Vaniver wrote:My argument is that's a poor definition of sexist, since now it needs to display property A and not an infinite host of other properties for us to call it A. It's much easier to think if you believe A is A.General Norris wrote:By definition there can't be a good reason for something to be sexist since it would no longuer be sexist.
I beg your pardon?
I think that sexism is the "irrational belief that a sex is inferior to the other". Since no sex is inferior to the other, there can't be a good reason to be sexist beacuse a good reason is not irrational.
Portraying sexism is not bad. That's my whole point. I mean, if you want to have a morally correct history you can go ahead but it's lying.
What makes you think that you understand it? Colbert could very easily be a meta-contrarian who knows that pretending to be a liberal mocking conservatives will get both liberals and conservatives to like him.General Norris wrote:I think that basing the moral worth of a work on the response of people that do not understand it is not a good idea.
If interpretations of art are inherently subjective then this topic is absurd as we are talking about art. I mean, what's your point? That we can never know what a work means? Then how are we going to judge if it's sexist? It's impossible!
I think that we can't judge
Again, "moral worth" is a horribly defined and loaded term. Why can't something be sexist and morally valuable?
Because sexism is irrational and logic is the basis of morality. I don't know where you are getting at Vaniver.
I think you are spot on.
However the test and the inverse test still produce false results in many situations. For example, if there are only 3 characters or if A meets B and C but B and C never meet.
Gender roles are sexism. I never said that it was contradictory, what I said is that gender roles leading to most writers being male is a bigger driver than blatant, concious sexism. (In other words "blatant, concious sexism" is a kind of sexism not how all sexism is).
As long as most writers are male, the test will be failed no matter how progressive such writers are.
BTW, the test I wrote is not the original one (I took it from another page). Should I remove the "alone" part?
On other order of things. The director of a movie doesn't choose who acts or not, that's chosen by the casting director and (normally) they have no weight in the matter.