Puerile sexist shite

Sexism may affect men in the same way that (most) racism affects white people?

Agreed Tim, but specifically, on this forum....was what I was referring to. I don't see it, and the rush to derail what is actually a shaming thread, makes me wonder.

I'm sure the dominant thinking here, is "We're alright Jack.....nothing wrong here". I disagree. But who would want to address that they themselves or their very good mates, behave in a sexist way on this forum? No-one I think.

Anyway, I shall leave this discussion for others that may care. But I predict that would be able to be counted in nanoseconds.

Partner's a woman blah, friends are women blah, glass ceiling blah, institutional inequality radiating outwards from The City blah, public school stranglehold on meaningful socio-political shift blah, trained in a profession that's 1% male but 90% male at managerial level blah, work in profession that's majority female but predominantly gay male at senior managerial level blah, surrounded by regressive cultural exploitation of women blah...

Is that suitable enough for you?

Partner's a woman blah, friends are women blah, glass ceiling blah, institutional inequality radiating outwards from The City blah, public school stranglehold on meaningful socio-political shift blah, trained in a profession that's 1% male but 90% male at managerial level blah, work in profession that's majority female but predominantly gay male at senior managerial level blah, surrounded by regressive cultural exploitation of women blah...

Is that suitable enough for you?

careful, he'll think you care.

I doubt it.

:)

I doubt it.

You are wrong. I appreciated your comment, because it highlighted a well-known phenomena, that is national. My view is that it is something that can be addressed in a smaller, newer community. This forum has only been functional a couple of years, and if some contentious issues were sorted out earlier in the life of this forum, a template would be set for it's entire life.

That is but a pipe dream though - I am aware of that. Also, BMMF's comment wasn't a derail. He left that to others.....who shall be along shortly.

.

Winston, I wasn't referring to you at all. If I were, I would have been clear.

As for Cliveo's image....he changed the image a few times, and I, as well as everyone else I should think, understood immediately what famous phrase he was pictorially quoting.

I, as well as everyone else I should think, understood immediately what famous phrase he was pictorially quoting.

Indubitably

In fact (though I expect no suitable answer), here's a question:

How does sexism affect men? And even more pointedly, How does sexism affect men on Lfgss?

If it doesn't appear to (I don't know, but maybe someone will tell me), then the title of this thread....."sexist"..... doesn't apply so much to men then. So if it might just apply to women, why is it that no women have tried to derail this thread?

There's been disagreement, but no derailment. I may be an "entrenched" kind of person, but I'm not blind.

Sexism is a consequence of gender stereotyping. Regardless of the fact that both men and women can have a wide range of personalities, they are often reduced to their mere gender in the expectations that people have of them, in the permissions they are given, in how they are judged, in dress that is considered acceptable for them, or the career options that are available to them, and so forth--all areas of life, really (with the obvious exception of those things that really are relevant to gender, such as the ability or not to bear and breastfeed children).

This sort of stereotyping arises out of an unwillingness to engage with the depth and diversity of character and personality. For instance, in a crude example, there will be both women and men who are unwilling, and women and men who are willing to stay at home to look after the kids instead of going to work. Understanding of personality requires more than skin-deep generalisations and is not easy to acquire. It is not in itself a guarantee against sexism, but a precondition of non-sexism. For instance, most people would not reduce their close friends, whom they know well, to a mere stereotype of their gender (unless there was major conflict between them). However, a casual acquaintance might well receive this treatment.

Gender stereotyping typically veers into sexism when the practical consequences of people's ambitions that do not make reference to gender become apparent to people who see others almost entirely in terms of their gender, e.g. when women demanded the vote. As gender stereotyping against women is very strongly based on their looks, women also often suffer sexist criticism of their looks.

I would think that there is quite a lot of sexism against men, too, but it operates in a slightly different way to sexism against women in that while women are supposed by sexists (male and female) to accept *sub*ordinate roles, men will typically be expected by sexists (male and female) to have *super*ordinate roles--e.g., a man who isn't very decisive or strong or an action-type leader may be considered to be less of a man, completely ignoring other qualities he may have, be stereotyped as a wimp, and perhaps enjoy life less as a result of this, analogously to a women who may be stereotyped as ugly/desperate/masculine.

While quantifying this is really impossible, there does seem to be more sexism against women than against men. It is certainly more obvious and tends to lead to worse consequences, such as rape of women by men, or violence against women by men who are physically (although usually not mentally) stronger.

Obviously, we're not envisaging anything so drastic on here, but I would think that some new female members may well disengage and move on if they find the forum atmosphere unwelcoming. While overtly sexist remarks may sometimes work as a joke among people who know and like each other, it is, after all, a fairly public forum.

As for Cliveo's image....he changed the image a few times, and I, as well as everyone else I should think, understood immediately what famous phrase he was pictorially quoting.

Which one was it?

Fish on bicycle.

I did enjoy your previous comment though. It reminded me of the thoroughness of some of Courant's replies. And on target also.

Fish on bicycle.

Well, I never. ;)

Your sarcasm here is actually well-founded, and has made me pause to consider the truth in it.

Quite entrenched ideas. You think so? In that case, you have just joined everyone on this forum with agreeing that one point.

This is actually ridiculous. It is a stretch that would amaze even The Brotherhood of Rubberband Lovers. They have an office next to the OTP Lovers.

Ok so maybe the homophobic thing was to far. It comes across to me that you have very traditional prejudiced views of what a "man" is and what a "woman" is, and so i was extending this to man and man or woman and woman relationships meaning that the men or women in these relationships were not being real "men" or "women" (extending what your view seems like, possibly not your opinion)

As an example (and i'm not standing up for you lil, just an example) you said lil was not your "average" woman, that she was testosterone fueled or something. Now to me this is a crazy generalisation and utter bullshit. You don't have average "women" a persons personality should not be classed in terms of their outer sexuality, their genes, their physical makeup. A person should be judged as an individual, which is why it seems so ridiculous to me to talk about "average" women and men.

The ideal "men" and "women" that you talk about seem to be relics of social conditioning, I believe psychologists are discovering that human sexuality is not purely XX or XY, it's not black and white, everything is grey, and I think if people were more willing to accept that it is not easy to group people into distinct categories (race, gender, sexuality etc) there would be a lot more zen vibes going around.

Joshua hasn't joined the forum with agreeing with that one point. He's made some reasonable comments and remarks on various other serious threads.

i have? ;)

repd mr shick for his post.

Oliver "wins"

@velo_libre, I am always learning, and what I have learned today, is that the cross-section of (vocal) women on this forum, doesn't actually represent the mainstream females of this country. After all, they mostly don't singlespeed cycle, or go fixed.....but the women on here do. That said, my remark regarding Lil's (sic) testosterone-laced humour, was meant to imply, that she took the very male humour on here and handly it without qualm.

Most women outside this forum, that I know personally, find the word "cunt" to be extremely offensive. It was the one example I gave, only to have the Bendix rear her head, take aim, and "get" me as only the best sniper can.

That Bendix and LndGrl have no problem with that word/expression, says more about the differences in the female demographic on here, than in the general populace. Yes, I'm generalizing again. But here's something to think about then - would one consider tatoos on women on this forum the norm, or away from the norm? However, if we look at the general female public (yes, PUBLIC, little sniggering boys), we find that tattoos are only found in a small minority......though they are becoming more fashionable by the minute. Remember, I am talking about the UK female public, across a range of religions, ages, colours, etc. It still isn't mainstream, but I concede, that in highscool and university aged females, it may even be the norm. But this country has a wider age and creed range of females than that, and that was my point.

*For the love of God make it STOP!!!*

I clicked on your link, but it didn't do anything. :(

Anyway, 500-600 more posts, and that will be it.

Nah. Kidding. :)

There you go, hyperlinked for your perusal.

I don't know any women who find the word cunt that offensive, but then they're not po-faced cunts.

As an example (and i'm not standing up for you lil, just an example) you said lil was not your "average" woman, that she was testosterone fueled or something. Now to me this is a crazy generalisation and utter bullshit.

Man it was more fun thinking my food was laced with testosterone. :(

However, if we look at the general female public (yes, PUBLIC, little sniggering boys), we find that tattoos are only found in a small minority......though they are becoming more fashionable by the minute. Remember, I am talking about the UK female public, across a range of religions, ages, colours, etc. It still isn't mainstream, but I concede, that in highscool and university aged females, it may even be the norm. But this country has a wider age and creed range of females than that, and that was my point.

Leave tattoos out of it! :O