man

Dear editor, this entry does not violate any of the rules on the editor homepage. "Rule 3. Publish opinions. Don't reject an entry just because it's opinionated. Opinions are useful to readers unfamiliar with a topic. Don't reject an entry because you disagree or are offended. Don't reject an entry because you think it's inaccurate." It is not sexist as it is a view which can be held by any gender, does not generalise entire groups and does not mention any approval or promotion of discrimination. "Rule 2 Entries can document discrimination but not endorse it." So act with a little integrity, for once. 90% are useless, worthless arseholes who vote up and post misogynistic definitions. when they're not doing that they're probably whining their egocentric hearts out that people are complaining about their stupid misogynistic arses whilst desperately trying to distance themselves from that fact. despite this they'll often either a) not vote down male chauvinism and only recognise sexism exists when (shock, horror!) it's directed at them (useless, worthless arsehole) or b) laugh at misogyny and casual sexism and vote it up. c) the absolute rarity on urbandictionary: feminist male who votes down chauvinistic, masculist sociopathy and who doesn't expect people to simply accept casual chauvinism and irrational prejudice because some other oblivious, privileged arsehole who only empathises with their own interests (fuck you) finds it amusing.