Well it's no guarantee, but does make it a lot less likely.
Why does being born a certain gender make one less likely to do something negative either to their own gender or the other gender?
If we take your statement at face value then we have to make a whole bunch of assumptions that make little sense to me (e.g. that people have the same opinions of what is sexist, that all women are "sensitive" to such issues, that women never actively take part in sexism of women on purpose, that women being sexist to men doesn't exist, etc).
So yeah... I'm going to go ahead and say that that statement is just false unless you can show me something that indicates it is true.
Women are people. People are "sexist." More or less likelihood of such sexism is hard to track because there is no fixed definition (or "line") of sexism its self, nor is there an easy way to /prove/ that someone is or isn't sexist/being sexist.
1. It's not "being born" but identifying with a group. Gender, race, sports team, etc. You're more likely to act favorably toward people in your group.
2. Clearly not everyone has the same opinion of what's sexist.
3. If women were not "sensitive" to this, then they wouldn't be complaining so much. They are complaining, therefore I conclude that they are sensitive to it.
4. Women can be mean to other women, but why would they be sexist against women on purpose?
5. Women being sexist to men is not relevant to this context. We're talking about treatment of women.
#1, while I will accept that at face value you're more likely to root for the home team - I disagree with the unspoken assumption that that translates into less sexism.
#2, right, but even with that being the case we know enough about what sexism is to blanket say that an entire gender is less likely to conduct it?
#3, some women are complaining, some men are complaining about the reverse (e.g. /r/mensrights). Therefore using identical logic I can claim that because some men have complained about sexism that men are "less likely" than women to be sexist. See how that works (or doesn't)?
#4, because women are people and people are sexist? What is it you want me to explain? If someone calls something sexist and it was produced by a women, earlier discussion not withstanding, it is.
#5, women being sexist to ANYONE is entirely relevant to this discussion. The discussion is: "women are less sexist." Therefore ANY sexism on the part of a women is fair game.
Gender is a performance, not a thing. You act in alignment with what you portray to others as your gender.
> 2. Clearly not everyone has the same opinion of what's sexist.
While this is true, the vast majority of disagreement about what sexism is are deflections that serve to discredit actual instances of sexism or to pretend that sexism doesn't happen.
> 3. If women were not "sensitive" to this, then they wouldn't be complaining so much. They are complaining, therefore I conclude that they are sensitive to it.
This is totally true, women are sensitive to sexist depictions of their gender that are objectifying. Who wouldn't be?
> 4. Women can be mean to other women, but why would they be sexist against women on purpose?
Sexism is more than just conscious actions taken against others, it is about cultural and social contexts and structures. The same misogynistic messages in our culture are heard by men and women and that means everyone is affected by them to some extent. Misogyny isn't limited to men against women, some women may have internalized misogyny: http://finallyfeminism101.wordpress.com/2007/10/20/internali...
> 5. Women being sexist to men is not relevant to this context. We're talking about treatment of women.
Women cannot be sexist against men in a systemic way. Advertising that objectifies men's bodies doesn't increase the rhetoric that devalues men nor does it contribute to a culture where sexual assault against men is the vast majority of occurrences.
As to whether or not this marketing event was degrading, the answer is quite clearly yes. Women's bodies were used as a marketing ploy to sell a product. Women's bodies as a commodity is a long running sexist theme in our society, including marketing. Commodify-ing women's bodies is dangerous and is directly related to violence against women. For an overview, see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_objectification#Sexual_o...
It's not like sexism at tech trade shows is a new thing, but there always seems to be people to defend it. They are using naked women as attention-getting displays to sell laptop batteries to a largely male audience. Forget blaming the company, maybe they had to do it to sell their product, but surely there is some sexism involved here.
That being said, I'd buy an argument that said women are more likely to be aware of these issues. Or even that women are less likely to be sexist. I suppose I took issue with your assertion that women are MUCH less likely to be sexist. I guess it's an argument of degrees.
My memory is a bit fuzzy but from interviews I've read with models, most of them (male and female) are against the "power structures" you're talking about. The only model I'm friends with is definitely not the sort of girl who believes her place is in the home etc.