This constant bashing of Olivia by some of the males here is disturbing.
North Report -- What is the evidence that this is a gender thing?
To introduce an accusation that this is gender based is to place a chill on what here is a fair comment. I think in the media and comment sections there is a definite racist and sexist bent but I have seen none of that here.
Secondly, most of the conversation for the last bit has surrounded the handling of a mistake that is not hers at all and not hers to respond to. Sexism is not a weapon to attack those you disagree with. That does more damage than good.
I have defended Chow and criticized whomever made the web post. But those attacking her here have not done so on gender lines and to criticize them for having an opinion while being male really requires you to back up exactly what of their gender or Chow's entered into this.
As for the lines being drawn -- let's label them for what they really are: partisan.
I personally think using an accusation of sexism with no foundation, in a partisan argument, to chill those you disagree with is itself sexist. There ought to be some foundation for such a charge and it should be leveled against a particular comment not spread over all those who disagree with you and happen to be male.
And all that said -- I suspect on most of this I agree with you since I see no fault from Chow in this story. That is unleass you want to misrepresent my criticism of the party's handling into a cirticism of Chow and then misrepresent that into a thing about gender.
How far does this manipulation, and co-option of the huge problem of sexism go when it comes to a partisan argument? And this appropriation of the fight against sexism is also coming from a man -- so really how deep in BS is this argument?
