What would you think if you saw this answer to a question on here?

Question

"Oh because men tend to be more respectful than men."

Answer 1

Dude, master the art of cut and paste because when you re-typed you left out something major.  You wrote:

"Oh because MEN tend to be more respectful than MEN."

You can't compare men to men...

You don't help us if you can't ask the question right.

Answer 2

If I saw that I would think it was a typo. I would wonder if the writer left the "wo" off the first "man" or the second "man." I would wonder what the writer's agenda was, as it's not possible to tell without the proper context. I would also wonder about the writer's gender. But mostly I would assume that whatever the story, the writer is making a generalization that will offend somebody.

Answer 3

I wouldn't thumbs-up an answer like that; it's just as sexist as the opposite. Those who did should have a good explanation for why.

Answer 4

Women are allowed to be sexist against men. It's not difficult to find it...  a more recent question states that women are smarter than men.

Answer 5

i don't agree with that statement literally, but maybe the poster meant women tend to not want to step on many toes or are less aggressive than men? i dunno, i don't really agree with any of that ....just trying to possibly defend someone that likely doesn't even know you are posting their comment for a public stoning.

can i also point out how many awful, stereotypical, unflattering comments/questions are aimed towards women on here? you cannot take what is said on here as anything other than rubbish 90 percent of the time, reb.

just a few:

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;...

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;...

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;...

EDIT: it's not "ok", but on the internet it is hard to get the context sometimes. i would ask that particular poster what she meant.

Answer 6

Or that women tend to be more respectful than men?

Answer 7

I don't find stereotyping, per se, to be of any value in critical assessment of an issue.

Spelling and/or syntactical human errors are not well tolerated in G&WS, eh?

I think it speaks to character when one can't get past such nonsense and see the big picture.