• Warl0k3@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      9
      ·
      edit-2
      21 hours ago

      Yes. they are (within the classic premise) the ones resisting being asked to put it down - hence the compromise position in the OP.

      edit: aight ya’ll, I’m explaining the joke not saying it’s right.

      • fatalicus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        21 hours ago

        But they aren’t the one complaining.

        If a man goes to the toilet and the seat is down, they will raise it, do their thing and leave.

        If a woman goes to the toilet and the seat is up, they will lower it, do their thing, then go complain that it wasn’t already down when they wanted to use it.

        That is the classic premise.

        Personally I think anyone who don’t put the lid down before flushing are crazy. Just think of all the particles thrown into the air…

        • Warl0k3@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          20 hours ago

          You’re leaving off the part where “and then the man complains he’s being asked to put the toilet seat down” from the classic formula, which is what makes this “battle of the sexes” nonsense. Everyone has a point regardless of gender, it’s annoying to be ‘nagged’ to do something, it’s obnoxious to live with someone that refuses to put the seat down (it has a lid for a reason).

          Dividing it by gender lines, instead of (as many commenters are doing) instead of the real lines (“why would you not want the lid closed” vs. nobody (who doesn’t want the lid closed???)) is just a way to force division between the genders.