POLITICS Origins of Racism, Sexism, Other “isms”?

I trust that you’re being honest in believing that this would be sexist, but I still just don’t get it.

Maybe I don’t understand your definition of sexist?

 

Ghosts are real. They got shows about em on the tv!

 

If an assumption about behavior or ability is made solely based on a person's sex

 

If thinking PMS is something that causes irritability in women, then I guess I am sexist.

Most women I know would be sexist too.

 

This is helpful.

But, my problem is that there definitely ARE things which only affect certain people, and those things are EXCLUSIVELY based on sex. It’s an assumption, but one which is both entirely reasonable and could in fact be accurate.

If I re-wrote your last sentence, I’d write it as:
“If you incorrectly, invalidly or unreasonably assume the problem is based on their sex based on no specific information other than that they are a man or woman... don't.”

And assuming that a woman might be irritable as a result of PMS easily meets those criteria, and hence, isn’t sexist.

 

Thinking a woman who is irritated must be PMSing is sexist, and not the same as knowing PMS can make one irritable. Many things can be irritating. My fiance assures me that a great many things irritate her.

 

Is it better to acknowledge that some provable differences exist, or to deny them?

The former seems much more accepting of both reality and that person, IMO.

Perhaps I’m just not bright enough to see it, but I’d like to understand it.

 

Can you give me an example of sex-exclusive effects, where only sex would need be known?

 

Give me some.

 

I agree with almost all of this.

But why must I deny the very real and provably true reality the either the source or a contributing factor of her irritability may very well be PMS, and that my mere consideration of that fact makes me sexist?

Do you see what I’m asking?

 

I think it is wisdom to acknowledge and accept differences. Such as the susceptibility to sickle cell anemia, for instance. But it is even more wise to acknowledge that 99.99% of differences between me and you are perceived, and not actual differences.

I believe you have as much variance, genetically, with me as with a black man. This makes the idea of race a non-starter. The genetic difference is just not there. I believe it is mostly cultural and economic.

 

PMS
Circumcision
Testicular torsion
Ovarian cysts
Endometriosis
Testicular cancer
Impotence

Etc.

 

How was your experience on the field and court vs other races? Your kids?
Notice anything? If you didnt or haven't, then you wont ever understand the point you refuse to acknowledge exists, based off zero experience to boot.

 

No, I think he is saying, what can you judge from someone, just looking at them and knowing their sex? The above things do not apply to all people of the proper sex. I don't have testicular cancer (hopefully). All women are not always PMSing (though I think this might be debatable! [sexist joke but all jokes are 'ist' and useful and funny]).

Can you look at a woman, and just because she is a woman, assume she is lactating? No.

 

I saw fast white kids and slow black kids. I can turn the argument back on you and say you are having confirmation bias, as well.

 

I’m not only perfectly ok in determining which differences are real or merely imagined (ie perceived, societally observed, culturally enforced, etc.), but entirely welcoming of it - be it racial, sexual, political, etc.

But some differences do exist.

Now, what we do with and how we act upon those differences is another matter entirely, but we’re not anywhere close to that yet.

 

Negroid, caucasoid, and mongoloid are still terms in use today. They are used primarily to describe morphological traits. However, it's not impossible for a caucasian to display negroid traits and vice versa.

 

How about I probe you for a while (giggity):

what are the differences you see?

 

Not at elite HS level and above you havent.