the real question is: will he be off tinder during the olympics or not

Okay clearly there is enough here to make the argument that it’s not a gendered term, but in my own experience with it it never came up for dudes. I also wonder if it’s fallen into the realm of political vocabulary because of Whips. Anywho, I’ll continue hating it on a purely personal level.

I think “when they were younger” is key. Would your uncle still refer to his grown sons as “whip smart?” That’s what I meant by saying it was condescending though there will always be exceptions in language usage because we are *~*~individuals~*~*. I have no doubt that some people apply this term without an ounce of…

I wasn’t even thinking of the connotations of the term before I posted but eesh and also yikes. A little internetting confirms that “smart as a whip” originally refers to the pain of a whip rather than intelligence.

Yes yes yes. But again. It is a debate that stems from its usage (i.e. It is applied mostly to dogs and stylish women) rather than its meaning. (Anecdote: I described a male friend as “whip smart” once as a fun experiment and he visibly recoiled from that term, even though he is a feminist.)

“Whip smart” is used to describe intelligence, not stupidity, but you are right that stupidity comes in all genders...

Honest off-topic question—are we using “whip smart” for women or not? It’s just such a weirdly gendered, condescending term. But maybe she meant it to be condescending because Wendy W is a mess? Idk. “Whip smart.” Opinions?

That girl baby is had the right idea in this situation.

FASHION.

Not to state the obvious but yes.

COSIGNED.

From the very first time I clapped eyes on one of these contraptions coming down a crowded sidewalk with a gum-chewing polo-shirt-wearing teenage weaselkid zooming aloft, I’ve hated these things with an unreasonable passion and so am feeling undeservedly triumphant.

If there’s a reason why the parallel between acting and writing awards is fundamentally flawed, I might concede that it’s a bad idea. Otherwise, I’m going to hold onto it, especially since I don’t affect the Oscar committee in any way.

It also reinforces the gender binary in the spotlight of an, unfortunately, influential cultural institution.

There would be a learning curve for sure, and things would still suck, but if the end goal is the same then we would be able to see a lot more clearly what kind of roles need to be written for women instead of giving them the modified-push-up-esque roles of wife and widow.

While I think that’s true, it would actually make the hard-to-define respect imbalance between women and men (even in the weird gendered diminutive -ess) more visible. If the end goal is the same (an Oscar) we can see more clearly that women deserve roles beyond wife or entertainer or widow to be judged at the “same…

On the contrary, it’s much more dehumanitizing to cease just and witty criticism of a man’s bad music because he has a mental disorder.

I’m really in favor of conflating all genders into one Best Actor prize.

Holy Mother of Pearl the Wikipedia endorsement lists are long! I couldn’t make it past the boring government people to find someone weird to post. Also, I’m lazy.

Those are some badddddd looking pants.