Re:Speaking up
by steveklabnik on Monday February 04, 2013 @06:46PM
(#5168061)
I am not making any statement about who is or is not sexist in this instance. I am solely talking about the role of intent with regards to actions that may or may not be sexist.
Also, note that that definition is not the one that most people who care about this topic use. That would be 'sexual discrimination.' Sexism is a systemic cultural force of sexual discrimination. That said, it's not particularly relevant to what I'm saying either, but I thought I'd mention it.
Re:Speaking up
by erikpukinskis on Tuesday February 05, 2013 @12:31AM
(#5169332)
> Where is the "basis on sex" in this story
The type of attack (porn) seems gender-specific to me.
And it's plausible to me that the "same old face" critique is more prevalent with women speakers than with men. How many talks does a man have to give, on average, to get that response, vs. OP's total of three?
> Sexism definition: Prejudice, stereotyping, or discrimination, typically against women, on the basis of sex.
I'm not arguing that this isn't a terrible, unwarranted attack; I'm arguing against the dilution of the term. Not every attack against a person of another race is racist and not every attack against a women is sexist.
Where is the "basis on sex" in this story (genuine question, i.e. did her gender motivate the attack)? Without this, you can call it many things but not sexist.