Women can't be sexist

knowless · 2014-02-18T21:48:46+00:00

Can someone please identify what textbook that is and what curriculum it's being introduced under?

iMADEthis2post · 2014-02-18T23:36:36+00:00

Correct. There is no such thing as reverse sexism or reverse racism. it's just racism and sexism no matter where it is coming from.

golemsheppard · 2014-02-18T22:16:14+00:00

This is a disturbingly new trend from the feminists and social justice Warriors. It builds upon the notion that women are always the oppressed proletariat, powerless before the male bourgeoisie. It's the whole, "discrimination equals prejudice plus power" mantra utilized to alleviate any personal responsibility for their actions. Because women lack any institutional power in their world view, they can never discriminate. In essence, because they are in their minds the chronic victims, they can literally never be the offender in any sexist manner, because they don't have power in their minds. It's prevents them from ever having to acknowledge that they can be just as terrible of a human being making statements like, "All men are pricksand deserve to die", as a man saying "all women are stupid cunts and shouldn't be allowed to vote." Both are abhorrent statements, but feminists will have you believe that their statements really aren't that bad because they are so powerless, all they can do is hurt feelings. I was reading over some discussions by SJWs on tumblr where they were acknowledging that some young white men had committed suicide after being repeatedly told by people like them that they are "obsolete" and should "hurry up and die". They accepted no responsibility for the fact that everyone words have the potential to have serious consequences. They fell back on the core argument of "We don't have any institutional power so we can say and do whatever the fuck we want and not only is it entirely permissible, but their isn't shit you can do about it." Its not about equality, its about bullies on the Internet justifying why their belligerence isn't really belligerence, and any who disagrees with them is just too stupid to see the truth.

feelingsupersonic · 2014-02-18T21:23:16+00:00

That's right guys. There are no female politicians, business owners, shareholders, or administrators of any sort. Ever.

Swimmingsolid · 2014-02-18T22:29:09+00:00

Source: "Is Everyone Really Equal? An Introduction to Key Concepts in Social Justice Education," page 46 (bottom).

A larger PDF excerpt of the book can be found here: http://forum.bodybuilding.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=5397833&d=1360855898

Book here: http://www.amazon.com/Everyone-Introduction-Concepts-Education-Multicultural/dp/080775269X

Authors: Drs. Ozlem Sensoy and Robin DiAngelo

Ozlem Sensoy is a professor at Simon Fraser University (SFU). Faculty bio page here: http://www.educ.sfu.ca/profiles/?page_id=253

SFU is the same university in which students rose up to oppose the creation of a men's center. See the AVFM article on it here: http://www.avoiceformen.com/feminism/feminist-governance-feminism/sfu-feminists-say-stfu-to-male-students/

Robin DiAngelo is a professor at Westfield State University. See her webpage here: http://www.robindiangelo.com/

Demonspawn · 2014-02-18T22:07:53+00:00

Women control 55% of the vote, therefore holding more political power than men.

Women control 80% of consumer spending, therefore holding more economic power than men.

Therefore, it's men who cannot be sexist under such definitions.

AlexReynard · 2014-02-18T23:09:03+00:00

Golly, it's almost as if they're covering their asses against accusations of being bullies so they can be bullies as much as they want to and feel righteous about it.

JixxyJexxy · 2014-02-18T21:25:28+00:00

Is that a textbook photo? If so I'm going to go cry inside for a while.

Crackerjacksurgeon · 2014-02-18T23:22:38+00:00

Women are >50% of the electorate. Boom, automatic institutional power on all levels.

Men can't be oppressors.

/s

edtastic · 2014-02-19T03:39:21+00:00

Women control 85% of consumer spending = Economic Power

Women make up 54% of the electorate = Political Power

There are 200 Women Studies Departments on campuses across the country whose gender ideology dominates the social science = Institutional Power

Any questions?

ZimbaZumba · 2014-02-18T22:26:20+00:00

Redefining sexism as requiring institutional power is an attempt to redefine our language. Orwell and Huxley warned about it in 1984 and Brave New World. They were more prophetic than originally imagined.

stoudman · 2014-02-19T00:00:30+00:00

Sexism is not defined by the amount of power one has in a society, it is defined by the philosophical approach one takes to gender roles. This is the stupidest argument I've seen in a while.

MTknowsit · 2014-02-19T01:38:42+00:00

See? Anyone can write a textbook, and they can say anything in it, no matter how inane. This is why you should question everything.

The_real_voltaire · 2014-02-18T23:10:18+00:00

There is no reverse racism or reverse sexism since all racism against (I'm assuming) whites is just plain racism. Sexism against men is sexism. Period. Also, what kind of retarded statement is that: "Women don't hold economic, political and institutional power." Last time I checked, there were plenty of rich/politically powerful women all over human history. And if you take into consideration how utterly manipulated many men are in their pathetic attempts to gain women's approval, I'd say women are the most powerful group of people on this planet.

“To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize.” - Voltaire

Ted8367 · 2014-02-18T22:52:52+00:00

There is no such thing as ... the reverse of any form of oppression.

Shorn of connotations of sex or race, the mendacity of this feminist argument by assertion stands out.

dontmindmeee · 2014-02-19T00:11:48+00:00

The dumbest shit I have ever read.

Magicslime · 2014-02-18T22:30:57+00:00

What's most alarming is the subliminal messaging here - "Women can be just as prejudiced as men" implies that men are prejudiced, and sometimes women are also prejudiced. If it were an unbiased statement (and I know, it's obviously not) it would state "Women are just as prejudiced as men".

harryballsagna · 2014-02-19T01:10:48+00:00

"Women cannot be sexist because it's extremely inconvenient to my feminist sloganeering."

-A feminist under a shot of sodium pentothal

laurence88 · 2014-02-19T15:02:48+00:00

Half right, there's no such thing as reverse racism or sexism it's all just racism and sexism.

KRosen333 · 2014-02-19T00:03:58+00:00

So what are we going to do about this?

Anything?

Anything at all?

Write a letter to the publisher? Make an infograph to spread awareness? What do you propose we do.

edit:

want to do more?

http://www.teacherscollegepress.com/contact.html

Contact the publishers.

Tell them that you don't agree with these concepts and are disappointed that such a low quality textbook is published by them. Here is the book data in question.

Is Everyone Really Equal? An Introduction to Key Concepts in Social Justice Education
?zlem Sensoy and Robin DiAngelo Multicultural Education Series Pub Date: November 2011, 240 pages

Paperback: $30.95, ISBN: 080775269X Cloth: $66, ISBN: '0807752703 $30.95 Add to Cart - Is Everyone Really Equal? An Introduction to Key Concepts in Social Justice Education

Falkner09 · 2014-02-18T22:56:17+00:00

so women can be prejudiced against men, but can't be sexist.

In the same way they can be human, but not a primate. nice.

CaptainChewbacca · 2014-02-19T00:39:47+00:00

If an institution is handing down broad-sweeping ultimatums about what we can and cannot say about women, wouldn't that be construed as an 'institutional power'?

kami232 · 2014-02-19T02:52:25+00:00

Gonna take the context to another relevant point now:

There is no such thing as reverse racism or reverse sexism

Aye, it's right there - it's just racism and sexism across the board. Calling it "reverse" anything is trying to dance around a PC agenda; it implies racism and sexism have different values based on who the parties are. Bullshit. Racism is racism; sexism is sexism.

And then the rest of the statement takes a giant dump.

2014-02-19T03:50:02+00:00

That is the most sexist thing I've ever seen!

Women can't hold institutional power? Check your privilege, book.

pretzelzetzel · 2014-02-19T06:19:51+00:00

If your definition of '-ism' is 'systematic oppression', then it stands to reason that an underclass can't be -ist. This is just a tautological statement. My problem is that this type of Marxist definition is tacitly accepted in so many of the social "science" disciplines without being examined whatsoever. Any rational person ought to be inclined toward much deeper reflection when presented with such a clearly subjective interpretation of the issue. You can't blame the students for winding up lacking critical thinking skills, though. They are actively discouraged from critical analysis of the core tenets of their fields of study.

2014-02-19T09:16:30+00:00

Angela Merkel likes this.

2014-02-19T09:27:57+00:00

[permanently deleted]

dejour · 2014-02-18T23:52:50+00:00

This is a common premise when describing the distinction between racism and prejudice. For example, you're prejudice if you hate someone for being black. You're racist if you hold any power and your prejudice is used to influence your decisions towards black people. You don't have to be at the highest levels of a company or our government to be racist. Power can be in the form of being a manager of a McDonalds or being the leader of a school project.

So while I guess I can agree with the original premise, the belief that we have no women CEO's, politicians, that we basically have no women in charge, is incredibly stupid and sexist in itself, which then destroys the initial premise. If there are women in power, and they hate men, and allow that to influence their decisions, then they are sexist, and therefore reverse sexism can exist.

2014-02-19T00:28:56+00:00

... said the sexist quote

2014-02-19T00:47:43+00:00

Ridiculous. Even if you believe that men hold the vast majority of political, economic, and institutional power in your country, that doesn't mean that women hold none. Even if you define sexism as requiring some kind of power to act on your prejudice (a definition which I haven't seen included in any dictionaries,) women could still be "sexist" in the venues where they hold power.

bitwolfy · 2014-02-19T03:00:44+00:00

Women... do not hold political, economic, and institutional power.

I find this statement somewhat sexist.

Arby01 · 2014-02-19T05:18:15+00:00

[permanently deleted]

wildfire2k5 · 2014-02-19T06:46:13+00:00

Let me just go to fantasy land where men don't get raped, they have equal prison sentences, they can drown their kids without fear of retribution, and they have an entire support network dedicated to the betterment and well bei...waaaaaaait a second...

idontcontributemuch · 2014-02-19T12:23:59+00:00

The last sentence should qualify as being sexist in itself, right? "Women are weak and have zero influence in society, totally not sexist."

Chevellephreak · 2014-02-19T12:38:43+00:00

Female here, pretty sure I can be just as bad as a man :/

Caelamid · 2014-02-18T23:08:27+00:00

Just a super subtle attempt at controlling language, so as to control discourse in general. If we forget the language to describe sexism perpetrated by women, we become limited in our ability to strive against it.

2014-02-19T00:23:29+00:00

This is terrible. There is no such thing as reverse sexism because it's all sexism. Reverse sexism is equality.

And... the rest... just no.

Electroverted · 2014-02-18T23:11:02+00:00

Wow, women really need to get in on that shit!

Kozmosis · 2014-02-18T23:25:33+00:00

This is rather depressing.

Roddy0608 · 2014-02-18T23:58:39+00:00

Well, they got the first sentence correct.

shadowmonk · 2014-02-19T01:15:39+00:00

I just love the irony in this.

GeekofFury · 2014-02-19T01:52:41+00:00

Horse shit.

2014-02-19T01:54:58+00:00

wtf were queens doing then if they weren't holding power

2014-02-19T02:17:17+00:00

That text is pretty damn sexist implying that women "do not hold political, economic, and institutional power".

2014-02-19T03:43:39+00:00

God I fucking hate how feminist agenda has infected every facet of our society. Absolutely disgusting that they'd brainwash children with their victim mindset.

2014-02-19T03:56:37+00:00

[permanently deleted]

armadillo_armageddon · 2014-02-19T04:25:31+00:00

The queen of England, just another oppressed victim with no political, financial or institutional power.

2014-02-19T04:48:43+00:00

I thought women held 3/5ths of a single vote?

arkindal · 2014-02-19T06:09:32+00:00

It's true, there is no such thing as reverse racism or reverse sexism.
It's just racism and sexism, not reverse, simple sexism.

faber541 · 2014-02-19T08:13:12+00:00

Other than my teachers.

shinarit · 2014-02-19T11:45:07+00:00

But that is plain false. I mean, even if we accept the bullshit that prejudice has to be accompanied with power, women DO have power. Just as not all men are in powerful position, some women are in those positions. It's not about gender, it's about the individual. There is no secret male society.

justthrowmeout · 2014-02-19T13:05:52+00:00

This might be true circa 1890

gsettle · 2014-02-19T14:12:48+00:00

Blah, blah, blah...YES, women can be are some are sexist!

NightSingerDayCaller · 2014-02-19T14:37:16+00:00

Ironically a sexist statement. lol

bh3244 · 2014-02-19T01:42:50+00:00

if it makes you feel better, the people who proclaim this stuff never achieve anything of worth in life.

joshsavage · 2014-02-19T02:06:12+00:00

Um got half right. There is no such thing a reverse sexism. Its just sexism. Claiming that its reverse is sexist in its own right

lazlounderhill · 2014-02-18T22:31:01+00:00

"They (unicorns and leprechauns) do not hold political, economic or institutional power", unless of course they have a penis.

blkarcher77 · 2014-02-19T02:12:19+00:00

You know what though, they're right. There is no such thing as reverse sexism or reverse racism. Its simply sexism and racism. Doesnt matter who did it or who's the victim

Hrel · 2014-02-19T06:11:07+00:00

Because they do not hold political, economic and institutional power.

Uh, yes, they do.

Oprah Winfrey, the Walton Family. Miley fucking Cyrus. Bunch of bitches with influence who did nothing to earn it. Well, ok, Oprah did at least earn it. Mostly.

sk8zero0619 · 2014-02-19T00:03:58+00:00

Can confirm. Am sex

thekingofdemons · 2014-02-19T02:16:15+00:00

Are they saying that you have to hold political/social power to be racist or sexist?

While I do believe that political offices within the government make it easier for prejudiced policies against certain groups of people to be implemented...for various reasons. It's retarded to think that prejudice stems from political or social hierarchy.

otter111a · 2014-02-19T04:51:20+00:00

I actually find this to be really funny.

This box is basically saying that after years and years of trying women are no better off today than they have been in the past.

Put another way, either the box is incorrect and women hold a share of political, economic and institutional power and feminists have made gains and been successful

or

the box is correct and women hold no political, economic or institutional power and the feminist movement has been a failure.

AtheistConservative · 2014-02-19T04:57:25+00:00

Just another fat time ideology that'll hang around until shit gets rough. No one would have cared about this sort of idiocy in WWI Britain.

annefranksgasmask · 2014-02-19T05:11:30+00:00

What screwed up book is this? Please, please don't be something trying to be an educational textbook.

2014-02-19T06:09:41+00:00

Women's studies is, in its current state, completely incompatible with academia. It seeks to redefine the meanings of words to suit its arguments (such as racism, sexism, oppression, etc.) and is anti-intellectual to the core.

NemosHero · 2014-02-19T06:12:56+00:00

Institutionalized -ism =/= -ism

2014-02-19T06:30:47+00:00

No, I won't stop.

What now, textbook? I'm running out of dry kindling for my firewood with all the rain here.

cedartom · 2014-02-19T07:03:29+00:00

What textbook is that printed in?

Luckyluke23 · 2014-02-19T07:07:36+00:00

...what?

Odd666future · 2014-02-19T08:35:03+00:00

That paragraph is literally sexist to both men and women at the same time.

2014-02-19T10:36:46+00:00

I see, so feminism isn't a institution that wields power and influence in universities, media and government.

HoundDogs · 2014-02-19T11:11:10+00:00

Who decides these definitions and what is their evidence besides cult literature?

SweetyMcQ · 2014-02-19T11:15:27+00:00

What the fuck?

lillojohn · 2014-02-19T12:00:19+00:00

XD So women are not equal.

frackzilla · 2014-02-19T12:10:20+00:00

This is the "equality" feminism has been fighting for and why it will never have my support.

2014-02-19T13:35:25+00:00

Anyone can be sexist regardless of gender. Sexism isn't just about political or economic power. Clearly that was written by a feminist.

PurpleSfinx · 2014-02-19T13:35:41+00:00

It's true, there is no such thing as reverse racism. There's just racism, and it can go in any direction.

2014-02-19T13:45:24+00:00

Here is a way that you can respond using their own logic.

Given the entire conversation on gender including what is and isn't sexist is controlled by women at an institutional level - women cannot be sexist against men.

Given that women typically dominate family matters and family law, and the legal system which is the cornerstone of society is biased towards women - women cannot be sexist against men.

Given women are the majority of voters and therefore have most political power - women cannot be sexist against men.

Given the once we consider male to female relationship sharing and transfer, the money gap is likely significantly in women's favour - women cannot be sexist against men.

Rabbit_TAO · 2014-02-19T13:52:49+00:00

Source?

GrosCochon · 2014-02-19T15:41:13+00:00

Oh so the fact that my Première ministre is a woman doesn't count? What about my bank director? Or my school's board director? My own boss is also a woman so is my doctor, lawyer and mechanic. I'd say women have a pretty strong influence on my life. I didn't choose any of these but i don't care. You see unlike you I don't see prejudice in all these positions of power over me. Because I am comfortable in my person and position in life. People respect me ( I hope) because I bring opinion in an intelligent form and know when to stand down to allow said women to tell me about things she knows better than me.

2014-02-19T23:20:15+00:00

Considering words are defined by how they're used, it becomes immediately clear that the word "sexism" merely serves to grant political and/or cultural power to the individuals using it. This is as much the case with now largely archaic terms such as "heretic".

There's no point in deciding upon an objective definition since they're not used objectively.

2014-02-20T03:50:21+00:00

as a broke, politically neutral person, I'm glad I can say anything I want without being racist or sexist

rotisserieve · 2014-08-06T02:31:23+00:00

The reverse racism part gets me, too...i really hate this textbook wtf

edtastic · 2014-02-19T03:24:27+00:00

Institutionalized racism =\= racism

Institutionalized sexism =\= sexism

Socioeconomic and political institutions do not negate rather simply defined words.

Misandry isn't institutionalized, doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

It's simply the hate of men. It doesn't have to be institutionalized for it to fucking exist.

BUT HEY LET'S REDEFINE WORDS TO FURTHER OUR CAUSE

Words are coined to describe a concept, an object, an idea. if someone is behaving the very definition of that word, then that makes the person that particular word. No matter institutionalization or not. Or would they prefer we made a word strictly to describe being hateful to someone for their ethnicity/skin color? Oh wait. We already do. It's called racism, RACE-ism.

Space_Ninja · 2014-02-19T04:44:01+00:00

So, if i go to Haiti and I start liberally using the ~~word nigger~~ (dats racist) n-word everywhere I go, am I racist? Cause I have no power there, which means I can't be racist for using that word.

Xach_ · 2014-02-19T03:12:58+00:00

That's sexist.

VengefulFuries · 2014-02-19T17:33:13+00:00

The thing is, even if that definition of discrimination was true, the point would still be false. Women are in charge of majority of purchases, they have the right to vote and they also hold seats in Parliament and Congress.

DemiDualism · 2014-02-19T02:19:03+00:00

To be fair, i think this says more about the term sexism than it does prejudice. The claim is that sexism is defined as the sex of higher power abusing the power over other genders. yes there are only 2 genders, but in the case of racism.. Black people cannot be racist towards Asians and vice versa (in general, in US at least) because neither holds political/social power over the other.

It doesn't mean that they cannot be prejudice (as the book points out) and that they are immune from those prejudices. . It's just not considered part of the -ism. Though I disagree, I can tolerate the argument that the -ism is more about actions that abuse a group of peoples power over a different group of people than it is about an individual acting out against another individual because they belong to two different groups.

In this line of thinking though, I would say the only fair consequence is that no individual can be sexist or racist, even white males.. Since the -ism is not defined by actions of any particular individual but of the laws/rules created by the group as a whole.

So i don't think the claim is outrageous.. but like I also said, I don't really agree with it either.

Davethe3rd · 2014-02-19T01:20:54+00:00

STOP! There is no such thing as "reverse racism". Black people cannot be just as racist as white people because Black people do not hold any political, institutional or economic power.

...honky.

U_R_Shazbot · 2014-02-19T06:21:05+00:00

This is the same garbage that says only white people can be racist.

Ridiculous garbage

Vandredd · 2014-02-19T14:25:03+00:00

Intersectionality don't real. That picture has to be a joke. A rich white woman has more power than anyone but a rich white man. And that is only if that rich white man is richer than here. Its almost as if class and wealth play a Large factor.

2014-02-19T15:10:12+00:00

I tell you what they are doing. They're trying to do science.

Woman A:) "We have a Problem - They say, we are just as sexist as Men"

Woman B:) "Well then, we have to make it impossible to be sexist for Women"

A:) "But, how would we do that?"

B:) "Well, we get the prerogative of interpretation for the word "Sexism"

A:) "Please Explain, what does that mean? I'm just a Woman, make it easier."

B:) "Oh, Sorry, I got carried away. So, we just make it impossible for a Woman to be sexist, by making the word MEAN something else!"

A:) "Duuhh.... uh..... Buy Shoes"?

B:) "What? No! Imagine: "Sexism" is something, that only someone with political, economical and institutional power can be." - Okay? And now we simply claim, that Women DON'T have political, economical and institutional power. Only men have that. Therefore, even if we are sexist, even if we are more sexist then men, we really are not, because that word does not apply to us.

A:) "... uhm... I dont... what does that... babble"

B:) Do you understand what that means? We actually... wait a second you're drooling, let me clean your chin... we actually change the meaning of the word. And we can do that again and again and again. For example, lets call Men we don't like "Creep". No matter what they do. If a Man you don't like looks at you, call him "Creep". We change the meaning of the word "rape" we make NEW words like "rape-culture" we combine harmless words with bad words to make them terrible... hm... for example.... RAPE-Stare! That's it. Men just don't stare at you, they RAPE you with their eyes. That is not okay!

A:) I understand....

B:) No you don't, but it's okay, that is why I am here.

A:) But you're a Man, why you're doing that?

B:) Because I want to help and respect women. By the way, how about we have lunch together?

A:) Eeeeeew, leave me alone, you creep, stop raping me!

zenguyva · 2014-02-19T17:34:04+00:00

Hillary Clinton? Quite possibly our next president...

PantsOnHead719 · 2014-02-19T17:38:31+00:00

"[Women] do not hold political, economic, or institutional power."

Wrong. Sexism and racism are what they are, there's no such thing as reverse oppression, because it's just oppression. Oppression is as oppression does, no matter who it comes from.

CaptainMinty · 2014-02-19T18:15:37+00:00

That's sexist!

Edit: Since no one seemed to get it, the statement that women don't hold these positions of power is sexist. I bet Hillary Clinton would like to have a word about that. Eleanor Roosevelt is probably rolling in her grave.

Macdaddy357 · 2014-02-19T18:22:38+00:00

More lies from the ballbusting man haters, and self-loathing men they have cowed.

PeteTheFirst · 2014-02-19T19:22:34+00:00

Sexism = views or actions which are prejudiced based on gender. Institutional whatever is fucking irrelevant. If person X makes a derogatory generalization based on the gender of person Y, person X is being sexist towards person Y. End of story.

DaddyGoBot · 2014-02-18T20:56:00+00:00

tumblr

A bit redundant, no? Tumblr is notorious for being a feminist/SJW utopia.

SpecialFester · 2014-02-19T02:24:54+00:00

One interesting thing to me is the fact that all of Gawker Media has to be banned from this sub.

Yup, Feminists have no institutional power whatsoever.

fattyrips · 2014-02-19T06:00:11+00:00

It seems like people are getting hung up on sexism 'technically being prejudice based on sex'. This author is discussing radical definitions of sexism and racism, not definitions grounded within the linguistic framework of the hegemony.

The point that is being made here, which I, a male three-sport athlete and philosophy/poli-sci double major agree with, is that while women can clearly be sexist towards men, in actions or in words, it is a fundamentally different activity because it does not bring with it the weight of a history of oppression, in the same way as male chauvinism does.

A good corollary for thinking about this are the terms 'nigger' and 'cracker'. When a white person uses the term 'nigger' it is fundamentally different from when a person of color uses the term 'cracker' because the former is meant to invoke, and does, a history of genocide and enslavement, while the latter is a derogatory term, reactionary in nature to this oppression.

Similarly, a member of the proletariat cannot be accused of classism for refusing service to a member of the bourgeoisie because they are not in a position to invoke the sort of institutional repression as to oppress the bourgeoisie with their reactionary action.

Systemic and institutional bias on a historical level and scale is the relevant dimension in this discussion.
You can equivocate on definitions of 'sexism', but the author is not discussing the same concept that many of you seem to be alluding to as proof of the author's incorrectness. (I'm a phil major, I can deconstruct language to determine intention and intension pretty goodly.) She is talking about the invocation of a history of institutional oppression by these acts of sexism, not that the act was directed at a particular sex.

We are men, we are privileged, lets just acknowledge it and try to construct a more fair and balanced world.

IanAndersonLOL · 2014-02-19T13:58:47+00:00

The statement is true based on the definition of racism/sexism. Sexism/Racism means we live in a society when one or more races/genders is treated as inferior to another. Honestly, I don't think we live in a sexist society. I think there is a lot of sex based discrimination by, but I don't think we live in a sexist society. Anyway race/sex based discrimination are not the same thing as racism/sexism. They've both colloquially come to mean that, but since this is a text book we should assume they're using the proper definition of the terms.

simulet · 2014-02-19T05:33:56+00:00

[permanently deleted]

Title	Women can't be sexist
Author	herema
Upvotes	1801
Comments	329
Date	February 18, 2014 8:29 PM UTC (12 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/1y9toc/women_cant_be_sexist/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/women-cant-be-sexist.1003631 https://theredarchive.com/post/1003631

Comments

So what are we going to do about this?