Women are just as if not more racist than men are but as others have pointed out Women have a tendency to use different means to achieve their (also different) ends. You’d have to look at data that corresponds to those means/ends to draw a conclusion (White men, for instance, are far more comfortable partnering with minorities than their female counterparts).
Women usually don’t grab pitch forks until things get really, really bad for everyone. Men - be it social conditioning, testosterone, both or neither - will generally use violence as a means to an end far less hesitantly than Women, and thus you see mobs of them with torches and machine guns protesting “wrongs” or “threats” far more frequently.
Probably for the same reasons most right-libertarians are white men. Guys like fantasies of social Darwinism because they think they’ll be the ones at the top, instead of another broken body in the pile.
Why does it seem like women are less racist than men?
[/quote]
According to The Authoritarians by Bob Altemeyer, men and women score similarly on psychological measures of right-wing authoritarianism. Demographically, a lot of these Neo-Nazis are younger, 20-30 or so. Women in that group tend to lean left, whereas the men tend to blame the left for their problems, particularly feminism. Their online communities tend to be incredibly nerdy places as well, and women tend not to find such communities appealing even when they’re ostensibly pro-feminist, so I’d expect there to be even fewer of them when they’re explicitly anti-feminist.
I don’t know how to link it but today’s Daily Stormer, the alt right paper roughly says most people are glad Heather Heyer(Charlottesville victim) is dead. Since she had no children, her only reason for existence, she is a drain on society and would cost society hundreds of thousands of dollars. I have paraphrased with no intention to alter meaning.
I think it also goes to suggest that the people involved never saw this as a peaceable assembly. FAMILIES go to peaceable assemblies. This was always understood as a violent act. Even if misogynistic worldviews left women at home and away from politics, there’d have been dads with sons.
It’s not surprising. Most people derive their sense of worth from their accomplishments. If you need to derive your sense of worth from your skin color, it’s a strong sign you have no accomplishments.
Because they were there for, and expecting, trouble. In cases like that most groups with an undercurrent of violence will leave the ladies at home. The standard rule when we would come across motorcycle gangs/clubs was — Old Ladies on the back and no issue; men only and stay alert and ready to react at any moment.
I think Nava nailed it. To be sure, the majority of white supremacists are no doubt men. But there are plenty of racist white women as well, but it manifests in more subtle ways - perhaps being “shy Trump voters,” writing their views in print or on the Internet, or refusing to date minority men. I would guess that the majority of people that this article talks about are women, for instance.
It might be like asking why school shooters are men. I have no doubt that plenty of women have violent thoughts. They just are less likely to act on them in the kililng-spree fashion.
Idiosyncratic to the US, sadly. They flew over “oppressed group”, landed in “oppressed minority” and then dropped the “oppressed”, leaving “minority = oppressed group”. Note that in their case “majority” doesn’t necessarily mean “more than 50%”, it can mean “the biggest group” or “the most visible group”; the “mental default group”. This also leads to situations such as thinking that every single minority is by definition oppressed, like that guy who in these same forums said he’d be surprised to ever see a Basque or Galician among Spain’s rulers (the current Prez, already in power at the time of that post, is from Galicia, as was a certain short dude with a funny moustache and a penchant for waterworks).
I have seen that usage before, something akin to functional minority. I have a World Book Encyclopedia from 1988 that describes this, and specifically mentions South Africa, in its article on “minorities.” I can’t scan it or anything, but its certainly there.
I think, overall, the term “minority” is less favored as more specific terms are generally favored.
53% of American white women voted for Trump, so they are clearly apt to be racists, but has been pointed out, they are probably less likely to march in a rally with weapons.
As others have said, there are probably a lot of white nationalist women out there; they’re just less visible.
The reason we saw a see of white males in Charlottesville is that the people who attended this event wanted to feel more masculine in some way because being masculine and powerful is the essence of what it means to be a white male in American society. It’s important for a lot of white men to have power, through money or status, because implicitly that’s what a lot of white men are told they should expect. They’ve been told through a lot of implicit messaging over the years, through images in commercials and perhaps from what they experience in real life, that they are the ones who should become lawyers, general managers, corporate executives, union bosses, military generals, and president of the United States.
In recent years, though, white males have had to compete with non-whites and women for these roles. It’s no longer as simple as just going to college for four years and hitting up your frat brother for a job at his dad’s company. Some people perceive these changes as a threat to their status. I remember in the 1990s that a lot of white males had jobs in IT; now a lot of those jobs have gone to foreigners and women. Don’t get me wrong: white males are still well-represented in this and other fields, but the understanding that they have to compete and that it’s not as easy as they thought it would be, not just in IT but in all fields, is probably creating a crisis. IIRC the number of single white males without a mate and without children is at an all time high. White men feel that the promises of power and status weren’t kept.
Movements like the alt-right offer something to the white men who are feeling a little less powerful than they’d like to be. The aggressive nature of white nationalist politics appeals to young men who are looking to boost their testosterone levels. Being around other men who are brandishing weapons and openly defying the norms of society gives these men a sense of power that’s missing. Some thrill seekers probably liked the idea of being involved in a fight with counter-protesters, as it raises testosterone levels and makes them feel a little more macho, as long as nobody gets hurt.
That is my view, but you put it better. There is a hierarchy in western society and the more privilege that you stand to lose due to equality and multiculturalism, the harder you are likely to resist it. Whites are above non whites, men above women, Christians above other faiths, trad cons over non traditionalists, etc in the west. The less you fit this mold, the more you want to upend the system. The more you benefit from it the more you fight to uphold it generally.
Having said that, there are lots of women in white power movements. But none at the march. Not sure why. I guess because the marchers knew it would be violent.
However there were women in the antifa movement and they were fighting alongside the men. So maybe the men in the white power kept the women out, while the antifa invited women. That seems plausible.
Yes but if you watch videos online, there are some women fighting in the antifa movement, but not in the white power movement. At least from what I’ve seen.
I don’t know if any women were fighting in the white power movement, but apparently there were a few women there, according to a poster here. What percent of Antifa would you say was female, based on what you saw in videos?
