I recorded video with the Handsome Asians Motorcycle Club this week (peep it when its out ;) ) with some other ladies to discuss what kind of issues lady riders come across in the motorcycle community, and I was curious if other ladies have the same or similar issues. For example, I tried to buy new handlebars this past week and was told my boyfriend should order them for me, or order them online for me, or put them on my bike for me like I can't do it on my own. I'm also constantly congratulated for simple tasks, like being told, "Wow, you ride??" or, "You have your own bike? I thought you rode on his!!" And of course, the classic, "Oh, you have a scooter?"
Ladies, or anyone with a similar story, let me share your pain and groan with you. What's your biggest Lady Rider problem?
Hmm... let me see. Well I will say this... back when I had long hair, guys were more inclined to look at me disbelievingly/funny/condescendingly when it I'd go into a store like Auto Zone or whatever... or when I'd park somewhere and get out of my customized Spirit or the beautiful Valiant I used to own. But ever since I cut my hair short and (well TBH I've always dressed like a guy) this kind of thing rarely happens to me anymore.
The thing that still could happen has to do with online stuff (and it hasn't really happened too much on this forum thankfully) ...but if I ever and I mean EVER make a mistake or ask a question, it's like... put under a 10000x power microscope and dissected to the billionth degree simply because I'm female. But I read other things that guys post or ask or mess up and I'm like wow... nobody jumped all over his sh*t but if that was me... whoooo boy I'd be made fun of and picked on until the cows came home smh
I'm hoping maybe this thread will get a few more replies but truthfully there aren't many chickies on here... pandy, where you at girl?
Oh oh here's one I almost forgot about. When I tell people the size of my bike, and I get the reaction of, "So when are you gonna get a REAL bike?" or "Pfff... 500... that's so small..." like I don't know what I have or what I bought when I bought it. Got my GS 5 years ago and the honeymoon still isn't over :kiss3:
I will say that the women students I teach mostly seem to come into class with this attitude that they can't ride. A lot of them get dragged into it by their boyfriends, some are truly interested in riding and come there with an escort, and few rarely are there alone, but a majority of them make it seem like they have zero confidence in anything they're doing, like they aren't even sure if they want to be there.
Usually by day two the thrill has worn off to a "it's not so scary after all" more relaxed demeaner, and many times the women outperform the men. I've noticed if a couple is there together, even if the guy has been riding before, he'll tend to score higher on the eval (it's like golf, lower is better).
I'm trying to think back to when I took the safety course 4 years ago... I think there were 3 other females besides me in a class of 10. IIRC one didn't pass the written portion, one kept falling down during the riding portion and then target fixated and went crashing into the grass and one seemed to be too scared and she just gave up.
Only 6 of the 10 total people in the class passed and got their license at the end (yours truly included :woohoo:) but I got to see first-hand the fear and also I think they got more and more intimidated as the class went on because at least a handful of us had riding experience already and we were making simple things look super easy (cuz well yeah they are once you've been riding for a bit).
when i took the msf corse i have never been on a motorcycle before and it was very stressful but i learned alot but i didn't drop like a few of the cocky people did lol
My MSF (or whatever the new equivalent is- Total Control now I think?) had only 3 females, and I only know of myself and one other who actually got our permits (Under 21 means permit time, ugh). The whole "I can't ride" idea is something I've noticed about a lot of women. I had it before I started riding, and other females I know who have showed interest still have this. I wonder how much of it is our own organic idea versus what is taught to us? A friend of mine I'm trying to get into riding told me her boyfriend at the time told her she couldn't do it and she would die, and her parents have been completely unsupportive as well.
I lucked into a group of people who encouraged me to ride, but I have family who are still very against the idea of me riding even though they themselves rode in the past.
Quote from: mysho22 on April 11, 2017, 01:54:11 PM
My MSF (or whatever the new equivalent is- Total Control now I think?)
Total Control is just an alternative school that does more advanced techniques. The MSF is still the primary instructing and licensing agency in the USA.
Forgive me if i ruffle a few feathers, i dont mean to offend AT ALL ! , lady riders we dont see too many of ( specially aroundd here) when i see one i dont say whoa you can ride? ill be damned ! , i put gender aside . if i say anything its about the bike. as far as a lady wrench turner, that ive got alot of respect for. most parents dont teach their daughters to work on a car. i had located a garage once staffed by women. took my vehicle there without reservation. i believe if people as a whole would be a bit more open minded, wed not have a need for threads like this. but numberswise, the ladies are in a smaller percentage here. icve seen a few women staffing the local partshauses. and more often then not they know more than their male counterparts lol.
Aaron
Yes we WANT more female riders! The more the better.
However, there's a modern trend where people tend to put bad treatment down to their gender. Maybe it's not because you are female, it's very easy to have a knee-jerk reaction and blame it on sexism. Of course that exists (but it exists in the other direction too, but that is rarely acknowledged in the media -stick your head up and it will soon be cut off!)
Plenty of newbie male riders have the piss taken out of them when they've displayed lack of experience, - they can't put it down to being male.
There's no denying that motorcycling is a very male-dominated activity. The overwhelming majority of riders are men, most racers and other pro riders are men, etc. So, its unsurprising that with that comes some unconscious gender biases (guys being surprised women ride/wrench, guys over-praising or over-criticizing women riders, etc.) and maybe even some outright sexism (like you experienced when trying to buy handlebars, mysho). I mean, even some of motorcycling's colloquialisms are a little sexist when you think about it (saying "riding b*tch" when referring to a passenger is one that comes to mind).
I think if more there were more women in the riding community, some of the biases would eventually fade since it would be just a normal for a woman to ride as it is for a man to ride. But, "how do you get more women riding?" is a question I'm not sure anyone (even marketing execs) has a concrete answer for. :dunno_black:
This thread took a different path than I thought it would, but a turned to a very good point. There just aren't a ton of female riders. While I agree if there were more a lot of the motorcycle colloquialisms and over-congratulations/criticisms would die down, I feel like the opposite is very true. If we really want more female riders, encouraging women to ride and assuming any woman with a helmet rode over on her own (as a form of encouragement, as well as most would assume a male had ridden on his own) is the first step a lot of riders need to take. Changing the language as well, like referring to having a passenger as "riding two-up" or similar, rather than "riding b****" like is more common.
Female gear is also a very big problem, as many companies just "pink it and shrink it" - meaning they take men's gear, add pink, and make it a bit smaller rather than truly designing it for the female body and the differences bodies have. Female gear either doesn't fit, is bright pink, or is expensive and doesn't support women of lower incomes (especially college students in my experience). There is nothing wrong with the color pink, but when it is the only option for a large assortment of women it can be frustrating.
If women are brought into riding communities that obviously support the idea of them riding, they'll be more likely to take it up than if they are brought into a community that uses their gender as an insult.
Haha "pink it and shrink it" that's a good way to explain it!!! :icon_lol: :icon_lol: :icon_lol:
I've never bought women's gear. None of it ever appealed to me and you're right, there is a LOT more selection if you search for men's jackets, boots, pants etc. The only "gear" I have that's women's is my freeze-out base layer pants... cuz my mom bought 'em for me and wanted me to have at least a little bit of pink in my wardrobe somewhere LOL
I have always assumed that any lady wearing the gear is also the pilot. That may just be optimism on my part: I'm also biased because both my wife and my elder daughter ride. To me, there is no fun being the pillion on a bike, it's far more fun to be the rider, so that's what anyone should do. Around here I think I've seen more riders than passengers (I've never actually counted), and most of the passengers are on Gold Wings. The vast majority of ladies are riders.
Quote from: ShowBizWolf on April 12, 2017, 08:37:12 PM
Haha "pink it and shrink it" that's a good way to explain it!!! :icon_lol: :icon_lol: :icon_lol:
I've never bought women's gear. None of it ever appealed to me
That's a great way to get around it for some body types, but for some women that's not really an option. I wore a men's jacket (I got for free) for a few months when I was on my boyfriend's bike until I could get a female one, but it was ill-fitting to the point it was unsafe. The collar was too high (this was just annoying), the bust was too small, the waist too large, the hips too small, the collar to bottom was too small, and the arms were too large around and too long. Wearing gear that is too large can make so that if you do end up going off the bike, this extra leather (or whatever) can catch on the rode, and suddenly you're not sliding but rolling. The tightness is uncomfortable and can be distracting while riding, when you should be paying attention to other things (ie the road). It took me months of searching to find a jacket in my price range that fit and wasn't either pink or ugly to all hell (this part is important too. I have to want to wear it every time I ride or I'll end up not wearing it and being unsafe). It shouldn't have taken me this long, especially when female riders are such a fast growing group, and have just as much need for gear as male riders.
Quote from: barry905 on April 13, 2017, 02:15:22 AM
I have always assumed that any lady wearing the gear is also the pilot.
Around here I think I've seen more riders than passengers (I've never actually counted), and most of the passengers are on Gold Wings. The vast majority of ladies are riders.
Great!! I'm glad to hear that. A lot of riders don't, and I feel even this little assumption over and over again can give a general idea that women can't do this, or aren't "suppose to".
Maybe this is more of an issue in my area. In my part of California, and other parts of California I've visited, there is a passenger on every 5th or so bike it seems. It's very common, and especially in the summer months booty shorts and tank tops are common as well. (But this isn't necessarily due to lack of women's gear, but probably lack of understanding from the passenger of what the risks involved are.)
Quote from: barry905 on April 13, 2017, 02:15:22 AM
To me, there is no fun being the pillion on a bike, it's far more fun to be the rider, so that's what anyone should do.
While I don't disagree, you can have a lot of fun on the pillion as long as you trust the pilot, they trust you, and actually try to have fun with it.
I rode as a passenger last year, I was going to check out a new bike and since I knew the seller we were just going to ride around for the evening. My friend Matt was going to take me (I didn't have any transportation at the time) and he wanted to ride along so I had to be the 2nd up.
He actually commented that he never felt his FZ07 corner so well, a passenger that knows how to lean can actually be an asset in some ways.
Plus we were connected over Bluetooth and I was able to point out stuff to him. Potential dangers, I could check his blind-spot, cool scenery, etc.
Plus, in the spirit of having fun with it, a driver along the way noticed we were both guys and started joking about "Aspen" and what might happen that evening so I started making inappropriate hand gestures and blowing kisses and stuff, LMAO!
He's yelling at me, "Don't do that! People will get the wrong idea!"
I'm yelling back "Hey! One distinct job of the pillion is to look the part, I'm just fulfilling my half of the bargain!"
"You SOB! You can walk home!"
"Not if I buy that bike!"
:laugh:
When I first glanced at this, I thought it read "#lazyriderproblems" and I got all excited but, now that I'm here, I realize that I don't belong. :dunno_black:
Also, chick riders rock!
http://www.ridinginthezone.com/the-plight-of-women-motorcyclists/
mysho, give this article a read.
Great article qc !!
Recently was at a major motorcycle meeting, and hooked up with a mate from interstate who roadraces a Beemer kneeler outfit.
After one session he came in and we stood around chatting about the bike, his lines etc. As we were doing this, his passenger (swinger) made an amazing display of wrangling herself and her more than ample hooters out of her leathers, wow! After some minutes like that she then proceeded to pour herself back into the leathers like a calisthenics exercise. We boys enjoyed the display behind our sunglasses. Sexiness isn't always sexism. Girls?
uh.. well.. haha I'm still hung up on the leathers and hooters part :oops: :icon_rolleyes: ;) :angel:
This is true. Sexiness is not sexism, and if she was obviously doing this for you and your friend, or for herself with the knowledge you were watching thats completely fine! I 110% support that. I too, have done some of this for my partner's attention, and enjoyed the sexy/bad ass feeling of riding, and my own femininity intersecting to make me a female rider.
The issues come from the obvious mentions of, "ask your boyfriend to do it," rather than assuming I can wrench on my bike myself, or the over criticism or over congratulations. These can be frustrating, as well as people, men mostly from what I've witnessed, ogling as I take off my jacket after a ride. I'm clumsy and sweaty, not trying to be sexy. I'm not saying it can never be flattering, but it can easily start to feel ridiculous. I get it, I'm a lady on a motorcycle. I'd say to take a picture, but thats super creepy and please don't.
A friend of mine, also a young woman who rides, is a welder and pretty damn good at it. She notices that often if she tried to have a conversation about this, or joins a conversation about this, men have a hard time accepting she can be any good at it. Like it will damage their "man card" that a female is ALSO good at welding, maybe even better than them at this.
She has also told me many stories of men who have been riding much shorter of a time than her, and try to give her basic pointers and tips that she knows and has known since she began to ride. When talking to another man riding as long as her, these same people won't bring up these basic tips and pointers.
This is not to attack men in the slightest, but to bring awareness to this and just make sure you aren't contributing to things like this. They are frustrating and degrading to females. By all means please feel sexy on your bike, and do sexy things on your bike!!! I'm all about that!! Just don't necessarily force us into this same box unless we want to be there, ya know?
Will read the article later!!
Absolutely mysho22. And 'More power to your arm' as the saying goes. Respect to the females who, I agree, sometimes have to put up with patronising comments.
ShowBiz, hopefully we aren't too puritanical on here, and can deal with a little mischievous humour. :thumb:
I dunno, actually I find both you girls attractive... Am I even allowed to say that nowadays though? If not, the World has come to a very sorry state!
You made my night Jools :kiss3: :oops: :laugh:
Sometimes when I dig around through old threads (like 10 years ago-ish) I see how different this forum used to be! I can't say I'd be as comfortable here back then as I am now... but there are some times where I wish there was a tiny bit more humor and silliness here than what there is.
Quote from: qcbaker on April 18, 2017, 08:16:18 AM
http://www.ridinginthezone.com/the-plight-of-women-motorcyclists/
mysho, give this article a read.
Thanks for sharing this article! It was a great read with some great points
I know I couldn't do this, https://youtu.be/pEnw1OKyOV4
Ladies, I get it. But you have to give some of us guys a bit of a break. There are some legitimate reasons besides sexism that explain some of these issues.
Less selection, more expensive gear: this is simply a supply and demand problem. I work in product management, and this is a problem I am extremely familiar with. Companies make products to meet demand and make a profit. So usually they make things that will sell to 90% of the market, and that 10% stuff is niche product which will be extremely limited in production, making for scarcity and keeping prices high. In short, the only way in a free-market economy to change this is for millions more women to ride and buy this kind of gear. Likewise the "pink" stuff, my suspicion is that manufacturers find that women who shop for this stuff in retail stores use this coloring as sort of a gross indicator of how to find what is a niche and limited supply product in a store. In other words, if they made it black and and red and blue like all the guy's stuff, then these items would get lost in the sea of men's stuff in the store and more women would take one look on the showroom floor and immediately assume there are no women's products there. Having pink stuff draws women's attention to it and kind of says "see here's the women's stuff!". Downside? You get pink stuff. This is not unique to motorcycle gear. The same thing happens with running, cycling, climbing, etc. virtually all sports equipment because pretty much most gear-type sports and activities include mostly men so retailers have to have a way to make women's gear stand out. The American way is pink.
And as for the surprise that women ride, again this is not necessarily sexism. I'd have to guess that probably 95% of motorcyclists are males. And probably 90% of women with a motorcycle helmet are passengers and not pilots. So given this kind of extreme majority, it's a pretty safe assumption that any woman who shows up amongst a group of other motorcyclists is likely a passenger. And it's fair enough to be surprised to find that you are in the extreme minority.
BTW about the suggestion that you get your boyfriend or husband to install or fix stuff, well I have two daughters who are 21 and 24 years old and neither one has ever had any interest in ever trying to fix or repair anything mechanical no matter how much I tried to get them involved. But it's not just the girls. Most of their friends regardless of gender also have no idea which end of a ratchet attaches to a socket. This is generational as much as anything. But still it's a plain reality that for whatever reason, it's far more common for men to have tools and know how to use them at least a little bit than it is for women of the same age to do so, regardless of generation. When my wife goes to an auto parts store and buys something, she's more than happy to bring it home and expect me to install it. Why wouldn't the guy behind the counter expect it? Try not to get so offended. Again, the solution is, women and girls start to work on stuff so that this difference in actual real world behavior doesn't actually exist.
It's not sexism when expectations align with statistics. You're the outlier. You should embrace this. Most women don't ride motorcycles for whatever reason, you're special because you do. Most women won't replace as much as a wiper blade and you rebuilt your fork? That's awesome and you are truly a unique and special woman who can do that. Don't get offended when someone is surprised by this, instead take the opportunity to brag and relish the experience of being so unique.
IMHO.
I just had a similar conversation with my daughter who will graduate in the spring with a political science degree from A&M, she's considering what job to try to get. I told her to use her uniqueness as a young, cute, conservative woman who is well-spoken, writes well and is very well-informed politically, since that makes her a unicorn in the field. Hey, it's awesome to be a unicorn. The same applies for women who ride motorcycles and can replace their brake pads or adjust their valves.
IMHO.
Wish I could talk my wife into at least riding with me as a passenger. I tried real hard to get her to try riding a scooter, she won't. I work on this all the time. Believe me, most of the time when a guy is surprised you ride, it's a positive surprise. He's probably not denigrating you because you are a woman.
@Mr72, nicely said.
I will preface my post by saying that I am a man so my viewpoint on sexism can only carry so much weight since I can't experience it myself.
Quote from: mr72 on November 28, 2017, 08:17:32 AM
Try not to get so offended. Again, the solution is, women and girls start to work on stuff so that this difference in actual real world behavior doesn't actually exist.
Mr72, I think that is kind of messed up to require women as an entire gender to start wrenching and riding more before men treat them equally.
The proper thing to do is acknowledge that we as men have a biased view of women riding and wrenching and make a conscious effort to treat them no differently than we would treat a man in the same situation. This actually takes some effort on our part, because like you said we are very aware of how rarely we see women in this hobby and we are used to seeing women more as an accessory on the back of a bike or being an umbrella girl at the Moto GP. If a women wants to talk about how great it is that she is one of the few female riders, that's fine but let her bring it up. If we don't make the effort to treat women equally then women will always be fighting an uphill battle to be able to enjoy these activities as easily as men.
Its very unlikely that the cause of women being underrepresented in the motorcycling world is women as a gender having less potential to enjoy wrenching and riding. The more likely cause of women being underrepresented in motorcycling is that the society that we live in reinforces particular gender norms from an early age and continues to push more men into motor sports and fixing things. If you exposed a young girl to wrenching and riding at a very early age before she has a chance to notice what society expects of her then she is much more likely to become part of our motorcycling world.
Quote from: mr72 on November 28, 2017, 08:17:32 AM
It's not sexism when expectations align with statistics.
That's exactly what sexism is. What else could it be? A woman you are being sexist to didn't single handedly create the statistics your gender expectations are based on.
Quote from: Bluesmudge on November 30, 2017, 04:15:38 PM
Quote from: mr72 on November 28, 2017, 08:17:32 AM
Try not to get so offended. Again, the solution is, women and girls start to work on stuff so that this difference in actual real world behavior doesn't actually exist.
Mr72, I think that is kind of messed up to require women as an entire gender to start wrenching and riding more before men treat them equally.
...
Quote from: mr72 on November 28, 2017, 08:17:32 AM
It's not sexism when expectations align with statistics.
That's exactly what sexism is.
No, it's not. And I can see you completely missed my point.
Sexism is when someone says: you can't do that or you are inferior or incapable because you are a woman. That requires
intent. It's entirely different to make a statistically valid estimate of likely traits based on gender and well-known and accepted probability. Statistics, probabilities, that has no emotional content or malicious intent.
It's just way too common in today's society to assume (as you did, regarding my post) malicious intent when there is none. We just kind of need to ease up and cut people some slack. It's rare for women to be involved in motorcycling, and rarer still for them to know how to work on a motorcycle, because among motorcyclists, of which only a tiny minority are women, only a very small number work on their own bikes. There are exceptions, for sure. But those who are exceptions ought to cut some slack to everyone else who might not guess they are an exception. That's kind of the definition of being the exception. We are doomed to fail at communicating as a people if we insist on being offended every chance we get.
BTW there's a huge difference between the "gender expectation" you suggest and an innocent guess based on probability. Again, it's intent. And again, you ignored my post's intent, even though after reading it again, it seems pretty clear to me. You'd have to work pretty hard to read it the way you apparently did.
I am sincerely sorry I posted on this topic. Should have known better. I'll stand down now. :) :thumb:
it used to be a rare thing to see a woman who got her hands dirty on her own ride. ( or someone elses) nowadays not so much. more power to em. if they want to get theior hands dirty, who am i or anyone else to say anything about it.
Aaron
Women are not female men.
This is very entertaining!! :cheers:
I've always kinda considered myself to be a female man at times... :hmmm: :icon_rolleyes:
Mr72, I know you didn't have any malicious intent. What I am trying to do is get you to re-examine your thinking on sexism. The world has been a very sexist place for a very long time and for that to change a lot of people are going to have to realize how their assumptions effect other people. Try to think of it from the female perspective instead of as a man making an innocent comment based on statistical inference. What seems innocent to you may be harmful to someone else.
It's obvious we have different ideas of the definition of sexism.
I don't believe that sexism (or any ism for that matter) requires any degree of intent. There could be intent, but there could also be ignorance.
I see sexism to be defined by how things are received, not by how they are intended.
Statistics themselves are emotionless but improperly applied they can be prejudicial. It's obvious from this thread that not all women motorcyclists want to be singled out or have interactions based primarily on their gender whenever they get on a bike. I think that should be enough to want to try and stop singling out women on motorcycles based on their gender.
No matter what the statistics are or how much they back up an innocent guess about someone we shouldn't feel okay about acting on those assumptions. If you got on an airplane and noticed that there was a female by the cockpit door would it be okay to ask her to get you a soda? Statistically she is much more likely to be a flight attendant than a pilot and so it's an innocent assumption, right? Although that comment may seem innocent it might also be emotionally damaging to a female pilot trying to break into a male dominated field where she already has to deal with a lot of subdued sexism based on stereotypes. This is an extreme example but it's the same idea when it comes to making motorcycling a hard sport for women to get into. As men we need to stop thinking about how innocent our comments are and start thinking about how they might make someone feel. Asking people not to be offended is just another way of saying, "You should accept my point of view so I don't have to think about yours"
Quote from: mr72 on November 28, 2017, 08:17:32 AM
BTW about the suggestion that you get your boyfriend or husband to install or fix stuff, well I have two daughters who are 21 and 24 years old and neither one has ever had any interest in ever trying to fix or repair anything mechanical no matter how much I tried to get them involved. But it's not just the girls. Most of their friends regardless of gender also have no idea which end of a ratchet attaches to a socket. This is generational as much as anything.
I think part of the reason people are less interested in DIY repairs for vehicles/appliances nowadays is the fact that as time goes on, equipment becomes more and more complicated and its a lot harder now to just pick up a couple tools and fix your car/fridge/HVAC unit/etc than it was even say 10 years ago. Which is why bikes like the GS are often seen as great beginner bikes, because they're pretty easy to work on, for the most part.
As for your daughters, at least you try to get them involved. If they don't want to fix stuff, that's their choice, but at least you gave them the choice. Sometimes parents don't even try. A woman at my job told me that she hopes her next child is a boy because she thought her husband would want to have someone to do "guy stuff" with. I asked her what she mean't by "guy stuff" and she replied with "oh you know, hunting, fishing, football, that kind of thing." I just said "couldn't you just take your daughter to do those things? There's no reason you can't go hunting or fishing with her..." She just said "I guess, but it's not the same." I just stopped because I didn't want to seem like I was telling her how to parent her kid. But I felt really bad for her daughter. As someone who loves to fish, it makes me upset that her husband wouldn't even consider taking their daughter fishing just because she's a girl.
Quote
But still it's a plain reality that for whatever reason, it's far more common for men to have tools and know how to use them at least a little bit than it is for women of the same age to do so, regardless of generation. When my wife goes to an auto parts store and buys something, she's more than happy to bring it home and expect me to install it. Why wouldn't the guy behind the counter expect it?
That's fine if that's the dynamic you have in your family, but it's kind of rude to just assume, based basically nothing but the fact that they're female, that a woman isn't interested in doing something like that. You are making a judgement about someone you don't know based on nothing but their gender. That is sexism.
Quote
Try not to get so offended.
When a person tells you that you hurt them, you don't get to decide that you didn't. I really don't like when people have this attitude. But, it can be very difficult as someone who doesn't experience sexism on a regular basis to understand how these types of assumptions can hurt people's feelings. As a man, I often make this mistake as well. I just try to recognize when I do it, and try to do it less.
Quote
Again, the solution is, women and girls start to work on stuff so that this difference in actual real world behavior doesn't actually exist.
I agree that if more women were wrenching and riding, people would make less assumptions, but you need to think about the reasons why women aren't currently doing that. Don't you think it might be beneficial for men, the majority group in riding (who by and large WANT more women to ride and be a part of the riding community) to use a little introspection and think about why exactly more women aren't attracted to riding the way guys are? I think that assumptions like the "ask your boyfriend to do it" are part of the problem. It creates a hostile environment. Who wants to be part of a community that constantly is condescending to you based on your gender?
And if you think the counterargument to "women aren't attracted to riding because the community can be condescending or even hostile at times" is "don't get so offended" then maybe you're part of the problem? If you refuse to empathize and try to understand why women feel the way they do when men make comments like that, then you're not really helping the community become more welcoming for women riders.
Quote from: mr72 on November 30, 2017, 06:49:31 PM
Quote from: Bluesmudge on November 30, 2017, 04:15:38 PM
That's exactly what sexism is.
No, it's not. And I can see you completely missed my point.
Sexism is when someone says: you can't do that or you are inferior or incapable because you are a woman. That requires intent. It's entirely different to make a statistically valid estimate of likely traits based on gender and well-known and accepted probability. Statistics, probabilities, that has no emotional content or malicious intent.
sexism
noun | \ ˈsek-ˌsi-zəm \
1.) prejudice or discrimination based on sex; especially : discrimination against women
2.) behavior, conditions, or attitudes that foster stereotypes of social roles based on sex
Straight from Merriam-Webster. Notice how "intent" is not required? Your "estimate of likely traits based on gender" is an attitude that fosters stereotypes of social roles based on sex. Ergo, it is sexist to assume a woman doesn't cant or doesn't want to fix things just because "most women don't like to fix things." Obviously, this is a different kind of sexism than actively believing yourself superior based on sex, but it is still sexism. I don't think you think women are inferior, and I don't think bluesmudge thinks that either. But yes, you are being sexist. I don't think you're being malicious, but that doesn't mean your comment wasn't sexist.
Quote
It's just way too common in today's society to assume (as you did, regarding my post) malicious intent when there is none. We just kind of need to ease up and cut people some slack. It's rare for women to be involved in motorcycling, and rarer still for them to know how to work on a motorcycle, because among motorcyclists, of which only a tiny minority are women, only a very small number work on their own bikes. There are exceptions, for sure. But those who are exceptions ought to cut some slack to everyone else who might not guess they are an exception. That's kind of the definition of being the exception. We are doomed to fail at communicating as a people if we insist on being offended every chance we get.
I don't think he was assuming malicious intent. And if you ask me, you're the one doing that, honestly. The fact of the matter is that it is sexist behavior to make assumptions about people based on their gender. It would be sexist for a woman to assume I love sports because I'm a man, even if most men like sports. And it would be sexist for me to assume a woman doesn't like wrenching because she's a woman, even if most women don't wrench.
And again, you don't get to decide your comments aren't offensive. And people aren't offended by choice. That's not how it works. Maybe instead of insisting that you're not being offensive, you can try and understand why someone might be offended by your comments.
Quote
BTW there's a huge difference between the "gender expectation" you suggest and an innocent guess based on probability. Again, it's intent. And again, you ignored my post's intent, even though after reading it again, it seems pretty clear to me. You'd have to work pretty hard to read it the way you apparently did.
I get that your intent wasn't malicious, but like I said before, intent isn't required for something to be sexist. And you're right, there is a difference. Being unintentionally sexist and being intentionally sexist are indeed two different things. You were unintentionally sexist.
Quote
I am sincerely sorry I posted on this topic. Should have known better. I'll stand down now. :) :thumb:
This bit here is just kind of rude. And before you say I'm "assuming malicious intent", I want to re-iterate that I believe you are definitely not being malicious, but I want you to understand that you were definitely being sexist. I don't mean that as an insult, it just is literally the truth.
**trigger warning, my next comments are not meant to be mean**
I have a more animalistic view of things. I don't get bent out of shape or even think twice about being treated like a man when called on by women to do "man things" (i.e. pick up heavy things, getting my hands dirty, fix things using tools, being an unpaid bodyguard to women around me when called on, etc.). It happens to me every day, all day long, literally. I'm ok with getting used/stereotyped. I think most women realize this as well. I can plainly see women and men are different and I think it's normal to act differently or treat the other sex different based on stereotypes (abuse/violence against the opposite sex is unacceptable). Stereotype are real reflections IMO. Facts are facts and men do better at some things and women others. There is always exceptions to that rule...and that's fine. I think some women bikers, firemen, laborers, etc. are very attractive. But don't expect me to act like we are equals in the broad sense. Men are sexist and so are women and I think that is a good thing. That's what makes the world go-round. Embrace your animal self and roll with it. Own that shift. It's more about competitiveness than it is sexism and somebody's gotta win and somebody's gotta lose.
OOPS double post
Quote from: pliskin on December 01, 2017, 07:35:30 AM
**trigger warning, my next comments are not meant to be mean**
I have a more animalistic view of things. I don't get bent out of shape or even think twice about being treated like a man when called on by women to do "man things" (i.e. pick up heavy things, getting my hands dirty, fix things using tools, being an unpaid bodyguard to women around me when called on, etc.). It happens to me every day, all day long, literally. I'm ok with getting used/stereotyped. I think most women realize this as well. I can plainly see women and men are different and I think it's normal to act differently or treat the other sex different based on stereotypes (abuse/violence against the opposite sex is unacceptable). Stereotype are real reflections IMO. Facts are facts and men do better at some things and women others. There is always exceptions to that rule...and that's fine. I think some women bikers, firemen, laborers, etc. are very attractive. But don't expect me to act like we are equals in the broad sense. Men are sexist and so are women and I think that is a good thing. That's what makes the world go-round. Embrace your animal self and roll with it. Own that shift. It's more about competitiveness than it is sexism and somebody's gotta win and somebody's gotta lose.
I mean... I guess that's one way to look at it. I disagree with the bit about stereotypes, but I think I get your point?
I don't think that people are trying to deny that there are differences between men and women. Obviously, there are physical characteristics that lead to men and women being naturally better at certain things. But a lot of perceived "differences" are really just gender roles that we have a society have created. Masculinity and femininity are basically just constructs. This isn't always an objectively "bad" thing, since it can often feel good to do "manly" stuff. Sometimes as a man, you just wanna feel "manly", and that's totally fine. And it goes the same for women. If a woman wants to do "girly" stuff because she likes it and wants to feel feminine, that's totally fine. But it can be problematic when people shame others for doing things that don't align with their societal gender role. For example, if a guy likes to sew or bake cookies or other traditionally "girly" things, sometimes other men will make fun of them for doing so. Assuming a woman isn't capable of performing a repair because "most women don't do that kind of thing" is much the same.
Quote from: qcbaker on November 30, 2017, 08:25:55 PM
it's kind of rude to just assume, based basically nothing but the fact that they're female, that a woman isn't interested in doing something like that. You are making a judgement about someone you don't know based on nothing but their gender. That is sexism.
I completely disagree. And I think this is the core problem. An [innocent, well-intended] assumption is not a
judgment. If I don't think it's LIKELY you know how to fix your motorcycle is not even remotely the same thing as me thinking you are not CAPABLE of fixing your own motorcycle. Regardless of gender. I mean, when I meet a 25 year old guy with a man bun and skinny jeans, I think he's unlikely to have any clue how to fix anything. If I meet a 25 year old hipster woman I think the same thing for the same reason but with the woman, that's sexist? That's asinine and frankly I find that's a lot of what's wrong with our society.
Quote
When a person tells you that you hurt them, you don't get to decide that you didn't.
Again, I completely disagree. We all choose how we react to interactions with other people. We make similar choices over time when encountering similar interactions, and this becomes a habitual response. It goes both ways, by the way, as many people develop problems by conditioning themselves to not react negatively to truly malicious interactions, but the way a person reacts to an individual interaction is at least partly if not mostly a learned behavior. It is definitely something you can control and change given time and practice.
As evidence, I submit my daughters and my wife. None of them would react this way to "sexist" assumptions. How is it incumbent on the third party to read the mind of the person they are communicating with and determine whether they happen to have a sensitivity that will result in judging the interaction as sexist? or racist or anti-whatever, or whatever other judgment we want to make about how people interact for that matter...
And again, is it not just as "sexist" (as pilskin astutely pointed out) for a woman to ask me to lift something heavy or reach something on a high shelf (I mean, men are on average, taller...) or help change a tire or do whatever other "guy" stuff? Am I then incapable of choosing not to be offended when this happens?
Quote
you need to think about the reasons why women aren't currently doing that. Don't you think it might be beneficial for men, the majority group in riding (who by and large WANT more women to ride and be a part of the riding community) to use a little introspection and think about why exactly more women aren't attracted to riding the way guys are?
Why? Why must men take responsibility for why women en masse choose to not engage in an activity? That makes no sense. But this is popular group-think, the idea that women or men or immigrants or gays or whatever all only think as a group and therefore a common cause must apply to all of their choices which they tend to make in common, and such a common cause must be some kind of flaw. Is it not OK for women to just generally not prefer motorcycling? Do we, as a society, really care? I don't really see how there's a clear obvious judgment to be made here. Again, my observation point is my wife of 25 years and my two daughters and none of them either have any desire whatsoever to even come near a motorcycle and it's very clear that they never will. How is it any more sexist to say "that's ok" than it is to assume this is a problem and that women must somehow become included in a "men's" activity? Why can't it be ok for them to choose to do whatever they want to do and nobody gets upset about it or thinks it needs to be fixed?
I just don't see it as a problem at all that more women are not interested in motorcycling. Women can each choose whatever they want to do, more power to them. If they don't want to ride a motorcycle, what's wrong with that?
Quote"women aren't attracted to riding because the community can be condescending or even hostile at times" is "don't get so offended" then maybe you're part of the problem?
It's quite a leap to think the "community" is hostile or condescending, but again, being condescending or hostile are also personal individual choices people make,
and they imply intent. So sure, if people in the community are condescending or hostile, they should quit doing that. Some people are jerks, and some of those jerks are sexists.
QuoteIf you refuse to empathize and try to understand why women feel the way they do when men make comments like that, then you're not really helping the community become more welcoming for women riders.
Practically speaking, I think it's impossible for the "community", which is comprised of maybe millions of individual people, to become commonly more welcoming. How I feel about it has absolutely no bearing on it. I think for women who want to be involved in motorcycling, as individuals, it is far more productive for them to cut other people some slack, and try to assume the best when people interact with them. That has nothing to do with the "community". If most of the guys with motorcycles just innocently assume things based on their cumulative experience then don't jump to the conclusion that they are either condescending (intent), rude (intent), hostile (intent), or making a judgment, maybe wait until they actually show signs of hostility or judgment before becoming offended. That applies to all interactions regardless of whether it's the category of sexism or whatever else.
Quote
This bit here is just kind of rude. And before you say I'm "assuming malicious intent", I want to re-iterate that I believe you are definitely not being malicious, but I want you to understand that you were definitely being sexist. I don't mean that as an insult, it just is literally the truth.
And I literally think you are absolutely wrong. But that's ok! I'm really not being rude or upset at all, just not happy to have stirred debate on this topic since it so often just causes knee-jerk overreaction and it's difficult to have an honest, unemotional conversation about it.
Quote from: mr72 on December 01, 2017, 09:01:26 AM
I completely disagree. And I think this is the core problem. An [innocent, well-intended] assumption is not a judgment. If I don't think it's LIKELY you know how to fix your motorcycle is not even remotely the same thing as me thinking you are not CAPABLE of fixing your own motorcycle. Regardless of gender. I mean, when I meet a 25 year old guy with a man bun and skinny jeans, I think he's unlikely to have any clue how to fix anything. If I meet a 25 year old hipster woman I think the same thing for the same reason but with the woman, that's sexist? That's asinine and frankly I find that's a lot of what's wrong with our society.
It's only sexist if you assume she cant (or doesn't want to) fix stuff because she's a woman. If it's because shes a young, hipster type person, then no, it's not sexist. Re-read the definition of sexism. It's only when you make assumptions and/or judgements
based on sex.
Also:
judgement
a : the process of forming an opinion or evaluation by discerning and comparing careful judgment of the odds
b : an opinion or estimate so formed
In this case you are forming an opinion based on "the odds" (most women dont wrench, therefore this woman probably does not wrench). This judgement is sexist.
Quote
Again, I completely disagree. We all choose how we react to interactions with other people.
You can choose what actions you take in response to something, yes. But being offended is not an action. It's a feeling. You can't control how something makes you feel. You can't just choose to not be offended. If your words cause me to feel offended, you were being offensive. You don't get to decide otherwise. Plain and simple.
Quote
We make similar choices over time when encountering similar interactions, and this becomes a habitual response. It goes both ways, by the way, as many people develop problems by conditioning themselves to not react negatively to truly malicious interactions, but the way a person reacts to an individual interaction is at least partly if not mostly a learned behavior. It is definitely something you can control and change given time and practice.
It kind of sounds like you want people to just pretend you didn't offend them, and over time just become numb to your offensive behavior. I don't agree that this is the correct mentality and I'm honestly not sure how else to explain that instead of insisting you aren't being offensive, you should try to be less offensive.
Quote
As evidence, I submit my daughters and my wife. None of them would react this way to "sexist" assumptions. How is it incumbent on the third party to read the mind of the person they are communicating with and determine whether they happen to have a sensitivity that will result in judging the interaction as sexist? or racist or anti-whatever, or whatever other judgment we want to make about how people interact for that matter...
1. How your family reacts to the way you act is not an indicator for how other people will react.
2. I'm not asking you to read anyone's mind. I'm asking you not to try not to make judgements about people based on their sex (or race, or sexual orientation, etc.).
Quote
And again, is it not just as "sexist" (as pilskin astutely pointed out) for a woman to ask me to lift something heavy or reach something on a high shelf (I mean, men are on average, taller...) or help change a tire or do whatever other "guy" stuff? Am I then incapable of choosing not to be offended when this happens?
I'm not saying it's impossible for you to not be offended. If that type of thing doesn't offend you personally, then that's fine. I'm just saying that that feeling isn't something that is chosen. Just as you can't choose to actually
be offended by this, someone who
is offended can't just choose not to be. And again, it's all in the reason behind why that woman is asking you to do that. If she's asking you to do it simply because you're a man, then yeah that would be sexist. Whether or not it offends you has nothing to do with it. But if she's asking you to do it simply because you're stronger than her, then I wouldn't call that sexist.
Quote
Why? Why must men take responsibility for why women en masse choose to not engage in an activity? That makes no sense.
I'm not saying it's our job as men to get more women into motorcycling or that is isn't okay for women to not want to ride. I'm saying that it might be beneficial for us as men to examine the reasons why women aren't attracted to motorcycling. And if one of the reasons is that men can be jerks by making assumptions and judgements (like the one in mysho's story), then we as men should probably try to address that.
Quote
But this is popular group-think, the idea that women or men or immigrants or gays or whatever all only think as a group and therefore a common cause must apply to all of their choices which they tend to make in common, and such a common cause must be some kind of flaw.
I don't mean to purport that all women (or any other group) all think the same, but if a large amount of them feel a certain way about something, they we as men should probably at least try to empathize and understand why they feel that way.
Quote
Is it not OK for women to just generally not prefer motorcycling? Do we, as a society, really care? I don't really see how there's a clear obvious judgment to be made here.
It's totally okay if women just don't prefer motorcycling. But, I think we should care about why that is. Because right now, the answer is either :dunno_black: or that men sometimes create a barrier to entry by creating a hostile environment. And I don't mean that to say that men actively degrade or make fun of women for riding, but assumptions about their skills can be discouraging and that's something we as men should try to avoid.
Quote
Again, my observation point is my wife of 25 years and my two daughters and none of them either have any desire whatsoever to even come near a motorcycle and it's very clear that they never will. How is it any more sexist to say "that's ok" than it is to assume this is a problem and that women must somehow become included in a "men's" activity? Why can't it be ok for them to choose to do whatever they want to do and nobody gets upset about it or thinks it needs to be fixed?
1. Your observation point is a sample size of 3 women. Not exactly indicative of the mentality of women as a whole, IMO. But that's kind of beside the point.
2. Do you consider motorcycling a "men's activity"? If so, why? Just because it's mostly men who do it? There's nothing inherently "male" about motorcycling.
3. Again, I'm not saying it isn't okay for women to choose not to ride. I don't really know where your getting that from, as I don't think I said anything like that. All I'm saying is that if someone asks "Why aren't women as interested in motorcycling as men?" and you don't have an answer, then maybe we should talk about it and try to figure out the reason. That doesn't necessarily imply that the only reason is sexism. I personally believe that sexism is a part of it, yes, but it's obviously not the whole story.
Quote
I just don't see it as a problem at all that more women are not interested in motorcycling. Women can each choose whatever they want to do, more power to them. If they don't want to ride a motorcycle, what's wrong with that?
Nothing, not in and of itself. There's only a problem if the reason women aren't interested is that men can make them feel unwelcome.
Quote
It's quite a leap to think the "community" is hostile or condescending, but again, being condescending or hostile are also personal individual choices people make, and they imply intent. So sure, if people in the community are condescending or hostile, they should quit doing that. Some people are jerks, and some of those jerks are sexists.
It isn't a leap at all. Mysho described a situation in which a man was condescending to her. This situation is not uncommon in the motorcycling community. Therefore, the community can be seen as condescending at times. But I agree that those individuals should stop doing that, lol.
Quote
Practically speaking, I think it's impossible for the "community", which is comprised of maybe millions of individual people, to become commonly more welcoming.
Maybe you're right. But, I don't think that means we shouldn't at least try. :dunno_black:
Quote
How I feel about it has absolutely no bearing on it. I think for women who want to be involved in motorcycling, as individuals, it is far more productive for them to cut other people some slack, and try to assume the best when people interact with them. That has nothing to do with the "community". If most of the guys with motorcycles just innocently assume things based on their cumulative experience then don't jump to the conclusion that they are either condescending (intent), rude (intent), hostile (intent), or making a judgment, maybe wait until they actually show signs of hostility or judgment before becoming offended. That applies to all interactions regardless of whether it's the category of sexism or whatever else.
Condescension and rudeness do not require intent either. You can be rude or condescending without meaning to. I've been guilty of both more times than I care to admit. As for cutting people some slack, I'm not the type of person (as evidenced by my long winded posts about this) to let stuff like sexism just slide. If someone is being sexist, even if they don't intend to be (as I believe is the case in your other post) I think its more productive to call them out on it in an effort to get them to understand how what they are doing could be hurtful and hopefully get them to do it less.
Quote
And I literally think you are absolutely wrong. But that's ok! I'm really not being rude or upset at all, just not happy to have stirred debate on this topic since it so often just causes knee-jerk overreaction and it's difficult to have an honest, unemotional conversation about it.
I just meant that little snippet at the end came off as rude. If that wasn't your intent, fine, but it seemed a little pretentious.
Also, I don't mean this as an insult and I'm not trying to be mean, but I don't really care if you "think" I'm wrong about whether or not you were being sexist. Your attitude fits the literal definition of sexism. So, you were being sexist. You don't get to "disagree". Again, I'm not trying to dismiss or insult you based on that, it just is literally true. At this point, I'm saying 2+2=4 and you're just going "well, I disagree".
And if you don't want to "stir debate" I'm happy to talk over PM or whatever. I'm attempting to do what you said: have an honest, unemotional conversation.
:thumb:
As humans we tend to pick up on and default to patterns, and I think because of this many people end up doing things which can be considered racist or sexist without really even thinking about it. That being said, I think it's really easy to blow this stuff out of proportion.
Take casual racism/prejudice. They say not to judge a book by it's cover, but how many people here, for example, when crossing paths with a black man with facial tattoos, a tank-top, his pants slung low, and a wide-stepping slow walk would be cautious or defensive on sight? This person could be a community leader who volunteers at a homeless shelter every weekend, goes to church, and raises an honest living to support his children and his wife of 10 years, to whom he's been faithful, but at the end of the day if he looks like a thug people are probably going to see him as one. Not saying it's right, I'm saying it happens and it's natural based on cultural norms. After all, we get these assumptions from somewhere, they aren't just arbitrary. Someone crosses the street to avoid a "thug", the reality might not be as simple as "he's racist." A racist person might see ANY black man as a gangster, not just the one looking the part, while an average person might jump to the conclusion based on more specific evidence. Many images in the news and movies, for example, will portray the facial tattoos and the low-pants as associated with prison culture, and now the correlation is made, so when one sees it in person they draw on those correlations and now it alters that person's behavior, for good or for ill.
So when it comes to sexism, lets say you work at Lowes and a 5'3" small woman wearing makeup, heels, and a dress comes around the corner browsing the power-tools, your first instinct is likely going to be that she's looking for an angle-grinder or whatever for her husband/boyfriend/father/brother/significant-other/etc.
Lets reverse it, if she comes in wearing jeans, a cotton t-shirt, is covered in rust and oil stains, and her hands are dirty, would you assume she needs something for her own use? Likely. It's maybe not a negative assumption anymore, but it's still an assumption. Once again, we make these claims based on appearances and experiences, what we see and what we are used to seeing. A woman all dressed up usually isn't the first thing we think of when it comes to someone who knows fabrication, so is it sexist to assume the well dressed woman doesn't know power tools? Sure, it still is, but there is some basis in reality here. And once again this person may not particularly be sexist even though they jumped to a sexist conclusion, however a truly sexist person might see the woman covered in garage filth and STILL assume that she's getting a tool for her man.
So I'd make the argument that the feeling or thought is natural, but it's what we DO with the feeling or thought that makes the person. The "thug", do you immediately call 911 on the suspicion that he is a gangster and about to commit a crime? Of course not, you go on about your business, to do otherwise would be racist/prejudiced. The woman, do you go up to her and immediately talk to her like she doesn't know a drill from a mallet? Of course not, that would be totally sexist.
I agree with qcbaker about people being offended. If you offend someone, it's done. You can't "take it back" or explain your way out of it, or wave it off as "if they had a spine it wouldn't be such a big deal." The only way to avoid the offense is to not be offensive in the first place. That being said, I think in recent times it's become commonplace to raise a stink about every little comment that can be even remotely negative, and at some point you just have to shake your head and tell the person to go grow a spine, LOL! I know that seems super contradictory...
Being talked to derogatively is of course not to be tolerated, but in my Lowes example if the employee asked the woman straight away "Are you looking for a gift for someone?" should the woman immediately feel belittled? I think no. It may have been sexist by definition, but was it maliciously sexist? Maybe that's for the public to decide...
that one above ties the monster multiquote record here.
Aaron
Quote from: Watcher on December 01, 2017, 10:30:44 PM
lets say you work at Lowes and a 5'3" small woman wearing makeup, heels, and a dress comes around the corner browsing the power-tools, your first instinct is likely going to be that she's looking for an angle-grinder or whatever for her husband/boyfriend/father/brother/significant-other/etc.
Lets reverse it, if she comes in wearing jeans, a cotton t-shirt, is covered in rust and oil stains, and her hands are dirty, would you assume she needs something for her own use? Likely. It's maybe not a negative assumption anymore, but it's still an assumption. Once again, we make these claims based on appearances and experiences, what we see and what we are used to seeing. A woman all dressed up usually isn't the first thing we think of when it comes to someone who knows fabrication, so is it sexist to assume the well dressed woman doesn't know power tools? Sure, it still is, but there is some basis in reality here.
Thanks for making this point.
I'd say that 99% of the time, the "sexist" assumption is correct. That 1% o the time when the female home machinist happens to stop by Lowes on the way to her cousin's wedding to pick up an angle grinder she will need when she gets home, that woman probably won't be offended by this because she knows good and well that she is out of character. If she acts offended it's because she was trying to get offended. IMHO. Again, 99% of the time. There's always the exception.
OTOH I'm not sure this really is absolutely "sexist". Take gender out of it. If you work at Lowes and a 6'3" man comes in wearing makeup, heels, and a dress to look at angle grinders, you also are going to assume he is not the eventual consumer of the angle grinder. It's because his outward appearance, which was his choice, is an indicator of his cultural choices beyond the obvious. It would be sexist if you assume the man is buying it for himself in spite of his makeup, heels and dress, while a woman dressed the same would be buying it for a man.
Think about it the other way around: let's say Mike Rowe goes into Victoria's Secret, wearing a worn ball cap, slightly dirty flannel shirt, stained jeans and work boots. When he is looking at lingerie, it's perfectly safe to assume he's buying this for his wife or girlfriend, right? Why is THAT not sexist but it's sexist to figure the woman in Watcher's example is buying an angle grinder for a man? It's because men generally (again, there are exceptions...) are not consumers of lingerie for themselves, and everyone knows it, and nobody gets offended by this statistical reality. I think by qcbaker's definition (from M-W) it's sexist to think Mike's not buying lingerie for himself. And in that case, it means 'sexist' really doesn't mean anything, because it means everything. It means people can't be sensitive to obvious outward signs and informed by their own life's experience in their interaction with other people. We all have to treat everyone like they are a robot, and like we also are robots.
Of course I was just making the point that for the offendee, you may live a happier life if you can make peace with the fact that many people will maybe treat you in a way easily interpreted as 'sexist' (or maybe technically defined as 'sexist' but still normal) while having no malicious intent, and if you can adjust your own reaction so that it becomes acceptable, your life will be more easily lived with others around you. But to expect the entire world to change in your lifetime is a fool's errand. This, regardless of gender or whatever other 'class' you might be in that would entitle you to take offense.
qcbaker unfortunately personalized what was an objective discussion and instead suggested that I personally am a sexist even though he has no evidence of such from my own life. I disagree about the definition of 'sexism'. I also disagree that it's desirable to eradicate whatever passive/unintentional/etc. unwilling 'sexism' from our society because in 99% of cases it is valid assumption that makes communication and interaction between people easier. And I also disagree that just because many women choose not to engage in motorcycling that it somehow indicates a problem with male motorcyclists. That's not to say that individual people may indeed be (intentionally) sexist, and that their individual behavior likely needs changing. But I can't contribute to a corporate change because it's not my behavior that needs changing. A non-sexist overcorrecting doesn't cancel out a sexist who does not correct. And it does no good to further whatever good will we all have towards better interaction between the sexes for us to punish honestly well-meaning people (male or female!) for inadvertent offenses that they are unable to detect or control.
So ladies, if you work at Cycle Gear and I am in there shopping on the pink-jackets rack, it's safe to assume I am shopping for my wife and I would really appreciate your insight as a knowledgeable female motorcyclist. Go ahead and treat me with sexism. It will save me a lot of explaining. I think this applies to 99% of the guys in the motorcycling "community". And I think to fit in to the motorcycling community, women are going to have to understand that it's ok to reciprocate this attitude... if you're shopping the pink jackets at Watcher's Cycle Gear, he's not being a sexist to assume you might be shopping for yourself, and if you avoid that rack and shop the guy's jackets, give him a break if he thinks you might be buying for a man in your life, and just correct him if he's wrong and you actually want to buy a Bilt Cafe Racer jacket in men's size 38 for yourself. He's not trying to offend you, he's just doing his best to be helpful.
IMHO. :)
Quote from: Watcher on December 01, 2017, 10:30:44 PM
As humans we tend to pick up on and default to patterns, and I think because of this many people end up doing things which can be considered racist or sexist without really even thinking about it. That being said, I think it's really easy to blow this stuff out of proportion.
Take casual racism/prejudice. They say not to judge a book by it's cover, but how many people here, for example, when crossing paths with a black man with facial tattoos, a tank-top, his pants slung low, and a wide-stepping slow walk would be cautious or defensive on sight? This person could be a community leader who volunteers at a homeless shelter every weekend, goes to church, and raises an honest living to support his children and his wife of 10 years, to whom he's been faithful, but at the end of the day if he looks like a thug people are probably going to see him as one. Not saying it's right, I'm saying it happens and it's natural based on cultural norms. After all, we get these assumptions from somewhere, they aren't just arbitrary. Someone crosses the street to avoid a "thug", the reality might not be as simple as "he's racist." A racist person might see ANY black man as a gangster, not just the one looking the part, while an average person might jump to the conclusion based on more specific evidence. Many images in the news and movies, for example, will portray the facial tattoos and the low-pants as associated with prison culture, and now the correlation is made, so when one sees it in person they draw on those correlations and now it alters that person's behavior, for good or for ill.
So when it comes to sexism, lets say you work at Lowes and a 5'3" small woman wearing makeup, heels, and a dress comes around the corner browsing the power-tools, your first instinct is likely going to be that she's looking for an angle-grinder or whatever for her husband/boyfriend/father/brother/significant-other/etc.
Lets reverse it, if she comes in wearing jeans, a cotton t-shirt, is covered in rust and oil stains, and her hands are dirty, would you assume she needs something for her own use? Likely. It's maybe not a negative assumption anymore, but it's still an assumption. Once again, we make these claims based on appearances and experiences, what we see and what we are used to seeing. A woman all dressed up usually isn't the first thing we think of when it comes to someone who knows fabrication, so is it sexist to assume the well dressed woman doesn't know power tools? Sure, it still is, but there is some basis in reality here. And once again this person may not particularly be sexist even though they jumped to a sexist conclusion, however a truly sexist person might see the woman covered in garage filth and STILL assume that she's getting a tool for her man.
So I'd make the argument that the feeling or thought is natural, but it's what we DO with the feeling or thought that makes the person. The "thug", do you immediately call 911 on the suspicion that he is a gangster and about to commit a crime? Of course not, you go on about your business, to do otherwise would be racist/prejudiced. The woman, do you go up to her and immediately talk to her like she doesn't know a drill from a mallet? Of course not, that would be totally sexist.
I agree with qcbaker about people being offended. If you offend someone, it's done. You can't "take it back" or explain your way out of it, or wave it off as "if they had a spine it wouldn't be such a big deal." The only way to avoid the offense is to not be offensive in the first place. That being said, I think in recent times it's become commonplace to raise a stink about every little comment that can be even remotely negative, and at some point you just have to shake your head and tell the person to go grow a spine, LOL! I know that seems super contradictory...
Being talked to derogatively is of course not to be tolerated, but in my Lowes example if the employee asked the woman straight away "Are you looking for a gift for someone?" should the woman immediately feel belittled? I think no. It may have been sexist by definition, but was it maliciously sexist? Maybe that's for the public to decide...
You my friend are an absolute genius. You put into words what I only whish I could have. Well said. You just explained the whole thing. Reading it was like I was talking to myself.
Quote from: Watcher on December 01, 2017, 10:30:44 PM
As humans we tend to pick up on and default to patterns, and I think because of this many people end up doing things which can be considered racist or sexist without really even thinking about it. That being said, I think it's really easy to blow this stuff out of proportion.
Take casual racism/prejudice. They say not to judge a book by it's cover, but how many people here, for example, when crossing paths with a black man with facial tattoos, a tank-top, his pants slung low, and a wide-stepping slow walk would be cautious or defensive on sight? This person could be a community leader who volunteers at a homeless shelter every weekend, goes to church, and raises an honest living to support his children and his wife of 10 years, to whom he's been faithful, but at the end of the day if he looks like a thug people are probably going to see him as one. Not saying it's right, I'm saying it happens and it's natural based on cultural norms. After all, we get these assumptions from somewhere, they aren't just arbitrary. Someone crosses the street to avoid a "thug", the reality might not be as simple as "he's racist." A racist person might see ANY black man as a gangster, not just the one looking the part, while an average person might jump to the conclusion based on more specific evidence. Many images in the news and movies, for example, will portray the facial tattoos and the low-pants as associated with prison culture, and now the correlation is made, so when one sees it in person they draw on those correlations and now it alters that person's behavior, for good or for ill.
So when it comes to sexism, lets say you work at Lowes and a 5'3" small woman wearing makeup, heels, and a dress comes around the corner browsing the power-tools, your first instinct is likely going to be that she's looking for an angle-grinder or whatever for her husband/boyfriend/father/brother/significant-other/etc.
Lets reverse it, if she comes in wearing jeans, a cotton t-shirt, is covered in rust and oil stains, and her hands are dirty, would you assume she needs something for her own use? Likely. It's maybe not a negative assumption anymore, but it's still an assumption. Once again, we make these claims based on appearances and experiences, what we see and what we are used to seeing. A woman all dressed up usually isn't the first thing we think of when it comes to someone who knows fabrication, so is it sexist to assume the well dressed woman doesn't know power tools? Sure, it still is, but there is some basis in reality here. And once again this person may not particularly be sexist even though they jumped to a sexist conclusion, however a truly sexist person might see the woman covered in garage filth and STILL assume that she's getting a tool for her man.
So I'd make the argument that the feeling or thought is natural, but it's what we DO with the feeling or thought that makes the person. The "thug", do you immediately call 911 on the suspicion that he is a gangster and about to commit a crime? Of course not, you go on about your business, to do otherwise would be racist/prejudiced. The woman, do you go up to her and immediately talk to her like she doesn't know a drill from a mallet? Of course not, that would be totally sexist.
I agree with qcbaker about people being offended. If you offend someone, it's done. You can't "take it back" or explain your way out of it, or wave it off as "if they had a spine it wouldn't be such a big deal." The only way to avoid the offense is to not be offensive in the first place. That being said, I think in recent times it's become commonplace to raise a stink about every little comment that can be even remotely negative, and at some point you just have to shake your head and tell the person to go grow a spine, LOL! I know that seems super contradictory...
Being talked to derogatively is of course not to be tolerated, but in my Lowes example if the employee asked the woman straight away "Are you looking for a gift for someone?" should the woman immediately feel belittled? I think no. It may have been sexist by definition, but was it maliciously sexist? Maybe that's for the public to decide...
You bring up some very good points. Everyone has prejudices that they can't really be blamed for holding. Everyone has sexist/racist/etc. thoughts every time they see someone they don't know. Choosing to act upon them is what really matters. In the case of sexism, choosing to express sexist thoughts is a sexist act. So, I would consider a person who does that to be a sexist. But, because it wasn't, to use your phrasing, "maliciously sexist", I wouldn't consider them a bad person for it. "Malicious sexism" would be misogyny. Sexism is not necessarily misogyny. Things that are sexist by definition are not always misogynist, and I think I should have clarified that earlier, because (as I have addressed below in my reply to him) I think that mr72 is under the impression that I was accusing him (and others that share is viewpoint) of being a misogynist.
Quote from: mr72 on December 02, 2017, 07:35:49 AM
qcbaker unfortunately personalized what was an objective discussion and instead suggested that I personally am a sexist even though he has no evidence of such from my own life.
I'm not "personalizing" anything. I do have evidence that you yourself are a little bit sexist. The attitude you hold, based on your posts in this thread suggests that you are a bit sexist. I even said don't mean it as a personal insult, so if my stating that your behavior was sexist makes you mad, you're the one personalizing. Also, see how you can't simply choose to not be offended by what I said? If I hurt your feelings by pointing out how your behavior was sexist, I apologize. Based on what you sadi you wanted ("an honest, unemotional conversation"), I figured you would understand that I wasn't trying to insult you. Obviously, I was incorrect, and for that mistake, I apologize.
Everyone holds prejudices that makes them at least a little bit sexist. Like Watcher alluded to, it's what you do with those feelings that really matters. Like I said earlier, what you seem to think I'm accusing you of is being a misogynist. Which, for the record, I don't believe you are.
Quote
I disagree about the definition of 'sexism'.
Again, I think you're confusing sexism with misogyny. They're two different things.
Quote
I also disagree that it's desirable to eradicate whatever passive/unintentional/etc. unwilling 'sexism' from our society because in 99% of cases it is valid assumption that makes communication and interaction between people easier.
So your opinion is that prejudices are okay. Alright, I guess. At this point, I won't try to convince you otherwise.
Quote
And I also disagree that just because many women choose not to engage in motorcycling that it somehow indicates a problem with male motorcyclists.
I never said that it did, not in and of itself anyway. But, when you ask the question "Why aren't more women interested in motorcycling?", the behavior of male motorcyclists is part of the answer. It's not the whole story, IMO, but it's a big part of it. If you don't think that sexist behavior among male motorcyclists is causing this discrepancy in participation, why do you think it is that women don't choose to engage in motorcycling at the same rates that men do?
Quote
That's not to say that individual people may indeed be (intentionally) sexist, and that their individual behavior likely needs changing. But I can't contribute to a corporate change because it's not my behavior that needs changing.
Just because your sexism is unintentional doesn't mean it doesn't need changing.
Quote
A non-sexist overcorrecting doesn't cancel out a sexist who does not correct. And it does no good to further whatever good will we all have towards better interaction between the sexes for us to punish honestly well-meaning people (male or female!) for inadvertent offenses that they are unable to detect or control.
It may be difficult to do, but it is possible to detect when you do sexist things and attempt to do them less.
Quote from: Watcher on December 01, 2017, 10:30:44 PM
As humans we tend to pick up on and default to patterns, and I think because of this many people end up doing things which can be considered racist or sexist without really even thinking about it. That being said, I think it's really easy to blow this stuff out of proportion.
Take casual racism/prejudice. They say not to judge a book by it's cover, but how many people here, for example, when crossing paths with a black man with facial tattoos, a tank-top, his pants slung low, and a wide-stepping slow walk would be cautious or defensive on sight? This person could be a community leader who volunteers at a homeless shelter every weekend, goes to church, and raises an honest living to support his children and his wife of 10 years, to whom he's been faithful, but at the end of the day if he looks like a thug people are probably going to see him as one. Not saying it's right, I'm saying it happens and it's natural based on cultural norms. After all, we get these assumptions from somewhere, they aren't just arbitrary. Someone crosses the street to avoid a "thug", the reality might not be as simple as "he's racist." A racist person might see ANY black man as a gangster, not just the one looking the part, while an average person might jump to the conclusion based on more specific evidence. Many images in the news and movies, for example, will portray the facial tattoos and the low-pants as associated with prison culture, and now the correlation is made, so when one sees it in person they draw on those correlations and now it alters that person's behavior, for good or for ill.
So when it comes to sexism, lets say you work at Lowes and a 5'3" small woman wearing makeup, heels, and a dress comes around the corner browsing the power-tools, your first instinct is likely going to be that she's looking for an angle-grinder or whatever for her husband/boyfriend/father/brother/significant-other/etc.
Lets reverse it, if she comes in wearing jeans, a cotton t-shirt, is covered in rust and oil stains, and her hands are dirty, would you assume she needs something for her own use? Likely. It's maybe not a negative assumption anymore, but it's still an assumption. Once again, we make these claims based on appearances and experiences, what we see and what we are used to seeing. A woman all dressed up usually isn't the first thing we think of when it comes to someone who knows fabrication, so is it sexist to assume the well dressed woman doesn't know power tools? Sure, it still is, but there is some basis in reality here. And once again this person may not particularly be sexist even though they jumped to a sexist conclusion, however a truly sexist person might see the woman covered in garage filth and STILL assume that she's getting a tool for her man.
So I'd make the argument that the feeling or thought is natural, but it's what we DO with the feeling or thought that makes the person. The "thug", do you immediately call 911 on the suspicion that he is a gangster and about to commit a crime? Of course not, you go on about your business, to do otherwise would be racist/prejudiced. The woman, do you go up to her and immediately talk to her like she doesn't know a drill from a mallet? Of course not, that would be totally sexist.
I agree with qcbaker about people being offended. If you offend someone, it's done. You can't "take it back" or explain your way out of it, or wave it off as "if they had a spine it wouldn't be such a big deal." The only way to avoid the offense is to not be offensive in the first place. That being said, I think in recent times it's become commonplace to raise a stink about every little comment that can be even remotely negative, and at some point you just have to shake your head and tell the person to go grow a spine, LOL! I know that seems super contradictory...
Being talked to derogatively is of course not to be tolerated, but in my Lowes example if the employee asked the woman straight away "Are you looking for a gift for someone?" should the woman immediately feel belittled? I think no. It may have been sexist by definition, but was it maliciously sexist? Maybe that's for the public to decide...
Well said. Actions are much more important than what goes on inside your head.
We all have internal biases, stereotypes, and prejudices. The best thing to do is acknowledge that fact and and try to give
everyone the benefit of the doubt. That is, attempt to maintain a neutral opinion of someone until you have enough information to accurately come to conclusions about the person.
I think that, if you go through life jumping to conclusions about people and feeling comfortable making comments based on those conclusions, you are destined to make people uncomfortable (often without your knowledge). If you want to take that gamble then that is your individual choice but I can't see why you would choose the riskier option. From a purely rational/logical point of view we should try and offend as few people as possible. You never know what business deal or personal advancement your are going to miss out on because you offended someone by jumping to conclusions about their lifestyle. The Victoria's Secret salesperson approaching Mike Rowe in the lingerie store would be just as helpful and much less likely to offend by asking, "can I help you find anything?" rather than the riskier, "are you looking for something for your Wife?"
I have plenty of these similar experiences, including @ dealers that I don't know. They think I'm a clueless newb and don't believe me when I say I've got a bike, and even when I ride up on one they assume I'm clueless. I get all the usual, when're you gonna get a real bike, or how's that moped of yours etc etc.
Then, speaking of pinking and shrinking it - A few months ago when I last rode my GS, I got passed by a woman on a GSXR - that was lowered and pinked. What clued me in to the fact that it was a woman was the pinking and the lowering, and the fact that the poor bike was buried in - lets just call it "badonkadonk" ... she thought I was likely a chick too due to the small bike and slow speed - just about the speed limit, she tried to "lead" me, turned out - I was not willing or able to even keep up with her slower pace, so in a mile or 2, she ended up pretty much losing interest and leaving me.
Cool.
Buddha.
I haven't been on this forum for more than a month, so I haven't had a big chance to be part of this conversation. From the way it was handled (especially by BlueSmudge and QCBaker (btw, thank you)), most of the points I would have made were made anyway. Rather than going back into every little part of this bigger conversation, I'll keep it short.
As a female rider, all I am asking is to be treated like any other person on a bike. I ask any person with a helmet what they ride. Female riders are more common than one might think. Actually, about half of my riding community in my town is made of female riders. My town might have more female riders than many other places, but the female rider demographic is a fast growing one. Part of this is this "power to women" attitude that has been quoted several times in this thread. Next time you meet a woman with a helmet, even if she arrived on the back of someone else's bike, ask her what she rides. If she does not ride, ask her why? If she would like to in the future? Encouraging women to ride and welcoming women into our community is SO easy to do, and will help to further grow the number of female riders in our community. Assuming any woman carrying a helmet rides is a very small change to make, but you'll be surprised at how many women actually ride or gain more interest in riding their own bike because of this simple encouragement.
As a personal example of this, when I was still riding on the back of my partner's bike before I had any interest riding my own, we went on a group ride. He paid the entry fee for this club sponsored charity ride, and the man in charge of taking our money and signing us in asked immediately if I was a passenger. I was used to this. The club member woman beside him, however, gave him a fierce glare and said something along the lines, "How dare you assume she is on the back, just because she's a girl?" before turning to me and asking if I was riding today. It was awesome. I told her that I was riding on the back that day, but that was one of the moments that most encouraged me to start riding on my own. That moment changed my idea of riding from, "I can't do it" to "maybe I can try".
What I am asking is very simple. Just treat me, and all female riders, like we are any other rider on the street. Assume we ride, and assume we probably know something about our own bikes. If we don't understand something, we'll ask. Or we'll google it. One of the most frustrating things about this community is meeting people on bikes (often men, as was pointed out previously men are still the majority [Side note: I'm working on changing this B) ]) and immediately having men twice my age describing how hawt it is that I ride, and congratulating me for simple tasks. Its patronizing.
Final thing. If you're talking to a female rider, try to avoid using words describing our appearance or how "hot it is" we ride. If you wouldn't say it to a male rider who pulled up on my bike, don't say it to me. It's just unnecessary.
Much of what's being said in this topic is valid. But I just want to chuck in this thought.
In the past few years (it could be a generational thing) we are being constantly harangued by certain pressure groups who think that, unless we conform to their ways, that we should be 'corrected'.
The propaganda on public broadcasting radio in Australia and UK World Service is fearsome. The pressure to conform is greatly exacerbated by the social media groupthink syndrome.
The very BEST thing about human beings is the very thing that these people complain about... Our diversity, our differences, and yes, even our prejudices.
Don't have the arrogance to assume that everyone else must live by YOUR rules, because EVERYONE can be offensive, -it's just a matter of 'where you're coming from'.
As long as no actual harm (as opposed to perceived harm) is done, then just get over it. There's nothing so special about 'you' that dictates that we should all creep around complying with YOUR attitudes.
Let us avoid the push for dumbing-down compliance and conformity eh?
Quote from: Joolstacho on December 30, 2017, 04:46:12 PM
The very BEST thing about human beings is the very thing that these people complain about... Our diversity, our differences, and yes, even our prejudices.
You are right, it must be generational thing, because I can't understand how you can think that prejudice is one of the best things about being human. The world can't become a better place when making negative assumptions about other people is considered to be a good thing.
So you think that people who are driven by greed and selfishness should be treated and thought of the same as generous helpful people?
So you think that murderous violent people should be treated and thought of the same as considerate gentle people?
This is the thing... It is RIGHT to be prejudiced against some people.
You are making the assumption that all prejudice is bad. Wrong. More prejudice against bad people is just what we need to make the world a "better place".
Ok, but then you are making an argument that is far outside the scope of this thread. Nobody was trying to argue against anything related to what you are talking about. That is, unless you think that treating women with the same respect you give men is equivalent to interacting with convicted murderers.
If someone is driven by greed and selfishness, (which is pretty much everyone to some degree as it is a necessary assumption of supply and demand economics) and I have evidence to that fact, then I am likely going to avoid interacting with that person or, if they force the situation, do whatever is necessary to limit their negative impact on my life.
The word prejudice is generally used to imply a negative bias or an opinion that is not based on actual facts or experience. So yes, it may be more ok to be prejudice against convicted criminals if that's what makes you feel good, but you would be better off to have a fully formed opinion of a person before you treat them in a negative way. In modern society we should be leaving the quid pro quo punishments to the justice system. All people are a product of circumstance, there is no such thing as a "bad" person. It's not your job to decide who should be treated poorly.
Start every interaction with a new person with a blank slate. You don't know anything about them, so be nice until a given a reason not to be. If you think a person's sex, race, or appearance gives you enough information to immediately make assumptions about them, you are wrong.