Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

bloodrose wrote (edited )

If you erase "female" from your comment, it reads: "Architects talking about how women interact with their environments = fluff piece. Sexist much?"

As it's phrased now, no it's not sexist. Because the descriptor of "female" is what would have made such a dismissive statement ("fluff piece") sexist in the first place.

Is the fact that being dismissive about a piece about women enough to be considered sexist? I thought using "women architects" sounded too clunky. But I thought it was a valid point that people use "female" to mean "biologically female" to mean "those with a vagina." I did not intend to say "Architects who have vaginas" so I thought removing the word made more sense.

Edit to add: I also was comfortable with changing my framing to make those I was conversing with more comfortable talking with me.

5

DarkArmillary wrote (edited )

I think that being dismissive about stories about women could be, and most likely is, a sexist tendency, sure.

[Edit: it's also possible to be dismissive/critical of stories on the basis of media literacy, and being critical of the implicit ideology put forth in the piece.]

I can see your point about clunky wording, but don't you think the fact that those architects are female, is relevant to their influence on city design? Anyway, I think it is relevant. Not much more to add to that and what I've already said. Have a good one.

−1