To think this wasn't offensive?

[CasioBlues]

I work in an office, and after meetings, there are often spare sandwiches that are offered around.

I work in one group. A group of people of a similar level, all friends, were talking today and someone mentioned these sandwiches were brought to their group by a female member of staff, and also friend. A friend in another group mentioned sandwiches also came around to their group by a female member of staff.

A male friend in my group quipped about the member of staff who brings them around "what a slag!". A few of us laughed, one friend found it really offensive.

I think among friends, it was obviously a joke on the "promiscuity" of sandwiches, but I'm prepared to admit I was wrong to think it wasn't offensive. It wasn't very professional, but among friends?

OP, if it's funny because she's not a slag, then it is STILL A JOKE ABOUT HER SEXUAL BEHAVIOUR.

You are wrong...if you're sure then take all the intelligent people here and listen to their reasons as to why you need to adjust that idea.

Yes, I am from the UK, thanks

For the record I wouldn't have found it offensive as such, just in astoundingly poor taste. Perhaps your friend wouldn't have been offended if he'd acrually said it to the woman rather than snigger about it after?

WHY DON'T YOU SEE THAT THIS IS ABOUT HER SEXUAL BEHAVIOUR OP!!!

What's your area of expertise OP?

So the joke is, basically:

Helen gave sandwiches to two groups of people! She's a slag, because giving sandwiches to multiple people is comparable to giving sex to multiple people! That's funny because she doesn't actually offer sex to multiple people!

Right?

I don't understand how it's slut-shaming though? no-one was suggesting the woman who did a nice thing for group A and B was somehow a slut

But that was exactly what they were saying. That's the joke. What do you think the joke was if you don't think it was that? I don't understand what the joke was if it wasn't 'oh, what a slag, offering sex/sandwiches to A and B'

That said I can't get worked up about it. I don't think you can assume that someone's opinion is that women who have sex with 'a lot' of people are 'slags' or that they only hold women to a standard of not being promiscuous.

What if a colleague came in and took a biro and you jokingly called her a thief - how is that any different?

It's not about her sexual behaviour because it's clearly not about her sexual behaviour at all. The fact that she is married or has 100 sexual partners a week is irrelevant (I was wrong to mention) - it had no bearing on her sexual behaviour either way

My area of expertise is irrelevant

Yes, 'thief' and 'slag' - those two gender-specific, interchangeable terms.

I would argue that it is not!

Because, Casio, women don't face institutional barriers to equity because their every behaviour is assessed in terms of thievery.

Women DO, however, constantly confront the fact that irrespective of how professional an environment they work in, and how well educated they are, even simple behaviours like handing around sandwiches can give rise to comment about their sexuality.

Helen (why have I decided her name is Helen? I have no idea) has been told by your joking friend that she is a sexual object to him. Whatever she does, even something as simple as handing around food, it's all sexual.

The joke wasn't 'sniggered after'

It's a joke because the person in question clearly isn't a slag - as I say, she's happily married with children
Yes, so if you used the above example -"he kept all the sandwiches, what a jew!" - that would obviously be Just A Joke if the person were a well-known philanthropist.

And if the giver of sandwiches were a single woman who was believed by her work colleagues to have multiple sex partners, then this would have been Actually Offensive.

Ok then.

It's not about her sexual behaviour because it's clearly not about her sexual behaviour at all. The fact that she is married or has 100 sexual partners a week is irrelevant (I was wrong to mention) - it had no bearing on her sexual behaviour either way

ARRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHH. Can you PLEASE explain the joke in that case? You said it was funny because she's not a slag really. Now you aren't saying that. So what is the joke? Why did you laugh?

Thanks, I really have to go bed now. It's getting late

Oh this is so funny, what a load of boring old Po's.

OP, this is funny and some people do have a sense of humour, obviously not most people on here tonight.
It's times like this I'm glad I'm a sahm.
I am biased though and never wanted to be a Stepford Office type, they are soooooo boring

Why should how many men she sleeps with, even be an issue OP? You explain the joke away because she's married... but if she wasn't?

Oh, okay then. Morethanpotato, can you explain why it is a joke? Since the OP has gone to bed, and you find it funny?

You assume people who object are office types? How interesting.

Honestly, if you have to explain a joke, it's not funny, but I'll have one last go. It's a fairly common joke in British humour to have double entendres - he's got a big one, she offers sandwiches to everyone. That's the joke, ok? Fundamental double entendre

Now, I see the confusion comes between those who think those who joke are actually making a negative judgement on the woman who offered the sandwiches. However, I'm arguing that was obviously not the case - none of those there cared either way whether the woman had 0 or 100 sexual partners a week, and her sexual promiscuity was irrelevant - does that help?

OP, you're missing the point spectacularly. In fairness, though, lots and lots of people do miss the point - we are trained to miss the point, by living and working in a society that tells us all the time "it's just a joke" or "you really should not take things so seriously" - it is a cycle. Perpetuate the ideology by dressing it up as just entertainment, or harmless banter.

The "joke" status of the comment is predicated on a certain ideological idea. Women who have sex for pleasure are immoral.

Your colleague was (unconsciously I am sure) perpetuating this idea. That is the basis of its offensiveness - not whether the object (the sandwich giver) was offended, would have been offended, or indeed had any thoughts on it whatsoever.

It's a joke because the person in question clearly isn't a slag - as I say, she's happily married with children

Oh dear, God. Once more, just in case: nobody is saying he was saying THIS woman is "a slag". However, he WAS saying sexually active women are. THAT IS A MICRO AGGRESSION. It's reinforcing and supporting cultural assumptions that harm women. It is therefore offensive, regardless of whether the individual woman is (in his or indeed your opinion) promiscuous - though thanks so much for clarifying that she is happily married, and therefore gosh, not a slag. You've proven the point we're trying to make, if only you knew it.

Would I be "upset" if I heard such a joke? No. I hear shit like that all the time, as do we all, because we live in a sexist world and most people are completely blind to that. I have better uses of my emotional energy than banging my head against a brick wall, so I roll my eyes and move on. Does that mean I think it's okay, inoffensive, and acceptable? Hell no. It's corrosive. And when my FIL pouted and whined because he made a seriously offensive comment to a young female colleague and was warned over it, I told him I thought he had it coming, and explained when he asked why what constant "jokes" like that would do to that colleague, if every guy she encountered thought it was okay to make them. Much as I love the guy, and good-hearted as he is, it was a vile thing to say and he had no right to say it. And I was glad the company took that attitude, too.

Finally, women who preen because they aren't offended by working in places where these attitudes are commonplace might pause to consider why it is that 97% of Fortune 500 companies are headed by men, 75% of elected representatives are men, violence against women is so everyday and the pay gap is still so great. But hey, I'm sure "jokes" are "just jokes" and play no part in forming and reinforcing that sort of society. Right?