Women and sexism.

[Nirvash Type TheEND]

Then why did you bother posting?

Because I'm a sassy bitch.

Forums: probably not your thing then. May I suggest blogging?

No instant gratification for my salt during blogging.

[Nerotysia]

See? The people who actually care will follow up the claims I make. -nods-

...are you satirizing yourself?

[Nirvash Type TheEND]

See? The people who actually care will follow up the claims I make. -nods-

...are you satirizing yourself?

I see you're not one for the listening thing. I'm done with you. You can go now.

[Nerotysia]

...are you satirizing yourself?

I see you're not one for the listening thing. I'm done with you. You can go now.

Cute.

[Greater Corea]

In short I believe a woman can be sexist towards the man as pointed out by some fellow NSGers.
Sometimes to the extent of Misandry which is something looked over by most people I believe.
Overall, interesting thread but I'm not convinced by OPs arguments at all, mostly due to source bias.

[The Batorys]

What do I think about it?

Mostly I'm stunned by the fact that there's apparently a new person on NSG who I actually agree with and like.

So basically I agree. It's basically the same as why "reverse racism" can't be a thing (as excellently explained in the "Fear of a Brown Planet" comedy clip on the subject).

The ability to exempt yourself from the moral consequences of bad behavior and hypocrisy? 'Cause that's all it looks like to most of us.

Racism and sexism are patterns of legitimized prejudice and discrimination.

People can be prejudiced against white people, but because there isn't a social structure of oppression against them, it would be inaccurate to describe this as "racism" exactly.

[Forsher]

The ability to exempt yourself from the moral consequences of bad behavior and hypocrisy? 'Cause that's all it looks like to most of us.

Racism and sexism are patterns of legitimized prejudice and discrimination.

People can be prejudiced against white people, but because there isn't a social structure of oppression against them, it would be inaccurate to describe this as "racism" exactly.

No.

[Nerotysia]

The ability to exempt yourself from the moral consequences of bad behavior and hypocrisy? 'Cause that's all it looks like to most of us.

Racism and sexism are patterns of legitimized prejudice and discrimination.

People can be prejudiced against white people, but because there isn't a social structure of oppression against them, it would be inaccurate to describe this as "racism" exactly.

Why?

[AiliailiA]

See? The people who actually care will follow up the claims I make. -nods-

You could return the favor!

Though statistically there are sex differences in white matter and gray matter percentage, this ratio is directly related to brain size, and some argue these sex differences in gray and white matter percentage are caused by the average size difference between men and women.[42][43][44][45] Others argue that these differences remain after controlling for brain volume.[32]

Just looking at the number of numbers of citations, it's possible that there are fewer others and more somes.

some argue these sex differences in gray and white matter percentage are caused by the average size difference between men and women ... 4 citations

Others argue that these differences remain after controlling for brain volume. ... 1

Forsher is being polite. But NOT politely SUPPORTING your claim about grey/white matter differences by sex.

[Krieg-Deathworld]

What a bunch of slag. "Women can't be sexist" "Blacks can't be racist", yada yada yada. Do you not understand how stupid and unforgivably arrogant you sound? Redefining words to suit your purposes, calling people bigots purely because they don't agree with you? Pathetic. And you claim to be for equality? Shame on each and every one of you you reskinned neo-nazi's. Bunch of oversensitive, pampered morons. And I won't even start on those damned MRA's. Honestly, what is wrong with y'all? It's like you are both in separate worlds that are completely different from reality. Grow up.

[AiliailiA]

A white person living in a black suburb is a "minority" and if they experience discrimination it will have the same negative effect on them as white-on-black discimination by a white majority elsewhere. And I would say, just as negative an effect on wider society: as in either case it drives the minority person away and ends their attempts to integrate.

How does this relate to sexism? There are only a few places (oil rigs, remote mining or forestry towns) where women are a minority in the 'community'. Generally men and women live together in equal numbers. But if you look at workplaces you see the analogy. If women deserve legal protection against discrimination in a sawmill, then men deserve legal protection against discrimination in a primary school.

[Russels Orbiting Teapot]

The reason that I've felt that this argument is one I need to have, that this hill is worth dying on, is this:

This attitude is ruining the credibility of modern feminism.

At the same time when feminists have drawn a line against the silencing of the experiences of women in a variety of life situations, they are using a silencing tactic.

They are denying the use of a word to people that feel it is the word that best describes what they have experienced.

In many cases these people are trying to be empathic, to imagine themselves in situations where they have experienced similar things, to form a foundation of solidarity.

And the response is 'no you silly boy, you cannot experience sexism by definition. You will never be a part of the solution.'

This is what is alienating men from the movement. And men are half the people that need to be convinced in order for feminism to achieve its goals.

It's a silencing tactic and it's hypocritical and the longer that feminists cling to it the further they'll sink.

[AiliailiA]

The reason that I've felt that this argument is one I need to have, that this hill is worth dying on, is this:

This attitude is ruining the credibility of modern feminism.

At the same time when feminists have drawn a line against the silencing of the experiences of women in a variety of life situations, they are using a silencing tactic.

They are denying the use of a word to people that feel it is the word that best describes what they have experienced.

In many cases these people are trying to be empathic, to imagine themselves in situations where they have experienced similar things, to form a foundation of solidarity.

And the response is 'no you silly boy, you cannot experience sexism by definition. You will never be a part of the solution.'

This is what is alienating men from the movement. And men are half the people that need to be convinced in order for feminism to achieve its goals.

It's a silencing tactic and it's hypocritical and the longer that feminists cling to it the further they'll sink.

Well said. Let's put a label on that kind of feminist. How about "exclusionary feminists" ...

[Saiwania]

A white person living in a black suburb is a "minority" and if they experience discrimination it will have the same negative effect on them as white-on-black discrimination by a white majority elsewhere. And I would say, just as negative an effect on wider society: as in either case it drives the minority person away and ends their attempts to integrate.

Racism doesn't necessarily have to be seen as something negative, provided it isn't taken too far. it is no one's fault what racial group they are born into, but one can still choose to embrace their place in the world in acknowledging what race they are. I'll admit as much that integration is among the things of highest priority that I want to sabotage, in order to ensure that the racial communities where I live largely stay distinguishably separate from each other.

[Hyfling]

The ability to exempt yourself from the moral consequences of bad behavior and hypocrisy? 'Cause that's all it looks like to most of us.

Racism and sexism are patterns of legitimized prejudice and discrimination.

People can be prejudiced against white people, but because there isn't a social structure of oppression against them, it would be inaccurate to describe this as "racism" exactly.

NSG continues its slow, depressing descent into Tumblr 2.0

[Russels Orbiting Teapot]

Racism and sexism are patterns of legitimized prejudice and discrimination.

People can be prejudiced against white people, but because there isn't a social structure of oppression against them, it would be inaccurate to describe this as "racism" exactly.

No it wouldn't. The idea that it's only racism if the group being prejudiced against is the one generally in power is a bullshit revision to the word that is not widely accepted. You are trying to censor people by denying them the use of the most appropriate words to describe the situation they find themselves in.

[Geilinor]

The ability to exempt yourself from the moral consequences of bad behavior and hypocrisy? 'Cause that's all it looks like to most of us.

Racism and sexism are patterns of legitimized prejudice and discrimination.

People can be prejudiced against white people, but because there isn't a social structure of oppression against them, it would be inaccurate to describe this as "racism" exactly.

Racism and sexism are actions based on prejudice by individuals or groups. Where are these new definitions coming from?

[Nirvash Type TheEND]

Racism and sexism are patterns of legitimized prejudice and discrimination.

People can be prejudiced against white people, but because there isn't a social structure of oppression against them, it would be inaccurate to describe this as "racism" exactly.

Racism and sexism are actions based on prejudice by individuals or groups. Where are these new definitions coming from?

Tumblr.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

Racism and sexism are patterns of legitimized prejudice and discrimination.

People can be prejudiced against white people, but because there isn't a social structure of oppression against them, it would be inaccurate to describe this as "racism" exactly.

No it wouldn't. The idea that it's only racism if the group being prejudiced against is the one generally in power is a bullshit revision to the word that is not widely accepted. You are trying to censor people by denying them the use of the most appropriate words to describe the situation they find themselves in.

Basically, this.

The fact of the matter is that no matter what the word is, everyone can agree discrimination and bigotry is bad. What we're seeing though is not a problem of feminism becoming radicalized, but rather feminism still trying to grasp a modern, accurate narrative, when we are experiencing a post-modernistic approach to social sciences.

[Nazi Flower Power]

Am I the only one that feels like using the terms misogyny/misandry is a bit of an overstatement in a lot of the cases it is used? Perhaps I'm in the wrong here but misogyny or misandry are very strong terms to use in my opinion. Wouldn't it be more appropriate to use something like male/female prejudice in a lot of cases or just sexism against females/males?

Yeah, "sexism" is a broader category. "Misogyny" and "misandry" imply you dislike one sex or the other, whereas "sexism" can also mean pigeonholing or stereotyping people, even if you don't mean it in a hateful way.

[Aidannadia]

Racism and sexism are actions based on prejudice by individuals or groups. Where are these new definitions coming from?

Tumblr.

Well, actually they are using one of the definitions of sexism/racism because it can be used to describe what they are referring to. To say that how they are presenting racism/sexism is the only definition and all others are invalid, however, is rather close-minded and unfair.

Racism

Sexism

[Nazi Flower Power]

In case anyone missed this and could reply.

Given that the Nation of Islam is exclusively an American organization, "white" in this case would refer to White Anglo-Saxon Protestant caucasians.

I'm not white anymore? When did that happen?

[Nazi Flower Power]

It means women and blacks can't use the establishments of society to leverage their prejudices against another group. Otherwise men would be staying in the kitchen making sammiches and babies, and white kids would be riding the school to prison pipeline.

Except that women can use the establishments of society to leverage their prejudices against another group. So can men. So can whites. So can blacks.

The claim in the OP - and that you're making - breaks down to two distinct implicit claims. Both of those implicit claims are wrong.

1. "___"-ism is the combination of power + prejudice. (This is an inappropriate redefinition of sexism, racism, classism, etc being pushed by certain circles.)
2. Group X has the universal trait of lacking power. This is flatly false.

If a particular US bureaucrat is black, and discriminates against a white person on the basis of race, s/he has both power and prejudice, and in truth meets, as an individual, the redefinition of #1. And this is true in spite of the fact that blacks, in the US, are pretty much the closest thing to a universally disadvantaged ("oppressed") group you will find in the US. (Women are very far from being such a group.)

The truth of the matter is that individuals who are members of nearly any group can be found in positions with enough power to exercise their prejudices... and that even the groups, as groups, are not powerless, either.

What's the purpose of this act of redefinition? Well, since society has acknowledged that sexism is bad, trying to redefine sexism to exclude discrimination against men is yet another way of trying to avoid addressing gendered issues that impact men negatively. It's a morally bankrupt effort to defend sexism, racism, and other forms of prejudice and discrimination.

So much this.

[Arumdaum]

Racism and sexism are actions based on prejudice by individuals or groups. Where are these new definitions coming from?

Tumblr.

im beginning to think that tumblr is the boogeywoman of ns

[Threlizdun]

Yes, women can be sexist and people of color can be racist. Admitting that does not make one any less of a feminist or negate the importance of feminism, but rather it is an acceptance of reality. Yes, we need to discuss the existence of the patriarchy and male privilege. Yes, even though those terms make many people uncomfortable they still exist. Absolving women from guilt when they hold degrading views to men and non-binary individuals does nothing to help anyone however, and such narrow-minded views of femininity serve to constrain and oppress women rather than liberate them. Honestly about half of the people making these claims seem to end up being male trolls acting to vilify feminism, though there unfortunately are some poor women that actually buy into this nonsense. It's best to calmly explain why what they are doing is harming the movement and doing nothing to actually help women overcome oppression.

Not everyone has the same idea about how we can overcome oppression.
You should respect different opinions, instead of insulting these thoughts describing it as "such narrow-minded views of femininity serve to constrain and oppress women rather than liberate them"

Bold words for someone who has spent much of their time on this site attacking sex-positive feminism, body-positivity, and trans people and their supporters.

I think you should use your energy calling out men instead of calling out women prioritizing the issues of women.

I call out people who support oppressive positions regardless of sex or gender identity. So far you appear to only be interested in cis women who conform to your expectations of femininity.

Most nowadays "feminism" seems to me a joke, because it has been tuned down and even misleaded in order to appeal to men, that's why is now useless and even hurting.

No, it has simply come to embrace the fact that true liberation means getting to decide who you want to be without others telling you how to behave. Do you want to be a doctor? Do it. Do you want to be a teacher? Do it. Do you want to be a housewife? Do it. Third wave feminism has come to accept that as long as you stand for gender equality you can be a feminist, regardless of what your personal preference for how to live your life is. That is the ideal we should strive for. Anything else is merely a cage.

You writed about your experience but that's anecdotal, my experience is that men think we are beneath them and so they treat us accordingly, either by being condescending with mansplaining bs or simply by being abusive.

Where did I ever challenge the notion that women are commonly being oppressed by men? I recognized that most societies around the world are patriarchal and that such systems must be abolished. All I'm saying is that pretending that women are incapable of oppression is ridiculous. That doesn't mean that men don't have privileges or that women aren't being mistreated.

A really equal society is absolutely far away from us: pornography is pervasive, women all around the world are still being killed and raped and harassed - and that affects all the world, even first world countries

I will agree that we are a long way off from equality and that rape culture is having a devastating impact on the world. I will not agree to your ridiculous comparison between pornography and rape.

Gender roles are being putted in again, more than ever, misleaded as a "biological fact" by transactivists, and women are not allowed anymore to form their own safe spaces without fear of being harassed or even shut down.

Combatting gender roles and forming safe spaces is important. You do not understand the psychology of trans persons however. The fact that gender has a mental basis, largely believed to be rooted in the structure of the hypothalamus, does not mean that gender roles are biological, but merely that gender identity has a neurological basis. That doesn't further oppression. Quite the contrary, it erodes it. Your insistence on excluding and villifying trans people and their allies however certainly does further oppression.

Every step we take, for every single step we take, it seems to me like we take two steps back too.
As you said, women must overcome their oppression, and that's why real feminism is needed now, now more than ever, but in fact real feminism has never been weaker than now. Most "feminists" have become supporters of pornographers and the so-called "male rights" - basically they're, it seems to me, supporting misogyny under the guise of "empowerment".
That's why gender abolitionism is needed. Radical feminism, not ludicrous "egalitarian" bullshit.

I have struggled for years now to gain acceptance as a woman. You do not get to take that away from me. Gender abolitionism is a revolting concept that seeks to strip away our identities. We need to eliminate gender roles, not gender identity. Radical feminism is necessary, but it must be about equality for members of all genders and sexes however they wish to express it. For me, that means raising awareness about the oppression faced by women and non-binary people, explaining how patriarchy even harms men (albeit to a far lesser extent), raise awareness of rape culture and how pervasive rape, sexual assault, and human trafficking are, support the rights of sex workers so that they can be safe and treated with dignity, support the rights of trans people, and work to bring about liberation however I can. On the side, I'll wear dresses, put on makeup, flirt with cute people if they are comfortable with it, watch porn, and have sex, because I'm someone who enjoys these things and I am no less of a feminist for doing so.