My girlfriend says you can't be sexist against men. Please help.

iggybdawg · 2011-06-14T21:33:06+00:00

Okay, let's examine her argument in more detail.

"Sexism is prejudice + power"

This is a blatant redefinition of the word sexism to fit her own needs. Sexism is discrimination based on gender, plain and simple. Her definition is wrong, but for the sake of argument let's pretend she's not wrong.

What she's trying to assume in her argument is that all women are powerless and all men are powerful and therefore you can't be sexist against men but you can against women. This assumption is necessary in order for her premise to lead to her conclusion. And this assumption is also, obviously, demonstrably, false. Nancy Pelosi has more power than the vast majority of men ever will, so if Nancy Pelosi says "all men are pigs" then according to her own false definition of sexism Nancy Pelosi is being sexist.

BUT! That's not all! She clearly has not understood her own argument because her definition "sexism is prejudice + power" does not lead to her conclusion at all, EVEN if we grant her false assumptions about power:

With her definition of sexism then if you have power and you express prejudice you are being sexist. All of this has nothing at all to do with the target of said sexism, it merely defines the source of sexism. Any person who has power can be sexist and any person who does not have power cannot be sexist, no matter how much prejudice they expunge. So even IF she is 100% convinced that all men have power and all women don't then you can still have sexism against men from other men who, of course, have power. It also means that women are entirely incapable of sexism, even against other women.

None of this leads at all to the conclusion that sexism is impossible against men, but possible against women.

Any questions?

Edits: Grammar, spelling, clarifications

Alanna · 2011-06-14T22:23:15+00:00

[permanently deleted]

KMFCM · 2011-06-14T22:00:12+00:00

I'm gonna be the umpteenth person to say to kick her to the curb.

That's like the old "being racist against white people is reverse racism" argument.

speakerchewer · 2011-06-14T23:39:56+00:00

[permanently deleted]

nlakes · 2011-06-14T23:41:11+00:00

You: ಠ_ಠ

Her: ...

You: You have power to end this relationship, you've grated special power to women as a class by denying they can be sexist. Ergo, women can be sexist as you're using your power in this relationship to assert this and insist it to be true whilst disrespecting me.

P.S. GTFO.

levelate · 2011-06-14T22:07:12+00:00

this is just something feminists say so that they can have carte blanche to say/do whatever they like against men, and then say 'how can i be sexist, i'm a woman......'

never argue with idiots, they will drag you down to their level, and beat you through experience.

ttt1776 · 2011-06-15T01:13:46+00:00

Her statement is within its self sexiest. If you can't change her mind then she is dumb and you should leave her.

iongantas · 2011-06-15T00:37:25+00:00

This is the same tired argument about pretty much all forms of discrimination, and it is utter bullshit. Sexism, Racism etc. occur between human beings, and in the immediate and situation. It is in those situations irrelevant whose arbitrary group is perceived by some people as having the upper hand on some large scale. In the moment, everyone has the power to treat people respectfully, or discriminate against them for some irrelevant reason. Sexism just is discrimination on the basis of gender. Racism just is discrimination on the basis of race.

Obviously you would be unwise to continue dating her, and you should tell her exactly why.

dunskwerk · 2011-06-15T03:58:36+00:00

Ask her to detail why you specifically are more powerful than her.

shrug Or say that most men aren't powerful, even if most of the powerful are men.

Aavagadrro · 2011-06-14T21:23:51+00:00

Any help?

Yeah. Leave. Now. Don't look back. Run. No regrets. Goodbye. There's the door. See ya later.

HiddenHelix · 2011-06-15T00:32:38+00:00

Her argument is based on the implicit premise that, as a man, you have power over women. If you apply this premise to other definitions, like consent, the conclusion becomes much more serious for you.

Being in a position of power over someone means that they cannot really consent to sex (like a professor having sex with a student, a boss having sex with an employee). If you accept her premise that all men have power over women, then all sex is rape. If she believes that all intimacy is abuse, then she would not be in a relationship with you.

rantgrrl · 2011-06-15T01:17:35+00:00

Took me ages to find this again.

Merriam Webster Dictionary defines feminism as:

1: the theory of the political, economic, and social equality of the sexes

2: organized activity on behalf of women's rights and interests

while it defines a Masculinist as:

1: an advocate of male superiority or dominance

Anyone know if there's actually a good reason for this or is it's just plain bullshit?

2011-06-15T01:52:37+00:00

Just had an 'I'M AN IDIOT' moment. Should have thought of this earlier.

She says that you "can't be sexist against men, only discriminatory". Okay sure, that's fine because:

Discriminatory:

Making or showing an unfair or prejudicial distinction between different categories of people or things, esp. on the grounds of race, age, or sex.

She just disagreed with herself. Good god I can't wait for this argument :'D

thedarkerside · 2011-06-14T22:09:07+00:00

sexism |ˈsekˌsizəm|

noun

prejudice, stereotyping, or discrimination, typically against women, on the basis of sex.

DERIVATIVES

sexist adjective & noun

Sexism is discrimination based on sex, nothing more, nothing less.

ghebert001 · 2011-06-15T01:00:04+00:00

Definition of sexism in Merriam-Webster.com: prejudice or discrimination based on sex; especially : discrimination against women

That's right, discrimination against women. not men, not men and women...just women.

That's beside the point, your girlfriend needs to open her eyes and see that the female gender is not the centre of the universe.

When men don't get thrown in jail for calling the cops on a wife or gf that abused THEM and when men can get divorced without losing their kids and half their shit...and who has the power again? The way I see it, her argument is actually the reverse, men have no power in the court of law while women have almost complete control of the justice system. By her logic, only women can be sexist and not men.

2011-06-15T02:43:18+00:00

That's stupid.

Here is a dictionary definition of sexism:

1: prejudice or discrimination based on sex

2: behavior, conditions, or attitudes that foster stereotypes of social roles based on sex

Start with that. The dictionary makes no mention about prejudice and power, just discrimination. Also, she's wrong that men have all the power - that's what she's implying. Tell that to all the men who have nowhere to go when they are abused by their wives/girlfriends, because nobody cares or takes it seriously - they get blamed for the abuse. Tell that to the men who are falsely accused of rape and see their lying accuser walk away scot-free without ever having to make amends to his tattered reputation. Tell that to all the good fathers out there who never get a shot at having custody, because family courts are so biased towards women. Tell that to men who have absolutely no say in the fate of their unborn child, whose wives/girlfriends have an abortion even though they know that the father of the child wants it and is willing to raise it...does she know that thousands of men every year wind up with PTSD after losing their unborn child in this manner? How's that for "power"?

I could keep ranting. Bottom line, she'll either listen and realize she's wrong, or she will prove to be so entrenched in her sexist mindset that she won't be willing to listen. If that's the case, give up and break up, because you'll only be in for misery with a woman like that. The sexism will come up in some way or other during your relationship.

BarrySquared · 2011-06-15T03:09:54+00:00

I got the same "You can't be racist against white people" argument once.

Just tell her that making up her own definition for a word that already has a definition is just stupid.

2011-06-15T05:46:43+00:00

simple answer: power comes in various forms in various occasions for various needs. It is relative and spontaneous, no one has a monopoly on power.

and only discriminating against men means that it is still in action, which isn't much better

geodebug · 2011-06-15T06:23:28+00:00

Reddit boys will always say "dump her" so that you'll be as lonely as they tend to be.

My advice is to simply go the "meh" route:

HER: Men can't be sexist YOU: Meh, definitions are fuzzy.

-- you switch topics and the conversation is over. Most people don't want to come off as boring so if you act bored by the topic it should be easy to switch.

In a relationship, your job isn't being someone's teacher or psychiatrist. Don't worry so much about correcting or trying to be right.

It's not that big a deal. Many young women kind of get over-stimulated when they first start learning about women's studies, history, etc. It's fun to play victim for awhile. It's like r/atheism where you can tell the newbs because they're all up in arms making rage-comics over the smallest things.

Most folks tend to mellow as they hit their 30s and real life issues kicks in.

If it really bothers you then by all means, let her go.

iFuckedYourFather · 2011-06-15T07:17:29+00:00

you can pretty much be anything ist

FreddyDeus · 2011-06-15T09:02:08+00:00

[you] can't be sexist against men, only discriminatory

Don't rise to the bait and engage her with this bullshit.

Tell your girlfriend to stop dealing in semantics. Sexism is discrimination. She's falling into the trap of (or trying to trap you with) over-intellectualisation. Which admittedly, feminists do love so much.

Feckless · 2011-06-15T10:11:53+00:00

Good replies...if you want to know where her opinion is coming from check out the finally feminism 101 blog, here and maybe here.

Some rebutals collected via reading feministcritics an interesting blog:

One example is the argument that men cannot be oppressed by themselves. Yet there are many examples of women harming women (e.g. female genital mutilation) that are considered by feminists to be oppression. If women can oppress women on the dimension of gender, then men can oppress men.

A more sophisticated feminist argument is that men are not oppressed on the dimension of gender, but that harms to them can be oppression that is based on some other characteristic (e.g. race, class, sexual orientation). In short, men cannot be considered oppressed as men, but they can be oppressed as blacks, gays, or perhaps as black men, or gay men. As Charles writes in a thread on oppression on Alas, a Blog: “Men are not taken out and shot en masse for being men, they are taken out and shot for being men + something else. Men are not bullied for being men, they are bullied for being men + something else.”

Yet in many cases, women are harmed for being women + something else, yet feminists still consider those harms to be examples of oppression. Marc Lepine, the perpetrator of the Montreal Massacre, went on a rampage against women that he perceived to be feminists, not against any women. In Gendercide and Genocide, Adam Jones offers several similar examples. In the case of witch hunts, female “witches” were killed just because they were female, but because they were also presumed to be in league with the devil. In the case of female infanticide, girl children may be killed not just for being female, but for being female + an economic drain on the family. from here

And here is where gynocentrism started going wrong. These feminist women were correct to identify victimization, denial of rights, and oppression of women. The mistake was in concluding that in general, men were “less” disadvantaged in society than women, simply because men weren’t necessarily disadvantaged in the ways that women were. This conclusion presupposes some metric or scale on which women’s disadvantages weigh heavier.

However, to weigh one thing against another, you need to know the weight of both. Yet feminists only had an idea of the weight of women’s victimization. Since, as part of gynocentrism, they examined only women’s experiences, and not men’s experiences, they had no idea of what disadvantages, harms, and violations of rights that men were experiencing. This ignorance did not stop those feminists. They placed women’s oppression on one side of the scale, watched the balance tip, and concluded that women’s oppression weighed heavier. Men’s oppression never made it onto the scale.

Through their gynocentric lens, feminists figured out that women were suffering, and that the agents of that suffering were often male. Yet some of these feminists committed two fallacies. The first fallacy was to assume that if men were oppressors under the gender system, they could not be oppressed by it. The second fallacy was to paint men in general as victimizers and abusers of women. from here

“Men have disadvantages too” and it’s ugly twin “Patriarchy hurts men too” serve a number of useful ends for feminists. Superficially they acknowledge male suffering and disadvantage, and so serve to deflect one possible criticism of feminism. The word “too” positions male disadvantage as adjoint to and subordinate to female disadvantage, thus trivialising it. Finally, these alternative framings allow feminists to avoid ever admitting to the existence of female privilege. This is important, because the existance of female privilege would present a powerful challenge to the very idea of male privilege.

(“Patriarchy hurts men too” has one further function: By identifying victimiser and victim, it blames the victim, thus giving the feminist further reason to dismiss it.)

It’s important to realise that any relative advantage that group A has in comparison to group B could be framed either as a privilege (for group A) or a disadvantage (for group B). In practice gender is the only criterion used by feminists to decide on the framing. You will never see a feminist admit to female privilege, nor will they say that women suffer too. This is pure sexism.

(Feck: in Refercence to a male privilege checklist) "I have the privilege of being unaware of my male privilege."

For feminists to complain about this, while refusing to acknowledge female privilege is nothing less than rank hypocrisy. from here

The terms ‘oppression,’ ‘privilege,’ and ‘the patriarchy’ tend to be interchangeable, and all suffer from the same lack of clear definition or one-sided use. The problem with the term(s) may stem from the problem of the initial premise, i.e. it is something men systematically do to women. The term is not used necessarily to define or clarity that statement; rather it is used to justify that weak position. If one applied the term evenly, then the notion that only males cause social oppression falls apart, which is why one will often see even among feminists who do ‘concede’ that males can be oppressed do so with the caveat that women are oppressed ‘more’ or ‘worse.’ from here

Feminists are not concerned about promoting equality and equal treatment. They are solely concerned with bettering the social and economic position of women regardless of how it affects males. Equality will never develop from such a stance because equality requires seeing it from different perspectives, which includes the male perspective.

Therein, one can at least see why feminists routinely deny the existence male discrimination and male victims of violence and rape while overtly and covertly supporting those actions and engaging in the wholesale mockery of male victims. Yet, every time feminists do this, they hurt their own cause. For instance, there is no way to present male issues without appearing ‘privileged’ and ‘oppressive.’ Even non-inflammatory attempts are readily dismissed without more than a cursory glance. A reason for why the acts are never bad, why women and feminists can never be the slightest bit responsible and why those acts can and will never be considered discriminatory, sexist, privileges or oppressive has already been formulated. No discussion, no debate, no in-depth analysis of the problems need ever occur.

And how can it when just using a male name is considered at an act of privilege? The social inequities that exist did not occur in some kind of gender vacuum. Both males and females possess advantages and disadvantages as a result of their gender, which both groups contributed to. Some of those biases are older, others are the direct result of a sexist political ideology. Regardless of that fact, if one disallows a group of people to speak openly and candidly about their experiences of discrimination and social inequality while demanding that group acknowledge one’s own experience, one becomes a hypocrite. More importantly, it demonstrates how easily and quickly bias, sexism and bigotry can become socially ingrained.

After all, not too long ago the issues feminists wished to discuss were not considered to be ‘thoughtful analysis or even a result of unintentional misunderstanding- they’re intended as a “Gotcha!” moment.’ from here

In all of these examples, men suffered a substantially worse outcome than women of the same race, class, or age. They were less privileged and less powerful than women in the same circumstance, unless we measure “privilege” and “power” in such a contorted way that death or serious physical harm don’t count as a lack of those things. Feminists who perpetuate the falsehood that men are more privileged than women, when all else is held equal, either are unaware of these examples, ignoring them, or denying them.

Feminists could instead claim that when all else is held equal, perhaps men are not more privileged than women in all contexts, but just in most contexts. Maybe that is true. Yet feminists have no business making that claim until they do their homework, and show that they have examined contexts in which males are vulnerable well enough to determine that they are rarer than contexts in which females are vulnerable.

White, middle/upper-class men in Western countries without active drafts, who don’t work in hazardous industries, who stay out of trouble with the law, and who weren’t sexually abused can probably avoid most of the harms I mentioned (except infant circumcision). Yet we shouldn’t just consider the quantity of the situations in which one sex might be advantaged over the other, but also their magnitude or impact. In these situations where men are vulnerable, they are vulnerable to grave harms. While white, middle- and upper-class Western men might be able to avoid some of the worst harms that men can suffer, examining the men with the most privilege in the world shouldn’t mean ignoring the men with the least. from here

Maybe somewhat helpful...

tookMYshovelwithme · 2011-06-15T10:32:28+00:00

The way I view this is some very powerful old white males will not hesitate to trample over you regardless of race, class, gender. They have gotten ahead. Don't think they're sexist, bigoted or homophobic; they just stomp on anyone in their way. It's a personality thing that has gotten many people with the right connections to the top. It's not gender, race or sexuality, it's a self mentality.

shady8x · 2011-06-15T14:41:54+00:00

In the west, money is power. Who has the money? Women own 60% of the wealth in America. They control 85% of spending decisions. To say that they don't have power is beyond ridiculous.

ManThoughts · 2011-06-14T21:39:30+00:00

Don't bother arguing. Arguing with someone as far gone as that isn't going to work.

Break up with her immediately, in as final a way as you can muster. I am not joking. I dated a radical feminist about seven years ago and I count myself lucky i made it out alive.

Don't stick your penis in crazy. And if you already have, don't do it again.

You'll thank me later dude.

thedevguy · 2011-06-14T23:23:04+00:00

Her error is in assuming that power is a two-dimensional zero-sum slider. In other words, if you (as a male) have +2 power it necessarily means that she (as a woman) has -2.

The way it really works is that there are some areas where you have power and privilege an there are some areas where she has them. Increasingly for example, she has power in our legal system. She has power in social situations (where people will run to her aid but not to yours). Here's a great example of sexism against men due to women's privilege of being assumed "good"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LlFAd4YdQks

Whisper · 2011-06-15T01:44:04+00:00

"So all men have power over all women?"

petedacook · 2011-06-15T02:21:44+00:00

"Accidentally" put it in her butt, then dump her.

Demonspawn · 2011-06-15T02:58:59+00:00

Please enumerate any government-granted rights that men enjoy which women do not enjoy in equal or greater measure.
Please enumerate any government-imposed responsibilities that women bear which men do not bear in equal or greater measure.
Gender reverse those two questions.
Recognize that men face de-jure and de-facto discrimination from government.
Recognize that government is pretty much the definition of "power"
Recognize that under the definition of sexism she used, only women can be sexist.

Ball is in her court now.

McChucklenuts · 2011-06-15T04:09:33+00:00

Tell her she might have a point where institutionalized sexism is concerned. The concept of sexism is simply the belief that one sex is superior to the other.

ignatiusloyola · 2011-06-15T04:20:19+00:00

It all depends on the definition being used. As she said, her definition requires prejudice and power. So, in her world view, it is not possible to be sexist against men.

Instead of attacking her, why don't you ask her why she thinks men have power and women do not? Likely she will bring up the wage gap issue, gender based employment issues, rape issues, domestic violence issues, etc...

Wage Gap Issues: http://consad.com/index.php?page=an-analysis-of-reasons-for-the-disparity-in-wages-between-men-and-women

Gender Based Employment Issues: http://www.lagriffedulion.f2s.com/math.htm and http://www.lagriffedulion.f2s.com/math2.htm

Rape Issues: http://www.mediaradar.org/research_on_false_rape_allegations.php

Domestic Violence Issues: http://pn.psychiatryonline.org/content/42/15/31.2.full?eaf

If she still thinks that men have "power" but women do not, then she has an ideological position that she isn't willing to change. Her definition of "sexism" is just like the definition of "women". It is just simply a gendered word to her, and that won't change.

Then ask her whether she thinks that sexual discrimination is acceptable. If it isn't acceptable to one gender, then it isn't acceptable to the other. Crimes don't become acceptable based on who the victim is, and sexual discrimination is a hate crime.

If she isn't willing to accept that it is possible to be sexist against men, then just don't use that word.

cybergeek11235 · 2011-06-15T05:33:47+00:00

One FELL swoop. FELL.

Not "fowl".

</pedant>

texpundit · 2011-06-15T06:17:04+00:00

Edit: While I appreciate the general advice of 'dump her' and 'don't put your dick in crazy' both of those don't end in me exposing her obvious sexism.

She's not going to listen to you no matter what. She's indoctrinated.

As Ron White says, "You can't fix stupid."

erikmyxter · 2011-06-15T09:02:18+00:00

I support some of the MR but the idea that because she might think this one must dump her is crazy. There is no reason why a person could hold this viewpoint and still be a great person, even a wonderful girlfriend. Also what if she never heard an apposing viewpoint and if she has and still doesn't change her mind one must think that no one is going to change their ideas in one instance, things take time.

So unless there is dishonesty and other hardships in your relationship, please don't break up with her because she has a viewpoint.

NoSalt · 2011-06-15T13:18:48+00:00

Her statement is the ultimate in irony.

prhln · 2011-06-15T15:28:56+00:00

THAT'S MANSPLAINING

PorkRocket · 2011-06-15T14:24:10+00:00

Punch her in the face. You can't fix people who don't choose to think.

pmoney24 · 2011-06-15T00:02:41+00:00

well that's because girls are stupid, duh!

JROXZ · 2011-06-14T23:56:07+00:00

Successful troll girlfriend is successful...

plumeria · 2011-06-15T04:57:06+00:00

Seems her issue is about the verb-age, not the act. I suggest a dictionary

joeydeuce · 2011-06-15T13:48:12+00:00

Do not argue with a fool. Others will not be able to tell the difference.

2011-06-15T17:27:53+00:00

She is telling you, she has disproven the power imbalance, it's that simple.

Feckless · 2011-06-17T12:25:24+00:00

Did you talk to her yet?

kowalski71 · 2011-06-15T01:58:09+00:00

I found this after you made your edit, and clicked on the link solely to upvote the people who said 'dump her' and 'don't put your dick in crazy. Thanks for the heads up, karma where karma's due.

TBcasualty · 2011-06-15T13:25:35+00:00

If by "Please help" you mean "Please help me break up with her", then no, that's your job, unfortunately.

2011-06-14T23:34:46+00:00

I couldn't agree more.

Froggie92 · 2011-06-15T00:41:35+00:00

she is right

the practical skeptic, chapter 14 - lisa j mcintyre

I'm a guy, she is arguing from the sociological perspective you guys are just looking for a witch to burn

ghebert001 · 2011-06-14T21:51:58+00:00

Quit your fucking whining for one. God you sound like a such pussy.

sadshark · 2011-06-14T23:57:16+00:00

Grow some balls, don't go "please help" on reddit.

Title	My girlfriend says you can't be sexist against men. Please help.
Author	jimadybobalon
Upvotes	119
Comments	188
Date	June 14, 2011 9:23 PM UTC (15 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/hzqvx/my_girlfriend_says_you_cant_be_sexist_against_men/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/my-girlfriend-says-you-cant-be-sexist-against-men.1038627 https://theredarchive.com/post/1038627

Comments