Mortai Gravesend said:
Electrogecko said:
Mortai Gravesend said:
Assuming you will only do that for girls, sure.
Treating someone differently based on their gender like that is simply basic sexism. Thinking someone deserves to be treated differently like that really is an obvious case.
I disagree with the idea that treating men and women differently equals sexism.
When there's nothing to warrant the difference in treatment it is sexist.
Umm....you kind of just fell back on your entire argument there. The reason that men may hold the door open for women but not other men is because it's a safe assumption that most women have a harder time opening a door (no matter how easy it may be for everyone) then men do.
I don't ask men out for dinner and I don't talk dirty (at least as much) in the presence of women. I don't think that makes me sexist.
But what warrants it here is your own sexual preference. At least he first one. The second one not so much. That is kind of sexist. It's whether there is some kind of justification for it beyond simply gender. Sexual preference is something you can't control and it is a reason for some different behaviors.
Well, then I can use sexual preference to justify any difference in behavior that I have, and I'd love to hear how you would refute it.
The sexes are different, and until we have a universal personal attribute assessment system, I think it's safe to make certain assumptions. It's all part of nature. We don't challenge women to wrestling matches and we don't clean and dress up nice before we meet guys.
They are different. But unless you give a good reason based on those differences to treat them differently then they are irrelevant. Just pointing at them without making a link is lazy and pointless.
Part of nature? Sounds like an unjustified excuse.
You just fell back on your initial argument once again, and as I said before, I can use sexual preference to justify any behavioral changes I make around women, let alone the plethora of scientifically proven differences between the genders. Also, based off of what you just said, I guess you're okay with women not being allowed to participate in military field operations?
And nature is the best excuse there is. Nature is the only thing that matters in this whole damn world! Humans way too often forget that sexism and racism are rooted in survival instinct and are far from being completely concious decisions. We are animals...creatures of habit and impulse, and trying to control, change, or even outlaw these habits should always be questioned.
When's the last time a guy called a woman sexist when he got asked by her to lift something heavy?
Why would that matter?
......this is the 3rd time I've had to bring up that I was responding to your initial argument, which was "treating men and women differently is sexist."
It matters because if you think it's sexist for a man to only hire women to be a babysitter or a secretary, than you must also think it's sexist for a woman to only hire men to move furniture or be a security guard. I, however, don't think either one is sexist.
I've heard stories about women blowing up over having a door held open for them. It happens. My point is that men have as much a right to say "Why didn't you ask that lady to help you move your sofa? Just because I'm a man, you assume I'm physically stronger than her? That's sexist."
My view on sexism is that it should be an inherently bad thing. If holding the door open for someone makes you sexist, than what's wrong with being sexist? It's a polite thing to do, whether you do it for everyone or not. Would you rather that someone treated all people like shit instead of just one gender? The things that you say are sexist (like changing your language around women...give me a break....I'm sure most of us have had first hand experience with women being disgusted over "guy talk.") are mostly signs of empathy and consideration and should not be branded as anything negative.
As I've said, I was taking issue with what you said in your initial post, and since you qualified it here with a "when there's nothing to warrant the difference," I guess you already agree with me, so I don't know why you're arguing in the first place.
