Bridal Shower: sex toy sales shower

[VorFemme]

Not so much "type" as I really don't want coworkers thinking of ME and s3x whether toys are involved or not - no s3x at all connected to thinking about me, please. 

(((shudder)))

[penelope2017]

Absolutely no one is saying there is anything wrong with that. The issue is with the statement that you wouldn't want someone to have the tiniest clue that you were the "type" of person who would even have accessories. Which implies (though possibly accidentally) that there is something wrong with being that "type" of person.

I'm not that invested in this discussion one way or another, but I think the issue here is getting confused. The issue is not that some people want others to know about their sex lives and some people don't, or anything like that. The issue is that there are two different statements that could be made:

1) I don't want my coworkers to know if I use sex toys or, if so, which ones I use.
or,
2) There's a "type" of person who uses sex toys and I don't want to be associated with them.

The use of the word "type" in the sentence in question makes this much more like the second one than the first. And the two statements communicate two very different things. The first is just a privacy preference. The second is a judgment of people who use sex toys.

I'm guessing it was just a poor choice of words, but I think Rashea's reaction is valid.

I agree with this extremely well-thought out post and also agree that Rashea's reaction is valid. I have to say I had the same instinctive reaction.

[C0mputerGeek]

I'm not that invested in this discussion one way or another, but I think the issue here is getting confused. The issue is not that some people want others to know about their sex lives and some people don't, or anything like that. The issue is that there are two different statements that could be made:

1) I don't want my coworkers to know if I use sex toys or, if so, which ones I use.
or,
2) There's a "type" of person who uses sex toys and I don't want to be associated with them.

The use of the word "type" in the sentence in question makes this much more like the second one than the first. And the two statements communicate two very different things. The first is just a privacy preference. The second is a judgment of people who use sex toys.

I'm guessing it was just a poor choice of words, but I think Rashea's reaction is valid.

Actually, the disagreement is in how some are choosing to translate the statement into a personal diss. Let's take a look at the original text.

EWWWW!  Not only would I not want my co-workers to know what type of sex toy I buy, I wouldn't want them to even have a teensy hint that I could be the type of person to own and use them.  Nor do I want my work experience tainted with the knowledge of what my co-workers have purchased for their off-work pleasure.   I can see it now.... "Now Jeanne", the elderly senior secretary said, patting me on the arm matronly, " I really didn't think you were a 'jiggly fluffy bunny' kind of girl.  Between you and me, I've got my eye on that 'raging bull horns of love' thingy."

IMHO, it's clear that the eHellDame is talking about her own preferences, which has very little to do with what other people may or may not choose to bring into the bedroom with them. I see nothing in that quote that says, "There's a "type" of person who uses sex toys and I don't want to be associated with them." Rather, it's something people have chosen to infer.

[immadz]

I really don't see another interpretation to this

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

If there isn't a type of person to own and use sex toys then the word type is off.
If you don't feel that this is wrong and you wouldn't mind being associated with said people: then why don't you want to let others know that you could be a member of this 'type'.

In my experience the word type includes more that one set of characteristics. There are people that like hiking. There are outdoorsy-types. Outdoorsy-types tend to share more common traits than just liking to hike. There are a set of traits one associates with them. Not all types are negative. However in the sentence above, it does seem to indicate that the author seemed to think this 'type' was.

[TheBardess]

I really don't see another interpretation to this

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

If there isn't a type of person to own and use sex toys then the word type is off.
If you don't feel that this is wrong and you wouldn't mind being associated with said people: then why don't you want to let others know that you could be a member of this 'type'.

In my experience the word type includes more that one set of characteristics. There are people that like hiking. There are outdoorsy-types. Outdoorsy-types tend to share more common traits than just liking to hike. There are a set of traits one associates with them. Not all types are negative. However in the sentence above, it does seem to indicate that the author seemed to think this 'type' was.

Umm...because it's none of their business? It's none of their business whether you are that "type." It's none of their business if you're not. If the goal is to keep your Scrabble game private, then you don't want your co-workers to associate you with any type of Scrabble player at all, regardless of your own personal feelings about that specific Scrabble strategy. Personally, I don't want anybody but my DH to know what kinds of things I enjoy in the bedroom. Hence, I don't want anybody but my DH to know if I am the "type" of person to use Scrabble toys. I also don't want anybody but my DH to know if I am the "type" not to use them. The simple fact that I may personally be okay with something (particularly something as personal and private as Scrabble toys) does not necessarily imply that I want people to know I am okay with that specific thing, or even know my feelings towards it at all.

[immadz]

I really don't see another interpretation to this

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

If there isn't a type of person to own and use sex toys then the word type is off.
If you don't feel that this is wrong and you wouldn't mind being associated with said people: then why don't you want to let others know that you could be a member of this 'type'.

In my experience the word type includes more that one set of characteristics. There are people that like hiking. There are outdoorsy-types. Outdoorsy-types tend to share more common traits than just liking to hike. There are a set of traits one associates with them. Not all types are negative. However in the sentence above, it does seem to indicate that the author seemed to think this 'type' was.

Umm...because it's none of their business? It's none of their business whether you are that "type." It's none of their business if you're not. If the goal is to keep your Scrabble game private, then you don't want your co-workers to associate you with any type of Scrabble player at all, regardless of your own personal feelings about that specific Scrabble strategy. Personally, I don't want anybody but my DH to know what kinds of things I enjoy in the bedroom. Hence, I don't want anybody but my DH to know if I am the "type" of person to use Scrabble toys. I also don't want anybody but my DH to know if I am the "type" not to use them. The simple fact that I may personally be okay with something (particularly something as personal and private as Scrabble toys) does not necessarily imply that I want people to know I am okay with that specific thing, or even know my feelings towards it at all.

So suppose I say " I wouldn't want them to think that I was the type of woman to breastfeed". The same would hold true. It is really none of your coworkers business whether you breast feed or not. I am sure I would rather not tell people what other uses my private parts are being put to.

However, I imagine that the above statement would be offensive in its implications that there is a 'type' of person that does breastfeed, and that you wouldn't want to be associated with that type.

ETA: This is just an analogy, which I felt would get more people invested in the crux of the wording issue. Please lets not make this about breastfeeding, not breastfeeding or giving or not giving support to people who breast feed.

[kingsrings]

This thread is now just going around in circles.

[Dr. Horrible]

This thread is now just going around in circles.

Yes.

Can we agree that some of us found thoe comments insulting, and some us did not?

I'm not that invested in this discussion one way or another, but I think the issue here is getting confused. The issue is not that some people want others to know about their sex lives and some people don't, or anything like that. The issue is that there are two different statements that could be made:

1) I don't want my coworkers to know if I use sex toys or, if so, which ones I use.
or,
2) There's a "type" of person who uses sex toys and I don't want to be associated with them.

The use of the word "type" in the sentence in question makes this much more like the second one than the first. And the two statements communicate two very different things. The first is just a privacy preference. The second is a judgment of people who use sex toys.

I'm guessing it was just a poor choice of words, but I think Rashea's reaction is valid.

Actually, the disagreement is in how some are choosing to translate the statement into a personal diss. Let's take a look at the original text.

And, no, we did not choose to feel insulted. I feel insulted becuase her choice of words make me feel that Scrabble toys are shameful and no one should ever aspire to be the 'type' of person who uses them. This is what she implies with these words.

And if so many of us think this way, then it is not clear what she meant. Her words are ambiguous at best, insulting at worst.

If she did not mean it that way, then she just made a poor choice of words. That is fine. She can do what all of us do when we make poor choice of words that seem to insult someone else's lifestyle: flutter around a bit, apologize for poor choice of words and say we didn't mean it that way.

And we're all good again.

[ladycrim]

OP here.

I believe Miss Jeanne meant that she didn't like the idea of her co-workers thinking of her in terms of "I wonder if she's used that toy yet" as opposed to in a more businesslike way.  I can certainly understand that - especially in this office, where people snicker that I must be pregnant if I have a stomachache.  Her choice of wording was clearly not ideal, and I apologize that my post led to such a stirring up of anger.

FTR, I would have sent the shower's hostess to E-Hell even if it had been Pampered Chef or something like that, because the sales portion was still sprung on the guests when they arrived at the shower (presumably with gifts already in hand).  That it was for items that many people consider very private just added another layer.  I'm a pretty open person - all my co-workers know I do Rocky Horror - but in addition to not wanting them to have this particular info about me, I wouldn't want to have it about them!  I don't care one little bit if they own those toys, nor would I pass judgment on them; I just don't want to know about it.

And if anyone is wondering: nary a word of that shower was ever spoken in the office after Kathy told me about it.  I still don't know if my boss knew it was a sales shower beforehand or not.  (She'd have little authority to scold the hostess for it, as it happened outside of work.)

[C0mputerGeek]

I really don't see another interpretation to this

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

If there isn't a type of person to own and use sex toys then the word type is off.
If you don't feel that this is wrong and you wouldn't mind being associated with said people: then why don't you want to let others know that you could be a member of this 'type'.

In my experience the word type includes more that one set of characteristics. There are people that like hiking. There are outdoorsy-types. Outdoorsy-types tend to share more common traits than just liking to hike. There are a set of traits one associates with them. Not all types are negative. However in the sentence above, it does seem to indicate that the author seemed to think this 'type' was.

Hmmm...there is a type of person to enjoy any sort of activity. Again, I think it's more relevant to take the entire paragraph into context rather than picking over that one sentence.

And, no, we did not choose to feel insulted. I feel insulted becuase her choice of words make me feel that Scrabble toys are shameful and no one should ever aspire to be the 'type' of person who uses them. This is what she implies with these words.

And if so many of us think this way, then it is not clear what she meant. Her words are ambiguous at best, insulting at worst.

If she did not mean it that way, then she just made a poor choice of words. That is fine. She can do what all of us do when we make poor choice of words that seem to insult someone else's lifestyle: flutter around a bit, apologize for poor choice of words and say we didn't mean it that way.

And we're all good again.

Honestly, this goes back to the rule about people striving to not be insulting to others and to not look for the insult.

I don't see the poor choice of words, but it's clear to me that this conversation will never end since those of you who are insulted seem to want the comment to be about yourselves when it's clear from the context that it's not.

[Jander]

I can't help wondering what the response would be if the "type of person" comment had been made by anyone else. Would some posters be so quick to insist that it isn't insulting?

[Diane AKA Traska]

Okay, I may as well weigh in.  (Everyone: Wait, who's this?)

I don't believe Miss Jeanne meant to be insulting.  I *do* believe that saying there's a "type" of person who uses sex toys is akin to saying there's a "type" of person who wears certain clothing, or lives in a certain kind of home, or gets tattoos (for example).  Now, I don't believe fo a second she meant that, but she did type that.  That's where the insult comes from.

For the record, not insulted.  I can see both sides.  No one chose to be insulted, and it's possible to be insulted without choosing to be, or reaching for straws.

Ultimately, it's a phrasing that some people are going to view one way, and others are going to view another way, and neither one will be able to convince their "opponents" of the validity of their viewpoint.