Let me ask you this question, Dave..
Have you ever met a sexist person who did not hate women in some way, shape or form?
Yes. I know a woman who is sexist towards men.
As I said, sexism and mysogyny are two distinct things.
See other distinctions below.
You don't think that judging a a woman's job performance by her appearance is not hateful in any way, shape or form?
That's the basis of my point. You can't simply beg the question (i.e. implying the answer in the question).
No, disrespect is not hate. Many people have little respect for many other people but it does not equate to hate. I have little respect for, say, lawyers, but I do not hate them.
You don't think disrespecting women because they are women (sexism) is not also hateful? You don't think thinking someone is less worthy because she is a woman is not hateful?
You are simply asking me again if disrespect and hate are synonymous.
If someone is sexist, they think less of that person's sex, disrespects someone because of their sex, and that is hateful. Certainly, the victims of such behaviour find it hateful behaviour.
Now you are simply stating it. You have to make your case.
Have you ever met a misogynist who was not sexist?
Of course I haven't. Misogyny is defined by gyny - the root for female. Sexism is defining someone by their sex. Thus a misogynist is, by definition, a sexist. On this we agree.
But it does not follow that a sexist person is misogynous.
Lack of respect may not be intentional, or even conscious.
Let me be clear: that does not mean it is excusable. I am not excusing lack of respect, I am simply showing that it is distinct from hatred.
In other words, the two usually go hand in hand and you cannot have one without the other.
Actually you can. I listed a real world example at the top. Sexism toward men happens too.
I have also pointed out examples where one can be sexist without hatred.
Here's an example: a poorly-educated person who grew up without our cosmopolitan ways may be certain that "the fairer sex" should not have to do heavy labour. It's the way they grew up.
That is sexism, because they are defining a person by their gender - but there is no hatred involved. They mean no ill will. In fact they
mean well - even if misguided.
Again, that does not make it excusable, simply that it is free of hatred.
Chivalry is an example of sexism. Opening a door for lady. Giving a lady a seat on a bus. There is no disrespect intended. There certainly isn't any hatred there. (Again, that does not mean it is
appreciated by the woman, simply that the person was more thoughtful of a woman than of a man. One should be thoughtful of
everyone - man and woman alike. But that is an error of sexism, not of hatred.)
No one is disagreeing about the meanings of the words. We know they do not mean the same. But you are also discounting the fact that the two feed off each other.
I am not discounting it. What I am doing to dismantling the knee-jerk notion that they are one and the same.
You are discounting the fact that they are not. You are using too broad a brush.
Misogyny stems from sexism as sexism stems from misogyny.
In an ironic twist, your comment is actually sexist. You claim that the only form of sexism is towards women.
Does that sexist comment mean you are
hateful? No.
And finally, I appreciate your adherence to civil discussion.
