There is a stereotype that men are funnier than women. New research (n=5,057) found that, on average, men appear to have higher humor production ability than women. Humor may play a role in mating, with an evolutionary basis. It is correlated with intelligence, which may explain why women value it.

AutoModerator · 2019-10-26T14:00:02+00:00

Why are we quarantined? The admin don't want you to know.

Register on our backup site: https://www.trp.red and reserve your reddit name today.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

hiroshimatruthbombs · 2019-10-26T15:02:14+00:00

Women don’t like risk.

You have to take risk to be funny as it can go wrong.

Men are willing to take the risk of being funny.

Woman are pretty much never funny.

They play it safe.

SirKolbath · 2019-10-26T15:17:07+00:00

I have one word for you: Amy Schumer. Women think that the key to being funny is to be vulgar. The intricacies of wordplay, timing, tone, and even simply reading a crowd are beyond them.

When I did stand up I absolutely hated going after a woman on live mic nights. They'd kill the crowd and it was literally the only time I went on stage and felt it was downright hostile.

_do_not_read_this_ · 2019-10-26T14:26:45+00:00

A woman's ability to make me laugh can make up for lots of other faults.

Giant-__-Otter · 2019-10-26T15:43:24+00:00

Read Hitchens' article "Why women aren't funny? ". Must be still online. That's all you need to know. Matter of fact, read everything from him.

RightHandWolf · 2019-10-27T01:45:35+00:00

I've met a few girls in my day-to-day existence that not only had a good sense of humor, but could come up with some pretty good jokes on their own. Puns and other word play, risque comments that sounded like normal conversation unless you had heard the whole context, stuff like that. Most of them had above average intelligence, and also had some degree of class and manners out in public. There are still a few left, but not many.

By and large, though, I see two big problems for the younger girls these days in terms of "being funny."

1) The feminism movement is poisoning itself because there really aren't that many boundaries to bust through in a man's world anymore. Women are in the military, in law enforcement, the UFC, and the firehouse. They can vote, own property, start businesses, and put up with all the regulatory and financial headaches involved with doing so. The problem is that any movement that achieves it's stated goals suddenly fades into irrelevance, and that means an end to the grievance industry. The party's over, but nobody wants to be the first to leave and call it a night. In order to stay relevant, new causes have to be created and championed, which brings us to reason number two.

2) This social media insanity is a godsend for the marginalized masses with axes to grind. Anybody can claim to be offended, outraged or just less than perfectly pleased with anything from a police shooting in New York to getting a Whopper with cheese that didn't have enough lettuce and they have a platform to bitch about it. It's all outrage, all the time, and these special snowflakes take themselves far too seriously to even attempt to develop a sense of humor.

Some of them might grow out of it eventually. Around 25 or 26 is when most people start getting a handle on the world really works, as opposed to what they might have been told in their college classes. All the difference between being book smart and street smart.

PickUpScientist · 2019-10-26T18:27:52+00:00

i used to make jokes all the time to crickets. great jokes too, imo. then i put on 15 pounds of muscle, started grooming myself properly, forcing myself to speak from my diaphragm. now i get laughs regularly, whether i am telling a joke or not.

vullnet123 · 2019-10-26T18:47:41+00:00

I dont ever see women making jokes. I'll laugh if they do/say something stupid, but thats really it. Theres a reason all the good comedians are male.

Siddicky · 2019-10-27T00:34:31+00:00

Christopher Hitchens made a video on the subject

Women don't have a need to be funny, as men will chase them regardless, while men who are not physically attractive depend on humour to attract a mate.

SKRedPill · 2019-10-27T03:47:01+00:00

Statistics uses vague words like 'may appear' to be 'not insignificant'. You might get the impression that men are on average 0.5% funnier or something.

Let me give you real life - in virtually all the groups and gatherings I've been in, only the men ever crack the jokes and the funniest stories. Women are at best mildly funny when they try to tease the guys (and even that is basically done in a shit test way), otherwise when men are totally the more amusing sex. I mean look at some of the tools in our kitty.

Parody Humor

Dark Humor

Dirty Trash talk humor - only men can endearingly insult each other in such politically incorrect ways

Real life humor - I mean the funniest stuff happens only in real life.

Teasing humor (especially negging guys and the girls)

The Pranks

Pulling each other's legs

Every type of joke in the book - especially the long story with a twist ending

Humor is a powerful kind of frame control - when you can make a parody of life and spin it into something funny, you are that guy who can deal with the hard times good.

The best part is that it comes naturally to us. Women would have to really work hard for it - what they do very naturally however is giggle and lols or rofls at the men's jokes, or even when the hot guy does nothing more than just look in their direction.

Any woman who's the exception would definitely have had to train herself to master a skill that is not her first language. It can be trained, but we're looking at first tendencies, and in the absence of any kind of social conditioning, boys just learn humor and mutual roasting like a fish takes to water. I know women who simply don't get jokes, cause they end up taking it way too personally (insert any outraged social media woman here).

ntvirtue · 2019-10-26T16:38:22+00:00

This is from Psychology today.....a publications completely DOMINATED by feminists and betas. Don't think that's relevant? Who gets more pussy Stand up comedians or rock stars?

NabroleonBonaparte · 2019-10-26T16:03:58+00:00

Could you imagine a Rachel Dangerfield?

Let me tell you folks, I get no respect, none at all...

because of the Patriarchy

muff_marauder · 2019-10-26T16:28:48+00:00

"Humor production ability"

Jesus Christ...

gastrocks · 2019-10-26T23:17:16+00:00

Women think sarcasm is funny. Sorry ladies, when you put 'sarcasm is my second laguage' in your online profile it is an automatic hard pass for me. Sarcasm is always at someone else's expense and just makes you sound bitter and insecure.

Anusunset · 2019-10-26T15:25:30+00:00

Man, I’ve started a shit show on that thread. Find me at the bottom downvoted for stating the obvious.

tenpointmatt · 2019-10-26T19:38:12+00:00

sometimes you really dont need a study for shit like this.

the gold standard of hypothesis testing is replication. and whats so powerful about red pill communities and field reports is the statistical significance compounds with repeated, small replications.

specifically, because each individual anecdote is very statistically weak on its own, some people will (rightly) dismiss it when presented in isolation. but what the rabidly anti-TRP bluetards neglect (when they demand 'cItAtiOnS!'), is that every anecdote is a replication study with an n of 1. and when millions of those weak replications compound (with virtually no counter-evidence presented to the contrary) the statistical significance compounds to an insane factor. (side note of interest: this concept forms the basis of incredibly powerful methods of machine learning that incorporate ensemble modeling with many 'weak learners' instead of a model that produces a single estimate.)

although not a rigorously conducted human study with IRB approval, this method of 'real world science' is actually much, much more powerful, statistically. especially since the researcher 'activism bias' of far left social science departments has been circumvented.

dasCooDawg · 2019-10-26T21:41:57+00:00

In other news: water is wet

SKRedPill · 2019-10-27T07:20:41+00:00

And here's the part you missed - women find it harder to deal jokes themselves because they tend to take it way too personally - sollipsism to blame. Hence a lot of women not attracted to you on social media are often the ones getting outraged at any joke they get personal with. And one reason for that is that written words are really serious, the 93% of non-verbal communication is missing. So the same joke when cracked properly in person with a huge smirk or a straight face can result in ROFLs, but on social media it becomes offensive.

In fact any woman is capable of taking a joke badly - it all depends on how they feel about you and how serious you sound, and which emotion gets stirred. Hence outrageous stuff can reach a point where its no longer outrageous, but hilarious enough to the point of parody.

To roast a fellow guy, a certain amount of impersonal element is needed. That and a lot of frame, because your sense of humor is directly connected to your way of seeing life, as well as handling it well when someone roasts you in turn. Now you know why.

Men can endearingly call themselves the worst stuff in the world and be close brothers, but if that trust is broken, it's gone and it will never be the same again. Women tell each other "I love you, sweety dear" while seething with many Machiavelian complications within and can blow hot and cold faster than the weather changes. Earth vs Water.

In fact, discussing about jokes on a forum with women reading is the easiest way to kill the humor -too serious, just too damn serious, too much thinking, analyzing. But crack it in person, make it absurdly hilarious and their rationality will shut down, their minds will flip out and they'll all be giggling like the girls they are.

trueliberal1 · 2019-10-28T21:33:37+00:00

From the article...

What does it all mean? It means that to the best of our knowledge, on average, men appear to have higher humor production ability than women. Note that I emphasized the word average because the study does not mean, as Christopher Hitchens famously proclaimed, that women are not funny. The fact that men, on average, appear to be funnier than women, does not imply that every single man is funnier than every single woman. There are many great female comedians such as Sarah Silverman, Tina Fey, Ali Wong and historically, Lucille Ball, Joan Rivers, and many, many more. All these great comedians are funnier than 99.9 percent of all men.

Translation: The science shows something that is politically unacceptable, so we'll make non-scientific disclaimers and qualification to avoid offending idiots.

The entire purpose of science is to precisely and accurately describe reality. What you want to do with that reality is another issue, but the science should just honestly report on the reality as it is.

Of course men are much funnier than women in over 99.9% of male-female pairings in the cross set of all men and women. Of course this is entirely due to evolution and biology. Of course the evolutionary reason is that making a woman laugh meant sometimes a guy got laid and offspring, but no man has ever turned down sex with a woman because she wasn't funny. These things are so obvious that they don't even need scientific confirmation, but if a scientist is going to study these things then he -- and I'm using he as the generic pronoun for brevity -- should study it honestly and report on it honestly. Also, any media that covers the science should report on it honestly.

We all know that men are vastly funnier than women. Preferencing women by preceding this fact with patronizing platitudes to sooth their egos only makes women look childish and incapable of adult conversation. I can only conclude that the author, Gill Greengross, is afraid of political backlash like so many in evolutionary psychology. This is a terrible thing. Politics should be heavily influenced by science. Science should not be influenced at all by politics.

oldslut · 2019-10-26T16:29:12+00:00

a funny chick that is bad in bed isn't very funny at all.

HeiligKo · 2019-10-26T17:26:20+00:00

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VV7vv3rFxNA&t=238s Patrice O'neal on the matter.

PlebsFelix · 2019-10-27T00:24:07+00:00

Christopher Hitchens did this best

MachoToughGuy · 2019-10-27T00:43:19+00:00

Is there one about black comedians being funnier than white comedians? I cant think of any white comedians funnier than Richard Pryor, Dave Chapelle, Chris Rock and Eddie Murphy.

Mordor_Folker · 2019-10-27T01:56:18+00:00

Say the most obvious shit and get labeled as a bigot, misogynist, incel. Have scientific date to back your stance. Get treated the same exact way “because you wouldn’t have brought it up if you weren’t”

Jimmy2e · 2019-10-26T20:56:00+00:00

I'm going to post my removed comment from this thread. My assertion is that the feminist doctrine asserted in rebuttal to these findings is incomplete.

The specific comment I'm replying to asserts that seeing a bias towards gynocentrism in reddit is representative of my personal biases.

Original Comment

I think that's the bias of feeling attacked.

While I believe what you're inferring is that I personally have biases and therefore I have a proclivity to seek content that fulfills those biases, I would have agree to a certain extent. But only insofar in that it's human nature to form biases and that those biases can be socially engineered via popular culture/education.

This is why I don't brazenly touch pans sitting on the stove and also why I believe the US won the war of 1812. Two year old me and a lot of Canadians would disagree.

Keeping this in mind, I would tend to agree overall with your assessment. There seems to be a lot of people out there that have been led to view the world in terms of group identity.

Therefore, if I believe all women are historically oppressed and I see content like an all female flight crew flying 120 girls to NASA, I'm going to upvote it. It makes total sense that I would view this as an achievement if I believe a form of ambiguous societal oppression (both direct and indirect) had disenfranchised women in the past from taking part in aviation.

This ideologically driven belief is in turn opposed (or supported depending on how you look at it) by the fact that the military, which initially pioneered the innovation of aviation during war times, and produces the vast majority of commercial pilots to this day are by en large made up of men.

As such, I would also agree that historically the military has discriminated against women; albeit positively, via drafts, marketing, and general cultural norms (especially during times of war). Thereby reducing female participation in military aviation which has since dampened both the participation and normalization of women in commercial aviation over the last few decades given where the predominance of commercial pilots are trained, licensed, and start their career.

In this case, as to whether or not women not being forced or incentivized into serving in aviation based combat roles is seen as a form of oppression seems to be a subjective issue in feminist circles, but is still a form of discrimination nonetheless.

Therefore if we were truly interested in advancing gender equality in commercial aviation we would need to normalize the gender gap in military service to ensure equal female representation in combat roles.

This solution seems to be an unpopular idea though. Especially when weighed against simply treating the symptoms of the gap by circumventing the root cause entirely and directly advocating for government programs/entitlements that greatly reduce the personal risk and extrinsic public service requirements for females to enter into the aviation industry.

Personally, I wonder if there would be a strong push for women in infantry roles if the occupation was a direct feeder into a high paying civilian occupation. My gut says probably not directly, but I would be willing to bet there'd be a large feminist push for non-military based programs specifically targeted at women to gain easier entry into said occupation.

But I digress.

So what I'm saying is that it's other people's biases pushing a greater than average amount of intersectional content to the front-page. Those of us who browse reddit frequently just happen to notice the recurring theme and frequency of such content.

It'd be as though popular reddit culture believed green eyed people were historically oppressed. Because of this, any green eyed person's achievements no matter how trivial are upvoted to the front page because it highlights the social progress of green eyed people.

Then in the comments section of these threads it's typically people on the fringes of the ideology talking about how in the past, brown eyed people were responsible for oppressing green eyed people. These very same people then aggressively downvote any significant content or opinion outlining brown eyed achievements or struggles because they view the green/brown eyed struggle as a zero-sum game.

They don't want to hear about the problems or successes of brown eyed people. In their eyes they are historically advantaged and their issues, no matter how large, should therefore be trivialized in popular culture/discussions because it takes away from the perceived oppression and overall attention given to the issues of green eyed people.

d-quik · 2019-10-26T16:10:07+00:00

Uhhhh wow @ the censorship in the original thread like 7/10 comments are removed even one that yielded 700+ subthreads (children) and was awarded two golds. Damn

SteveStJohn · 2019-10-27T12:06:07+00:00

Watch male and female comics. Remove the jokes about sex, and the amount of material women have goes down by 70%. That’s all Amy Schumer had. Most female comedians lean heavily on sex for humor.

Notable exceptions include Ellen Degeneres, and Rita Rudner,

schmolch · 2019-10-27T12:53:57+00:00

Humor depends on abstraction and prediction. It plays with the predictions the human brain is making 24/7 and takes them for a clever surprise (jumping to another "place", requiring abstraction). Needless to say women lack exactly these skills, which are probably the primary reasons for a larger brain.

Truedemocracy5 · 2019-10-27T17:19:08+00:00

This is obvious to anyone who is actually honest with themselves. Men are more likely to be better storytellers, more charismatic, wider variance in sense of humor, funnier, etc

And this isn’t even a brag. Women have built in social equity based on their pussy - they don’t need to develop these traits like men do. Men also are more likely (or perceived to be) to be creepier, socially stunted, weird, etc

adequatebeing · 2019-10-28T17:16:37+00:00

How does one develop a good sense of humor?

[deleted] · 2019-10-29T18:50:41+00:00

You're at a party, your having fun. The bros are having fun, it's an altogether good time. I've never heard this at all, NEVER; "you know what would make this a better night? If my girl was here."

Girls just copy us at what we're good at and the men who don't usually copy them and stay righteous to our ways but still being aware to what we learn from them. That's the way I believe.

cupshadow · 2019-10-30T02:10:43+00:00

It really takes a good chunk of brainwashing to make a narrative against something so common. Guys who are good at storytelling and humor are generally surrounded by woman and we see that since high school.

Wax_Man_ · 2019-10-27T02:09:49+00:00

Reading between the lines here, the last line should be "why women don't have it"