Why it's silly to ask "Am I a sexist for doing this?"

[sqbr]

EDIT: So Cam is annoyed because I misinterpreted what he meant. So, let's imagine a hypothetical person asked: "I do action X. Does that make me a sexist?"

A metaphor to explain why that's not a useful question:

Suppose you're having a conversation about whether or not it's ok to cut people off in traffic. Suppose someone says:

"I cut someone off in traffic today, does that make me a bad person?"

Either you say "no", and they say "Oh good, so it's ok to cut people off in traffic."
Or you say "yes" and they say "But I can't be a bad person! I give money to charity!"

It's not about whether or not you're a bad person, it's about whether or cutting people off in traffic is an bad act. If it is, and you do it all the time, then maybe you are a bad person, but you can be an overall good person and cut people off from time to time. Everyone does both good and bad things.

Similarly, "Am I sexist for doing this?" isn't a very useful question. We are all sexist(*), in the sense of having sexist biases and being complicit in a sexist society. So the point is to figure out which acts are particularly sexist, and avoid doing them, not to figure out which people are sexist and punish them.

That said, you can draw a line in the sand and decide that anyone who is, overall, more sexist than that is a "sexist person", and some acts are so horribly sexist that you might decide that doing them means you've crossed that line. But most sexist acts (like most unethical acts) are, by themselves, pretty minor in the scheme of things, and doing them doesn't make you inherently worse than anyone else. Though that doesn't mean you don't have s responsibility to figure out the negative consequences of your acts and try to mitigate them.

I'm going to keep this relatively short so I won't go into all the complications of doing harmful things by mistake etc. I just liked the metaphor and wanted to share it :)

Relating to the original version of the post: I will say: I think liking a sexist show isn't a sexist act anyway. You can't help what you like!

(*)By my definition, and definitions vary

Comments

[sanguinity]

Boolean logic and classical set theory. *sigh* That "paradox" goes away if you use fuzzy sets.

color_blue and I were having an extensive geek-fest about race and racism in the context of classic-vs-fuzzy sets, in which we spent a while listing a bunch of classic race-and-racism cognitive traps that had to do with modeling the world via classical sets.

If we didn't actually list this particular trap -- I don't think we did, because we were talking more about construction of identity -- it's one more for the list.

[alias_sqbr]

I have a poor grasp of stats and am very tired today, so I shall merely look at your geek fest in admiring awe and try to remember to read it properly later :)

[gyges-ring.livejournal.com]

Sorry, run that one by me again. What's the issue that drops away if you're using fuzzy logics?

[sanguinity]

:: "Either I'm not sexist and this behaviour is ok, or I am sexist.. but I can't be because some of my best friends are girls (or whatever). So the behaviour must be ok" ::

In fuzzy logics, the exclusive-or drops away, so you can be both not-sexist (one of my best friends is a girl) and sexist.

[gyges-ring.livejournal.com]

Ah, OK. Cool. That was what it seemed like you were saying.

I was wondering, because it seemed like a round-about way of getting past something that didn't actually seem like a valid construction to begin with.