Racism and sexism

Anthropology, History, Psychology, Sociology and other related areas.

Racism and sexism

Postby Asparagus on March 1st, 2018, 8:47 am 

What is the difference between racism and sexism? Or would you say the two are basically the same, just with different objects of contempt?
Asparagus
Member
 
Posts: 258
Joined: 16 Dec 2017
Blog: View Blog (2)
Lomax liked this post


Re: Racism and sexism

Postby BadgerJelly on March 1st, 2018, 9:39 am 

They are political terms used for politcal means. What more is there to say?
User avatar
BadgerJelly
Resident Member
 
Posts: 5205
Joined: 14 Mar 2012
someguy1 liked this post


Re: Racism and sexism

Postby Asparagus on March 1st, 2018, 9:56 am 

Isn't there more to say about what the terms refer to?
Asparagus
Member
 
Posts: 258
Joined: 16 Dec 2017
Blog: View Blog (2)


Re: Racism and sexism

Postby Serpent on March 1st, 2018, 10:05 am 

Asparagus » March 1st, 2018, 7:47 am wrote:What is the difference between racism and sexism? Or would you say the two are basically the same, just with different objects of contempt?

Prejudice is mental state. You can slot in any object of discrimination without changing the subject's attitude, which might be summed up as: "I am entitled to more than they are."
How the object of discrimination is chosen, how the mental state of superiority is cultivated, how the values of a society develop around its prejudices and how individuals of entitled class justify their position varies greatly. Every prejudice has its own unique psychological foundation and social history.
Serpent
Resident Member
 
Posts: 2928
Joined: 24 Dec 2011
BraininvatAsparagus liked this post


Re: Racism and sexism

Postby Asparagus on March 1st, 2018, 10:16 am 

@Serpent
Every society has a pecking order?
Asparagus
Member
 
Posts: 258
Joined: 16 Dec 2017
Blog: View Blog (2)


Re: Racism and sexism

Postby Forest_Dump on March 1st, 2018, 10:40 am 

Both are examples of essentialism, which I suspect is a familiar concept, in that both racism and sexism are based on a belief that something important (i.e. of value) has been inherited, historically phrased as throught the blood line but now through the genes. Of course sexists would now argue that this is something(s) on the X chromosome while racists have a more difficult time because geneticists have found that the most commonly cited races don't really exist.
User avatar
Forest_Dump
Resident Member
 
Posts: 8763
Joined: 31 Mar 2005
Location: Great Lakes Region
LomaxBadgerJellyBraininvat liked this post


Re: Racism and sexism

Postby BadgerJelly on March 1st, 2018, 11:01 am 

Asparagus -

I wish you'd just spit out your thoughts rather than dance around saying something controversial (that is my gut feeling about your open OP.)

Don't be shy. Say something we deem stupid or something that annoys us is better than saying half of something/nothing. If you see what I mean :)

"Joe Rogan, Jordan Peterson, & Bret Weinstein: "Biological Essentialism" Explained ": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=51NJyN4s1vA
Last edited by BadgerJelly on March 1st, 2018, 11:07 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
BadgerJelly
Resident Member
 
Posts: 5205
Joined: 14 Mar 2012


Re: Racism and sexism

Postby Braininvat on March 1st, 2018, 11:06 am 

The two isms cited are, yes, two among many types of discrimination based on physical appearance. I used to know a woman who was a height bigot - she felt taller men were better and would not date anyone under six foot. Fortunately, she grew out of it and married a man her own height who was perfect for her and the love of her life. She was fortunate that she could recognize how puerile her form of bigotry was. Search committees for management jobs, however, haven't grown out of that one, and height bigotry is still quite common in the States. (since height and gender are related, sexism and heightism can overlap).
Last edited by Braininvat on March 1st, 2018, 12:25 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Braininvat
Forum Administrator
 
Posts: 6378
Joined: 21 Jan 2014
Location: Black Hills
Asparagus liked this post


Re: Racism and sexism

Postby BadgerJelly on March 1st, 2018, 11:10 am 

Not cross, just want some perspective. I've just edited last reply to frame better what Forest brings up.

I am just wandering what it is Asparagus is fishing for (if anything?) - the OP is not exactly revealing.
User avatar
BadgerJelly
Resident Member
 
Posts: 5205
Joined: 14 Mar 2012


Re: Racism and sexism

Postby Serpent on March 1st, 2018, 1:39 pm 

Asparagus » March 1st, 2018, 9:16 am wrote:@Serpent
Every society has a pecking order?

Every society has an organization chart.
The phrase pecking order is loaded with too many incoherent associations to be useful. Generally, it suggests a hierarchy based on physical power, which is rarely the case in more complicated human social organizations. An emperor may be quite feeble in body and mind, yet still be at the top of his pecking-order, while a turkey vulture in the same condition would be last to get at the carcass.
A human organization may be pyramidal or horizontal or web-like.
TBC
Serpent
Resident Member
 
Posts: 2928
Joined: 24 Dec 2011
Asparagus liked this post


Re: Racism and sexism

Postby Asparagus on March 1st, 2018, 2:31 pm 

Forest_Dump » March 1st, 2018, 10:40 am wrote:Both are examples of essentialism, which I suspect is a familiar concept, in that both racism and sexism are based on a belief that something important (i.e. of value) has been inherited, historically phrased as throught the blood line but now through the genes. Of course sexists would now argue that this is something(s) on the X chromosome while racists have a more difficult time because geneticists have found that the most commonly cited races don't really exist.

True. Sexists and racists will both point to nature as a source of evidence. How does the question impact assumptions about what we are? I'm thinking of twins who display similarities. And yet I don't see the question falling back to nature vs nurture because I think oppressed groups tend to act out certain roles as a survival strategy.

Anyway, science can confirm that race is a social construction. It can't do the same for gender. That's a difference.
Asparagus
Member
 
Posts: 258
Joined: 16 Dec 2017
Blog: View Blog (2)


Re: Racism and sexism

Postby Asparagus on March 1st, 2018, 2:32 pm 

Braininvat » March 1st, 2018, 11:06 am wrote:The two isms cited are, yes, two among many types of discrimination based on physical appearance. I used to know a woman who was a height bigot - she felt taller men were better and would not date anyone under six foot. Fortunately, she grew out of it and married a man her own height who was perfect for her and the love of her life. She was fortunate that she could recognize how puerile her form of bigotry was. Search committees for management jobs, however, haven't grown out of that one, and height bigotry is still quite common in the States. (since height and gender are related, sexism and heightism can overlap).

I've encountered the heightism thing. Associating size a power?
Asparagus
Member
 
Posts: 258
Joined: 16 Dec 2017
Blog: View Blog (2)


Re: Racism and sexism

Postby Asparagus on March 1st, 2018, 2:37 pm 

@Badgerjelly
I'm not sure what you're on about. Did the question strike a nerve with you or something?
Asparagus
Member
 
Posts: 258
Joined: 16 Dec 2017
Blog: View Blog (2)


Re: Racism and sexism

Postby mitchellmckain on March 1st, 2018, 4:17 pm 

Preferring to date those who are blond is not blondism any more than prefering to date a member of the opposite sex is a form of sexism. Nor is preferring to date Buddhists a bigotry based on religion. If is simply a matter of personal preference in the conduct of your own life, and not any kind of bigotry at all. We have every right to preferences in the conduct of our own life AS LONG AS it stops there -- just as we have every right to like chocolate rather than vanilla ice cream. It becomes bigotry only when it becomes a matter of condemnation for other people and pushing your own preferences on other people as if it were more than just a personal preference but constituted an objective superiority. It ceases to be a matter of personal preference when it comes to public arena such as when you are marketing a product or a service. Preferential treatment for customers whether because of hair color, sex, religion, or race is not good behavior and thus worthy of condemnation in a free society.

Race and sex are a matter of circumstance rather than choice. Some people would like to put things like sexual preference into the same category and I do not think it belongs there. Sexual preference is a preference and a matter of rights to live our lives as we choose as long as there is no objective evidence of harm to anyone, and all such preferences, actions, and choices must be held accountable to this limitation regarding the rights of others. Even if people are born with a preference (and I do not believe this is the case) for molesting children, it would have not the slightest bearing on whether this behavior would be acceptable.

But talking about a right to be of a particular race or sex doesn't really even make any sense. Yes, it is possible to change the superficial aspects of this and I can even imagine a future in which these are completely changeable. But although this may make the difference a bit thinner, the difference does remain for it doesn't change the fact that we were born (or conceived) a particular way. Imagine a future society where everyone made such changes to their children so everyone was blond blue eyed Caucasians. I think that would be very wrong and the implicit bigotry of such a society is obvious to me. My psychology based morality tells me that such a society by defining their humanity by such superficial characteristics have in fact lost what I would call humanity found in much more important things. But ok, what if they do not change children after conceived but control they way they are conceived. That is not only dangerous for the survival of the species but excessively controlling and intrusive. Parents have too much control over their children's lives as it is and that would be too much - leaving next to nothing to the child himself.
User avatar
mitchellmckain
Active Member
 
Posts: 1155
Joined: 27 Oct 2016


Re: Racism and sexism

Postby Serpent on March 1st, 2018, 5:33 pm 

There are personal preferences, cultural comfort-zones, habitual prejudices, deliberate discrimination and systemic bigotry. They're all different and unequal.

However, even systemic bigotry doesn't stop at the genetic, or the physical distinctiveness of people. It can just as well be based on geography (Those lowlanders are all cattle-rustlers.) ethnicity (Those emotional Latins can't think straight!) clan (Those McLeods will clout anyone who looks crosseyed at them.) caste (Those plebians breed like rabbits.) religion (Those papists ware child-molesters.) occupation (Those fishmongers sell their daughters.) family status (Those bastards are eaten up with jealousy of the legitimate sons.)

The societal promulgation of prejudice is a common characteristic of steeply hierarchical organizations, where inequality of power and privilege is essential to hold the top tiers up, by squashing the bottom tiers down. The productive lower tiers need someone to kick down at, in compensation for all the kissing up they have to do.
As the ***** said to the #####: "If it wasn't for us, you'd be the last people on Earth."
The other factor that sustains categorical discrimination is a surplus population. If there are no more people than the society needs to survive, they can't afford to devalue anyone. The larger the surplus population, the more groups have to be goaded into competition with one another, so's to keep their exploiters safe.
Serpent
Resident Member
 
Posts: 2928
Joined: 24 Dec 2011


Re: Racism and sexism

Postby Forest_Dump on March 1st, 2018, 8:38 pm 

I once pulled a lot of information together about inequalities of different types in different cultures/societies. All societies recognized status differences based on gender, age and individual achievementso but only in chiefdoms and kingdoms (state-level societies) are these differences allowed to be inherited. But status differences also have to be recognizable. In the smallest scale societies, people can be recognized as individuals. As population size increases, other markers such as hair style or costume will play a role since that acts as a cue to establish relationships which will then identify the individual. But of course hair and clothing can be changed so in the largest scale of populations, more immutable identifiers are used to signal who people are and from this we get populations identified by skin colour, height, eye shape or other unchangeable feature to identify how individuals can be treated. All societies have rules, typically unwritten but understood (i.e. learned) about how to treat people based on social distance. You never charge family for food,for example, and sharing food makes you family. Just watch The Sopranos for that.
User avatar
Forest_Dump
Resident Member
 
Posts: 8763
Joined: 31 Mar 2005
Location: Great Lakes Region


Re: Racism and sexism

Postby Serpent on March 1st, 2018, 10:41 pm 

As population size increases, other markers such as hair style or costume will play a role since that acts as a cue to establish relationships which will then identify the individual. But of course hair and clothing can be changed so in the largest scale of populations, more immutable identifiers are used to signal who people are

Yes. Costume, especially mandatory uniforms, is a very common identifier. In a sophisticated civilization like England, there is the navvy's cap to distinguish its wearer from the tradesman's derby and the gentleman's topper. They would start little boys on their assigned headgear at eight or nine years old. And, of course, no decent female of any age would wear anything but a long, full skirt, to cover her shameful, seductive nether parts.
Less effete cultures might have body decorations, such as scarring or tattooing, unnatural ear and head and foot shapes cultivated from infancy. It's important, to raise a child into its proper place in a stratified society.
But if you need a designated Kick-me class, you can't go wrong with branding.
The king of Denmark might put on a yellow armband - but would have a J burned into his forehead?

People are crazy.
Serpent
Resident Member
 
Posts: 2928
Joined: 24 Dec 2011


Re: Racism and sexism

Postby BadgerJelly on March 2nd, 2018, 12:02 am 

Asparagus » March 2nd, 2018, 2:37 am wrote:@Badgerjelly
I'm not sure what you're on about. Did the question strike a nerve with you or something?


No, I just don't know what you think about the "question" what the context is, or what you are asking/thinking.

You wrote a line and a half of text. It is so opened ended, which is fair enough, that I don't know what you're looking for or what you think about the question yourself. If you offer some thoughts about what you think I can flesh them out a little maybe and hopeful offer counter positions as well as evidence to back up whatever you may think.

They are political terms. Scientifically they are used in a different manner. Givne that we're in the "Social Sciences" here I would say we're in very vague territory because the scientific use of "race" is quite different from the sociopolitical use of "race." What then happens is political agenda uses the appearance of scientific jargon to bolster certain poltical movements - this may not always be purposeful, and merely aa habit of language and crossing over technical jargon with colloquial language.

So, without context I cannot really address your questions. "Race" and "Sex" have scientific meanings and cultural meanings.

Just because I can be combative and direct with my views doesn't mean I am necessarily enraged or overly emotional about the topic.

I find it strange you "don't know what I'm on about"? I am saying I don't know what the context is because you;ve not given one and merely posted a very open question that can be interpreted in multiple ways ... now I see a little of what you wish to look at given some of your (again brief) responses.

Are you asking what is "sex" and "race"? That would be the obvious place to start. What I find straneg is asking what "sexism" and "racism" are other than political terms? In social sciences we can talk about the distribution of "race" and "sex" across different areas of human interest and geographically. We can even talk about the differences physiologically.

"Sexism" and "racism" are political terms. What exactly are you asking in relation to "social sciences"?

If we want to ask about how the sexes and racial differences (cosmetic and/or biological) are treated under different cultural systems then there is a great deal to say on this subject. As forest notes, there is more to how people in society are treated than simply sex and race. Age is important as is diet, language and general education; not to mention philosophical/poltical/religious views and construct of the family/community "unit."

Is "biological essentialism" anywhere in the ballpark of your interest? What is your view of this?
User avatar
BadgerJelly
Resident Member
 
Posts: 5205
Joined: 14 Mar 2012


Re: Racism and sexism

Postby wolfhnd on March 2nd, 2018, 12:38 am 

The differences between sexism and racism would require writing book because of historical background and the intricacies of social interactions. I'm not a fan of intersection analysis so I see no reason to lump them together. I also don't think that genetic differences between ethnicities is irrelevant, medicine, being one example, the decline of racism means we may actually be able to talk about it some day in the distant future.
User avatar
wolfhnd
Resident Member
 
Posts: 4559
Joined: 21 Jun 2005
Blog: View Blog (3)



Return to Social Sciences

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests