Sexism or Racism

[NorthSideSox72]

Racism is still very alive and kicking in this country due to the socio-economic situation of the inner city. Many of the fears and hatred as result of crime and poverty are a direct result of race thus resulting an inert dislike for a race whether intentional or not. Jesse and Al do nothing to assist in disfusing this situation because it keeps them in the spotlight. There is no definitive voice for the minority race. Obama can be looked at a face for this cause.

 

I find sexism funny. Sexism is an emotional process related to instinctual feelings that need to be repressed by the human mind which I feel is not even possible. Hillary being a women is not why I would not vote for her. If women really wanted sexism to go away and the objectivity of women to cease they would evaluate their status. I really think that at least average looking women geta pretty good shake. I am not advocating sexual harassment and am not tying it to this response as that is a different opinion.

 

The black senator v. female senator is all you need to know.

 

I like Obama and hope he wins. I loath Hillary. I also planned to vote for Giuliani............

Those two bolded sentences pretty much make my case. Thanks.

 

Seriously, WTF difference does it make whether or not women are "at least average looking"? Unless you are planning on dating that woman, who cares? I don't care if a male job applicant is good looking or not, why should I care if a woman is? I'm not blind, I can see these things, but I think its complete B.S. that it should be used as a determinant of whether or not someone gets a "pretty good shake".

 

[bmags]

I don't know the answer to this question, but I feel like in the political world, it would be easier for a black male than a female to lead America - America being key. In the corporate world, I have no experience. I know as a 21 year old student that I'd have no reason to care about sex if I was hiring. In any accelerated classes I've had they were dominated by girls in high school, and in the journalism school women have been the hardest working in the newsroom. In any light, I feel like they are a lot more included than the black students at the journalism school, who I feel like have a burden to be used as a voice for the black community. This is possibly true for hispanic students, they do have Adelante` to work for, but there are so little hispanics at Mizzou, I don't have an opinion.

 

But I feel Hillary feels a need to appear overly strong in her politics to contrast the thought that women are weak as rulers, and that scares me, as a leader. I don't really think America has the right to be as controlling in world politics with our military might as we once were able to get away with, so I'd like the opposite approach. So politically, I feel sexism prevails further than racism, if both candidates are considered having crossover appeal.

 

but in one note, damn it's easier being a woman and trying to find college housing. That is some straight sexist s*** they pull on dudes in college. We had a house lined up, they said it was ours, then they found women tenants who applied and they gave it to them. Bravo, women, for your less destructive sisters to my caveman brothers.

[knightni]

Funnier: Mississippi Burning or Anchorman?

 

I rest my case.

[FlaSoxxJim]

I know as a 21 year old student that I'd have no reason to care about sex.

 

Bro, I would transfer to another campus if I were you.

 

 

[bmags]

what's funny is I looked at that after I wrote it and wondered whether to shift it to gender...I decided not to. Shame on you Jim, shame. haha.

[Controlled Chaos]

Racism is still very alive and kicking in this country due to the socio-economic situation of the inner city. Many of the fears and hatred as result of crime and poverty are a direct result of race thus resulting an inert dislike for a race whether intentional or not. Jesse and Al do nothing to assist in disfusing this situation because it keeps them in the spotlight. There is no definitive voice for the minority race. Obama can be looked at a face for this cause.

 

I find sexism funny. Sexism is an emotional process related to instinctual feelings that need to be repressed by the human mind which I feel is not even possible. Hillary being a women is not why I would not vote for her. If women really wanted sexism to go away and the objectivity of women to cease they would evaluate their status. I really think that at least average looking women geta pretty good shake. I am not advocating sexual harassment and am not tying it to this response as that is a different opinion.

 

The black senator v. female senator is all you need to know.

 

I like Obama and hope he wins. I loath Hillary. I also planned to vote for Giuliani............

Of course average women get a pretty good shake...even large very unaverage women get a good shake...they just have to find a guy to push the right buttons. And in a strange ironic twist on the topic, in the case of large white women, a lot of times that guy is a black man. See...no sexism or racism...just love!! All is well...Peace!

[iamshack]

I honestly believe there is a fundamental conundrum with the issue of "sexism," especially as it impacts the workplace....

 

Let me premise this by stating that I was raised by a single mother for most of my childhood, who worked full-time from about the time I was four years of age.

 

Women are, biologically, the more nurturing gender. They are also, quite obviously, biologically tied to the birthing and upbringing of our children. Whether a woman births and raises children prior to entering the workplace (which was often the case in the "Baby-boomer's" generation), or chooses to temporarily or permanently exit the workplace while doing so (much more popular among the current generation of women entering their child-birthing years), there are often very important issues which create complexity in the manner in which employers treat these women. While progress has been made by employers as they adapt to the more "career-oriented" brand of mother, these issues simply cannot be overlooked. Whether it is paternity leave and the obstacles created by it, or mothers more permanently exiting the workplace, or mothers or grandmothers scaling back their contributions in the work environment to help care for children, these issues create or add a complexity to the workplace that makes these particular employees unique. How do employers (and their employees) address these scenarios, being sympathetic to the issues of motherhood and child-bearing, yet considering what's best for the company or organization as well? To me, this creates obvious issues which cannot simply be dismissed by saying "working mothers/grandmothers should be treated absolutely equal to their male counterparts. I simply don't know that this is possible.

 

Now, before everyone jumps down my throat for being antiquated, I'd just like to explain a few of my concerns:

 

While men and certainly working fathers have absolutely evolved as a group in their functions as caregivers for their children or grandchildren over the past few decades, we must ask ourselves the question "Is this truly beneficial or better for our children"? It's my general belief that our society as a whole benefits from having children who are raised by at least one steady parent who is present the majority of the time and whose primary function is the caregiving or upbringing of their child/children/grandchildren. Because women are the more nurturing gender, and as I said earlier, obviously biologically tied to the birthing and raising of her children, it certainly seems that they are the more "qualified" or optimal of the genders to do so. While having both parents around the majority of the time would obviously be the most advantageous of circumstances, reality, for the most part, prohibits this. And I do understand that sometimes, at least, it prevents both parents from not participating at least in some form in the "breadwinning" capacity.

 

But I struggle with the idea of the career-oriented woman who is also playing the role of mother and/or grandmother. And while I certainly don't mean to suggest that women shouldn't have as much right as anyone to participate and advance in the workplace and in their careers, the issue really confounds me. Are we better as a society with children who spend most of their days in daycare, or with a babysitter, or with little parental supervision and guidance until the workday is over? How can we allow our mother and grandmothers the same opportunities in the workplace and in their careers without jeopardizing the quality of our children and our future?

 

Obviously, there is an entirely other side to sexism that I did not address here, but these are some of the issues I struggle with when I begin thinking about sexism and women in the workplace...

 

Thoughts?

Edited January 31, 2008 by iamshack

[max power]

In this country, racism. In many other nations sexism.

 

Biggest problem in the world? Religion.

[knightni]

In this country, racism. In many other nations sexism.

 

Biggest problem in the world? Religion.

 

Bigger problem...

 

Self-centeredness disguised as humanism that derives from blind religious intolerance.

 

 

[FlaSoxxJim]

Bigger problem...

 

Self-centeredness disguised as humanism that derives from blind religious intolerance.

 

 

The real problem in both cases. . . intolerance.

[max power]

The real problem in both cases. . . intolerance.

Yeah no kidding. But the bigger problem is obviously, to anyone not biased, religious intolerance by other religions. Its a social taboo to even criticize religion in general, as evidenced by the comment two posts up. Its rarely done, therefore, and by a lot less people. How many people are there disguising themselves as humanists? Come on.

Edited February 2, 2008 by max power

[knightni]

Its a social taboo to even criticize religion in general, as evidenced by the comment two posts up. Its rarely done, therefore, and by a lot less people.

 

Puhleese. People criticize religion all the time.

 

Mostly it's by people who used to be in that religion and have left it.

 

It's re-directed anger against their parents/grandparents to criticize the religion that they grew up with.

 

 

[max power]

Puhleese. People criticize religion all the time.

 

Mostly it's by people who used to be in that religion and have left it.

 

It's re-directed anger against their parents/grandparents to criticize the religion that they grew up with.

People still don't criticize it enough. My point was that religious intolerance by other religions is much more prevalent. I stand by that, as you just ignored most of what I said and typed "puhleeeze." Grow up.

 

lol, I have no idea what you are talking about. Someone you know who does this? I don't know anyone like that. Personally I think Islam is the least tolerant religion, and I sure as hell didn't grow up a muslim.

 

The simple fact is, today a difference in religion pins more people against each other than race and sex. 50 years ago I would have said that a difference in economic politics was the world's biggest problem. Take the blinders off please. Stop blaming people who "disguise themselves as humanists." Its ridiculous.

Edited February 2, 2008 by max power

[sox4lifeinPA]

I don't know but most of the people that I hear criticizing religion (or race or sex) tend to be either:

 

a) have no substantial physical exposure to it even if there is some intellectual exposure. (talk radio)

b ) have minimal exposure which for them was a bad experience in sunday school class (how they were raised)

c) involved with people or a group that claimed to be of the said religion but turned out to be a bizarre subset of that group, which ultimately led the critical person to have a negative view of the macro-group. (experimental phases of their life)

 

Either way you slice it, sexism, racism, religious persecution, it's all about ignorance and misperception and the intolerance that flows from fears driven by those things.

[max power]

I don't know but most of the people that I hear criticizing religion (or race or sex) tend to be either:

 

a) have no substantial physical exposure to it even if there is some intellectual exposure. (talk radio)

b ) have minimal exposure which for them was a bad experience in sunday school class (how they were raised)

c) involved with people or a group that claimed to be of the said religion but turned out to be a bizarre subset of that group, which ultimately led the critical person to have a negative view of the macro-group. (experimental phases of their life)

 

Either way you slice it, sexism, racism, religious persecution, it's all about ignorance and misperception and the intolerance that flows from fears driven by those things.

Another ridiculous and ignorant post that tries to generalize a group?

 

Why don't you two presumably religious people have any respect for other peoples beliefs?

[sox4lifeinPA]

Another ridiculous and ignorant post that tries to generalize a group?

 

Why don't you two presumably religious people have any respect for other peoples beliefs?

 

uhhhhh....

 

is that first sentence a question or a statement?

 

 

uhhhh.....

 

 

is that second sentence for real?

[max power]

uhhhhh....

 

is that first sentence a question or a statement?

uhhhh.....

is that second sentence for real?

I think the answer to those questions are obvious, you just don't want to address the fact that you are a bigot in regard to people who aren't religious.

 

If I typed anything close to the absolute nonsense you did, about another group in some cockamamie effort to generalize them into 3 groups, I'd probably be banned from this site.

[sox4lifeinPA]

I think the answer to those questions are obvious, you just don't want to address the fact that you are a bigot in regard to people who aren't religious.

 

If I typed anything close to the absolute nonsense you did, about another group in some cockamamie effort to generalize them into 3 groups, I'd probably be banned from this site.

 

 

right, and you're a bigot of people who have no regard for people who aren't religious. The cycle will never end!!!

 

 

please, don't stop on account of me.

 

 

 

I could admit to being inarticulate and unclear in my post, but my intention was not to generalize people into just three groups. My point was the it's impossible for me to believe that people who have a clear anxiety towards anything religious didn't just "happen" upon that opinion; something led them to that opinion...and more often than not it was a bad experience with a someone who claimed to be of a particular belief and they were a wolf in sheeps clothing...whether they know it or not.

 

Anyway, I see the trap laid before me and I choose to walk away...despite my boredom.

 

Enjoy your day. I mean that.

[max power]

Any humanist has complete regard and respect for the religious. Being critical is not the same as being intolerant.

 

Whatever your intention was, its exactly what you did. Now if I considered myself an atheist or "secular humanist" I would take offense to what you said. However, I'm not.

 

And I'm too sick with the flu to enjoy my day. Thanks though.

[NorthSideSox72]

I know I started this thread, but, this religion discussion (which was added on) needs to tone down. No one here has said anything worthy of being called a bigot, or anything of the sort. Let's play nice folks.

 

[CanOfCorn]

The issue isn't respect for religion itself, it's respect for the people that practice that religion.

 

Personally, I don't care for religion, I think in many cases it's too much of a dividing force between people who ultimately believe the same ideals. But, I have absolutely no problem with people who practice those religions in a way that doesn't affect, bully or harm others and their ideals.

[SleepyWhiteSox]

RACISM FTW!

[iamshack]

The issue isn't respect for religion itself, it's respect for the people that practice that religion.

 

Personally, I don't care for religion, I think in many cases it's too much of a dividing force between people who ultimately believe the same ideals. But, I have absolutely no problem with people who practice those religions in a way that doesn't affect, bully or harm others and their ideals.

 

That is very rarely the case, unfortunately...

[sox4lifeinPA]

That is very rarely the case, unfortunately...

 

 

really? can you even pick up the brush that you just used to paint that generalization?

[mr_genius]

really? can you even pick up the brush that you just used to paint that generalization?

 

you just don't get it, do you. yes, it is ok for iamshack and people like him to bully his ideals on everyone....why? he is righteous and enlightened, he has EARNED the right to be intolerant.