Talk:Reverse sexism

message: Reverse racism *does* not exist. White people do not experience racism. It seems a little risky to refer to this as reverse sexism considering that implication. Picklesticks123 (talk) 19:39, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reverse Sexism is like Reverse Racism 

message: The retirement age https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Retirement_age has 37 countries with laws giving multiple year earlier retirement ages for women than for men.
There should be RS that that is sexism and discrimination. 2600:1700:D591:5F10:C4E0:BE5C:690A:5A33 (talk) 21:06, 30 September 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: OK then, feel free to go find some. Wikipedia is not a reliable source, by the way. --Sangdeboeuf (talk) 23:25, 30 September 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: At least Rina Torosyan sais it's discrimination: "Однако установление разного возраста выхода на пенсию для мужчин и женщин привело к возникновению гендерной дискриминации мужчин в области пенсионного обеспечения". https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/politika-sovetskogo-gosudarstva-v-otnoshenii-muzhchin-v-sfere-pensionnogo-obespecheniya/viewer Reprarina (talk) 01:51, 9 October 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: This source seems to specifically be about pensions in the USSR. Doesn't seem very generalizable. And doesn't say anything about sexism per se. —Sangdeboeuf (talk) 12:04, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Retirement age sexual discrimination  

message: I'm not entirely sure why this article was moved to this name in the first place as there are a few sources which talk explicitly about discrimination against men instead of reverse sexism (as a whole). It seems to be WP:POV pushing as there is now no place on Wikipedia to talk about discrimination against men.
This article is about the term, and so is the misandry article, instead of the old discrimination against men article describing genuine discrimination instead of how the term is used.
I think that a reverse sexism section should be added to a discrimination against men article explaining the term, but again, I think it's WP:POV pushing to have no article to describe discrimination as a whole.
Or perhaps we can merge all of the articles together to avoid a WP:FORK? For that the article would have to focus on discrimination in itself and sections about each term.
Panamitsu (talk) 09:48, 14 August 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Unfortunately this seems to be what the literature often *does*. Study the nasty properties of some people who use particular terms rather than if there is some underlying concept that exists in the real world. Talpedia 12:10, 14 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move back to discrimination against men 

message: :The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The result of the move request was: not moved. There is consensus that the reverse sexism and discrimination against men are distinct topics. (non-admin closure) Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 19:12, 24 August 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Reverse sexism →  – Currently there are no articles to discuss discrimination as a whole as this article and the misandry article talk about the terms themselves and how they are used instead of what discrimination against men looks like. I would like to put 'reverse sexism' and 'misandry' into sections on a discrimination against men page, as there is a lot of literature on those terms specifically, but it is important that we can use literature that studies discrimination against men instead of the terms used to describe it.
This article was moved from discrimination against men without consensus via a talk page as far as I am aware. 
EDIT: I now OPPOSE my own request.
Panamitsu (talk) 00:53, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: — 1677venzel gottorpskij (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. 
*Oppose. Sangdeboeuf, ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ and Jayron32 have said all that needs to be said as far as I can tell. Support arguments do not appear to be based in policy. Generalrelative (talk) 19:33, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 16 August 2023