[Lawtonfogle]

>one cannot call positive discrimination "reverse sexism" or "sexism".

Positive discrimination for one person is negative discrimination against another, of whom the discriminator has power over the discriminated. So it still fits as being a *ism.

That is assuming you even accept the whole 'power + mistreatment' bit.

[neogodless]

No - the actor in this scenario, the one with power - is not the male or female engineer, but rather the employer or conference coordinator. They may very well be male, but they are giving the female engineer, who as a class have less power then the class of male engineers a leg up in getting an opportunity to speak.

The male engineers experiencing what you call reverse discrimination are still in a position of power as a class.

[new_corp_dev]

Giving someone an opportunity based on a protected class, which denies that same opportunity to someone else of that protected class, is discrimination. It is treating someone negatively based on their protected class. It's the textbook definition of discrimination.

Critical race theory is as effective at hiding that fact as a Klu Klux Klan white hood.

[Lawtonfogle]

The whole 'in power' is just a means to justify racism/sexism/etc. Anyone who defends it is defending racism/sexism/etc.