Routinely, feminists are accused of thinking that there are no differences between men and women. This statement, aside from being patently ridiculous, is one of the straw-men that is routinely disassembled.
Feminists do think that there are differences between men and women, but those differences do not mean that women or men are inferior to each other, and generally that those differences are irrelevant to the matter at hand. But since this is confusing to some, I thought I’d give a friendly list on what makes something sexist.
Diapers made for boys and girls: not sexist, different genitalia
Boy’s diapers having “boy things” on them and girl diapers having “girl things” on them: sexist
Citing evidence that the mean of men and women are different in some things: not sexist
Using that evidence to claim that it is “natural” or that any individual man would be better than any individual woman: sexist
Having a female writer write about “Women’s Issues” in a magazine/ webzine/ newspaper: not sexist.
Having “Women’s Issues” ghettoized in the “Fashion” section of self-same publication, and having women ONLY write about women’s issues: sexist.
Saying that women are routinely the primary caregiver: not sexist.
Saying that women SHOULD be the primary caregiver: sexist.
Saying that there are currently not a lot of women in some professions: not sexist
Claiming that this means that women are just not interested in these professions: sexist
Bonus: If you think that male-dominated fields are more important than female-dominated fields; and that sexism has nothing to do with the pay gaps you should probably think about why you think that. I’m not willing to go that this is always sexist (as I don’t want to mix it up with certain science majors that think humanity majors are less important/ easier.)
Suits tailored differently for men and women: not sexist
“Professional standards of dress” dramatically different for men and women: sexist
Different products for men and women (like tampons for women): not sexist
Different gender marketing for essentially the same item (loofas, deodorant, razors): sexist
Please feel free to leave your own examples in the comments.
This really peaked my interest because i said something like what was mentioned above and wondered if what I said was sexist. I work on the 3D side of a 3D/2D animation studio. In my group there are 30 people. Five of them, including myself are female. This makes me happy, because I was given the impression there would be less.
Anyway, it’s defiantly sexist to say women are not interested in a certain profession. In your opinion, is it sexist to say there are currently less woman interested in this profession than men? I don’t think that statement makes assumptions about the nature of women, just the current climate of the industry.
In my humble opinion, to say that women are less interested in a profession is something that we should be very, very careful about. As a fact statement, right now, for adult women, it is probably true. But when we say things like “women are less interested in a profession then men” people go “okay, then we shouldn’t encourage little girls to pursue that career” either consciously or subconsciously.
Great post! I always have a lot of trouble explaining this to people, too, whenever someone accuses me of “looking for sexism.” I thought of some to add.
Selling health products (medicine, toothpaste) to women: not sexist
Conflating health with beauty (diets, anti-aging anything): definitely sexist
And speaking of diets…
A magazine article saying that exercise is healthy: not sexist
A magazine article giving you tips for a great bikini bod: sexist
…or they extrapolate that if women aren’t interested in this field, but you are, what kind of woman are you? I think it’s “safer” to just stick to the factual “there ARE fewer women than men in this profession” than to make assumptions about whether it’s based on interest, ability, culture, sexist hiring and promoting, etc. It’s good to examine why it is, but bad to assume, if that makes sense.
Those are good points. Especially about how those opinions will effect the way we encourage children to take up some professions over others. Good call.
And there’s also the fact that there’s no real equivalent to the suit for women. The suit is a great big symbol of maleness, which is why it’s so inconceivable that there would be a female equivalent. So while it’s not sexist that women dress differently in professional situations, it is sexist that there’s no kind of clothing that unambiguously communicates the presence of power. (Also, the closest equivalents tend to expose a lot more skin on women.)
And for people who say the “so” when referencing how there is more exposed skin on women: more exposed skin means that most women are FREEZING in buildings that have the temperature set for men (and their suits).
I don’t like “professional standards of dress” that much anyway: it tends to be really classist and racist.
Purely out of interest, where do you stand on female-only health clubs / gyms?
Or female-only Clubs or schools?
I don’t have a problem with previously male-only Clubs and institutions opening up to admit both sexes, it was long overdue.
However, it seems that the pendulum swung the other way and whereas it isn’t acceptable to have a male-only gym these days, it seems perfectly acceptable that there be female-only facilities. I can’t see the justification for it.
It’s the same with the Scouting movement. In this country, the Cubs and ‘Boy’ Scouts were forced to accept girls that wanted to join, and had to make the necessary changes to accomodate them. I have no problem with that, but then find it somewhat hypocritical that the Brownies and Girl Guides still exist, and are still run as female-only packs.
Surely what’s good for the Goose…..?
How is replacing one form of sexism with a different one progress?
And I beg to differ with this:
“The suit is a great big symbol of maleness, which is why it’s so inconceivable that there would be a female equivalent.”
The suit is a “great big symbol” of conformity. It’s safe and satisfies the herd instinct in us all. It gives subtle (or not so subtle sometimes) indicators of wealth and social class (via the cut and quality of fabric used) without being too ostentatious.
Women power-dress to achieve the same effect – they’ve just got more leeway in how they do it. You can see that as a curse if you like, but I’d LOVE to have more freedom in how I choose to come in to work.
Apples and oranges, JamesH. Women have fought to get into previously male-only spaces b/c they were effectively being locked out of education and networking opportunities that their male peers could pretty much take for granted. Women-only spaces function as ‘safe spaces’, where women can get an education/network/exercise w/o having men obliviously/not so obliviously shoulder us aside, talk over us, hog attention and resources, engage in obnoxious/predatory behaviors.
I can personally say that going to an all-girls high school was a relief in many ways. There was no need to fuss w/ hair and makeup, I could swap out my winter sweats for the uniform skirt in front of my locker w/o fear of sexual harrassment,…come to think of it, skirts, stairs and high school age boys would’ve made a very noxious combination! Oh, and lack of a school dating scene meant much more concentration towards actually learning.
Oh, and sorry for the lack of citation, but there was at least one study that showed single-sex schools didn’t necessarily help/hurt boys, but were most definitely beneficial for girls. When boys and/or men are clearly being hurt by being locked out of specific girls’ and/or womens’ spaces, come back and we’ll talk.
As far as ‘proper’ work attire goes, I agree that the current lack of options for men sucks. Actually, it’d be great if guys had expanded wardrobe options for life in general. It does seem some progress has been made, but I’ll happily advocate for a wear-whatever-you-want society, as long as the attire doesn’t create a specific health/safety violation for that job/activity, or doesn’t advocate some kind of hateful/intolerant agenda.
“Women have fought to get into previously male-only spaces b/c they were effectively being locked out of education and networking opportunities that their male peers could pretty much take for granted.”
With you on that, no problems there for me (other than the modifier that it is/was their RICH male peers that took them for granted).
“Women-only spaces function as ’safe spaces’, where women can get an education/network/exercise”
Ah… so you’ll break up the institutions that were unfairly favouring men (in order to promote equality) but then replace them with institutions that will unfairly favour women. And that promotes EQUALITY how…?
As for your High School experience, would it be normal for a High School aged boy OR girl to strip off in a mixed-sex public place (I assume that your lockers were in a corridor)? Do you think that a boy in a co-ed school would get away with changing his trousers outside of the changing rooms?
Do you think that boys in co-ed schools are not compared / contrasted with their peers by girls as well as boys? Boys bullied other boys, but sexual harrassment was a two-way street in my school. As I recall, the favoured way of embarrassing boys (for a while, until the next ‘wheeze’ came along) was a pack of ‘top trumps’ of all the boys in a given year. To say that some of the categories (and the contents) were unflattering would be a massive understatement.
Girls (as the object of bullying) were strictly off limits to us. The bullying was carried out by other girls and it was bloody vicious at times. An ex of mine, who went to an all-girls school, had some pretty horrific ‘war stories’ about it as did some of the girls I knew that also attended (different) all-girl schools.
Not really such a “safe space,” whatever the educational outcome, and I wouldn’t send either of my daughters to one.
I will answer your question in another post, as this is a little more complicated than a comment will really allow.
Granted, ‘the hall is your locker room’ thing is certainly a single-sex school thing (as well as a function of wearing shorts under one’s skirt). And I always get a good laugh over the idea of women as the ‘gentler, nurturing, nonviolent sex’. People can be raging assholes in all kinds of ways. Doesn’t mean all girls/women-only schools are hotbeds of vicious, evil behavior. And I have a feeling you significantly underestimate the harassment/abuse girls routinely get from boys (as well as its impact), often b/c ‘that’s just the way things are’, or some other ‘let’s keep the status quo’ bullshit.
As for girls/women-only spaces ‘unfairly’ locking out the menfolk…nope. That implies women are at least on an equal footing w/ men, and that isn’t the case yet.
“People can be raging assholes in all kinds of ways.”
Amen to that.
“And I have a feeling you significantly underestimate the harassment/abuse girls routinely get from boys (as well as its impact), often b/c ‘that’s just the way things are’, or some other ‘let’s keep the status quo’ bullshit.”
I’ll concede that our school experiences were probably very different, but bullying girls was strictly not on, and was something that was self-policed as well as by the school. Girls were either ignored (before puberty, and they ignored us right back) or were desperately courted as potential girlfriends (perhaps it’s that ‘repressed’ British thing, or perhaps it was because our school had only recently gone co-ed from all-boys, and girls were a scarce commodity).
I’m not sure if schools are better or worse now – my eldest daughter is only just at primary school (5 stage) so it’s a little early to tell from first hand. (not that she’s likely to tell us anything anyway – getting her to admit she was actually IN school on a given day is difficult enough, let alone finding out what lessons she had!).
I disagree. Yes, it’s a symbol of conformity, but I wore a suit twice in a week recently (I wear my one suit very infrequently–only for job interviews, weddings, funerals and litigation, essentially), and once I got over how unfamiliar it was, I felt an unfamiliar yet undeniable sense of power from wearing it.
It says you’re a member of a class, and it’s a powerful class. That’s the point. In Self-Made Man, Norah Vincent writes about how the only time she ever really felt the privilege she expected from passing as male was when she put on a suit.