NationStates Jolt Archive

Which do you feel is most prevalent in the society in which you live?

Is it harder for women to be treated equally with many companies thinking that women are unsuitable for upper management or is skin colour a greater impediment? Do you feel that things generally better in your particular company/field? Does the fact that most people below the poverty line are women of any race affect how you think about this? Does the fact that in some countries racial minorities are more likely to be below the poverty line affect how you think about this? How do you suspect women or racial minorities feel about this subject (esp women who are racial minorities)?


edit: I couldn't give a "this isn't a problem here" category for each group, but if you believe that neither is a problem, let us know where you live so we can all try moving to this utopia of equality.

Define racism. People here for instance can speak condenscending about "those brownies" when referring to people of e.g. Moroccan descent - but that is not due to them believing Moroccans are a different race. Would it count for your survey though ?

I think racism is probably slightly more prevalent, but I really don't know. I don't know any racists or sexists personally (not that that's a problem), nor are there any in my area that I know of. Or, if they are, they keep it to themselves pretty well.

I voted "racism" but I'd say they're about the same odds.

Define racism. People here for instance can speak condenscending about "those brownies" when referring to people of e.g. Moroccan descent - but that is not due to them believing Moroccans are a different race. Would it count for your survey though ?

I suppose? It's a similar idea to racism even if they aren't considered a separate race. Unless you think it's because they're first generation immigrants and people would be indifferent to their children...

It's more about which is the more prevalent problem in terms of how a person is treated. So not necessarily who gets talked about in a condescending manner (although listening to a lot of music nowadays...) but who gets denied opportunities as a result of their race/sex.

I voted "racism" but I'd say they're about the same odds.

So I should have gone with a 10th poll option to the effect of "they're both about equal". Shit.

Well Dakini, I can't answer you're poll because there isn't one answer that fits me. Where I live racism, sexism, and a million other isms are major problems. They aren't as apparent as in many places but they are real easy to see if you look, and they are rampant.

I suppose? It's a similar idea to racism even if they aren't considered a separate race. Unless you think it's because they're first generation immigrants and people would be indifferent to their children...

Well, it is primarily due to the associated (sub)culture. Almost nobody here believes races even exist. But I shall call it racism anyway.

Hmm. Then I have to say that racism is *perceived* as the bigger problem - but I think that sexism is more prevalent in reality. Lots of female lower level managers for instance, but few at the true top.

racism is funnier so I guess thats more a no-no

gosh being a white male is awesome I'm like a quarter stronger than a woman and you can take me home to meet mom and dad

Why can't we have both?

Sexism, as it involves several aspects, more than just male-female relations.

White anglo-saxon male, and the from my point of view, racism is the more significant problem in the US.

But, given that it has begun to take on the characteristics of a more open conversation, it is also more likely to be significantly alleviated sooner.

Why can't we have both?
Because I planned the poll poorly.

It's very hard to tell because I tend to move in social circles where neither is acceptable. But I do see both around me all the time. If I had to guess, I'd say that in Massachusetts, where I live now, racism is more prevalent than sexism, although both are significantly less prevalent than in some other areas of the country. But Massachusetts' history with open and institutionalized racism is still very recent, and racist attitudes are still common, especially among older people.

However, in the US in general, I would guess that they might be about equal, and that both are getting rarer.

However, in the US in general, I would guess that they might be about equal, and that both are getting rarer.
I'd say this is true, they're both about equal. I think sexism is harder to complain about, though, both in the laws and how society perceives it. Maybe because traditional roles have existed for so long and seem so universal, or maybe because blacks and other minorities have been more visibly mistreated by society and the government in recent history. It could be both.

Sexism is still common and acceptable in our society (see topfree equality).

I think both are still major problems, but sexism is more insidious. We notice racism more nowadays, while sexist attitudes are more often simply taken for granted.

Sexism is still common and acceptable in our society (see topfree equality).

I kinda think that issues like employers being less likely to hire women because they might want to take time off and have kids; employers being less likely to promote women to important positions within the company because women "aren't suited for leadership"; presidents of large universities making statements to the effect of "women can't do math" and so on are bigger than the inability to walk around without a shirt.

I kinda think that issues like employers being less likely to hire women because they might want to take time off and have kids; employers being less likely to promote women to important positions within the company because women "aren't suited for leadership"; presidents of large universities making statements to the effect of "women can't do math" and so on are bigger than the inability to walk around without a shirt.
Especially in Scotland.

Especially in Scotland.
Well, it doesn't matter much here in Canada either... in my province women have the right to go topless (as long as whatever establishment allows it) but I have yet to see anyone do it who wasn't breastfeeding (which is actually why the law was created).

In my area they are about equal in prevalence but sexism is "more acceptable".....like people know not to make racist comments at work or in front of people that they aren't sure about, but sexist comments are never taboo.

They're both a problem, but where I live, I see racism negatively affect people's lives more than sexism--or at least more dramatically. If you're white, Indian or northern Asian, people generally assume you're intelligent, hard-working, honest, etc. If you're black, Latino or southeast Asian, people are more likely to think you're stupid, lazy, in a gang, etc., and you're more likely to be harassed by cops and live below the poverty line.

I'm a minority, Hispanic, living in America (though it doesn't feel like I'm a minority...) and I think racism is worse. Well, I used to think they were both pretty bad but when you think about it sexism has never led to the sort of bloodshed and loss of life as compared to racism. I mean, women not having equal suffrage and lower pay wages and everything else they had against them was still better than how blacks were treated for example, or how many people died in the Holocaust and the Holodomor.

I'm a minority, Hispanic, living in America (though it doesn't feel like I'm a minority...) and I think racism is worse. Well, I used to think they were both pretty bad but when you think about it sexism has never led to the sort of bloodshed and loss of life as compared to racism. I mean, women not having equal suffrage and lower pay wages and everything else they had against them was still better than how blacks were treated for example, or how many people died in the Holocaust and the Holodomor.

Actually, I read a fantastic paper--I'll try to see if I can find it, but it was years ago for my Psych of Women class--that attempted to calculate the number of women that had been killed or allowed to die because of their gender over the past 100 years. Once it began listing causes--gendercide in China and other countries where female children are unwanted; sati, the banned Hindu practice of burning wives alive on their husbands' funeral pyres; the stoning of "impure" girls and women in some Muslim societies--it really was quite shocking to see the numbers add up.

I'm a minority, Hispanic, living in America (though it doesn't feel like I'm a minority...) and I think racism is worse. Well, I used to think they were both pretty bad but when you think about it sexism has never led to the sort of bloodshed and loss of life as compared to racism. I mean, women not having equal suffrage and lower pay wages and everything else they had against them was still better than how blacks were treated for example, or how many people died in the Holocaust and the Holodomor.

Actually, I read a fantastic paper--I'll try to see if I can find it, but it was years ago for my Psych of Women class--that attempted to calculate the number of women that had been killed or allowed to die because of their gender over the past 100 years. Once it began listing causes--gendercide in China and other countries where female children are unwanted; sati, the banned Hindu practice of burning wives alive on their husbands' funeral pyres; the stoning of "impure" girls and women in some Muslim societies--it really was quite shocking to see the numbers add up.
Also, the women's suffrage movement in the US was accompanied by physical violence against the suffragists, by imprisonment of suffragists in jails and mental institutions where they were beaten, tortured, force fed, raped, and otherwise abused.

Also, there are the uncounted number of women brutalized and murdered by abusive spouses because sexist attitudes stopped law enforcement taking such violence seriously for many years. That problem still exists in some places.

Id say sexism, but that might be because I find it a lot more irritating for some reason and so remember it clearer when I encounter it.

Actually, I read a fantastic paper--I'll try to see if I can find it, but it was years ago for my Psych of Women class--that attempted to calculate the number of women that had been killed or allowed to die because of their gender over the past 100 years. Once it began listing causes--gendercide in China and other countries where female children are unwanted; sati, the banned Hindu practice of burning wives alive on their husbands' funeral pyres; the stoning of "impure" girls and women in some Muslim societies--it really was quite shocking to see the numbers add up.

Hmm, that is true now that I think of it.

But then again, I wonder how those numbers add up to the 12 million killed because of the Holocaust. I think around 15 million killed in the Holodomor. Easily more than 10 million Africans perished because of the Colombian Exchange. More than 6 million civilian victims tortured and executed by the Japanese in World War II.

That list kind of goes on and its scary. I do think that they are both pretty bad though.

I'd say sexism is probably worse, note this last presidential election, for instance. McCain probably could've stood a better chance if he picked Romney as his running mate. However, Clinton's successes were a start in the right direction, imho, so by the next election... who knows? I think it would be interesting to see Obama debate Palin, or if Clinton tried to challenge Obama in 2012.

I'd say sexism is probably worse, note this last presidential election, for instance. McCain probably could've stood a better chance if he picked Romney as his running mate.

Palin sinking McCain had nothing to do with her being a woman.

Palin sinking McCain had nothing to do with her being a woman.

Hey, that's not true!

She never would have had the chance to sink the campaign had she been male, given that they chose her for the VP slot because they thought that women would vote for any female candidate.

Palin sinking McCain had nothing to do with her being a woman.

In fairness, that's not entirely true. There was sexism directed at Palin, and I have no doubt there's a few assholes out there who were genuinely horrified by the idea of a female VP.

That said, I'm pretty damn sure they were outnumbered by people who were more horrified by the idea of a batshit crazy, woefully underqualified VP who happened to be female.

Hmm, that is true now that I think of it.

But then again, I wonder how those numbers add up to the 12 million killed because of the Holocaust. I think around 15 million killed in the Holodomor. Easily more than 10 million Africans perished because of the Colombian Exchange. More than 6 million civilian victims tortured and executed by the Japanese in World War II.

That list kind of goes on and its scary. I do think that they are both pretty bad though.

So the fact that women are still in some countries being stoned for being raped, forbidden from taking jobs, precluded automatically from promotion; rape, which destroys their position in the community (as bad as death in some cases) is used as a weapon of war, is somehow less relevant because the actual body count of sexism isn't as high?

Many people are also neglecting things like the witch burnings, which killed hundreds of thousands of women in brutal ways for the crime of being, well women.

Women are still subjugated in almost every religion, prevented from advancing in their careers, and are continually objectified in the media. Further to that, violence against women is perpetually trivialised in the media, simply because the perpetrators prefer women to suffer, rather than just die.

I think that comparing sexism and racism cannot be done fairly and taking into account the varied and diverse kinds of damage that each one can do. Granted, racism has certainly produced a more volatile reaction and created more openly despicable practices, but sexism is more insidious and secretive, engaging in its practices behind closed doors.

prevented from advancing in their careers, and are continually objectified in the media. Further to that, violence against women is perpetually trivialised in the media, simply because the perpetrators prefer women to suffer, rather than just die.


I think you're exaggerating a bit here.

I think that comparing sexism and racism cannot be done fairly and taking into account the varied and diverse kinds of damage that each one can do. Granted, racism has certainly produced a more volatile reaction and created more openly despicable practices, but sexism is more insidious and secretive, engaging in its practices behind closed doors.
^this

I would say they are likely equal but I chose sexism since it seems to go more unnoticed than racism. I live in New York. It seem either way they can always find something else to blame it on.

In fairness, that's not entirely true. There was sexism directed at Palin, and I have no doubt there's a few assholes out there who were genuinely horrified by the idea of a female VP.

That said, I'm pretty damn sure they were outnumbered by people who were more horrified by the idea of a batshit crazy, woefully underqualified VP who happened to be female.

I was more worried about having a rookie in the position of President, than somebody who was a bit eccentric as VP. That is why I deserted my own party and voted McCain. I did not have confidence, at the time, that Obama could run the country as president since there seemed to be a scant record to go off of, so I had no idea about his judgement. He has proven me wrong. Obama can do the job as well as anybody before him, but I have yet to see groundbreaking reform. However it is too soon to tell, he has been president for only three months, if that.

sorry if this was a bit of a divergence.

I think you're exaggerating a bit here.


Which part is an exaggeration?

Is it harder for women to be treated equally with many companies thinking that women are unsuitable for upper management or is skin colour a greater impediment?

I have no idea. Why does it have to be one of those two though?

Do you feel that things generally better in your particular company/field?

A lot of the things I do to bring in money, I'm #1 in a field of one, at least in my locality, so I've not really noticed me discriminating against myself. Now that I know it's a possibility, though, I assure you I will keep a close eye on me.

Does the fact that most people below the poverty line are women of any race affect how you think about this?

Not really.

Does the fact that in some countries racial minorities are more likely to be below the poverty line affect how you think about this?

Not really.

How do you suspect women or racial minorities feel about this subject (esp women who are racial minorities)?

I have no idea. If they are all poverty-stricken, I can't imagine they're too happy about it.

I couldn't give a "this isn't a problem here" category for each group, but if you believe that neither is a problem, let us know where you live so we can all try moving to this utopia of equality.

The post smacks a little of 'begging the question.' You ask all those questions to...what? What's your point? Do you have a proposed solution for all these cosmic imbalances, or is this just another round of 'other people are responsible for my life not turning out the way I thought it would?'

I think you're exaggerating a bit here.



Are you suggesting that violence against women is not trivialised or underreported in the media? I'm very confused as to where exactly I am exaggerating?

The post smacks a little of 'begging the question.' You ask all those questions to...what? What's your point? Do you have a proposed solution for all these cosmic imbalances, or is this just another round of 'other people are responsible for my life not turning out the way I thought it would?'

Why is it that whenever anyone suggests that there may be an issue when there is an imbalance between races with regard to poverty, opportunity and access (to education, jobs and other services), apparently its just minorities refusing to help themselves and then bitching about it? Has it ever occurred to anyone that maybe the reason they are complaining is due to having attempted to gain this access or improve their situation, and have encountered obstacles related to race, gender, ethnicity, sexuality that have caused them hardship?

Why is it that whenever anyone suggests that there may be an issue when there is an imbalance between races with regard to poverty, opportunity and access (to education, jobs and other services), apparently its just minorities refusing to help themselves and then bitching about it?

I didn't say that. I made no claims about 'minorities' at large or offered any generalizations(unlike the OP, it may be noted). I merely questioned the motives of the OP for writing the post.

To answer your question though, as best I can: I don't know.

The post smacks a little of 'begging the question.' You ask all those questions to...what? What's your point? Do you have a proposed solution for all these cosmic imbalances, or is this just another round of 'other people are responsible for my life not turning out the way I thought it would?'

Then please explain what precisely is meant by the bolded above? Because to me, and I admit, I may have misinterpreted, its suggesting that people should take responsibility for their own lives. And in the context of this thread about sexism and racism, and the context of the questions quoted, it would seem that the sentiment that minorities should suck it up is perfectly appropriate to deduce.

Then please explain what precisely is meant by the bolded above? Because to me, and I admit, I may have misinterpreted, its suggesting that people should take responsibility for their own lives. And in the context of this thread about sexism and racism, and the context of the questions quoted, it would seem that the sentiment that minorities should suck it up is perfectly appropriate to deduce.

My original comment was adressed solely to the OP, and was not meant to be a comment on race relations or minorities in general. It's been my experience that, a lot of the time, when people start to maunder on about 'the evils of racism/sexism/whatever-ism' it's often not so much that they're so concerned with those 'evils' as it is that they feel personally slighted or dis-satisfied with their lives, and instead of doing something about it, they're just going to bitch. You can generally tell when this is happening because they talk alot of generalities, assume their stance on the matter is the default stance, and offer no solutions to the perceived 'problem', just complaints.

Now, granted, this is armchair psychology garnered solely from one person's perspective, but the original question, I think, remains.

Are you suggesting that violence against women is not trivialised or underreported in the media? I'm very confused as to where exactly I am exaggerating?

I would also like an answer to this. The only bit where I'd say there might have been exaggeration is the account of the number killed by the witch burnings, which (ha,ha) is heavily debated and will likely never be known. I don't think CM was referring to that, though, so I'm just as confused.

while there are still statistical glass ceilings for both, it is open adherence to any nonchristian system of belief that seems to suffer the greatest social and economic discrimination. mostly perhaps, because it is so much more deniable.

Ahh, the good old Oppression Olympics! Where being a competitor means you've already lost!

Perhaps I'm oversimplifying, but it seems pretty transparent that sexism is more prevalent, since even within marginalized racial minorities there exists rampant sexism.

Perhaps I'm oversimplifying, but it seems pretty transparent that sexism is more prevalent, since even within marginalized racial minorities there exists rampant sexism.
Good point. It's hard to tell, though. without referencing statistical studies, because the apparent effects of both vary so tremendously from place to place.

The post smacks a little of 'begging the question.' You ask all those questions to...what? What's your point? Do you have a proposed solution for all these cosmic imbalances, or is this just another round of 'other people are responsible for my life not turning out the way I thought it would?'

What makes you think there's anything wrong in my life? My life is perfectly fine.

Is what you're saying that I'm not allowed to think about others or to ask others how they think about people who are treated poorly because of something about themselves they can't control? I don't have a proposed solution for these really, I just wanted to see what people thought.

My original comment was adressed solely to the OP, and was not meant to be a comment on race relations or minorities in general. It's been my experience that, a lot of the time, when people start to maunder on about 'the evils of racism/sexism/whatever-ism' it's often not so much that they're so concerned with those 'evils' as it is that they feel personally slighted or dis-satisfied with their lives, and instead of doing something about it, they're just going to bitch. You can generally tell when this is happening because they talk alot of generalities, assume their stance on the matter is the default stance, and offer no solutions to the perceived 'problem', just complaints.

So people who are excluded from jobs or promotions based on their race or sex should suck it up then? And if I was complaining because I was excluded from a job or promotion for one of these reasons, I'm just bitter and shouldn't be able to discuss it? Is this basically what you're saying?

Now, granted, this is armchair psychology garnered solely from one person's perspective, but the original question, I think, remains.

I think you fail at armchair psychology.

Well, it doesn't matter much here in Canada either... in my province women have the right to go topless (as long as whatever establishment allows it) but I have yet to see anyone do it who wasn't breastfeeding (which is actually why the law was created).

Sorry, just had a discussion about this recently, thought I'd pop in for a sec. Gwen Jacobs (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gwen_Jacobs), the woman who got charged with indecency and won the court case that allowed women to go topless in Ontario. She argued her case based on the equality provision in the Charter (15(1)). The legislation wasn't created for breastfeeding, it was brought into line with the Charter.

However, you have to be careful to check that legislation because there are plenty of places you can't go topless as a woman, while men can, even in Ontario. Pre-op transmen, doing shows at clubs in Ontario cannot expose their nipples. A big wtf to that. Post op transmen, and bio-men can expose their nipples all they want. So things remain as moronic as ever, really.

Ahh, the good old Oppression Olympics! Where being a competitor means you've already lost!Lol.

I was thinking this conversation is pointless without including homosexuals and people with various physical and mental disabilities. Then white, heterosexual, middle class, abled men could whine about how they are the REAL victims of bigotry these days.

Perhaps I'm oversimplifying, but it seems pretty transparent that sexism is more prevalent, since even within marginalized racial minorities there exists rampant sexism. There are a number of aboriginal feminists who argue that sexism isn't something that minority women can deal with outside of the context of racism. Historically, they feel, feminism has turned a blind eye to racism (or has had racist roots itself) and so is unable to provide an adequate analysis of root causes of sexism.

Sorry, just had a discussion about this recently, thought I'd pop in for a sec. Gwen Jacobs (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gwen_Jacobs), the woman who got charged with indecency and won the court case that allowed women to go topless in Ontario. She argued her case based on the equality provision in the Charter (15(1)). The legislation wasn't created for breastfeeding, it was brought into line with the Charter.

Ah. My mistake.

However, you have to be careful to check that legislation because there are plenty of places you can't go topless as a woman, while men can, even in Ontario. Pre-op transmen, doing shows at clubs in Ontario cannot expose their nipples. A big wtf to that. Post op transmen, and bio-men can expose their nipples all they want. So things remain as moronic as ever, really.

That is silly... but I'm not actually planning on going topless anywhere. I like my boobies safely covered.

Ah. My mistake.

That is silly... but I'm not actually planning on going topless anywhere. I like my boobies safely covered.
Yeah, I'm not wild about it, but I do think it's stupid that transmne putting on a freaking strip show can't show their nipples if they're pre-op. Pffft.

I kinda think that issues like employers being less likely to hire women because they might want to take time off and have kids; employers being less likely to promote women to important positions within the company because women "aren't suited for leadership"; presidents of large universities making statements to the effect of "women can't do math" and so on are bigger than the inability to walk around without a shirt.

Summers was severely taken out of context, though. From what I was able to glisten from his talk, it seemed that he was actually bemoaning a disinclination for women to go towards the sciences.

Summers was severely taken out of context, though. From what I was able to glisten from his talk, it seemed that he was actually bemoaning a disinclination for women to go towards the sciences.

This is true. Around Harvard there's a lot of anger about that because Summers has a history of actively promoting women's advancement in the sciences. The out of context quote was akin to him saying "Some people bigotedly think women can't do math," and his detractors jumping up and yelling, "He said 'women can't do math'!"

This is true. Around Harvard there's a lot of anger about that because Summers has a history of actively promoting women's advancement in the sciences. The out of context quote was akin to him saying "Some people bigotedly think women can't do math," and his detractors jumping up and yelling, "He said 'women can't do math'!"

Aye, there was a lot of internal unhappiness with how Summers was operating at Harvard, and his internal opponents pretty much used this to drive him out. It's kind if a shame, because he was trying to bring positive changes to an institution that is so closed and inaccessible.

Summers just has foot-in-mouth syndrome, I feel for the guy 'cause I've got it too.

I am often the only white woman in science classes at my university.

Well, it doesn't matter much here in Canada either...
I was more thinking of the weather.

But then, Canada.

Sorry I didn't read the thread. I just thought I'd chime in with my two cents on the op's poll. Historically at least racism is worse than sexism. Both are bad but I can not recall any attempt in human history by one gender to wipe the other - given time who knows? Genocide on the other hand has been historically common place. So while women have been oppressed by men throughout history the consequences of being a woman have never been as bad as say being a Jew during the Holocaust.

There are a number of aboriginal feminists who argue that sexism isn't something that minority women can deal with outside of the context of racism. Historically, they feel, feminism has turned a blind eye to racism (or has had racist roots itself) and so is unable to provide an adequate analysis of root causes of sexism.
Historically, feminism has been CLASSIST more than anything else, and classism almost always overlaps right into racism, given that racial minorities tend to be disproportionately represented among the poor. So aboriginal feminists have a valid point.

Personally, I think minority women (like any other women) absolutely can deal with sexism as separate from racism. Whether or not they want to is up to them. One of the few luxuries of being oppressed is that you get to pick how the fuck you want to deal with it. :P

Lol.

I was thinking this conversation is pointless without including homosexuals and people with various physical and mental disabilities. Then white, heterosexual, middle class, abled men could whine about how they are the REAL victims of bigotry these days.I would say that homophobia is a subset of sexism. What is sexism other than "boys can't do..." "girls can't do...", etc.

Given that we have an African-American President, I'd say that sexism narrowly edges racism out as an ongoing problem.

Are you suggesting that violence against women is not trivialised or underreported in the media? I'm very confused as to where exactly I am exaggerating?

Which part is an exaggeration?

I would also like an answer to this. The only bit where I'd say there might have been exaggeration is the account of the number killed by the witch burnings, which (ha,ha) is heavily debated and will likely never be known. I don't think CM was referring to that, though, so I'm just as confused.

Further to that, violence against women is perpetually trivialised in the media, simply because the perpetrators prefer women to suffer, rather than just die.
That part. Sorry for the lack of clarity, I'm not always in the best of shape when I post.

That part. Sorry for the lack of clarity, I'm not always in the best of shape when I post.

I am actually even more confused now. It's an exaggeration to say that rape and domestic abuse cause suffering without causing death? :confused:

That part. Sorry for the lack of clarity, I'm not always in the best of shape when I post.

The reason I say that is because people who commit domestic violence, people who insist on women staying in the home, the various religions that deny women the right to bodily integrity, don't want women to die. So all that is left to deduce from their actions and positions is that they want women to suffer.

Abrahamic religions usually expect this as some sort of penance for original sin; conservatives because they perceive women as weaker and more in need of control (I actually think this is a power trip), and men who commit domestic violence because they usually want the woman to suffer because of some perceived slight. Same with rapists.

My original comment was adressed solely to the OP, and was not meant to be a comment on race relations or minorities in general. It's been my experience that, a lot of the time, when people start to maunder on about 'the evils of racism/sexism/whatever-ism' it's often not so much that they're so concerned with those 'evils' as it is that they feel personally slighted or dis-satisfied with their lives, and instead of doing something about it, they're just going to bitch. You can generally tell when this is happening because they talk alot of generalities, assume their stance on the matter is the default stance, and offer no solutions to the perceived 'problem', just complaints.

So we should never examine disparities between majority and minority groups because minorities should just suck it up? Are you seriously suggesting that a member of a minority group who has been discriminated against should not be able to discuss it and draw attention to problems of this nature?

I also did not get anything of the above from the OP. What I got was a question comparing the effects of sexism to those of racism.

Now, granted, this is armchair psychology garnered solely from one person's perspective, but the original question, I think, remains.

Maybe you should leave this to the experts.

The reason I say that is because people who commit domestic violence, people who insist on women staying in the home, the various religions that deny women the right to bodily integrity, don't want women to die. So all that is left to deduce from their actions and positions is that they want women to suffer.

Abrahamic religions usually expect this as some sort of penance for original sin; conservatives because they perceive women as weaker and more in need of control (I actually think this is a power trip), and men who commit domestic violence because they usually want the woman to suffer because of some perceived slight. Same with rapists.
Erm... When you put it that way, well, I hadn't thought of that. I was thinking along completely different lines, a misunderstanding, if you will. So I'm in agreement here.

Erm... When you put it that way, well, I hadn't thought of that. I was thinking along completely different lines, a misunderstanding, if you will. So I'm in agreement here.


:wink:It's all in perception.