96 thoughts on “On how it’s done

  1. Flip says:

    So many guys not understanding that’s it’s about the aggression afterward, not the goddamn conversation. And also the goddamn conversation, I guess.

    • WhoAmI says:

      I’m pretty sure being interrupted in your music session by a straight fuckboy is how they punish people in some of the lowest circles of Hell.

  2. VeryIrritable says:

    There are appropriate times to make small talk and inappropriate times. Headphones are fucking Big Ben telling you that it’s “no talk o’clock.”

    I’m ashamed for all the men who don’t understand this.
    But mostly I’m ashamed for the person who wrote in thinking that Cq response is or would be funny.

      • VeryIrritable says:

        That’s why it’s a problem. The benign deviation theory of humor requires that in order for something to be funny it has to be both deviant and benign. You think it’s funny because to you, it’s benign. By “it” I mean the behavior of asking women to take off their headphones. But we could take “it” to mean her response as a whole.

        Either way, this is clearly a social problem for many many women, it is not benign to them.

        At least you should question the tone you’re hearing in her response. Is it stern or casual fatigue? Consider that at the very least most women really do mean “FUCK OFF” in a most serious tone. For you to divorce Cq from that tone is understandable only in the most abstract sense.

        Maybe she really does want you to fuck off.

        I’m still ashamed that even the tiniest gnat of decency has to be addressed on a personal level.

          • VeryIrritable says:

            In response to your name, clearly chosen as a troll tactic, I am not in fact offended by any measure. Shame and offense are different things entirely. I’m ashamed for anyone who thinks it’s okay to interrupt someone using headphones for anything that isn’t of utility value for the person wearing the headphones.

        • Aaa says:

          No. Just no. We can laugh at this.

          It’s funny because the idea that a sad little man would approach a fierce unapologetic bitch like coke and demand her attention is absurd. This man is absurd. He is ridiculous. He is funny.

          We are not laughing at the situation, so the humor does not require it to be benign. We’ve been through this and we know it is annoying as fuck.
          We are laughing at him, at his ridiculousnes and his pathetic worldview colliding with a person like coke.

          • VeryIrritable says:

            Yeah, I can’t laugh that collision off. There’s way too many assholes that don’t get it.

            This whole thing exists in a realm of schroedingers audience. Some number of people will see both the OP and Cq response as benign and/or deviant, etc.

            You just happen to be in the audience that sees his “absurdity” as benign. I am not in that audience because year after year I see thousands of infractions that are similar in nature and my perception is that too many people laugh this stuff off when it’s indicative of a real problem. Respect.

            It’s pathetic and sad. And if you’re trying to draw a laugh from it, maybe you’re desperate to see humor in it.

            Anyway even if it is benign…it’s just not funny.

          • Strangely Rational says:

            I’m a woman who has been sexually assaulted as a child and have personal space issues and major social anxiety, and I think the imagery of the ridiculous man up against Coke is humorous to me. I think it’s the badass, straight to the point attitude that makes me love this. Maybe more so because I’m in the sad position of being one of those women who had politeness brainwashed into them so deeply that I’m still struggling to get rid of it.

            VeryIrritable, you are completely entitled to your reaction. It’s completely understandable. But you’re dead wrong that humor in general (not just your humor, but everyone else’s) requires a situation to be benign. Have you seriously never heard of dark humor? Or bringing humor to a tragic situation because sometimes it functions as a good coping mechanism? I think there are things too serious to joke about (such as rape, for example, unless it’s a coping thing for someone who’s experienced it), but this isn’t something that, on its own, is 100% serious for everyone who experiences it.

            So your reaction is valid. So is AAA’s.

        • it's clear says:

          Veryirritable quite being a faggot, and I mean that how Doug Stanhope does, 100% separate from gender and sexulization, instead we mean: WEAK

          • VeryIrritable says:

            Using the term faggot to equate with the word “weak” is derogatory no matter how much you want to try to weasel out of it. So let me be far more clear than you.

            Your words are useless.

          • Margo says:

            You don’t get to redefine a slur however you want just because it’s convenient to you. Actually you’re not even redefining it, you’re using it exactly with the weight and poison of the thing, you’re just also pretending like you can do so without taking responsibility for it.

            You’re a disingenuous, intellectually lazy, morally deficient piece of shit.

            Fuck. You.

      • VeryIrritable says:

        I feel like the same people who would laugh at Cq response are the same ones that would think it’s funny to throw food at animals in a zoo.

        “What?! It’s food! and it’s funny when they make noises! They aren’t hurt!”

          • it's clear says:

            And are all mammals dogs? My point was that the throwing of food is a terrible example in general. A Hersey bar isn’t going to inflict injury…use rocks at least. Jesus H.

          • WhoAmI says:

            Just as irrelevant as your initial point. Which was my point.
            That’s some low quality troll, two terms I’d rather not associate with dearcoquette, so get a life.

          • VeryIrritable says:

            [announcer voice]

            Are all animals mammals?
            Are all mammals deathly allergic to chocolate?
            Is it okay to throw rocks instead of food?
            Can you use the word faggot to mean “weak” without referencing gender or being derogatory towards homosexuals?

            Find out the answer to none of these questions by reading anything that the ironically named “It’s clear” spouts off like a diarrhetic cannon.

            Next time on “Fuck off.”

        • Aletheia says:

          Yeah. No. I realise you’re mostly trolling this, but you’re so far off the mark with this it’s not even funny.

          Personal anecdote: I’ve been told by strangers and family alike to remove headphones in public and in gatherings. The thing is, I get migraines pretty often, and sometimes these migraines cause me to be really sensitive to noise; I wear headphones around people solely for the purpose of blocking noise out. To be told to take the headphones out is not only an annoyance or an act of…. whatever, but it’s a request to inflict pain upon myself. I can’t expect strangers to know this (though their entitlement is still rife in their request), but my family does. For either group, this request is not a benign one.

          The problem is, these migraines also remove my ability to word usually, too; I don’t mean that in a cutesy Internet sense, I literally can’t speak straight (I forget words, the ones I do remember come out jumbled or I end up saying something completely different, etc) and I can’t *think* of responses to anyone, let alone snappy, off-the-cuff (if banal in your eyes) ones. Add on the fact that my family aren’t the type I can just say “fuck off” to (it would cause more drama than the brief moment of satisfaction from saying it would be worth), and… yeah. I laughed at her response. Try to paint me as an asshole if you want, but it felt good to have someone say it to the type of bastards that write letters and/or say things like this, in the same way removing a deeply embedded thorn from your foot feels good.

          I know this is only my own, personal experiences and reaction (both to the letter, Coke’s response, and the discussion going on here), but practically everyone else is telling you how wrong you are. That should tell you something. :/

          • VeryOff says:

            I’m not wrong in my premise. Though some of my assertions afterwards were not clearly defined.

            I’m not “trolling.” I should have clearly stated that there is a section of the audience that wants to see it as benign that shouldn’t be.

            There are guys out there that think that joke was funny. And, as I identify as a “guy”, I accidentally left out that context. So the assholes I envisioned that would “throw things at animals” are also guys. And as though on cue, an asshole jumped up to identify himself clearly.

            You can only laugh at things that are benign, period. You cannot find something that is not benign that is also funny. I defy you.

            It also has to deviate from a norm in a way that causes tension. Otherwise it’s just predictable. This is why lots of people find Christian humor completely lame. It doesn’t actually deviate from a norm far enough to cause tension.

            And then the resolution or perception of both of those things at the same time causes people to laugh.

            I suffer from migraines to the same degree you do, btw. I know what it’s like to have silence that is too loud and a dark closet that is too bright. And reality is nothing but a screaming cacaphony of pain. And thinking thoughts causes you to think more thoughts and all thoughts are of, about, and causing pain. You have my sympathy.

      • VeryIrritable says:

        It’s the predictability that makes it not funny in my book. It casts the person writing it as needing attention in exactly the same negative way that someone asking you to remove your headphones does. It’s recursive in rudeness.

        • Okami says:

          You are being the biggest, loudest, most useless and embarrassing white knight.

          Coke Talk has a finely tuned sense of humor/irony, dude. It’s weird of you to trample all over her joke and give a big confused lecture to everyone who got it.

          Sorry you didn’t get it.

          • VeryOn says:

            Sorry Okami, it’s not that i didn’t “get it.” As I said before. It’s not funny to me. I’ve tried to explain why at several levels that as a joke it doesn’t work for me. You don’t seem able to hear the possibility that it’s not meant as a joke, but literally as an instruction. “This is how you tell people to fuck off.” It’s in the title.

          • Okami says:

            Yeah, I got that. What I don’t get is why you were saying that we were laughing at her. We were all laughing at the type of pathetic asshole who bothers us in the street. What am I doing, I don’t have the patience to explain dark humor to you.

          • VeryIf says:

            “…why you were saying that we were laughing at her.”

            I don’t know how you arrived at this conclusion. I admit that some of my writing was not precise.

            There’s a range of responses to everything in the post. It can be framed at the response, the original question or the title of the post.

            Each piece or combination of pieces and context can be perceived as benign or not and deviant or not.

            In order for someone to find it funny, they must perceive it as both benign and deviating from a norm.

            A portion of the audience that finds it funny is probably considering a portion that I find upsetting as benign.

            If you’re a guy and you found the any piece of that situation funny, you should probably stop and consider why.

            As for all the people taking my observation personally…feel free to ignore me. I’ve already skipped to finding you irrelevant to my observation.

    • Charlene says:

      You know, you could have replied to me directly with your opinion instead of passive-aggressively making jabs at me on how I/others should be reacting to this situation.

      1) You’ve been doing a lot of projecting in your comments on why you think I laughed, and it’s not at all because I belittle this. As someone who experiences gender-based violence on a regular basis, it felt cathartic and I laughed bitterly because it feels great to crush a man’s ego, particularly one who feels entitled to a woman’s time, personal space, and attention. And yet, I don’t get to do so all the time because I run the risk of putting myself in danger as I do so. I never implied that I found this to be benign. You’re the one who’s in here pontificating on how people should interpret and react to this, somehow assuming that you’re the only one who has seen/experienced harassment and understands it.

      2) You can fuck right off for not seeing the irony of shaming me in particular while claiming to advocate for women because of my reaction to join Coquette as she obliterated a gross man’s ego.

      3) On your way out, don’t forget to pull your head out of your asshole.

      • VeryIrritable says:

        Let me first deal with your right fucking off by telling you to do exactly the same thing to exactly the same degree to which you would have me fucking and also let me communicate a strong desire for you to terminate said fucking in exactly the same manner you would imagine I should do.

        I don’t recall addressing you directly. But please, continue with the fucking off until you are fully sated.

        I have a right to not find the response funny. I have a right to feel that even as some people are laughing, others are not seeing that it’s still an issue. This is well evidenced by the troll that attempted to insult or berate me, whatever that was. As I’ve stated so many times today. The people who will find it funny will see it as benign and deviant. So, it’s not surprising that some women will see it as the crushing of a mans ego (deviant in that it rarely happens.) AND benign in that telling someone to fuck off is a completely empty concept on the internet. I get that.

        Now, from my perspective, having read all the comments in my social media, and having considered it…it was far too common to be deviant. And Cq’s response was too predictable to be funny as well. What would have been funny years ago as a bit in the movie Heathers is now just tiring. I’m tired of hearing about it and it’s tiring thinking that it still fucking happens!

        I’m not some SJW just because I think there’s something to talk about and didn’t find it funny. I’m not an SJW just because I think a lot of assholes are laughing for the wrong reason. I’m not an SJW just because I am speaking up for peoples personal space. But furthermore, even if I was, good for me!

        Totally don’t remember shaming you in particular. But I can see how you might have fallen into thinking that. Sorry, I’ll try to identify every person who comments as an individual and try to imagine what my words would mean to them.

        All that said, I definitely could have outlined my premise better and explained how I saw the audience divided.

        • Charlene says:

          On shaming me (fwiw, I’ve engaged in jokes regarding this topic):

          “I feel like the same people who would laugh at Cq response are the same ones that would think it’s funny to throw food at animals in a zoo.”

          Hell, even in the comment above, you call people who laughed to be assholes.

          The problem I have with you is that you conflate your response and your right to one to the response everyone should have, and the only appropriate one. Not only that, you project your reasons as to why people would find it funny. It’s funny to me and possibly for other commenters for neither of the reasons you ascribed, and it’s not because I don’t understand your point. Do you not see how self-absorbed you sound? You could have mentioned that you were irritated and stated your reasons why, but you’re making this discussion all about yourself. And you’re also aggravating people in an otherwise chill and constructive comments section by coming in and attacking everyone who found humour in Coquette’s response for no damn reason and giving a disproportionate amount of importance in your opinion.

          “I’m not an SJW just because I am speaking up for peoples personal space.”
          You’re not. You felt the need to silence others by berating them because you didn’t find it funny like they did. Of all the possible responses you could have given to create a discussion with commenters on why you think seeing Coquette’s response to be humorous, you chose to attack and shame others, more so than the harassers themselves.

          No one here ever contested or belittled your initial point regarding harassment or respecting personal space, that was all you putting shit in people’s mouths. If you’ve hung around here for a while, you would see that everyone is in the same boat regarding that.

  3. Cuttlefish says:

    Is this the most fucking ridiculous comment thread in the history of two-word replies, or am I just way more baked than I thought?

    • VeryIrritable says:

      It’s definitely getting there. It’s helping me clarify my own thinking even as people try to trounce me.

      The bottom line is that it should be “that simple” and it shouldn’t be funny. It’s about as funny as someone saying “get off my foot, cockwongle” or “don’t take up two seats, dickmonkey.”

      • Cuttlefish says:

        If it’s getting there, it’s because you’re the one bringing it there. almost single-handedly. Although those taking you seriously enough to “debate” you are also doing their part.

        • VeryIf says:

          Nobody I’ve seen so far is debating me. It’s all attacks based on either misperception or miscommunication. I don’t think I’m saying anything particularly inflammatory so it’s kind of bizarre how many people think I’m assaulting their “experience.” I do see how my not being clear about audience could easily be turned towards them…but subsequent attempts at clarity just ended up misinterpreted again. Gave up.

  4. BlueRhapsody says:

    Honest question, what about a man approaching a woman is entitled?

    Is it the specific man in the video circulating around the internet that everybody feels is entitled, or the PUA community that he represents or all men who speak to women when they have their headphones on in general?

    Obviously this video doesn’t exist in a patriarchal vacuum, but is there anything wrong with a man asking a woman to take off her headphones to speak to him in itself? Honestly not trying to prove a point here, I just want to know what people here think about this.

    • VeryIrritable says:

      Forget about gender. If you ask someone to take off headphones just so you can have company, what benefit is that to the person taking off headphones?

      You aren’t entitled to their interaction.

      And for god sake if someone is jamming the fuck out on headphones or in their own world you have no right to interrupt them with anything less than a benefit to them.

    • Guiliana says:

      to bluerhapsody –
      headphones are a universal “i don’t want to talk” symbol. they allow a person to have privacy and focus in a public space. so it is rude to ask someone to remove them to talk when the headphones are a signal of telling people to leave one alone. that is why it is wrong for a man to ask a woman to take off her headphones to talk. or any gender combo.

      also, no one is entitled or inherently deserving of another person’s time or attention. it takes emotional/social intelligence, which many people lack, to know when approaching is appropriate. wearing headphones, no. at the gym when someone is there for their personal gain and enjoyment, and not to look attractive or socialise because another person finds them attractive, no. when someone is obviously focused on reading a book in a cafe or bar, no, because they are reading for their enjoyment, the book is not a prop to pick up people. there are appropriate situations to approach people: hobby clubs, music shows, social gatherings designed for people to mingle. situations where a person is enjoying their own hobby, even if it is in public, no. because they are there for their own enjoyment, not anyone else’s.

      • BlondeBlue says:

        In my mind it seems like approaching someone in public is generally a friendly thing. Though I am seeing it from a male point of view and I don’t have to deal with random people approaching me with hidden motives all the time, so I guess my perspective of the public space is inherently different.

        Thank you for the reply!

        • Guiliana says:

          it may be your – or anyone else’s – intention to be friendly, but there are times when others do not want to interact, even with friendly people. headphones are one way to signal that friendly approaches or otherwise are unwelcome.

          to give you a further different perspective, women are often approached by friendly men, or men who think they are being friendly. they are approached at a cafe while studying or reading, for example. maybe the guy thinks she is cute and is hoping to chat her up a bit, so he asks “what are you studying?” it is not inherently wrong to strike up a conversation with a stranger, but in many cases, men have made a couple assumptions. one is that she is there to make friends or pick up guys. she is not. she is studying or enjoying her book. so when she replies briefly with “i am studying for school,” or “i am enjoying this book,” and then returns her attention to her materials, those are both signals that she is doing something for herself and does not wish to talk. this is the moment when people with emotional i.q say “okay, cool,” and back off. sadly, many guys do not understand these signals, and perhaps some willfully ignore them, and proceed with “what are you studying/reading?” at which point the woman becomes annoyed because she has made it clear that she does not wish to talk. when a guy proceeds to try to engage with her when she has politely made it clear she does not wish to talk, he is demonstrating that he thinks he is entitled to her attention. his actions say “i do not care that you came to this cafe to relax and be immersed in your book. my desire to talk to you is more important, and you should forgo your plans to read and relax in favor of talking to me.”

          humans are social creatures. in appropriate places where people go to social potentionally – bars, cafes, music or art venues, it is okay to make one attempt at concersation. but it is about using emotional intelligence. if a woman is making it clear she does not wish to talk, headphones, focused on her work, then leave her alone. she is not there because she wants to talk to you or any other stranger. and if you do try to strike up a conversation and are met with brief replies with little or no eye contact, then take the hint and leave her alone. and perhaps have understanding if she comes off as rude or annoyed. women have to deal with guys trying to chat them up all day when they are simply trying to go about their business and it gets old and incredibly frustrating real fast. when you happen to be the sixth guy who has intruded on her life that day, she might be liable to snap.

        • Bruce says:

          Yeah, but a guy approaching a girl in public isn’t really just being friendly, is he? He wants something.

          As dudes, your and my perspectives of the public space is indeed wildly different from womens’. Strangers never approach me in public unless they are homeless or trying to sell me a little book. In other words, unless they want something. And this is a universal rule: strangers never approach you in public unless they want something.

          Women get approached way more than we do. And it’s a lot less “I hope you’re having a great day, neighbor!” and a lot more “Ma’am, could you spare some vagina?” And unlike with homeless people, they can’t just keep walking and avoid making eye contact or they’re bitches. If they’re too mean, then that person is hurt and it’s a Whole Deal. So it’s a much more exhausting version of that same exchange that they need to do much more often.

          • ThankDog says:

            “Ma’am, could you spare some vagina?”

            That is the funniest, realest thing I’ve read all week. I’m glad I’ve gotten to the age where they seem to think my vagina is all used up, but I remember the times.

          • Sean says:

            Bruce, i believe you are confidently over generalizing a bit. If I’m in a large hotel bar on a business trip and it’s empty and then a dude comes in and walks all the way over to sit next to me and start’s talking to me, I know he’s in Sales. There is no goal of wanting anything material. And I happily talk back because I like talking and meeting people. I talk to lots of people, including 51% women, without an evil agenda. It happens. It’s usually pretty obvious when someone doesn’t want to be bothered and I why would I bother the person? It would result in a poor and terse conversation and I would feel bad for interrupting. Knowing the difference? That’s called having social skills.

        • VeryOff says:

          Others may have already commented and covered what I’m about to write. But I’ll offer what I believe is another take on the situation.

          Asking someone to take off their headphones because you’re being friendly is actually a passive aggressive move. You’re asking politely for them to do something that, if they do not comply, could paint them as being anti-social, unfriendly, impolite, or worse.

          In fact it’s that exact excuse that many men use to escalate their aggression from passive into active. “She’s being a bitch to me when I was just being ‘friendly.'” And that again is another reason why I can’t find humor in Cq’s response. Because even if it was just a humorous setup, even it if was “being friendly or funny.” The bottom line is that it’s manipulation at best and dismissive of the other persons context and identity at worst.

          Simple solution. Don’t do it unless you have literal value to share pertinent only to them like, “The bus driver just announced the bus is on fire.”

    • Nina says:

      There’s plenty wrong with it. Why does some random shithead think they can go around telling people what to do? Why do they think whatever crap they want to say is more important than the masterpieces flowing through these headphones?

  5. VeryIrritable says:

    And for anyone who feels like I’m taking this “too seriously” or “have gone off the deep end in considering the minutiae”…

    “If you take care of the small things, the big things take care of themselves.”

    I’m tired of people with no manners born out of lack of respect or consideration of another persons perspective.

    Empathy motherfuckers.

      • Rainbowpony says:

        Hey coke,
        As to the forum idea… I know I’m skipping posts here …. is there gonna be any filter on people? I get how this blog isn’t about that, but I have this insane fear your book is going to make you hella popular and its gonna bring in all sorts of trash. I mean, I’ve seen other great comments sections get completely overrun.

          • Gaybeard says:

            That comment definitely isn’t for you considering since you aren’t the one throwing around words like “faggotry”

          • VeryOn says:

            Yes Gaybeard, but I have also taken care not to assume that my views aren’t considered “trash” by some. I think I get along pretty well with you and Rainbow, so I’m being 60% facetious.

    • this person says:

      I agree with you that the answer is completely serious. That’s how it’s done. But there are times when flipping someone off is both serious *and* funny. Perhaps more in the “mwahahaha” than “hahahaha” tradition. In any case, it’s also very satisfying. I think it’s okay for humor to act as a coping method for the BS in this world. Right now, someone like me is laughing about your BS, VERYIRRITABLE.

  6. Melissa Low says:

    If I were Coke, I would be annoyed not at the fact that someone is trying to communicate with me. After all, that’s what she’s here for. I’d be annoyed that the person dictated a specific order for my behaviour. It’d be like someone asking me to see him in his office in a funny costume.

    If I were sitting in a coffee shop and a man walked up to me and started speaking to me, I might take my headphones off if I wanted to hear what he was saying. If he had to ask me to take my headphones off, it’s a clear sign that he does not think of me as a person with autonomy or common sense. Either that or he thinks he’s my dad.

    So he can fuck off.

    • Guiliana says:

      i always ignore people who talk to me when i have headphones on in public, be it on the street or a cafe. if the building were on fire or i was in imminent danger, i assume the person would look pretty drastic. but they never indicate that, they just want something from me, which i feel no need to acknowledge because my headphones are in. unless they point at the empty chair ar my table, in which case they get a thumbs up.
      so many people do not understand that headphones in are a symbol of “i wish to be left alone.” it is very baffling to me.

      • Jessica Sen says:

        You could justify someone wearing headphones as a practicality – listening to media at optimal sound quality without disrupting others.

        I find wearing a bitch face to be far more effective.

    • VeryClear says:

      I just imagine this is exactly the same as people saying, “Hey, smile for me.” And just thinking that makes me want to scowl or pick my nose at them.

      • Jessica Sen says:

        Whenever that happens, I wish my teeth could emit microscopic mode locked repetitively pulsed focused laser beams to turn them into holy cheese. I won’t even have to smile to achieve that. I just have to open my fucking mouth.

        • VeryOn says:

          There was this girl on a train in Boston and an unwelcome guy was leaning to read her book. At first I thought it was her boyfriend because he was really close. He said something and as the train slowed she hip checked him. He got the picture. But like your super power…I thought that a super power of hip checking people into the past would be neat.

          But my worst failing as an SJW was being unable to chase some fratboy party crashers from a mostly lesbian party I had been invited to. It was really weird how I was chosen first to approach them…like, “you speak guy, right?” It didn’t help that I looked like a scrawny Fabio at the time. It took three people standing around them and saying very loudly, “you are not welcome.” They thought, that because a guy was there, that they should be allowed to be there too since they lived in the building. That is some fucked up logic.

          Laser teeth would have been handy.

    • Jessica Sen says:

      I have to talk about Dan Bacon’s poor choice in stock photography. Firstly, only one of the women featured is actually wearing headphones. The rest are wearing earphones and some don’t even have a foreign object in their ears. Secondly, the running couple appear to be meeting for the first time on some love-locked bridge. Lame.

  7. Ouitney says:

    I got off the bus five stops early because some guy was talking through my sunglasses and headphones and smooshing right up next to me and I’m still pissed about it.

  8. The Peanut Gallery says:

    Ah, the ego returns for a sequel. It’s a shame but it’s understandable. The behavior her fans are willing to pay for diminishes her presence. It’s a difficult situation. Good luck, lady.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *