John2290 said:
And how do you define that? Any interaction between the opposite sex could be interpreted as sexist depending on how far society brings forward the definition of sexism. A wink and a smile? The wrong noun used? A simple touch on the shoulder or sinple actions like a male opening the door for a female. This is the way its going, sexism seems to be increasingly determined by how the "victim" felt by the words or actions, that is why this vague law is scary, it could literally be used in any situation between the sexes and the fact that it can be used to convict citizens in interactions with police is down right Orwellian. |
Yeah, that's precisely the problem with this! A few months back I read an interview in a german newspaper with two leading female politicians from the social democratic party. They discussed in seriousness whether "a hand on the knee" should count as sexual assault and be punishable by law. I doubt the people who are in uproar about this want women naked and in the kitchen - but the boundaries are being pushed all the time. Just look at the stupid "consent" debate: First we had "no means no", then "yes means yes" and now we seriously have politicians (especially in frontrunner countries like Sweden) that think women should be able to retroactively withdraw consent and concept like "enthusiastic consent", just in case the woman said yes but didn't really mean it. It's a slippery slope argument and that's the problem with it - especially considering how quick things move in one direction. The question no one asks is: Why can't government just stay out of minor things? Do we really need the state to punish someone for using the "wrong" pronouns? And why do we ignore that feminism is a political view, like socialism or libertarianism? Would we jail people or fine them a hefty sum for "questioning libertarianism"? Would we try to teach our children to be social democrats?
