For example, on page 247 he says in the "traditional male role" a "real man" is one who "wears the pants around the house." This is an old-fashioned concept and has little to do with a man being "sexist" except for the fact that the writer himself seems to have chauvinistic ideas about the man-woman genre.
Meanwhile, some of the arguments spelled out by Laurence Thomas have value, but others are completely innocuous. How can he say that "sexism" is "unlike racism" because it "lends itself to a morally unobjectionable description"? Both sexism and cultural bigotry are morally objectionable. Both are examples of the cultural confusion in our country.
Also, he could have taken the position that blacks are culturally biased against white people because many blacks were raised in families that don't trust white people. Blacks in some cases show hatred for whites in the same way whites show hatred towards blacks. The author could have made the point that this cultural antipathy is a two way street, and made a comparison between blacks hating whites and whites hating blacks. That would have been far more relevant that comparing sexism and "racism."
In addition, the author should have noted that when things don't go right for blacks, too often they fall into the trap of saying it's "racist." When a black athlete like Terrell Owens, who is a football star, got criticized by the media for a certain stunt he pulled in the end zone (autographing a football with a pen he pulled out of his sock) he claimed it is "racism." He claimed that if a white player had done the same thing, nobody would have said a word. This point...
For some blacks, it's a crutch.
But the most irrelevant comparison the author makes is by saying that "behind every man is a good woman," and that
women "play a central role in the self-development of men" and thus men have a "positive conception of themselves." Of course men also
play a central role in the self-development of women, and in a good relationship, it is a two way street. Those are not unreasonable assertions. But then (p. 243) Thomas uses that man-woman theme to bring in the racist comparison; "There is no time-honored saying to the effect that behind every white there is a good black." That is ridiculous.
In
conclusion, it is clear that sexism is a separate issue completely from racism. And racism is such an entirely different topic from chauvinism (or "sexism" if you prefer) that they shouldn't be considered as side-by-side issues. So maybe Thomas was defeated before he even began his essay, since the two concepts are not just as different as "apples and oranges," but they are really as different as oceans and deserts, or maybe trees in Ohio and rocks on the
moon.
Works Cited
Thomas, Laurence. (1980). "Sexism and Racism: Some Conceptual Differences."
Ethics, 90,
