Discussions About Sexism On The Internet

Post Reply New Topic

Correction: we are all different (outside and inside) and it's okay. Our differences make us unique individuals. Any categorizations we make based on our differences would be arbitrary - we may as well categorize people on their hair texture, height, or length of fingernails. Thinking that no differences exist would perpetuate the problem; it's all about finding out more about other people's differences.

Educating both genders equally works, but sometimes is not enough. This is evident in a study that concluded if a woman is asked her gender before writing a math test, she will perform worse than if she isn't asked her gender prior to writing the test. It's up to the woman to reduce her anxiety before the test so that she doesn't feel like she has to conform to the stereotype that women are bad at math. An even better solution in my opinion would be if we discredited stereotypes, like this is doing:
http://lookslikescience.tumblr.com/ or even mentoring programs for young girls to encourage an interest in male-dominated fields (we could have similar programs for boys who want to pursue typically female-dominated fields as I have heard that sexism exists there as well - get rid of stereotypes that boys can't cook or play with dolls for example)

Also I think it's up to women to stand up for themselves, not just in words but in their actions. See Sheryl Sandberg:
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=18uDutylDa4[/youtube]

She encourages women to take advantage of the opportunities available to them, because sometimes we shy away, as she so eloquently explains. She is also an idol of mine. We need more leaders talking about how women can achieve success, so we can get a more equal society later on. Even Warren Buffett spoke to the BBC recently about how he is in favour of women reaching their full potential. Business leaders can help by making schedules more flexible so women can have a family as well as balance their career. Just read Anne-Marie Slaughter's essay on "Why Women Still Can't Have it All" and you will hear a story of a woman in a high-status position who felt conflicted between family and work balance. If business leaders were more flexible and understanding about this conflict, we could help solve sexism in our culture.

Oh and like Sheryl Sandberg says, women as well as men also need to be more accepting of men who take an active family role. We could praise men for their fatherly roles instead of just success in their career.

I was trying to say that there are no differences from a societal standpoint. Each individual is unique, but that does not mean they should have limited roles based on their differences. Everybody should have the opportunity to achieve their goals, as long as those goals are realistic (I guess that means I am not going to be Batman anytime soon, but I can still be a millionaire hermit ).

And the discrediting of stereotypes could be achieved by education. However, like I said, there would still be a lot of indoctrination from family. There is no way the changes can be made in just one generation. Hell, probably not even three. But the sooner we begin to work, the sooner your (not our, because I do not want children ) descendants will achieve results.

I still think we have come a long way since a few decades ago. Here in Brazil, for example, we have a woman president: Dilma Roussef. While she was elected mostly because of the support from her wildly popular antecessor, Luís Inácio Lula da Silva, she is doing a very competent job and is not receiving any orders from her male antecessor (as some people suggested when she began).

As I said, it is time to stop whining about sexism/racism/homophobia/religious intolerance and actually put those issues out of their misery. A small ammount of prejudice will always be present in some people's minds; probably it is human nature. But we can make a society where such thoughts are ignored/discredited/disencouraged/whatever it takes to make the haters stop.

Damn, I am talking like a Saturday Morning cartoon character.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pele5vptVgc[/youtube]

Yeah, I agree, I don't see a point in whining about sexism/racism/homophobia/religious intolerance because that won't solve the issue and it's better not to give the people making these remarks attention or an audience so they aren't encouraged (negative punishment ftw). I'd rather concentrate my energy in being the best woman that I can be and to break boundaries between people one person at a time... All I can do in my meager position right now. But I still hold authority figures accountable for helping to solve these problems for the next generation. Maybe I am too idealistic too

Last edited by deltafunction on 01 Jan 2013, 7:54 am, edited 1 time in total.

the discussions about sexism on the internet that i have seen usually consist of two types of people:

1. The women are evil type. These people basically blame women for everything.
2. the men are evil type: these people believe the man= violent predator stereotype is true of all men.

I avoid online discussions of this issue because all it consists of is making hurtful comments about big groups of people that the poster has never met.

I don't think it does any good to place the onus entirely on authority figures is an option, as they are not going to fix problems just because we try to hold them accountable. (which is also very difficult to do.)

I don't consider speaking up to be whining, either. In an oppressive society, just speaking up is a form of activism. The problem with ignoring racism, homophobia, sexism, and religious intolerance is that people's lives are greatly effected by those in power who lobby or have any kind of influence in law making. The number of queer people killing themselves and being killed is enough not to shut up about it. The percentage of non-white people convicted for crimes etc vs the number of people who are white and get off on lesser charges or never get charged at all, these things are not things I wish to "whine" about but I will continue to at least talk about social injustice until the day I'm gone. It's supposed to make people uncomfortable, at least those who haven't yet become comfortable talking about it.


This thread wasn't meant to be a serious discussion but I love seeing these thoughtful replies. Thank you, everyone.

I don't think speaking up is the wrong thing to be doing.
Trying to enforce quotas and crap - that stuff is very conterproductive.

The only thing we need to do is hold people accountable to their actions.
Currently that isn't happening, and that is why it's all so common - until people actively hold people accountable instead of ignoring it or letting it happen by bystanders not doing anything, it's going to continue. The only thing we need for it to continue is silence, and more importantly, inaction.

I don't mean to ignore that they are issues, but I'm just more concerned about policies and procedures that allow sexism to exist. Sexist remarks however don't bother me so much because in my opinion, they are usually made by men who fear women in power. They can fear all they want but in the end their words alone will not change the power that women hold (unless they are authorities, which I would get upset about). I don't mean to offend by saying "whine"

Also, say what you want about quotas, but they have helped women who deserve the highest ranks to even be considered. Though people may fear that quotas will bring in token women who are just there for that purpose, they have helped deserving women to be given a chance to show their worth.

I read that thing, and I think it is paranoid. Men are actually more likely to be victims of violent crime than women, but they aren't afraid. I think the fact that women are more concerned with this has more to do with inert psychological tendencies than logical reasons. Also, the majority of rapes are not committed by strangers, so being mean to random strangers doesn't really help. Although I am a little disturbed by the behavior of that guy who kept sending emails even after he was rejected I would watch out for that guy too.

I know that this is just anecdotal evidence, but recently a girl invited me to study with her after having only talked with me briefly for a couple times, and it turns out I was with her all by herself in her house while we were studying. I'm fairly certain that she wasn't interested in me sexually (she always kept telling me about her boyfriend), so this meant to me that she trusted me a lot, which meant a lot to me. She was much, much nicer to me than most women. I was so happy that someone was so nice to me that I cried after I left. Also, a couple of years ago I met a girl who rejected me quite soundly a number of times, but somehow, her rejections did not hurt. They seemed honest and direct, whereas womens' rejections usually seem to have some sort of malice or contempt in them, which makes them hurt. I liked her a lot and still flirted with her (I think I annoyed her, but I think she understood that I expected to be rejected, so I'm pretty sure that she didn't think I was creepy). The reason I kept flirting with her was that I thought it was a novelty to be rejected without feeling bad. Anyway I think I like these women because I could tell that they did not think I was a threat. I deeply resent being suspected of wrong-doing just because of my gender.

I liked that Ted Talks video. I think talking about gender differences like that is the right way to work on improving problems with sexism, and not all this crap with affirmative action, and sex-specific aid programs. I think putting in place some sort of law to make women feel comfortable at the work place is just as absurd as it would be to put in place some sort of law that would make innocent men not feel like they were being suspected of being rapists. You can't legislate people's feelings.

They forgot to include the type that think that men and women actually have extremely identical brains so that there is no such thing as a male brain and a female brain.

I think those differences in brain structure are irrelevant when discussing sexism.

If you also read Anne-Marie Slaughter's article in The Atlantic, she talks about how she used to put the onus on women to power through their career, but then realized how she actually wanted to spend more time with family and she couldn't in her current job. I haven't been there yet with a family, but that seems to be a main reason why women aren't considered for better jobs - because many times the workplace doesn't provide the option for a work-life balance including time to raise a family. She makes a good case for bosses to be more understanding of family commitments and not let that affect a woman's seniority.

Also the reason why I brought up mentors was because I was in a male dominated field for a while in university. I saw how much sexism took place... You can try to power through but I think the sexism can be discouraging for many women hence why mentorship programs may help. Some are already in place so it's nothing new really. Also it makes me sad because recently a study showed how a gender bias still exists in science when reviewing potential candidates for the job: Study: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/25/scien ... .html?_r=0 Another article on sexism in science: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/20 ... 101033.htm

So that's why I think that just trying to tell women to take on all the onus for sexism in the workplace and to pretend that women always have equal opportunity to excel will not work. I think we need something to change, maybe in legislation so that women are considered equals in some work forces - not saying it's happening everywhere, it's just my experience in certain sciences and maths.

I really don't understand why rape jokes are so bad. We joke about worse things than rape like murder. IMO, anything could be made to be a subject of a joke and be funny if the comedian is clever enough.

And the person who wrote schrodinger's rapist is definitely paranoid.

"Is preventing violent assault or murder part of your daily routine, rather than merely something you do when you venture into war zones? Because, for women, it is."

Seriously? Come on... Honestly, when I was reading the article I thought it was satirical and it was poking fun at feminists until I read the comments at the bottom of the page.

Christ, here we go again. A thread expressing this same dismissive stupidity got locked the other day so you know.

Yup - a woman is more likely to be raped by some man she knows and might even know well and trust than some random stranger or something like that. The basic advice for women (and men) still applies - don't get absolutely paralytic in public, watch out for your surroundings and so on and so forth. Women wouldn't be quite as ready to absolve the man of all criticism had he had his wallet nicked whilst being too drunk to remember anything. That doesn't mean to say that a woman is ever even remotely responsible for rape but it is possible to avoid taking stupid risks that no sensible man would take either.

enough. this isn't the "explain to women about rape" forum it's the Women's Forum, and you are expected to remember that.