I know it’s almost a half-century old, and the woman is fictional, but still I find myself begging this woman to GET A FUCKING DIVORCE!!!!
Also, check out this article from a British paper: Marksman called in to kill Kingston’s pigeons. You can almost skip the article; I’m linking this for the comments, which are brilliant.
Finally, The New Yorker has a time-lapse video, taken from a building’s security cameras, of a man trapped alone in an elevator for 41 hours. Oddly compelling. (Curtsy: Boing Boing.)
I agree, Amp. Here’s what should have happened:
Wife: “Harvey, want anything special for your birthday?”
Husband: “Just a decent cup of coffee.”
Wife: “You’re kidding!”
Husband: “I’m serious. Honey, your coffee is… undrinkable!”
Wife: “No… I think you kind of missed my implication there. I meant, you’re kidding about just wanting a cup of coffee for your birthday, right? Seriously? Not new golf clubs? Not a suit and tie? Not a bowling ball bag? Not a framed picture of McCarthy? Not a new copy of the Holy Bible with all the parts potentially justifying homophobia triple-underlined? Just a damn cup of coffee? Is that it?”
Husband: “Er, well…”
Wife: “Okay, fantastic. If a cup of coffee is all you want, then it’s what you’ll get. That’ll leave me plenty of extra cash to buy a one-way ticket to someplace with beaches and nice weather and maybe even people who don’t continually piss me off with inane, patronizing commentary and startlingly unclever innuendo.”
Husband: “Ah, but…”
Wife: “Anyways, you can go ahead and keep the house, I always hated it anyways. I know you can’t tell, since we’re in black and white, but as soon as Technicolor kicks in, this kitchen is going to turn the nastiest shade of puke green you could possibly imagine.”
Husband: “Wait, um-”
Wife: “However, I do intend to take my car with me. I’ll mail you the divorce paperwork once I get to Honolulu. Have a nice day at the office.”
Wife pecks husband on the cheek, and leaves the room.
Husband continues to stare into his cup of coffee.
Fade to black.
DSimon: Bravo! A work of genius.
Amp: As an Englishman, that comment thread makes me quietly proud. I think my favourite is, “Kill them with axes.”
Ok, I am at a loss. She should get divorced because he wants her to learn how to make better coffee? He should have just smiled and said he liked it anyway? This is the 50’s right? The assumption was that she had his entire workday, everyday, to learn how to cook, clean and make coffee correctly, right? He was at work while she was visiting the neigbor and chatting away, right? I am not saying that SHOULD be the default, but it was the default when the comercial was filmed. He may have been a bit blunt, but divorce? Over COFFEE?? And should men get divorced if their wives criticize the ties they wear or some such as well? OI!
ed, are you for real?
The guy is an asshole. There are ways to ask for better coffee without making his wife feel THIS bad. There are ways NOT to mention how awesome ‘the girls at the office’ are.
Divorce over coffee? Maybe. Divorce over being a fucking asshole? I’d applaud.
But you know what? She married him, she is putting up with his shit, how is it my business?
Yes, I am for real. Remember you are looking into a PRIVATE conversation. He is not berating his wife in public. If you honestly believe married couples can’t be this blunt and forthcoming..even moreso, then don’t get married because you are headed for a divorce. This is the person you eat, sleep, bathe, and … relieve yourself … within feet of daily. If attitudes like /divorce him/ are that prevelent I no longer wonder why we have a 50% divorce rate. As far as “for better or worse” goes, this guy is a long way from as bad as it gets.
I was reading about Mothers of Police Accountability up in the Seattle area. Their link is down but they were instrumental in the development of the CIT program in that city’s police department.
I blogged on sexual harassment in law enforcement. It’s part of a series.
ed, the problem isn’t with married couples being blunt and forthcoming with one another. At any rate, as it happens, I am not currently permitted to marry and so I will be unable to take your kind advice.
After reading those comments on the pigeon issue, all I can say is that England apparently has a MUCH worse problem with excessive use of recreational drugs than I had thought. But I bet they’re all a lot of fun at parties.
Here’s Tom Lehrer singing a song appropriate to the occasion. I actually remembered this from when it came out!
“ed, the problem isn’t with married couples being blunt and forthcoming with one another. At any rate, as it happens, I am not currently permitted to marry and so I will be unable to take your kind advice.”
Two points to address… first, if that is not the point then what is? He is an “asshole” for being blunt about how horrid his wife’s coffee is and that warrants a divorce. What point did I miss?
Second, unless you are under 18 (varies state to state), legally declared incompetent, or incarcerated (and some places you still can) then you are permitted to marry. Do you have some other situation unique to you? Not being allowed to marry who or what you want is not the same as not being allowed to marry. I want to marry and divorce Bill Gates, it is illegal for me to marry him against his will and because he is already married…darn, I am not allowed to marry.
I could care less about gay marriage (making an assumption here), but this kind of logic drives me nuts. Every society has norms. You want to define them for your entire society and shame on those who want the majority to do that. That is selfish and self absorbed.
We have no problem with excessive recreational drug use; that’s how the comments got that way…
I see what you mean by “no problem”. Apparently they’re freely available to all.
first, if that is not the point then what is? He is an “asshole” for being blunt about how horrid his wife’s coffee is and that warrants a divorce. What point did I miss?
That he’s probably like that about everything? That she’s doing him a favor (making his coffee) and he is complaining about it? That he could make his own dam coffee?
I was going to ask this in the comments to Mandolyn’s post, but I didn’t want to sidetrack the discussion Mandolyn had intended, so I thought I’d post my question here. When Brownfemipower says:
What is the difference between “dismantling” and “shifting”? Metaphorically, I think I understand what dismantling is – using different tools of theory and practice to deconstruct both theoretical and practical systems of oppression. But what does “shifting” involve? Is that redirecting the target of violence? The metaphor I am thinking of is that a gun is aimed at you, so you reach out and push the barrel away, but it hits another target. Is that right? Or have I got that completely wrong?
I appreciate any enlightenment. Thanks!
Diane,
Probably, we are going to read so far in to an advertisement as to say he is probably an asshole about everything so she should divorce? Funny, in your world, if that is how he is about everyting, why did this one thing warrant a discussion with the friend about it as if it was out of character for him? This is a relatively silly thing to be fighting over but the comment about divorce annoyed me. I could assume a WHOLE list of things…like he has been politely begging for her to learn how to make coffee for years and she didnt because she is selfish and incompetent…but that would be just as silly as your assumption
I think the idea is that white fminism ends up (I think her argument is intentionally) not freeing all women from violence that’s gender-targetted, but only ending up making white women unacceptable targets, so that the rate of violence doesn’t change, but all the violence is aimed at women of color.
I’m confused.
I have certainly heard the argument that white feminism is a “me first” movement, which selectively addresses and selectively attempts to cure problems germane to white feminists. I get that.
And I have recently read an argument* that white feminists, by using/overusing/trusting in the criminal justice system, are making matters worse for the POC who are, generally, treated like shit by said system (i.e. ‘increasing police presence” may be beneficial if you’re white, and actively a problem if you’re nonwhite.) i get that, though I think it’s a lot more complex and less obvious than the first one.
Systems are complex, so i can grokthe idea of systemic changes having unexpected or unwanted effects, or tradeoffs.
But what I read you saying here–and I may be misreading you entirely–is th concept that white feminism is taking non-systemic aggressors–individual men, i assume, mostly–and transferring their ‘bad acts’ to POC women WITHOUT redicing the total number of violent acts. Am i reading you right?
*a linked article on feministe a while back, don’t recall where
No, I think the idea is that white feminism takes the systemic violence currently aimed against white women and women of color, and ends up changing the system so that the non-reduced number of violent incidents ends up targetting women of color (some shifting in how that violence occurs is probably involved).
I could still be wrong about all that; it’s just what I read the argument as meaning.
I am fairly sure this is the article/letter to which you refer.
Yes, that was it, thanks.
I think I see what you mean.
I actually suspect that in some situations the total violent incidents probably DO decrease, but that the rate of violent incidents for WOC as a subgroup increase.
(This is theoretically possible because WOC are a numerical minority. For example, a law that, through whatever result, reduced domestic violence against white women by 50% while increasing domestic violence against black women by 50% would vastly reduce the total number of assaults, and would also reduce the total rate of assaults as measured against all women combined–because there are more white women than black women. And no, I don’t think that’s a good result, I’m just trying to avoid confusion about the math.)
Perhaps bfp will clarify at some point. Does anyone know of a concrete example of this phenomenon?
I’m hopefully not mangling the issue of sexual harassment in law enforcement. I’ve received some interesting responses on this one, not in the blog but through other channels.
Radfem, did you mean t post a link?
Oh yeah! Thanks.
Sexual harassment
I found out that one case I had written on earlier in several postings settled very quickly and quietly after being filed.