" 

 == March edits == 

 I changed many of the edits of March, 2012, to the lede and generally. 

 Some rephrasings change meanings. I restored ""are judged"" to ""can be understood or judged"". Sexism is not ""defined as prejudice or discrimination based on ... behavior, conditions, or attitudes that foster stereotypes of social roles"" without sex; therefore, I restored the prior wording. I restored ""necessarily"" in several places, because it's needed. The difference between ""women and men’s perceptions"" and ""women’s and men’s perceptions"" is that the former treats both genders as having the same perceptions; they don't; so I restored the latter. The difference between ""children read"" and ""children were read"" is one of agency, regarding the study being discussed, so I restored the latter. ""To the extent that females are defined as deferential and emotional, they"" is more limited than ""[f]emales are defined as deferential and emotional and they"", so I restored the former. I restored the content of the blockquote. If any of these restorations contradict sourcing, please post that information. While it was correct to edit ""else is as unnecessary"", it should have been to ""else as unnecessary"", so I did so. ""Research of the factors"" implies research by the factors, so I restored ""[r]esearch into the factors"". Two conditions were reduced to one condition and a subsidiary clause; for clarity and consistency with the conclusion, I restoried to two conditions. ""[S]eem"" has to agree in number with ""fact"", so I restored ""seems"". An edit made adjacent wording syntactically wrong, so I deleted an excess ""during"". 

 I restored a sentence to the lede, deleted for lack of sourcing, because the sourcing is in the body and the lede, being a summary of the body, isn't supposed to show sourcing. 

 Terms that are core to an article and are in the lede should be boldfaced, so I restored the boldfacing. 

 Links were broken or needed piping. Two links, by being rewritten to plural and abbreviated forms, were made into redlinks and I restored them but also kept the new forms. Another was made into a redlink, by a change of dash, and I restored it. Another was made into a redlink as part of giving a fuller identification of an organization; I reworded the passage. Two links worked with their new spellings but did so by sending visitors to redirects, so I piped to prevent that. 

 The article said that swear words would not be enumerated and that was taken out, but it's probably a good idea to retain it for the sake of editors, so I restored the principle of nonlisting as a comment visible to editors but not to most readers. 

 Besides that, for content predating the above-cited edits, I edited ""men"" to the genitive or possessive, ""system bias"" to ""systemic bias"", to fix a bare nonlinking URL, and ""and"" to ""with"" and, minor, I deleted a spurious line break and two spaces. 

   "