Let’s get at this racism thing another way…

Let us assume that a number of women complain that they have been burned while cooking dinner. They complain that the design of a certain brand of stove should be improved to make sure that this type of accident does not happen. Men have complained that they have been burned by the same brand of stove as well. Let’s assume that in the universe of people who use that specific brand of stove, there are more women than men.

Which statement is inherently sexist?

A) People who do not want to be burned should stay away from a hot stove.

or

B) Women who do not want to be burned should make sure that a man doesn’t press their hand against a red-hot burner.

It seems to me that statement A is a basic truth that does not single out any specific group of people; it’s much like telling a child that he must stay out of the road so that he won’t be hit by a car. A car can skid off the road and into a yard where a child is playing, but a child’s chances of being hit are certainly lowered — and I would guess substantially lowered — if he stays out of the road. Statement A refers to people in general, assuming that anyone can be burned, whether more women use the stove in question or not.

Statement B asserts that women are burned specifically because a man has caused the injury to occur with malicious intent. It implies that women are not ever burned by their own actions, but rather that the opposite gender is required to complete the transaction. It seems to assume that only men would burn a woman: a woman would never burn another woman, and that as long as there are no men around, a woman should be able to cook without expecting any injury at all.

Which statement is the fair statement of the two? Which is inherently sexist? Which statement assumes without looking at the specifics of an individual situation that one gender will desire to hurt another?