Bye way of reverse sexism, how prevalent is it? See example:?

Question

When you imagine the US Presidential campaign may just be a fine art form in sociological demographics on prejudice if say Condi and Hillary get chosen.

Imagine when we are weak we are strong and when we are strong we are weak, about being well balanced in politics?

Consider the vast majority of men where for one reason or another feel sexism is the new racism? Where being fair skinned someone jumps down your neck hypersensatively being disrespectful prejudiced based on their experience with past prejudiced and rather than being in denial rather than talking on issues of race, religion or other prejudice well even sexual orientation we looked to the talk as an art on philosophy where we considered the other folks feelings?

Women have had sufferegettes, unequal pay yet a lot of younger women or men might not study history or know why we are here now? Would this hurt Hillary or Condi to be impertanent or hateful to men rather than inclussive or kind? Where is the love? Bill !!!!

Answer 1

People hate--and are entitled to hate whomever--for whatever frivilous reasons they desire to invent.  Basing hatred on mere superficiality is, to me, absurd.  I believe that if one gets to know someone that they will find a far better reason to hate a person on an individual level.

That being said, the only statement that irked me in your comment was the term 'reverse' predicating sexism (or racism).  There is no such thing.  Prejudice is prejudice no matter how individually justified one might believe themselves to be (perhaps due to personal experiences, perhaps based upon some malignant sense of historical communion).

Everyone experiences prejudice in their lives.  Some men hate women, condescend to women and believe them intellectually inferior the same way that some women think of men.  Some white folks hate anyone of any other race as plenty of people from all races hate other races except (sometimes including) their own.

Prejudice as a sociological issue is a fascinating study, more the impact of bigotry than the necessary root causes, but as a political issue it really is something of a distraction.  An added controversy (either in stereotyping someone for gender or race, or by blaring self-righteously some sob-story of moral indignation) that avoids more pressing issues.  The only people that such issues truly matter to are those so self-consciously obsessed with gender or racial issues that they have no room in their hearts or minds for considerations of actual other people.

Answer 2

I just call it collective karma.  People who've historically had the power(and still do) have done many reprehensible things that they've benefited from and never had to answer for in their life time.  Now their descendants are paying to price for their failure to recognize an important truth:  You can't oppress one group with out eventually oppressing you own.