to totally fail to understand why Sexism is never seen as bad as racism??

[chemicalsister]

Following on from the Saudi Olympics thread, I keep getting upset about Sexism thriving in the modern world when racism is quite correctly - seen by the fast majority as clearly wrong and abhorent.
Even educated professionals have wound me up recently asserting we sholud adapt schools, especially first few years of infants , to better suit boys and their poorer attention span,
AND poor boys now do less well at exams at 16 so we must reduce course work etc..
I am old and remember when boys did better than girls at 16-- There was no outrage and plans to change exams then! It was just seen as inevitable ..... Fume!

Sexism and racism are oppressions that need structural power behind them to exist. So white people can be racist to black people because laws, media, culture, history reinforce and back that up in a global way.

A black person can be insulting to white people in terms of their ethnicity. But it is not backed up in the same way by structural power.

It is the same with the oppression of women. And yes, whenever women talk about how women are treated by men, we get - what about how some women treat some men. It is a silencing tactic.

I think that is true Kim, but I do think different isms are more likely to be challenged than others. 40 years ago in mainstream media, racist jokes were accepted by many, they are not now. Sexist and disabled jokes are still seen as fine by many.

Mittens, you don't understand the political meaning of these terms then. There is a difference from 1 person being mean to you, and society being structured in such a way that it discriminates you on the basis of something you have no control over.

DontPanicMrMannering

Interestingly, I was involved (in a minor fashion) in a discussion in Feminist Chat, and the subject of people presenting their limited experience as universal fact cropped up; it might be worth having a read.

No they are not. They simply understand political analysis.

Yes exactly Kim. And while someone who is an anti racist is seen as a good person, feminist is often used as an insult.

Grennie

Mittens, you don't understand the political meaning of these terms then.

I think you should define the term as you use it, because words often have many meanings. Human communication is only 7% words, so in a text-only medium such as an Internet forum it is very easy to misunderstand if you're not clear enough.

Racism (in a core definition) is beliefs about superiority or inferiority of races; that is independent of state or power structure.

There is a difference from 1 person being mean to you, and society being structured in such a way...

Yes, I'm well aware, and I know that racism isn't "just being mean to someone of a different race," it's about the motivations behind prejudicial, discriminatory or violent behaviour. Every aspect can occur at individual, social group or national level, so a 'power structure' is not mandatory for every racist event; it facilitates one (or some) levels of racial discrimination or prejudice.

The worst exam results are white working class boys

www.theguardian.com/education/2008/mar/27/schools.uk4

www.suttontrust.com/news/blog/the-trouble-with-boys/

I'm not sure why this should be ignored just because they are men and white.

Historically yes less was expected of girls and women and that wasn't right but I'm not sure if benefits anyone to have large white young male population whose historical industries are gone left feeling disfranchise - that group is more likely to commit suicide or end up in prison system anyway.

Yes if methods to address this adversely affected female students or ethic minorities - I'd be worried but adapting schools to fit more energetic boys might well help many girls.

As a mother of a primary school aged DC - I'm more annoyed that a lot of problems are put down to him being a boy yet when we offer extra help at home he massively improves. IME your also more likely to encounter primary teachers who seem anti-boys - or massively seem to favor the girls than otherwise.

I don't see why that should be tolerate just because it isn't politically correct to focus on white men/boys or because once they hit adulthood society is arranged more in their favor.

Of course white working class boys should get help to improve their exam results. As should any child who is underperforming.

Boycotting Saudi would bring religion into the mix. I dont think religion was involved in S. Africa?

And do the women of Saudi want "rescuing"? Or some and not all?

There are plenty of Saudi feminists fighting the driving ban.

at Trish

The OP seems to be saying they shouldn't :

Even educated professionals have wound me up recently asserting we sholud adapt schools, especially first few years of infants , to better suit boys and their poorer attention span,
AND poor boys now do less well at exams at 16 so we must reduce course work etc..

Yes it would have been nice if historically females had been helped and more expect from them but society has moved on (though not as much as you'd hope ) and now we face under achieving white males.

White working class boys are not ignored at primary school.

I'm not saying it is just the schools - but there are problems and I'd disagree that all white working males are being helped or that the help is the correct kind - I don't think stifling debate there helps anything.

I don't see why racism still existing and sexism - and how that affects individuals varies widely - should be used as an excuse for ignoring disadvantaged group in this case white working class boys.

Adapting schools to suit boys, at the expense of girls, would be wrong. Helping boys to achieve more, is fine.

I must be very lucky then - I have never encountered sexism personally. But then I think it is sometimes down to personal sensitivity.

I should say that I know it isn't ALWAYS down to that but it can be perception.

I didnt see the Saudi Olympics thread, and there wasnt a link. Off to read the thread.

I think the "oh men get treated in a sexist way too" argument simply illuminates sexism. Structurally powerless people do mock and humiliate powerful people but they do not have the structural political and social power for those comments or actions to make a blind bit of difference.

Yes I despise adverts that invite us to laugh at how 'crap men are' at housework. But these are also sexist about women. They are saying oh you girls, youre so good at this cleaning lark! Well fuck me, i dont eant to be credited with being good at cleaning, or childcare, or any domestic field. Until I see an advert that laughs at how 'crap men are at running the country' or that invites us to mock how pants men are at creating a wold free demo war, I'm afraid I see "sexism against men" as a load of ovaries.

Exactly, mrs. It's like David Cameron moaning about reverse snobbishness of someone takes the piss out of his accent. I mean, really. And yet another thread about sexism has been turned into a discussion on how hard men have it...

discussion on how hard men have it.

I have a DH, father, FIl and a DS. I do not live in a bubble that means my only concerns are female.

I also don't think I or my sex is structural powerless.

We've had a female prime minster, minsters, MP, judges, reporters, police office most industries have female workers and managers.

Yes there are fewer in number than ideal and yes they often face more hurdles than many men. I have the right to vote and the right to have property and money in my name so I have economic power - something that historically women in this country didn't always have.

oooo one female prime minister and a handful of mps.

despite girls out performing boys in education. aren't we lucky

Hex - do you think we should be grateful, then, and stop fighting?

I have two sons by the way - I am concerned about how boys do in education! I just don't think it is equivalent to he massive disadvantages being female gives you.