This won’t be news to a lot of you — I’m a little late getting to it — but our old pal Tom Martin, the repulsive British MRA celebrity, is actually going ahead with the somewhat baffling video “women and comedy” project he was babbling about in the comments here many months ago, when he was still allowed to comment here. Well, “actually going ahead with it” this August if he can get anyone else to agree to work for him for free minimum wage.
The documentary project is called “Laughing with Women” and, Martin explains, it will “investigat[e] if gold-digging impairs women’s joke-making ability, and if, when women reject gold-digging in all its forms, they can become instantly funnier.”
In case that didn’t make sense to you — don’t worry, that’s a completely natural reaction — Tom explains his, er, “logic” a bit further in a jobs listing he’s posted in hopes of finding a crew, which has already gotten a good deal of ridicule over at PZ Myers’ and on at least one comedy website.
Why are women, on average, slightly less funny than men? Does gold-digging in particular impede women’s joke-making ability? When women publicly reject gold-digging, do they become as funny, or even funnier than men?
In his numerous visits to Man Boobz, Martin expounded at length on the topic of gold-digging women, generally referring to them by his preferred term, the shorter and blunter “whores.” Martin has previously estimated that roughly 97% of women fit this description, and has suggested that female penguins are also whores. Frankly, once he gets going on the topic, it’s hard to shut him up, which is partly why he’s no longer welcome in the comments here.
In any case, this odd hypothesis will be tested, Martin says, with a “radical, and revealing street-based social experiment.”
Still puzzled? Mike Booth, the British video comedian behind SomeGreyBloke and Dan Cardamon, has managed to tease out a few more details from Martin (posting here as sexismBusters):
Martin is confident that his proposed video will blow the lid off this whole “women and gold-digging and comedy, no really, they’re connected” thing:
If the radical, and revealing street-based social experiment at the centre of our documentary proves gold-digging does make women less funny (as pre-production research suggests) then our findings will make headlines around the world, our film’s two minute teaser trailer attached to all those news and blog articles (Update: this advert alone has already been blogged and tweeted about by outraged PC types).
The full documentary will be shot to a broadcast-quality standard and format, giving mainstream television companies worldwide the opportunity to purchase broadcasting rights (if they’re feeling brave enough) whilst we maintain a virtually guaranteed revenue stream from our already established hardcore of supporters and fans within the non PC gender equality field around the world, who, along with everyone else, will be able to enjoy Laughing with Women on newly launched pay-per-view channel, Vimeo on Demand (VoD) – where VoD itself takes a very modest 10% cut. The documentary has the potential to be translated into several languages – gold-digging a familiar if hidden story in every country, until now.
In other words, it sounds like some sort of video gold mine.
So I’d recommend that all gold-digging women out there try to get in on the ground floor of this Tom Martin dude.
Oh, and speaking of Dan Cardamon, here’s the faux MRA’s take on the project:
CORRECTION: This post originally stated that Martin wouldnt’ be paying his crew, but he says he will be paying them minimum wage, so I’ve corrected the relevant passage above.
EDITED TO ADD: Tom has shown up in the comments, and I’m letting his comments through (for now at least), so if you have any questions for him, feel free to head to the comments to address him directly.
Seriously, there is no salvaging bad survey design. That’s like salvaging an out of focus photo, no can do.
Food, then back to compiling the religion data. Which, btw, for the sake of my sanity I’m not running stats on. Y’all have percentages or counts or similar, but I’m not even attempting to figure out the stats unless things end up really standing out. It’s just too much data with too few data points for each option.
If talacaris takes me up on the offer, and acts like a decent person, he can crunch things like whether being cats in a David suit is correlated with being a female WHORE penguin. (And I will run the top level religion categories, e.g. whether people raised X where more likely to change religion than the average)
Haha vaginal photoplethysmographs, you are so goddamn ridiculous. I hope you know how you come across and just don’t mind rather than honestly thinking you’re making great sense and great change in the world. I also hope you’re just joking about the women claiming to be turned on by money thing. About 90% of the time you sound like an alien–that’s really how off, off, off you are on the psychology, interior life, and drives of women. You don’t seem like the worst guy in the world (erm…compared to other MRAs; I mean, I guess you do acknowledge that women can be as funny as men, which is half a step up from congenital moron?) so it’s kind of sad. Why in the world are you spending your time reading meta analyses of photoplethysmograph and plethysmograph data? The world is such a rich and diverse place and you’ve shrunken your lived experience and applicable knowledge of it to near zero. What the hell drives you to devote your life to these comically off-base, reductive theories about a class of people as varied and complex as the one you just happened to fall into when that Y chromosome kicked in? I’m absolutely serious with that question. It’s baffling. You’re just so deeply, deeply not getting it. And I’m not one to jump to the “you must not get laid!” thing but, erm, in all honestly you don’t come across as a true activist and thinker–you come across as a spurned weirdo with a metric fuckton of personal issues relating to women and sex. We’re on earth to enjoy and experience as much as possible, and instead of reveling in that, and in the great variety of people in this world, you’re reading studies about women’s netherbits and formulating cuckoo theories about faked orgasms and sperm ingestion and “gold-digging behaviors.” What a waste.
Also, why do you care about people’s stated fantasies vs. actual turn-ons? Like…why are you bothering to read this shit? I understand why it’s of use to sexologists but I guess I just don’t understand what acting like a spambot that turned sentient and went insane with resentment when porn actresses wouldn’t talk back or acknowledge your advances gets you. Certainly not a reputation as someone to be taken seriously.
Most people hear a guy moaning about gold-digging whores and But Studies! and the scientific truths about bluffin with her muffin and immediately recognize a resentment-steeped, love-unlucky goofball afraid of female sexuality and driven to rationalize his weird and unhealthy attitudes not just personally and privately but with a public crusade.
But whatever, keep on keepin on I guess. I don’t recognize anything resembling a human female in any of your ideas and theories but what does a human female know about being a human female?
I’d been wondering about that.
Regardless, it’s both stretching the definition of “documentary” and completely throwing the last shreds of credibility out the window “yeah, these are paid actresses following a script, but I swear that this is exactly what real women did!”
And pardon me for not being familiar with your canon, but have you spent some time grappling with that depressing study from a few years back that concluded that the majority of heterosexual men, at least the those questioned, don’t want funny partners and perceive humor as a male thing, for which the ideal partner should be the audience? I don’t know if you’re one of those evo-psych dopes you posits that human beings stopped evolving 10,000 years ago and that the truly sad reduction of women’s capacity for humor to appreciated laughtrack is some But Look at Male Peacocks! simplicity, but the sad reality of the world is that a lot of guys act really threatened by funny women. Really, really threatened. And that’s actually because of…wait for it…the patriarchal stuff we’ve all been saddled with, women and men. Socialization. Ego. Stereotype. All that stuff. When you’re a little girl, at least in my experience (I actually know about being a human female, listen up now!) you notice that as your hetero, female peers start entering the stage in which they start noticing boys, many of them start suppressing parts of themselves. Because funny and opinionated is supposedly unattractive, and we’re inundated with messages that we’re meant to be attractive above all else. This isn’t biology; it’s the system of social relationships we live in, and the weight of history and the limited boxes we’re shoved into before we’re even conscious of gender, telling girls to shave down their edges.
And there are consequences if you don’t! I barely dated in high school. My guy friends loved hanging out with me, and I was just as attractive as the girls the guys I liked dated, but they’d tell me that a really witty, really intelligent girl was too intimidating. I’ve been at parties where I was cracking everybody up and it enraged some guy to the point that he would turn on me for no damn reason whatsoever and just start trying to pull my psyche apart and leave me in tears. I hope you consider some of these dynamics when you obsess over women and humor. It has nothing to do with this “gold-digging behavior” you’re fixated on, behavior that isn’t found in as many women as you goofy MRAs think. If a lot of women suppress their wit–and none of my female friends do; the women in my social circle are generally funnier than the men, actually–because women are still expected to diminish themselves in this world.
This stuff has zero to do with gold-digging, sheesh. What’s with the MRA whiny resentment complex about that sort of thing? Do y’all just see the vanishingly small number of trophy-wife types as the only women on earth, as they’re “10s”–or whatever other dehumanizing concept you want to use–and every man deserves one of those?
Round of applause for HM. That was amazing.
Seconded!
I dare him to respond honestly rather than returning to not-getting-it stuff about The Vibrator. Though the not-getting-it stuff about The Vibrator actually really underlines what I wrote. Female sexuality: it’s not a scary, demonic thing, kiddo.
Shhh, don’t tell him that!
HM….have an internet made out of kittens
BigMomma – you mean like this?
I read this and I laughed. And then I realized that a) it was true and b) he thought he was being clever and I was sad.
Oh, and Tom Martin fan (Tom Martin), could you let us know which professor you’ve been corresponding with so we can read their publications and get a better picture of the intellectual basis of this *cringe* study.
Yeah where are you going to get the money to pay everyone in the film? If you’re charging 3$, that’s not much…
Ha, kitteh, yes!
Tom’s idea is just such a fucking stupid idea. I mean, I’ve read the proposal, I’ve read his comments and I just can’t believe that he thinks this shit is for real. It’s like Spinal Tap for fucking stupid misogynists.
@BigMomma
But this survey’s accuracy goes up to eleven!
I will get back to your anti-male shaming tactics I mean comments a bit later on. In the meantime, Spinal tap are for real
He is so right. We would never laugh at bad science done by women. Only men. Ever. Amirite?
Seriously Tom, cough up a name. Who are you corresponding with? Surely you know; even someone so stupid as to think that Spinal Tap is a real band would at least know the name of a person they’d been corresponding with. If you copy and paste it here, we could even help you sound it out!
Now I’m imagining Tom Martin on stage, playing a guitar while penguin skip around a circle of misandric hard chairs
Criticism(with a heavily sarcastic tone) isn’t anti-male shaming. Jesus.
But the chairs are only 18 inches tall.
Hellkell, built to scale.
Argenti Aertheri
The statistics was a while ago, but it could be fun to give it a try.
You agree to act like my trusting you with the data isn’t misplaced trust? Because I do think you can be a decent human being, but you seem to enjoy proving me wrong.
If so, once I close the survey I’ll pull that chunk of data out and idk, put it on google docs or something.
You’re going to love the format the survey site exports the data in. But hey, finding the funny correlations gives you a chance to be funny without being a tool.
Argenti.
Yes I agree to be decent. Goggle docs will work fine.
“You’re going to love the format the survey site exports the data in”
Hmm, hope I can read and understand..
Awesome!
And it exports as, say, Q23.3, which is answer option 3 to question 23. And then the column has the flippin’ words of the answer in it without a header! I already put headers on the columns, but it’s still words = checked it, no words = didn’t. Argh!