[brightlancer]

> he was obviously rubbed raw by the interaction, and blamed it on sexist things rather than considering that maybe he had a hand in the outcome of the conversation with the woman in question.

If we consider that the captain spoke for 32 minutes, I don't think a half dozen quotes are necessarily representative of the 32 minutes.

It's possible he spent 30 minutes talking about her poor technical performance and poor teamwork with other pilots, and 2 minutes making sexist remarks. But sexist remarks are much more sensational, plays to certain prejudices, and are more likely to drive clicks than criticism (perhaps warranted) of someone's professional behavior.

[naikrovek]

sexist remarks are also very indicative of where his head was at the time. he was not focused on the task in front of him.

please stop seeing things like this as virtue signaling. it's myopic, and negatively colors your view of what is going on.

mentioning the sexism is a very effective way to communicate what was going on in that pilot's mind to people who have a good handle on why sexism is a problem and where it is commonly observed. that's all it is.

there's no "I'm better than you because I say sexism is bad" in this article.

[brightlancer]

> sexist remarks are also very indicative of where his head was at the time. he was not focused on the task in front of him.

My point, which I will repeat again, is that you should not judge "where his head was at the time" based on a handful of quotes cherry picked from 32 minutes.

> please stop seeing things like this as virtue signaling

Please stop seeing things as reinforcing whatever prejudices you walked into this with.