~ archived since 2018 ~
Popular
Other
DarkStar0129
[–][deleted] 48 points49 points50 points 7 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
Typically against women...
That's just an opinion lol
[–]DarkStar0129[S] 52 points53 points54 points 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Do opinions have a place in the dictionary?
[–][deleted] 28 points29 points30 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
No. Especially when the dictionary definition doesn't say much about it. Feminism is not equality as its defined and communism and capitalism aren't like their definition either.
[–]14b755fe39 10 points11 points12 points 7 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
What dictionary is that? The ones I checked first define as discrimination based o sex, than say especially against women.
[–]DarkStar0129[S] 12 points13 points14 points 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Googled it.
[–]sphinx2626 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Google is INFESTED with sjw filth
[–]racunix 8 points9 points10 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
pfff in Chile we have a "Ministry of Women and Gender Equality", and by the name you can tell is not really about equality.
[–]skcornivek1 5 points6 points7 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Here's why sexual abuse against men is not a public issue, presented by the US National Library of Medicine:
"We explore 3 factors that lead to misperceptions concerning gender and sexual victimization. First, a male perpetrator and female victim paradigm underlies assumptions about sexual victimization.6 This paradigm serves to obscure abuse that runs counter to the paradigm, reinforce regressive ideas that portray women as victims,7 and stigmatize sexually victimized men.8 Second, some federal agencies use outdated definitions and categories of sexual victimization. This has entailed the prioritization of the types of harm women are more likely to experience as well as the exclusion of men from the definition of rape. Third, the data most widely reported in the press are derived from household sampling. Inherent in this is a methodological bias that misses many who are at great risk for sexual victimization in the United States: inmates, the vast majority of whom are male.9,10 "
[–]jeff_the_nurse 1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Mansplain, manspread, manflu, manterrupt, manslaughter, garbageman...yeah, so indicative of how culture sees women.
[–]Drayelya 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Well I mean it’s from google. They’re so far left they fell off the measuring rod a long time ago. They’re also well known for changing several definitions.
[–]Apellosine 1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
They've taken the definition straight from the Oxford dictionary.
https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/sexism
[–]MorrishMusic 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
The definitions of rape, sexual assault etc also feature the same bias, regardless of source.
[–]genkernels 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
This thing really ought not to be an autological word.
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
welp guys it's time to pack up out shit
[+][deleted] -9 points-8 points-7 points 7 years ago (27 children) | Copy Link
The definition is properly descriptive in how the word is used.
English is not a prescriptive language.
The definition doesn't exclude its use to refer to actions against men, but it is completely accurate to say that it is typically against women.
Your beef isn't with the dictionary.
[–]Pathfinder24 15 points16 points17 points 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
but it is completely accurate to say that it is typically against women.
Would you find it appropriate if the definition of rape had "... often committed by blacks" appended to the end?
That wouldn't make any sense in the context. The dictionary is about defining words and concepts, not about offering statistical information. Therefore, it would be redundant.
Have you looked at the definition for gold-digger? It says "a woman who forms relationships with men purely to obtain money or gifts from them". In this case, it doesn't even say "typically". Why doesn't it include men who go after rich women? Because that's not what people mean when they typically use the term. Almost always, when people say "gold-digger", they are referring to a woman. That's what typicality means.
The dictionary is simply describing how words are used, not how they should be used. That's why, when a lot of people misspell a word a certain way, it becomes standard after a few decades. It doesn't mean anything more.
[–]DownrightCaterpillar 4 points5 points6 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
u/ChefSqueaky do you have a scholarly source on this topic? Or is it just your personal opinion that sexism is generally against women?
[–]tenchineuro 11 points12 points13 points 7 years ago (21 children) | Copy Link
The definition doesn't exclude its use to refer to actions against men
No, it does not include discrimination against men.
That is the feminist dogma.
[–]NibblyPig -4 points-3 points-2 points 7 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link
The dictionary is completely objective, it is describing how the word is used, and it's saying it's mostly used to refer to women, which is true.
This kind of post makes me feel embarassed when others come to the sub and read it, it doesn't shine a positive light on the movement.
[–]tenchineuro 2 points3 points4 points 7 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
The dictionary is completely objective
There's some objective test for dictionary definitions? Really?
and it's saying it's mostly used to refer to women, which is true.
It pretty much defines sexism as something that happens to women.
Let's try merriman-webster...
------------
nounsex·ism | \ ˈsek-ˌsi-zəm \
1: prejudice or discrimination based on sex
especially : discrimination against women
2: behavior, conditions, or attitudes that foster stereotypes of social roles based on sex
This is, if you ask me, a more objective definition. Which dictionary do you claim is cannon?
Yeah, you'll never win friends by asserting that sexism can be against both men and women.
If you're embarrassed then there are plenty of subs where you will never see posts of responses like this, for example r\feminism, r\againstmensrights or r\menslib. Something to keep in mind, eh?
[–]NibblyPig 1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
They're both objective.
Find 1,000 people and ask them to name something that's sexism. The vast majority will name something that is discrimination against women.
Because most people associate sexism with women, the dictionary has stated that when the word is used, it's typically being used with regards to women.
I can't believe people would screech about a dictionary definition that explains how a word is used.
The fact that people neglect to acknowledge sexism happens to both men and women equally is terrible, but that has nothing to do with how the dictionary explains the usage of the word.
People will read this and think jeez these people will get salty about anything, even the dictionary explaining how a word is used, how can I take mens issues seriously if they think a dictionary's definition is serious business?
[–]tenchineuro 1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
Source?
Look, I understand that you don't understand, so there's no progress to be made from here. But I still think there are several subs that would be more to your liking.
[–]NibblyPig 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Source: Living in the real world
Try googling 'what is sexism' and look how many results are about women. Are you surprised that the dictionary says ya, sexism is usually referring to women.
Dictionaries tell you how words are used, which is why they have silly words in that people invent if they become popular enough, like mansplaining.
Let me guess, you think the dictionary having a definition for that is sexist too? Evil dictionary, explaining what words mean that people use!
I'm interested in men's rights but I am not interested in this except where it serves to undermine them.
[–]tenchineuro 1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
You just keep on guessing, and you can have the last word too, I'm done with this.
[–]aVeryLonePepe-8 points 7 years ago [recovered] (14 children) | Copy Link
It does. It says "Based on sex", and "male" is a sex.
It isnt. People usually use it as a synonym to misogyny. It is a a fact and it should be there that it is typically used to describe misogyny. You are getting dangerously close to the pit of "Lets remove facts because of Political correctness".
[–]Standard_Rules_Apply 7 points8 points9 points 7 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link
Do you have a source for your alleged facts or are you getting dangerously close to the pit of "Believe all women."
?
[–]aVeryLonePepe-6 points 7 years ago [recovered] (5 children) | Copy Link
This is not about believing women. This is about the fact that most people use "sexist" as a synonym to "misogynist". Whether its right or wrong, it is like that.
[–]Standard_Rules_Apply 3 points4 points5 points 7 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
You did not provide a source for your "facts.".
I conclude that means you don't have a source.
Verdict: your facts are merely your opinions.
There is no room to argue when a statement uses sexist language.
[–]aVeryLonePepe-6 points 7 years ago [recovered] (3 children) | Copy Link
When most if not all dictionaries put sexism as a common word for misogyny, it is Safe to assume that it is not feminist dogma.
And common uses are not sexist. Change my mind.
[–]Standard_Rules_Apply 4 points5 points6 points 7 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
If most of your friends want to rape a woman, is it safe to assume that rape is ok?
[–]aVeryLonePepe0 points 7 years ago [recovered] (1 child) | Copy Link
So let me try this differently. I wont make any comments anymore because you will disregard anything I say. Simply go out and ask people if people use those 2 words synonymously.
A good example is a "sexist" joke. People will always automatically assume that it is misogynistic, because sexism against men is a relatively new concept awareness-wise.
[–]Standard_Rules_Apply 1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
I wont make any comments anymore because...
...you know you are wrong claiming your opinions are facts.
...your argument that credibility is earned by repeated use rather than verifiable information is not only wrong but malicious in its intent.
Using sexist language to define the meaning of words is unacceptable in every way.
[–]tenchineuro 1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago* (6 children) | Copy Link
No, it does not include discrimination against men. It does. It says "Based on sex", and "male" is a sex.
It does not say "Based on sex", did you read it?
And the word male is not mentioned once, the word women mentioned twice...
prejudice, stereotyping, or discrimination, typically against women, on the basis of sex
sexism in language is an offensive reminder of the way the culture sees women
Can you spot the difference?
That is the feminist dogma. It isnt.
It isnt.
By feminist definitions it's not even possible for a woman to be sexist.
It is a a fact
Great, feel free to prove it.
You are getting dangerously close to the pit of "Lets remove facts because of Political correctness".
Political dogma is not fact nor based upon fact. Neither is religious dogma. They are essentially the same thing.
[–]aVeryLonePepe3 points 7 years ago [recovered] (5 children) | Copy Link
The "on the basis of sex". It is functionally the same.
Because people actually use it like that? Whether right or wrong, it is used like that by the majority of people.
I never talked about Feminists. I just said that a definition informing people about its common use doesnt have anything to do with any kind of dogma.
I am doing just that.
Call me a turkey, but removing the common use of words just because you dont like it seems quite reminiscent of the people you hate so much.
[–]tenchineuro 1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
It does not say "Based on sex", did you read it? The "on the basis of sex". It is functionally the same.
You put quote marks around it, which means you used the exact same words as the definition.
Because people actually use it like that?
That's not the way people here use it, surely you mean some people use it like that.
but it is completely accurate to say that it is typically against women. Great, feel free to prove it. I am doing just that.
but it is completely accurate to say that it is typically against women. Great, feel free to prove it.
You have not provided even one bit of evidence to back your assertion, you've made no attempt to prove it whatsoever. Do I need to post the dictionary definition of evidence? Would that help?
[–]aVeryLonePepe1 points 7 years ago [recovered] (3 children) | Copy Link
Whatever.
I am talking about the general public, noone here would use it due to the information we have.
Point is, people use it like that. Ive seen it in books, family, school, online publications and more. Even if I am wrong in all of this, people should be informed about all the possible uses of the words.
Point is, people use it like that. Ive seen it in books, family, school, online publications and more.
So do you agree with the OP that the definition of sexism is sexist?
[–]aVeryLonePepe2 points 7 years ago [recovered] (1 child) | Copy Link
No. It is not. It simply showcases the popular use of the word, whether the use is right or wrong, it is a use.
No. It is not.
I see. So what do you say about this claim?
It simply showcases the popular use of the word, whether the use is right or wrong, it is a use.
Which has nothing whatsoever to do with whether that dictionary definition is sexist or not.
Google has been changing definitions of words for years now.. so yes our beef is not with the ACTUAL definitions..but with entities who fuck with our society's via langauge and relabeling words and concepts. Yw
[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Stop downvoting posts that simply say things you don't like. This argument is valid. The definition is indeed descriptive, not prescriptive. What it means is that, when someone says the word sexism, they typically refer to the kind against women. Typicality is not a moral imperative.
© TheRedArchive 2026. All rights reserved.created by /u/dream-hunter
[–][deleted] 48 points49 points50 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]DarkStar0129[S] 52 points53 points54 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 28 points29 points30 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]14b755fe39 10 points11 points12 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]DarkStar0129[S] 12 points13 points14 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]sphinx2626 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]racunix 8 points9 points10 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]skcornivek1 5 points6 points7 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]jeff_the_nurse 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Drayelya 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]Apellosine 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]MorrishMusic 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]genkernels 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[+][deleted] -9 points-8 points-7 points (27 children) | Copy Link
[–]Pathfinder24 15 points16 points17 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]DownrightCaterpillar 4 points5 points6 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]tenchineuro 11 points12 points13 points (21 children) | Copy Link
[–]NibblyPig -4 points-3 points-2 points (5 children) | Copy Link
[–]tenchineuro 2 points3 points4 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]NibblyPig 1 point2 points3 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]tenchineuro 1 point2 points3 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]NibblyPig 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]tenchineuro 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]aVeryLonePepe-8 points [recovered] (14 children) | Copy Link
[–]Standard_Rules_Apply 7 points8 points9 points (6 children) | Copy Link
[–]aVeryLonePepe-6 points [recovered] (5 children) | Copy Link
[–]Standard_Rules_Apply 3 points4 points5 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]aVeryLonePepe-6 points [recovered] (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]Standard_Rules_Apply 4 points5 points6 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]aVeryLonePepe0 points [recovered] (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]Standard_Rules_Apply 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]tenchineuro 1 point2 points3 points (6 children) | Copy Link
[–]aVeryLonePepe3 points [recovered] (5 children) | Copy Link
[–]tenchineuro 1 point2 points3 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]aVeryLonePepe1 points [recovered] (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]tenchineuro 1 point2 points3 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]aVeryLonePepe2 points [recovered] (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]tenchineuro 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]sphinx2626 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point (0 children) | Copy Link