If you're unsure why benevolent sexism is worth discussing,Google 'benevolent sexism victim blaming'

[redqueen]

http://www.google.com/search?q=benevolent+sexism+victim+blaming&hl=en&

http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=benevolent+sexism+victim+blaming&btnG=&hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C44&as_vis=1

I get that many of you seriously don't care, good for you. Be proud.

For those that actually might, I thought I'd offer something more enlightening than the average YouTube quality comments.

[Buzz Clik]

1. This is coming directly from the holding doors open discussion? Right?

If someone opens a door for me, am I about to get raped? I'm serious. A lot of people open doors for me, and I don't want to get raped.

And, being the kind of person who takes a kind gesture and pays it forward, I hold doors open, too. Does that mean I am a latent rapist?

[redqueen]

2. No, from the benevolent sexism discussion.

But congrats on your continuing the herculean efforts to mock and trivialize feminist issues.

[Buzz Clik]

6. Sorry. I saw a lot of "benevolent sexism" mentioned in the "door opening" threads.

I don't trivialize or mock issues of import. However, if this was an offshoot of the "opening a door for a woman is benevolent sexism", yeah, I was getting excited for some real trivializing of an incredibly stupid stance.

But, since this thread is about something important, I'll leave you to it.

[redqueen]

9. So if it's throwing feces, you're all in.. but if it's something serious

you'll go back to another thread where you can keep muddying waters and throwing feces.

Got it.

[Buzz Clik]

12. So feisty!

Time to alert my post?

[redqueen]

15. Why would anyone alert on your post?

Don't let me hold you up, there are plenty of threads dedicated to mocking and trivializing that you could be busy in.

[Squinch]

135. You seem so outraged by all this!

You need to lighten up.

[Melon_Lord]

32. Different definitions of seriousness apply I think...

Angst over being nice to or protecting women because of a subconscious urge to subjugate them doesn't qualify IMO...

[niyad]

153. "a subconscious urge to subjugate women" does not qualify as serious?? pleae tell me you forgot

the sarcasm icon.

[datasuspect]

125. i love it when you talk dirty

[Ian David]

156. You know, there's a difference between fighting for a cause, and fighting just because. n/t

[niyad]

10. no, you saw a lot of "door opening" remarks in the benevolent sexism threads, but, hey,

keep up the proud tradition here.

[Buzz Clik]

14. meh.

Regardless of red queen's motivations, my suspicions are being confirmed.

[NCTraveler]

18. You asked redqueen no questions based in reality.

What honest question did you ask her?

[Whisp]

19. still smarting, are you?

[niyad]

20. as are mine, so thanks.

[seabeyond]

28. yes. because you men created a manufactured argument to become the victims, being picked on by

feminists, that never existed. lie after lie after lie in op after op after op to make yourself victim with such poutrage and outrage, for 24 hours you have been running around with your hair on fire.

[treestar]

147. It's not just the door

There's no reason to limit it to that in order to make it look silly.

It's the society wide idea that women are delicate and need protection and men should gallantly help women they don't know (even if those women may be perfectly able to open doors or change tires or may know more about whatever it is than the man does.)

[Ian David]

157. This is why I like to stand with my hands on my hips in front of glass doors at the mall....

... and just watch women open the doors by themselves, for hours. That way, they'll know how not benevolently sexist I am.

[Buzz Clik]

158. Kick it up a notch.

Hold the door handle from the other side and keep it closed. This is particularly fun if they are laden with packages and trying to get out or if the weather is hideous and they are trying to get in.

[Ian David]

177. And then are you supposed to look confused, like you can't understand why the door won't open? n/t

[Buzz Clik]

178. You've done this before!

I salute you.

[NCTraveler]

3. How do you.....

How in the world do you get from the information posted here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022512182

To what you have written in your post. I just don't see how it is possible.

[Buzz Clik]

8. Ok. Noted.

I asked a question of red queen, and she answered.

But thanks for taking the time ...

[niyad]

13. believe me, it is for some posters.

[fishwax]

4. go easy on the straw, man

[NaturalHigh]

47. You shouldn't open doors.

They're bad it would seem. Try going down the chimney.

[Buzz Clik]

150. Novel idea. I'll give it some thought.

[babylonsister]

152. ...

This is so dumb, but riveting!

[niyad]

5. k and r and thank you for shedding light on a very serious issue.

dear goddess, they ARE out early this morning.

[redqueen]

11. It has to be intentional.

As someone else said, it's just too hard to believe that this many people are having this much trouble understanding the real issue here.

[Apophis]

7. Wow, another thread on this?

[niyad]

17. nobody is forcing you to read threads you find redundant, or useless, or uninteresting.

[Katashi_itto]

164. A least it's all of those things you listed. That makes is interesting.

[Buzz Clik]

26. You can never have enough threads on the same subject submitted by the same person. Never.

I think Confucius said that. Maybe Aesop.

[seabeyond]

39. ah, cause 10 Ops about doors. but, wtf, right? nt

[NaturalHigh]

62. Even when the subject is doors?

[Katashi_itto]

165. Maybe it's a door fetish thing.

[seabeyond]

30. why, isnt it a bummer us women having to continually address these stupid lies the men are putting

out, repeatedly, to dismiss a womans voice? what a bummer.

[Apophis]

40. Um kick any 100 of the other treads on this topic.

Now it just seems like its spamming general discussion.

If you want serious discussion, don't create 5747474646987 threads on them, threads I end up trashing.

[Luminous Animal]

42. There is only one other OP about this topic. All the rest are about opening doors...

[redqueen]

43. Exactly.

All that outrage and drama, simply because some wish to discuss how these ideas fuel rape culture, and are attempting to convey the serious issues involved.

Hmmmmm

[Apophis]

61. "Some," as in you?

You're not discussing this topic du jour with those who are actually discussing it. Hmmmm.

[Luminous Animal]

69. Could you point me to the actual discussion? I am being sincere here...

because I don't see many people discussing benevolent sexism. Most people seem to be discussing door opening.

[Apophis]

81. Post 31 in this very thread, for example.

It seems as though a few of you like the drama and don't much care to have an actual, civil, adult conversation on the issue. I'm an observer and even the blind can see this.

[Luminous Animal]

92. The "drama" is people side-tracking and trivializing the topic of the OP.

Post #31 is one of few that supports the OP. If you find it worthwhile, why don't you join THAT discussion instead of pretending that the OP is merely yet another stupid door opening thread.

[Apophis]

95. I never claimed the OP was another "stupid door opening thread".

[Luminous Animal]

98. Okay. So where are the 100 of other OPs on THIS topic that we should

be kicking. Please provide links because I can find only two that are attempting to discuss benevolent sexism. All the rest are about door opening.

Apophis (238 posts)
Um kick any 100 of the other treads on this topic.

Now it just seems like its spamming general discussion.

If you want serious discussion, don't create 5747474646987 threads on them, threads I end up trashing.

[Apophis]

99. ...

For future reference, try educating people instead of being confrontational. You'll get more people to listen to what you have to say.

[Luminous Animal]

102. No.

[theKed]

116. This entire thread is

pure drama. Ot was started to be dramatic, many of the posters are happy to throw logs on the fire. And the cycle continues.

[NaturalHigh]

70. Seriously, Redqueen, this issue started downhill...

the second someone said it's sexist to open doors for women. I mean no offense, but that's just a fact. After that, it became a joke.

[seabeyond]

72. no. it started downhill when a number of men refused to read a definition of benevolent sexism and

used the door issue to create lies attacking feminists.

[redqueen]

75. That never happened.

That could only be inferred if someone didn't bother to read, because this was the body of the post:

Glick and Fiske have shown the negative consequences of attitudes that idealize women as pure, moral, pedestal-worthy objects of men's adoration, protection, and provision. People who endorse benevolent sexism feel positively toward women, but only when women conform to highly traditional ideals about "how women should be."

Benevolent sexism motivates chivalrous acts that many women may welcome, such as a man's offer to lift heavy boxes or install the new computer. While the path to benevolent sexism may be paved with good intentions, it reinforces the assumption that men possess greater competence than women, whom benevolent sexists view as wonderful, but weak and fragile.

Cross-national comparisons show that hostile and benevolent sexism go hand-in-hand (that is, nations that endorse hostile sexism also endorse benevolent sexism). The beliefs work together because benevolent sexism "rewards" women when they fulfill traditional roles whereas hostile sexism punishes women who do not toe the line, thereby working together to maintain traditional relations. In other words, act sweet and they'll pat you on the head; assert yourself and they'll put you in your place.

Numerous studies by various researchers document benevolent sexism's insidious effects. For example, when led to expect benevolently sexist help in a masculine workplace, women became unsure of themselves, got distracted, and consequently performed poorly.


http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/10/111004121314.htm

[NaturalHigh]

77. Post that same blurb all you like...

then go read how many people actually claimed that opening doors for women is sexist. Someone told me that in a reply just a few hours ago.

[redqueen]

93. Someone told you what?

Quote & link?

[NaturalHigh]

96. Link

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2517248

[redqueen]

97. You misread or mischaracterized his statement. Which is it?

He didn't say "opening doors for women" is sexist.

He said "If you only do it for women than it is sexist", which is a true statement.

Are you unclear on how these two statements are very different?

[NaturalHigh]

106. Actually, you are right about one thing...

I did misread his statement. Maybe I just thought it was so ridiculous that I dismissed it.

I don't only hold doors open for women. Generally, I hold them open for anyone when it seems appropriate. Even if I only held them open for women, it wouldn't be sexist. It's the polite thing to do. At least that's what I was taught, and it's still what I believe. If that pisses somebody off, then so be it.

[Squinch]

137. By the same token, if some women don't appreciate having doors held for them simply because

they are women, and that pisses somebody off, so be that too.

What is the big freaking deal?

Why the outrage that some women disagree with you about the meaning of holding doors?

[treestar]

149. Nothing about door there

The number of threads represents the number of men desperate to avoid this subject and so trying to make it look ridiculous.

[Luminous Animal]

82. Nope, it started with this..

no matter how many people keep pretending it is.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/10/111004121314.htm

Glick and Fiske have shown the negative consequences of attitudes that idealize women as pure, moral, pedestal-worthy objects of men's adoration, protection, and provision. People who endorse benevolent sexism feel positively toward women, but only when women conform to highly traditional ideals about "how women should be."

Benevolent sexism motivates chivalrous acts that many women may welcome, such as a man's offer to lift heavy boxes or install the new computer. While the path to benevolent sexism may be paved with good intentions, it reinforces the assumption that men possess greater competence than women, whom benevolent sexists view as wonderful, but weak and fragile.

Cross-national comparisons show that hostile and benevolent sexism go hand-in-hand (that is, nations that endorse hostile sexism also endorse benevolent sexism). The beliefs work together because benevolent sexism "rewards" women when they fulfill traditional roles whereas hostile sexism punishes women who do not toe the line, thereby working together to maintain traditional relations. In other words, act sweet and they'll pat you on the head; assert yourself and they'll put you in your place.

Numerous studies by various researchers document benevolent sexism's insidious effects. For example, when led to expect benevolently sexist help in a masculine workplace, women became unsure of themselves, got distracted, and consequently performed poorly.

[NaturalHigh]

89. Please re-read from post to which you replied.

I was giving my opinion of when the subject began to go downhill, not the origins of the subject.

[MattBaggins]

74. bumper crop of straw this year

had to do something with it

[NaturalHigh]

55. It's the flavor of the day.

Just wait until "breast-feeding" or "circumcision" day. This is a walk in the park by comparison. No levity is allowed in those.

[seabeyond]

66. yes, a gang of men presenting misogyny is a walk in the park. women know this well. nt

[NaturalHigh]

73. Wow...I don't even know what to make of that one.

How anyone could turn "opening doors" into "misogeny" is beyond me.

[seabeyond]

76. when men purposely tell lies repeatedly saying feminists are outraged and picking on them, making

males victims when it is not happening, in a mob mentality.... that would be misogyny.

[NaturalHigh]

85. Okie dokie, then.

I don't see any misogyny here, just a manufactured tempest. The second someone (seriously) replied to me this morning that opening doors for women is sexist, I saw how ridiculous the whole thing had become.

[treestar]

146. It is continually and on many threads

being deliberately misunderstood and taken personally, so it takes as many threads to counter that idea, which we are allowed to do.

The door thing is all those poor men who feel so personally affronted by a social theory because they know they've been holding doors open for women and are scared that it's sexist. It's been all about how some men are afraid of the subject and to distract us from talking about it to placating them that they are "doing things right" and "being courteous."

[quinnox]

16. I'll put it on the list

of things to do, right under googling for the teachings and precepts of scientology, in terms of priority.

[redqueen]

21. You care that little about the ideas which fuel rape culture.

Rape culture, which is why Steubenville happened. Why Jyoti Singh was raped and murdered. Why Anene Booysen was gang raped and murdered. Why sexual harassment is something girls start experiencing in elementary school.

Got it, thanks.

[Major Nikon]

22. Holding doors open for women = Steubenville rapes

Good point

[redqueen]

23. You are obviously intentionally twisting words in order to dismiss feminist issues. nt

[Buzz Clik]

27. Maybe not. Maybe he just saw the same bullshit I saw and is calling it.

Are you seeing a trend here?

[redqueen]

29. See post 25. It's telling that you're all in to mock and trivialize,

but lose interest re: serious issues.

[Major Nikon]

38. Naturally you would never twist anyone's words around

[quinnox]

83. exactly, lol

[seabeyond]

33. again. manufacturing a lie to dismiss real issues. ya, i get it. you think it is funny and would

like women to lighten up on the whole steubenville rape thing.





right?

wrong. not gonna happen

[Major Nikon]

34. The irony is getting pretty thick here

Somehow I think it's completely lost on you.

[geek tragedy]

118. That one rejects "no means no" so not a person with credibility on the

subject.

[Niceguy1]

160. It's a slippery

slope. First it is door then one thing leads to another

[quinnox]

24. oh boy

If I'm going to look at bizarre and wacked out philosophies, I would look at scientology first. At least it would be colorful!

[redqueen]

25. People who score high in benevolent sexism place less blame on rapists

and are more likely to recommend shorter sentences to perpetrators for the most common types of rape.

[Major Nikon]

36. Why should that surprise anyone?

[Luminous Animal]

44. Who's surprised?

[Major Nikon]

52. Good question

I suspect the ones who are seeking to educate everyone on the subject are assuming as much.

The idea that the same people who hold extreme views that women should be barefoot, pregnant, and in the kitchen are the same ones who believe women may be "asking for it" just doesn't seem like it's all that much of a revelation.

[Luminous Animal]

54. "barefoot, pregnant, and in the kitchen" are not examples of benevolent sexism.

[Major Nikon]

114. That's exactly what benevolent sexism is

The idea of benevolent sexism is you're doing women a favor by encouraging them in traditional gender roles.

[Luminous Animal]

115. Benevolent sexism allows for women in the workplace. Hostile sexism, such as

barefoot, pregnant, and in the kitchen, does not.

[Major Nikon]

117. Both happen inside and outside the workplace

Examples of benevolently sexist attitudes include the reverence of women in wife, mother, and child caretaker roles, the romanticizing of women as objects of heterosexual affection, and the belief that men have a duty to protect women.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ambivalent_sexism#Theoretical_framework

[redqueen]

49. Since people are mocking the idea of benevolent sexism, by throwing feces in threads about doors,

that would lead one to believe that they aren't quite making the connection that benevolent sexism fuels rape culture.

One would think that being concerned with such things as victim blaming and rape culture would mean less mocking and more serious discussion of the circumstances which lead to people blaming rape victims.

What's the alternative? That they understand that benevolent sexism ties into victim blaming, but still think it's better to muddy the waters with nonsense about doors?

What would that indicate, if that were the case?

[Major Nikon]

80. "ties into" can be a very misleading statement

First of all, there's no evidence that I know of that demonstrates a causal relationship between the two things you are claiming do have such a relationship.

Some people (men and women) hold extreme views when it comes to traditional gender roles. Not surprisingly, those who believe women should be barefoot, pregnant, and in the kitchen are also some of the same ones who believe some women are asking for it. That is coorelative evidence and shouldn't be confused for causation.

Just because some people hold the doors open for women, doesn't mean they believe women should be raped. It also doesn't mean they are unwittingly encouraging other people to believe such things.

[redqueen]

84. Did you read any of the studies which indicate that that is exactly the case?

I'm guessing no.

Hostile sexism is the 'barefoot and pregnant' stuff. Benevolent sexism is different. There have been many links posted which explain it very well.

[Major Nikon]

104. No, and I suspect none such studies exist

The studies I've read have stated that tested subjects who tested the highest for benevolent sexism also happened to be some of the same people who were willing to assign blame to women in aquaintence rape cases.

This is correlative evidence, and correlation does not imply causation.

Just sayin'

[seabeyond]

35. yes, being uninformed and uneducated, refusing facts is so.... oh what, fox like? and being proud

and vocal in the process? amazing.

[Major Nikon]

41. Seems to be plenty of educators around here to set us all straight

I don't see the danger, really.

[seabeyond]

57. no. all you men are doing is contaminating the subject enough to make it about doors. OP after OP

about damn doors. a duer comes in clueless, with all the OPs about doors and you men being victimized by the mean ole, bad feminists picking on "nice" men. now, lets talk about the "nice" men concept. men going around saying how nice they are. yet.... create lies to attack the feminist on du with a bogus argument.

nothing nice about it. pure dismissal of women and womens issues. sexism at the least, misogyny at worst. there is your "nice" men on du.

[Major Nikon]

86. Well it's certainly true that anyone who disagrees with a self-described feminist is a misogynist

So you may have something there.

[NaturalHigh]

121. "All you men are doing..."

That's pretty much all one needs to read to discern your attitude.

[quinnox]

88. please then, continue with the "edumacation"

I find it almost as enlightening as the teachings of Scientology.

[Logical]

79. Question to you, are you offended when a man holds a door open for you? yes/no?

[redqueen]

87. Really? Doors? Still? nt

[Logical]

90. Yes, simple question. Even for you. Does it offend you? n-t

[Luminous Animal]

94. It's not about fucking doors. The people here who are trying to discuss benevolent sexism

have been asserting this OVER AND OVER AND OVER AGAIN.

It's about THIS:

no matter how many people keep pretending it is.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/10/111004121314.htm

Glick and Fiske have shown the negative consequences of attitudes that idealize women as pure, moral, pedestal-worthy objects of men's adoration, protection, and provision. People who endorse benevolent sexism feel positively toward women, but only when women conform to highly traditional ideals about "how women should be."

Benevolent sexism motivates chivalrous acts that many women may welcome, such as a man's offer to lift heavy boxes or install the new computer. While the path to benevolent sexism may be paved with good intentions, it reinforces the assumption that men possess greater competence than women, whom benevolent sexists view as wonderful, but weak and fragile.

Cross-national comparisons show that hostile and benevolent sexism go hand-in-hand (that is, nations that endorse hostile sexism also endorse benevolent sexism). The beliefs work together because benevolent sexism "rewards" women when they fulfill traditional roles whereas hostile sexism punishes women who do not toe the line, thereby working together to maintain traditional relations. In other words, act sweet and they'll pat you on the head; assert yourself and they'll put you in your place.

Numerous studies by various researchers document benevolent sexism's insidious effects. For example, when led to expect benevolently sexist help in a masculine workplace, women became unsure of themselves, got distracted, and consequently performed poorly.

[NaturalHigh]

123. You keep posting that same piece...

like someone is going to say "oh, now I get it!"

[Katashi_itto]

167. That it. I refuse to hold doors open for women anymore.

Hell with Chivalry, its now evil..somehow.

[Whisp]

31. some interesting stuff at those links, redqueen. Thanks

The most well known theory behind victim blaming is the just world hypothesis.

"Individuals that have a strong belief in a just world can have this belief challenged when they encounter a victim of random misfortune such as a rape victim. The individual wants to believe that the world is a safe, just place where people get what they deserve and deserve what they get.

Even when evidence suggests otherwise, the individual is very reluctant to give up this belief that the world is not just. In the face of contradicting evidence, research suggests (Kleinke and Meyer, 1996) that people with a high belief in a just world will do one of two things: either they will try to eliminate the suffering of the innocent victims or else they will derogate them for their fate.

Since it is impossible to reverse the crime of rape, and thus relieve the victim of her suffering, the rape victim is often subjected to derogation and blame. In this manner, the person who believes in a just world can maintain this belief as there is no longer a suffering person, but a woman who deserves her misfortune."

http://www.ibiblio.org/rcip/vb.html

[redqueen]

65. Thanks...

like someone else said, it isn't really surprising that people who have a lot of benevolently sexist views would be more likely to blame rape victims and go easy on rapists... but it is surprising that so many would work so damn hard to trivialize the issue and muddy the discussion about it. Well... kinda surprising. Not really all that surprising, actually.

[cali]

37. I don't think that a lot of people get that this isn't about opening doors

or taking your hat off when you speak to a woman. It's about a pattern that's part of something larger and institutionalized.

[Whisp]

45. that's why they refuse to go further into the debate with any seriousness.

It's pretty obvious, and over done.

They either don't want to because it may cause some discomforts in their world views, particularly about women. And sometimes learning new things and accepting you may have been wrong most of your life, well, that's kind of threatening. It's can be pretty unsettling.

Or they have other objectives of which learning isn't one of them - but attacking certain individuals no matter what opinions those individuals have. It's about the person, not the subject.

[JI7]

162. people are being assholes, it has reached the level i thought was only possible with wingnuts

[MjolnirTime]

46. Down with Chivalry!! Who would have survived the Titanic in such an age?

[NaturalHigh]

50. Probably the people who jumped in lifeboats and rowed like hell.

[seabeyond]

60. another post of dishonesty to contaminate a subject and make men victims. nt

[theKed]

48. Do we really

need another thread on this topic?
This is quickly approachong spam-levels in GD.
This isn't something that can be continued to be discussed in the numerous other threads?

[Luminous Animal]

56. There are only TWO threads about benevolent sexism. The rest are about opening doors.

Perhaps you should take your concerns to those threads.

[theKed]

58. Like I said...

...do we really need another?

[seabeyond]

63. since men are once again contaminating the subject with doors to shut women up and become victims...

yes, we need another thread. maybe you ought to address the men that lie OP after OP about feminists on du being outraged about doors. maybe that would be a more apt outrage for you.

[theKed]

103. Those darn men!

[Luminous Animal]

67. If two threads about a topic is burdensome for you, there is a little x next to the title.

Click it.

[theKed]

101. There are (last time I looked anyways)

Four threads on the first page alone of GD on the topic og sexism. Most, if not all, containing some measure of discussion on the topic of "benevolent sexism". Most, if not all, featuring the same people arguing the same points.

Another thread is vanity, and spam, and really is bringing nothing new to the table.

[Luminous Animal]

105. There are two original posts about benevolent sexism. ALL the rest are about straw...

I mean, door opening and not about sexism. They may contain comments about benevolent sexism but those posts are attempts to clean up the straw.

[theKed]

108. None of what I said was false

(i even excluded the "sexual benevolence" thread from that count ... so five, really).

[LittleBlue]

51. Clicked on your links, still don't think it's a big deal

Still going to open the door and pull out a chair for women

[NaturalHigh]

59. Kind of what I thought.

It's what my mother taught me.

[seabeyond]

68. and still not the issue. but then, consistently you do not have an issue with any sexism, so

no one really expects you to see benevolent sexism as an issue.

[LittleBlue]

91. I don't have an issue with the outrage du jour.

Sexism is one thing, but opening doors for women? Really?

[DisgustipatedinCA]

53. I think it's entirely plausible to believe

...that we have a long way to go with sexism in this country while simultaneously believing that the OP likes to pick fights on the subject.

[NaturalHigh]

64. Thumbs up.

[seabeyond]

71. and what about the upward 10 Ops making this about a damn door when we have repeatedly said it is

not about the door. no one is "outraged" about doors and the OPs were only created to make men victims of mean old feminists with lies?

does that warrant a comment from you? or only a dissing of the feminist the made her second OP on benevolent sexism to counter the upward of ten OPs on doors?

[DisgustipatedinCA]

78. I'm not going to swim in all this, no

My comment was fairly general in nature, and I'll leave it there.

[NaturalHigh]

122. Do you realize that you're the one who keeps bringing up the door in this thread?

Edited for spelling.

[datasuspect]

127. these kinds of posts are an affront to true feminism.

[niyad]

143. and what, exactly, is "true feminism"?

[datasuspect]

148. the opposite of carciature feminism

cartoon feminism

troll feminism

[niyad]

151. having never heard of either "cartoon feminism" or "troll feminism", do, please, elucidate.

and, again, define "true feminism". this is not contrast and compare but define, with actual, dictionary definitions, and cite the dictionary, because none of the ones I have checked list those terms.

[Sheldon Cooper]

107. lol

First you say this:

DisgustipatedinCA

53. I think it's entirely plausible to believe

...that we have a long way to go with sexism in this country while simultaneously believing that the OP likes to pick fights on the subject.

When called out by seabeyond:

seabeyond (84,158 posts)
71. and what about the upward 10 Ops making this about a damn door when we have repeatedly said it is

not about the door. no one is "outraged" about doors and the OPs were only created to make men victims of mean old feminists with lies?

does that warrant a comment from you? or only a dissing of the feminist the made her second OP on benevolent sexism to counter the upward of ten OPs on doors?

You say this:

DisgustipatedinCA (5,287 posts)
78. I'm not going to swim in all this, no

My comment was fairly general in nature, and I'll leave it there

So, after explicitly referring to redqueen 'the OP' as someone who 'likes to pick fights', you then turn around and back out of defending your comment because you say it's 'general in nature'. Hahahaha. Such integrity.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

109. Neither you nor the other poster

...caught that in my original post, I said right up front that we have a long way to go as regards sexism. You're trying to make me swim in this swill; not happening. Good day.

[Sheldon Cooper]

111. Oh, I caught that alright.

And I couldn't agree more. But then you had to make a direct attack on redqueen, for no reason, and then back away when called out on it. It's all there, for everyone to see.

[Apophis]

113. + a million

On both accounts.

[lumberjack_jeff]

100. You're bucking a coalition here RQ

It's a coalition of women who like the privileges of men "being nice" (yet are surprised that the pay raises go them) allied with men who think chivalry=feminism.

Unexamined attitudes are the most dangerous.

[sharp_stick]

110. I for one have taken

to slamming doors in the faces of those behind me.

[NaturalHigh]

120. Good for you!

At least you can't be accused of sexism.

[chervilant]

112. "Benevolent sexism ..."

Quite a different tone than "ambivalent sexism."

Have you read Dorothy Dinnerstein's "The Mermaid and the Minotaur"? William Ryan's "Blaming the Victim"? Carol Gilligan's "In a Different Voice"? (I know I'm dating myself here...)

Sexism (and misogyny--sadly, no equivalent word for hatred of men) has long been a gaping, festering wound on our species' emotional development. It is stultifying and damaging to us all.

[dreamnightwind]

128. Hatred of men is misandry - eom

[chervilant]

139. I never knew.

Thanks.

[RetroLounge]

119. Yawn

RL

[klook]

124. Ambivalent Sexism survey

I imagine this is not news to you, redqueen, but I found this interesting and suggest that everyone with a sincere interest in sexism and its ramifications check this out:
http://www.understandingprejudice.org/asi/

If one carefully considers and answers the questions honestly, it's a thought-provoking exercise.

Info on the origins of understandingprejudice.org can be found here:
http://mith.umd.edu/WomensStudies/OtherWebSites/Prejudice.html

[Luminous Animal]

129. Thanks for the links!

[Orrex]

140. Interesting

I scored a 1.18 Hostile Sexism Score and a 1.45 Benevolent Sexism Score.

Perhaps there's hope for me after all.

[datasuspect]

126. do you hear that?

it's the sound of your credibility drying up and blowing away in the breeze.

[niyad]

130. you keep telling yourself that, sweetie. most of us know that simply is not the case.

[NaturalHigh]

131. Would you be offended if someone called you "sweetie"?

If not, cool. If yes, then you are applying a double standard by using the term.

[niyad]

132. depends on who, and why. but seriously, that is the best you can come up with?

it absolutely cracks me up that this thread has been subjected to all sorts of nonsense about the original post, and yet, this is what you criticize. wow. . .just. . .wow.

[NaturalHigh]

133. No, it just sort of jumped out at me.

Nonsense is in the eye of the beholder, BTW. Also, a little nonsense once in a while is good.

[datasuspect]

134. right-o jiggles,

keep telling yourself that, sizzlebutt.

[niyad]

141. oh my, such a little word to cause such reactions. . apparently a case of "you can dish it out. .

a little clue here: you really have to do much better than that. we can read you all too well.

[datasuspect]

142. cool post bro

u mad?

[niyad]

145. remdi95

[Warren DeMontague]

166. ooooh, what's that? A little google nugget, perhaps?

Hmmmm, clever.

[Warren DeMontague]

136. Would you consider "men will kill each other and everyone" to be a bigoted statement?

Would you consider that sexism? Or perhaps gender-based bigotry?

How about "men are more or less inherently violent and there is no way to stop this or change it"

Do you think that is a bigoted statement?

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

138. "The beatings will continue until morale improves"

For some reason, that's all I can think of.

[dogknob]

144. It is certainly worth discussing...

...but don't look for a discussion to happen here.

[ismnotwasm]

154. What the fuck

Is wrong with people? I have a book, among many books on sexism and gender studies, about the same thing, only it's called 'enlightened sexism'--very, very easy read. I've taken classes and listen to lectures and read blogs and participated in Webinars regarding topics of gender. Yes benevolent sexism exists, yes it helps maintain sexist and heteronormative standards and yes it's fucked up.

Why is this an argument?

Door opening? Don't give a shit. I open doors, people open doors for me. Boob size preference? Don't give a shit about that either.


It's like watching dumass caribou being chased by a lion from thread to thread on this topic. One way then the other en masse.
All in all, I'd rather be the lion.

[dogknob]

159. Rawr!

Pretty much.

Meanwhile, while we are enjoying the, um, discussions -- TPP's going to become the law and DU will go buh-bye.

Watch the birdie!

[NaturalHigh]

179. Well, if it's in a book...

it must be true. Not like anyone just makes stuff up and prints it.

[Ian David]

155. This is why I ALWAYS leave the toilet seat up. So I'm not benevolently sexist.

In fact, whenever I see a toilet seat that is down, I always make sure to lift it back up, even if I'm not using the toilet.

That way, I'm completely non-sexist, benevolently or otherwise.

[ismnotwasm]

163. Ew, dude

That puts you in the same category as women who 'squat' over the toilet.

[Katashi_itto]

170. I go a step further and leave the seat down and just piss on it.

That way, I'm militantly non-sexist, benevolently or otherwise.

[d_b]

180. you too, eh?

one can never be too militantly non-sexist.

[Katashi_itto]

181. Exactly!

[JTFrog]

161. It's obvious who doesn't care.

Seriously.

The mentality behind the taunting, the ridiculing, the belittling, the shaming, the posturing, the name calling and all of the other tactics used by some incredibly transparent asshats individuals shows their true colors.

All I have to say is, may they all reap the karma they sow.

[Warren DeMontague]

168. Yeah, you'd think someone on DU was linking to a blogger who advocates gender-based baby starving.

Good thing no one here is that screwed up in the head.

[JTFrog]

169. Oh, look, here comes one now. n/t

[Warren DeMontague]

171. here comes one what? A blogger who advocates starving babies on the basis of gender?

Egads, that sort of thing really doesn't belong on a progressive website, if you ask me.

[JTFrog]

172. GFY.

Good for you. I see what you've done there. Oh so clever. As usual.

[Warren DeMontague]

173. Grand Forks Yountville? Grievously Ferocious Yodeling?

No, No, I know what you're saying. Gee, whiz, that's kind of uncalled for, that acronymic personal attack.

Lucky for you I'm not one of the button-happy alert jockeys.

GPAARYHMFDOB,YAYPATLSODU. HYTISLEVITPSSYPAYSPAZC. BTWWKAATMAG,YGAFA.

PS,MHCIFOE,JGWTGGPOAT,AIYXAMYJMGBIT.

[JTFrog]

174. Good For You.

[Warren DeMontague]

175. Okay, Okay. "My Hovercraft Is Full Of Eels"

That part is a gimme.

[Katashi_itto]

176. GFY? Official music video Kenelis 'GFY' (Radio Edit)

Just like the group "Coldplay" Except "Coldplay" is all guys (Real Sexist) and this is one girl and sings a totally different style. Otherwise their the same.