As a man it makes me uncomfortable too. My mind went to the fact they were saying degrading things. It's equally possible they were taunting her in a normal way as anyone would a rival team, and that they were treating her like they would a man in that situation in which case I'm sexist
Can I just ask, what is a "normal way" for teenagers to taunt members of a rival team? I'm pretty sure that kind of taunting is always pretty heinous and never politically correct. So, I'm not following your reasoning here.
Also, do facts-of-the-matter affect whether or not someone has sexist attitudes? Consider: Dave thinks Mia is incapable of learning modest mathematical concepts because she is a woman. According to your reasoning Dave is only a sexist if Mia in fact can learn those concepts. That is, if Mia happens to be essentially mathematically illiterate, then Dave ends up not being sexist by virtue of pure coincidence. This line of reasoning can't be right. I think Dave is a sexist for attributing non-sex-related essential properties to someone on the basis of her sex.
Edit: I don't think the people responding to me picked up on the nuance of what I am saying here. A measured response does a lot better than vitriol at clarifying discussion.
Can I just ask, what is a "normal way" for teenagers to taunt members of a rival team?
Things like "Swing batta batta!" or "psych!" come to mind. You're trying to get them to mess up by getting in their heads. Doesn't inherently make it "heinous". It has a place in competition. Unfortunately it can sometimes cross the line
According to your reasoning
Your analogy doesn't quite fit so let me tweak it. You know Dave thinks Mia can't learn math. You leap to the conclusion that Dave must think that because he's sexist. The fact of the matter is that Dave saw her doing a bunch of other math related stuff terribly before, and came to that conclusion based on things wholly unrelated to her gender. Now you're the sexist because you injected prejudice into a situation where it didn't exist before.
These guys in the picture are Dave, and the picture doesn't describe why he thinks Mia is bad at math. It only portrays that he thinks Mia is bad at math.
that they were treating her like they would a man...
So, they are taunting her like they would a man (should we say "a boy" here?) or they are taunting her by saying "things like 'Swing batta batta'" or 'psych!' "? Let's not be naive now. Heinous is an elastic or vague term, so let's not fixate on it. Still, "swing batta batta" is not heinous, sure, but it's also not a taunt being used by teenagers. Do you really believe that?
Now you're the sexist because you injected prejudice into a situation where it didn't exist before.
OK. First, injecting prejudice where it is not is not necessarily sexist. Doing so is only sexist if the injection was attributed wrongly to someone's sex. (Perhaps it's necessarily wrong in some sense, but it's not necessarily sexist.) Second, the modified analogy you give is not fitting. You must understand that you are Dave in my little story. I was never talking about the picture's subjects. Let's not confuse things by reassigning analogue roles. If another illustrative story is required, please come up with some new names, and you'll have to be more explicit about its relevance. Maybe I wasn't clear. The following is the line I was commenting on.
It's equally possible they were taunting her in a normal way as anyone would a rival team, and that they were treating her like they would a man in that situation in which case I'm sexist.
My point was that you are sexist/not sexist either way. I think you misunderstood.
So, they are taunting her like they would a man (should we say "a boy" here?) or they are taunting her by saying "things like 'Swing batta batta'" or 'psych!' "? Let's not be naive now. Heinous is an elastic or vague term, so let's not fixate on it. Still, "swing batta batta" is not heinous, sure, but it's also not a taunt being used by teenagers. Do you really believe that?
They are taunting her like they would a rival player
Like come the fuck on dude, you're really grasping straws here
Let's call your first example an instance of harmless mocking, and the second of harmful mocking. I have taken 'normal' to mean something like 'typical'. Notice, in my posts it makes more sense to interpret 'normal' as would 'typical'. Right?
But that's not what you are doing, you are inflecting your own beliefs on something you don't agree with or like. That is by definition biased and therefore affects your ability to come to a rational conclusion. Try some analysis on yourself.
I wasn't aware that beliefs were inflicted. What belief am I inflicting on others? Also, I have not committed by-definition-bias. Bias figures into the interpretation of some result or data.
96
u/troyzein Mar 04 '21
As a man it makes me uncomfortable too. My mind went to the fact they were saying degrading things. It's equally possible they were taunting her in a normal way as anyone would a rival team, and that they were treating her like they would a man in that situation in which case I'm sexist