this post was submitted on 13 Aug 2026
169 points (90.0% liked)

General Memes & Private Chuckle

1116 readers
374 users here now

Welcome to General Memes

Memes for the masses, chuckles for the chosen.

Rule 1: Be Civil, Not CruelWe’re here for laughs, not fights.

  • No harassment, dogpiling, or brigading
  • No bigotry (transphobia, racism, sexism, etc.)
  • Keep it light — argue in the comments, not with insults

Rule 2: No Forbidden FormatsNot every image deserves immortality on the memmlefield. That means:

  • No spam or scams
  • No porn or sexually explicit content
  • No illegal content (seriously, don’t ruin the fun)
  • NSFW memes must be properly tagged

If you see a post that breaks the rules, report it so the mods can take care of it.

Otherwise consider this your call to duty. Get posting or laughing. Up to you

founded 11 months ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] SailorFuzz@lemmy.world 30 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (9 children)

Needlessly gendered, casual sexism. It's not "people" who are implied to be dumb and impulsive, just men. Cool, very haha.

EDIT. man, sure are a lot of people who wanna defend sexism. I think the real lesson here is that I should just block people earlier.

[–] TranscendentalEmpire@lemmy.today 23 points 1 week ago (3 children)

Pretty sure people like their orange cats?

Also if we're going by your interpretation of what the poster is meaning it's not really needlessly gendered. Most people on the site would be young men, and young men statistically make more dumb and impulsive decisions than young women, it's why we pay more for insurance.

[–] FilthyShrooms@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago (2 children)

The only issue I have is her saying "too many", as if it's a bad thing or something

[–] velma@sh.itjust.works 7 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

I think that says more about how we view men as a group than anything. Why is "too many men" automatically a negative?

It's funny, I stumbled on this meme in the wholesome community just now that I think is fitting:

[–] notjustlurking@lemmy.world 5 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Because in this context it means there are more men than necessary that exhibit this. Otherwise the statement would be, "not enough men"

[–] velma@sh.itjust.works 5 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Eh I think it’s neutral personally.

[–] Archimedes@sh.itjust.works 5 points 1 week ago

It's a beige alert, your Neutralness!

Eh, variety is the spice of life. Monocultures are bad for the social environment as well.

[–] starlinguk@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago

It's why more boys are born than girls! Because, and I quote my uncle (who works in healthcare) "men are really fucking stupid."

[–] SailorFuzz@lemmy.world -4 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (2 children)

Not sure I understand, are you implying that because insurance companies openly discriminate, that means it's not discrimination? So if a capitalist industry says it's true, then it's true?

Or, are you implying something along the lines to say that men are, by nature, dumber and impulsive? Like it's some fact of biology measurable by statistics? And not like, some kind of expected role placed on men to fit into society, encouraging them to be brash and aggressive? Boys will by boys and all that.

But hey, lets abuse statistic and this "by nature" argument a bit more, see how that line of thinking has been used against other groups of people, and see if it feels alight:

"Women are simply not as smart and are meant to be caring and loving mothers, its in their nature".

Hmmmmm, troubling. But statistically, at that time, true. Because women weren't allowed in higher education and were expected to keep house. So crazy thing, that's what a large statistic of women did. The weren't educated and grew up to be housewives as their only skill. And look at that, now I can use the artificially induced statistic as evidence and create this neato little feedback loop until everyone just accepts it an immutable fact of nature.

It's almost like... we have this society built on explicit gender roles and expectations. And trying to use those societal pressures as some kind of proof of nature, is pretty fucking dumb, and inherently sexist af. And flipping the roles so as to say "haha men dumb" doesn't make it any less sexist. And playing this dumb "what do you mean?" game is insincere bullshit.

[–] velma@sh.itjust.works 13 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

Hmmmmm, troubling. But statistically, at that time, true. Because women weren’t allowed in higher education and were expected to keep house. So crazy thing, that’s what a large statistic of women did. The weren’t educated and grew up to be housewives as their only skill. And look at that, now I can use the artificially induced statistic as evidence and create this neato little feedback loop until everyone just accepts it an immutable fact of nature.

Comparing systemic sexism and centuries of patriarchal suppression of women to a funny tweet that's akin to the "golden retriever boyfriend" trope sure is a thing you can do.

[–] SailorFuzz@lemmy.world -4 points 1 week ago (2 children)

interesting that you flipped the comparative metaphor to a positive one. Why didn't you chose a "funny tweet" that's derogatory? Do they have different connotations and thus are treated differently when discussing issues of discriminatory behaviour?

[–] velma@sh.itjust.works 6 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

I think being compared to an orange cat is generally positive.

[–] SailorFuzz@lemmy.world -3 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (2 children)

sure man, lets just play pretend that the popularly understood interpretation of a thing is not what's being implied. I think you're a bitch... waitwaitwait, I mean that in a positive way, like how bitches are motherly and loyal dogs. Isn't that what people mean when they say that?

[–] velma@sh.itjust.works 6 points 1 week ago (15 children)

Come on, name calling is crossing the line and you know it.

[–] TranscendentalEmpire@lemmy.today 8 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Lol

"I like cats"

"You Fucking Bitch!"

This guy is speed running the Incel mask removal

[–] revelrous@sopuli.xyz 4 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

I like that the title implies this was posted by a man. But this guy saw a feminine profile pic and just had to start calling people bitches. 😬

load more comments (14 replies)
[–] Wren@lemmy.today 6 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Wow. You're terrible at arguments.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] hirihit640@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 week ago

Not a directly response to your comment, a small observation. imo when grandparent comment said:

Comparing systemic sexism and centuries of patriarchal suppression of women to a funny tweet

Then you immediately know they are of the prejudice + power definition of sexism and racism. People on either side of this debate are so hard to convince to the other side that I personally just don't engage further

[–] TranscendentalEmpire@lemmy.today 11 points 1 week ago (7 children)

Not sure I understand, are you implying that because insurance companies openly discriminate, that means it's not discrimination?

Discrimination usually requires proof of unfair treatment. Insurance companies avoid this by proving these metrics are mathematically and actuarially tied to risk rather than intentional bias.

Are you denying that young men are less risk adverse than young women, that young men do not injure themselves and others more than young women?

are you implying something along the lines to say that men are, by nature, dumber and impulsive? Like it's some fact of biology measurable by statistics?

Yes..... Testosterone is well known to effect mood regulation and decision making, including the ability to control and reflect upon impulsive behaviour.

line of thinking has been used against other groups of people, and see if it feels alight:

Yes because falsely equating modern medical science to something like phrenology is totally a legitimate argument....

Women are simply not as smart and are meant to be caring and loving mothers, its in their nature

That is making an absolute claim, which is not what I or the original the original post did.

Also, most all studies agree that women and men both have the same average IQ of around 100, but tend to be better at different aspects of the test.

The second part of your claim is not really something that can be statically measured? "Women are supposed to be loving mother" as opposed to what exactly? How are we quantifying what a loving mother is?

The weren't educated and grew up to be housewives as their only skill.

More women are seeking higher education then men currently?

Even your "pretend" sexism is moronic. So I guess you are being a little orange cat brained today.

It's almost like... we have this society built on explicit gender roles and expectations.

It's almost like you are dramatically over reaching to turn this two sentence post so you can turn this thread into an Incel soapbox about the male loneliness epidemic.

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] BigDiction@lemmy.world 11 points 1 week ago

Such a gray cat reaction to this orange cat meme.

[–] AdolfSchmitler@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago (1 children)

What do you consider to be "orange cat behavior"?

[–] SailorFuzz@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (2 children)

A google search away

Orange Cat Behavior and Orange Cats Share One Brain Cell refers to the widespread notion and cliche that orange (ginger) cats are more chaotic, more affectionate and more stupid than other types of cats.

[–] velma@sh.itjust.works 13 points 1 week ago

Interesting that you didn't bold the "more affectionate" part.

[–] AdolfSchmitler@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago

I didn't want to know what the Google definition was. I was wondering what YOU specifically thought. Which is that orange cats are chaotic and stupid. I kinda mentioned this in my other comment further down the chain.

But the logic is orange cat = bad, men = cat, therefore men = bad. Yes? But that's YOUR personal interpretation. The person in the original pic intentionally left it vague and our minds filled in what we thought should go there.

[–] velma@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Are “dumb and impulsive” the only traits that orange cats exhibit?

[–] Droechai@piefed.blahaj.zone 8 points 1 week ago (2 children)

No, but its whats implied by "orange cat behaviour". It has no real foundation in actual cat behaviour research, but its a tag or search term for orange cats doing stupid and/or impulsive things that people upload

[–] velma@sh.itjust.works 9 points 1 week ago

Broadfern’s comment is a more wholesome interpretation that I think describes some boys quite well:

Cute, friendly, food-motivated, prone to getting into lighthearted mischief, and occasionally doing things with little regard to personal safety because the fun factor is more important.

[–] SailorFuzz@lemmy.world -4 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

thank you. That's exactly what most people mean by "orange cat": Stupid, impulsive, "sharing one brain cell".

Some (very insincere) people rushing in the comments to pretend "nono, that's not what it means". Because if it means, what everyone else thinks it to mean, then they'd have admit that they're a little sexist. Or okay at least with sexist humor targeted at men.

[–] dogdeanafternoon@lemmy.ca 0 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I’ve only seen one insecure person in this thread.

[–] SailorFuzz@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

insincere

not "insecure", get your eyes checked.

But hey, you want jokes, I got blocks. Cheers.

[–] Wren@lemmy.today -1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

No one is implied to be dumb and impulsive. The statement isn't exclusive to men, or even all men. This is far from sexism, it's humorously punching up.

If you're going to ignore the post and make up your own joke anyway, why don't you tell us what it is?

load more comments (4 replies)