3 ms·
I know that's what you meant. Regarding male-only traits as prestigious implies that they are superior to female-only traits. That implication is sexism. Whethe
by seldo 14y ago
I know that's what you meant. Regarding male-only traits as prestigious implies that they are superior to female-only traits. That implication is sexism. Whether or not you think sexism is insulting -- and it appears you do not -- it was definitely sexism. And other people find sexism insulting.
- Xcelerate 14y ago> Regarding male-only traits as prestigious implies that they are superior to female-only traits Nope. It in no way implies that. That was an assumption you made. Among male traits, strength has historically been prestigious. How on earth is that implying female-only traits are inferior? Give me a first-order logic chain or something here because I'm not seeing the inferences. > Whether or not you think sexism is insulting I do think sexism is insulting. His post was not sexism.
- RivieraKid 14y agoThat's reality. There are traits that men are better at. And the same applies for women. If someone finds reality insulting, it could be their problem.