Sexism: What do you find sexist?

[psychology]

Nope. Every single sociology class I have ever taken that has discussed sexism (or any discrimiation, actually) defined it as discrimination + power. All of the readings I have done outside of those classes have defined it the same way. Thus, people of colour can not be racist, women can not be sexist, poor people can`t be classist, etc. While women and people of colour can both discriminate against their societal oppressors, they don`t have the institutionalised power in order to make it anything but individual bigotry.

 

I have compiled some reading for you, if you're interested.

http://apicp.tumblr....n-by-danica-liu

http://finallyfemini...ism-definition/

 

 

Though, maybe I should clarify- sexism can hurt men, but it's not sexism that is directed at them. It is sexism against women that harms men as well. The patriarchial attitude that tells women that they should be in caring jobs (if they have a job at all!) can lead to men entering those careers being insulted. My brother, for example, left a job at a lumber mill to go to school to become a nurse. I bet you can imagine some of the insults that were thrown at him- all of them have to do with questioning his manliness, right? Things like that are intended to say that being like a woman is a terrible thing that should be avoided at all costs- and those attitudes, men avoiding "pink collar jobs", can hurt men. But it hurts them as a side effect of being sexist against women.

 

you should have seen my face as i was reading this. i have taken a few "women's studies" courses in university (lol at referring to a sociology class when talking about sexism) and the professor discussed the issue of sexism towards men. thank you for those links, which virtually didn't make a difference since everyone has their own opinion and in the end, you're arguing the definition of sexism (true definitions come from the dictionary, not a site such as finallyfeminist101), which is kind of humorous. again, to each their own and it shows a great deal of immaturity when you say "no" to someone else's opinion.

 

on a side note, in hopes to end pseudo-feminism, i suggest this link: http://likeawraith.t...ost/26239621394 the more you know!

[passiflora]

I think the whole racism and sexism thing is really a "tomato/tomahto" type issue, because it still all boils down to discrimination. I'd be very willing to bet that you could find scholarly articles for both sides of the coin (sexism = women only, sexism against men).

 

 

Society thinking it's ok for women to hit men.

Just to be clear: the fix for this should be "it's not ok for anybody to hit anybody else", not "society should think it's okay for men to hit women, too." I'm fairly sure you'd choose the former over the latter, but I've also met people who don't make that distinction. :P

 

 

on a side note, in hopes to end pseudo-feminism, i suggest this link: http://likeawraith.t...ost/26239621394 the more you know!

I'm not sure I understand the point of that link. Most of hit has more to do with racism than feminism and can't be pinned solely on white women. I get that women of colour have obviously undergone a far greater struggle than white females, and I think it's important to learn from our history, but what does most of that have to do with contemporary women's issues? For example, reproductive rights are a problem, and the vast majority of women affected by it right now weren't even alive during the Puerto Rican trials for the pill. Horrendous things have been done to people, especially in the medical and research fields, but our laws and regulations regarding that are getting better and better because we learn from it. We can't go back in time and change it, though, so that post just seems uptight IMO.

[psychology]

I think the whole racism and sexism thing is really a "tomato/tomahto" type issue, because it still all boils down to discrimination. I'd be very willing to bet that you could find scholarly articles for both sides of the coin (sexism = women only, sexism against men).

 

 

 

Just to be clear: the fix for this should be "it's not ok for anybody to hit anybody else", not "society should think it's okay for men to hit women, too." I'm fairly sure you'd choose the former over the latter, but I've also met people who don't make that distinction. :P

 

 

 

I'm not sure I understand the point of that link. Most of hit has more to do with racism than feminism and can't be pinned solely on white women. I get that women of colour have obviously undergone a far greater struggle than white females, and I think it's important to learn from our history, but what does most of that have to do with contemporary women's issues? For example, reproductive rights are a problem, and the vast majority of women affected by it right now weren't even alive during the Puerto Rican trials for the pill. Horrendous things have been done to people, especially in the medical and research fields, but our laws and regulations regarding that are getting better and better because we learn from it. We can't go back in time and change it, though, so that post just seems uptight IMO.

 

just some info since half this site seems to have feminism has an interest on their profile. i found it interesting so i decided to share it. no need to assume that i am being uptight.

[passiflora]

just some info since half this site seems to have feminism has an interest on their profile. i found it interesting so i decided to share it. no need to assume that i am being uptight.

I didn't mean to say that you were uptight. :* Just the tone of that tumblr post you linked is kind of... well, maybe uptight isn't even the right word. Abrasive, perhaps. It's interesting, but I stand by my analysis in my previous post. :P

[Rebecca~]

you should have seen my face as i was reading this. i have taken a few "women's studies" courses in university (lol at referring to a sociology class when talking about sexism) and the professor discussed the issue of sexism towards men. thank you for those links, which virtually didn't make a difference since everyone has their own opinion and in the end, you're arguing the definition of sexism (true definitions come from the dictionary, not a site such as finallyfeminist101), which is kind of humorous. again, to each their own and it shows a great deal of immaturity when you say "no" to someone else's opinion.

 

on a side note, in hopes to end pseudo-feminism, i suggest this link: http://likeawraith.t...ost/26239621394 the more you know!

I'm sorry, but I fail to understand what you find so humorous about equating sociology, feminism, and sexism. Sociology studies society, and human interaction. Obviously, in our patriarchal culture, sexism is a part of that society, and feminism aims to understand sexual inequality, and fight it. The three seem quite linked to me.

 

Sexism has little to do with opinion though. It is a real, tangible thing. Sexism can't exist against men because there is NO systemic discrimination against them. Where do men get paid less than women for the sole fact of their sex? Where do men have to fear for their lives while walking down the street? Where do men get blamed for being attacked because they had the gall to be outside of their homes?

Where do men get discriminated against systemically for the sole basis of their biological sex?

Nowhere. It doesn't happen

 

I think that passiflora was right in her complaint about your link. White women today are not completely at fault for ANY of those things. White women are responsible for all lynchings because in SOME cases they pointed the finger at the Black men? How about the white MEN that actually did the lynching? The women who did point the finger, and did cheer at the lynchings should definitely be held responsible, but you can’t make women NOW be responsible.

In just about every example given there, men were the ones that actually did those things. Women have reaped the benefit, but men were the ones attacking people, doing the science, and lying to people. Men were the ones that owned the slaves- women at the time didn’t have a right to own anything; they were property of their husbands too.

I think that blaming the people that benefit from science, no matter how terribly people were treated in the finding of that information can’t be held responsible for what other people did. Are you going to blame the people that get treatment for hypothermia for the actions of Nazi doctors in concentration camps? It’s only because of them that we know how to properly treat hypothermia, and they discovered it by torturing their prisoners, and testing out different treatments- most of them died, unsurprisingly.

 

Dictionaries are written by white men, whom are just trying to make a record of the word. Their word isn’t law when it comes to language- the beautiful thing about language is how it changes.

They still refer to sex as being meepit-in-cave chia, for example, despite the fact that the majority of people would classify sex as a whole bunch of other things as well.

 

(Also, I'm interested to find out that that I'm apparently half of this site now. I haven't seen anyone else that has had feminism listed as an interest.)

[psychology]

I'm sorry, but I fail to understand what you find so humorous about equating sociology, feminism, and sexism. Sociology studies society, and human interaction. Obviously, in our patriarchal culture, sexism is a part of that society, and feminism aims to understand sexual inequality, and fight it. The three seem quite linked to me.

 

Sexism has little to do with opinion though. It is a real, tangible thing. Sexism can't exist against men because there is NO systemic discrimination against them. Where do men get paid less than women for the sole fact of their sex? Where do men have to fear for their lives while walking down the street? Where do men get blamed for being attacked because they had the gall to be outside of their homes?

Where do men get discriminated against systemically for the sole basis of their biological sex?

Nowhere. It doesn't happen

 

I think that passiflora was right in her complaint about your link. White women today are not completely at fault for ANY of those things. White women are responsible for all lynchings because in SOME cases they pointed the finger at the Black men? How about the white MEN that actually did the lynching? The women who did point the finger, and did cheer at the lynchings should definitely be held responsible, but you can’t make women NOW be responsible.

In just about every example given there, men were the ones that actually did those things. Women have reaped the benefit, but men were the ones attacking people, doing the science, and lying to people. Men were the ones that owned the slaves- women at the time didn’t have a right to own anything; they were property of their husbands too.

I think that blaming the people that benefit from science, no matter how terribly people were treated in the finding of that information can’t be held responsible for what other people did. Are you going to blame the people that get treatment for hypothermia for the actions of Nazi doctors in concentration camps? It’s only because of them that we know how to properly treat hypothermia, and they discovered it by torturing their prisoners, and testing out different treatments- most of them died, unsurprisingly.

 

Dictionaries are written by white men, whom are just trying to make a record of the word. Their word isn’t law when it comes to language- the beautiful thing about language is how it changes.

They still refer to sex as being meepit-in-cave chia, for example, despite the fact that the majority of people would classify sex as a whole bunch of other things as well.

 

(Also, I'm interested to find out that that I'm apparently half of this site now. I haven't seen anyone else that has had feminism listed as an interest.)

 

if you refer to dictionaries as being written by white men, then sociology is formed by white men. you're implying that dictionaries can never be altered by women. we live in a society where women are inching closer and closer to equality so you're stating women can't be editors for dictionaries and such. this seems a bit counter to your argument.

all in all, i never said that sexism was not more prominent in women, i just definitely believe sexism can include men and has included men.

 

p.s. the whole feminism thing on this site was an exaggeration. surely someone as educated as you should have grasped that.

[Rebecca~]

if you refer to dictionaries as being written by white men, then sociology is formed by white men. you're implying that dictionaries can never be altered by women. we live in a society where women are inching closer and closer to equality so you're stating women can't be editors for dictionaries and such. this seems a bit counter to your argument.

all in all, i never said that sexism was not more prominent in women, i just definitely believe sexism can include men and has included men.

 

p.s. the whole feminism thing on this site was an exaggeration. surely someone as educated as you should have grasped that.

Dictionaries are written by small committees (lots of writers and editors) that agree on a definition. I'm sure there are women editors, but they are, I'm sure, not the majority, and that doesn't mean that they're sociologists as well as editors, nor does it mean they are feminists. Even if there is a feminist woman on a committee to agree on a new definition, there are lots of other people that don't agree. Status quo.

 

Again, I ask you to give one, just one example of systemic discrimination of men based on their biological sex.

[Dynohawk]

Just to be clear: the fix for this should be "it's not ok for anybody to hit anybody else", not "society should think it's okay for men to hit women, too." I'm fairly sure you'd choose the former over the latter, but I've also met people who don't make that distinction. :P

 

Goes without saying! Though a girl in school once hit me when I voiced my opinion on something she didn't like, I didn't hit her but I had had no issue pushing her into a ditch, still unapologetic to this day :-P

[psychology]

Dictionaries are written by small committees (lots of writers and editors) that agree on a definition. I'm sure there are women editors, but they are, I'm sure, not the majority, and that doesn't mean that they're sociologists as well as editors, nor does it mean they are feminists. Even if there is a feminist woman on a committee to agree on a new definition, there are lots of other people that don't agree. Status quo.

 

Again, I ask you to give one, just one example of systemic discrimination of men based on their biological sex.

 

i feel like you're assuming that sexism is present in every aspect of society one-hundred percent of the time. maybe women are the minority among editors in the dictionary-writing community but that doesn't mean they do not have a voice.

there are so many portrayals that men feel they need to achieve in the media. i completely understand this is present for women too and it's much more prominent as a women's issue. however, i'm arguing that sexism applies both for men and women, not that sexism is equal in men and women.

women are generally assumed to be the care-givers, single male parents is still a bit taboo. the suicide rate for men greatly overtakes the suicide rate in women. there are so many things that are sexist against men, mainly media.

 

 

 

[Rebecca~]

i feel like you're assuming that sexism is present in every aspect of society one-hundred percent of the time. maybe women are the minority among editors in the dictionary-writing community but that doesn't mean they do not have a voice.

there are so many portrayals that men feel they need to achieve in the media. i completely understand this is present for women too and it's much more prominent as a women's issue. however, i'm arguing that sexism applies both for men and women, not that sexism is equal in men and women.

women are generally assumed to be the care-givers, single male parents is still a bit taboo. the suicide rate for men greatly overtakes the suicide rate in women. there are so many things that are sexist against men, mainly media.

 

 

 

 

Sexism is everywhere all the time because it`s embedded in our society, and the way we`re socialised, in our langiage, in our institutions, in EVERYTHING. That isn`t to say that there will never be a moment where something is not sexist, but that it is such a huge part of our society, and it is impossible to get away from it entirely.

 

Again, you have not shown SYSTEMIC discrimination. You have shown an example of men being objectified, and dehumanised, but it`s not sexism becuase it`s not a systemic objectification. (White) Men are virtually never dehumanised, while women and people of colour often are. Media is run by men moreso than almost any other industry.

 

Single dads are NOT taboo. They get so many kudos for what they do by society. A mum taking her kid to a doctor`s appointment will be seen as normal. A dad that takes his kid to an appointment will be told what an amazing father he is. A man doing any normal child care tasks is treated as though he is the best father in the world, while a woman doing the same thing is seen as just another mum. That can be seen as discriminatory, as it assumes that men normally can`t be good parents, or are absent, but they are treated as though they are incredible for doing the most mundane things.

 

The suicide rate for men overtakes women for two reasons- one, they tend to use more deadly methods (guns, jumping from buildings, etc) rather than pills like women (likely because women are socialised to not be violent), and two, men are less likely to ask for help, becuase admitting that you need help is a weakness, and only women are weak. Yet another example of how sexism directed at women also hurts men.

[psychology]

Sexism is everywhere all the time because it`s embedded in our society, and the way we`re socialised, in our langiage, in our institutions, in EVERYTHING. That isn`t to say that there will never be a moment where something is not sexist, but that it is such a huge part of our society, and it is impossible to get away from it entirely.

 

Again, you have not shown SYSTEMIC discrimination. You have shown an example of men being objectified, and dehumanised, but it`s not sexism becuase it`s not a systemic objectification. (White) Men are virtually never dehumanised, while women and people of colour often are. Media is run by men moreso than almost any other industry.

 

Single dads are NOT taboo. They get so many kudos for what they do by society. A mum taking her kid to a doctor`s appointment will be seen as normal. A dad that takes his kid to an appointment will be told what an amazing father he is. A man doing any normal child care tasks is treated as though he is the best father in the world, while a woman doing the same thing is seen as just another mum. That can be seen as discriminatory, as it assumes that men normally can`t be good parents, or are absent, but they are treated as though they are incredible for doing the most mundane things.

 

The suicide rate for men overtakes women for two reasons- one, they tend to use more deadly methods (guns, jumping from buildings, etc) rather than pills like women (likely because women are socialised to not be violent), and two, men are less likely to ask for help, becuase admitting that you need help is a weakness, and only women are weak. Yet another example of how sexism directed at women also hurts men.

 

it's not even worth debating with you. 'feminists' like you, are why the word has been so extremely toxic. women jump, shoot, cut, hang themselves just as much as men. i want you to show me a reliable link that says women tend to intake chemical substances more so than other methods because they are socialized to be less violent.

SINGLE DADS are the minority and it IS taboo. and what i argued is, in my opinion, an incredibly accurate depiction of systemic sexism towards men. this is not a black and white issue, there is a huge spectrum of grey sitting between the two.

[passiflora]

women jump, shoot, cut, hang themselves just as much as men. i want you to show me a reliable link that says women tend to intake chemical substances more so than other methods because they are socialized to be less violent.

CDC suicide mechanisms by gender: http://www.cdc.gov/V...echanism02.html

Also, while males are more successful, females actually attempt suicide at a higher rate than men do (I'm not sure if this would include multiple attempts by the same person though, which may skew the results).

 

 

Yet another example of how sexism directed at women also hurts men.

I think gender stereotypes go hand-in-hand, not that one is necessarily a byproduct of the other.

 

People think men have to be x because only women are y.

People think women have to be y because only men are x.

 

You can flip it either way to make it sound like 'sexism' against one gender is harmful to the other. I think I'd argue that sexism is an application of gender stereotypes, not the other way around.

 

In what ways is sexism still systemic? I can think of a lot of things I find sexist, but none that truly affect my ability to function well in society. I can vote, I can own property, I work two jobs involving manual labour and get the same pay as everybody else, I go to university (more females do that males, nowadays), there are extra scholarships available to me just because I'm a woman, etc.

 

 

 

However, the only 'systemic sexism' I can think of that affects males almost exclusively is circumcision (in Western society). I don't want to turn it into a circumcision debate, but in females we call it "genital mutilation" and for males it's normal - some people (including women) even say it looks better, or whatever. Even if you don't consider it sexism, I think it could be considered on par with reproductive rights for women, which many feminists fight for.

[psychology]

CDC suicide mechanisms by gender: http://www.cdc.gov/V...echanism02.html

Also, while males are more successful, females actually attempt suicide at a higher rate than men do (I'm not sure if this would include multiple attempts by the same person though, which may skew the results).

 

 

 

I think gender stereotypes go hand-in-hand, not that one is necessarily a byproduct of the other.

 

People think men have to be x because only women are y.

People think women have to be y because only men are x.

 

You can flip it either way to make it sound like 'sexism' against one gender is harmful to the other. I think I'd argue that sexism is an application of gender stereotypes, not the other way around.

 

In what ways is sexism still systemic? I can think of a lot of things I find sexist, but none that truly affect my ability to function well in society. I can vote, I can own property, I work two jobs involving manual labour and get the same pay as everybody else, I go to university (more females do that males, nowadays), there are extra scholarships available to me just because I'm a woman, etc.

 

 

 

However, the only 'systemic sexism' I can think of that affects males almost exclusively is circumcision (in Western society). I don't want to turn it into a circumcision debate, but in females we call it "genital mutilation" and for males it's normal - some people (including women) even say it looks better, or whatever. Even if you don't consider it sexism, I think it could be considered on par with reproductive rights for women, which many feminists fight for.

 

yes, i am completely aware that methods of suicide vary between gender, however, i do not think it's fair to say that men tend to use firearms because they are conditioned to be violent. statistics are statistics. although they give us numbers, assuming that most women commit suicide by poisoning or suffocation is not fair for women in general. categorizing has never shown positive results. it dismisses feelings and emotions.

i also agree that circumcision is a good example of systemic sexism. i didn't think of the difference in term.

[Welcome Back Apathy]

 

However, the only 'systemic sexism' I can think of that affects males almost exclusively is circumcision (in Western society). I don't want to turn it into a circumcision debate, but in females we call it "genital mutilation" and for males it's normal - some people (including women) even say it looks better, or whatever. Even if you don't consider it sexism, I think it could be considered on par with reproductive rights for women, which many feminists fight for.

 

I would LOVE to have a debate on circumcision; I'm just not sure if it would get inappropriate for TDN. I think that male circumcision is not as bad as female circumcision, but I'm still very against it.