In a message dated 2/6/2006 8:18:52 PM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Mon, Feb 06, 2006 at 09:48:01PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > Marnie aka Doe :-) Well, enuff said. It's basically sexist humor if you > can't figure that out.
Well, no it isn't, necessarily. Much of the time the joke is aimed at the male - the butt of the humour isn't the character being personified, but rather at the impersonator. And even if it had been, using it as a launching pad for a racist dig at the British really wasn't the best way of making your point. ==== Racist? Don't you mean Nationalist? Are all Brits the same race? I wasn't under that impression. I thought Britian had a fair number of Blacks and quite a few Indians. Nationalist, sure. Yeah, I was digging re nationalism or countrism or whatever you want to call it. :-) To me it's like blackface. People used to think that was pretty funny too. Okay, maybe not QUITE as bad as that. But people did used to think it was funny for a white man to put on blackface. Ergo, for a man to dress like a woman... exactly who is being made fun of??? Truly, John, I have NEVER EVER EVER understood why it's supposed to be funny. And you missed the humor in my posts (or tongue in cheekiness or just plain cheekiness). Too. Just getting a little controversy going to maybe create some discussion and thought. Later, Doe ;-)
