What is sexism?

[Katherine Brengle]

Dictionary definition:

sexism (n.): (1)Discrimination based on gender, especially discrimination against women; (2)Attitudes, conditions, or behaviors that promote stereotyping of social roles based on gender.

Some perspective:

"I've yet to be on a campus where most women weren't worrying about some aspect of combining marriage, children, and a career. I've yet to find one where many men were worrying about the same thing." (Gloria Steinem)

"Feminism directly confronts the idea that one person or set of people (has) the right to impose definitions of reality on others." (Liz Stanley and Sue Wise)

My definition:

Any and all justification for the continuation of a patriarchal social order that views women as "other" than normal, including, but certainly not limited to, willful indifference.

Any and all justification for the continuation of a patriarchal social order that teaches females that their bodies are a source of shame, that the things they go through, such as menstruation and menopause, are to be dealt with, not simply experienced, and hidden and never talked about.

Any and all justification for the continuation of a social order that allows women to be raped--ever--period.

(I've got more... but I'll save it for later.)

What's yours?

[NMDemDist2]

1. ooo KB

this is a worthy topic of discussion, but I fear flames ahead.

My main gripe is the sexist language that is used unthinkingly of women in the spotlight. While a man can be sexual or promiscuous, it's rarely the defining "be all" of his worth (or lack of it) Often being highly sexed is a badge of honor or esteem when the exact same behavior is considered shameful for women.

Hillary, Condi, Ann Coulter and the unfortunate Ms. Harris of FL are all perfect examples of a public woman being judged on her appearance and dress rather than on her actions (good or bad) toward her work and fellow citizens.

Hope this thread can be constructive and informative to all.

[Katherine Brengle]

10. I can take flames--

I'm a redhead and a Leo, lol.

I think we need to keep talking about this until it is resolved--not back away because people disagree.

And I agree about the women in the public spotlight issue--"Katherine Harris's breasts", "Ann Coulter's skinny whatever" etc... How about, "She's a crazy neocon."?????

Anyway, I'm looking forward to the responses, lol.

[omega minimo]

51. That's a noble cause

"I think we need to keep talking about this until it is resolved--not back away because people disagree."

However, you will find a bedrock of "willful indifference" here.

The South Dickota abortion vote / International Women's Day DU Massacre proved how pointless........................


GOOD LUCK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :yourock:

[Katherine Brengle]

73. omega --

I've seen it waaay too much to give up.

And I think you rock too!

[izzybeans]

187. Simply, Thank you.

[Katherine Brengle]

219. : - )

:hi:

[izzybeans]

229. I hope you don't mind but I tried to piggy back this thread

here:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=763422&mesg_id=763422

I fell off the back it seems;

[LostinVA]

88. Agree -- for example, I loathe Tara Reid, and think she so can't act

But she said something in an interview I completely agreed with: she goes out, gets drunk and parties, and is labeled basically a tramp, a "party girl," etc. -- things with a negative connotation. Whereas Colin Farrell (whom she used as an example) is an alcoholic, and totally sleeps around... yet his pres is all nudge nudge wink wink, and basically saying he's this cool dude. She stated she had been told by her agent that her "behavior" was the reason she didn't get certain parts, even though she has always been professional during shoots.

I Googled a bunch of articles after I read this... and she was dead on.

[Katherine Brengle]

185. Good point, LostinVA, very good point.

The double standard is old news, but it never hurts to remind people of their hypocrisy :).

[Fountain79]

2. Women can't be sexist? n/t

[BlooInBloo]

8. Why is it....

That members of a group that PERPETRATE the crimes are ALWAYS scared shitless about that crime being perpetrated against them?

I guess the question is really self-answering....

Sexist women, racist black folks,... sheesh...

Tell you what people: when we start having problems on a national or worldwide level with sexist women or racist black folks, then we'll talk. m'kay?

In the meantime, let's solve the ACTUAL problems ACTUALLY confronting us. Two of them are: men's sexist treatment of women, and white folks' racist treatment of black folks.

[Katherine Brengle]

13. Well said!

I am with you, 100%.

While I don't feel entitled to speak for people of color, I can say that it disgusts me that men are constantly on the defensive when it comes to sexist behavior--I take this to mean that they are absolutely terrified of facing the fact that the society they live in is intensely destructive and extremely anti-female, and anti-anything it feels is outside the norm.

I find it disturbing also that being female is considered abnormal (just take a look at phraseology like "woman doctor" --we need to amend the term bc we see it as innately masculine), just like us white folks think that being other than white is outside the norm, nevermind that most of the people in the world are:

WOMEN

and

NON-WHITE

wtf...

[BlooInBloo]

15. Denial's not just a river in Egypt....

... so they say...

[NMDemDist2]

29. BTW, women were the doctors for 1000's of years. men only got involved

when there was $$$ to be made, and they still wouldn't actually TOUCH! the sick person.

Witches were just women herbalists with years of study behind them that kept folks and animals well and got killed for it eventually

[Clark2008]

101. And they labeled them "witches" and evoked a bad

image of witches AFTER they realized there was money to be made and that these women had years and years of experience and handed-down experience over their "learnedness."

It was propaganda.

[Kipling]

178. Not sure about that.

From a purely historical viewpoint I would point out that the earliest doctors, Imhotep's ancient Egyptians, were mostly male although they did accept women. And they certainly got the $$$ right from the start.
As for witches, in Dark Age Europe they were simply a fictional menace like vampires in later years. If you are thinking of shamans, then the majority were men except among the Vikings.

[NMDemDist2]

191. I was speaking generally of Medieval "crones" the old woman who

gathered herbs and helped with childbirth and general first aid in their communities. While the kings had male physicians who held great sway in the courts of the rich, the common folk made due with grannies and crones.

Shamans were more in the religious/spiritual side. is there a word for female shamans?

[johnnie]

39. My opinion

You said: "I can say that it disgusts me that men are constantly on the defensive when it comes to sexist behavior"

I can't speak for all men of the world, but my problem with that statement is that many of us men are genuinely aware of sexism and we abhor it. Then when the topic comes up in places such as DU we are lumped in with all men and it is frustrating to know that deep in your being you are all for equality, but accused of being a nasty man and sexist for the mere fact that we were born male. And because this is a "progressive" board, you can't defend yourself because you already have be pre-judged because you are a man.

[Name removed]

41. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[johnnie]

47. There has been many men confronting it here

I have no need for your sympathy either, I know who I am and I know how I am. All I was saying is it tough to be lumped in with all men and you are the typical "lumper". Do I stand up for women's rights? Yes. Would I stand up for yours? Probably not. You are the kind of person that would rather fight with people than stand together, and that doesn't play well with me.

[RazzleDazzle]

49. Well, how very egalitarian you are

I have to behave in a way that you approve before you will accord me full equality and stand up for my rights. Interesting in a society where even the worse criminal's rights are defended vigorously, isn't it?

Now -- about the claim in your subject line. Care to provide some concrete examples (otherwise known as LINKS)? I'd love to see that.

Oh -- and I predicted you wouldn't take my challenge, didn't I? In this case you found a way to tell me I didn't deserve your support as a woman, and make it my fault because of my "bad" behavior.

[IselaB]

54. I hate to say this

But I know one man - the guy who introduced me to DU - who stood up just as you're saying in a thread he felt was sexist. They banned him almost immediately. He was accused of being a "disruptor." I don't think he's been back since.

[RazzleDazzle]

68. Oh, boy. That really takes the cake. But BOY does it provide

one helluva lot of ... well, information.

[smirkymonkey]

56. What was the "better in bed " thread?

curious. You can PM me if it's "flamey".

[Katherine Brengle]

I think it is linked on the DU homepage as an article now --

I missed the post that spawned this dicussion, so I am not commenting on that, but if that is the thread you are looking for, you can find it there. The poster was Skinner.

:)

[omega minimo]

55. Hi johnnie. Here's the thing

"I can't speak for all men of the world, but my problem with that statement is that many of us men are genuinely aware of sexism and we abhor it. Then when the topic comes up in places such as DU we are lumped in with all men and it is frustrating to know that deep in your being you are all for equality, but accused of being a nasty man and sexist for the mere fact that we were born male."

Men who "are genuinely aware of sexism and we abhor it" very rarely, if ever, speak up on DU to express that awareness and support of women and women's issues. The silence is deafening-- and reinforces what the OP referred to as "willful indifference." The women here get consistently attacked with word games and mind games that do nothing but deflect from whatever-issue-we-were-actually-trying-to-address. Talk about "frustating"!! Imagine how it feels to be lumped in with somebody's cartoon version of "feminist" and being argued with about things you never said because others think THEY ALREADY KNOW WHAT YOU THINK or they try to have pre-recorded arguments with you because all feminists are the same/wrong/obnoxious? "I got yer broad brush right heah!"

Some men here claim to be against sexism and support women but don't show it. They think they have good reasons to be pissed off and jump in these threads all antagonistic claiming support that they rarely, if ever, communicate. How would we know that they really do?

It takes some confidence to stay clear and step in and drop the defensiveness ("you can't defend yourself because you already have be pre-judged because you are a man") and say what you have to say and show support and counter sexism when you see it here..... and it's so RARE that if you manage to do it IT WILL BE GOLDEN! :hug:

[TahitiNut]

70. Here's part of what's wrong with your "don't show it" thesis.

(1) Folks have no obligation to trot out a resume to 'disprove' some broad brush McCarthyism smear. The burden of proving the negative (a fallacy) is not theirs. That kind of 'policy' was what gave us Inquisitions and witch-hunts.

(2) The DU Forums are NOT the place to accuse someone of bigotry, sexism, or FReeperism. That's for the Alert system and the Admins/Moderators to deal with - NOT SELF-APPOINTED INTERNET VIGILANTES!

[omega minimo]

83. No dear TH, that's not what I was suggesting

Not talking about an altercation.

Rather, <SOME> cool men that we know are here (we assume) don't speak up much in support of women, whether a thread is peaceful (contributing to the flow) or antagonistic (helping counter the attackers who get things off course),

"The DU Forums are NOT the place to accuse someone of bigotry, sexism" as long as people refrain from displaying bigotry and sexism. If there is an atmosphere fostered that is hostile to women (and cool men) then Katherine Brengle is right, it really does need to to corrected, or at least identified.

And no offense. but it's hard to square your claims of supporting women here with comments like "some broad brush McCarthyism smear and "SELF-APPOINTED INTERNET VIGILANTES!"

When do we get to see that supportive or open-minded side of you?

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

92. I Think He Was Referencing That Comment Towards Over The Top Extremists.

It wasn't referencing all women. I find it perplexing that an accurate comment about over the top extremists is twisted to try to infer that he doesn't have an open mind towards, or is unsupportive of women. I think it is that exact type of broad brush, twisted, spun and extreme type rhetoric that the poster was in fact referring to. Inferring he is unsupportive of women and closed minded is all sorts of an unjustifiable stretch of imagination.

[omega minimo]

98. This mindfucking being a perfect example of the problem

It won't work

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

107. I Worry About You.

Seriously.

[LostinVA]

111. And saying he seriously worries about you

Yeah, say the hysterical woman has a mental problem -- he needs to try something new.

Of course, I won't read it -- I finally did something I should have done months ago -- IGNORE. I have to deal with this crap in RL... but not on DU. Flamebait...

[omega minimo]

119. The sort of twisted, manipulative reversals domestic abusers use

:evilfrown:

[LostinVA]

121. Textbook

Not saying the poster is an abuser, just that he is using manipulative techniqyes...

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

120. With All Due Respect, Posts Like Above Aren't Exactly Non-Provocative.

And I do seriously worry. The sentiments are always attacking, overly broad and try to smear the hell out of the poster being replied to. Just because of an opposing opinion. Disagreeing with someone is one thing. Smearing them to obvlivion while twisting their words to the extreme is just irrational. All I did was bring the discussion back to the reality of the original comment's intent in attempt to disarm the unfair smearing and attack. Lord knows I've been on the other end of it myself, so I can sympathize with other posters who have to deal with the same abusive and demeaning replies. Not sure I'm the one who's being inappropriate here, but to each their own.

on edit: Case in point the post above. Now I'm a domestic abuser. Twisting words and intent in such smearing, demeaning, extremist and irrational ways is simply counter-productive to any conversation that could take place. It is unhealthy, unjustified, unfair and inappropriate. But it really doesn't get to me much as most level headed people take it for what it's worth, with a grain of salt.

[Name removed]

140. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[NMDemDist2]

141. easy omega

take a breath there.

:hug:

[Marie26]

143. Don't take the bait.

;-) :hug:

[Katherine Brengle]

189. I have a question:

When were we told we were not allowed to be provocative?

Most of the questions we ask here on DU, in general, can be considered provocative.

I have to say this--you might as well have told her she was being unladylike, honestly.

I cannot, for my life, understand why you refuse to at least spend a few minutes considering what we have to say instead of reacting immediately without a moment's thought.

[LostinVA]

199. Yup... why people want to hijack these threads for their little games

Instead of fostering understand is beyond me. Debate and discussion is one thing... intellectual masturbation is another.

[Katherine Brengle]

220. "Intellectual masturbation"

I need to file that away, lol.

[LostinVA]

223. Yup... they get off on simplemindedly whacking away to how smart

they are... ignoring everyone and everything around themm... crazy.

[Katherine Brengle]

186. I have to agree on this one OMC -- you were clearly...

trying to discredit her by saying this.

It was intellectually dishonest and also only went towards proving what I originally posted here -- that there are some here who refuse to admit that there is a serious problem running rampant at DU.

[omega minimo]

236. This subthread is a perfect example of the sexist problems here

[NMDemDist2]

128. OMC you know I love ya man

but this link shows exactly what the OP was talking about. now TN says we shouldn't accuse people inthread of sexism, but I was a moderator and my comment in the link stands, but I took some grief for it as you will see

it's so insidious in our culture it's easy to miss, or pass off as a "joke" but blackface was a joke too

I usually let it slide but sometimes it needs to brought up and addressed to attempt to educate. the young women today will have a hell of a fight on their hands just trying to protect their reproductive freedoms from the RW wack jobs. it's gonna be tough enough but perhaps a little education will go a long way to help, just as it is helping with GLBT equal rights and as it's helped in racial equal rights.

here's the OP

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x2535314

and here's my response to the "joke"

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x2535314#2535347

notice the response I got from a liberal, progressive website. what do you think it's like in less friendly venues?

thanks for listening, and just think about it OK?

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

135. Love Ya Too AZ. I Agree With Your Sentiment Wholeheartedly.

I think sexism in any form is utter bullshit, and in fact think prejudice, racism, bigotry etc.. towards anyone for any reason is always utter bullshit. I know women still face many challenges in today's world, regardless of how far they've come. I'm still in awe that statistics overwhelmingly show that women get paid less for the same work that men do. In today's modern day and age, I find it 100% illogical and perplexing that this still has to be an issue. At my work, for example, the best boss I had yet was a woman, and she was far more on the ball, competent, in control, responsible, and talented then any previous boss I've had since. In fact, the majority of women in my company are amazing at what they do and most often better then the men in equal positions. My wife in her company kicks major ass as well and is also damn good at what she does. And though the women in my company do as far as I know get paid equally to men, I know my wife doesn't and that's bullshit. So I'm 100% aware of the plight of women in this sense and think the macho male ego type is pathetic and should be erradicated completely from society, for those that are guilty of using it to hold others down.

So don't get me wrong, I know sexism is overwhelmingly an issue affecting women and it is one I stand with them on completely. But I do get sensitive when some choose to use the issue as a springboard for gender hate and smear tactics while foresaking any level of real thought provoking conversation. As I said, I will always stand up firmly and defend against anyone being treated unfairly and prejudiced against, or any type of broadbrush unfair smearing. That doesn't mean I don't stand in the spirit of the OP, however, as I know the topic is an important one and believe me, I wouldn't hesitate to put a sexist male fuck in their place any chance I get. I've never been a male pig, never condoned the macho crap, and never even joked lightheartedly in sexist ways. Course, that's why my friends were always mostly female, since I never got into the whole lockerroom 'hey look at this photo in maxim' immature mentality.

So god bless ya AZ, it's all good.

[NMDemDist2]

139. thanks! if only 5% of the DU men did I what I did in that Harris thread

it would go so far to educate their brethren

I find myself in way too many threads defending GLBT issues and I ain't one! Makes it hard to address the issues that I have absolutely no life experience in, but I keep wading in there.......

thanks for diving in here, and I just read the whole thread and I didn't see TOO many flames, thank goodness

:hide:

but it gets tiring seeing thread after thread on "Mann Coulter" or "Ho-mentum" Harris with nary a peep from people who should know better.

:hug:

[LostinVA]

162. self delete

[Katherine Brengle]

192. That thread is a perfect example of the sexist problems here--

Katherine Harris is a piece of crap neocon--but that has absolutely NOTHING to do with her wardrobe, her breasts, or any other physical features she may have.

She's being maligned in that thread for being a woman and not trying to hide it even though she is in politics. She's being demeaned through sexual "jokes" instead of bc of her actual politics--which are certainly bad enough to dig at her until the end of time.

[NMDemDist2]

193. BINGO! n/t

[LostinVA]

200. Exact;ly!

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

85. Very Well Stated, Level Headed and Accurate. n/t

[LostinVA]

94. And, unfortunately, there is often quite a few misogynistic posters

in certain threads -- especially ones about sexism, (like this thread), child support, etc. And, male posters often say things that would NEVER eb tolerated in a thread discussion about, say, race. It is very, very frustrating for us women to have to continually face this sh*t in our daily lives, and then also have it smeared in our faces here -- one of the most Progressive sites on the Internets. A place we like to think is a bit of a safe harbor.

What everyone needs to realize -- and I tell me Dad this to -- is, if you're not sexist, then don't think it's directed toward you. Talking bout how "The Man" grinds us down every way doesn't mean we think YOU do it, too. I give everyone the benefit of the doubt, unless they give me a reason not to.

Please, also understand that many women on DU have been treated really badly by "The Man," both at work and in their personal life. Humiliating, nasty behavior, often wrapped in a pretty little package. It sucks. And we get so tired of it, guys. Please understand that it can rub us raw. And, when you get all prickly and think, "Hey, she's implying I act like that. I don't act like that!" and then say that, I want you to understand something: you often say almost EXACTLY the same kind of things a truly sexists jackass says. Seriously. It's weird. I know, when a poster I know is a good guy, says this kind of stuff, that he's just being defenesive... like my Dad. However, when a poster I don't know says this... I have no idea what he really means. And, there are often ALOT of posters on DU who I know are... not nice guys, who use this as an opportunity to grind it in, using "reverse sexism" as an excuse. They make me sick!

It's a real problem, guys, and some of us have been really mistreated. We know who are the good guys, okay?

[Clark2008]

104. And even the good guys sometimes say stupid shit.

eom

[LostinVA]

105. Like my Dad!

They get all spazzed out or something...

[Katherine Brengle]

194. Really well said, LostinVA.

I see this a lot--great guys here on DU who get all freaked out by a discussion of gender relations and lash out in clearly sexist ways--I honestly believe that American men have been trained to respond this way.

However, I do not think that indoctrination is an excuse to continue a certain attitude/behavior/mindset--I think that these responses are a great chance for our DU men to see that they too are effected by this pervasive part of our culture and a chance for them to see it clearly and put an end to it.

[LostinVA]

201. *blush*

[johnnie]

100. Hi omega

I think some of the problem here is that both "sides" are sometimes "lumped" by the extremists and therefore everyone comes out swinging.

The thing about us liberals is that we tend to think for ourselves and don't follow one set of guidelines. That can be good, but it can also make for some heated discussions regarding many issues that a lot of us feel strongly about.

There is no doubt that sexism exists in the world today and there is no doubt that the majority of it is against women. No one likes to be looked at as not as on the same level as anyone else and women have every right to be pissed off when they see something they regard as sexism. Unfortunately, some people take things a little too far and instead of looking at a situation as a "people" issue, they tend to "paint with a wide stroke" and are quick to jump to an easy assumption of "sexism", "racism" or a few other "isms" that are too general and don't truly reflect the issue as it really is.

I really didn't want to go too deep into all of this tonight, but I didn't want you to think I didn't read what you posted to me. I appreciate it and I appreciate that you discussed it rather than attacked me. I really don't want to start any kind of bad vibes between anyone here at DU. I respect and look forward to all opinions posted in this place and I try not to be too disruptive..lol.

[omega minimo]

155. Hi johnnie. Here's the same thing

Thank you for reading the post in the peaceful spirit it was intended. :hi:

Isn't it CRAZY how the defensiveness and attacks in the sub-thread proved EVERY point that I made?

Men who "are genuinely aware of sexism and we abhor it" very rarely, if ever, speak up on DU to express that awareness and support of women and women's issues.
The silence is deafening-- and reinforces what the OP referred to as "willful indifference."
The women here get consistently attacked with word games and mind games that do nothing but deflect from whatever-issue-we-were-actually-trying-to-address. Talk about "frustating"!!
Imagine how it feels to be lumped in with somebody's cartoon version of "feminist" and being argued with about things you never said because others think THEY ALREADY KNOW WHAT YOU THINK or they try to have pre-recorded arguments with you because all feminists are the same/wrong/obnoxious? "
I got yer broad brush right heah!"

Some men here claim to be against sexism and support women but don't show it.
They think they have good reasons to be pissed off and jump in these threads all antagonistic claiming support that they rarely, if ever, communicate.
How would we know that they really do?
It takes some confidence to stay clear and step in and drop the defensiveness ("you can't defend yourself because you already have be pre-judged because you are a man") and say what you have to say and show support and counter sexism when you see it here..... and it's so RARE that if you manage to do it IT WILL BE GOLDEN!"

[lumberjack_jeff]

112. Rejecting a false premise is not defensiveness. n/t

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

127. Hear Hear!

:toast:

[Katherine Brengle]

78. I can't stress this enough--

it's not "men" -- it's "patriarchy" -- there is a difference.

What bothers me is that when "men" take a discussion of "patriarchy" and turn it into a personal insult, nothing productive can happen.

I don't think that men are bad (hell, I'm married to one, lol) -- but I do think that men are generally unaware of what we go through as women. This doesn't make you bad people -- but I think it is fair to expect, as a woman, that those of you who consider yourselves progressive take the things we say to heart and do your best to be understanding and open-minded when faced with these issues.

[johnnie]

89. And there is nothing wrong with asking us men to take it to heart

But we can only do the best we can to put ourselves in your shoes. We can witness things, but we can *never* feel the actual feelings that women feel.

I guess all I am asking is that we be given a bit of understanding ourselves and for women to know that many men are fully supportive of them, but we have to do the best we can to express that feeling.

Another thing is that many of us were raised to treat women with respect and open doors and all that stuff, and it can get confusing as to how far we, as men should treat women differently and how and when we should treat them as "one of the guys".

I'm not trying to be combative, I am just expressing what I think many of us men face. :hi:

[Katherine Brengle]

195. I agree that men get mixed messages about this stuff--

and I do my best to be understanding about this.

What I have a lot of trouble understanding is why so many men are so afraid to hear this stuff and consider it (not personally directed toward you here, just a general observation).

[lumberjack_jeff]

108. All-encompassing generalities

I can say that it disgusts me that men are constantly on the defensive when it comes to sexist behavior

... and I can say that it disgusts me that women constantly use gross generalizations to describe men.

The above is just one person's opinion? Oops, sorry - my bad. :sarcasm:

Besides - take it from a guy who knows; "Woman doctor" is considered less of an aberration than "stay-at-home-dad".

[Katherine Brengle]

198. Umm...

"Stay-at-home dad" is not offensive. Nor is "stay-at-home mom" in my opinion. Those are equal descriptors.

One does not hear "man doctor" but we do hear "woman doctor." Just as we hear "male nurse" but not "female nurse."

"Gross generalizations" "broad brush" "reverse sexism" = deflection from the actual point of this discussion.

[mmonk]

216. Sexism is a double edged sword.

That's why in reality, it leaves no one victimless even if it is predicated on male supremacy.

[TahitiNut]

25. "members of a group that PERPETRATE the crimes"

Therein lies the core of the irrational and illiberal claim that gender intrinsically confers both GUILT and GUILTLESSNESS ... a kind of bigotry indistinguishable from sexism. It's "gender profiling" and rife with logical (and ethical) fallacies. Guilt by association. Broad brush. Claim of privilege. Nonsense.

Not only is it fallacious, it demeans and insults all those decent and conscientious men who've materially sacrificed and invested in gender equity and EEO.

I find the continuing assault on THIS audience (DU, and it's male members in particular) just as disruptive and intolerant as any right-wing FReeper coming here to antagonize and insult us. It's even more noxious when such assaults are accompanied by the claim that members of the audience are somehow even inherently INCAPABLE of comprehending the message - due solely to their gender. If that's so, why the f*ck even continue such rants?

[BlooInBloo]

31. Aaahhhh.... the dreaded moral equivalence....

.... being concerned about past and continuing racism and sexism is now equated to being a right-wing freeper troll....

Genius.

[Fountain79]

33. bravo...

:toast: :toast:

[Name removed]

44. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[smirkymonkey]

57. Touche!

Very nicely done. :thumbsup:

[Name removed]

65. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[RazzleDazzle]

66. dupe

[RazzleDazzle]

67. Why, thank you.

I hope the same for you. :party:

I thought this: _!_ wasn't allowed here any more??????

[LostinVA]

114. It's not

[wtmusic]

82. I'd like to know how sexism has personally damaged you

I'm curious. I wanna know the "real life ways". :shrug:

[Katherine Brengle]

86. It has damaged ALL women --

and men as well.

I am really at a loss as to why DU in general refuses to at least consider this honestly and with an open heart...

[LostinVA]

95. These threads always bring this out -- I hate it

It really bemuses me... and on occasion, appalls me... *sigh*

It's almost made me leave DU a few times.

[wtmusic]

106. Bring what out?

Curiosity? A chance to explain yourself? What? Educate me.

So far all I've learned is that you're bemused and appalled, which frankly doesn't mean squat to me.

[LostinVA]

109. Your post explains it all

I've done nothing but write thoughtful posts on this thread, trying wanting to bridge this artificial gap that exists... and you stoop to a snotty little post that strives to do nothing but widen that gap. Unbelievable.

Have fun slagging someone else. Your posts explains what I meant.

You are on Ignore. I may have to put up with this shit in the real world, but not on DU. Have fun, Junior.

on edit: oh, and saying my opinion and concerns means "squat" to you, illustrates part of the problem the OP stated: you don't fucking care about anything we think about this -- it's like a big intellectual game to you -- nothing more.

[LostinVA]

96. If you have to ask that, you honestly don't understand the problem

And no, WT, I am not being snarky or nasty... I really mean that. It is often rather constant, and I myself have learned to tune out alot of it -- especially stuff in the media. That doesn't make it better, or make it any less bad... it just means I've given up in some quarters. Because a person can only handle so much.

on edit: and it's also why I've put you on ignore a few minutes ago. You don't want to be educated -- you just want to play a game of "oneupmanship." Life is too short to be bothered by people like you. Have fun on this thread.

[bloom]

117. For one thing

It drives women away. (Personally - I think that is the intent of some people - those who just love their "right to offend").

Some will stay and fight, some will ignore it and some will leave. And then are not part of the conversation.


Like the people (middle-schoolers?) who voted that they would rather follow the philosophy of Larry Flynt (whether they were serious or not) than that of Dr. Seuss. Dr. Seuss may have written children's books - but he had quite a bit more developed philosophy than Larry Flynt ever will. If some Democrats think that Democrats can win with a Larry Flynt philosophy and attitude - they need to think again. I think the people who are proud to say that they are "followers" of Flynt are generally clueless when it comes to sexism.

I also think people who say that Larry Flynt is "our" slimeball one minute and then attack the Republicans for their lack of morality just sound like dingbats and have no credibility.


I've had plenty of "real life ways" that I don't feel like listing here - in employment & in education. Most women have when they get to talking about it.

[LostinVA]

122. Excellent post n/t

[wtmusic]

123. Larry Flynt is a slimeball

but in my experience most men are in solid accord on that one.

A lot of people have been discussing the gravity and seriousness of the problem, but I haven't heard how people have been personally damaged.

[NMDemDist2]

134. i'll give you one example

Medical Research

in medical research for heart disease, the vast majority of the $$ went to studying heart disease in MEN. until about 10 years ago almost no research was done on heart disease in women, even though it is the #1 reason for female death.

they only figured out a few years ago that women's heart attack symptoms are usually totally different than a man's symptoms. Women don't recognize the symptoms through a lack of education or if they do make it to the hospital they were misdiagnosed for years.

that impacts every woman's life, you mother, your sister, your wife. It impacts me and my mother and my sister and my husband's mother and his sisters.

It systemic. I don't think they were "picking" on women, I just recognize it never entered the researcher's minds that it might be different for women. Systemic sexism you see.

here's a link to a recent article

http://www.thewashingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A48769-2004Aug7.html

....This new understanding is emerging only now because heart disease research has traditionally focused almost exclusively on men. Experts assumed that women's tendency to fare so poorly was the result of not being treated as early or as thoroughly as men.

[wtmusic]

184. Thank you

and a good example that is. I know stuff like this is happening, and I wasn't trying to be facetious.

[bloom]

136. Maybe in your experience

but on DU there is a contingent of Larry Flynt supporters - one who likes to say Larry Flynt is a slimeball - "But he is OUR slimeball"


He got 17 votes on today's poll.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=757189&mesg_id=757189


Here he got 84 votes for being a "Great American"

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=364&topic_id=544086

[Nobody]

166. Ah yes, the right to offend

generally means: Yes I know it bugs you and I'll keep on doing it because I know it bugs you.

Had a conversation with a friend and I mentioned a personal pet peeve and got the familiar "right to offend" line and the familiar "you can't please everybody" line. Those are just lines. They're telling you your concern isn't valid to them.

My response was: You don't have to please everyone, but you can choose who you want to offend.

This puts the ball back in their court. Instead of you being framed as a thin-skinned whiner, they are framed as the person who declared that they don't give a rat's ass about offending you. They've chosen to offend YOU.

And if they try to be more careful in the future, give them credit for trying.

BTW: I've been paid less than a male co-worker who did measurably less work than I did and had the same education and experience and time on the job. I saw the pay stub.

FURTHERMORE: I've been told on my first day on the job by a friend of the guy training me in that he sbouldn't be surprised to see a girl pumping gas. After all girls can do the same jobs people can do. At least he turned red and backtracked.

AND EVEN MORE: Guy came in with an electronic part. Wanted to ask a question of one of the guys. I was the only one not busy. I asked him what his question was. he wouldn't say but as the phones kept ringing off the hook and it was their job, not mine, to deal with the phones, I made him ask the question. My response: "Sir, that is a quarter watt 1 k ohm resistor with 5% tolerance. You'll find them in (wherever the heck they were) at 3 cents a piece."

[Marie26]

153. Sexism affects women all their lives. nt

[LostinVA]

163. And in every segment of their lives

[wtmusic]

80. thank you TN

astute analysis, as usual :thumbsup:

[Katherine Brengle]

84. Okay...

This is not an assault.

I don't know where all of this defensive reactionary behavior comes from, but it simply clarifies the need for these discussions.

[LostinVA]

97. Happens on every thread like this -- ALWAYS

[Katherine Brengle]

202. I'm still fairly new here, so I guess I don't know the...

"rules" as well as most.

[LostinVA]

212. Not rules, KB -- just weird and very unDU things happen when

you start talking feminism....

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

129. Speaking For Myself, I Think Overall You Are Quite Clear In Your Intent

and that you are genuinely seeking open discussion and productive conversation. I think sexism is an important issue and think it is something that continually needs to be taken seriously and have people made aware of. I think where these threads go off track and the reactionary type behavior comes in is from those that instead of directing the issue towards the perpetrators while seeking discussion from all on how to work together to erradicate the problem, they instead use it as a stomping ground to air their frustration at an entire gender lumped into one broad brush rage. It is that type of 'you're all guilty on one level or another' mindset that degenerates what could've been a productive, thought provoking and civil thread into one where it degenerates into defensiveness. People will always get offended and defensive when they are lumped into a shameful group that they wouldn't dare on their own want to be part of. When that occurs, it is extremely offensive to the individuals being lumped together unfairly.

So please understand it is not your thread, it's content or nature of topic that's an issue, as I think it was done quite well. It is those who come in these threads and make broad brush prejudiced smears while using twisted logic and word/intent twisting that causes them to degenerate. I'm sorry that it has to keep occurring, but overall there is still always some quite good dialogue that goes on in these threads outside of the negative and abusive sub threads.

[TahitiNut]

133. Well said, imho.

:thumbsup:

[Marie26]

144. Reactions

I think sometimes people are reacting, not to a oarticular post, but to some other posts from another thread by another person.

[Marie26]

145. ...

[lumberjack_jeff]

116. Well said

I reject the idea that every newborn boy inherits an unending moral debt to their sisters.

That's not equality, that's a blood feud and it's inherently illiberal.

[TahitiNut]

130. It's a perverse kind of "original sin," I guess.

There's absolutely no question that females have been and are treated as 2nd class (or worse) human beings for most of recorded time in this world and, to an arugably lesser extent, in the US. It's appalling. Binding feet in China, clitorectomies in Africa, timelessly treated as chattel, dowries, "female intuition," ... the list is tragically and appallingly endless. The continuing assault on reproductive rights in the US weighs most heavily on women by far - but we're all in the same leaky boat. Some have committed the career-limiting sin of being disloyal to the "boy's club" and blowing the whistle to plug a leak. Some have put their very lives on the line (and incurred medical expenses) in support of victims of spousal assault to plug another leak. Some realize it and some merely try to throw others overboard rather than repair the leaks. Throw enough leak-pluggers overboard and everyone sinks.

:cry:

[Scout]

43. kind of like people who don't think gender neutral language is important..

except for the words that make THEIR gender look bad...

wife beaters
deadbeat dads
etc.

[mondo joe]

74. Are these crimes committed by groups now?

Tch tch.

[LostinVA]

90. Agreed...

[baby_mouse]

196. Because they haven't pertpetrated it and are sick of being told they have?

[Scout]

42. start a thread about it....

no one said women are never and can never be sexists...

get a grip.

[RazzleDazzle]

46. Actually, I have said it

Because there's way more to sexism than some dictionary definition. What, for example, are the real life CONSEQUENCES of nearly half the population thinking the other half is inferior and for that reason that they don't "deserve" tghe same benefits, the same consideration, the same respect, the same anything?

What does it mean for our society? Our social contracts? Our institutions? Our laws? Our education? Our healthcare? Etc., etc., etc. What does it mean for the people who are the inferiors? How does it affect their lives?

Sexism isn't just some banal, consequence-less notion some people have, no harm done. No!

Sexism is a system of oppression. A SYSTEM. It has tentacles into every aspect of our society and culture. EVERY SINGLE ONE. It causes real harm because the slightly more than half the population NEGATIVELY affected live lives that are less than they otherwise could be. Every single woman in this world -- even the Queen of England -- suffers and is diminished in some way or another because of the sexism in this world. Every single woman is less-than-fully-equal in THIS democracy where "all men are created equal."

There's no amount of "sexism against men" that can make men's lives less than what our lives as women are like. They are completely impervious and completely protected from any social or other kinds of potential harm from any kind of anti-male bigotry: THEY ARE MEN! THey own the world. Sure, a couple of decades ago they got shamed and coerced into making a SHOW of giving us a little more equality. and we took that and ran.

But you can see for yourselves that with both racism and sexism the reality is: WE WILL ALLOW YOU TO BE JUST A LITTLE MORE EQUAL, but not entirely equal. We'll shut you up with a little more equality, but not full equality.

[dogday]

3. Sexism is a woman is a revealing bikini selling a screwdriver nt

[Warren Stupidity]

5. well I disagree with that

although this might be an example of sexism, it is mostly besides the point. It is an example of using sexual objectification to sell merchandise, and I am not sure that equates to gender discrimination.

[Marie26]

26. Objectification is the worst type of sexism. nt

[TahitiNut]

151. Treating any human being as an object or commodity, ...

... as a means to some end rather than an end in themselves, is a pervasive evil in our society. While it may seem 'pragmatic' (or useful) to apply reductionism to this evil, I think it merely makes the overall evil seem more banal.

[Marie26]

237. Okay...

Well, I agree w/your first sentence. But I have no idea what the second sentence means. Reductionism makes evil banal? In what sense? What is the reductionism here? What is the pragmatic view? What does reductionism have to do w/objectification? You may have a good point, but it's not clear from the brief post.

[omega minimo]

58. Here is an olive branch

This made me laugh out loud :rofl: the first time I read it

"It is an example of using sexual objectification to sell merchandise, and I am not sure that equates to gender discrimination."

but in the interest of mutual respect........... it there is some uncertainty B-) :spray:

:yoiks: no wait, I'm sorry, really, come back...........



If it were NOT gender discrimination, it would not be 99.9999999999999999999999999% FEMALE BODIES utilized in "using sexual objectification to sell merchandise."

And think about it, how much media and marketing is designed with MEN as the target audience? Yer right-- MOST.

[Warren Stupidity]

161. Except of course that men's bodies and male sexuality are

also used to sell merchandise and the ratio is nowhere near 99.9999999999999999999999999. Is female sexuality used more often than male sexuality to sell merchandise? Yes of course, and that might reflect sexism in society but it is not clear that it either causes sexism or is sexism. I think it is simply marketing merchandise using sexual imagery and I happen to disagree that that, in and of itself, is 'bad' or 'sexism' or 'oppressive'.

Also, while men respond to visual sexual imagery, women seem to respond to different sorts of stimuli, so the marketing done to women is not as overtly visually sexual as the marketing done to men. It is similar to the difference between male oriented pornography (the traditional pictures of naked women) and say soap operas which I would classify as female oriented pornography, although I suspect that you will not even consider that argument.

[omega minimo]

179. Ya smack me with my olive branch!?!

:cry: :spank:


"Except of course that men's bodies and male sexuality are also used to sell merchandise and the ratio is nowhere near 99.9999999999999999999999999. and the ratio is nowhere near 99.9999999999999999999999999."


Well, I'm sorry for the OBVIOUSLY SILLY exaggeration-- I forgot I was supposed to be "humorless."

The fact is that although "men's bodies and male sexuality are also used to sell merchandise" in recent years, even a cursory look at the history of advertising shows that women's bodies and sexuality have been used for the overwhelming majority of that time.

"Yes of course, and that might reflect sexism in society but it is not clear that it either causes sexism or is sexism. I think it is simply marketing merchandise using sexual imagery and I happen to disagree that that, in and of itself, is 'bad' or 'sexism' or 'oppressive'."

Fascinating that you are able to parse out some sort of distinction there. If you do not think that that has a sociological effect, perhaps you need a book or a class on the subject.

"Also, while men respond to visual sexual imagery, women seem to respond to different sorts of stimuli, so the marketing done to women is not as overtly visually sexual as the marketing done to men."

Don't know where you picked up this "rationale" but if you think that's the reason, that would contribute to the lack of awareness of the societal relationship between sexism and advertising.

"It is similar to the difference between male oriented pornography (the traditional pictures of naked women) and say soap operas which I would classify as female oriented pornography, although I suspect that you will not even consider that argument. "

I would be willing to discuss that if I believed that DU could have a rational discussion about it.

DU and its goals for Democrats would be better served if this board could discuss the realities and facts about these subjects, rather than ALWAYS fall back to petty slapfights about personal opinions. Many of these personal opinions are uninformed and nothing will be learned or accomplished here if every discussion is forced into a gender war.

Pointless. :think:

[dogday]

64. Yes, you would, you are a man

The next time you are standing in a thong, selling some household products directed mainly at a female audience, then you can let me know what you think sexism is.....:rofl:

[Warren Stupidity]

4. Your definition conflates 'sexism' and 'feminism'.

These are separate but related concepts. Opposition to "the continuation of a patriarchal social order" is a feminist issue, as feminism is in some respect defined simply as 'opposition to the established patriarchal order'. Gender discrimination is sexism and is not just discrimination against women. A partriarchal order requires gender discrimination against women, but one could easily imagine a matriarchal order that required gender discrimination against men. There certainly are real world examples of gender discrimination against men.

A non-sexist society would be gender neutral, and would be neither a patriarchy nor a matriarchy. It is an essential part of the progressive world view.

[Finder]

7. Matriarchal societies have historically...

been egalitarian.

Matriarchal societies or matrilineal societies are not simply mirror images of patriarchal societies but completely different.

[Katherine Brengle]

11. While I agree with this historical perspective, I do not...

promote matriarchy any more than I promote patriarchy.

[izzybeans]

172. Examples please.

[Katherine Brengle]

16. Sexism is an issue that...

feminists have a vested interest in eradicating.

While gender discrimination can effect men as well as women, it is much more prevalent against women in our society, and in the world at large, and therefore, this is where I focus.

Also, I have to say, as I have said many times, this is not a problem that can be solved through the clever semantic manipulation of our PC natures.

Can women be sexist? Sure, but it doesn't matter.

Why doesn't it matter? Because sexism against men, when it does occur, is so unimportant that it doesn't make the cultural climate any less hospitable for men. It hasn't been institutionalized--therefore, it's effect is negligible.

[RazzleDazzle]

53. Where did you get that load of bahooey?

Sorry, but that's -- ridiculous, simply.

Gender discrimination is sexism and is not just discrimination against women.

And feminism concerns itself with all of it. We FOCUS on women first because women are still being hurt badly (including dying daily), but we are VERY well aware of the fact that patriarchy harms men pretty badly too. It's hell to be told you have to hold all your feelings inside in order to "be a man." It's hell to have to shoulder all (or most of) the financial burdens of raising a family by yourself. It's hell to have to always "be the strong one." It's hell to have to live in a patriarchal world that does NOT value life, including your own and so sends you deep into the mines without adequate protection and off to war as often as possible. And so forth and so on.

Feminists have at various times tried to appeal to men on the basis of how much they lose and are hurt by patriarchy, but in general and as a class, men really preferred the power trip involved in being higher on the pecking order than ANY woman on earth, no matter what kind of a loser they were otherwise.

A partriarchal order requires gender discrimination against women, but one could easily imagine a matriarchal order that required gender discrimination against men.

Well, you can imagine it, but the evidence in the matrilineal societies of the past doesn't support that, just isn't there. It just isn't. The evidence showed that when women had the opportunity to do so, they chose equality. Even in contemporary societies which are matrilineal, they aren't matriarchies. Further, there is NO urge or call for that among 2nd Wave feminists or feminists of the past. What we want is equality.

You know why? Because "power OVER" is a patriarchal concept. Women are into partnership models of society.

[lumberjack_jeff]

110. The OP more closely conflates it with misogynism.

In fact, she uses "sexism" as a replacement for "misogynism".

[Katherine Brengle]

204. I consider them one and the same.

This bologna about "reverse" sexism is just an attempt, repeated attempt, to detract from the meaning of this discussion.

As I said somewhere else in this thread, it is absolutely possible for a woman to be sexist, both against men and against women, even though she is a woman herself.

A woman's sexism against men does not matter because it is not institutionalized and therefore does not have a negative effect on the overall existence of men.

A woman's sexism against women is the worst kind, because it proves how pervasive self-loathing has become among American females, and this has been part of our training for a very very long time.

[LostinVA]

213. Good post n/t

[lumberjack_jeff]

221. There's no such thing as "reverse" sexism.

It's one thing. If you want to talk about sexism against women, the operative term is misogyny.

But thanks for sharing your view that sexism against men is okay. I disagree.

[Boojatta]

6. If I don't use the word "sexism", then do I need a definition?

Any and all justification for the continuation of a social order that allows women to be raped--ever--period.

On several occasions, the 25-year-old brother of an 18-year-old woman accompanies her while she meets an 18-year-old man in a public place. Then she says that she wants to meet the young man alone. Her brother suspects that the young man is not trustworthy and forbids her from spending time alone with the young man. If the "social order allows" the young woman to meet with the young man alone and he rapes her, then...?

[Finder]

9. the young man forbids?

A social order that allows males to dictate to adult females is the problem.

Your example is not a good framing.

[Boojatta]

12. Okay, suppose he says, "I would forbid you from seeing him alone, but

it would be a problem if the social order allowed me to do that. Therefore, I strongly recommend that you not see him alone."

Now what?

[Finder]

17. The women in your scenario is an adult.

If she is raped, it is because the guy is a criminal. I suppose I may be missing what point you are trying to make. Are you saying women should never meet men alone?

[Katherine Brengle]

19. Bah, why do people not get this???

We are WOMEN.

We must, must, must be controlled.

In order to be controlled, we must be very, very, very afraid.

What better way to scare us than to force us to live under the constant threat of RAPE?

Mission accomplished.

[Boojatta]

28. My questions were provoked by the OP.

Would you say that rape can occur even if the social order absolutely does not allow any rape to ever occur?

[Finder]

35. Technically, rape is not just a crime against women.

Prison social order among males, for example.

Do you find it interesting that society became outraged over the Catholic Church scandal when it was exposed many of the victims were male? For centuries females have been molested by clergy.

[smirkymonkey]

61. Or the outrage over Abu Graib?

Especially photographs of a WOMAN sexually humiliating a MAN? Does anybody think that it would even have been newsworthy if it was the other way around? Because Male on Female sexual violence has been going on during wartime (and in peace time) since the beginning of patriarchy.

I was amazed to see the outrage of the men - most of who are noticeably absent in threads where male on female violence is being exposed.

"THEY (WOMEN) CAN'T DO THAT TO US!!!"

[mondo joe]

Do you think the fact that this was systematic and authorized by

the military might have something to do with it?

[Katherine Brengle]

87. Rape is most often a crime against women --

90% of rape victims are women.

Of male rapes, 70% are committed by men.

It is a crime using sex as a weapon.

I know of no men who are scared to go out alone at night for fear of being raped.

In normal society, the vast, vast majority of rapes are committed by men against women.

Using the minority to cancel out the need to address the majority is a strategy to cancel out the initial argument, and it is intellectually dishonest.

[Finder]

169. No cancelling intended...

I was pointing out rape was a patriarchal control tool. I was responding to the other poster regarding the woman meeting a man alone against her male sibling's advice...ala "blame the victim".

[Katherine Brengle]

207. Gotcha, my apologies.

[RazzleDazzle]

48. Your question itself was sexist, thru and thru

On two counts:

a) putting a male relative in charge of her, in a role where he can "forbid" anything.

b) blaming the victim (if she doesn't follow her "better's" advice).

Anything other than the following is 100% sexist:

No matter what a women ever does, she is NOT responsible or at fault for her own rape. No matter what a women ever does, she is NOT responsible or at fault for her mate beating or assaulting her.

Period.

[Boojatta]

60. A response and some questions

Your question itself was sexist, thru and thru

On two counts:

a) putting a male relative in charge of her, in a role where he can "forbid" anything.

Can you tell me that my question was sexist without using the word "sexist"? The meaning of the word "sexism" is the topic of this thread and is still being discussed and debated.

My question was about a hypothetical situation. The role of the male relative is part of the hypothetical situation. Would you say that any question that begins with the words, "Suppose a woman is raped" is a sexist question?

Please note that the male relative doesn't forbid anything. When you read post 6, please read the amendment in post 12. Alternatively, ignore post 6 and replace it with the following:

On several occasions, the 25-year-old brother of an 18-year-old woman accompanies her while she meets an 18-year-old man in a public place. Then she says that she wants to meet the young man alone. Her brother suspects that the young man is not trustworthy and says, "I would forbid you from seeing him alone, but it would be a problem if the social order allowed me to do that. Therefore, I strongly recommend that you not see him alone." If the social order allows the young woman to meet with the young man alone and he rapes her, then...?

b) blaming the victim (if she doesn't follow her "better's" advice).

Who blamed the victim? My understanding was that the OP blamed the "social order." My question started from the assumption that the OP is correct and then basically left a blank for you to fill.

One more thing: did you notice my first question in this thread?

[RazzleDazzle]

71. Let me try to understand this

Can you tell me that my question was sexist without using the word "sexist"? The meaning of the word "sexism" is the topic of this thread and is still being discussed and debated.

You're serious, right?

As if the outcome of this thread (hint: there won't be any) would define sexism for all people and all time?

Another hint: No, it's NOT being debated here. The dictionary definition is already set. Personal understandings are being discussed here.

Would you say that any question that begins with the words, "Suppose a woman is raped" is a sexist question?


No, but I do find your question ludicrous.

Your post number 12 changed nothing: any premise, any inference, any construct in which blaming the victim for her own rape is apparent, is SEXIST!

[Boojatta]

79. A little more discussion should resolve this

No, but I do find your question ludicrous.

Are you answering "no" to a ludicrous question or are you saying that the earlier question introduced with a hypothetical situation involving an older brother is a ludicrous question?

(...) any premise, any inference, any construct in which blaming the victim for her own rape is apparent, is SEXIST!

Where do you see the victim being blamed?

Note: The OP starts with the title "What is sexism?" and includes the words "My definition." The question "What's yours?" (i.e. "what is your definition of sexism?") appears at the end of the OP.

I think you are right that this thread will not define the word "sexism" for all people and all time, but if you are claiming that my question was sexist and I wish to understand what you are claiming, then isn't it enough for me to know your definition of the word "sexist"?

[Katherine Brengle]

18. You nailed it -- I am a woman, therefore I MUST live in fear -- because...

that is how things are meant to be.

This is exactly the kind of thinking that I am trying to bring into focus here.

I refuse to accept the commonly accepted "truth" that I must watch where I walk at night, what I wear, and how I interact with men because I might be "inviting" something awful to happen to me.

Name one man you know who lives in constant fear of being raped, and I'll give you a cookie.

What garbage.

[Finder]

22. Good point...did you hear the comments...

about the woman in NY that was murdered? Abrams on MSNBC offered a great rant in defense of the victim and all women. I was shocked to see and hear so many people "blame the victim".

[Katherine Brengle]

91. "Blaming the victim" is very particular to rape cases --

it is something deeply rooted in our patriarchal past and present.

[mondo joe]

93. I don't think anyone has said you SHOULD live in fear.

But the fact is that we are all potential victims of crimes, some more particular to us than others.

As a gay man I know I am more subject to certain crimes than others. It does mean I need to be more cautious about certain things. If I fail to do that it doesn't mean I invited a gay bashing - but it can mean I willingly took on certain risks.

[Katherine Brengle]

208. This is dangerous thinking--

We need to completely nullify the need for fear instead of taking steps to avoid danger.

Going to the local 7-11 at 10:30 pm for a bag of potato chips should not be characterized as "taking a risk."

[mondo joe]

210. I'm sorry but you cannot nullify fear.

All of life can't be designed to be risk- or danger-free.

We can and should create laws to reflect our values. So it's illegal to rape or assault or kill.

A lot of things SHOULDN'T be a risk, but in fact ARE, though not by design.

[neebob]

14. I would say it's any kind of discrimination based on gender -

even if it's just mental - and we're all guilty of it, a lot more often than we realize.

[BlooInBloo]

20. nah. gotta Tie it down tighter than that.....

For example - I discriminate all the time - I'm a straight guy. :)

It doesn't seem right to describe that as sexism - unless you really insist on abusing language....

One has to mark a difference between appropriate discrimination and inappropriate.

Sexism would be inappropriate discrimination based on gender.

And speak for yourself, not for moi please. I'm guilty of a lot of things, but sexism as above isn't one of them.

[Finder]

24. Hmmm, "appropriate discrimination" is oxymoronic. n/t

[BlooInBloo]

27. Uh... no it's not....

... the word only means "to tell the difference between this and that"....

I suppose you're thinking of a more recent usage of the word, which carries the "bad" connotation built into it.

Think instead of "a discriminating palette" or "discriminating taste" - those exhibit the real meaning of the word, not just the 3rd grade education level we Americans use it at.

[lumberjack_jeff]

118. Sure, the antonym of "discriminate" is "indiscriminate"

Indiscriminate is not a virtue.

[neebob]

32. Okay, then I'm with the dictionary definition at the top of the thread

except for the especially clause. And by the way, I wasn't referring to the kind of discrimination you seem to be suggesting. But now that you mention it, maybe I should add or sexual preference to the end of that dictionary definition.

With regard to speaking for myself, if you're completely free of attitudes that might cause you to treat men and women differently, ever at all, congratulations. I doubt it.

[BlooInBloo]

34. *Inappropriately* differently. Sheesh.

Why is that so hard to understand?

Here's one way I treat men n women differently: I feel the urge to hookup with members of one group, but not the other. There's nothing inappropriate about being discriminating in such a manner. (I don't think so at any rate)

[neebob]

36. That's the kind of discrimination I thought you were suggesting

and I already clarified myself with regard to the dictionary definition. I said nothing about appropriateness. If you're going to throw that in, you need to define it.

[BlooInBloo]

37. ROFL! Exactly how much of the English langauge....

... do I need to define before you're happy?

Sheesh.

Hopefully now you see what is, in the end, the *poverty* of definitions - they're only helpful if you know the words doing the defining. You apparently want a definition without words (else you'll ask for a defintion). Good luck with that project!

[neebob]

38. Before I'm happy?!

Dude, I was happy before you came along and challenged me to be clear. Now it's your turn.

[lumberjack_jeff]

21. No. Anyone who believes that men cannot be discriminated against...

has never:
1) been a father in divorce court
2) been a male student
3) sought assistance for your autistic child
4) been told by people here that it's okay that men are underrepresented in college by a ratio of 3:2 because unlike women, men can get jobs as plumbers, ironworkers, taxi drivers or other unpleasant and/or dangerous professions.

I want my sons to pay for their own sins, not the sins of some hypothetical male ancestor.

Rant off.

[etherealtruth]

40. All valid examples ...

As are these:

1) Been a mother that did NOT want custody of her child(ren) ... society is a harsh judge.

2) Been a women enrolled in a traditionally male program.

3) Sought assistance for a disabled child (this just "sucks" all the way around).

4) Been told that an employer could not imagine her "out in the trenches" ... make $0.76 for every dollar men (as a whole) make.

I want my sons and daughters to be limited by their capabilities, not societal stereotypes.

Sexism, racism and classism all exist; I would hope we all have a goal to work for their elimination.

[lumberjack_jeff]

103. I fully agree. n/t

[LostinVA]

113. Here we go --

And here i go -- IGNORE

[lumberjack_jeff]

126. Good idea.

There's no better tool to facilitate surrounding one's self with a personal echo chamber.

"Sexism" is gender neutral, and it's a problem for everyone. I fight against the injustices that face GLBT, the disabled and women, but the job of recruiting allies would be well-served by (at a bare minimum) not actively promoting the injustices that face men.

All men are not to blame for all women's problems.

[etherealtruth]

23. How about describing human rights violations ...

... as simply "cultural differences" when the victims of these violations are all women.

I bring this up as an example ... obviously, not a definition.

[smirkymonkey]

62. "When Men are Oppressed, It's A Tragedy, When Women Are

Oppressed, It's Tradition." - Bernadette Mosala on the frequently used justification of the abuse of women based upon "Cultural Differences."

[mmonk]

30. My dictionary says

sex'ism n. discrimination against one of the opposite sex-sexist n,adj.


Nothing at all about a social order allowing rape, etc. I guess your definition is an extrapolation (to project a value outside the range of available data) since there isn't anything indicative in the meaning of the word to indicate all that. While such a society would be deemed sexist, there isn't data sufficient that that is what the word sexism means or is limited to.

[noiretextatique]

45. outside the range of available data?

we live in a social order that at least tolerates (and perhaps encourages)rape.

[RazzleDazzle]

63. Yep, this looks like a Rape Culture to me

While I was noodling around in Wikipedia looking at Matriarchy, I happened across this:

Rape culture

Rape culture is a term used to denote a culture in which rape and other sexual violence is common and in which prevalent attitudes, norms, practices, and media condone, normalize, excuse, or encourage rape or other violence against women. Within the paradigm, such a thing as "trivial" or "harmless" sexism does not exist; for instance, telling a sexist joke is interpreted as fostering a misogynistic disrespect for women and an accompanying disregard for their well-being, which can ultimately make rape seem acceptable.

The term is widely used within women's studies and feminism (particularly radical feminism). In a 1992 paper in the Journal of Social Issues entitled "A Feminist Redefinition of Rape and Sexual Assault: Historical Foundations and Change," Patricia Donat and John D'Emilio suggested that the term originated as "rape-supportive culture" in Susan Brownmiller's 1975 book Against Our Will: Men, Women, and Rape.

Rape culture has been described as detrimental to men in addition to women. Some writers and speakers, such as Jackson Katz and Don McPherson, have said that it is intrinsically linked to gender roles that limit male self-expression and cause psychological harm to men. It has also been linked to homophobia. For instance, Andrea Dworkin, in her 1983 "Twenty-Four Hour Truce" speech, said, "If you want to do something about homophobia, you are going to have to do something about the fact that men rape, and that forced sex is not incidental to male sexuality but is in practice paradigmatic."

Examples of behaviors that typify rape culture include victim blaming, trivializing prison rape, and sexual objectification.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_culture

Looks like a rape culture to me.

[bloom]

125. Like when a reporter at the LA Times writes that he is more sympathetic

to the gang rapists than he is to the victim - because the proscutor was suggesting too long :eyes: of a jail sentence.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=341x6472

[mmonk]

170. If our society as a whole agreed with the reporter,

we could call it such. The fact the law prevailed would indicate our society does not tolerate it to the sense indicated.

[bloom]

231. The fact is

that the rapists will end up with serving 21 months m/l for a heinous crime - which is far less than what they deserved - and there were DU posters going around repeating the same kind of crap - repeating the defenses lies as if they were the truth.

I think if someone had printed anything as racist as I think that was sexist - they would have been fired.

[LostinVA]

232. Oh, they would have

[TahitiNut]

138. Rape is something I doubt I'll ever comprehend.

That's not to say I don't comprehend, to some degree (based on personal experiences I will NOT go into), the almost limitless sense of personal violation, subjugation, and befouling that a victim feels. I do. To some degree. But I do NOT, to any degree whatsoever, comprehend that which would impel a person to rape another. From my (sometimes disturbing) studies in Abnormal Psychology, I found that I could discover some small kernel or inclination (or empathy) inside myself which I could use to give me some tiny insight to most mental illnesses and personality disorders. (Bothered by this and asking professors, I was assured that this was entirely normal and healthy, and that the abnormality was in the extreme imbalance of what was in all of us, if only as an empathic association.) Such is just not the case with rape. I just can't comprehend it. I am unable, despite soul-searching even with assistance, to find anything within myself that would allow me to have empathy for a rapist, no matter the gender of the victim. One professor/shrink even waggishly said that I might be missing something. She had a bit strange sense of humor, though. Strange.


(It has sure disqualified me as a potentetial partner for some who may have had certain fetishes. Good.)

[mmonk]

168. While some may tolerate it,

it's still against the law and should be enforced.

[mmonk]

173. Rape is against the law in our society.

Sexism can exist even in societies that don't tolerate rape. That is where extrapolation comes in concerning the post. Tolerance of rape is a symptom of a sexist society, not the definition of sexism.

[Katherine Brengle]

209. It may be illegal, but...

it is ridiculously prevalent, which tells me that it is not being deterred, which makes me think that it is not being prosecuted and punished as it should be, which means our culture is indifferently supportive of it.

[omega minimo]

50. Fear

of The Other


:bounce: :hide: :bounce:

[Odin2005]

52. I'm sick of the men-bashing quite frankly.

Some men can be assholes, that doesn't mean all of us men have to be called evil, masochists because of the sins of our ancesotrs and the actions of present day male chauvinist jerks. That post about matriarchal socities being peaceful and egalitarian is BS, I remember reading things about Minoans, a matriarchal society, ritually sacrificing ceremonial kings.

[RazzleDazzle]

59. Minoans?

The people named after King Minos?

Well, here's some info for you:

Feminist Joan Bamberger notes that the historical record contains no reliable evidence of any society in which women dominated (Bamberger 1974), though there are many known matrilineal societies.

snip

Peggy Reeves Sanday favors redefining and reintroducing the word matriarchy, especially in reference to modern, matrilineal societies like the Minangkabau. This group lives in West Sumatra and numbers about four million; it is considered the largest and most stable matrilineal society in the modern world. Sanday argues that this society is a modern matriarchy defined not in polar opposition to patriarchy, but on unique terms. A clear and consistent definition has been given by Heide Goettner-Abendroth, who did cross-cultural research on all of the still existing matriarchal societies of today (in her major work on matriarchy). Her viewpoint is close to that of Sanday. One of her examples are the Mosuo people of Southwestern China

snip

Whether matriarchal societies might have existed at some time in the distant past is controversial. The controversy began in reaction to the book by Johann Jakob Bachofen Mother Right: An Investigation of the Religious and Juridical Character of Matriarchy in the Ancient World in 1861. Several generations of ethnologists were inspired by his pseudo-evolutionary theory of archaic matriarchy. Following him and Jane Ellen Harrison, several generations of scholars, arguing usually from myths or oral traditions and neolithic female cult-figures, suggested that many ancient societies were matriarchal, or even that there existed a wide-ranging matriarchal society prior to the ancient cultures of which we are aware (see for example The White Goddess by Robert Graves).

More recent archaeologists like Marija Gimbutas have argued for a widespread matriarchal culture in pre-Indo-European Old Europe of the Neolithic.

But I'm pretty sure Gimbutas wasn't talking about the polar opposite of patriarchy.

Matriarchies in mythology
One area where written myths are available from an early period is the Aegean culture-zone, where the Minoan Great Goddess was worshipped in a society where women and men were apparently equals. Gender equality is a typical characteristic of matriarchy, according to the claims of modern Matriarchal Studies.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matriarchal

[etherealtruth]

69. Why are claims of sexism "man bashing" ?

How does this differ from claims of non-whites in the USA claiming (legitimately)racism? Is that "white" bashing?

Racism, sexism and classism exist ... discussing it is not "bashing."

[Odin2005]

72. I never said discussing sexism was men-bashing.

It's the "all men are evil pigs" and the "men are root of everything bad in the world" vitriol spewed by some that gets on my nerves.

[lumberjack_jeff]

131. The op makes the case that misogynism and sexism...

... are synonymous. Follow-on posters said that there's essentially no such thing as sexism against males, and men are inherently unable to understand sexism because they "belong to the group" who perpetrate the crimes.

You can't see it? Really?

If a person of Japanese descent said that you're unable to understand racism because as an american, you're a part of a morally inferior group, would you still be unable?

[LostinVA]

102. This is not male-bashing

It is talking about how a patriarchal system has allowed -- and often encouraged =-- women to be treated a certain way. By the very nature of the system, men are the ones who cause it -- but "men" is not the same as "all men." No one would accuse anyone of "white bashing" in a discussion about the institutionalization of racism in America... well, some try it, but it doesn't fly. That's what this is. It's about The Man, not the man. And, until people can not get defensive and try to understand this, we'll get nowhere... and we have to get somewhere. Seriously.

And, as I say up thread, please understand that your saying that is exactly what anti-feminist say. Wait a minute -- I'm not calling you an anti-feminist. What I'm saying is that when men get defensive, very often what they say is exactly what their chauvinist pig jerk brethren say, so it immediately does no good. Like if you were talking to someone you knew was a Progressive about abortion or whatever, and they suddenly started saying the exact same thing Rush said -- male bashing, etc. It freaks us out, because that's NOT what this is.

It's NOT about you -- it's about the people who allow this to happen. And, 99% of all the posts by women in these threads say that.

God, I hate these threads. I'm going to start hiding them. It discourages teh hell out of me.

[izzybeans]

174. I hate these threads too. I think the poster is refering to some subthread

where a few men were attempting to say "I am person attempting to go against this trend" or clumsly express solidarity and they got ripped to bits because they asked for more precision in word choice.

The all women vs. all men thing is the very expression of sexism on either side. Matriarchy or Patriarchy thrives on "sex" for its definition and using either one as a battering ram is sexism because they both uphold a social fiction that stands between a true partnership. This is true regardless of whose cake we have and whether we are eating it or not.

Man I hate these threads, but they the OP did a service by saying what needs to be said. We need these discussions however painful they are. Without recognition of the conflict we can never hope to change it.

When the dust clears I just hope that allies remain just that.

[LostinVA]

176. Ah -- understood re: sub thread

I was like... what???

No, I agree -- I hate these threads, and I agree with the OP.

[ismnotwasm]

75. Sexism

While the definition of sexism is important, and I can go with the dictionary examples, I think it becomes clearer with the extreme damage sexism has caused thoughout history. (Too long to list)
Sexism is not a new, even if at one place and time it was perfectly natural to think of females as inferior, delicate, mental defectives, useful only to bear children, unclean, temptresses (like men are so weak they can't control themselves)Or the cause of all the troubles the human race has ever experienced.
More recently, young women are automatically judged based on looks, size, how sexually desirable they are. The media promotes this idea. I can go to any grocery store, and look at so called "womens" magazines on any given month and find what I call the Big Three: Weight, looks and sex--mostly "how to please your man in bed" Sometimes it's worded differently, "how to get ultimate pleasure in bed" or some such thing. The sexist idea that is femininity promoted over and over, and is not limited to silly magazines.

Middle aged women become invisable and marginalized, and many desperately try to hang on to the percieved "power" that youthful looks bring--all under the guise of self esteem. This isn't new either, but since it's what is happening now, it may be easier to relate to that the dusty old history that got us to this point.
Women make less on the dollar, have harder time getting promotions, (In the military, from what my daughter tells me, this is especially true) Are subject to sexual harrassment and I am NOT refering to the joking that men and women do with each other. Women Live in DAILY fear of rape. This fear is not always spoken, but it boils under the surface of ever women.
Women are subject--for more than males-- to being discussed body part by body part. (Nice tits but damn that ass is big) And with modern surgery, even our labia can be returned to a prepubesent look. Or the hyman restored. (Is there any surgern that does a good testicle lift?, Even the "Enzyte" approach is phallic and sexist in nature, and assumes that women "want a big one"

Saying men are victims of sexism may be true in individual cases, but not as a gender. And this holds true thoughout the world.

If equality in "isms" is desired, it's better to look at class distinction, sexual orientation, wealth, and race. Men suffer as much as women in these catogories, but then take a look at the role of women within the catorgories, and you'll find women the victims of sexism. In my neighborhood, both men and women have been shot, robbed or attacked in some way, and all walk the streets with care.

Only women have been raped. I live, as I always have, in a tough, multiethnic working class neighborhood. The violence against men and women equalizes only to a point. And that point is rape and sexual explotation. In the little downtown part of my neighborhood, there are several stores devoted to pornography. NOT nice clean, little love shops. You can get anything type of pornography there.
I do NOT want to start a pornagraphy arguement--I have no wish to damage the first amendment-- but I will mention that just a casual glance at the titles and covers of these videos shows mostly women being degraded, humiliated, overpowered. And liking it. (I've always wondered what pornography would look like if sexism did not exist?)

Living as hard as I've lived at times, (not any more, I'm quite middle class--almost-- you can take the girl off the street, but you can't take the street out of the girl) I've learned to look at the streets--with all the poverty, violence and recklessness for the pulse of the nation. In this case shit rolls up hill.

[mbee]

76. Watched an old Doris Day/James Garner movie today and it was

full of sexism. Garner is a Dr. who at one point calls in his nurse/secretary and tells her to order flowers for his wife and make reservations in a restaurant for 8 that night and tell his wife to be there. At the time the movie was made (probably the 70's) I'm sure no one would have ever thought anything about this, but now it looks very strange to watch.

[Iris]

115. oh, good heavens, no.

That's probably "Send Me No Flowers" - early sixties.

[mondo joe]

77. Sexism is discrimination against, stereotyping of, or bias against people

based on their gender rather than their individual qualities.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

81. It's Just What It Says In The Definition, Whether Towards a Man Or A Woman

The definition you provided in the first lines of the OP pretty much summed it up. It is simply when an individual (whether male or female) either discriminates against or perpetuates stereotypes of social roles based on gender. Both men and women can be sexist and both men and women can be the victims of sexism. Though it is more common to be seen towards women, it is starting to often be found towards men as well (as was blatantly found on DU with the SD abortion ban threads).

Regardless of whether it is directed towards a man or woman, it is equally intolerable and should be dealt with until prejudice and discrimination are no longer an issue with either gender, just as all prejudice and discrimination should be dealt with towards anybody for any reason. Such is the liberal way :)

[Neil Lisst]

99. Sexism is a word that is not gender specific.

YOUR definition is not the definition of sexism. It's the definition of sexism against women.

Sexism is a problem and it's not limited to attitudes about women.

Your failure to acknowledge that there is sexism against men, too, makes your definition inherently sexist. Which brings me to "why are you sexist?" What's wrong with seeing sexism for what it is - a societal mandate for gender specific roles that affects both sexes?

[frustrated_lefty]

124. The dictionary definition works for me:

sexism (n.): (1)Discrimination based on gender.

The quote from Stanley and Wise is a hoot. More than a few feminist theorists give the impression that their objection isn't against the process itself, but against who's doing the defining. Patriarchy, matriarchy, they both suck beans.

That aside, if the objection is to patriarchal perpetuation of a social order which is harmful to women, there's one basic observation I'd like to throw into the mix: in the vast majority of instances, it sucks for men too.

Statistics On Suicide
Until boys and girls are 9 their suicide rates are identical
from 10 to 14, the boys' rate is twice as high as the girls'
from 15 to 19, four times as high
from 20 to 24, six times as high

Source; U. S. Bureau of Health and Human Services

Table 2. Percentage of Infants Born in 2002 Expected
to Die Before Reaching Age 20, by Race and
Gender

Total White Black
Total 1.3 1.2 2.3
Male 1.6 1.4 2.6
Female 1.1 0.9 1.9

Source: Derived from E. Arias, "United States Life Tables, 2003,"
National Vital Statistics Reports 53(6): Table 10. Available:
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr53/nvsr53_06.pdf

"In 14 member states of the European Union, women’s relative to men’s levels of job satisfaction are compared by using data of the European Household Community Panel. The countries under consideration can be assigned to three different groups. Denmark, Finland and the Netherlands do not show significant gender-job satisfaction differences. In contrast, in Portugal men are more satisfied with their jobs than women. However, in the vast majority of the investigated countries female workers show a significantly higher level of job satisfaction. As the majority of women are disadvantaged compared to men in the labor market, the findings clearly demonstrate a gender-job satisfaction paradox in these countries."

Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA) in its series IZA Discussion Papers

Then, of course, there are a wide range of sources pointing to gender-based differences in life expectancy, physical and mental well being, etc. By participating within these social hierarchies within which men are the supposed beneficiaries, they are quite literally killing themselves. Am I trying to equate the two realities, that experienced by women with that experienced by men? No. Please read that again: No. I am not. However, I would suggest:

1) that the social order within which we endure is one which sucks the life out of each of us individually;

2) sexism sucks and is a bad thing; and,

3) any form of discrimination ultimately has a whammy effect on the oppressing demographic because the very act requires a compartmentalization of "self," requiring a rejection of the very things needed to promote emotional balance and psychological wholeness.

This probably has all the traces of an attempt to detract from the very real experiences of women trying to confront sexism. It isn't meant to be. If you're a woman reading this, though, hopefully you can treat it as a gentle reminder that the social forces which give rise to sexism in your daily life are the very same forces which are driving your fathers and brothers, husbands and lovers, sons and even grandsons to early graves. Things suck all over. It'd be nice if we could change that in our respective ways.

-fl

[bloom]

132. I agree that sexism

against women adversely affect boys and men as well.

But a lot more men argue for keeping the sexist status quo - and for holding on to the idea of women as the "sex class" - even if they don't put it in those terms. And that tend to see men as far more victimized than they comparatively are.

[NMDemDist2]

137. thoughtful post, thank you

not much I can add except to say that sexism should be addressed for everyone's mental and physical health. most of the women I've read in this thread so far agree with you as well.

we know it can't be healthy or easy to live up to societies role expectations as a man. what galls me though is that more men aren't screaming about it.

wouldn't it be easier if we ALL tried to make the society more equal? not only for women but for gays and race and any other minority you can name. However we have to start somewhere huh?

We work on racial and class issues every day. DU has a vocal and active GLBT community which bring up their issues on a regular basis. Yet when sexism is brought up, it invariably degenerates into a flame war.

Why do suppose that is? :shrug: We can discuss the need for racial equality but gender equality is a red hot potato around here.

[Mythsaje]

147. I usually just avoid these threads

because they ARE flame wars, and I have too much respect for women in general to get into a knock-down drag-out with them over something I generally agree with them on. I have, as long as I remember, thought of men and women as equal. In many ways I think women are more formidable than men, if they haven't been stepped on too much.

I can't stand these feuds.

[NMDemDist2]

148. I have to disagree. I think it needs to be aired.

I understand your feelings of avoiding these, I often do also, but it's really getting bad again around here with Katherine Harris being such a embarrassment to herself. and so we let it slide about her, then about Ann Coulter (another horrid blotch on womankind) and pretty soon it's "whore" this and "bitch" that and "skank" over there and "slut" everywhere.

but i do get tired.........

Education is the key. I believe most folks wouldn't use those words if they had racial connotations yet think nothing of the sexism inherent in them.

It doesn't help that Rap and HipHop glorify them not realizing (I think) that disrespecting your woman is disrespectful to yourself.

I just keep trucking along though when I am feeling frisky :evilgrin:

[Mythsaje]

149. I don't use those words myself...

It does need to be discussed, but since when do these threads actually accomplish anything positive?

I don't post in Ann Coulter threads, usually, though I'll occasionally make a reference to her in one of my own threads.

I have long thought sexism was bullshit, in all its permutations. The best I can do is fail to practice it and spend time around people who aren't sexist. It doesn't hurt that I'm involved in the pagan community to some extent (though I'm not really pagan myself) and it tends to support strong female roles.

[NMDemDist2]

150. ROFL, I just alerted my own post for those words, with a request the

mods let me know asap if I need to edit

but I see it around here all too often and IME a thread like this will usually tone it down for a while. the worst part is when good men (and women) do nothing and let the language stand without comment

I always shudder when I do comment though... I know I'll get bashed for it and I'm never disappointed

x(

[Mythsaje]

152. I tend to correct for the word "witch" as an insult...

It pisses me off. People try to avoid using ONE word in an offensive capacity and end up using another.

I have always found the whole IDEA of "slut" distasteful. Like some comic once said--"by 'slut' you mean someone that sleeps with everyone but won't sleep with YOU."

I always thought it was a bullshit charge to level at a girl or woman when men were patted on the back for doing the same damn thing. And what's wrong with a woman enjoying sex in the first place?

[NMDemDist2]

154. I know what you mean. I was pretty proud of "horrid blotch on womankind"

:rofl:

[LostinVA]

164. I really dislike the use of bitch, skank, slut, etc. on DU

And wish it would be banned. To me, it's no different than allowed n*gger, sp*c, fag, etc. A poster about two weeks ago called his ex -- who got child support from him -- a c*nt. Such an ugly, ugly word. It just sat there in that post for HOURS, until I alerted on it... then it stayed there a while on.

[NMDemDist2]

181. the mods can't unilaterally delete, they have to get consensus

which takes time

but I agree, the language can get pretty harsh around here and the language against women is so insidious.

these threads, flames and all, are a start to hopefully get people thinking about what they are saying. we can only hope to educate and to get more folks to be willing to speak up when they see words like that. folks of all sexes and persuasions to realize that to let them stand with out comment is wrong and hurtful. but as I said in another post here the comments need to be thoughtful, respectful and when done best, humorous.

some may say "Why should I respect someone who is showing no respect toward me and my sisters" but I say "I won't be drawn into fighting fire with fire, I'll just add love and see if the flames die down"

there are times and places to shout and fight, but here on DU I believe that most are on our side, or would be, with a bit of reasonable dialog. I am loath to alienate my allies or my ignorant brethren until I attempt logic, reason and even shame first. :evilgrin:

the men of DU, for the most part, are our brothers, lovers, sons and fathers. they need a slight push not a baseball bat up side the head IME.

[Starbucks Anarchist]

167. A minor correction to your post.

Regarding hip-hop, please don't confuse most of the mainstream crap with good rap that is non-misogynistic.

If you listen to rap artists like Common or post-1980s Beastie Boys, among others, you'll see it's actually antithetical to the usual "bitches and hoes" tripe you might hear on the radio or see on TV.

Sorry, just had to defend some good music. Carry on. :hi:

[NMDemDist2]

182. while I am blissfully ignorant of hiphop and rap the very fact you must

dismiss the "mainstream crap" makes my point. if the mainstream is full of "hoes and bitches" then society is glorifying it. see what I mean?

[LostinVA]

183. And... you're right

The language is so many mainstream rap songs is hair-raising... that's one reason why I admire Kanye West, even if I don't like his music.

[frustrated_lefty]

159. Good thoughts.

Hey there. :hug:

You're right, it is necessary to start somewhere and these threads do almost invariably degenerate into flame wars. The topic pushes a lot of people's buttons, and it's easy for individuals to get defensive.

It seems to me that women often go through a phase when addressing the subject where they're surprised to discover they can give voice to their anger without a bolt of lightning descending from the heavens to strike them down in their tracks. In that process, they can get a little carried away in their enthusiasm, painting every aspect of masculinity in a negative light. I don't know what to make of that, and suspect it may be a necessary emotional phase. It has to be difficult allowing yourself to fully experience an emotion which you've been told to suppress for your entire life. And, developing an emotional rheostat is something that doesn't come until you've had some experience with the emotion in question. Generally, I think men jumping in to point out "hey, that's not MY fault, I didn't do those things to you" screws with that learning curve and is otherwise counter-productive. Yet, it's very easy to want to jump in, to become defensive, to get egos involved.

I do think sexism is one of the crimes of the fathers which falls upon the heads of the sons. Somewhere in our past, our ancestors broke something, and it falls upon us to fix it. Somebody has to accept responsibility, and, as you say, "we have to start somewhere." If that requires men occasionally having our feelings hurt because the mean old women aren't talking nice about men in general, too damned bad. Suck it up and deal with it. View it as your contribution towards promoting the health and emotional well-being of the women in your life.

just thots,

-fl

[NMDemDist2]

188. hey back at ya! it's always so good to see you! as for your idea of

the emotional learning curve, there may be some merit to that, however may I postulate that it is less a learning curve and more a matter of overall temperament. some folks get old and mellow (like me) some folks are just more passionate and the longer they fight the deeper the frustration and pain grows.

I am grateful there are still some women who jump up and down and scream but I recognize that a broad brush is a messy business. It splatters both your friends and your enemies indiscriminately.

Most of us old bra burners are long married and recognize the need for incremental gains and are aghast to watch the minor gains we DID achieve being systemically rolled back. In health care, education, wages and poverty statistics woman are again losing ground. what is the most heartbreaking is the fact that American women have it better than so many other countries where the fight hasn't even begun.

I am getting old and lazy though and will let the younger women take up the banner for the most part, I need to set my sights on seniors issues since that is where my life is now. What is ironic is the fact that when I burned my bra, the Gray Panthers were a bunch of whiners in my eyes. I bet your priorities have also had a major shift in the last months, yes? Funny how things change huh? It just brings to light at human rights and equality are EVERYBODY's business.

:hug:

[rucky]

157. One note on your suicide stats:

Women ATTEMPT suicide twice more frequently than men.
Men are just four times more successful at it.

source: NIMH

[frustrated_lefty]

160. Disturbing numbers.

Do you have any ideas what the basis for those differences might be?

[KitSileya]

190. Just a clarifying question to your second table.

Isn't there 105 boys born for every 100 girls precisely because boys die at greater numbers than girls before reaching adulthood?

As for demographics, didn't Ayan Hirsii Ali (sp?) write an op-ed just this week asking why the world at large doesn't react more strongly to the fact that between 113 and 200 million women disappear from the demographics *each* year - can it be anything but worldwide sexism towards women, if the aforementioned statistic is correct?

[lumberjack_jeff]

142. I've thought about your OP a bit more...

Looking for common ground, y'know. :)

The patriarchal social order didn't evolve in a vacuum. It serves (and does a disservice to) both genders. The social order that made it difficult for a woman to get a job also made it unnecessary for her to seek dangerous work outside the home. The social order that treated women as essentially big children, also obliged men to give their money and lives protecting them.

Freeing women from the limitations imposed by the patriarchal society is a good thing. However there is a reciprocal factor at work - men should be entitled to seek the same kind of freedom and fulfillment that women do.

Men should be equally entitled to an education, all kinds of violence should be reduced, a proportional effort should be made to solve health problems that affect men (which lead to 10% shorter lives) and the law should protect boys and girl abuse victims equally.

I do believe that sexism is gender neutral, and solving it through gender-based retribution is wrong. I also believe that the all-encompassing generalities I've seen in this thread (not necessarily from you) constitute counterproductive man-bashing.

[NMDemDist2]

146. thanks for thinking about it Jeff

of course it's limiting to both sexes, but if you read through the thread bashing men was not the issue. What gets me riled up (and what I read from some of my more plain spoken sisters) is the fact that rather than agreeing there is a problem for BOTH genders, it devolves to finger pointing and name calling

"Bitch"

"Chauvinist Pig"

"illogical"

"unfeeling"

"too emotional"

"too rigid"

it's counter productive.

the only way to get everybody to just chill out is first agree there is a problem, agree that action needs to be taken, even here on our beloved DU. If just a small fraction of the high profile men around here starting calling their brethren on some of the misogynistic, sexist tripe that gets posted at least we could begin a dialog and start educating each other what the issues are for both genders.

No one wants DU to be rigidly PC but some things just get beat to death around here and it gets extremely tiring day after day.

Thanks again for giving it some thought, that's the first start to any dialog and any hope for change.
:thumbsup:

[bloom]

238. I'm glad you're trying to think about it

On the education question you might consider this:

Sunday, March 26, 2006
Suffering from Too Much Gender Balance

....I find this question--" What are the consequences of young men discovering that even if they do less, they have more options?"--to be the most bittersweet one asked in the course of this op-ed. While many wingnuts suggest that women and minorities get jobs and into college simply because they are women and minorities, it appears that the opposite is true. Men now get into college because they are men. Our unquestioned assumption that gender imbalance is an unthinkable social disaster on college campuses has made them valuable, just because of their XY chromosomes. What irony. Before the feminist movement, women had to work three times as hard as men to have any hope of getting into one of the few slots alotted to women applicants. Now, after the feminist movement, women have to work three times as hard to get the positions that they deserve because they have to compete with less qualified men who are sought after, just because they are men. Women are punished for their success.

What I find fascinating is that for many years, college admissions didn't feel the need for gender balance. Many colleges simply did not allow women in. But now that we have dismantled many of those archaic and hopelessly sexist institutional rules, women are suffering from a new rule: gender balance.
http://melancholicfeminista.blogspot.com/

[Anser]

156. My own experiences

I have read about 60% of this thread, and there are a few things I would like to say.

How have I been hurt directly by sexism? Keep in mind that I am only 23. Here are some of the ways:

1. I had applied for a job at a department store while I was in high school. I get a phone call from them, pick it up, and they start saying how they have a stocking job open and wonder if I’m interested. As soon as they hear my voice for the first time say yes, they immediately retract their job offer. Their reason? I’m a woman, too weak for a stocking job. Didn’t matter that I could carry my 180lbs boyfriend in my arms and did farm work.

2. I wanted to go to college. I applied to my local college, enrolled in Engineering Science. But my mother didn’t care that I had been accepted into the hardest field at the university, she just was pissed at my that I wouldn’t accept her boss’s offer of a secretary position instead, because “every girl my age would jump at the chance to be a secretary.”

3. Later, at college. I stopped to talk to my chemistry teacher, after the first day of lab, about something specific in the lab. For some reason, towards the end of our talk, he drew a Venn diagram up on the board, showing men’s intelligence and women’s intelligence. His conclusion? I was dumber than the men in my class.

4. The next year, my boyfriend, Frank, (who is in the same major as me) and I were looking for an English teacher to take composition class with. We arrived at this one professor’s office, and proceeded to ask questions about what his class would be like. He refused to ever look at me, instead only talking to my boyfriend. Needless to say, we found another professor.

5. We were applying for scholarships at the engineering school. The interviewers knew that we were together. In our separate interviews, Frank was asked all about his career goals and the school, I was never mentioned in his interview. In my interview, I was told not to marry before getting a Bachelors and was asked all about Frank, hardly any questions were about me. We both got the scholarship, but Frank got twice the amount I did, and I had a higher GPA.

6. When we were graduating from that college with Associate Degrees, we were both honored at graduation, as flag bearers. I was the one for the Engineering school and had to sit down with everyone else, and Frank was honored with the whole campus one and got to sit up on stage. There was an article about us in the local newspaper that day, how we’d been together through adversity and were graduating at the top of the class. During his speech, the President of the University congradulated “Frank and his girlfriend” for this accomplishment.

7. We’d transferred on into Physics at a 4 year university. One summer we worked together on a research project. Our employer was doing some funny business with our payment. When we approached him about it, he offered Frank 1.5 times what he was willing to offer me, even though we had the same level of experience. Right in front of my face. We quit.

8. Being fed up with Physics, we decided to try law school out. When checking out different schools, we got a tour from a current student at one. She gave us both our pamphlets, and proceeded to take us around the school, answering both of our questions. After about 20 minutes, she turns to me and says how the law school has a great support network for people whos spouses were in law school. I didn’t know what she was getting at right away, but then it dawned on me. She thought I was just tagging along with my husband, and hadn’t been an admitted student in my own right.
…. And I cant right forever, so I have to stop somewhere.

So my point is that yes, sexism is systematic, and yes, it does have specific harmful impacts on individuals. As you can see, I married a great man, who has supported me, and we have faced sexism together. But most women aren’t so lucky.

Another point that needs to be said that I didn’t see addressed, is that yes, there are many women who are sexist. However, they’re not aiming their sexism at men. They’re aiming it at other women. My mother was a prime example, trying to keep me back for no other reason.

Sexism internalizes itself into our minds, that is how it is perpetuated so well. So we, as progressives, have to take an active stand in ourselves to try to pay attention to when we are making gerneralizations about gender. And we have to not allow any outward manifestations of it. Only then will it be eliminated.

Thank you for reading.

[LostinVA]

165. OMG -- great point, kiddo

"Another point that needs to be said that I didn’t see addressed, is that yes, there are many women who are sexist. However, they’re not aiming their sexism at men. They’re aiming it at other women. My mother was a prime example, trying to keep me back for no other reason."

Definitely -- self loathing? Bitter? Trying to wrest some control from somewhere? Who knows.....

Good post. And, Anser, sometimes it gets better, sometimes it gets worse... the only thing you can do is be confident, stick up for yourself, and file complaints if it happens at work.

You sound like a smart, self aware young woman. Good luck!

And, welcome to DU!!!

[mmonk]

177. Precisely why the proposed definition

was inadequate.

[Katherine Brengle]

217. That's why I asked others to add to it--

I was giving a starting point for a discussion, not a be-all end-all definition.

[Katherine Brengle]

215. Amazing...

I am in awe of you for making it through all of that, and more I am sure.

My father was like that as well--did not understand why I wanted to go to college when I could just get a job... it was really hard--I had to go through the whole process of applying and paying for school without any help from my parents bc they were not supportive.

And this is not 20 or 30 years ago--I am 24, in the same age group as you--this is 5 years ago, in the 21st century.

I think that your clarification about sexist women is an important one--I made it somewhere else in this thread today myself--most women who are sexist are sexist against other women.

I was kept from studying abroad in Egypt by a male program director, not because the program was canceled due to tense conditions in the Middle East, but bc he perceived me as too weak to take care of myself under those conditions bc I was female.

I was discouraged from doing hands-on work when I was a retail supervisor, not because of my position, but because once again, I was considered too weak by my male manager to do stocking work and delivery work.

I used to be a very committed weight-lifter in college. I would go to the gym with a good male friend of mine who is a personal trainer, and he trained me for about a year at the college gym. Without fail, nearly every day, the head trainer at the gym, who was also the men's football coach, would come over to me and ask me if I knew what I was doing, if I could handle the weight I was lifting, etc. It was very demeaning. I was lifting more than most of the men in the gym, most of whom were there not to improve themselves, but to pick up girls.

I can't walk down my street at night for fear of being raped, I am expected to make sacrifices for my husband's career but he is not expected to make them for mine, I am expected to stay home and care for our daughter and he is not (and if I were working instead of doing this, it would come up in conversation, whereas his working would not be a factor considered).

There are many many examples that we could all offer. These are just a few...

[paul_fromatlanta]

158. Sexism includes those define sexism as only applying to one gender. n/t

[izzybeans]

171. The OP speaks for me. Most of the crap on this thread however

has been fucking hilarious.

Sexism in its empirical state is partriarchy. But that is just a historical fact. The social fact of sexism is the attempt to lump essential characteristics about "sexes" into one category. That social fact is devisive enough to turn allies against each other and to kick start the reactionary "my egalitarianism is bigger than your egalitarianism" nonsense that constitute the flames on this thread.

Reading this thread I've seen folks expressing their solidarity get ripped to shreds. Sad really.

[mmonk]

175. The premise of the post as I see it is this:

We live in a society that tolerates rape. Such a society is a sexist one. Our society is based on a patriarchial one. Therefore, sexism is only applicable concerning males towards females. Tolerance of rape is an adequate definition of sexism. Have I got the premise right?

[omega minimo]

180. Sexism= Privilege in all its self-righteous, blamethevictim, hostile glory

:hi: :puke:


:bounce: :bounce:

[Dora]

197. Pretty Good for a Man - OR - No Chicks in the Band

Sexism exists in all our lives, whether we're men or women, whether the victim or the perpetrator.

I am a woman, and these are examples of the sexism I see, experience, and/or admittedly inflict or facilitate:

1) A male friend of my husband's and mine comes to visit, yet spends nearly the entire time speaking directly to my husband, barely acknowledging my contributions to the conversation. He doesn't engage or debate my opinions; he "corrects" them.

2) My father-in-law says to me, "Please keep my son in line." His son is 47 years old and eleven years older than me, and the last time he needed to be "kept in line" was six years before we met.

3) I ask my husband to handle all communications and negotiations with subcontractors for an upcoming remodeling job. The reasoning behind this is part sense, part sexism: I work full-time, he works part-time, and in my experience with tradesmen, they're more explicit and forthcoming speaking with a man than with a woman.

4) I do most of the cooking and shopping. I think I'm a better cook, and I also think I'm a better shopper. It's purely sexist. When my husband makes dinner, I am surprised and think something along the lines of, "pretty good for a man..."

5) Often, my husband is reluctant to join a musical project that has a woman involved. He's only half-joking when he says to me, "No chicks in the band, man."

6) My husband and I work for the same university, and I've worked here longer than he has and I have a graduate degree when he does not. He earns $1.50 more an hour than I do.

7) I applied for a position that opened within my department - the move would have been lateral but with the opportunity for greater professional development in the long run. The position went to the only other in-house applicant (male) who had "more experience" in publishing, even though I had been with our unit for a longer time, the difference between his and my length of experience in publishing was a mere couple of months, and I held a greater understanding of our overall work-flow and in-house procedures.

8) When I was a graduate student, my first choice of thesis advisor (male) asked me to choose another faculty member to work with (also male, but one who needed to bump up his grad advisee load). This second-choice advisor had not been writing or publishing for years and could not offer any professional support or advice other than feedback on my writing. He was a likable man with an incredible mind, and I enjoyed working with him greatly. However, I watched my fellow students make inroads in their careers as a direct result of the support and influence of their advisors, support and influence that was not available to me. My first choice did not ask any other students to work with #2, and I have always suspected that I was asked to work with #2 because as a woman, I would be more "accommodating" of such a request.

9) Whether it's every day (like it used to be) or once a year (hey, I'm older now), it's a drag to look up from whatever I'm doing realize that a man is staring at my breasts or my ass. Yes, it's a drag. My heart sinks, and I feel angry.

It's my belief that men and women are not equal, we're different with different needs skills abilities hopes dreams biological functions, etc. But we should given equal opportunity, equal access, equal protections, and equal rights.

[NMDemDist2]

205. thanks for chiming in here Dora. you are a consistant defender

of woman's rights here I know. and you're post was a breath of fresh air and reason. especially here:


It's my belief that men and women are not equal, we're different with different needs skills abilities hopes dreams biological functions, etc. But we should given equal opportunity, equal access, equal protections, and equal rights.

:yourock:

[Dora]

225. Awww, thanks.

You're sweet, AZDem. Everytime I read one of your posts I feel a little homesick for the Valley, but that's just a little homesick. The Valley sure ain't what it used to be. :hug:

[NMDemDist2]

234. you ain't kidding lady, I'm moving to New Mexico this summer LOL n/t

[Katherine Brengle]

211. Beautiful post, Dora. Thank you.

[Dora]

233. We have a son now.

He's our first child, and probably will be our only. He's only a year old, and even in this year I'm still waking up to how insidious sexism is in our culture. I thought I knew, but oh honey, I had no idea:

-It's nearly impossible to buy clothing for boys that's not associated with sports, military/hunting, or heavy equipment.

-Every store where I've shopped for clothing for him at has at least 75% of its floorspace dedicated to girls clothing. And the girls clothing? Oh my, oh my.

-I have two dolls from my childhood. They're made of stuffed fabric and yarn, and they're of Navajo children - one boy, one girl. I brought them out for my son to play with for the express purpose of having a way for my son to practice tenderness and affection on these "babies" they way I model tenderness and affection with him and his father. By doing this, I know I'm working against currents of both sexism and racism, and I count my blessings that any family or friends that may take issue with the doll/race factor is far far away from us.

Thanks for your OP - this is a discussion that is sorely needed around here.

[mmonk]

203. Sexism is a carry over from ancient societies and religions.

Sexism has as its predominate ideas the 2 following characteristics:
1)Women are nurturers therefore, not hunters (breadwinners).
2)Men are hunters therefore, not nurterers (parents).

Sexism leaves no one victimless (women, men, children). If you still harbor half of the disease of sexism (accept one of its premises) you are still infected by the disease.

[kestrel91316]

206. Sexism is what happened to me in HS, way back in 1973:

I wanted to get a job at a local vet clinic (entry level kennel work) and so went in to apply, and was interviewed by the vet. After talking to me a few minutes he said he wasn't going to hire me because it was a BOY'S job. I informed him that I wanted to work at a vet clinic because some day I hoped to go to vet school and go into practice, and he laughed and said that was silly. Girls didn't go to vet school, and if they did it was just a waste of space because all they did after graduation was get married and have kids.

I didn't get the job. But I never let anybody stand in my way again. Today I have 24 years of practice under my belt, and own a cat hospital, and nobody tells me I can't do something because I am female.

[LostinVA]

214. Yay! Doctor Kitty!

I always take my furbabies to cat-only places -- thank all of you vets who have kitty-only practices!

My 14-year-old niece volunteers/works at a local vet twice a month... she wants to go to vet school.

[Solon]

218. I think your definition is inadequate and the wrong word is used...

First I won't really go into the actual gender neutral definition of the word sexism to begin with, apparently others already covered that. However, aren't you talking about Misogyny instead?

Besides that, I would expand the definition of the word, Misogyny, in this manner, using wording similar to yours, and as additions to, not replacements of, your definition.

Any and all justification for the continuation of a patriarchal social order that places limits on what role women can play in the social order itself. This includes, but is not limited to, women defined as homemakers, mothers, maids, servants in general, in addition to models, and other stereotypical roles that they are culturally limited to. This is also in addition to judging women who do not fit said roles as abnormal in any way.

[LostinVA]

222. Sexism is a part of misogyny; however, I believe you can be sexist

without being a misgynonist... and sexism by itself is a very harmful thing.

[Solon]

224. Wait a second here...

Misogyny is defined as being prejudiced or discriminatory, even having outright hatred towards females, sexism basically says the same thing, but is general to cover both sexes. A Misandrist woman is just as sexist as a mysogynist man, the only difference is the focus of their hatred or prejudice. Plus, its not limited to just those two, women can be mysogynists themselves, and men can be misandrist as well. Sexism, as a word, is simply too general, period. Its interchangable, to a degree, with the other two words I mentioned, but usually its a matter of degree.

To give another example, all White Supremicists are Racists, but not all Racists are White Supremicists.

[lukasahero]

226. Misogyny is defined as "hatred of women" nothing more, nothing less

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=misogyny

Edited because I can't type today.

[LostinVA]

227. It's not interchangeable -- misogamy has an element of hatred in it

You can be sexist and not be hateful -- just ignorant or/and stupid. Who's talking about women can't be sexist? I'm not saying at all like that.

You don't need to give me another example -- mind worked fine, and makes perfect sense.

[Solon]

228. This doesn't really jive in my mind, especially this...

You can be sexist and not be hateful


OK, I have yet to meet anyone who proudly proclaims to be sexist where that attitude doesn't contain at least an element of hatred in it. Look at the OP again, she was talking about tolerance of RAPE, what could be more hateful than that? Not only that, mostly, as I said, its a matter of degrees only, not really anything substatial beyond the fact that the word sexist is itself gender neutral. Let me see if I can put it this way, a man who is sexist against women will only spew his hatred in words, and usually only in the "right" company, usually all males. A misgynist will do the same, but wouldn't really care who he spews it too, and may follow it up with actions. The difference are their actions, not attitudes, like the difference between like 70% of whites in this country and skinheads, same thing really.

[LostinVA]

230. You're male, so I don't think you've experienced sexism from a man

in the same way I have -- I've not been given jobs because of my gender, along with other things.

And,m I have been the target of sexism that is not hateful -- it's ignorant, and when you jack the guy up and tell him what was wrong with what he said, he sees the light. Some guys are just clueless, not mean or hateful or controlling.

And, you really have no idea about the differences between sexism and misogysim... is had nothing to do with words vs. actions,a nd EVERYTHING TO DO WITH ATTITUDE. What you're saying literally makes no sense.

Seriously, please quit schooling me on whether I'm right or wrong.

I'm not in the mood for, as I put it earlier, intellectual masturbation. I won't be responding to any more of your posts. This thread has gotten ridiculous.

on edit: And guys, notice what I said, okay? I'm not male bashing, I'm doing the opposite... I'm saying some guys are just clueless and need to be told that what they're doing/saying is wrong... they just need some educating.

[Solon]

235. I'm only reporting on what I observe from guys that look like me...

And believe me, this is a major reason why most of my friends end up being either gay, non-white of some variety, and/or female. I'm a straight white male, hence considered "safe" by racists, sexist assholes that I have been forced to work around at jobs. If your not going to do some male bashing, allow me, I lost one of my jobs, why? Because I had the audacity to side with women for equal pay there, got a nice pat on the back and a "sorry you're not a team player" by the male managers. From my experience and observations, I would say that about 80% of males are sexists and/or misgynists to some degree and out of the whites about 70% are White Supremicists to some degree as well.

Granted, as they say about statistics, most are pulled straight out of people's asses, and I agree, I pulled this out of my ass, but then again, I doubt most people that hold these attitudes are brave enough to be honest about it to pollers. Plus, don't get me started on homophobia, ugh, I have so far only met one straight guy who actually didn't have a problem with gays.

While some of this prejudice can be attributed to ignorance, that is really no excuse, and also another note, I found this out the hard way, but dressing down people for their attitudes usually doesn't work unless they are already ready for a change. The culture that these attitudes spring from is deep and pervasive, from top to bottom, and it is hard for many people to change, especially if they were taught these things from their parents. Most people are two faced, I found out, acting one way around some types of people, and another way with "their" type of people. There is really no way around that.

[Dora]

239. No - sexism is sexism. Misogyny is something else.

I'm engaging in and enabling sexist behavior when I ask my husband to deal with our remodeling subcontractors because they'll listen to and talk with him in a way that they won't with me.

It's sexism when I monitor every step of my husband's dinner-making because I think I do it better only because "I'm the wife."

It's sexism when I expect him to mow the lawn.

It's sexism when I cannot find clothing for my son that doesn't have sports, hunting, military, or heavy equipment on it.

Just because you're confusing sexism with misogyny doesn't mean that they're one and the same. Misogyny does factor into the algebra of sexism, but it's not the only factor. There's apathy, education, experience, religion, etc.

[Moderator]

240. locking

flamebait.