> The solution is not merely one sided.
Thinking in terms of "sides", "them", "us" is harmful. Sexism can be internalized by anybody.
Thinking in terms of "sides", "them", "us" is harmful. Sexism can be internalized by anybody.
I see this brought up a lot, and I get it: we SHOULD be able to treat everybody equally regardless of the bits between their legs, but we haven't gotten there yet.
I think it's counterproductive to be pedantic about language when it's serving a purpose and not hurting anyone. If someone brings up a better way to express this type of thing, then I'll be in total agreement, but I haven't found a better way to do so using the english language.
How about: "Some people, regardless of gender, can perpetuate or reinforce gender roles through speech, action or inaction."
"Some people should be willing to give up traditional gender roles."
I agree that that type of language should be used in general (and I make a concerted effort to use it, even in my native tongue where sex is strongly denoted), but IMHO it's useless when describing specific scenarios.