Logic and Math of Sexism (WAS Article)

[cindysphynx]

No: HPFGUIDX 41291

Laura wrote:

>It really alarms me the way people here can be so dead-set on one 
>thing that they take little pieces of canon that support their 
>views and completely disregard the rest of it.  

<snip> 

>To me, this suggests that the *readers* more readily forgive Colin, 
>Neville, Justin, and Ron (think about all the inane theories and 
>prejudices this one's come up with) for being silly/immature/etc. 
>because they are male, but if Lavender or Pavarti do the same 
>thing, WATCH OUT.  What's even more disturbing is that nearly all 
>of the people I see doing this (on this list and off) *are* 
>female.  So who's sexist? 

<blinks>

Oh, ouch!

Gee, to my ears, it sounds like you're taking issue with some of 
your *fellow list members* on a personal level rather than simply 
disagreeing with their *views.*  In fact, if I read this correctly, 
you've come straight out and said that the women on the list who 
disagree with you are "sexist."

I seriously hope that is not what you meant to say here.  After all, 
the pieces of canon you think support your views might well be 
things that others simply don't find compelling in this debate.   It 
wouldn't be at all polite for those who view things differently from 
you to call *you* "sexist" rather than to refute your points on the 
merits. 

Remember the Dean Thomas thread from a few weeks back?  IIRC, no one 
called another list member "racist" or denounced another list member 
as "dead-set" in their beliefs just because we were having a 
disagreement.  Which is as it should be.

Personally, I think JKR hasn't done much to develop very many female 
characters.  This could be by design or an oversight.  She just 
might be more accomplished at writing male characters than female 
characters.  I find this aspect of the books to be less than 
satisfying for me personally, and I hope that it changes in future 
books.  

I hope that doesn't make me "sexist."  ;-)

Cindy