Feminism/Sexism and Gaming/Geek/Popular culture Catch All

Bloo Driver wrote:

Well, the internet vomitted this up at me today. Linked due to some language.

I think I should just hold on to it for anyone who feels like all the "tongue-in-cheek" sexism has no impact on people and is hilarious if one might just loosen up.

Jesus.

Well, the internet vomitted this up at me today. Linked due to some language.

I think I should just hold on to it for anyone who feels like all the "tongue-in-cheek" sexism has no impact on people and is hilarious if one might just loosen up. It was literally a fine little thing that was fun and funny on its own, but someone felt compelled to put that little tag on the end because either A) they want the negative attention, or B) they feel like that's just an alright, common comment to make.

edit: Also: Keystone, really?

SixteenBlue wrote:
Bloo Driver wrote:

Well, the internet vomitted this up at me today. Linked due to some language.

I think I should just hold on to it for anyone who feels like all the "tongue-in-cheek" sexism has no impact on people and is hilarious if one might just loosen up.

Jesus.

Yeah, I didn't see the big deal, then last paragraph fail.

Bonus_Eruptus wrote:
SixteenBlue wrote:
Bloo Driver wrote:

Well, the internet vomitted this up at me today. Linked due to some language.

I think I should just hold on to it for anyone who feels like all the "tongue-in-cheek" sexism has no impact on people and is hilarious if one might just loosen up.

Jesus.

Yeah, I didn't see the big deal, then last paragraph fail.

Oy gevalt

Yep, I was kinda chuckling through the whole thing until that last bit. Seriously, WTF?

Seth wrote:
SixteenBlue wrote:

That said, I don't buy the "stereotypes exist for a reason" argument as justification for continuing to reinforce stereotypes. Lots of things exist for a reason and I'd still like them to go away. I don't really see what that line of thinking accomplishes.

This is definitely where we agree. Where I get ruffled is when negative stereotypes are applied to sell products for any reason, other than perhaps pointing out that there's always exceptions.

Positive stereotypes, like a hardworking woman using Asda to pull off Christmas? I have a harder time calling those out, hence my curiosity. I know that positive stereotypes can be equally harmful (women are nurterers [and should stay at home]! Women are detail oriented [and are therefore good at cleaning]!), though. So I wanted to get opinions from people.

My apologies if it sounded like I was snapping. This work day became much more stressful than I anticipated about 45 minutes ago, and I may have let that bleed into my post.

Positive stereotypes are no less damaging because they end up placing unrealistic expectations of performance on people. That Asda ad is just one of many, many cultural tropes about the "modern" woman being expected to not only do it all but also be capable of doing it all while being happy about it.

Sure, companies advertise to their target audience but advertising is part of our cultural milieu and as such it ends up reinforcing and/or defining roles. Personally I'm not really very comfortable with corporations "telling" me how I (or anyone) should be behaving. By all means sell me the product but I'd rather you didn't model gendered behaviour to me while you're at it.

As a guy who does most of the cooking and tidying and organises the cleaning in my household (and who expects to continue to do so once the kids come along shortly) I find that Asda ad deeply depressing and sexist. Where's the role for me in that family? It's just a really sh*t 1-dimensional idea of family and I'd feel deeply depressed if that's what my or my partner's roles ended up like. I find that ad exist because it complete excludes men for family life and that is a big problem.

The disconnect for me is: why is it sexist? I get that the television family in the asda ad is not a 100% match to you. It's not a perfect match for me, either. Different isn't sexist, though, and nothing that mother does in the ad sets up unrealistic expectations for female capability.

I think this has come up in other threads, but the chicken and egg debate about ads driving cultural norms or reflecting them is much too complex to just be one or the other. If women did not statistically do a large portion of domestic holiday prep, asda would not make an ad reflecting that. That's not sexist. It's not particularly exciting, either, but certainly not sexist.

Seth wrote:

The disconnect for me is: why is it sexist? I get that the television family in the asda ad is not a 100% match to you. It's not a perfect match for me, either. Different isn't sexist, though, and nothing that mother does in the ad sets up unrealistic expectations for female capability.

I think this has come up in other threads, but the chicken and egg debate about ads driving cultural norms or reflecting them is much too complex to just be one or the other. If women did not statistically do a large portion of domestic holiday prep, asda would not make an ad reflecting that. That's not sexist. It's not particularly exciting, either, but certainly not sexist.

That's a really, really fine line. You could show a terrible, offensive black person stereotype and say "it's not a match to me or you, but that's ok, it's just different."

As for the bolded part, maybe that's something people don't want anymore and they don't want commercials reinforcing that idea.

Sure, it's a fine line. Not only is it a fine line, but it's a line everyone sets for themselves. If DanB wants to call the asda ad sexist, that's fine. If I want to call his decision silly, that's also fine.

And you're right, maybe some people don't want people reinforcing what is a reality for a statistically significant portion of asda's clientele. They can take to twitter and make mountains out of molehills.

You call it mountain out of molehill, others call it trying for positive change.

Bloo Driver wrote:

Well, the internet vomitted this up at me today. Linked due to some language.

I think I should just hold on to it for anyone who feels like all the "tongue-in-cheek" sexism has no impact on people and is hilarious if one might just loosen up. It was literally a fine little thing that was fun and funny on its own, but someone felt compelled to put that little tag on the end because either A) they want the negative attention, or B) they feel like that's just an alright, common comment to make.

edit: Also: Keystone, really?

Well, if you're a college student.

Occasionally, I feel like younger generations have come up with a new way to defeat bigotry in America. Rather than education and compassion, which haven't completely solved everything yet, they're gonna try total ignorance and a lack or caring.

In theory, it makes a kind of deranged sense. If everyone doesn't know or doesn't care about being called slurs, then it's a utopia where we can say whatever whenever we want, and as long as you say you're joking, everything's okay.

I think Daniel Tosh is their prophet.

Seth wrote:

The disconnect for me is: why is it sexist? I get that the television family in the asda ad is not a 100% match to you. It's not a perfect match for me, either. Different isn't sexist, though, and nothing that mother does in the ad sets up unrealistic expectations for female capability.

I think this has come up in other threads, but the chicken and egg debate about ads driving cultural norms or reflecting them is much too complex to just be one or the other. If women did not statistically do a large portion of domestic holiday prep, asda would not make an ad reflecting that. That's not sexist. It's not particularly exciting, either, but certainly not sexist.

It's sexist because the onus falls on one specific sex. I have never, ever, ever seen an advertisement that shows a man getting back from a hard day at work and breaking his back to make dinner for his family and do the laundry, when those same things seem to be expected of women according to advertising.

As DanB said already. Supermom is sexist and destructive because it creates unrealistic expectations of women.

And I don't think the 'chicken and egg' situation is at all complex. Nothing is lost by not marginalising women, in fact a less stereotypical ad could have a more positive marketing result than reinforcing stereotypes. It's just laziness.

When I ask myself 'is it sexist?' and I'm not sure I will wait for a woman who is aware of gender issues (and not all women are) to tell me. As a white male I try not to control debates about issues where my privilege may affect my perspective.

SixteenBlue wrote:

You call it mountain out of molehill, others call it trying for positive change.

*fist bump*

Gender issues are very frequently dismissed as 'mountain out of molehill' but that's usually from someone who isn't trying to climb said mountain.*

[size=6]*Sorry for torturing that metaphor.[/size]

Eh, complaining on the Internet about what amounts to a not particularly insulting advertisement for Walmart seems like spitting into the wind.

And why do you get to decide whether women should be insulted or not?

*edit*

I mean that in a much less antagonistic way than it probably comes across. I just don't have patience for verbal tiptoeing around.

It's a genuine problem though. Those who are privileged are very quick to dismiss the concerns of those who are not, it's something this thread keeps coming back to.

bnpederson wrote:

Eh, complaining on the Internet about what amounts to a not particularly insulting advertisement for Walmart seems like spitting into the wind.

I don't think anyone's claiming that complaining about this ad on the Internet is going to change the world.

Nothing wrong with wanting to discuss things that bother you, even if it doesn't really change anything.

Seth wrote:

Sure, it's a fine line. Not only is it a fine line, but it's a line everyone sets for themselves. If DanB wants to call the asda ad sexist, that's fine. If I want to call his decision silly, that's also fine.

And you're right, maybe some people don't want people reinforcing what is a reality for a statistically significant portion of asda's clientele. They can take to twitter and make mountains out of molehills.

Just because something happens to be statistically true doesn't mean that emphasizing the stereotype and reinforcing it wouldn't be harmful.

MrDeVil909 wrote:

And why do you get to decide whether women should be insulted or not?

Complaining on the Internet about an absolutely offensive and utterly repulsive advertisement for Walmart seems like spitting into the wind, too.

Demyx wrote:

I don't think anyone's claiming that complaining about this ad on the Internet is going to change the world.

SixteenBlue's comment that this was "trying for positive change" seemed, to me, to imply just that.

bnpederson wrote:
MrDeVil909 wrote:

And why do you get to decide whether women should be insulted or not?

Complaining on the Internet about an absolutely offensive and utterly repulsive advertisement for Walmart seems like spitting into the wind, too.

Demyx wrote:

I don't think anyone's claiming that complaining about this ad on the Internet is going to change the world.

SixteenBlue's comment that this was "trying for positive change" seemed, to me, to imply just that.

Positive change doesn't mean change the world, necessarily. It just means making improvements.

MrDeVil909 wrote:
Seth wrote:

The disconnect for me is: why is it sexist? I get that the television family in the asda ad is not a 100% match to you. It's not a perfect match for me, either. Different isn't sexist, though, and nothing that mother does in the ad sets up unrealistic expectations for female capability.

I think this has come up in other threads, but the chicken and egg debate about ads driving cultural norms or reflecting them is much too complex to just be one or the other. If women did not statistically do a large portion of domestic holiday prep, asda would not make an ad reflecting that. That's not sexist. It's not particularly exciting, either, but certainly not sexist.

It's sexist because the onus falls on one specific sex. I have never, ever, ever seen an advertisement that shows a man getting back from a hard day at work and breaking his back to make dinner for his family and do the laundry, when those same things seem to be expected of women according to advertising.

As DanB said already. Supermom is sexist and destructive because it creates unrealistic expectations of women.

Well, if this is becoming a race to the bottom to see who can get more offended first, maybe we should investigate the idea that the asda ad was portraying unrealistic expectations for females. Are you saying a woman can't do everything in that ad? I suspect a good portion of Asda's customers would disagree with that. I would go so far as to say that not only do a huge portion of women do everything in that ad (and more) they probably find that work fulfilling.

I agree that part of the problem with advertising is the unspoken suggestion that the reality in the ad is normal and nothing else is normal. That's just a flaw in the medium, because adding endless caveats to a message dilutes that message. But that does not necessarily make those unspoken suggestions sexist. Showing a woman handling a huge amount of domestic responsibility is not the same as saying that's *all* she can handle, nor is it the same as showing a man can't handle the same.

Axe deoderant spray, for example, is a clearly sexist ad campaign, because it shows women as feral animals incapable of controlling their pheremone based urges. Asda showing a strong women essentially being a single employee event planning corporation is neither unrealistic nor destructive.

And I don't think the 'chicken and egg' situation is at all complex. Nothing is lost by not marginalising women, in fact a less stereotypical ad could have a more positive marketing result than reinforcing stereotypes. It's just laziness.

I really don't think it's complex either; I was offering a compromise since I think you're wrong. This ad was neither negative nor marginalizing nor lazy.

When I ask myself 'is it sexist?' and I'm not sure I will wait for a woman who is aware of gender issues (and not all women are) to tell me. As a white male I try not to control debates about issues where my privilege may affect my perspective.

I'm not sure where you're coming at here. If you don't think your opinion matters on this topic, why are you discussing it? I think your opinion matters, btw. I don't think it's fair nor constructive to exclude men from a discussion about sexism.

Seth wrote:
When I ask myself 'is it sexist?' and I'm not sure I will wait for a woman who is aware of gender issues (and not all women are) to tell me. As a white male I try not to control debates about issues where my privilege may affect my perspective.

I'm not sure where you're coming at here. If you don't think your opinion matters on this topic, why are you discussing it? I think your opinion matters, btw. I don't think it's fair nor constructive to exclude men from a discussion about sexism.

When I have a thought, but an expert in the field tells me my thought is ill-informed, or fails to account for factors x, y, and z, or whatever, I generally defer to their expertise, or at least say "I can see how it can be read that way." What Socrates said about the truly wise man, and all. Why dig my heels in on what has been shown to be a faulty position? Besides "Nuh-uh, nuh-uh, Nonononononononono!" isn't a very constructive discussion either.

Well, if this is becoming a race to the bottom to see who can get more offended first, maybe we should investigate the idea that the asda ad was portraying unrealistic expectations for females. Are you saying a woman can't do everything in that ad? I suspect a good portion of Asda's customers would disagree with that. I would go so far as to say that not only do a huge portion of women do everything in that ad (and more) they probably find that work fulfilling.

I agree that part of the problem with advertising is the unspoken suggestion that the reality in the ad is normal and nothing else is normal. That's just a flaw in the medium, because adding endless caveats to a message dilutes that message. But that does not necessarily make those unspoken suggestions sexist. Showing a woman handling a huge amount of domestic responsibility is not the same as saying that's *all* she can handle, nor is it the same as showing a man can't handle the same.

Superficially you're right. But something like this was covered when we were talking about Lego. It's not just sexist if it portrays women in an overtly negative way. It's also sexist if it uses gender coding, it's subtle and apparently 'mostly harmless' but contributes to a broader climate of prejudice and expectations.

And it's not about offence, it's about actual harm. Exposing young children to gender coded messages is harmful to them in a myriad of subtle ways, especially if they aren't educated to examine the messages.

Axe deoderant spray, for example, is a clearly sexist ad campaign, because it shows women as feral animals incapable of controlling their pheremone based urges. Asda showing a strong women essentially being a single employee event planning corporation is neither unrealistic nor destructive.

Unrealistic? Nope, but definitely destructive if it's part of a broader culture that represents women in these coded ways.

I really don't think it's complex either; I was offering a compromise since I think you're wrong. This ad was neither negative nor marginalizing nor lazy.

Thanks for the offer but I think you're wrong. :p

When I ask myself 'is it sexist?' and I'm not sure I will wait for a woman who is aware of gender issues (and not all women are) to tell me. As a white male I try not to control debates about issues where my privilege may affect my perspective.

I'm not sure where you're coming at here. If you don't think your opinion matters on this topic, why are you discussing it? I think your opinion matters, btw. I don't think it's fair nor constructive to exclude men from a discussion about sexism.

I like to think my opinion matters, and I think yours does too. But we, as privileged White, hetero males need to bear in mind that our perspective is distorted by our positions. We need to resist the impulse to try control the discussion and set the terms. There's a reason that there's a school of feminist thought that men need to stay the hell away. I disagree with it, but understand why those people hold that perspective.

MrDeVil909 wrote:

Superficially you're right. But something like this was covered when we were talking about Lego. It's not just sexist if it portrays women in an overtly negative way. It's also sexist if it uses gender coding, it's subtle and apparently 'mostly harmless' but contributes to a broader climate of prejudice and expectations.

And it's not about offence, it's about actual harm. Exposing young children to gender coded messages is harmful to them in a myriad of subtle ways, especially if they aren't educated to examine the messages.

We're well into splitting hairs territory, here, but Asda is not marketing toward impressionable children who are still developing their sense of place; they're marketing toward the 80% of women who likely represent a fairly accurate reflection of Blonde Asda Mom.

Exposing a young girl to an ad portraying her mom as completely normal...that's not harmful at all. Sure the ad doesn't (and I would argue, can't) portray every statistical probability available. But that doesn't mean it's racist because Asda Mom didn't marry a black guy or homophobic because Asda mom didn't marry a woman. white-centric and hetereo-centric, sure, but so is the market Asda's trying to reach.

Axe deoderant spray, for example, is a clearly sexist ad campaign, because it shows women as feral animals incapable of controlling their pheremone based urges. Asda showing a strong women essentially being a single employee event planning corporation is neither unrealistic nor destructive.

Unrealistic? Nope, but definitely destructive if it's part of a broader culture that represents women in these coded ways.

I think you'd have to prove that it's destructive toward women. This is not a fantasyland like LEGO that can be portrayed however the creators decide; it's a targeted ad accurately reflecting the real life makeup of Asda;s customers.

I like to think my opinion matters, and I think yours does too. But we, as privileged White, hetero males need to bear in mind that our perspective is distorted by our positions. We need to resist the impulse to try control the discussion and set the terms. There's a reason that there's a school of feminist thought that men need to stay the hell away. I disagree with it, but understand why those people hold that perspective.

I see what you and SpacePPoliceman are saying here, and it's not wrong. It's why I brought the ad to our attention in the first place, because the GWJ hivemind is a good repository of thoughtful opinions. And I certainly agree that white males discussing the role of advertising in minorities relationships need to make sure the tinted glasses of privilege are checked and considered.

But everyone's coming from some sort of bias, and we've all acknowledged that the schools of feminist thought aren't exactly the same as the hard science of mathematics. Considering an opinion of an expert is different than parroting it -- not that I think anyone here is doing that, of course.

We're well into splitting hairs territory, here, but Asda is not marketing toward impressionable children who are still developing their sense of place; they're marketing toward the 80% of women who likely represent a fairly accurate reflection of Blonde Asda Mom.

The target of the advertising would matter if it meant that only the target sees the advert, but that's unlikely. Anyone who sees the advert gets the information it transmits.

Exposing a young girl to an ad portraying her mom as completely normal...that's not harmful at all. Sure the ad doesn't (and I would argue, can't) portray every statistical probability available. But that doesn't mean it's racist because Asda Mom didn't marry a black guy or homophobic because Asda mom didn't marry a woman. white-centric and hetereo-centric, sure, but so is the market Asda's trying to reach.

But here's the thing, normative portrayals are fundamentally harmful. Especially when the 'normal' they are portraying is reinforcing patriarchal culture and dominance.

I think you'd have to prove that it's destructive toward women. This is not a fantasyland like LEGO that can be portrayed however the creators decide; it's a targeted ad accurately reflecting the real life makeup of Asda;s customers.

Well, I'd argue that advertising is as much a fantasyland as Lego even if what's being advertised is real.

Good point regarding the proof though. The problem comes in that this is social science, so it's tough to 'prove' anything scientifically, AFAIK. There's a ton of philosophical writing on the subject though.

This looks pretty interesting too. Unfortunately my internet prevents me from watching it.

Ultimately I choose to defer to smart people who have thought about and discussed this for years. I choose not to perpetuate normative/sexist/racist/whatever stereotypes (most of the time successfully) in case they are harmful. When I have children I will work very hard to get them to analyse the media messages they are exposed to and make sure they don't accept anything potentially harmful as being 'normal.'

There is a huge post mortem of Uncharted: Golden Abyss up on Gamasutra. They have a huge section on the Marisa Chase character which is fascinating. Sounds like they really could have made her a terrible character if they hadn't changed it. No wonder I was so impressed with the character! Anyways, play the game everyone!

Here's a small section of it:

Gamasutra wrote:

For example, in Chapter 10, Drake sees Chase being choked by a thug on a bridge; in the original version, Drake has so many seconds to use his sniper rifle to take the thug out, or Chase would die. In the revised version, Chase kicks the guy in the junk and runs. Drake still has to protect her as she runs, but at least she showed some initiative and power, and wasn't a complete victim.

We also found that focus testers were taking their cue from Drake: because he sounded annoyed with Chase for constantly getting into trouble, focus testers became annoyed with her as well. So when we revised Chase, we also revised Drake, making him react to her in a more positive way. In the bridge encounter mentioned above, for example, Drake originally sees Chase being choked and sounds exasperated -- "Not again!" In the revision, he sees Chase take action and says, "Chase... Ooooh, nice!"

Mr.Devil909, you could say it before I could get to a decent computer and hammer it out. Thank you!

This isn't the first time we've been subjected to media that implies that it's our role as women to single-handedly coordinate domestic entertainment and for an entire group, that we'll get exhausted and exasperated BUT PERSEVERE, then we'll find satisfaction in getting all that thankless work done. This is a culturally perpetuated message we've been bombarded with from the media, and more importantly, the people we live and work with who've also consumed said assumptions through media and the people around them who've consumed these ideas for decades. It is an old, oft used advertisement aimed specifically at women to imply we have the tools to help you do your job as the wife and mother.

That disappointing ad is perpetuating a dated gender norm that people continue to fulfil because we've been told that's what we should do. Its bad because, not only does it imply what the womens roles are (decorating, cleaning, cooking, cleaning, serving, cleaning, shopping, oh and also cleaning) it finishes by implying that despite all that hard, thankless work, you will find satisfaction in watching your husband play with your children! You will see everyone else bonding and sitting around connecting and find satisfaction in that because that's what christmas is about! Also, if after you've done all that work to make this happen, and you're NOT finding satisfaction in the results of others due to your persistent toil, you're probably doing something wrong, girl. You've probably failed at something, you're doin' it wrong.

Seth wrote:

I think you'd have to prove that it's destructive toward women.

Amoebic wrote:

Mr.Devil909, you could say it before I could get to a decent computer and hammer it out. Thank you!

This isn't the first time we've been subjected to media that implies that it's our role as women to single-handedly coordinate domestic entertainment and for an entire group, that we'll get exhausted and exasperated BUT PERSEVERE, then we'll find satisfaction in getting all that thankless work done. This is a culturally perpetuated message we've been bombarded with from the media, and more importantly, the people we live and work with who've also consumed said assumptions through media and the people around them who've consumed these ideas for decades. It is an old, oft used advertisement aimed specifically at women to imply we have the tools to help you do your job as the wife and mother.

That disappointing ad is perpetuating a dated gender norm that people continue to fulfil because we've been told that's what we should do. Its bad because, not only does it imply what the womens roles are (decorating, cleaning, cooking, cleaning, serving, cleaning, shopping, oh and also cleaning) it finishes by implying that despite all that hard, thankless work, you will find satisfaction in watching your husband play with your children! You will see everyone else bonding and sitting around connecting and find satisfaction in that because that's what christmas is about! Also, if after you've done all that work to make this happen, and you're NOT finding satisfaction in the results of others due to your persistent toil, you're probably doing something wrong, girl. You've probably failed at something, you're doin' it wrong.

I hope you don't need more proof than that.

Thank you, Amoebic, for saying it before I could get here. I am staring down the barrel of November and December, and even though I don't let my gang sit on the couch and even when I was married my ex helped, it didn't seem to lessen the pressure. If I don't "do it right" in proper Berle Ives fashion, I'm being a bad parent, and damaging my children. This year it's going to be even more interesting; we're adding two new members to the family and my monster-in-law is in town. I love seeing my family, but I wish it didn't mean months of turmoil and stress because of expectations.

This isn't just a product of my own self-image problems. It's handed down to me, from my Gramma and my mother and all my aunts and the ladies at church and everyone else who has been taught that this is how things have to be done. That ad is just one more image among thousands every day that perpetuate the notion that if my house isn't spotless, it's a) all my fault and b) I'm a bad mother/spouse.

It's not just the holidays. It's all the time. When was the last time you saw an ad with a male cleaning the toilet? You get plenty of rippling biceps and toolbelts if they're broken or stopped up in some way, but just cleaning it? Nowhere. The only media I can ever remember seeing that in would be that article here with the pic of Certis helping clean up for Rabbitcon. In real life, I bet they help all the time. But we don't see that reflected anywhere, and for a lot of the demographic it's reflected in actions.

How many young guys do you know who won't keep their place clean? We've all had roommates like that. They're not taught it, thanks to the ancillary message that moms are supposed to handle that stuff. And when they're grown they don't even think about it; it's like they think the scrubbing bubbles guys will jump out of the can and magically do it for them. That, by the way, is pretty much verbatim from one of my son's friends when he spent some time staying with us and I insisted he join the round of chores. Gee, I wonder where he got that image?

It's not just guys, either. I know quite a few young ladies who don't know which end of a scrub brush is which. Because they've also been raised in an environment where moms are the ones who clean. Since they're not moms, they don't. Like they're going to magically acquire the skills and know-how for housekeeping as a super-power once sperm meets egg.

My elder son has to have long reassuring conversations with his girlfriend because she is absolutely floored he does the dishes and cleans. And my daughter has had to have some long pointed talks with my son-in-law because he came from a house steeped in that mythos and so it didn't even dawn on him to pitch in.

How many of the gang around here will be watching football/playing a game on Thanksgiving while their wife is in the kitchen? I hear it every year, and see it in the what-are-you-playing-this-weekend threads. I don't say you should all drive her crazy by hanging off her left elbow (remember, she's been trained to handle it all herself so her methods don't automatically include you). But you might want to talk to her about it, and offer what help would actually be helpful.

I do most of the cooking on thanksgiving and do most of the household cleaning because my wife is basically inept with a broom and vacuum.

Spoiler:

I am pretty sure she has tricked me into believing that she is inept with a broom and a vacuum so that she doesn't have to use them. Clever girl.

SallyNasty wrote:

I do most of the cooking on thanksgiving and do most of the household cleaning because my wife is basically inept with a broom and vacuum.

Spoiler:

I am pretty sure she has tricked me into believing that she is inept with a broom and a vacuum so that she doesn't have to use them. Clever girl.

BRB need to see if my wife really can't fold a fitted sheet.

Bonus_Eruptus wrote:
SallyNasty wrote:

I do most of the cooking on thanksgiving and do most of the household cleaning because my wife is basically inept with a broom and vacuum.

Spoiler:

I am pretty sure she has tricked me into believing that she is inept with a broom and a vacuum so that she doesn't have to use them. Clever girl.

BRB need to see if my wife really can't fold a fitted sheet.

I don't think anyone is really capable of folding a fitted sheet. The best you can hope for is a not-complete-crappy approximation of folding.