host. He said something along the lines of,
>>
>> "If I say something that offends you, that's not *my*
>> problem. It's *yours*. I'm not the one who is offended".
>
> Well, by that reasoning, everyone who's offended by Pete's criticism
> should understand that that's *their* problem, not Pete's.
<Snipola>

You're absolutely right. Which is why after I let loose on him
I've decided to just ignore the ******* from now on, hence solving
my problem.

But I brought it up to point out that it is *his* problem if he is
offended by the original joke. If he doesn't like it, he needs to do
something to change *his* situation so he will no longer be exposed
to that which offends him - and I don't mean forcing his opinion of
what is offensive or not onto everyone else.

If there's one place in this world where you are bound to run into
something "offensive" much sooner than later, it's on the internet.
People need to "grow up" and "get over it" and "move on".

Brian
--
http://www.skywise711.com - Lasers, Seismology, Astronomy, Skepticism
Seismic FAQ: http://www.skywise711.com/SeismicFAQ/SeismicFAQ.html
Quake "predictions": http://www.skywise711.com/quakes/EQDB/index.html
Sed quis custodiet ipsos Custodes?

[Rachel]

Gary Drescher wrote:
> "Rachel" > wrote in message
> ...
>
wrote:
>>The point is, women aren't scared away from aviation by sexism. Plain and
>>simple.
>
>
> It may be plain and simple, but is it true?
>
> If you mean that many women aren't scared away from aviation by sexism, then
> that's obviously correct. But if you mean that there aren't many women who
> *are* scared away (or otherwise excluded) from aviation by sexism, could you
> say why you're confident of that?

Because women aren't as weak and pathetic as is implied by this entire
thread. Those that ARE scared away probably have a preconceived idea of
what aviation is like and don't give it a chance. So I think you'd be
right in saying that many are scared away, but it's a fear that has no
merit. The rampant sexism that people are talking about just doesn't
exist - except in feminists' minds.

[[email protected]]

> Gary Drescher wrote:
> > "Rachel" > wrote in message
> > ...
> >
> wrote:
> >>The point is, women aren't scared away from aviation by sexism. Plain and
> >>simple.
> >
> >
> > It may be plain and simple, but is it true?
> >
> > If you mean that many women aren't scared away from aviation by sexism,
> > then
> > that's obviously correct. But if you mean that there aren't many women who
> > *are* scared away (or otherwise excluded) from aviation by sexism, could
> > you say why you're confident of that?

Rachel > wrote:
> Because women aren't as weak and pathetic as is implied by this entire
> thread. Those that ARE scared away probably have a preconceived idea of
> what aviation is like and don't give it a chance. So I think you'd be
> right in saying that many are scared away, but it's a fear that has no
> merit. The rampant sexism that people are talking about just doesn't
> exist - except in feminists' minds.

Not "rampant" sexism, but sexism *does* exist. Should it prevent women
from pursuing goals in aviation? Heck no! Does it? There is some
percentage of women that have been put off or "scared away" by it, yes.
If a woman makes an inquiry, encounters a sexist attitude (yes, it
*does* happen), and is frightened away, then the fear has merit, plain
and simple! ... and that attitude is NOT only in "feminists' minds".

On the other hand, PLENTY of aviation-related schools, businesses,
endeavors *welcome* a woman for a change, too ... and you don't hear any
of us complaining about THAT!

P.S. Please take a little more care when quoting previous posts. My name
appears above, but NONE of that quoted text is mine. Thanks.

[Matt Whiting]

wrote:
>>Peter Duniho wrote:
>>
>>>That's great. But you're one of the rare women who have managed to ignore
>>>or get past the sexism in the aviation industry. That's good for you, but
>>>means you're not exactly representative of women generally.
>
>
> Being aware of sexism in the aviation industry doesn't mean we can't
> take a joke. It definitely exists, and there's a time when being
> sensitive to it is appreciated; but looking for a reason to make a fuss
> when there is none doesn't help the cause. The blurb was pretty funny,
> especially the one about it being very bad when things get quiet! Most
> of us (women) have been around long enough to know the difference
> between humor and an intentional insult.

Unfortunately, Peter D. hasn't been around long enough to know the
difference.

Matt

[Gary Drescher]

> wrote in message
...
> P.S. Please take a little more care when quoting previous posts. My name
> appears above, but NONE of that quoted text is mine. Thanks.

Oops, sorry, my mistake. (The indentation actually showed that the text was
not yours, but at a glance it appeared otherwise, for which I apologize.)

--Gary

[[email protected]]

> > wrote:
> > P.S. Please take a little more care when quoting previous posts. My name
> > appears above, but NONE of that quoted text is mine. Thanks.

"Gary Drescher" > wrote:
> Oops, sorry, my mistake. (The indentation actually showed that the text was
> not yours, but at a glance it appeared otherwise, for which I apologize.)

No worries ... and thanks again.

[George Patterson]

Bob Noel wrote:

> Q. Why is Santa always so jolly???
>
> A. Because he has the list of all the naughty girls.

Girl, just remember what your Mama always said. That Santy Claus won't never
come if you don't go to bed.

George Patterson
Coffee is only a way of stealing time that should by rights belong to
your slightly older self.

[Peter Duniho]

"Chris" > wrote in message
...
> Well my wife thought it was funny when I showed her.

And mine, who finally had a chance to read it, did not. Quite the opposite,
in fact.

Since a sample of two, or even of twenty, tells you nothing, all we really
know from that is that we and our respective spouses are well-suited for
each other.

[Matt Whiting]

Peter Duniho wrote:

> "Chris" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>Well my wife thought it was funny when I showed her.
>
>
> And mine, who finally had a chance to read it, did not. Quite the opposite,
> in fact.

That's certainly a surprise. :-)

Lack of a sense of humor must run in the family.


Matt

[Matt Barrow]

"Skywise" > wrote in message
...
> "Dan Luke" > wrote in news:11skm3qcv2cqg90
> @news.supernews.com:
>
>>
>> "Peter Duniho" wrote:
>>
>>>> [...]
>>>
>>> And people wonder why so few women participate in aviation.
>>>
>>
>> The jokes are tasteless and stupid and do reflect a kind of boneheaded
>> good-ol'-boyism that infects aviation to an excessive degree.
>>
>> The howls of protest and cries of "politically correct!" that greeted
>> your post are illustrative.
>>
>> Hang in there, Pete.
>
> I forget where I heard this, but I'm pretty sure it was a
> radio talk show host. He said something along the lines of,
>
> "If I say something that offends you, that's not *my*
> problem. It's *yours*. I'm not the one who is offended".
>
Quite!

What a nation of thin-skinned, thumb-sucking whiners the US has become.

[Matt Barrow]

"Skywise" > wrote in message
...
>
> But I brought it up to point out that it is *his* problem if he is
> offended by the original joke. If he doesn't like it, he needs to do
> something to change *his* situation so he will no longer be exposed
> to that which offends him - and I don't mean forcing his opinion of
> what is offensive or not onto everyone else.

Given the original joke, he needs to change his meds!

[Gary Drescher]

"Matt Barrow" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Skywise" > wrote in message
> ...
>> I forget where I heard this, but I'm pretty sure it was a
>> radio talk show host. He said something along the lines of,
>>
>> "If I say something that offends you, that's not *my*
>> problem. It's *yours*. I'm not the one who is offended".
>
> Quite!
>
> What a nation of thin-skinned, thumb-sucking whiners the US has become.

....he says while whining about a "PC" post that offended him, oblivious to
the irony.

--Gary

[Matt Barrow]

"Gary Drescher" > wrote in message
. ..
> "Matt Barrow" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> "Skywise" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> I forget where I heard this, but I'm pretty sure it was a
>>> radio talk show host. He said something along the lines of,
>>>
>>> "If I say something that offends you, that's not *my*
>>> problem. It's *yours*. I'm not the one who is offended".
>>
>> Quite!
>>
>> What a nation of thin-skinned, thumb-sucking whiners the US has become.
>
> ...he says while whining about a "PC" post that offended him, oblivious to
> the irony.
>
Which person are you referring to?

Oh, and are you referring to Skywise's take on PC?. or on Peter's completely
psychotic reaction to the original joke?

[Gig 601XL Builder]

Political Correctness is Fascism run by "Progressives".

[Blanche]

[no flame, just small candle]

Newbies. They buy their computer at the grocery store, get on
the web, and discover a new world. And don't realize there's
very little original humor online. We've seen it. Far too
many times.

[small candle off]

No, this is not why there are so few women in aviation. But
it is a symptom.

On the other hand, since I'm usually one of the few (or only)
females at work (or school when I'm taking classes or teaching
at the university level -- adjunct faculty) I'm used to it.

But I really long for originality.

[Blanche]

Peter Duniho > wrote:
>Well, screw you. People bitch and whine about how aviation is dying on the
>vine, and yet the industry basically excludes 50% of the population, through
>a variety of means but very much including this sort of sexism.

Peter:

I've used the line "screw you" once. But the entire comment was

"I'd say screw you, but you're not my type".

Completely confounded the other person!!

[Blanche]

Skywise > wrote:
>Ok, time for a show of hands. Any ladies reading this group
>please speak up and vote whether you feel aviation is
>discrimanatory to women.
>
>Since it's the ladies that seem to be the subject of this
>debate, let's hear what THEY have to say.

OK - as one of the resident females...and lady, I'll speak up. (Which
I already did at the original post, but let's continue the
discussion)

Yes, aviation is discriminatory. As is most of the hard sciences.
My undergrad degree is math. Anytime anyone heard that, they asked
at what grade school I was going to teach. And I have the math
degree because after 3.5 years in EE, I was bored. And had already
been accepted to grad school in engineering. And business for an
MBA, but I went with the engineering school. My PhD is a joint
Math and Computer Science. Most of my professional career has
been in aerospace. From a fashion POV, the US Navy wins all the time.

I've been told to change majors to business or education or sociology
far too many times. I laugh. College students that I advise have
been told by other faculty to quit, that they shouldn't be there, or
they should drop out until they have the baby (one was pregnant
at the time).

I fly. I own an airplane. I've worked as a consultant to ATC, so I've
spent a fair amount of time in towers.

What the underlying issue becomes is not "political correctness" but
one of manners and respect and maturity.

[Blanche]

Peter Duniho > wrote:
>is a hypocrite. In a perfect world, all jokes are equal and none are
>offensive. But we don't live in that world,

Actually, when you study the sociology of humor, you discover that
almost all jokes are offensive. Humor by its nature is rather cruel,
even the most minor ones.

Think about it...think about what makes you laugh.

[Blanche]

Michelle > wrote:
>Men,
>Can't live with them, can't kill them (legally). ;-)

Justifiable homicide?

[Blanche]

City Dweller > wrote:
>Here you go.
>
>WHY AIRPLANES ARE BETTER THAN MEN
>
>-- An airplane NEVER leaves the toilet seat up.
>-- An airplane lasts longer than seven seconds.
>-- An airplane won't care if you gain five pounds.

And when was the last time *you* worried about W&B?

>-- Flying an airplane can't make you pregnant.

[Montblack]

("Blanche" wrote)
> Actually, when you study the sociology of humor, you discover that
> almost all jokes are offensive. Humor by its nature is rather cruel,
> even the most minor ones.
>
> Think about it...think about what makes you laugh.


On TV, apparently it's hitting men in he groin. Where's the outrage...!!


Montblack
"It works on so many levels." - Homer Simpson.

[RST Engineering]

Blanche ...

As the immediate past State Director For Community College Part Time
Faculty, I'm very sensitive to the use of "adjunct" as applied to faculty.

Look up "adjunct" in the dictionary and see how pejorative the term is when
applied to a person who has the same (or better) academic and technical
chops as their full time colleagues.

Part Time is good.

Jim



"Blanche" > wrote in message
...


teaching
> at the university level -- adjunct faculty) I'm used to it.

[[email protected]]

"Peter Duniho" > wrote:
> And mine, who finally had a chance to read it, did not. Quite the opposite,
> in fact.

Peter, part of the reason gender jokes are funny is because there is a
least a bit of truth to them. Not all of us, men or women, fit gender
stereotypes completely, but it's silly to try and pretend those traits
don't exist and sad to not be able to see humor in some of them when
there clearly was no one being singled out and made fun of.

The idea that sexism in aviation doesn't exist is also burying one's
head in the sand. Two recent incidents come to mind:

One was a friend, nearing her private checkride. In a stage check with
an old-school, ex-military examiner that was not satisfied with some of
what he saw, he made the comment: "I think we have a 'blonde thing'
going on here."

Another friend was the only woman in an A&P course. The instructor
continually made snide remarks, even telling her before one procedure
not to cry because she was probably going to ruin her "painted nails".

Both of these women were offended, but neither were "scared away," and
both achieved their respective goals in spite of these attitudes.
Nevertheless, these are both examples of remarks and attitude that would
never be directed at any male student.

Bottom line is that these gender jokes are not specific to aviation, and
sexist attitudes such as the ones mentioned above aren't going to change
one way or the other because of them. People who *should* know better
and who get away with making these inappropriate, unprofessional remarks
that blatantly and intentionally offend women in aviation are
responsible for sexism in the industry, not these harmless gender jokes.

[Bob Noel]

In article >, Blanche >
wrote:

> Peter Duniho > wrote:
> >is a hypocrite. In a perfect world, all jokes are equal and none are
> >offensive. But we don't live in that world,
>
> Actually, when you study the sociology of humor, you discover that
> almost all jokes are offensive. Humor by its nature is rather cruel,
> even the most minor ones.

not always.

what about the joke about the duck(?) that walks into
a bar. The bartender says "hey, we have a drink named
after you". The duck says "you have a drink named Phil?"

ok, maybe that wasn't funny.

--
Bob Noel
goodness - the NFL officials are making
the NHL officials look like geniuses

[Private]

"Gig 601XL Builder" <wrDOTgiaconaATcox.net> wrote in message
...
> Political Correctness is Fascism run by "Progressives".

I just knew there had to be something worthwhile in this thread somewhere.

I have to admit I am surprised that this reposting of an old collection
would result in so much comment. What's next the "military snags and
replies" list?

[Montblack]

("Bob Noel" wrote)
> what about the joke about the duck(?) that walks into
> a bar. The bartender says "hey, we have a drink named
> after you". The duck says "you have a drink named Phil?"
>
> ok, maybe that wasn't funny.


Horse walks into a bar. The bartender says, "Hey, why the long face?"


Montblack

[Jim Logajan]

"Montblack" > wrote:
> ("Bob Noel" wrote)
>> what about the joke about the duck(?) that walks into
>> a bar. The bartender says "hey, we have a drink named
>> after you". The duck says "you have a drink named Phil?"
>>
>> ok, maybe that wasn't funny.
>
>
> Horse walks into a bar. The bartender says, "Hey, why the long face?"

Psychiatrist: What's your problem?
Patient: I think I'm a chicken.
Psychiatrist: How long has this been going on?
Patient: Ever since I was an egg!

Not funny? Okay...

A pair of chickens walk up to the circulation desk at a public library and
say, 'Buk Buk BUK.' The librarian decides that the chickens desire three
books, and gives it to them...and the chickens leave shortly thereafter.

Around midday, the two chickens return to the circulation desk quite vexed
and say,' Buk Buk BuKKOOK!' The librarian decides that the chickens desire
another three books and gives it to them. The chickens leave as before.

The two chickens return to the library in the early afternoon, approach the
librarian, looking very annoyed and say, 'Buk Buk Buk Buk Bukkooook!' The
librarian is now a little suspicious of these chickens. She gives them what
they request, and decides to follow them.

She followed them out of the library, out of the town, and to a park. At
this point, she hid behind a tree, not wanting to be seen. She saw the two
chickens throwing the books at a frog in a pond, to which the frog was
saying, "Rrredit Rrredit Rrredit..."

[Jim Logajan]

"Montblack" > wrote:
> ("Bob Noel" wrote)
>> what about the joke about the duck(?) that walks into
>> a bar. The bartender says "hey, we have a drink named
>> after you". The duck says "you have a drink named Phil?"
>>
>> ok, maybe that wasn't funny.
>
>
> Horse walks into a bar. The bartender says, "Hey, why the long face?"

A motorway walks into a pub one day. He goes up to the bar and orders
himself a drink. He just sits down when in walks a strip of tarmac.

The motorway sees the tarmac and starts to panic so he jumps over the bar
and ducks down so it won't see him. The barman looks down at him and says,
"What's the matter with you? Why are you hiding? You've got six lanes and
two hard shoulders. Why are you frightened of a piece of tarmac?

The motorway replies, "You don't know him like I do. He's a cyclepath."


Hey don't blam me if they aren't funny - I don't write 'em - I just rip 'em
off! :-)

[Flyingmonk]

>"You don't know him like I do. He's a cyclepath."

Hehehe...

[Chris]

"Jim Logajan" > wrote in message
.. .
> "Montblack" > wrote:
>> ("Bob Noel" wrote)
>>> what about the joke about the duck(?) that walks into
>>> a bar. The bartender says "hey, we have a drink named
>>> after you". The duck says "you have a drink named Phil?"
>>>
>>> ok, maybe that wasn't funny.
>>
>>
>> Horse walks into a bar. The bartender says, "Hey, why the long face?"
>
> A motorway walks into a pub one day. He goes up to the bar and orders
> himself a drink. He just sits down when in walks a strip of tarmac.
>
> The motorway sees the tarmac and starts to panic so he jumps over the bar
> and ducks down so it won't see him. The barman looks down at him and says,
> "What's the matter with you? Why are you hiding? You've got six lanes and
> two hard shoulders. Why are you frightened of a piece of tarmac?
>
> The motorway replies, "You don't know him like I do. He's a cyclepath."
>
>
> Hey don't blam me if they aren't funny - I don't write 'em - I just rip
> 'em
> off! :-)

Now that was funny and is of English origin I can tell.

[Matt Whiting]

Jim Logajan wrote:

> "Montblack" > wrote:
>
>>("Bob Noel" wrote)
>>
>>>what about the joke about the duck(?) that walks into
>>>a bar. The bartender says "hey, we have a drink named
>>>after you". The duck says "you have a drink named Phil?"
>>>
>>>ok, maybe that wasn't funny.
>>
>>
>>Horse walks into a bar. The bartender says, "Hey, why the long face?"
>
>
> Psychiatrist: What's your problem?
> Patient: I think I'm a chicken.
> Psychiatrist: How long has this been going on?
> Patient: Ever since I was an egg!
>
> Not funny? Okay...
>
> A pair of chickens walk up to the circulation desk at a public library and
> say, 'Buk Buk BUK.' The librarian decides that the chickens desire three
> books, and gives it to them...and the chickens leave shortly thereafter.
>
> Around midday, the two chickens return to the circulation desk quite vexed
> and say,' Buk Buk BuKKOOK!' The librarian decides that the chickens desire
> another three books and gives it to them. The chickens leave as before.
>
> The two chickens return to the library in the early afternoon, approach the
> librarian, looking very annoyed and say, 'Buk Buk Buk Buk Bukkooook!' The
> librarian is now a little suspicious of these chickens. She gives them what
> they request, and decides to follow them.
>
> She followed them out of the library, out of the town, and to a park. At
> this point, she hid behind a tree, not wanting to be seen. She saw the two
> chickens throwing the books at a frog in a pond, to which the frog was
> saying, "Rrredit Rrredit Rrredit..."

Don't quit your day job ... unless you are a stand-up comic. :-)

Matt

[Dave]

Hehehe.. love it! :)

Dave


On 16 Jan 2006 18:41:37 GMT, Blanche > wrote:


>
>Peter:
>
>I've used the line "screw you" once. But the entire comment was
>
>"I'd say screw you, but you're not my type".
>
>Completely confounded the other person!!

[Jon Kraus]

A priest , rabi and a minister walk into a bar.

so they raise the bar. :-)

Jon Kraus



Jim Logajan wrote:

> "Montblack" > wrote:
>
>>("Bob Noel" wrote)
>>
>>>what about the joke about the duck(?) that walks into
>>>a bar. The bartender says "hey, we have a drink named
>>>after you". The duck says "you have a drink named Phil?"
>>>
>>>ok, maybe that wasn't funny.
>>
>>
>>Horse walks into a bar. The bartender says, "Hey, why the long face?"
>
>
> A motorway walks into a pub one day. He goes up to the bar and orders
> himself a drink. He just sits down when in walks a strip of tarmac.
>
> The motorway sees the tarmac and starts to panic so he jumps over the bar
> and ducks down so it won't see him. The barman looks down at him and says,
> "What's the matter with you? Why are you hiding? You've got six lanes and
> two hard shoulders. Why are you frightened of a piece of tarmac?
>
> The motorway replies, "You don't know him like I do. He's a cyclepath."
>
>
> Hey don't blam me if they aren't funny - I don't write 'em - I just rip 'em
> off! :-)

[Blanche]

Montblack > wrote:
>("Blanche" wrote)
>> Actually, when you study the sociology of humor, you discover that
>> almost all jokes are offensive. Humor by its nature is rather cruel,
>> even the most minor ones.
>>
>> Think about it...think about what makes you laugh.
>
>
>On TV, apparently it's hitting men in he groin. Where's the outrage...!!

I rarely watch sitcoms on tv -- and this is one of the reasons. The
only justification for a groin kick is immediate danger.

[George Patterson]

Blanche wrote:

> The only justification for a groin kick is immediate danger.

According to a self-defense class I once took, you should never try for a groin
kick. The prospective victim reacts instinctively to defend this area, so it's
actually very difficult to connect. If you do connect, the pain is delayed a few
seconds, and the now-infuriated victim is very likely to do serious damage to you.

The instructor recommended that you kick the knee joint instead. It's much
easier to connect there, and the joints are fragile and not designed to be bent
backwards. Best of all; if you connect, the victim is immediately incapacitated.

George Patterson
Coffee is only a way of stealing time that should by rights belong to
your slightly older self.

[Matt Whiting]

George Patterson wrote:

> Blanche wrote:
>
>> The only justification for a groin kick is immediate danger.
>
>
> According to a self-defense class I once took, you should never try for
> a groin kick. The prospective victim reacts instinctively to defend this
> area, so it's actually very difficult to connect. If you do connect, the
> pain is delayed a few seconds, and the now-infuriated victim is very
> likely to do serious damage to you.
>
> The instructor recommended that you kick the knee joint instead. It's
> much easier to connect there, and the joints are fragile and not
> designed to be bent backwards. Best of all; if you connect, the victim
> is immediately incapacitated.

Personally, I prefer the "action at a distance" methods of self-defense.
:-)


Matt

[Frank Ch. Eigler]

Matt Whiting > writes:

> > [...] The instructor recommended that you kick the knee joint
> > instead. [...]
>
> Personally, I prefer the "action at a distance" methods of
> self-defense. :-)

That's cool, but if you're in a self-defense situation, only the rare
perp is considerate enough to have taken your preferences into account.

- FChE

[Matt Whiting]

Frank Ch. Eigler wrote:
> Matt Whiting > writes:
>
>
>>>[...] The instructor recommended that you kick the knee joint
>>>instead. [...]
>>
>>Personally, I prefer the "action at a distance" methods of
>>self-defense. :-)
>
>
> That's cool, but if you're in a self-defense situation, only the rare
> perp is considerate enough to have taken your preferences into account.

That is why you should always be prepared. :-)

Matt

[George Patterson]

Matt Whiting wrote:

> Personally, I prefer the "action at a distance" methods of self-defense.

That's also my favorite. I call it the "reach out and touch someone" approach.

George Patterson
Coffee is only a way of stealing time that should by rights belong to
your slightly older self.

[Flyingmonk]

George patterson wrote:
>Matt Whiting wrote:
>> Personally, I prefer the "action at a distance" methods of self-defense.

>That's also my favorite. I call it the "reach out and touch someone" approach.

Personally I prefer the [get into the fetal position and cry out,
"LEAVE ME ALONE!" method of self-defense].

The Monk

[Dave]

"Prepared"... like...

........Never take a knife to a gun fight... :)

Dave



On Thu, 19 Jan 2006 00:46:44 GMT, Matt Whiting >
wrote:

>Frank Ch. Eigler wrote:
>> Matt Whiting > writes:
>>
>>
>>>>[...] The instructor recommended that you kick the knee joint
>>>>instead. [...]
>>>
>>>Personally, I prefer the "action at a distance" methods of
>>>self-defense. :-)
>>
>>
>> That's cool, but if you're in a self-defense situation, only the rare
>> perp is considerate enough to have taken your preferences into account.
>
>That is why you should always be prepared. :-)
>
>Matt

[George Patterson]

Flyingmonk wrote:

> Personally I prefer the [get into the fetal position and cry out,
> "LEAVE ME ALONE!" method of self-defense].

As long as it works ....

George Patterson
Coffee is only a way of stealing time that should by rights belong to
your slightly older self.

[Blanche]

Flyingmonk > wrote:
>George patterson wrote:
>>Matt Whiting wrote:
>>> Personally, I prefer the "action at a distance" methods of self-defense.
>
>>That's also my favorite. I call it the "reach out and touch someone" approach.
>
>Personally I prefer the [get into the fetal position and cry out,
>"LEAVE ME ALONE!" method of self-defense].

I view self-defense much like flying. The key is situational
awareness. And a really good pair of track shoes to run away
really fast!

I try really hard not to get into unpleasant situations. yes, I'm
a wuss.

[Matt Whiting]

Flyingmonk wrote:

> George patterson wrote:
>
>>Matt Whiting wrote:
>>
>>>Personally, I prefer the "action at a distance" methods of self-defense.
>
>
>>That's also my favorite. I call it the "reach out and touch someone" approach.
>
>
> Personally I prefer the [get into the fetal position and cry out,
> "LEAVE ME ALONE!" method of self-defense].

Whatever works for ya!

Matt

[Matt Whiting]

Dave wrote:

> "Prepared"... like...
>
> .......Never take a knife to a gun fight... :)

Yep, that's it.

Matt

[Matt Whiting]

Blanche wrote:

> Flyingmonk > wrote:
>
>>George patterson wrote:
>>
>>>Matt Whiting wrote:
>>>
>>>>Personally, I prefer the "action at a distance" methods of self-defense.
>>
>>>That's also my favorite. I call it the "reach out and touch someone" approach.
>>
>>Personally I prefer the [get into the fetal position and cry out,
>>"LEAVE ME ALONE!" method of self-defense].
>
>
> I view self-defense much like flying. The key is situational
> awareness. And a really good pair of track shoes to run away
> really fast!
>
> I try really hard not to get into unpleasant situations. yes, I'm
> a wuss.

That is just being smart. Avoidance is always best. However, if the
perps don't give you a good route of avoidance, then .45 Colt is next best.


Matt

[Grumman-581]

"Matt Whiting" wrote in message ...
> That is just being smart. Avoidance is always best. However, if the
> perps don't give you a good route of avoidance, then .45 Colt is next
best.

I figure if 11 rounds of .45+P ACP doesn't solve the problem, I need to
reload...

[Peter R.]

Flyingmonk > wrote:

> Personally I prefer the [get into the fetal position and cry out,
> "LEAVE ME ALONE!" method of self-defense].

Weren't you the one who claimed a third degree black belt in Tae Kwon Do in
a recent post?

If so, I suspect you might issue a verbal warning, but you would never get
in to a fetal position. Instead, you would follow up an unheeded warning
with a round-house kick.


--
Peter

[[email protected]]

A man and a dog get into a gun fight in the middle of the street.
The man gets a shot off and hits the dog in the hand.
This ****es off the dog
The man runs away into the bar.
The dog runs after him into the bar and can't see him
The bartender asks the dog if he can help him
The dog points to his hand and says
I'm lookin for the man who shot my paw.

[Matt Whiting]

Grumman-581 wrote:

> "Matt Whiting" wrote in message ...
>
>>That is just being smart. Avoidance is always best. However, if the
>>perps don't give you a good route of avoidance, then .45 Colt is next
>
> best.
>
> I figure if 11 rounds of .45+P ACP doesn't solve the problem, I need to
> reload...

My Cold doesn't hold 11 rounds, but if 8 won't solve the problem ...
then I pull my .44 magnum... Always have a plan B.


Matt

[Grumman-581]

"Matt Whiting" > wrote in message
...
> My Cold doesn't hold 11 rounds, but if 8 won't solve the problem ...
> then I pull my .44 magnum... Always have a plan B.

In my opinion, my Colt is a bit too large for true concealed carry, so it
just stays home in the gun safe with all the other weapons who infrequently
get invited to come out and play... The PT-145 that I carry holds 10 in the
mag plus one in the chamber... Good enough for most things and quick enough
to toss another mag into it... Plan B is a 12-gauge with 8 rounds of
000-buck... Plan C is multiple 50-round mags in a TEC-9 for
spray-and-pray... <grin>

[Matt Whiting]

Grumman-581 wrote:

> "Matt Whiting" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>My Cold doesn't hold 11 rounds, but if 8 won't solve the problem ...
>>then I pull my .44 magnum... Always have a plan B.
>
>
> In my opinion, my Colt is a bit too large for true concealed carry, so it

It depends on the size of the concealer. :-)

Matt

[Flyingmonk]

I have a CCW in Virginia and reciprocal states. I carry concealed a
Glock 17 (a lot of 9mm). I also have Kel-tec Sub2000 that accepts the
same mag as the glock. I have ten 32 rd mags and ten regular glock
mags. A Moss 500 with pistol grip in the closet a Colt CAR-15, a AK47
and a few other less threatening toys that go bang. :^)

The Monk

[Gig 601XL Builder]

"Matt Whiting" > wrote in message
...
> Grumman-581 wrote:
>
>> "Matt Whiting" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>
>>>My Cold doesn't hold 11 rounds, but if 8 won't solve the problem ...
>>>then I pull my .44 magnum... Always have a plan B.
>>
>>
>> In my opinion, my Colt is a bit too large for true concealed carry, so it
>
> It depends on the size of the concealer. :-)
>
> Matt

And the holster.

I'm 5'8.5" 175#. I have a shoulder holster that will allow me to carry fully
concealed my full size Colt National Match and two magazines under just
about any jacket.

[Grumman-581]

"Gig 601XL Builder" <wrDOTgiaconaATcox.net> wrote in message
...
> And the holster.
>
> I'm 5'8.5" 175#. I have a shoulder holster that will allow me to carry
fully
> concealed my full size Colt National Match and two magazines under just
> about any jacket.

That works great if you live in a part of the country where people usually
wear jackets... In Houston, that is rarely the case... Hell, it's short
sleeve weather today and I have the air-conditioner turned on in my house...

[Matt Whiting]

Gig 601XL Builder wrote:

> "Matt Whiting" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>Grumman-581 wrote:
>>
>>
>>>"Matt Whiting" > wrote in message
...
>>>
>>>
>>>>My Cold doesn't hold 11 rounds, but if 8 won't solve the problem ...
>>>>then I pull my .44 magnum... Always have a plan B.
>>>
>>>
>>>In my opinion, my Colt is a bit too large for true concealed carry, so it
>>
>>It depends on the size of the concealer. :-)
>>
>>Matt
>
>
> And the holster.
>
> I'm 5'8.5" 175#. I have a shoulder holster that will allow me to carry fully
> concealed my full size Colt National Match and two magazines under just
> about any jacket.
>
>

I'm 6' and 220 and can conceal my Colt in the small of my back under a
t-shirt. Or an ankle holster. Or a shoulder holster.

Then again, in PA my permit doesn't require me to carry concealed. I
got my permit back when it was a protection permit and it has no such
requirement.

Matt