'Stupid Woman'

[Raider5678]

3 minutes ago, Phi for All said:

I included that in my list of why-would-they. I think it's perfectly legitimate to call someone a kid if you're trying to emphasize a difference in age, unless you're implying something negative. This would include people who call you kid because they knew you when you were a kid.

1

And I still disagree. I can put the conversation in context, as we're clearly seeing two different things.

I just helped a much older coworker. The much older coworker then says "Hey, thanks for your help. You're pretty smart for a kid."

 

[Phi for All]

14 minutes ago, Raider5678 said:

And quite frankly, I know of a few people who use my age as an insult, not a compliment, directly. It still doesn't offend me. In my experience, if I start acting butthurt about it they'll just do it more. 

Welcome to Adulting 101. It's now actionable when people offend you, and keep doing it after you mention how offensive it is. 

Also, "butthurt" is offensive in this context, because it implies an oversensitivity. Do you think women are being oversensitive when their gender is used to beat them up?

[Raider5678]

5 minutes ago, Phi for All said:

If you were older, how would they imply that your intelligence and expertise were in question? As it sits now, they can just keep calling you "kid" and hope the negative connotations are picked up on.

Pretty sure if their hope is that the negative connotations are picked up on, they should stop complimenting me.

Saying "Hey, that kid's really good at his job" is not going to make someone sit there and think "Hmmmm. He's right. He's a kid. He might be too inexperienced to give these responsibilities."

Just now, Phi for All said:

Do you think women are being oversensitive when their gender is used to beat them up?

I'm pretty sure you don't mean actually getting beat up. But, assuming you did, the answer is no.

But, assuming you're talking about something on context, such as being called a stupid woman, yes, I do think they're being oversensitive. I also think men who get offended over being called a stupid man are being oversensitive. I also think a lot of conservatives who get offended at being called an ignorant white male are being oversensitive. I think a lot of people are being oversensitive.

 

[Phi for All]

6 minutes ago, Raider5678 said:

And I still disagree. I can put the conversation in context, as we're clearly seeing two different things.

I just helped a much older coworker. The much older coworker then says "Hey, thanks for your help. You're pretty smart for a kid."

I hope your generalization holds true all your life. Obviously, all people are like your coworker.

5 minutes ago, Raider5678 said:

Pretty sure if their hope is that the negative connotations are picked up on, they should stop complimenting me.

Are you for real? One of the best ways to put someone down is a backhanded compliment. The real haters of this world know this very well. You can always point back and claim it was just a compliment. See Donald Trump for some great examples.

[Raider5678]

2 minutes ago, Phi for All said:

I hope your generalization holds true all your life. Obviously, all people are like your coworker.

I'm more than certain that it'll generally remain true.

6 minutes ago, Phi for All said:

Are you for real? One of the best ways to put someone down is a backhanded compliment. The real haters of this world know this very well. You can always point back and claim it was just a compliment. See Donald Trump for some great examples.

Yes, I'm for real.

There is a difference between a sarcastic compliment and a compliment. And the difference is obvious. 

[Phi for All]

29 minutes ago, Raider5678 said:

Pretty sure if their hope is that the negative connotations are picked up on, they should stop complimenting me.

Saying "Hey, that kid's really good at his job" is not going to make someone sit there and think "Hmmmm. He's right. He's a kid. He might be too inexperienced to give these responsibilities."

I'll have to drop this line of argument, now that the coworkers (with you to help them) are using full sentences along with their implied agism.

29 minutes ago, Raider5678 said:

But, assuming you're talking about something on context, such as being called a stupid woman, yes, I do think they're being oversensitive.

I still hope younger people will recognize what I have, that men in general (to ward off your inevitable subjective examples) have discriminated against women since patriarchies were invented. I don't feel threatened by women telling me I've trampled on some of their rights as a human, and I'm glad there are enough men who recognize the problem that we may be able to move in a better, more accepting direction.

23 minutes ago, Raider5678 said:

There is a difference between a sarcastic compliment and a compliment. And the difference is obvious. 

You're right, of course. Thanks for the talk; you always make me feel better about my own problems. 

[Raider5678]

42 minutes ago, Phi for All said:

I still hope younger people will recognize what I have, that men in general (to ward off your inevitable subjective examples) have discriminated against women since patriarchies were invented. I don't feel threatened by women telling me I've trampled on some of their rights as a human, and I'm glad there are enough men who recognize the problem that we may be able to move in a better, more accepting direction.

And this is a strawman. It's already been pointed out that this discussion is not about whether or not women experience sexism or not. The discussion is about phrasing and it's relation to sexism.

 

[CharonY]

1 hour ago, Raider5678 said:

Because when they get past the word "that", saying "peers" just sounds weird.

 

And it is patronizing and/or emphasizes rank differences. In your case it may be fine as though it diminishes the praise. I.e. see: "you are smart" vs "you are a smart kid" or even "you are smart for a kid". If you do not see a nuance between these sentences, good for you. Just do not assume there is none.

It is even more significant if I refer to, say a 30-something postdoc as kid. I do it jokingly but am aware that I am pulling out a rank card and most would perceive it that way. Again, if you are insensitive to nuances, well, it does like that you have to be more perceptive on how folks interact with each other and how power dynamics form.

[MigL]

Ten oz's comment is accurate...
"Unnecessary or irrelevant compliments may be just as insulting as explicit insults. Take another look at Ten Oz's post if you still don't get it."

Anything MAY be offensive.
If a person is having a bad ( stressful ) day, telling him the sky is blue might offend him/her.
Offence is 'in the eye of the beholder' and people's perceptions vary widely.
From Raider's willingness to put up with misguided comments to Phi and Strange's assumption that certain groups ARE ( they assume ) offended by those same trivial comments.

But, offended or not, we are examining whether these perceived offences rise to the level of sexism.
And that is what I'm not sure about.
( so I, for one, will not judge )

 

If someone of a religious background, on this forum, is offended when we talk about evolution, do we need to modify our behaviour ?
Sure, he is offended, and one could argue an offence has been committed, as some of you have ( Ten oz ).
Bot does that mean we are intolerant Religious Bigots ?
Of course not.
 

Similarly, the fact that you are offended by my calling you a woman ( Because of preconceptions in your own mind ), does not ( necessarily ) make me sexist. It's the English language.
And  if I continue to do it after you've expressed your discomfort at my comments, I'm an insensitive jerk ( but possibly still NOT sexist ).
I don't know how to make this idea any clearer.

Edited January 7, 2019 by MigL

[Strange]

4 minutes ago, MigL said:

Anything MAY be offensive.
If a person is having a bad ( stressful ) day, telling him the sky is blue might offend him/her.
Offence is 'in the eye of the beholder' and people's perceptions vary widely.

Exactly.

4 minutes ago, MigL said:

From Raider's willingness to put up with misguided comments to Phi and Strange's assumption that certain groups ARE ( they assume ) offended by those same trivial comments.

I am not assuming any such thing. (How dare you!  )

[CharonY]

10 minutes ago, MigL said:

But, offended or not, we are examining whether these perceived offences rise to the level of sexism.
And that is what I'm not sure about.
( so I, for one, will not judge )

I think the issue here is that you are trying a categorical ranking. I.e. something either is sexist or something is not. However, the overall discussion is more about can something be sexist (even perhaps unintentionally). The bigger issue here is that sexism (as well as other negative isms) are not clear categories. Some things can be implemented without any gender thoughts in them, but have sexist results, for example.

As such, the perhaps confusing issue is that in fact innocuous things can have gendered (or racial or religious offensive) components. There is pretty much no way to ensure an entirely egalitarian system or language. The difference is that if one becomes cognizant of them (rather than outright denial) it might make it easier to maneuver it more carefully. It is not entirely "just" about perception, as the perception itself has its own history. Like it or not, perhaps due to the increasing desire for a more egalitarian system, coupled with less privacy in individual actions there will be an increasing discussion about society and how folks perceive their position in it. It is not even about judgement, it really is about acknowledgement. And again, in that context and in this particular example, Corbyn seems to be reflective, which, if a judgement must be made, I see as a positive, at least.

There will be a longer discussion until folks settle on what is acceptable or not. But note, this has always been the case. For the longest times insensitivity to Christian values and themes were considered blasphemous and in some countries laws were in place censoring such utterances in public spaces, which is far more restrictive than folks expressing that they somehow feel offended (which in this case does not seem to be broad consensus either way). 

[Ten oz]

1 hour ago, Raider5678 said:

But, assuming you're talking about something on context, such as being called a stupid woman, yes, I do think they're being oversensitive. I also think men who get offended over being called a stupid man are being oversensitive. I also think a lot of conservatives who get offended at being called an ignorant white male are being oversensitive. I think a lot of people are being oversensitive.

Individuals decide for themselves how they feel about things. It's your business how "stupid woman" or "smart kid" makes you feel. Just as I have no business telling you what you should be offended by you have no business telling others what they shouldn't be offended by. That is how mutual respect works. If I asked you not to call me "kid" and you honestly respected me you'd stop calling me "kid". There is no default scale by which you or anyone else can label someone else's offense wrong.

You may not find "stupid woman" offensive but others do. Criticizing them for being offended and claiming to know better is disrespectful.

[Raider5678]

32 minutes ago, CharonY said:

However, the overall discussion is more about can something be sexist (even perhaps unintentionally).

If this is the case, then I feel that I should clarify that most of my discussion points are related to whether or not the phrase "stupid woman" is sexist in the context that it's used.

[iNow]

2 hours ago, Ten oz said:

Just as I have no business telling you what you should be offended by you have no business telling others what they shouldn't be offended by. That is how mutual respect works.

QFT

[MigL]

I don't get it...
What does Quantum Field Theory have to do with anything ?

(  )

[Raider5678]

15 hours ago, Ten oz said:

Just as I have no business telling you what you should be offended by you have no business telling others what they shouldn't be offended by. That is how mutual respect works.

And I'd agree with that. 

But, mutual respect goes further than that. Including making an effort to understand the other person's intentions, before handing him over to the lions(In this case, the media). Which is what we're attempting to do. 

You're free to be offended by it. I'm free not to be. But we're also free to have a discussion about whether it's sexist or not.

[dimreepr]

3 minutes ago, Raider5678 said:

11 minutes ago, Raider5678 said:

But, mutual respect goes further than that. Including making an effort to understand the other person's intentions, before handing him over to the lions(In this case, the media). Which is what we're attempting to do. 

 

 

how much straw do you have?  

13 minutes ago, Raider5678 said:

You're free to be offended by it. I'm free not to be. But we're also free to have a discussion about whether it's sexist or not.

Yep.

On 1/7/2019 at 1:13 PM, dimreepr said:

I think even he would agree, it should be challenged, if only to make us think twice.

 

[dimreepr]

[iNow]

Quote

No one is born racist. Racism is taught.

Preparing for the point to be completely missed in 3...2...

[DrP]

It can be untaught too... although it is hard work what with the human disposition towards cognitive dissonance.

 

 

 

[dimreepr]

1 minute ago, DrP said:

It can be untaught too... although it is hard work what with the human disposition towards cognitive dissonance.

 

we have to challenge it first...

[Ten oz]

20 hours ago, Raider5678 said:

No. Because I'm smart enough to realize getting offended at something so trivial is ridiculous.

 

19 hours ago, Raider5678 said:

And quite frankly, I know of a few people who use my age as an insult, not a compliment, directly. It still doesn't offend me. In my experience, if I start acting butthurt about it they'll just do it more. 

 

19 hours ago, Raider5678 said:

But, assuming you're talking about something on context, such as being called a stupid woman, yes, I do think they're being oversensitive. 

 

 

1 hour ago, Raider5678 said:

You're free to be offended by it. I'm free not to be. But we're also free to have a discussion about whether it's sexist or not.

You are free not to be offended and we are free to have a discussion. However you are taking things further than that by demagoguing those who are or might be offended by "stupid woman" calling them not smart oversensitive butthurt ridiculous people. Your passing judgement on and complaining about what offends other people. 

[StringJunky]

Someone on another forum put this up and it seems appropriate in this discussion and others like it: "

The best lack all conviction, while the worst 
Are full of passionate intensity.

William Butler Yeats

[Strange]

On 1/7/2019 at 5:48 PM, StringJunky said:

It's because it's been hyped to F- and it's not about women, so it doesn't matter. What annoys me is that none of this is about the real injustices and indignities women suffer in places like Saudi, Pakistan , India etc. What's being wittered about here are first world problems i.e. pretty  trivial. i actively search and read about women's lives in these countries and think "What are their First World "sisters" doing to help them?

There are frequent and regular campaigns to hep people in countries where women (or other groups) are discriminated against. Often these only get in the news when a particular individual makes the headlines (e.g. Samar Badawi, Asia Bibi, Malala Yousafzai, Rahaf al-Qunun, etc.) but that doesn't mean people aren't always working for their cause.

But I think the idea you should ignore the everyday sexism that women have to put up with in the West because it is worse elsewhere is ridiculous.

[Raider5678]

6 hours ago, Ten oz said:

You are free not to be offended and we are free to have a discussion. However you are taking things further than that by demagoguing those who are or might be offended by "stupid woman" calling them not smart oversensitive butthurt ridiculous people.

1

The first part you quoted is replying to you asking me if I'd get offended by someone calling me "a smart boy". It wasn't me calling them not smart ridiculous people for anything, anywhere, for any offense. It was for that specific statement, in the specific context of what you said it as. Not, as you so claim, me saying that it applies to anyone who gets offended over being called a stupid woman.

The second part you quoted, was me saying what would happen if I acted butthurt when people bullied me. I wasn't saying anyone who didn't like being bullied is butthurt. Additionally, once again, it applied to a very specific context. Mine. I even started it off with "In my experience." I didn't say "in every situation." Not, as you once again claimed, me calling people who get offended at "stupid woman" being butthurt.

The only part you didn't take out of context entirely was the third one, which is where I say I think they're being oversensitive. I still stand by that. But once again, it was only in the context of a single statement. 

 

If we're going to talk about mutual respect then you should start by not taking what I've said out of context in an attempt to make a point.

Edited January 8, 2019 by Raider5678