Can women be sexist

jcoote

so say a guy makes a smart remark about a woman or whatever he is sexist

but if a woman does the same is that sexist???

Dilly1

Well they are completely mental, so yes.

Oriel

They are completely sexist, but they call it "sticking up for one another."

Thomas_S_Hunterson

It is, but due to the society we live in, it's not seen as an issue

ferdi

of course!

men can be discriminated against just as much as women. look at advertising today - men are always portrayed as hapless oafs incapable of the simplest of tasks, where as women are shown to be permanently in control and sexy.

layke

Blokes are sexist, so are girls although it's usually in jest.

Caryatnid

Of course women can be sexist. They are also human beings. Sexism is discrimination based on gender.

I'm not sure exactly what your post is asking.
If a woman makes a smart comment against a woman?
or
If a woman makes a smart comment against a man?

Women, like men, have the capability to be sexist against men and women.

Doctor Fell

Of course women can be sexist! Is this a trick question??

ferdi wrote:

look at advertising today - men are always portrayed as hapless oafs incapable of the simplest of tasks, where as women are shown to be permanently in control and sexy.

Couldn't agree more - and its not just advertising, look at Desperate Housewives or Sex & City (blurgghh!) - objectification of men as sex objects, stupid, incapable of intelligent thought, or if they are then they are gay.
(BTW I don't watch those programs by choice, my wife does so sometimes I see them .... they make me mad:mad: )

jcoote

ok maybe i worded it wrong if a women makes a condecsending statemant tabout a man or to a man is that seen as sexist in the eyes of society thats what i meant

i know women are capable of sexism but is it seen that way???

that make more sense

DAEDULUS

some women have penises too

abetarrush

Yup

especially the ones who are all about women's rights

they're the most sexist [hypocrits] of all

Dragan

jcoote wrote:

so say a guy makes a smart remark about a woman or whatever he is sexist

but if a woman does the same is that sexist???

Yes they can, and are. I work in a female dominated company, and not saying that is a bad thing. We are very forward thinking here, and it really is a case of "best person for the job" most of the time.

However, i find it very funny because a lof of these women are extremely sexist, or at least they make silly comments and do not expect to get called on it, because apparently as men we should let it slide, or not be offended or something.

Here is an example....one of the guys here in work was covering for someone who was out sick, and was giving the other persons project to finish as well as his own. I would have refused but like a looney this guy was in here 14 hours a day for 4 days trying to finish up both projects. He couldn't do it as he just didn't have enough time to finish up both of them despite his best efforts.

In a crowded weekly meeting that was about 80% female he had to give a progress report and said that he was unable to finish them both, his manager ( female ) said with a smile "Sure, what can you expect from a man." to which all the other females bar 2 laughed ( both of them said to me after they felt the comment was inappropriate. )

If the situation was reversed and it was a smaller number of women vs a larger number of men, with a girl saying she couldn't finish an inhuman target to a male boss and he said "Sure, what can you expect from a woman" there would have been a war.

As such, i called the lady in question on it, and she has agreed that she was wrong and has said sorry to the chap in question.

So yes, sexism can go both ways, women can make guys feel just as bad as guys can make women film.

Ism's are , generally speaking, equal opportunity!

Happily , incidents like this are VERY rare where i work but i have female managers in other jobs try and pull some stuff on me that didn't fly, and i have called male managers on what i see as unfair treatment of girls.

I'm pretty much an employers nightmare if they act unfarily!!!:D

Doctor Fell

jcoote wrote:

ok maybe i worded it wrong if a women makes a condecsending statemant tabout a man or to a man is that seen as sexist in the eyes of society thats what i meant

i know women are capable of sexism but is it seen that way???

I think certain elements of society see it as a woman being assertive, fully in control of her life, power woman taking no crap and putting ignorant man in his place. You go sister!
Whereas in reality she is being sexist, or ignorant, or a bitch or whatever.

Miguel_Sanchez

Can women be sexist

What's wrong with being sexy?






(oh come on someone had to quote Tap)

Nevyn

Makeing condesending comments about anyone based on thier gender is sexist.
There are female misogynists out there too.


lol
Smell the glove.

Drax

Dragan wrote:

As such, i called the lady in question on it, and she has agreed that she was wrong and has said sorry to the chap in question.

Fair play! I would have done the same...

Dragan

Drax wrote:

Fair play! I would have done the same...

I find a lot of times the men or women in question do not even realise that they may have said something that could cause offence....so will always give them a chance before i take it any further.

Zombrex

Yup

especially the ones who are all about women's rights

they're the most sexist [hypocrits] of all

As my ex-girlfriend used to say

"I love the smell of feminist-backlash in the morning ... smells like .. victory"



To the OP, its probably not a good idea to load your question so much. Unless you are asking a retorical question

Most guys make sexist jokes in jest and this is largely ignored, or even seen as playfull, by modern (young) society including girls. Guy makes silly joke, girl rolls eyes, while finding the delivery actually funny, they move on

So this isn't really sexism since hardly anyone is getting offended, or taking it seriously. It is mostly done in an post-modern ironic, I-shouldn't-say-this-so-when-I-do-its-funny-but-i-don't-really-mean-it kinda way.

If a guy made an obviously offensive remark that wouldn't be so funny. But then, as far as I'm aware, it isn't funny if a girl does it either, so long as it is obviously offensive.

Those who can't tell the difference between something said in ironic jest and something meant to be offensive, and who constanly believe there is a massive double standard going one, are probably themselves quite sexist or have issues towards men/women.

This searching for a double standard seems to ignore the fact that what most guys say is happly accepted by society as a bit of fun, so long as that is what it is, a bit of fun

DaBreno

Id never let a woman speak to me like that. If she tried anything, I'd be like, HEY! You get your b***h ass back in the kitchen and make me some pie!

youthacademy

DAEDULUS wrote:

some women have penises too

lol!

of course they can be, what do you think a feminist is??

Doctor Fell

What Dragan said about his work exeprience reminded me of something in mine: this is incredible but true.

We have a "Gender Equality" unit in my workplace. 8 people are employed in this unit. What do you think the Male/Female ratio is???
...
...
There are 8 women employed, and 0 men. In the Gender Equality unit.
Ridiculous or what??:eek:
Imagine if it was 100% male in the GE Unit? There would be absolute uproar, but nobody says anything when its skewed im favour of women...Weird

Gordon

Doctor Fell wrote:

Ridiculous or what??:eek:

Maybe the women are better at the job than men.

A gender equality department doesn't have to be comprised equally of men and women by the way.

SteamTrean

In this; the age of equality I think it's fair to say that expecting the man to get the bill for dinner/ cinema/ drinks is sexist (Not that many women do feel this way). Discuss.

SteamTrean

Gordon wrote:

Maybe the women are better at the job than men.

A gender equality department doesn't have to be comprised equally of men and women by the way.

I agree with the good doctor who is not saying that it should be 50-50 split! merely that there should be representatives of both sexes in the group.

Doctor Fell

Gordon wrote:

Maybe the women are better at the job than men.

Are u implying that men are incapable of doing that particular job?:D

Seriously, if a unit for Gender Equality was staffed by 100% males, I don't think you would be excusing it by saying "maybe the men are better than women". That's rubbish. This unit is responsible for promoting and monitoring Gender Equality - yet they are biased 100% towards women. You don't think that is weird?

Dragan

Gordon wrote:

Maybe the women are better at the job than men.

A gender equality department doesn't have to be comprised equally of men and women by the way.

Whilst i agree with Gordon i do also find is a little funny and ironic!!!

Dragan

Doctor Fell wrote:

yet they are biased 100% towards women. You don't think that is weird?

Not really, they are COMPRISED 100% OF women....does not indicate there bias....in fact for your to assume that the fact that it's all women would mean they would be biased towards women is actually kinda sexist!!! j/k

SteamTrean

Dragan wrote:

Not really, they are COMPRISED 100% OF women....does not indicate there bias....in fact for your to assume that the fact that it's all women would mean they would be biased towards women is actually kinda sexist!!! j/k

Hypothetical Scenario:

Chairperson: I'll open the meeting with an issue raised in last weeks meeting. Susan said that Tom was incompetant because he's got a penis.

Jane: hee hee

The whole table breaks up laughing and hi fiving each other

Chairperson: Tom'll be alright he's a big boy. Next!

Gordon

Dragan wrote:

Not really, they are COMPRISED 100% OF women....does not indicate there bias....in fact for your to assume that the fact that it's all women would mean they would be biased towards women is actually kinda sexist!!! j/k

Indeed.

Doctor Fell, you should ask your HR department tbh.

Dragan

SteamTrean wrote:

Hypothetical Scenario:

Chairperson: I'll open the meeting with an issue raised in last weeks meeting. Susan said that Tom was incompetant because he's got a penis.

Jane: hee hee

The whole table breaks up laughing and hi fiving each other

Chairperson: Tom'll be alright he's a big boy. Next!

Once again this is your projecting your assumptions onto the situation and maybe even projecting the assumption that if it was 8 males they would sit there doing the same thing.

Chairperson : Okay so, let start, i need to get home and bone the wife...now then, Susan says that Tom touched her on the bum and made a comment.

Peter : Susan needs to shut the fu*k up and make me a sandwich

* everyone laughs *

Chairperson : Susan will be okay, maybe she is on the rag or something.....oh yeah, and tell her to cut the crusts off

It's easy to assume that the opinion would be one way or another, just by looking at the sexes of the people involved....it isn't very smart though.

DonkeyStyle \o/

Yes women can be sexist, I've met one extreme case in a past job, openly spouting such shíte that if she were a man she'd be sacked on the spot.
But then she'd probably cry sexism if anyone reported it :rolleyes:

It's a minefield of doublestandards IMO... the rules as a man seem to be - take everything said to you in good humour and keep your mouth shut.
I'm all for equality, but sometimes it seems more like a role-reversal.

I definitely agree with the poster who said men are being portrayed as typical-male-oafs in many advertising roles... but it's up to us to complain to the advertising standards people... but at the risk of sounding sexist, I think men are a generally less uptight and insecure about being men than women are about being women... but that's to be expected given the history involved... I suppose if men had to fight their way up through some kind of opressive sexist matriarchy, we'd be more sensitive about it aswell.

SteamTrean

Dragan wrote:

It's easy to assume that the opinion would be one way or another, just by looking at the sexes of the people involved....it isn't very smart though.

I am finding it hard to believe that you believe what you are saying. If there was a race equality group in the workplace a few decades ago and they were all black/white.. regardless of how bias they would(n't) be; it would be difficult to take them seriously.. That's all. I'm not making any judgements on whether there'd be any bias in the group .. and obviously my Hi-five hypothetical scenario was unrealistic. sheesh!

Dragan

SteamTrean wrote:

I am finding it hard to believe that you believe what you are saying. If there was a race equality group in the workplace a few decades ago and they were all black/white.. regardless of how bias they would(n't) be; it would be difficult to take them seriously..

Find it hard all you want....as i said i find it a little funny and ironic that the mentioned Equality Team is made up totally of women, but i do not feel that is a reason to doubt it's effectiveness.

Zombrex

Doctor Fell wrote:

This unit is responsible for promoting and monitoring Gender Equality - yet they are biased 100% towards women.

Without knowing how many men have applied for positions in your Gender Equality department, or what their qualifications are, it is kinda presumptious to believe that "they" (who ever they are, your company directors, your HR department etc) are biased towards women.

If one can make sweeping generalisations it would be equaly valid to claim that men don't care about gender equality, because look none of them even bother to join the gender equality department in your work. An obvious sign that the gender equality in society is tilted well in men's favour and they are not bother or don't want to change this.

If you knew well qualified men were getting turned down for positions left right and centre from the department you might have a case for bias.

connundrum

Two scenarios..

A
Woman: Hey, your ass is fine!
Man: Hey, thanks baby - back to my place?

B
Man: Hey, your ass is fine!
Woman: Hey, fcuk off you pig! I hope your family die in a bush fire!

This is how women can be sexist, but it isn't taken seriously. Men allow it not to be taken seriously for fear that they (we) might actually piss the women off

DonkeyStyle \o/

Wicknight wrote:

This searching for a double standard seems to ignore the fact that what most guys say is happly accepted by society as a bit of fun, so long as that is what it is, a bit of fun

It's only fun if everyone invloved agrees it was fun... the line between a fun comment and an offensive one can be the level of sensitivity of one person involved... it's hit and miss... there's always a chance of offending someone if you don't know them well enough.
Personally I think where a mans fun sexist quip is taken badly, it'd be treated far more seriously than a womans sexist joke where a man takes offense... a total generalisation I know... but right or wrong, that's what I've observed.

jcoote

yeah it must be because men (in a lot of cases) are the predators and women are the prey if u like

men don't wanna **** up their shot at gettin layed or whatnot so women are allowed to be sexist to a certain extent because if we lose the plot like some women we do **** up our chances

Zombrex

men don't wanna **** up their shot at gettin layed or whatnot so women are allowed to be sexist to a certain extent because if we lose the plot like some women we do **** up our chances

That implies one of two things :-

Either we don't really care much about the "sexism" and therefore aren't offended

Or we are offendend, but we still want a shag of the girl who just offended us. Which would make us a bit weird

Doctor Fell

I think everyone except Steam Trean has missed my point - the Gender Equality section is clearly biased in the make up of its staff. 100% female, 0% male. I didn't say anything about whether their work, or attitudes are biased, just the plain fact that the sexual representation is 100% biased towards female. I am not assuming they are biased opinion-wise. And it is funny and ironic, I agree.
And their effectiveness should be questioned, considering they are promoting and monitoring GE in our various sections. Yet their own section does not have anything resembling gender equality. So they have clearly failed in terms of the gender make up of their own section.
WickKnight, what "sweeping generalisations" have I made? I stated a fact, which you misunderstood, so keep the lecturing on jumping to conclusions to yourelf, thx. And like I said, if the situation was reversed, I don't think anyone would buy into your reasoning - no women applied, yes, that must be it. (The mistake with this in this instance is that it is a Government Department, you don't apply, you are assigned to this section).

Dragan

Doctor Fell wrote:

I think everyone except Steam Trean has missed my point - the Gender Equality section is clearly biased in the make up of its staff. 100% female, 0% male. I didn't say anything about whether their work, or attitudes are biased, just the plain fact that the sexual representation is 100% biased towards female.

Not really no, as already mentioned it could just a case that no males wanted to work on the team or went for the job....you never gave us any further information, we are going off what we know.

So no, i don't think anyone missed your point tbh. We are all well aware how strange it is to have a GE unit made up of only females.....but we also don't want to jump to conclusions as to the why.

Fanny Cradock

I find it entirely unreasonable to assume a company large enough to merit a gender equality unit does not have at least one male that has the required experience to represent the “needs” of his gender. Besides, it would be foolish to ignore that fact that a male would be able to contribute different perspectives and understanding to situations that females, however qualified, could not fully empathise with.

A race equality department comprised entirely of one race could not effectively achieve its goal. Indeed, saying that members of the other race(s) were not qualified to sit in this department would, by some, be considered racist. Bias, however unintentional, would surely set in. Many other examples can be used to highlight the flaw in failing to appoint representatives of a unique stratum within a population. For example: sexual orientation unit comprised entirely of gay men; or an anti ageism department populated by 20 year olds etc., etc. It is preposterous to assume that the needs of an entire population (in this case, a company comprised of males AND females) can be effectively represented when only one stratum speaks for all.

In conclusion, women belong in the kitchen; not the work place.

Doctor Fell

Dragan wrote:

Not really no, as already mentioned it could just a case that no males wanted to work on the team or went for the job....you never gave us any further information, we are going off what we know.

So no, i don't think anyone missed your point tbh. We are all well aware how strange it is to have a GE unit made up of only females.....but we also don't want to jump to conclusions as to the why.

Really?? You understood?
How about this then - "Not really, they are COMPRISED 100% OF women....does not indicate there bias".
Hmm, bit of a contradiction tere, don't u think?
You also said that it didn't mean their opinions were biased. You missed the point totally with that one, as I explained in my previous post.
No-one is jumping to conclusions about the why, except you and WickKnight and Gordon. You all suggested reasons for this, I did not.
So like I said, you missed, just admit it. And you jumped to conlusions.

ferdi

Fanny Cradock wrote:

I find it entirely unreasonable to assume a company large enough to merit a gender equality unit does not have at least one male that has the required experience to represent the “needs” of his gender. Besides, it would be foolish to ignore that fact that a male would be able to contribute different perspectives and understanding to situations that females, however qualified, could not fully empathise with.
In conclusion, women belong in the kitchen; not the work place.

spot on.

Fanny Cradock wrote:

In conclusion, women belong in the kitchen; not the work place.

dont forget the maternity ward!

Dragan

Doctor Fell wrote:

So like I said, you missed, just admit it. And you jumped to conlusions.

No....i didn't.

Or maybe you were just incapable of putting your point across clearly. I feel that there is NO reason why a department made up of 100% of one kind of sex would be biased. I WILL agree that it is a little odd though, i have said this many times already.

To be honest, someone who would think so could merely think that THEY would be biased in the same circumstances, and then project this bias on to whatever party is involved, in this case the 8 ladies.

I know i would not be biased in the circumstance of being on a team of 8 guys who were looking after Gender Inequality.

If i jumped to any conclusion it was merely that i would need to know the people involved and the circumstances of the teams creation before i made my mind up.

Shame on me.;)

This just my opinion, and obviously you don't like that i am not agreeing with you that the ladies are obviously bias.....i do not know this for sure so i will not agree, nor do i agree that a department made of of 100% of one sex would automatically be sexist.

This is just my opinion my friend, if you don't like it then i'm very sorry but i'll not be changing it just to make you feel better.

Gordon

But Dr. Fell - if even one man was given the job in the GE dept purely because he is a man - that is sexual discrimination. And vice versa for women.

Dragan

Gordon wrote:

But Dr. Fell - if even one man was given the job in the GE dept purely because he is a man - that is sexual discrimination. And vice versa for women.

*chuckles*

Chairpersn : And joining us today is the new member of the Gender Equality Team, Token Mann

*giggles from around the room *

Ruu_Old

*Girl dumps poor Ruu and walks away to pack of girlfriends*
"YOU GO GIRLFRIEND *LOLZ*"

Thats how.:p

Shauna21

You bunch of Pussies.... you are going on like a pack of old biddies. Suck it up a real man wouldn't care what remarks are made to him by a woman.

Doctor Fell

Dragan wrote:

Or maybe you were just incapable of putting your point across clearly. I feel that there is NO reason why a department made up of 100% of one kind of sex would be biased.

I know i would not be biased in the circumstance of being on a team of 8 guys who were looking after Gender Inequality.

i am not agreeing with you that the ladies are obviously bias.....

This is just my opinion my friend, if you don't like it then i'm very sorry but i'll not be changing it just to make you feel better.

WIth respect, I don't care what your opinion is. But I do care that you at least understand what I was talking about before making a decision. This misunderstanding arises not because of my ability to express myself, but because of your misunderstanding of the word "bias". You are still assuming that I think those ladies in question are biased in their opinions. Once again, you are mistaken - I do not. I said the sexual make up of the department is biased in favour of women, which it clearly is. Now, you say you don't agree with this, but look "Bias" up in the dictionary, and I am correct in using it in this instance. You can disagree of course, but at the risk of offending your ego, I won't feel better or worse whatever you think. I get the impression you will argue with me over anything.
So giggle away there to your hearts content.

Gordon - you're right of course, it would be discrimination. But how did this situation arise in the first place? It would be sexual discrimination if a man wasn't give a job there, just because he was a man.

Gordon

Doctor Fell wrote:

But how did this situation arise in the first place?

Neither and none of us know. You should ask your HR department.

Dragan

Doctor Fell wrote:

I said the sexual make up of the department is biased in favour of women, which it clearly is. Now, you say you don't agree with this, but look "Bias" up in the dictionary, and I am correct in using it in this instance.

And once again, i will state that this can only be considered if a load of men went for the job and did not get it.

Like i said, i would need to know more about the process.

Do you think that if no men went for the job they should not have created the department? As it is, only women may have applied, so they need to fill the positions with the best possible applicants, in that case it would have been all women, no?

As far as i am aware, "bias" in it's broadest sense will imply a preference or inclination.....but this could only have existed if MEN and WOMEN all went for the job.....as such, i do not know this so i cannot automatically agree with you.

If a load of qualified men went for the jobs and did not get them then yes, i would agree that there would be some bias there....but i cannot do so right now.

I would not say there is bias on the team if it is made up of the only available candidates and they were all female.

I'm not disagreeing with you just for the sake of it dude, i'm just putting my point across is all.

Maybe you can find out if any men went for the role? Or maybe even go for it yourself should one open up?