I agree, and that’s why I think these discussions are supremely helpful. What I do not find helpful, however, is the attitude that people are being “too sensitive”, need to “toughen up”, or just simply leave if they don’t like it.
Further, I think the gist of what we were asking for was not an additional rule that prohibited sexist comments. It was that it be included under the umbrella of existing prohibited behavior.
Yes, men are often badgered with comments that are actually sexism against women. It is such a common way of thinking that I doubt the speaker is usually aware of it:
I was never an insult to be called a “tomboy.” But want to hurt a little guy’s feelings? Call him a “sissy” (Short for sister. Everyone knows that being a “sissy” is being “weak and afraid.”
“You cry like a girl.” Big insult. Mustn’t be like a girl! Do you think girls and women don’t get the message? Over and over again through all of their lives? (And I would never say to a boy the untruth that “men don’t cry.”)
Sometimes the word “pussy” is used instead of “sissy” to imply weakness – for adults as often as children. Do I really need to explain why that is insulting a woman as well as the man it is said to?
“If you don’t hush, I’m going to make you sit with the girls!” (Fate worse than death.)
Rune, is English your first language? Do you understand why just the word “hysterical” is an insult to women? If not, look up the origin of the word. And can you think of a derogatory name for a man that means the same as “slut”?
I do see signs of discriminatory behavior toward men in such areas as healthcare and the justice system. Some men aren’t aware that they can have breast cancer too, for example. It more than balances out though. I didn’t know what the symptoms of a woman’s heart attack are until about ten years ago. They are different from the more commonly known male symptoms. Meanwhile, men are discriminated against in custody cases. I hope that is changing.
But the biggest sign of gender discrimination is right in front of our eyes almost every day. 44 Presidents and none of them have been women. And look at the composition of the Senate and the House by gender. I don’t like to see anyone discriminated against because of her or his gender.
Finally, Giraffe, it’s such a pleasure to see you here again.
Is calling someone a dick sexist against men?
No. Read the last 3+ pages to figure out why on your own.
It’s just an insult. It doesn’t bring down men to make women look better.
What about “Men are insensitive” or “Men couldn’t handle the pain of being a woman”? Both of these suggest areas where men are inferior to women.
Is there an institutional punishment for being “unable to handle the pain of being a woman”? Are men experiencing damages as a result of this common myth? Then it’s a gendered insult. Not sexism.
Listen, once again. Sexism isn’t “gendered insults”. It isn’t saying mean things about men or women. Look to Irishguy to a very good explanation:
[QUOTE=Irishguy]
As I understand what ladyfoxfyre is saying, sexism refers to the institutional and sociological level power imbalance based upon sex. As such, in Western culture (and probably most current cultures), sexism applies to the repression and degrading of women, and cannot apply to men, because men have historically and culturally held the power. Gender discrimination is the term reserved for mistreatment based upon sex differences that do not rely on the cultural power imbalance.
[/quote]
Coming back every couple of hours to say “but what about when you call a guy a dickhead, is that sexism?” doesn’t magically make it sexism. It’s mean, it’s untrue, it’s perpetuating gender stereotypes and myths. It isn’t sexism just because gender is a topic of the insult.
Sexism involves the overall balance between the sexes, not individual localized examples, right?
Now this is where I’m hitting a brick wall, and maybe you can help here: Most of the definitions of “sexism” that I’ve found so far are variations of “Sexism is prejudice or discrimination based on a person’s sex” and about half add the phrase “…, especially for women”, but none say anything like “exclusively for women”. There is a large article about sexism in Wiki, and while it does emphasize that most of the sexism is directed against women, it also gives examples of what they refer to as sexism against men.
How do we square off the common definitions found elsewhere with what you have told us here?
Does it not?
Well, I ask because neither me nor my other half, or our wider circle of friends, family and colleagues (in West Yorkshire, England, if the context matters) consider calling someone a ‘pussy’ sexist (number 3 in Zoe’s list).
We both use the names for all the body parts of all the genders to refer to things in negative ways. ‘Tits up’, ‘balls’, ‘bellend’ etc. Even the c-word isn’t much of an insult, or at least, from what I gather from internet conversations, it’s used in a very different manner. I don’t use it personally, because I find it utterly crass, and I appreciate that it is considered Really Bad in most other social circles. But there aren’t many words that are taboo where I’m from - hence why I’m genuinely curious how they’re perceived by others.
Ladyfoxfyre, are you saying ‘gendered insults’ are not considered sexist by many feminists? Because I went to university with a lot of them! I know personal experience isn’t much to go from, but it’s all I’ve got I’m afraid (and is why I read threads such as these).
You could come to the conclusion that my opinion is not the only one on the internet on the matter?
How about your definition does not square with any of the dictionary definitions of the word, thus giving room for reasoned debate on the matter.
We aren’t having reasoned debate though. You’ve posted exactly one post, after being asked repeatedly what your opinion was on the matter by Giraffe. You’re just asking me a bunch of questions, again, seemingly for the purpose of setting up a “gotcha”. I’m not playing anymore. If you want a reasoned debate, participate in the reasoned debate. Don’t run to wikipedia and ask me why my definition differs from theirs. I’m sure you’ll find a lot of stuff on wikipedia that doesn’t exactly get into the academics of an issue.
Until you can respond to my many thoughtful and detailed posts in this thread with something besides a one-liner question, I don’t see this as a productive “reasoned” debate.
Agree with all of the above.
This is a gross mischaracterization, and I didn’t just “run to Wikipedia”- I “ran” to just about every dictionary definition I could find, but I thought that quoting the definitions from eight or nine dictionaries would be crass and unproductive. I do want reasoned debate on this matter, and I’m curious as to what you think that might consist of at this point.
Not curious enough to read my post, apparently.
My response to all that you have given us so far on this matter is that the definition you have put forth for “sexism” does not corespond to any encyclopedic or dictionary definition of the word that I have found thus far(still searching, btw), so I am wondering if you have any academic cites you could give that show that sexism can only be against women at this point in our culture.
Here are a couple decent articles about sexism against men.
This one is a business blog for women, with an interesting interview with a professor of philosophy on the topic.
This one is just a well written take on the subject.
I think part of the issue here is that based on the demography of this message board, most of the people discussing this topic here are going to be more intelligent, urbane, and worldly than probably 80% of the world. I know it sounds like I’m bragging on how great the Dope is, but I’m not. There are plenty of average and below average people here, they just don’t tend to get deep into these kinds of discussions.
Anyway, the point of that lead up is to say that in a LOT of the country, sexism has an entirely different flavor than how women are treated in the boardroom or on a message board. It’s about being forced into the role of housewife, mother, etc by men who are expected by those housewife-types to bring home a good salary, go hunting, fishing, drive big pick-ups, etc. And if you think I’m exaggerating, you haven’t spent enough time outside of cities.
The truth is, many women in this country expect a certain type of housewife life, and expect their husband to earn enough to support that. I lived a lot of my life in an area of the country where this is extremely common and I personally know many women that have expectations of what roles they expect the men in their life to fill, but now that I live and work in Chicago - I’ve been exposed to an entirely different take on gender roles and what husbands and wives, men and women, are “expected” to do. I’m just saying that perhaps some of the disagreements on what sexism is or isn’t here depends on what kind of lifestyle you are surrounded with. But to say that there isn’t sexism against men in this society is just plain wrong.
What I think I’m saying is that ladyfoxfyre has described something that is a very real problem that should be fought against, both on this board and in the larger world, but what she has described may need to be called by something other than “sexism” since that word seems to already have a definition that does not correspond to hers.
Power itself is far more complicated than a simple “who benefits / who is the oppressor” type of analysis will reveal, and radical feminist theory, far more than (say) marxist theories of oppression, soon dove into that and addressed it.
Patriarchy does not benefit males. Not in the sense that, as individual people, they are better off in a patriarchal system than they would be in an alternative.
In fact, if power is genuinely intrinsically desirable, a revolution against the general system wherein the powerful oppress the less powerful is problematic, and probably insoluble. If, on the other hand, the tendency to organize society around authoritarian power structures is itself explainable as an aspect of some fundamental principle, there is hope for motion away from that kind of dynamic. And radical feminism said that sexual inequality set a pattern that has been replicated in other power-over arrangements and that our society is based on them NOT because they are inevitable but because they are patriarchal.
It is also true that if you do not view women as passive powerless people (and in fact believe that women possess the power to change society and attain their goals as feminists) it doesn’t make sense to posit that the social arrangement was simply “done to women”; instead, to some extent the notion had to have been sold to women. That they get something out of it even though they lose a lot from it.
These are deeper, higher-level analyses that were present within radical feminst theory by the mid-1980s, but they don’t easily fit on placards and protest signs and they don’t make good sound bites. It can be hard to explain just how and why we should regard it as oppressive when the victims of the oppression cooperate in their own subjugation, let alone explaining how the system applies coercive and personality-distorting pressures to shape and train those who are of the class (males) who will hold the power. And how men as well as women will benefit from a feminist transformation of society.
Given that I don’t have access to JSTOR or other current scholarly journals, this is all I can provide to you via google scholarly search:
Differentiating Hostile and Benevolent Sexism Peter Glick and Susan Fiske, American Psychological Association
Janet K. Swim
Laurie L. Cohen
Pennsylvania State University
Social Dominance Orientation, Right-Wing Authoritarianism, Sexism, and Prejudice Toward Women in the Workforce
Andrew N. Christopher1
Mark R. Wojda1
Department of Psychology, Albion College.