Because not everyone misunderstands it. He's referring to people who claimed they were offended and outraged about the joke to demand action and an apology. Had to nothing to do with whether or not anyone found it funny.

"might be to avoid normalizing this behavior. "

normalizing what behavior specifically? gender specific attacks?

so why do the same people have as a central tenet of their movement that white heterosexual males are a problem? ( you have denied this and i disagree with you )

beyond that people slagging each other off is normal behavior, men do it to men, women do it women, men do it to women and yes even women do it to men

why is it only an issue when men do it to women?

" Brushing off women's issues, treating them like a joke"

could this perhaps be because they have been deceptive or dishonest with some of the issues they have raised? and have themselves caused damage to the perception of women's issues?

" The President kind of sets the tone and the agenda in the United States.

The President appoints judges that will make rulings on issues that affect women."

you mentioned bill clinton... did women loose any rights while he was in office?

i personally don't think it likely that women's rights are in jeopardy because trump is president but i could be wrong on that

that's kind of an odd reply i mean couldn't i just say then that your idea of a good world is one where certain ideas are suppressed?

there's obviously some nuance here and i think you understand that

i didn't at any point state that people shouldn't be able to reply to other people

but when its just for the purpose of suppressing other opinions because of "offense" that's what i have a problem with because a lot of the time "offense" isn't based on facts or logic or context

Normalizing the idea that women are loud and complain and that they're complaints aren't to be taken seriously. 

On the why it is/isn't okay to be racist to white people thing

Anyone who harps endlessly about how white men are the beginning and end to all of life's problems is not to be taken seriously. 

It is, however; legitimate to point out that white men have held the majority positions of power in the United States basically since it's inception and that it's probably a natrual tendancy to legislate, judiciate, and enforce laws in a manner that benefits people like you. There are countless examples of this that I'll spare for the sake of brevity. 

Many people labled "SJWs" point this out because it's important to recognize this in order for us to progress. I think some people do it more articulately than others but I also think that some white men take offense and feel attacked when these obvious (to me), historically precedented ideas are pointed out. People don't like to be told that they might not be where they are in life 100% due to their own awesomeness. It's called the fundamental attribution error and confronting it is difficult and uncomfortable for some people. 

On the real impacts of electing people with regressive thoughts on gender issues

Trump campaigned on appointing justices committed to overturing Roe v. Wade. He at one point talked of punishment for women who get abortions. I understand why alarm bells are going off.

I doubt he'll get Roe v. Wade overturned, but there are many things that he can affect. In his first week he signed executive orders dealing with Federal funding for abortions. He is going to appoint judges, both to the Supreme Court and to lower courts. Legislation comes up all the time at the state level aimed at limiting access to abortions and the justices he appoints are going to play a role in determining the validity of such legislations. 

Though it has since been pulled, the health bill championed by Trump and the Republican congress propsed cutting out EHBs which means that plans wouldn't have to cover maternity or newborns.

Abortion rights is a sensitive issue and federal funding for things the benefit you isn't a right, I will grant you that. But I can see why some women are uncomfortable with the idea of the guys making these decisions having retrograde views about women.

I think it doesn't take too much dot-connecting to say that this is part and parcel to why something like an employer's right to strike birth control as a benefit from their health plan is frequently a national debate with many politicians (and awful nationally syndicated radio hosts) slut shaming and citing personal responsibility, meanwhile no one seems to be giving legislative attention to issues like unpaid child support. 

You don't neutralize a circlejerk by circlejerking about another company. That just make two circlejerks. Criticism is the only thing that neutralizes circlejerks, and to me, Colin was the only one that ever seemed to bring some criticism, even if it was just a tiny bit.

You clearly don't know what a circle jerk is.

But you don't like Sony, that much you made clear.

Can we keep the conversation about Kinda Funny and not about me, please?

Kind hard when you bring up a "circle jerk" but don't actually know what it is.

I found these guys kinda biased and kinda boring, tbh.

"they're complaints aren't to be taken seriously. "

i'm of the view that the very people who claim to be pushing women's issues are more responsible for this than any other group of people

on some issues they have contradictory viewpoints as to what benefits women, an example of this is whether women should be as free to be as sexual as they wish and another that believes women should be more sexually reserved because they are playing right into the "male gaze" or some other nonsense... how can they be taken seriously on these kinds of issues when even they aren't clear on what they want?

then there are issues where it is clear that they are being deceptive or using miseading information, an example would be when they claim that women only make 70% of what men make for the same work, when its really that women work for lesser hours so we now have a situation where women in some cases are even paid more for less work like in women's tennis

"Many people labled "SJWs" point this out because it's important to recognize this in order for us to progress."

that's interesting.... justifying using racism and sexism to progress to a state of equality

when do you think it won't be ok then to use the racism and sexism we've talked about? when there is a 50/50 split?

suppose as i know because of the inherent differences in people it never happens?

"that plans wouldn't have to cover maternity or newborns."

i don't think that rights can be equated to benefits and that also goes for birth control

"But I can see why some women are uncomfortable with the idea of the guys making these decisions having retrograde views about women."

retrograde views in what way?

"legitimate to point out that white men have held the majority positions of power in the United States basically"

finally if men and women are truly equal as is the underlying idea here... then how could that ever happen?