Sexism on L&D

Post Reply New Topic

Those whiney guys are the type of people who are going to blame EVERYTHING on somebody else. If they are applying for a job and don't get it then they will make a blanket statement about either the person who did the hiring or the person who got the job instead. They refuse to take any personal responsibility for themselves, and until they actually understand that, they won't get anywhere in life. It's been pointed out to them, just like when they do that in other situations. Calling it sexism when they do it about women is completely mislabeling it and minimizing actual sexism if you equate it to somebody's whiney statement.

You see all the blanket statements on this forum about NT's and how they are evil because of bullies and folks who won't give those of us on the spectrum a chance, and you know it's not true either, but not that many people are calling it discrimination or ableism against NT's the way it's called sexism when some guy whines about women. Blanket statements seem to be acceptable when they are said against one group but not the other here.

Of course if there were a request to moderate all posts that were about blaming others and those that didn't accept personal responsibility for situations then there would be a lot less posting going on around here.

The reason sexism gets involved in these whiny rants is because someone invariably pops up and says "oh, I used to be like you, until I read this book on PUA techniques!"

PUA techniques, by definition, are sexist and manipulative. When you tie the two together, you have something that really does create an atmosphere of hatred towards women, especially in the ones who are already willing to blame their woes on women.

So they read the PUA manual, they try a few tricks with varying degrees of success, and now believe that treating women as objects to be "acquired" vs. individuals to become acquainted with, and it mushrooms into something that looks a helluva lot like outright misogyny. It's a slippery slope, in other words, and a potentially dangerous one.

It's not mislabeling at all, it's the perfect label actually. If someone were to say something like "Beware all black people because they'll rob you" because they got robbed by one black person, would you not call that racist?

Call it whining if you want, it's sometimes an apt description, but whining or not, it's STILL sexism.




Probably because there are less NT's here to defend the NT population, but to be honest I've not seen a lot of those kinds of statements about NT's, personally. (Not trying to say they don't happen, but only that I've not really witnessed it myself)

But you are absolutely correct that it seems acceptable to make these kinds of statements about one group, but not the other. For example, it's okay to make these types of blanket statements about WOMEN, but not black people or homosexuals. Thanks for pointing that out (even though that's what we've been doing all along).

That PUA crap is just a money making scam to get socially inept guys to pay money to learn to act like a lounge lizard. It doesn't actually work and they will crash and burn when they try it. Let the guys try that if they want to, but it so doesn't work. Well, it works on a particular type of gal, and she knows them for what they are too usually. It won't work for a lot of these guys on here because they don't have anything to back up their talk or anything that girls who go for the PUA types are looking for at the time. PUA crap is OOT BS that almost goes directly back to the 70's "swinger" approach. I've looked at some PUA s**t on the internet and it's hilarious. I could just see the guy writing it all decked out in his sans-a-belt pants, his white shoes, his shiney shirt unbuttoned halfway to show the chest hair and gold chains and also the required mustache that goes with the whole thing. Even if he's not wearing it, his lines are going to make it seem like he should be. PUA isn't a threat, it's a joke.

Here are some problems I have with this. What if the school authorities had a rule that was the complete opposite. If one is supposed to respect one's elders what if one group of elder's commandments and edicts contradict another group of elder's? How does a child display respect and how does the child obey? Who does he obey?

Here is an issue that I believe Momsparky brought up in the parent's forum. What if one thought the person hit you and was being a bully but really it was a case of being an accident? This was an issue that her son ran into? How does one suss out what is what?

Oliveoilmom, I have a question for you about common sense and the idea of it. How do we have a "common sense" that truthfully is in common if we all disagree upon so much and we all seem to have varying experiences and we have different genetic make ups? We have varying cultures and varying beliefs around the world who more than likely will claim their beliefs are "common sense?" I have the feeling even that fellow priest you knew said that certain things were common sense? There were people who said things like the earth was flat and it was common sense.

What exactly does common sense mean and what is the essence of it? How is it truthfully reliable if so many things throughout human history that have been claimed as common sense have been disproven?

The schools here have a rule against fighting at school, but it happens every day. They know that kids will fight and most teachers agree with the "hit them back" philosophy but can't support it at school because of the political climate over everything that basically forced all schools to impliment a zero tolerance policy. When my younger son was being picked on before and wouldn't stand up for himself one of the male teachers took him aside and told him that what he was about to say went against school policy and he would deny it if asked, but told my son to "beat his ass" about the bully. This teacher knew me and my husband and knew that like most parents down here, we held that view as well and was supporting us by telling him that. So the kid gets an in school detention or even a suspension? Every parent I know would be fine with that if it was for their kid standing up for themselves.

The thing about accidents is always something to watch out for. Of course you ask the kid what actually happened before you tell them to hit back.

As for respecting adults when they have different views, well that's always going to be an issue isn't it?

Well, it is possible to have differing views without disrespecting the other person.

OK, common sense in this instance would be not equating a handful of whiners on a forum's comments with something that would have any impact on anybody, anywhere. If a guy running for office, or a guy who made policy in a large business was out there running off at the mouth and saying those same things then that guy poses a threat to women, not some guy who is powerless over pretty much everything and everybody. Sure, yell at him about it, but ignore him otherwise. It's like being able to tell the difference between a garden snake and a cobra. They are turning garden snakes into cobras and putting them on a plane and just waiting on Samuel L Jackson with this overreaction, I believe.

Common sense is the ability to see the obvious and differentiate between something that you should take action on and something to ignore. It's also the ability to know what to do when you do take action. We don't normally have it as aspies, but it's possible to learn it, and many times that means believing somebdoy who tells you that you are blowing something out of proportion.

No matter how outlandish a cause is, you can always find some supporters. That doesn't mean it's even in the same ball park with correct.

But who decides what is something you should take action on an what isn't? You? Common sense is usually labelled as such because it's "common". What we have here is a disagreement, because some think what you describe IS sexism and some think it's not, but then you call your side of the argument "common sense", but I'm not sure how you can do that, because it doesn't sound like common sense to me and it seems as though others agree.

edit: Also, no matter how much you call a cause 'outlandish' that doesn't make it correct either.

It's not common sense to say these whiners are being sexist because it's obviously not sexism that's fueling it but frustration. Also, while their comments can be frustrating and infurating, they don't have any impact on anyone who isn't reading their threads. It's people stating their opinions, not people planning to act on them or suggesting others act on them. They aren't saying that women are incompetent or need to be put "in our place in the kitchen" or denied rights, etc. They are saying things like "women only want jerks", they are saying "women only want guys to spend money on them and are goldiggers". Nobody believes them or takes that seriously and those comments don't incite anything at all.

Please tell me how some loser making those two statements I posted above is actually hurting any woman, any where.

I've got you by a year.

I suppose sexist generalizations are annoying, but usually they're made when someone's in a bad mood and just someone to take it out on. It's not right, but I honestly don't think it's something that's going to be fixed.
http://www.wrongplanet.net/postp4962282.html#4962282
This guy regretted it later and asked a mod to lock his thread. ^^

But if it's the same people continually spewing hate, then I think's it a legitimate problem.

Since I don't remember everyone agreeing on what is sexist and what isn't, I think it would be difficult to make a rule change.

Last edited by ReticentJaeger on 29 Jun 2014, 7:57 pm, edited 2 times in total.

*Sigh* I don't need to. There have been many women on here telling you/whoever will listen how the sexism on WP affects them, so I'm not sure what more you're expecting from me. I think the women have been much better at speaking for themselves in that regard.



No, perhaps not those words exactly no, but they have been saying "Women are [insert some other random sexist thing other than the 2 you listed]". You seem to have a very narrow view of what sexism is.

I've asked this question once before and you didn't answer me. If I were to say, "All black people are thieves!" just because one black person robbed me would that not be racist? Does racism/sexism/what-ever-ism only apply to actions and not words or something? If so, that doesn't seem to go with everything I've ever learned about the concepts.

What if your idea of what is obvious is different than my idea of what is obvious? To me, it is obvious that one can't just gain confidence. One has to learn the things that lead confidence. To me it is obvious that one can't just develop confidence in a vacuum. Yet, a lot of people seem to persist in this belief.

To me, it is obvious that one is not in complete control of his life especially if nothing is guaranteed in life. I thought the answers to the questions on the learner's permit test for driving would obvious. I bombed it the first time because I chose not to study and assume the answers would be common sense and obvious.

Others would've said that it was common sense that one should've studied the manual and others would've agreed with me. If we all have differing views, fallacious reasoning at different points, differing personalities, and what not then how is common sense truthfully reliable. It is supposed to be something that is in common and even some of the police criticize civilians all of the time for not having common sense. What exactly is in common and what is obvious? How does one suss out what is what and who is the final arbitrator of what is important and what is not and what is the reasoning either way?



Who declares what is outlandish? What does outlandish even mean? What is the essence of this? Wasn't Women's Suffarage considered an outlandish thing at one point? Who is the final arbitrator of is outlandish? What rubric do we go by and how does one tell the reliability of this rubric?

The problem is what is obvious is dependent on one's interpretation, perceptions, thoughts, and experiences. How is common sense truthfully something that is based upon sound reasoning that one can rely upon? I don't get it and it makes no sense to me.

Last edited by cubedemon6073 on 29 Jun 2014, 8:11 pm, edited 1 time in total.