Why is sexism such a difficult topic?

WindSock

Because Micky Dolenz has tits in his avatar

Millicent

I think it can't be discussed because there are still posters here who refuse to accept that there is any need for feminism or that women's rights issues still exist. You can't discuss something with someone who refuses to believe or place any worth on your standpoint or perspective. It's a lost battle before it's begun.

coffee_cake

hooradiation wrote: »

"I don't experience it so why should I care" is a probably a bit more accurate, if less socially acceptable.

i've seen a few "i've never seen it, it doesn't happen anymore"

Scanlas The 2nd

44leto wrote: »

Men as the power in the dynamic do not understand or see anything is wrong, they are understandably conservative because they hold the power. So anyone challenging that position is a man hater, because what other reason would they challenge the status quo.

I wonder was it the same during the Civil Rights struggle in the US when the African Americans challenged the separate but equal legislation.

If the African Americans claimed equality of race to be the priority for them yet never campaigned for whites if there were numerous cases of discrimination against whites then eyebrows may have been raised that equality was the priority for them. As far as I'm aware it wasn't the case that whites were discriminated against. It is the case that men are discriminated against. Some say then why not let the men campaign for men's rights. That's fine. But if you claim equality is your priority which according to my sources it is under feminist principles then you would expect feminists to campaign for men's rights if it means bringing about equality between the sexes which is supposedly their primary goal.

I believe in the right of people to campaign for any demographic they want, be it only women, only men or only kangaroos. But why claim equality is the prime goal.

As far as I can tell people who call themselves feminists seek to improve women's rights for which there is nothing wrong. But when that is done in te name of "equality" when it's only one sided it's bound to make some people raise an eyebrow.

SheFiend

+1 to BipolarJoe.

There's sexism on both sides of the fence.

Some posts I've seen from women seem to show that some women think sexism against men = feminism, and being against sexism towards men is anti-feminism.. as if it's a woman's right to hate men because she feels oppressed by society's conditioning of females / sterotypes of women etc.

If a man is offended by this (false) idea of feminism, and says so, then it's also offending women who are not man-haters, but are being tarred with the same brush, and they react aggressively.

That's fuel for a heated debate.

Chuck Stone

It's easier to focus on equality than sexism. In many areas women face prejudice and discrimination and in some areas men do.

Also there are degrees of prejudice and discrimination against different female identities.

Women who choose to stay at home and raise children might get criticised by other women as copping out. I, personally, find this abhorrent - surely raising children is the most important and difficult job in the world? Didn't Mary Robinson describe women who choose to raise children over a career as 'cop outs' once? (paraphrasing).

There are also sub groups of women who face a greater intensity of prejudice i.e. black women, Traveller women, Muslamic women etc.

Zulu

With respect to the previous thread, I believe ad homenim attacks didn't help, but essentially it's what people reply to, and how they reply.

A pertainant point ended with a flippant comment about how people clearly have issues, tends to provoke only one reaction - and it's not to address the pretainant point.

Also, addressing the trolls, or addressing the outlandish comments while ignoring the more balanced ones, doesn't encourage the balanced poster to report.

Feisar

Just so people know where I'm coming from I'm male.

I was amazed at the last thread, both camps were so vehement!

I didn't realize it was still such an issue. I work in the construction industry (or what's left of it) and I treat would treat a female engineers opinion the same as a males. I don't see myself as being sexist however I've noticed when greeting female coworkers I'm more inclined to smile and say hello as opposed to the nod the lads get.
Does that make me sexist because I'm treating females differently based on their sex? I suppose it does.
Is it harmful? There is an argument that in a minor way I'm contributing to the status-quo.

In my personnel relationship I do the cooking 90% of the time, a task that would traditionally be seen as female. I do my own washing etc but I not as tidy as herself so she does more cleaning.
I'm also not upset/insecure about the fact that she earns more than me.
At night though I'll always pop down to the shop rather than her for safety reasons. Unlikely but you never know. That again is sexist I think

I can't see how I have been "inherently privileged" due to my sex. The argument "oh but its part of the privilege that you don't realize" doesn't stack up in my mind. That's just a cop out to absolve the requirement of proof.

So, am I a sexist pig or fairly alright?

Can someone from the feminist camp outline how their or others lives have been negatively effected by sexism?

smash

Micky Dolenz wrote: »

we should be adult enough to discuss any subject in a respectful and open environment.

That will never happen with sensitive subjects. It's happening more and more often, single mother threads etc.

Anyway, my viewpoint on this matter is:

Women's rights = fighting for equality
- no problem, fight for rights!

Feminism = fighting for equality + sexism + sexism to the extreme
- no problem, fight for rights!
- Sexism is wrong. Workplace bullying etc.
- Sexism to the extreme. Well it's all subjective, you might have a perception of someone being objectified but it's an opinion and it's not going to stop. Some things might offend you but they wont offend others, and there are more than enough people willing to be what you call 'objectified' and that's their prerogative in which case you have no right to object. And if you don't hold the same opinion on this matter as a feminist, then you're sexist apparently.

Ickle Magoo

TheZohan wrote: »

Because sometimes people find it difficult to step back and look at the bigger picture.

In this thread a poster asks would you propose to your OH, only 25% of women polled said that they would. That's 75% of women that would prefer if their boyfriend would, yet everyone wants equality. (I'm not for one moment suggesting there's anything wrong with women wanting the guy to propose either)

Actually, let's look at that again...

Hmmm, 26 women polled wanted their man to propose - 26.

It should surely go without saying but that doesn't equal 75% of "women" - it doesn't even constitute 75% of women who post in AH....nor does such a pathetic number give anything close to grounds for dismissal of every topic and subject where folks are "wanting equality"...I think it's precisely this kind of sweeping dismissal based on such ridiculous points that causes some of the issues.

--Kaiser--

Millicent wrote: »

I think it can't be discussed because there are still posters here who refuse to accept that there is any need for feminism or that women's rights issues still exist. You can't discuss something with someone who refuses to believe or place any worth on your standpoint or perspective. It's a lost battle before it's begun.

I admit, in my modern western society I don't see many womens issues but I do see issues with men being discriminated against every day from low grade ("You didn't cook that, did you? You're a guy!") through mid-grade (women only club, men only club not allowed) to high grade (unqualified and inexperienced woman being hired over experienced and qualified male becasue the hiring manager was female and part of the women only club).

So, for me, egalitarianism is the way forward. Gender quotas and the like are just big steps backwards

AngryLips

This is really part of a broader question about when it is appropriate to pre-judge / apply bias and when it is not appropriate to do so. It's like asking to draw the line between national stereotyping and racism. What's interesting is that different standards apply to the same concept; what might be deemed inappropriate in the context of differences between the sexes might be perfectly acceptable if the same point were applied to the differences between nationalities. How that's determined comes down to the sensitivities of the offended party ...so while almost everyone accepts that it's okay to bash "dumb Americans", for example, it's less okay to knock "stingy Israeli's".

Ultimately, it's stupid to take political correctness to heart and neglect to bring your experiences to bare on any given situation. And that stupidity is only trumped by failing to account for the persecution complex in the offended party. Of course, none of this will excuse an overreaction on the part of the offended either.

Doctor Jimbob

TheZohan wrote: »

Because sometimes people find it difficult to step back and look at the bigger picture.

In this thread a poster asks would you propose to your OH, only 25% of women polled said that they would. That's 75% of women that would prefer if their boyfriend would, yet everyone wants equality. (I'm not for one moment suggesting there's anything wrong with women wanting the guy to propose either)

I think things like this are a large part of the problem. If women still expect the man to propose, then there's no equality. I'd hazard a guess that in a poll about men paying for the first date we'd see similar results. On the other hand though, as (believe it or not lads) women are not all one being with some kind of hive mind, it's unfair to deny the women who want complete equality the right to have it just because some women are happy to let the man stay in the role of breadwinner.

That's another point that often seems to be ignored by feminists. Some women out there like men to be the ones out earning money so they can have it spent on them. Personally I'd rather avoid this kind of woman so please don't think I'm trying to imply that's how things should be.

Going a bit more on topic, I think sexism is a difficult topic because there are extreme opinions on either side, and these tend to get seen by people in general as the prevailing opinion, when really they're just coming from nutjobs who are shouting louder than the people with sane, rational arguments. If I go into examples I'll probably just get abuse from men and women so I'll leave it at that.

Millicent

Feisar, if this thread is still open when I get home from work, I will give you a detailed response to how sexism has affected my life.

TheZohanS

Lady Chuckles wrote: »

I'm sorry. How is that poll a bigger picture? And what is it a bigger picture of?
Women prefers if their special someone proposed to them, that means women.... ?

I purposely made two separate paragraphs to indicate that I was making two separate points.


"that means women...." it just means that both sexes might strive for equality but in reality there is always going to have to be give and take and compromise.

coffee_cake

Right, i forgot that one.

- some women want different things, therefore all feminists are hypocrites and their cause is worthless because they're not trying to force these women to have the same opinions. why aren't you addressing those 26 women you hypocrites?!!?!

Lady Chuckles

Doctor Jimbob wrote: »

If women still expect the man to propose, then there's no equality.

Just for the record perfer and expect isn't the same thing. The poll says "prefer".

hondasam

Millicent wrote: »

I think it can't be discussed because there are still posters here who refuse to accept that there is any need for feminism or that women's rights issues still exist. You can't discuss something with someone who refuses to believe or place any worth on your standpoint or perspective. It's a lost battle before it's begun.

You want everyone to have the same beliefs as you, are we all not entitled to have our own opinion and live our lives the way we want rather than the way others want or expect us too?

Feisar

44leto wrote: »

Men as the power in the dynamic do not understand or see anything is wrong, they are understandably conservative because they hold the power. So anyone challenging that position is a man hater, because what other reason would they challenge the status quo.

I wonder was it the same during the Civil Rights struggle in the US when the African Americans challenged the separate but equal legislation.

Can someone show me this power that I hold???

Millicent

--Kaiser-- wrote: »

I admit, in my modern western society I don't see many womens issues but I do see issues with men being discriminated against every day from low grade ("You didn't cook that, did you? You're a guy!") through mid-grade (women only club, men only club not allowed) to high grade (unqualified and inexperienced woman being hired over experienced and qualified male becasue the hiring manager was female and part of the women only club).

So, for me, egalitarianism is the way forward. Gender quotas and the like are just big steps backwards

But just because you don't see it, doesn't mean it doesn't exist. I can acknowledge and condemn sexism against men. Why is it impossible for the other side to return the favour?

Feisar

Millicent wrote: »

Feisar, if this thread is still open when I get home from work, I will give you a detailed response to how sexism has affected my life.

I hope it is and that you do, it's something I didn't regard as a serious issue these days.

Millicent

hondasam wrote: »

You want everyone to have the same beliefs as you, are we all not entitled to have our own opinion and live our lives the way we want rather than the way others want or expect us too?

That's far from what I said.

Seachmall

smash wrote: »

Feminism = fighting for equality + sexism + sexism to the extreme

Just to make the point that there are (at least) 2 main divides in feminism; Liberal Feminism and Militant Feminism.

Liberal Feminists are essentially just equal rights activists who focus on feminist issues.

Militant (or Radical) Feminists are the ones who believe we live in a "patriarchal society" which is inherently flawed and that only a matriarchal one would work.

It seems when people use the term "Feminists" they're typically referring to Militant Feminists who are, I believe, the (vocal) minority of feminists. I don't think the confusion over that helps the discussion.

TheZohanS

Ickle Magoo wrote: »

Actually, let's look at that again...

Hmmm, 26 women polled wanted their man to propose - 26.

It should surely go without saying but that doesn't equal 75% of "women" - it doesn't even constitute 75% of women who post in AH....nor does such a pathetic number give anything close to grounds for dismissal of every topic and subject where folks are "wanting equality"...I think it's precisely this kind of sweeping dismissal based on such ridiculous points that causes some of the issues.

Why enter into a debate with me if you're going to start flaming straight away? Can you not post in a manner that would encourage debate? Seriously...

The poll had 35 female respondents at the time, yes a small enough number but out of that number only 25% would propose to their boyfriend, surely you can see that it gives an indication that not all women want to be equal when it comes to everything?

Bannasidhe

Scanlas The 2nd wrote: »

If the African Americans claimed equality of race to be the priority for them yet never campaigned for whites if there were numerous cases of discrimination against whites then eyebrows may have been raised that equality was the priority for them. As far as I'm aware it wasn't the case that whites were discriminated against. It is the case that men are discriminated against. Some say then why not let the men campaign for men's rights. That's fine. But if you claim equality is your priority which according to my sources it is under feminist principles then you would expect feminists to campaign for men's rights if it means bringing about equality between the sexes which is supposedly their primary goal.

I believe in the right of people to campaign for any demographic they want, be it only women, only men or only kangaroos. But why claim equality is the prime goal.

As far as I can tell people who call themselves feminists seek to improve women's rights for which there is nothing wrong. But when that is done in te name of "equality" when it's only one sided it's bound to make some people raise an eyebrow.

It was the case that people like Malcolm X constantly referred to 'white devils' and described interracial marriages as an example of African-Americans hating their own kind. http://teachingamericanhistory.org/library/index.asp?document=539

The Nation of Islam advocated complete separation of the races and the creation of a 'Black' only nation - no Whites allowed. They were also vocally Anti-Semitic.

shows American Nazi Party Commander George Lincoln Rockwell (center) at a Nation of Islam (NOI)
rally, Uline Arena, Washington, DC, June 25, 1961.

nommm

Because people don't like admitting that they're in a position of privilege so they'll do anything to try and deflect from the actually issue at hand by picking out smaller things that really mean nothing when you look at the big picture. See also white privilege.

Gummy Panda

TheZohan wrote: »

Because sometimes people find it difficult to step back and look at the bigger picture.

In this thread a poster asks would you propose to your OH, only 25% of women polled said that they would. That's 75% of women that would prefer if their boyfriend would, yet everyone wants equality. (I'm not for one moment suggesting there's anything wrong with women wanting the guy to propose either)

Sorry but I fail to see what that has to do with equality?

smash

Seachmall wrote: »

It seems when people use the term "Feminists" they're typically referring to Militant Feminists who are, I believe, the (vocal) minority of feminists. I don't think the confusion over that helps the discussion.

It also doesn't help that they're the most vocal and a liberal feminist wont turn around and tell a militant one to shut up for fear of being branded as not standing behind the cause.

coffee_cake

TheZohan wrote: »

Why enter into a debate with me if you're going to start flaming straight away? Can you not post in a manner that would encourage debate? Seriously...

The poll had 35 female respondents at the time, yes a small enough number but out of that number only 25% would propose to their boyfriend, surely you can see that it gives an indication that not all women want to be equal when it comes to everything?

That has nothing to do with equality. It's preference. As in, we now have an equal choice about it and now we can express which we individually like. Because we can have preferences now.
Just like women who want to be stay at home mothers aren't being discriminated about w.r.t. married women in the workplace. Because they have the choice.

hondasam

Millicent wrote: »

That's far from what I said.

''posters here who refuse to accept'' ''someone who refuses to believe''

Your words say this is what I think and anyone that does not agree is wrong.
Sorry millicent this is how I see it.