[kmm]

First, I just knew this was going to be about sexism. It's not because your feelings are hurt, that you receive intellectual immunity. If you are making a generalisation about an entire community, consisting of thousands to millions of people, you're going to need to justify that! You're free to say you've encountered some sexist people and I sympathise with that, sexism is terrible. But do not accuse me of being sexist.

Secondly, although I believe logic is the only way to have a real argument, we're all human beings and thus my judgement will be influenced by the colour of your argument. If you have a perfectly logical argument, yet call me a slur, unconsciously you're going to have a way harder time convincing me.

[zorpner]

> But do not accuse me of being sexist.

But you are. So am I -- we all are. Our culture and society are so riddled with pervasive sexism that we all exhibit sexist behavior at baseline, and the responsible thing to do is try and identify it within ourselves so that we can determine how best to negate it. If someone were truly lacking sexism, that would be an extraordinary claim, and would require extraordinary evidence to demonstrate. And if you'll forgive me for saying so -- that's not about to come from someone who says things like "I just knew this was going to be about sexism."

[kmm]

There's a big difference between acknowledging the sexist baseline that exists in society, something which we should all strive to improve, and saying a certain subset is fundamentally (more) sexist, which is quite discriminatory and unfair towards that subset.

> And if you'll forgive me for saying so -- that's not about to come from someone who says things like "I just knew this was going to be about sexism."

No, I don't forgive you. This is a completely uncalled for.

[Avshalom]

Okay so to review: you do admit that you're sexist because you exist in society but don't want to be accused of being sexist?

Also zorpner was not asking for forgiveness, that was a rhetorical flourish.

Which is actually a big part of what the article is talking about: the apparent inability of some people to accept that humans don't speak in Z-notation or something.

[kmm]

Uhm, I was trying to be funny. You're assuming I have the social skills of a potato.

I suppose what I've said is pretty clear. I'm no saint and I'm sure I am in some ways a little sexist (although I hope less than average). Yet I don't want to be called especially sexist, or have a group I might be part of be accused of being fundamentally sexist. Sexism is a spectrum.

[obviouslygreen]

Really? Because you perceive "our" culture and society to be "riddled with pervasive sexism," it follows that we all "exhibit sexist behavior at baseline?" And if the GP believes contrary to your claim, it'll "require extraordinary evidence to demonstrate?"

Ridiculous. Call yourself sexist if you'd like. And if the day comes when the Singularity puts us all closely in touch with each other's psyches, then you're free to tell us how sexist we've all been and we'll cry about it over a collective mug of chai.

Until then, perhaps you should go apologize to some women on behalf of the detriment all of us that have had on their lives today. I'll go let my girlfriend know what a pig I am (after I'm done cooking her dinner).

[Avshalom]

It's no more about sexism than it is about book reviews.