AnnihiSlateR wrote:So it's ok to be sexist towards men for a couple of thousand of years now to make up for it?
Pretty sure that's not how gender equality works. It sucks that that was the situation for so long, but I don't think an eye for an eye is the way to go about correcting the problem. We surely deserve to be on a level playing field.
I'm not saying inverse-sexism is the right thing to do by any stretch. I am saying that it is not a level playing field though - there is much more of a precedent and attitude set for anti-female sexism than there is for anti-male, which this entire event feeds in to rather horrifically as displayed by the responses surrounding it (primarily the overly potent tone of victim blaming that immediately came out of it).
You're right, of course, in that egalitarianism is the way forward. I would never advocate eye for an eye. But to readdress the gender balance obviously requires far more effort in identifying anti-female sexism than it does in identifying anti-male.