That's the 3rd-highest-rated comment at the NYT article "Are Shirt Buttons Sexist?/A reader questions the point of having men’s and women’s shirt buttons on different sides."
The highest-rated comment is "Sometimes I really do wonder what life is like for people who are constantly scanning the world in search of something to gripe about."
I didn't pick that for the post title because it's too gripe-y — it gripes about griping — and I don't think the article is griping. It's puzzling over a quirk of clothing construction.
The author of the article, Vanessa Friedman, is addressing a question from a reader. She goes through the various theories of how this right/left difference might have happened — one is most common and perhaps you're sure it is the explanation — and observes that none of those reasons apply today. Tradition has its hold. We could change but we don't.
Only the headline writer uses the word "sexist" — and only to ask a question.
But the commenters — NYT commenters! — come for Friedman. They don't say what an amusing light-hearted jaunt through history, thanks for the fun. She's not perceived as having fun at all. She's seen as a grim, angry feminist. Things are changing.
Writing that made me think of this video clip I saw yesterday:
"The View" host Sunny Hostin stands up for accused Cornell gang rape defendants.
— TMZ (@TMZ) September 29, 2026
🎥: ABC pic.twitter.com/4wo46PXsQU
પોસ્ટ્સ
41 ટિપ્પણીઓ:
The framing in the headline says everything about the NYT worldview, correctly diagnosed by the comments.
(Yes, writers don't pick the headline in most cases so I agree it is unfair to slag Friedman which is why I say it reflects the mindset of the NYT at large)
The NYT readers and staff just have an entirely different world view. It’s not just about buttons either.
The crazy thing is that their Leftism enjoyed a huge amount of success and that would have continued but for Trump. Open borders and CAGW laws are just two examples.
Shirt buttons may or may not be sexist but they are definitely a scam.
Many readers won’t read an article if it doesn’t appear to include some reason to stroke their political angst. “The Story Behind Left or Right Button Closures” wouldn’t catch as many readers, I imagine.
The "sexist" framing was needed to make the article seem perhaps important enough to appear in the NYT.
In The View video, Joy Behar claims they (the Cornell students) "attacked" the woman claiming she was sexually assaulted and that her being drunk has nothing to do with it.
It's as if Behar did not listen to or comprehend what the other panelist (Sunny?) just spent two minutes explaining. Behar would be a perfect Massachusetts juror. Feelings over facts.
I wonder what mentally ill people like Joy Behar are hearing while other people are talking, because she clearly isn't listening to anything other than the voices in her head.
“The highest-rated comment is "Sometimes I really do wonder what life is like for people who are constantly scanning the world in search of something to gripe about."”
After reading through the over night open thread, I think Achilles doesn’t wonder.
I don't think Hostin has earned benefit of the doubt on her motives in defending the Cornell case. It is, as best I can tell, missing some of the racial dynamics of the Duke LaCrosse case (not all of the accused are white) and supporting them also defends Cornell's investigation and actions.
Behar was listening to the extent that she wanted to make sure it was her turn. She knew what she would say when she walked in that day. Kind of like a professional hit man who does the job and blends into the crowd, excepting the use of bullets of bottomless vacuity instead of hot lead.
BTW, anybody here want to take about tuxedo shirts? (spits)
gah, take = talk. Read (twice), then hit enter. Passion is my downfall.
Alas, it has become difficult to find a “feminist” who isn’t in a constant state of being grim and angry. It must be Trump’s fault.
Articles like this get planted by the Big Zipper companies.
"The author of the article, Vanessa Friedman, is addressing a question from a reader." You believe that? "Dear Penthouse Forum -- "
…is does sound like an over reaction by the readers/commenters, then again this is NYT so live by the stupid propaganda die by the stupid propaganda…
I vote for keeping the buttons as they are. Buttoning shirt buttons is something I do on autopilot, and I really don't want to have to think about it in order to do it properly. It ain't broke, sexism nonsense aside, so please let's not fix it!
I suppose there might be some advantage in the brain training. For example, I'm working on brushing my teeth and doing other things with the "wrong" hand. This is supposed to be good for the aging brain (or any brain), but more practically, it's good practice for when I get my right shoulder replaced, after both hips. But I don't want to be forced to do something after a lifetime of doing it automatically! Especially for a stupid reason. Call me selfish and unenlightened.
I'm grumpy this morning. Please excuse me in advance.
The buttons are on opposite sides to make it easy for men and women to undress each other.
Shirt buttons are classist. Women who could afford buttons once upon a time could also afford servants to button them. Women who can't afford servants are forced by fashionistas to contort themselves to button their shirts on the wrong side.
Death th fashionism!
"the headline writer uses the word "sexist""
When you're a hammer, everything's a nail, but...if a nail isn't sticking up, why are you pounding it?
Which is why I don't think it was "only to ask a question."
Are women wearing bras for a top now because the climate is warming?
This is easy: the buttons on girls' blouses are as they are so a teenage boy in the driver seat of a parked car can easily slip his left hand inside the blouse of the girl curled up against him. Or, as an old man, that is as I remember it, anyhow. Damned bucket seats.
Maybe that's why that guy crashed his car into Kroger. He was trying women's clothes for the first time to see what all the fuss was about, didn't fully grasp the button difference and panicked when he couldn't get his pecker out. Maybe he wasn't looking for a restroom, maybe he was after a pair scissors or a box knife.
I want to say:
"All my life, foolish young women have been walking into frat houses, getting drunk and being sexually [ ] by several frat boys. [ ] means there's never been agreement on whether foolish young women know what will happen if they get drunk at a frat party. But it's always the same thing - whatever it is. The young men are being foolish, too, but, truth is, women really pay for being fools. We aren't the same. Be careful out there."
But, feminism doesn't let you warn women that we aren't the same.
"Sexist" in the headline made people read the article. What else would make anyone read an article about shirt buttons? Apart from button makers, button collectors, and button fetishists, I mean.
Gender differences.
Diversity in utility.
Are moomoos sexy?
Has Wokemaxxing passed it's "sell by" date?
I have some motorcycle apparel I bought in Europe. The zippers are all.on the wrong side. Does this make me gay?
Not only buttons, but on girl jackets the zipper is reversed so you pull up with the left hand.
I don't get the connection of the video to the article. Can someone explain?
Buttons, Ann?
You're still subscribing to this?
As was mentioned above, I'm wondering what Sunny Hostin's take was during the Duke Lacrosse scandal.
@Josephbleau: lol
The VIEW is a VIEW of what the corrupt crime democrat party has managed to do to our nation.
I deleted a comment of mine because I misread what you were saying about the duke case
Seriously - ABC thinks this is good information.
Drugs sex drugs sex. Debased behavior.
ABC = MS ABC.
Yeah, i hope the obsession with "sexism" is fading since it attracts not only libtards, but fakes who are obviously trying to prove their leftwing bonafides by finding "sexism" is the most absurd places.
Example: A was listening to a star trek podcast about "Spocks Brain" and the two middle aged (if not over 60) male hosts were having the vapors and pearl-clutching over the "Sexism" of having the space aliens played by good looking actresses in Go-go boots.
Of course most people who talk about Star trek online cant differentiate between the actor and character. They all for "strange new worlds" and "seeking out new civilizations" as long as everyone behaves like a NYC liberal/leftist.
Of course, tradition. Same reason women wear dresses and skirts instead of trousers.
But then men wear suit out of tradition and the suit jacket still has aspects accommodating sitting on a horses. And why must men wear trousers? Can they not wear leggings and such as they did in the 16th century height of fashion?
Hats for men, and even for ladies were abandoned as common wear as they were cumbersome in the new automobiles with enclosed seating areas.
Very little modern, non-work, clothing has requirements imposed by modern living due to less outdoor exposure and the doing away with aid in dressing
And really we need to get over this lie that the New York Times has credibility. They famously covered up the atrocities in the Soviet Union in the 1930s.
And in their "credible" opinion declared powered flight to maybe be a possibility in a a million years when reporting on a recent test flight failure of one of the many attempting flight.
"The New York Times published an editorial titled "Flying Machines Which Do Not Fly" on October 9, 1903, which predicted that developing a functional flying machine would take one to ten million years. This publication occurred just 69 days (approximately two months) before Orville and Wilbur Wright achieved the first successful powered, controlled flight at Kitty Hawk on December 17, 1903."
ટિપ્પણી પોસ્ટ કરો
Please use the comments forum to respond to the post. Don't fight with each other. Be substantive... or interesting... or funny. Comments should go up immediately... unless you're commenting on a post older than 4 days. Then you have to wait for us to moderate you through. It's also possible to get shunted into spam by the machine. We try to keep an eye on that and release the miscaught good stuff. We do delete some comments, but not for viewpoint... for bad faith. Also: No italics, even briefly. Use asterisks for emphasis. And don't play with the format by changing fonts or using boldface or all caps. Never include more than one extra line break between paragraphs.