Sexism: Still A Problem?

[Namyre]

I think you explained that very well. Each sex has its physical differences, but each individual person has its personal differences.

[ConjoinedWeasels]

Sexism is still a huge problem. Examples:

1. Women make less money than men do

2. Female breasts are sexualized and tabooed, while men can walk around without their shirts on and no one will bat an eye.

3. The term "you fight/play/throw like a girl" is used offensively

4. You only ever see women sexualized in ads for things. Lemme tell you, if we put men in the same clothing/positions as half of the women in ads, the problem would be obvious.

There are so many more...

[Guenhwyvar7373]

I apologize if some of this has been said before-- I'll be perfectly honest, I haven't read through all of those pages!-- but here are a few of my opinions.

First off, I'm female, and I have a bit of a non-typical view. I see sexism in places where other people don't, and fail to see it in places other people do. I've honestly never found that women are hyper-sexualized in ads, more so than men; maybe I'm just not reading the magazines that contain those ads, though? Since everyone else seems to think otherwise, I'd say it's quite probable that you guys are right on that one.

With regards to "you fight like a girl!"-- let's be honest, I'm sure most of us have seen girl fights. Most of us can't really fight for junk when it comes to technique [ myself included! ], but girl fights can get vicious.

It is perfectly true that men and women have different types of minds and work ethics. While IQ is not regarded as a precisely accurate measure of intellect in modern academia, multiple studies have shown that there is a statistically significant difference in IQ between genders, with males leading by approximately 3-5 points during young adulthood. [ Though females do appear to lead slightly before adolescence and in advanced ages. ] At the same time, many behavioral studies have shown that females tend to work harder and more consistently in school during adolescence. It's not that one gender is better; it's that they're different. I don't take it as an insult if someone mentions that women are better at understanding people than at understanding graphs, because statistically, it's been highly supported. And is it really an insult to be told that I can understand people well?

The one thing that I perceive as sexist [ and this may be only me ] is the sheer number of flyers that I see in the school every day exhorting me to attend the "Women in Engineering" day, or the sheer number of scholarships for women going into scientific fields. I was raised to be self-reliant, and quickly became more or less libertarian. Knowing that I have a higher probability to enter the college of my choice merely because I'm female jabs me right in the pride.

Personally, I believe the only solution is to stop considering sexism to be an issue, and make job applications and college admissions gender-blind [ and race-blind, while we're at it! ]. It's not right to admit unqualified students, just as it's not right to exclude them on basis of gender. And only when we stop treating gender as an issue [ or a separating factor of any sort ] will it cease to be an issue.

[crazyflight]

2. Female breasts are sexualized and tabooed, while men can walk around without their shirts on and no one will bat an eye.

3. The term "you fight/play/throw like a girl" is used offensively

4. You only ever see women sexualized in ads for things. Lemme tell you, if we put men in the same clothing/positions as half of the women in ads, the problem would be obvious.

There are so many more...

Most men don't have breasts, unless they have gynecomastia. Female breasts are sexualized because it so happens that straight males and lesbian girls get sexually aroused by them. They are tabooed in general speech because the subject of female breasts has a direct connotation with sexual activity in and of itself. They have many "uses" in the sexual world, in ways that the male torso doesn't in any way. And to be honest, if a particularly fine-bodied young man walked by with no shirt, I'm sure some eyes would be batted. Female breasts are just more sexually related (and not to mention, more sensitive physically, but that's another argument) than a man's chest.
And in many cases, it would be indecent for a man to walk around shirtless.
But it's just a social norm that women shouldn't walk around shirtless, and I honestly don't think that's sexist at all. Maybe in the smallest ways. But not really.

I haven't heard someone say "you hit like a girl" in years (id est, when I was in elementary school), and personally, I've heard it used as a stereotype argument more than I've ever heard it used as a real insult. So, no. I've been hit hard by girls. Ouch.

Have you ever seen underwear ads? Hollister bags?
And "putting men in women's positions..." No one wants to see a bikini commercial with a man wearing the bikini. In the same light, women don't belong in commercials advertising underwear for men.

I hope this wasn't too harsh. I didn't mean to offend anyone.

[Intempestivity]

I made some sweeping statements earlier in this thread. Because my basis for comparison was an extremely sexist state that I lived in for several years, sexism in the country I currently live in "didn't seem so bad".

I retract that. Sexism is everywhere, and it's so ingrained in our psyches that we accept it as the norm despite it staring us in the face.

Male privilege breeds sexism. For those who don't know, privilege is the advantages the majority group has in that they (the group) are viewed as the norm, and others are viewed as deviations from the norm. In the society that we live in, there are many different types of privileges, but the one specific to this thread is male privilege.

Our society is male-centric. Studies have shown that in groups where the male/female split is 50/50, men perceive that there is a female majority in the room. When the split is closer to 70/30 (consequently the most common male/female ratio in most aspects, from entertainment to business, despite there being a 50/50 split among the population as a whole), it is viewed as being equal.

In the world of business, the sexism is stark. The further up the management chain you go, the less women there are. Women are often viewed as "not strong" enough to handle the demands of upper management. There's the "damned if you do, doomed if you don't" double bind for women managers, in that if they do assert themselves as a man would in the same position, they are viewed as a bitch (a man would be viewed as taking charge). If, however, they choose to manage more by involving people, they are viewed as "too soft" for the job (men would be viewed as being open and friendly towards their staff while still maintaining a position of authority). They have actually had to make a baseline for companies to have a minimum of 30% women on their advisory boards and in upper management, because so many companies had less than that (many had 0%). When this mandate was introduced, it was made clear that companies were to work hard to go past the baseline, but you know what happened? Those companies who already met the 30% target projected their plans to remain at 30% and had to be further challenged to take it past the bare minimum.

Diversity and inclusion initiatives HAVE to exist in businesses to ensure that women are not tossed to one side or consistently overlooked in favour of their male counterparts. Despite this, many men in businesses tend to take the viewpoint of "women want to work in lower positions and part-time so they can stay at home and raise a family". This is something I have actually heard said by more than one man at my place of work. I have also heard said at my work "Women only care about bags and shoes, bags and shoes, or hair and makeup, hair and makeup." "Women don't get higher positions because they don't bother to apply for them." And a group of senior managers sat together at a table at lunch and had a little male bonding moment, in which they listed all of the female senior managers by name and their worst attributes (chiefly, that they're all "bitches" who "don't know their place").

And this is just a sample of sexism that goes on in a place of business; this isn't including all of the harassment on the street that women get, how women are expected to behave, how we're expected to smile for men and allow them to invade our personal space, how the word "no" from a woman is "playing hard to get" and apparently an open invitation to continuing harassment and countless other examples from life in general.

So, does sexism exist? It sure does. It's rampant.

Anyone who says it doesn't, or who says that women fighting for equality are "bitches who make it worse" are playing in to the patriarchy's hand and helping keep women under men's thumbs. Fighting for change is messy. It is difficult. It has a lot of backlash. But it is necessary. Think about the racism that was everywhere in the early 1900s (and in some places, still is quite alive and well, unfortunately). Racism is little more than white privilege (white is the norm). The protests that happened then were viewed as unnecessary, because they felt that people who weren't white didn't know their place and were just making it worse for themselves. It made the people with the privilege angry, because change does.

Sound like any arguments you've heard against women trying to fight sexism? People who are in the privilege pool have a fishbowl effect. They are generally swimming around, blissfully unaware of their own privilege, but everyone outside of the fishbowl can see it clearly. Those inside the bowl don't even know that the said bowl exists.

[IllusionQueen]

Don't live in the U.S.. Don't know.

But I always hear crazy things about Americans so I'm gonna assume yes

[Raneth]

Don't live in the U.S.. Don't know.

But I always hear crazy things about Americans so I'm gonna assume yes

Hi there,

Please keep in mind this is the Hall of Speakers section, which is a bit different than other sections of the forum. Topics here should be discussed in a bit more depth. Please take a look at this topic to get a handle on the rules here: 42-hall-of-speakers/96929-rules-of-cond ... ction.html

[Kestrad]

I apologize if some of this has been said before-- I'll be perfectly honest, I haven't read through all of those pages!-- but here are a few of my opinions.

First off, I'm female, and I have a bit of a non-typical view. I see sexism in places where other people don't, and fail to see it in places other people do. I've honestly never found that women are hyper-sexualized in ads, more so than men; maybe I'm just not reading the magazines that contain those ads, though? Since everyone else seems to think otherwise, I'd say it's quite probable that you guys are right on that one.

With regards to "you fight like a girl!"-- let's be honest, I'm sure most of us have seen girl fights. Most of us can't really fight for junk when it comes to technique [ myself included! ], but girl fights can get vicious.

It is perfectly true that men and women have different types of minds and work ethics. While IQ is not regarded as a precisely accurate measure of intellect in modern academia, multiple studies have shown that there is a statistically significant difference in IQ between genders, with males leading by approximately 3-5 points during young adulthood. [ Though females do appear to lead slightly before adolescence and in advanced ages. ] At the same time, many behavioral studies have shown that females tend to work harder and more consistently in school during adolescence. It's not that one gender is better; it's that they're different. I don't take it as an insult if someone mentions that women are better at understanding people than at understanding graphs, because statistically, it's been highly supported. And is it really an insult to be told that I can understand people well?

The one thing that I perceive as sexist [ and this may be only me ] is the sheer number of flyers that I see in the school every day exhorting me to attend the "Women in Engineering" day, or the sheer number of scholarships for women going into scientific fields. I was raised to be self-reliant, and quickly became more or less libertarian. Knowing that I have a higher probability to enter the college of my choice merely because I'm female jabs me right in the pride.

Personally, I believe the only solution is to stop considering sexism to be an issue, and make job applications and college admissions gender-blind [ and race-blind, while we're at it! ]. It's not right to admit unqualified students, just as it's not right to exclude them on basis of gender. And only when we stop treating gender as an issue [ or a separating factor of any sort ] will it cease to be an issue.

Your argument sounds reasonable, but I'd love to see actual links to the statistics you cite. Many studies regarding IQ/EQ/what have you differences between genders have some inherent biases in the way they are set up, and there is a lot of academic critique flying around about their methodologies and the accuracy of their results. Also, your argument about "you fight like a girl" doesn't address the actual point, which is that regardless of how vicious girls can actually get, the point of that statement is that it accepts as a unspoken truth that girls are inherently weaker than boys, and that is a problematic message for girls to hear.

However, the main thing I want to address is the part I have bolded. First of all, you do *not* have a higher probability of entering the college of your choice just because you are female, at least not in the sense that you are using it. In the average US college, the percentage of female students is significantly higher than males. Forbes has a thoughtful breakdown of the percentages, though my point is that many colleges are no longer actively seeking to attract more girls. The gender gap where girls are outstripping boys in college is actually getting to be a point of concern for boys and higher education. So while statistically speaking you may have a higher chance of getting accepted because more women overall go to college, it is not because colleges will specifically choose you because you are a woman.

Also, why are these "Women in Engineering Day" posters and scholarships bad? Having a Women in Engineering day hardly makes girls have a higher chance of getting into college, except for maybe encouraging women to apply for programs they otherwise may not have considered. And scholarships are almost always targeted towards some group. You could get a scholarship for making a prom costume out of duct tape. You could get a scholarship for liking to drink a certain soda. There are scholarships for men, too, though perhaps less common. And it sounds like you may come from a relatively financially secure background here. It's good that you're self reliant. Many people, however, simply do not have the financial background to attend college if they do not get scholarships. The fact that this amount of money has been set aside for women (who still have to go through the work of applying to colleges!) is not inherently sexist, or else we can start venturing into the absurd and say that scholarships for people who like cats discriminates against those with allergies, and scholarships for people with specific illnesses discriminates against the healthy.

Also, here are some statistics for the gender breakdown in engineering: Pdf by Society of Women Engineers
Look at the chart on page 3. Note the highest number on the Y axis. Now look at page 4. There are more undergraduate women in college than men, yet only 20% of engineering students are women. Basically look at all their charts; it shows a clear lack of women in STEM fields in general despite how many women are in college, with even less in "hard" sciences (math, physics, cs, etc.) than in "soft" ones (social sciences). (Actually, the number of women in bio is climbing fairly quickly but it's often considered a "softer" science than math or physics, but that's a discussion for another time.) While this publication is somewhat old, the number of women in STEM is still disproportionately low today. In addition, only one or two women's colleges in the entire nation have their own engineering program. Clearly, there is sexism in play here--and it certainly does not favor women, as you argued.

There are a few counterarguments you can make in order to claim that sexism isn't a factor, one being the IQ difference you brought up earlier. Assuming that the methodology in those studies is completely sound and has no bias whatsoever, a difference of 3-5 IQ points on average should not translate to 60% fewer women than men in engineering.

Or you may say that this is just a reflection of women not being as self-reliant as you are. Perhaps that is the case. Do you see how that is still a reflection of sexism? Our societal values often tell us that women should be reliant. While it's great that your family taught you to rely only on yourself, generally it's okay and even expected that a woman is the one who quits her job to take care of her family or children, whereas it's the man's job to be the "breadwinner."

The root of the problem is that historically, STEM has been a very male-dominated field. Some women fought very hard to be allowed to participate in STEM, and were still shoved to the sidelines in favor of their male colleagues. Emmy Noether, for example, had to fight for the right to study mathematics and ended up having to audit her classes entirely because she was female, and still published a thesis and graduated in spite of this. After graduating, she was only allowed to teach in the name of male professors and wasn't even paid for her work at first. Despite all these hardships, she came up with some pretty revolutionary work in abstract algebra. It's amazing that she was able to accomplish this in spite of all the obstacles she faced solely because she was a woman. Imagine how many more female mathematicians we might have to look up to today if women *hadn't* had to face such huge obstacles. Also, Noether's family supported her; imagine how many women's families didn't. Even if those women had the same determination, eventually their options would rapidly have become "pursue a more 'womanly' pursuit, or starve." While things certainly aren't as overtly sexist today, women in STEM still constantly have to "prove" they are as good; that they belong in a STEM field. Many others don't even consider that they *can* do STEM because they think it is something men do. I mean, be honest with yourself. When you read about a "scientist" or a "doctor" or a "researcher" or a "programmer," is your default mental image male or female?

To get back to the rest of your argument, though, I agree with you that admissions should be based on merit only! And I agree that we have to stop treating gender as an issue for it to stop being an issue. The problem, though, is that our society currently has an ingrained culture that doesn't treat both genders equally. Until that gets addressed, gender will never not be an issue. Simply ignoring it won't make that go away; it'll simply be tacit agreement that this is okay. So yes, one day, maybe we'll get to that stage where all of us can simply not treat gender as an issue. But that time has not come yet.

[MissMurderPaws]

2. Female breasts are sexualized and tabooed, while men can walk around without their shirts on and no one will bat an eye.

3. The term "you fight/play/throw like a girl" is used offensively

4. You only ever see women sexualized in ads for things. Lemme tell you, if we put men in the same clothing/positions as half of the women in ads, the problem would be obvious.

There are so many more...

Most men don't have breasts, unless they have gynecomastia. Female breasts are sexualized because it so happens that straight males and lesbian girls get sexually aroused by them. They are tabooed in general speech because the subject of female breasts has a direct connotation with sexual activity in and of itself. They have many "uses" in the sexual world, in ways that the male torso doesn't in any way. And to be honest, if a particularly fine-bodied young man walked by with no shirt, I'm sure some eyes would be batted. Female breasts are just more sexually related (and not to mention, more sensitive physically, but that's another argument) than a man's chest.
And in many cases, it would be indecent for a man to walk around shirtless.
But it's just a social norm that women shouldn't walk around shirtless, and I honestly don't think that's sexist at all. Maybe in the smallest ways. But not really.

I haven't heard someone say "you hit like a girl" in years (id est, when I was in elementary school), and personally, I've heard it used as a stereotype argument more than I've ever heard it used as a real insult. So, no. I've been hit hard by girls. Ouch.

Have you ever seen underwear ads? Hollister bags?
And "putting men in women's positions..." No one wants to see a bikini commercial with a man wearing the bikini. In the same light, women don't belong in commercials advertising underwear for men.

I hope this wasn't too harsh. I didn't mean to offend anyone.

I don't think it's harsh, more as it is a little biased. You're speaking from the point of view of a man, who hasn't had to deal with the same oversexualization women do.

I think that the point is what is the difference between a males chest in public, and a females chest. I for one do find arousal when I see the chest of a man. If it's just the breast part of it, (I do not mean this, it is only an example) Why can't flat-chested women, or overwight men get to walk around without/with a shirt? It's easy for a man to say something like that when they've never dealt with having breasts. It becomes almost painful when you know that some men would be far more interested in how your breasts bounce without a bra, then what kind of person you are.

I've heard men say you throw/kick like a girl even still. Whether or not you use it as an insult is irrelevant, because you're still saying that it's somehow wrong to have a womans strength, or that women are just weaker. It's like saying "Why are all men so dense?" it's offensive, because if you don't view yourself as dense, or you don't think the same way, how does some random girl have the right to insult you like that?

I think it's a little unfair to say nobody wants to asee men like that. You're a guy, and unless you're homosexual, I don't think you would. It's not about men wearing bikinis, it's about men being sexualized int he same way.

Let me bring up an example. We didn't bat an eyelash that Robin Thicke was getting twerked against, we cheered him on. Now Miley? oh she's such a disgraceful slut, who could do something like that? She's a whore. These are all things iv'e heard. Yes, she is being a little overly sexual, but it's HER CHOICE. Nobody even really paid attention to the fact that the dude had a girlfriend, or a wife-- Something of that sort.

As a woman, I feel like it's harder for you to understand--I can't say you haven't, but you must not have to go through the same insecurities, fears of rape, prejudices as a woman does. I doubt you've ever been worried that you're going to be raped by the man who seemed to be following you home, or have to dress a very specific way because if you reveal too little you're boring, you're childish, but if you reveal to much you're a slut.

That's another thing. That the word slut even exsists. Yes, men get called players, or manwhores, but it's not that same. When you call a man a player, you're critizizing the behavior towards women that that particular man has. When you call a woman a slut, you're talking about the sex itself. You're attacking women JUST because she had sex.

It's unfair for you to say things like that if you've never been in a womens shoes. Now I'm not saying that women are better than men, or we hold all the worlds problems--We don't. We're lucky we don't have to deal with some od the crap men do, but in our society, if a man doesn't get laid before he reaches manhood he's pathetic. If a women does it's fine because she's a virgin. If she does have sex, shame on her for not saving herself. Do you see what I mean?

[HobbitFeet]

Most men don't have breasts, unless they have gynecomastia. Female breasts are sexualized because it so happens that straight males and lesbian girls get sexually aroused by them. They are tabooed in general speech because the subject of female breasts has a direct connotation with sexual activity in and of itself. They have many "uses" in the sexual world, in ways that the male torso doesn't in any way. And to be honest, if a particularly fine-bodied young man walked by with no shirt, I'm sure some eyes would be batted. Female breasts are just more sexually related (and not to mention, more sensitive physically, but that's another argument) than a man's chest.
And in many cases, it would be indecent for a man to walk around shirtless.
But it's just a social norm that women shouldn't walk around shirtless, and I honestly don't think that's sexist at all. Maybe in the smallest ways. But not really.

I haven't heard someone say "you hit like a girl" in years (id est, when I was in elementary school), and personally, I've heard it used as a stereotype argument more than I've ever heard it used as a real insult. So, no. I've been hit hard by girls. Ouch.

Have you ever seen underwear ads? Hollister bags?
And "putting men in women's positions..." No one wants to see a bikini commercial with a man wearing the bikini. In the same light, women don't belong in commercials advertising underwear for men.

I hope this wasn't too harsh. I didn't mean to offend anyone.

Actually, males who have had breasts at some point in their lives is not an uncommon thing, even if they never knew it. It can happen from infancy through adulthood to almost any man for a variety of reasons, such as hormornal imbalances and weight gain, as pointed out by the Mayo Clinic. Your article actually only contained straight males, no lesbians involved ):

I'd also like to point out that your argument about the sexualization of female breasts sounds backwards. They provide a function (to feed offspring), first and formost, and have been sexualized by society through time. THAT'S why they're seen sexually. That's why it's taboo to even breast feed in public - because people link female toplessness with indecency first rather than with the simple act of feeding a child during that period of time. We've warped it in our heads so much that we can't separate the idea of sex from female breasts when the time comes and it's sad. It's not like women are proposing to be able to take off their shirts in stores and restaurants, only in places where men are able, like their own private property (front lawn and back yard), beaches, etc. If it's not appropriate to ask a man with breasts to cover himself, then why ask a woman to cover herself? If the whole idea against topless women is that female breasts can be used in sex then where does that leave flat chested women, and overweight men? Breasts mostly consist of fat, after all, what's so obscene about that? And most everyone has nipples anyway, so don't tell me female nipples are any more sexual than a man's.

Have you ever seen underwear ads? Hollister bags?

Okay, perhaps Weasels worded it wrong, or she was wrong entirely in what she meant, but it has always been more prevalent for women. Always. And when we're not contesting hypersexual ads, sometimes we're the subject of some scary advertisement that "playfully" uses domestic abuse, murder, stalking, rape, and all manner of violence against women to sell what? Perfume. Clothes. Cigarettes. Bumper stickers. Ridiculous items that have nothing to do with what they're depicting in the images. It's sickening. So yeah, a few underwear ads for men here and there with men making super serious faces. Not the same, but okay. They don't look vulnerable. They're not in strange poses.

No one wants to see a bikini commercial with a man wearing the bikini.

Crazy, c'mon... sweeping generalizations here. I have a whole section of my Tumblr dedecated to men in women's lingerie. There are many, many people like me out there. We would love to see a bikini commercial with a man wearing a bikini.

Lastly, I'd have to say I don't hear "like a girl" slurs anymore. It's only ever been replaced by "pussy," which is a synonymous insult on the playground all the way through adulthood. What better way to tell someone they're weak than to compare them to (the slang term of) a female sexual organ, hm?