[Split] Sexism

This forum is the place to have more serious discussions about politics and religion, and your opinions thereof. Be courteous!

Moderator: Forum Administrators

Forum rules
When a registered user insults another person (user or not), nation, political group or religious group, s/he will be deprived of her/his permission to post in the forum. That user has the right to re-register one week after s/he has lost the permission. Further violations will result in longer prohibitions.

By default, you are automatically registered to post in this forum. However, users cannot post in the politics forum during the first week after registration. Users can also not make their very first post in the politics forum.
User avatar
linguoboy
Posts: 23382
Joined: 2009-08-25, 15:11
Real Name: Da
Location: Chicago
Country: US United States (United States)

Re: [Split] Sexism

Postby linguoboy » 2014-01-27, 18:45

Varislintu wrote:I disagree that "feminism" should be up there with the examples of counter-discrimination. Sure, it's a huge umbrella term nowadays, but I don't think it deserves that characterization. Some of the sanest voices I've encountered online are from feminists, and they are not anti-male ones.

As an old school feminist of the second wave, I still have a lot of affection for this word. But lately I've begun to wonder if we shouldn't just give up the battle for its core meaning as lost, admit that reactionary bigots have ultimately succeeded in making it pejorative, and work on finding a new term that third-wavers and others feel comfortable rallying behind.
"Richmond is a real scholar; Owen just learns languages because he can't bear not to know what other people are saying."--Margaret Lattimore on her two sons

User avatar
languagepotato
Posts: 464
Joined: 2013-01-22, 7:17
Gender: male
Country: NL The Netherlands (Nederland)

Re: [Split] Sexism

Postby languagepotato » 2014-01-27, 18:48

linguoboy wrote:
Varislintu wrote:I disagree that "feminism" should be up there with the examples of counter-discrimination. Sure, it's a huge umbrella term nowadays, but I don't think it deserves that characterization. Some of the sanest voices I've encountered online are from feminists, and they are not anti-male ones.

As an old school feminist of the second wave, I still have a lot of affection for this word. But lately I've begun to wonder if we shouldn't just give up the battle for its core meaning as lost, admit that reactionary bigots have ultimately succeeded in making it pejorative, and work on finding a new term that third-wavers and others feel comfortable rallying behind.


i think the term that i use for myself can be a good one: equalist
native: (ar-MA) (nl)
very comfortable: (en-US)
somewhat comfortable: (de) (es) (af)
forgetting: (fr) (ar-arb)
touristy level: (ro) (sv)(ber)(pl)
someday hopefully: (ja) (sq) (cs) (tr) and many others

Sol Invictus
Language Forum Moderator
Posts: 2988
Joined: 2007-01-04, 13:59
Gender: female
Location: Rīga
Country: LV Latvia (Latvija)

Re: [Split] Sexism

Postby Sol Invictus » 2014-01-27, 18:51

linguoboy wrote:
Sol Invictus wrote:
linguoboy wrote:If people don't draw attention to the inequalities, they will never get dealt with. But the people who benefit from them don't want them dealt with so they call any attempts to draw attention to them "whining" as a way of discrediting them. And you know what? More often than not, it works.

I disagree, problems need to be addressed, but you do not need contstantly draw attention to problem, that's just as bad overgeneralization as assuming school is best model for workplace and ignoring other examples of how females act in work and assuming main cause of problems is gener and ignoring other factors. Plenty of examples mentioned before have male acting on somewhat dated rules of politeness and probably not thinking that these norms originate from sexist beliefs, unless the male holds those dated beliefs, it is not really symptomatic of sexism, the guy is just trying to be polite.

Actually that's precisely what makes it "symptomatic of sexism". You're falling into the old trap of thinking of sexism as consisting of nothing more than the personal attitudes of a few retrograde individuals as opposed to a systematic institutionalised problem.

How exactly does this cause any harm, if the guy is not advocating discrimination of opposite gender?

Sol Invictus wrote:Complaining about a problem that does not exist is not only whining, but can also evolve into discrimination aimed against the supposedly more adventagous group - such things as wanting certain number of females in a job, all-female workplaces, feminism and so on also is sexism.

That's one of the weakest slippery slope arguments I think I've ever seen. Please to explain how getting pissy with someone for holding open a door inevitably leads to employment quotas.
I did not say that (but you might need to explain how holding a door open inevitably leads to oppresion)
It beats me how you think we're going to make any progress against inequality if you consider simply raising the issue unnecessary at best and, at worst, tantamount to reverse discrimination.
or that

I said that raising an issue just for sake of rising it (and attacking smallest discrepancies that might be interpreted as connected to it) does no good to anyone
languagepotato wrote:i've met 'I HATE YOU CAUSE YOU'RE A GUY'-feminists
and i've met 'there are some problems with the way some people act towards women'-feminists
I meant the "females are better" kind

User avatar
Varislintu
Posts: 15330
Joined: 2004-02-09, 13:32
Real Name: M.
Gender: female
Location: Helsinki
Country: FI Finland (Suomi)

Re: [Split] Sexism

Postby Varislintu » 2014-01-27, 18:59

linguoboy wrote:
Varislintu wrote:I disagree that "feminism" should be up there with the examples of counter-discrimination. Sure, it's a huge umbrella term nowadays, but I don't think it deserves that characterization. Some of the sanest voices I've encountered online are from feminists, and they are not anti-male ones.

As an old school feminist of the second wave, I still have a lot of affection for this word. But lately I've begun to wonder if we shouldn't just give up the battle for its core meaning as lost, admit that reactionary bigots have ultimately succeeded in making it pejorative, and work on finding a new term that third-wavers and others feel comfortable rallying behind.


I hate so say it, but I also sometimes feel it's a lost cause. Maybe sometimes, words just can't be salvaged. So many times I've wasted time discussing with people (well, men usually), who complain to me that they would otherwise support feminism, but they just can't digest the term itself. Sometimes I feel like it's just because they think there is something dirty about femaleness, and I want to resist, but I also feel that I don't want to get hung up on a word, either. And of course there is plenty of legitimate rejection of the term among sexual minorities, trans people, people of colour, etc.

Equalist could work, if people know what it means. I can totally see it getting confused with socialism. :lol:
Det finns ingen
tröst. Därför
behöver du den inte
(Gösta Ågren)

User avatar
languagepotato
Posts: 464
Joined: 2013-01-22, 7:17
Gender: male
Country: NL The Netherlands (Nederland)

Re: [Split] Sexism

Postby languagepotato » 2014-01-27, 19:32

Varislintu wrote:
linguoboy wrote:
Varislintu wrote:I disagree that "feminism" should be up there with the examples of counter-discrimination. Sure, it's a huge umbrella term nowadays, but I don't think it deserves that characterization. Some of the sanest voices I've encountered online are from feminists, and they are not anti-male ones.

As an old school feminist of the second wave, I still have a lot of affection for this word. But lately I've begun to wonder if we shouldn't just give up the battle for its core meaning as lost, admit that reactionary bigots have ultimately succeeded in making it pejorative, and work on finding a new term that third-wavers and others feel comfortable rallying behind.


I hate so say it, but I also sometimes feel it's a lost cause. Maybe sometimes, words just can't be salvaged. So many times I've wasted time discussing with people (well, men usually), who complain to me that they would otherwise support feminism, but they just can't digest the term itself. :


i kinda agree with them, the word kinda looks like it's striving for matriarchy, that's also why i don't call myself a feminist but an equalist.
native: (ar-MA) (nl)
very comfortable: (en-US)
somewhat comfortable: (de) (es) (af)
forgetting: (fr) (ar-arb)
touristy level: (ro) (sv)(ber)(pl)
someday hopefully: (ja) (sq) (cs) (tr) and many others

User avatar
md0
Posts: 7591
Joined: 2010-08-08, 19:56
Country: FI Finland (Suomi)

Re: [Split] Sexism

Postby md0 » 2014-01-27, 19:53

It's true that first and second wave feminists are still around, but it's baffling that you guys seem to always meet them, and noone else.
Current-day feminist is closely tied to anarchism. There's no room for any -archy in there, including matriarchy. As a matter of fact, I feminist activist that I'm good friends with spends many hours explaining feminist theory to women who want to impose their bahaviour on all women (two weeks ago, a woman was saying that every woman who wears make-up does it because she feels she should please men, so it must stop. A feminist does not believe that, and my friend explained in depth that a woman can wear make=up and nice clothes because she likes them, and that it's no one's job telling her how to dress)

So it's often funny, but mostly annoying to see feminism portrayed as "replacing men telling women how to behave with women telling women how to behave".
"If you like your clause structure, you can keep your clause structure"
Stable: Cypriot Greek (el-cy)Standard Modern Greek (el)English (en) Current: Standard German (de)Elementary Finnish (fi)
For fun: Legacy: France French (fr)Japanese (ja)Standard Turkish (tr)

User avatar
linguoboy
Posts: 23382
Joined: 2009-08-25, 15:11
Real Name: Da
Location: Chicago
Country: US United States (United States)

Re: [Split] Sexism

Postby linguoboy » 2014-01-27, 20:18

languagepotato wrote:i think the term that i use for myself can be a good one: equalist

I've got at least two problems with this word. One is that it doesn't specify what is being equalised. As Varislintu points out, it could be read as applying to income as well as any of a dozen other factors. Part of the usefulness of "feminism" is its specificity. The other is that for too many people "equal" means "the same". And part of the point of feminism (and any similar form of social justice advocacy) is that treating everyone "the same" will not make them all "equal".

Varislintu wrote:So many times I've wasted time discussing with people (well, men usually), who complain to me that they would otherwise support feminism, but they just can't digest the term itself.

I've always been wont to dismiss these arguments as tendentious. When you get down to discussing actual programmes, you generally find that though they may advocate treating men and women "equally" what they consider "equal treatment" isn't very close to what I would call just and fair. But it would have the advantage of giving them one less strawman to focus their attempts at derailment on.
"Richmond is a real scholar; Owen just learns languages because he can't bear not to know what other people are saying."--Margaret Lattimore on her two sons

User avatar
linguoboy
Posts: 23382
Joined: 2009-08-25, 15:11
Real Name: Da
Location: Chicago
Country: US United States (United States)

Re: [Split] Sexism

Postby linguoboy » 2014-01-27, 20:32

Sol Invictus wrote:
linguoboy wrote:Actually that's precisely what makes it "symptomatic of sexism". You're falling into the old trap of thinking of sexism as consisting of nothing more than the personal attitudes of a few retrograde individuals as opposed to a systematic institutionalised problem.

How exactly does this cause any harm, if the guy is not advocating discrimination of opposite gender?

I suggest you have another look at some of the points Varislintu was making as well as looking into the topic of "microaggressions" generally. The problem with excusing discrimination on the basis of intention is that it places the burden for dismantling an unjust system firmly on those who suffer most from it. Those who benefit from injustice have a moral responsibility to examine their behaviour critically for ways in which they help perpetuate that injustice.

Sol Invictus wrote:I said that raising an issue just for sake of rising it (and attacking smallest discrepancies that might be interpreted as connected to it) does no good to anyone

How do you determine that someone is "raising an issue just for the sake of raising it" and not raising it because they actually want people to change their behaviour? What gives you that kind of insight into their motives?

You claim that I misrepresented what you said. Fair enough, let's go back to the actual quote again:
Sol Invictus wrote:Complaining about a problem that does not exist is not only whining, but can also evolve into discrimination aimed against the supposedly more adventagous group - such things as wanting certain number of females in a job, all-female workplaces, feminism and so on also is sexism.

I've quoted the part which I characterise as a "slippery slope argument". (I left out the "that does not exist" portion because this is an exercise in begging the question.) What I would like to see you do is explain cogently how complaining about unequal treatment "can evolve into [reverse] discrimination".
"Richmond is a real scholar; Owen just learns languages because he can't bear not to know what other people are saying."--Margaret Lattimore on her two sons

User avatar
languagepotato
Posts: 464
Joined: 2013-01-22, 7:17
Gender: male
Country: NL The Netherlands (Nederland)

Re: [Split] Sexism

Postby languagepotato » 2014-01-27, 20:35

linguoboy wrote:
languagepotato wrote:i think the term that i use for myself can be a good one: equalist

I've got at least two problems with this word. One is that it doesn't specify what is being equalised. As Varislintu points out, it could be read as applying to income as well as any of a dozen other factors. Part of the usefulness of "feminism" is its specificity. The other is that for too many people "equal" means "the same". And part of the point of feminism (and any similar form of social justice advocacy) is that treating everyone "the same" will not make them all "equal".


i might have a better term but it's not as catchy and i don't know how to translate it from dutch,
it's geslachtsgelijkwaardigheidsactivist
geslacht means gender
gelijkwaardig means something along the lines of 'having equal value'
and well, activist means...well, activist
native: (ar-MA) (nl)
very comfortable: (en-US)
somewhat comfortable: (de) (es) (af)
forgetting: (fr) (ar-arb)
touristy level: (ro) (sv)(ber)(pl)
someday hopefully: (ja) (sq) (cs) (tr) and many others

Sol Invictus
Language Forum Moderator
Posts: 2988
Joined: 2007-01-04, 13:59
Gender: female
Location: Rīga
Country: LV Latvia (Latvija)

Re: [Split] Sexism

Postby Sol Invictus » 2014-01-27, 20:54

linguoboy wrote:
Sol Invictus wrote:
linguoboy wrote:Actually that's precisely what makes it "symptomatic of sexism". You're falling into the old trap of thinking of sexism as consisting of nothing more than the personal attitudes of a few retrograde individuals as opposed to a systematic institutionalised problem.

How exactly does this cause any harm, if the guy is not advocating discrimination of opposite gender?

I suggest you have another look at some of the points Varislintu was making as well as looking into the topic of "microaggressions" generally. The problem with excusing discrimination on the basis of intention is that it places the burden for dismantling an unjust system firmly on those who suffer most from it. Those who benefit from injustice have a moral responsibility to examine their behaviour critically for ways in which they help perpetuate that injustice.
Even microagression requires passive aggression and intent. What you are talking about is a mix of dated concepts and stereotyping that are not intentionally used to belittle women, but in many cases are well intentioned and some women may even welcome them. A calm discussion comparing different opinions on them might do more to break them than getting pissed when somebody complies with them

Sol Invictus wrote:I said that raising an issue just for sake of rising it (and attacking smallest discrepancies that might be interpreted as connected to it) does no good to anyone

How do you determine that someone is "raising an issue just for the sake of raising it" and not raising it because they actually want people to change their behaviour? What gives you that kind of insight into their motives?

You claim that I misrepresented what you said. Fair enough, let's go back to the actual quote again:
Sol Invictus wrote:Complaining about a problem that does not exist is not only whining, but can also evolve into discrimination aimed against the supposedly more adventagous group - such things as wanting certain number of females in a job, all-female workplaces, feminism and so on also is sexism.

I've quoted the part which I characterise as a "slippery slope argument". (I left out the "that does not exist" portion because this is an exercise in begging the question.) What I would like to see you do is explain cogently how complaining about unequal treatment "can evolve into [reverse] discrimination".

I actually pointed out some examples, if you do not consider that sexism and don't see how it has emerged out of fight for women's rights, I don't think I'll be able to convince you

User avatar
linguoboy
Posts: 23382
Joined: 2009-08-25, 15:11
Real Name: Da
Location: Chicago
Country: US United States (United States)

Re: [Split] Sexism

Postby linguoboy » 2014-01-27, 22:45

Sol Invictus wrote:Even microagression requires passive aggression and intent.

No, they don't. That's rather the point. Often, in fact, they result from intentions not to discriminate. That's one of the things that makes them so difficult to deal with, since any reaction at all is likely to be read as an "overreaction" (or "whining") and lead to further characterisation of the affected party as "unreasonable" or even "hysterical". (This site goes further into the concept and provides copious examples. I daresay some will be recognisable to you.)

Sol Invictus wrote:What you are talking about is a mix of dated concepts and stereotyping that are not intentionally used to belittle women, but in many cases are well intentioned and some women may even welcome them. A calm discussion comparing different opinions on them might do more to break them than getting pissed when somebody complies with them

I think we all agree that getting pissed isn't an ideal response. But again--as I think Varislintu explained well--sometimes it's the best response you can muster. And when presented with that response, you have the choice to be dismissive or to be empathetic. My radical assertion is that when you're standing on the upper end of the power differential, there's an onus on you to choose empathy.

Sol Invictus wrote:I actually pointed out some examples, if you do not consider that sexism and don't see how it has emerged out of fight for women's rights, I don't think I'll be able to convince you

We've already established that I do not consider feminism to be "sexism", so if your goal is to convince me otherwise then the discussion is probably at a dead end.

Before I give up on it, however, I'd like to make one point clear, and that's that making a claim is not remotely the same thing as proving it. You asserted that complaints which you characterise as "whining" can result in demands you consider "sexist". The problem isn't just that you haven't presented good evidence for either of these characterisations, it's that you haven't demonstrated how one thing leads to the other. All you're really saying is "these are two things I associate with feminism that I think are bad so one must cause the other". If you can't see the problem with that argument then we really are done here.
"Richmond is a real scholar; Owen just learns languages because he can't bear not to know what other people are saying."--Margaret Lattimore on her two sons

User avatar
johntm
Posts: 6717
Joined: 2011-03-17, 21:11
Real Name: John
Gender: male
Country: US United States (United States)

Re: [Split] Sexism

Postby johntm » 2014-01-28, 4:32

meidei wrote:So it's often funny, but mostly annoying to see feminism portrayed as "replacing men telling women how to behave with women telling women how to behave".

It's the vocal minority, kind of like the bad stereotype of vegetarians, or atheists, or whatever. They're the ones you see making the news or in screencaps online saying the dumbest shit anyone ever heard, and after a while people associate that with that whole group.
Native: [flag]en-US[/flag]
Learning: [flag]fr[/flag] [flag]es[/flag] [flag]de[/flag]
"The goal [of learning foreign languages] is to speak not so that you can be understood, but so that you cannot be misunderstood."-Earl W. Stevick
"You either get good at accomplishments or you get good at making excuses."-Anonymous

Sol Invictus
Language Forum Moderator
Posts: 2988
Joined: 2007-01-04, 13:59
Gender: female
Location: Rīga
Country: LV Latvia (Latvija)

Re: [Split] Sexism

Postby Sol Invictus » 2014-01-28, 5:56

I don't think you follow what I am saying: 1. Treating any sex better than the other is sexism, even if it is considered oppressed 1.5 artificially creating advantages for certain sex does not create equality 2. If people are only discussing small issues either there are no big issues or they do not want to address those; you apparently understand perfectly well this can create negative image about oppressed party. This does not mean that small issues should not be addressed, but that making mountains out of molehills is not the best approach. Take for the example the case which started this discussion - the guy probably meant no ill asking father for permission to marry his daughter, the father could have calmly explained he feels uncomfortable with that as making decision for her would be treating her like property and the guy should ask her; by instead saying ''no" he probably ruined relationship between the guy ad his daughter or between guy and himself (depending on what happened with the relationship next), plus he actually did make decision instead of her

User avatar
Varislintu
Posts: 15330
Joined: 2004-02-09, 13:32
Real Name: M.
Gender: female
Location: Helsinki
Country: FI Finland (Suomi)

Re: [Split] Sexism

Postby Varislintu » 2014-01-28, 12:33

mak wrote:I was trying to make a point that it doesn't happen in TV only. Who's to say something like that but to a lesser extent can't also happen in politics? Any case to disprove it?

I think that any person, male or female but not transgender, who's very good at their job will have few hurdles in their way to succeed in their workplace. I had an Algorithms professor at university who was in her mid twenties and looked like a model, there's a couple of women in my male dominated workplace who we go to for advice. If you excel at your job I'll dare say sexism can do little to stop you from succeeding. Otherwise it sounds a lot like whining.


Do we have any case to disprove that women are more "bad characteristic X" in politics? Are you for real? Hey, do you have anything to disprove my claim that most men do a crappy job in politics? My stats show that most male politicians don't get reelected and that a lot of people are unhappy with how they did things.

Anyway, concerning your second paragraph. What if the person interviewing me for a job holds your view of women? What if my boss does? What if I'm surrounded by male colleagues who hold your view, but my success at my job depends on working together with them? What if I don't excel at my job? Do you know how many women are in the work force? How many of them can be stellar in their field, to overcome the possible odds that are set against them? In short: I think this "just be excellent in your job and sexism/racism/ableism/whatever can't possibly impeed you" is a load of bullcrap, excuse my French. :yep:
Det finns ingen
tröst. Därför
behöver du den inte
(Gösta Ågren)

User avatar
linguoboy
Posts: 23382
Joined: 2009-08-25, 15:11
Real Name: Da
Location: Chicago
Country: US United States (United States)

Re: [Split] Sexism

Postby linguoboy » 2014-02-26, 18:58

Not to rip off an old scab or anything, but it's interesting to see some empirical research done on the old "opening doors" debate: http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/02/25/favorite-anti-feminist-theory-debunked-by-purdue-researchers/#.UwzMaoWAMrU.twitter

tl;dr: Opening a door for a woman had no measurable impact on her emotional state but it bummed out men. No instances of feminist rage were recorded at all.
"Richmond is a real scholar; Owen just learns languages because he can't bear not to know what other people are saying."--Margaret Lattimore on her two sons

User avatar
mōdgethanc
Posts: 10658
Joined: 2010-03-20, 5:27
Gender: male
Location: Toronto
Country: CA Canada (Canada)

Re: Random complaints and advice thread 3

Postby mōdgethanc » 2014-03-02, 16:42

Sol Invictus wrote:The other day I read an interview with some random psychiatrist who claimed that too many women in government would cause stagnation, because most women have PMS, which makes them angry, guys solve everything faster and obviously the females only get into politics, because their husbands tell them what to do :evil: BTW our society usually pays so little attention to gender that it was hardly even discussed that the new prime minister is the first female in that post
What a quack.

User avatar
md0
Posts: 7591
Joined: 2010-08-08, 19:56
Country: FI Finland (Suomi)

Re: [Split] Sexism

Postby md0 » 2014-03-04, 21:14

So, it seems like Woman's Day is this week, and as a token of recognition for their struggles, women get reduced prices for plastic surgery and kitchen appliances, if we go by the Facebook advertising. Women themselves don't seem amused by this.
"If you like your clause structure, you can keep your clause structure"
Stable: Cypriot Greek (el-cy)Standard Modern Greek (el)English (en) Current: Standard German (de)Elementary Finnish (fi)
For fun: Legacy: France French (fr)Japanese (ja)Standard Turkish (tr)

User avatar
Varislintu
Posts: 15330
Joined: 2004-02-09, 13:32
Real Name: M.
Gender: female
Location: Helsinki
Country: FI Finland (Suomi)

Re: [Split] Sexism

Postby Varislintu » 2014-03-05, 13:43

meidei wrote:So, it seems like Woman's Day is this week, and as a token of recognition for their struggles, women get reduced prices for plastic surgery and kitchen appliances, if we go by the Facebook advertising. Women themselves don't seem amused by this.


Personally I dream of a longer ankle chain to the kitchen.
Det finns ingen
tröst. Därför
behöver du den inte
(Gösta Ågren)

User avatar
md0
Posts: 7591
Joined: 2010-08-08, 19:56
Country: FI Finland (Suomi)

Re: [Split] Sexism

Postby md0 » 2014-03-06, 4:56

It's funny how men complain Woman's Day is some sort of overly-PC discrimination against them, when it basically exist to reinforce the good old "woman must be attractive to men, a homemaker, and have lots of children".

Ads go like "we honour the mother, the sister, the wife"
Not women in general, just certain roles of them.
"If you like your clause structure, you can keep your clause structure"
Stable: Cypriot Greek (el-cy)Standard Modern Greek (el)English (en) Current: Standard German (de)Elementary Finnish (fi)
For fun: Legacy: France French (fr)Japanese (ja)Standard Turkish (tr)

User avatar
mōdgethanc
Posts: 10658
Joined: 2010-03-20, 5:27
Gender: male
Location: Toronto
Country: CA Canada (Canada)

Re: [Split] Sexism

Postby mōdgethanc » 2014-03-06, 15:00

[citation needed]


Return to “Politics and Religion”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest