• KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            6 months ago

            yeah but like, you don’t need to specify that one individual is naked. If that’s a required factoid of the statement, the engineer, mathematician, and physicist should also be naked. But there’s no mention of that.

            Now i don’t have much experience in relationships, particularly inter personal ones, but to my knowledge, you are generally clothed most of the time.

            • Croquette@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              6 months ago

              You are overthinking it. This is just a premise to setup the joke that an engineer deals with approximation while the other two give up because they’ll never reach 0.

              It could be a bowl of ice cream for all that matters, but people like corny jokes, so that’s it.

              • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                6 months ago

                no i understood that part. Unless the naked woman has something to do with that part of the joke itself, then i don’t know why it’s mentioned.

          • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            19
            ·
            6 months ago

            no i just don’t fucking understand why the naked woman matters here.

            Could be fucking anything, a pile of a billion dollars. Three turtles, or a goat, it’s the same joke.

            • Captain Aggravated@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              19
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              6 months ago

              I don’t think it’s the same joke when it’s three turtles or a goat, because the joke is “I think I can get close enough…to engage in unspecified sex acts with this woman.”

              You think the same chemicals that turned the frickin frogs gay is responsible for this aversion to sexual thoughts? “Could it not be a naked woman? That clutches my pearls.”

              • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                17
                ·
                6 months ago

                “I think I can get close enough…to engage in unspecified sex acts with this woman.”

                that’s what i would assume, but then again it never states anything, so this is like walking into a fucking storage shed and seeing a colonoscopy going on. It’s just fucking weird.

            • RoosterBoy@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              10
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              6 months ago

              Exactly, it’s the same joke regardless so why get bent out of shape over it?

              • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                6
                arrow-down
                8
                ·
                6 months ago

                i mean yeah, i guess so, but that’s not what im confused over.

                I just want to know why specifically it was written with a nude woman? It never alluded to anything in particular.

                • Rev3rze@feddit.nl
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  12
                  ·
                  6 months ago

                  Is it really that confusing? If it had said there was a pot of gold the implication is clear that the person who reaches it will be rich. You ask “why a nude woman?” and the answer is simply because, just like being rich, desiring a sexual partner is a common desire.

                  • XTL
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    8
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    6 months ago

                    A pot of gold explaining the rules to you about it ringing a bell would definitely be even more suspicious than a random naked woman.

            • LinyosT
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              6 months ago

              Could be fucking anything

              Like a naked woman.

    • echolalia@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      23
      ·
      6 months ago

      Only straight men are mathematicians, physicists and engineers. This is why the joke is framed this way.

      See: responses from OP, valiantly defending his choice to “piss people off”, instead of noticing the joke is just yet another reminder that men are default.

      After all, sexism is over, and STEM isn’t hostile to women/non-heteronormative people. It’s all in our head.

      • sorrybookbroke@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        Hi there friend, I am here to inform you that many woman also like the titty. Gay girls exist my friend, and the gender of the three professionals is never specified.

        I’ll assume ya ain’t trying to be homophobic my buddy but I hope you keep that in mind for future refference.

        Edit racism comment was another guy, sorry, very tired

        • echolalia@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          7
          ·
          6 months ago

          I’m not going to spend much time engaging with your comment because you didn’t read mine well.

          I did not mention race.

          I included mention of gay folks (see non-heteronormative). The “joke” doesn’t work unless the stem major desires being very close to a naked woman, so I don’t find your mention of gay men to make sense.

          • loaExMachina@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            6 months ago

            You did a racism. You did an imperialism. You did a nationalism. You did a xenophobia. You did a white fragility. You did a weak apology. You did no growth. This makes it abundantly clear you don’t understand the intersectional nature of the multiplicity of your offenses

            /s

      • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        10
        ·
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        that’s the vibe i’m getting, but it’s a really fucking weird premise for a hypothetical regardless.

        “there are a fisher, a farmer, and a welder in a bar, on the other side is cthulhu” is basically how it’s worded