Are these words sexist?

polarizing
calculating
disingenuous
insincere
ambitious
inevitable
entitled
over-confident
secretive
will do anything to win
represents the past
out of touch

If so, why?

These words alone? No.

But is there some context for them you are not mentioning?

Sure.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/hillary-clintons-super-volunteers-aim-to-rebut-media-sexism/

These words are no more sexist than the conjunctions "and, but and or". My question is why these words, and not real words that can be sexist. Is this an over-sensitivity?

bbauska wrote:Sure.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/hillary-clintons-super-volunteers-aim-to-rebut-media-sexism/

These words are no more sexist than the conjunctions "and, but and or". My question is why these words, and not real words that can be sexist. Is this an over-sensitivity?

But the context is whether they are used to describe a particular person.

When I saw the words I wondered if it was related to research like this: http://www.researchgate.net/publication ... ion_Making

Where women seem to get described more pejoratively than men are.

I don't know why these may be seen as sexist. Are they used frequently in US politics, and if so, are they used equally across genders?

From the article you linked to -

Throughout Clinton's time as first lady, senator, and secretary of state, she's periodically faced coverage and scrutiny that strikes some of her closest allies as sexist. They believe she's characterized pejoratively for exhibiting traits nobody would question in a man, and that she faces questions no man would have to face.

But this is just a twitter account, right? Could just be one weird person with no connection to anyone.

In fact, the more I look at this, the more it looks like a hoax.

Sadly it is not a hoax.

bbauska wrote:Sadly it is not a hoax.

I mean that the twitter account is a hoax.