Bridal Shower: sex toy sales shower

[Mrs. Pilgrim]

That's not how it came accross to me. I agree with the previous posters that it sounds insulting and judgemental.

   Oh, but isn't that assumption judgmental, also? 

[Sharnita]

I wouldn't want them to even have a teensy hint that I could be the type of person to own and use them.  

This hit a nerve - what exactly is the type of person to own scrabble accessories? I may be reading too much in this, but this sounds as though using this type of product is somehow reprehensible.

But I agree that coworkers don't need to know what happens (or doesn't) in anyone's bedroom.

I don't think that the Dame meant that as an insult, rather I think that she meant that she could do without the judgements that some people heap on you if they find out you're not completely vanilla in the bedroom. I don't think that she herself judges people that way.

That's not how it came accross to me. I agree with the previous posters that it sounds insulting and judgemental.

I enjoy these kinds of parties and I have even worked for a "scrabble" company, but inviting someone without informing them of the party's nature is a very bad idea.

I saw it as her making it clear that she doesn't want her co-workers to think of her in a sexu@l nature. 

[rashea]

I wouldn't want them to even have a teensy hint that I could be the type of person to own and use them.  

This hit a nerve - what exactly is the type of person to own scrabble accessories? I may be reading too much in this, but this sounds as though using this type of product is somehow reprehensible.

But I agree that coworkers don't need to know what happens (or doesn't) in anyone's bedroom.

I don't think that the Dame meant that as an insult, rather I think that she meant that she could do without the judgements that some people heap on you if they find out you're not completely vanilla in the bedroom. I don't think that she herself judges people that way.

That's not how it came accross to me. I agree with the previous posters that it sounds insulting and judgemental.

I enjoy these kinds of parties and I have even worked for a "scrabble" company, but inviting someone without informing them of the party's nature is a very bad idea.

I saw it as her making it clear that she doesn't want her co-workers to think of her in a sexu@l nature. 

I think it's the word "type" that is the problem. Saying I don't want my co-workers to think of me in a sexual nature is one thing, saying that there is a type is another.

[Hushabye]

I wouldn't want them to even have a teensy hint that I could be the type of person to own and use them.  

This hit a nerve - what exactly is the type of person to own scrabble accessories? I may be reading too much in this, but this sounds as though using this type of product is somehow reprehensible.

But I agree that coworkers don't need to know what happens (or doesn't) in anyone's bedroom.

I don't think that the Dame meant that as an insult, rather I think that she meant that she could do without the judgements that some people heap on you if they find out you're not completely vanilla in the bedroom. I don't think that she herself judges people that way.

That's not how it came accross to me. I agree with the previous posters that it sounds insulting and judgemental.

I enjoy these kinds of parties and I have even worked for a "scrabble" company, but inviting someone without informing them of the party's nature is a very bad idea.

I saw it as her making it clear that she doesn't want her co-workers to think of her in a sexu@l nature. 

I think it's the word "type" that is the problem. Saying I don't want my co-workers to think of me in a sexual nature is one thing, saying that there is a type is another.

I agree.  If one doesn't want one's coworkers to think of one in a s3xual manner, why not just say, "I wouldn't want them to have even the teensiest reason to think of me in a s3xual manner" rather than insinuating that there's a "type" of person who owns s3x toys and that it's bad to be one of those people?  What IS the "type" of person referred to, anyway?  And why is owning s3x toys a negative thing?  (That's mostly meant rhetorically; I know that not everyone is comfortable or excited about them, which is totally okay.  I'm just trying to explain why some of us find that particular wording to be kind of offensive.)

[TheBardess]

I wouldn't want them to even have a teensy hint that I could be the type of person to own and use them.  

This hit a nerve - what exactly is the type of person to own scrabble accessories? I may be reading too much in this, but this sounds as though using this type of product is somehow reprehensible.

But I agree that coworkers don't need to know what happens (or doesn't) in anyone's bedroom.

I don't think that the Dame meant that as an insult, rather I think that she meant that she could do without the judgements that some people heap on you if they find out you're not completely vanilla in the bedroom. I don't think that she herself judges people that way.

That's not how it came accross to me. I agree with the previous posters that it sounds insulting and judgemental.

I enjoy these kinds of parties and I have even worked for a "scrabble" company, but inviting someone without informing them of the party's nature is a very bad idea.

I saw it as her making it clear that she doesn't want her co-workers to think of her in a sexu@l nature. 

I think it's the word "type" that is the problem. Saying I don't want my co-workers to think of me in a sexual nature is one thing, saying that there is a type is another.

I agree.  If one doesn't want one's coworkers to think of one in a s3xual manner, why not just say, "I wouldn't want them to have even the teensiest reason to think of me in a s3xual manner" rather than insinuating that there's a "type" of person who owns s3x toys and that it's bad to be one of those people?  What IS the "type" of person referred to, anyway?  And why is owning s3x toys a negative thing?  (That's mostly meant rhetorically; I know that not everyone is comfortable or excited about them, which is totally okay.  I'm just trying to explain why some of us find that particular wording to be kind of offensive.)

I think the bolded part has a lot to do with it. If you are deeply uncomfortable with, or have strong personal/ethical/religious/etc. objections to something, I can see how, even if you understand that not everybody shares that discomfort or those objections, you would still not want people to think of you in conjunction with that something. If I may illustrate from my own experience:

I am a devout Catholic. As such, I believe very, very strongly in not playing Scrabble until you are married. Now, I understand that many people these days don't share that belief. And that's absolutely fine. But even so, when DH and I were dating/engaged, it used to really bother me when people made the assumption that we were playing Scrabble together. Why? Because that's not what we were doing, that's not who I am, and I didn't like the idea of people thinking I was doing something that went so completely against my religious and moral beliefs.

Similarly, if someone is uncomfortable with Scrabble accessories, or has religious, moral, or similar objections to them, I can understand them not wanting other people to think of them as using said accessories, even if they completely understand that not everyone has those same objections. I think that's maybe what the case is with the offending comment- not caring if other people use extra Scrabble tiles, but having personal objections to them, and as such not wanting to be thought of in conjunction with them by others, simply because it's something that would go so strongly against who the person is and what they believe.

[rashea]

Similarly, if someone is uncomfortable with Scrabble accessories, or has religious, moral, or similar objections to them, I can understand them not wanting other people to think of them as using said accessories, even if they completely understand that not everyone has those same objections. I think that's maybe what the case is with the offending comment- not caring if other people use extra Scrabble tiles, but having personal objections to them, and as such not wanting to be thought of in conjunction with them by others, simply because it's something that would go so strongly against who the person is and what they believe.

That's fine. But using the word "type" makes it seem like judging others. If that's the case, then go ahead and use the word. But if the issue is just that you wouldn't want people to associate you with using accessories for some reason, then say that. By saying "I wouldn't want them to think that I was that type of person" you imply that there is a type, and that it is a negative. Arguable, the statement is just saying there is a type and not necessarily putting a judgement on it, but because the statement is so distancing "I don't want them to think I'm like that" it implies that the type is negative.

[C0mputerGeek]

Similarly, if someone is uncomfortable with Scrabble accessories, or has religious, moral, or similar objections to them, I can understand them not wanting other people to think of them as using said accessories, even if they completely understand that not everyone has those same objections. I think that's maybe what the case is with the offending comment- not caring if other people use extra Scrabble tiles, but having personal objections to them, and as such not wanting to be thought of in conjunction with them by others, simply because it's something that would go so strongly against who the person is and what they believe.

That's fine. But using the word "type" makes it seem like judging others. If that's the case, then go ahead and use the word. But if the issue is just that you wouldn't want people to associate you with using accessories for some reason, then say that. By saying "I wouldn't want them to think that I was that type of person" you imply that there is a type, and that it is a negative. Arguable, the statement is just saying there is a type and not necessarily putting a judgement on it, but because the statement is so distancing "I don't want them to think I'm like that" it implies that the type is negative.

I don't find the phrase rude, and I disagree that the subtraction of the word "type" makes the sentence better.

I think people need to remember the part about striving not to be offended. I also think if you want to know what the EHellDame was trying to say, you can always send her a link to the thread and ask.

[weeblewobble]

I have been to one of these parties.  I was invited by a friend of the bride. Basically I'd never met the bride before, or anyone else, and I thought it was going to be super-awkward. (The bride didn't have a lot of friends she was comfortable inviting to that sort of thing. I was invited to increase the body count and help increase the total sales, thereby increasing the bride's reward points.)

Polite and etiquette-hell-approved? Not quite.  That said, I had a fantastic time. I don't talk about my sex life with friends or sisters. I'm just a private person.  But, the other guests and I didn't know each other, so we felt more comfortable asking questions, cracking jokes, and participating in the conversations. I got to know the other ladies pretty well, obviously, and made some friends.

I think that would be the only circumstances that I would attend another of these parties.  They don't have to be completely tacky or horrible.  Would I ever think about attending one with co-workers?  Not even in my dreams... or worst nightmares.

[Precarious Armada]

I have to admit, the use of the phrase "type of person" could have been better phrased.
From what I have read, the only "type" of person who may consider purchasing "scrabble" toys is somebody with an interest in "scrabble", in other words, the vast majority of human beings. Which does make the statement rather uninformative.
I understand what Miss Jeanne is trying to convey, and I agree with her, in most work environments that would be my preference too.

As for the shower itself...

Not informing people what the shower theme would be, especially one so likely to cause offense/discomfort - bad.
Not informing people until they get there that it's a sales party - worse.
Doing both of the above for co-workers - career suicide, imo.

[JadeAngel]

I still haven't recovered from an incident where the maid of honor threw a sex toy shower from her sister and then collected the purchases from the supplier and she (and a group of very drunk friends) thought it was hilarious to unpack everything in the middle of a party and display it to a roomful of strangers while naming the person who bought each item.

I knew there was a reason that I never purchase anything from these parties.

As for the issue of the workplace, I think the dame was trying to express that people generally like to keep their professional life very separate from their personal life and there isn't really anything more personal than sex. As far as I'm concerned there's a whole wide world of sexual proclivities out there and as long as you're not hurting anyone including yourself go for your life. Human beings are bizarre creatures and sometimes there's just no accounting for what turns us on. Whether it's costumes and props or dancing the tango with a lampshade on your head it's no-one's business but yours and your partners.

Personally I'm quite happy not knowing that Mary from Accounts owns fluffy handcuffs and a can of cool whip or that  Tara from Marketing wears crotchless knickers. Our work mates are not necessarily our friends and throwing people into such an intimate situation without warning was a terrible idea. Obviously there was no heads up on the invitation or later in proceedings because the hostess knew full well that if half the guest list knew the intention of the party they would have made their excuses and declined to attend.  

[rashea]

Similarly, if someone is uncomfortable with Scrabble accessories, or has religious, moral, or similar objections to them, I can understand them not wanting other people to think of them as using said accessories, even if they completely understand that not everyone has those same objections. I think that's maybe what the case is with the offending comment- not caring if other people use extra Scrabble tiles, but having personal objections to them, and as such not wanting to be thought of in conjunction with them by others, simply because it's something that would go so strongly against who the person is and what they believe.

That's fine. But using the word "type" makes it seem like judging others. If that's the case, then go ahead and use the word. But if the issue is just that you wouldn't want people to associate you with using accessories for some reason, then say that. By saying "I wouldn't want them to think that I was that type of person" you imply that there is a type, and that it is a negative. Arguable, the statement is just saying there is a type and not necessarily putting a judgement on it, but because the statement is so distancing "I don't want them to think I'm like that" it implies that the type is negative.

I don't find the phrase rude, and I disagree that the subtraction of the word "type" makes the sentence better.

I think people need to remember the part about striving not to be offended. I also think if you want to know what the EHellDame was trying to say, you can always send her a link to the thread and ask.

It's not that I'm not striving to not be offended. It's that even with that, I find the statement offensive. It's not so bad that I would leave the forum, or set up a campaign, or even ask for an apology. I'm giving feedback that I, and others, find this offensive, and pointing out what makes it so. You don't have to find it offensive for me to feel that way. And I do know what she was trying to say. I'm pointing out that the way she chose to express herself is offensive to me, and could potentially be taken badly by others.

[C0mputerGeek]

It's not that I'm not striving to not be offended. It's that even with that, I find the statement offensive. It's not so bad that I would leave the forum, or set up a campaign, or even ask for an apology. I'm giving feedback that I, and others, find this offensive, and pointing out what makes it so. You don't have to find it offensive for me to feel that way. And I do know what she was trying to say. I'm pointing out that the way she chose to express herself is offensive to me, and could potentially be taken badly by others.

I just don't get being offended that there are people out there who don't want others to know the details of their sex life.

[kingsrings]

ITA w/computer geek.

[rashea]

It's not that I'm not striving to not be offended. It's that even with that, I find the statement offensive. It's not so bad that I would leave the forum, or set up a campaign, or even ask for an apology. I'm giving feedback that I, and others, find this offensive, and pointing out what makes it so. You don't have to find it offensive for me to feel that way. And I do know what she was trying to say. I'm pointing out that the way she chose to express herself is offensive to me, and could potentially be taken badly by others.

I just don't get being offended that there are people out there who don't want others to know the details of their sex life.

I'm not offended that people don't want others to know the details about their sex life. I don't share that information with co-workers. I'm offended that apparently there is a "type of person that uses sex toys" and that that is a negative thing. Part of it is that "type" usually means that there is a stereotype. So saying, "I don't want someone to think I'm the type of person who does x" usually means that x is something the person considers morally negative (or at least is concerned it will be seen that way).

[Shoo]

An unfortunate choice of words.  That's all it was.  This thread is being derailed.