I think there needs to be a differentiation between what is lazy stereotyping, what is sexism and what is neither. An advert for a product aimed at women that portrays a feckless husband and a strong women saving the day in a domestic setting is stereotyping; it's arguably comparable to the idea a spray of Lynx makes men irresistible to women. I suppose you could even flip it and say the fact advertisers aim adverts for household and cleaning products directly at women or portray men as unthinking beasts who only care about personal hygiene as part of a ploy to attract women verges on sexism. Young men, in general, paying more for their car insurance is neither sexism nor stereotyping. It's based on statistical evidence that men of a certain age are more likely to be involved in an incident than women of the same age. If there is evidence an individual women is habitually a more dangerous driver than a male counterpart then she will pay more. I'd argue the twerk comment falls into a bit of a grey area. On one hand you have to ask whether the DJ would have made a similar comment to a man yet you could also argue whilst the comment was crass and moronic it was a result of idiocy rather than malice.
With regards the #metoo movement I think it's both a great thing and a necessity. Arguably the most powerful man in the world was still deemed electable despite suggesting it was ok for a man in a position of power to 'grab a woman by the pussy'. That alone suggests there are attitudes that still need challenged. There was a rape trial recently in Ireland during which the defence lawyer produced the pants the alleged victim had been wearing on the night of the incident. They asked the jury if they looked like the pants of someone just out for a few quiet drinks with friends. Think about that for a second; the implication was because she wore underwear with a lacy front she was either 'asking for it', out looking for sex or that choice of underwear somehow implied consent. That's frightening. Too often the argument against the movement is 'it was only....' as though personal boundaries of acceptability don't matter. No woman should have to go out and be subjected to groping, touching, a proprietorial arm around the waist or whatever else if they don't feel comfortable with it or don't find it an acceptable level of contact. It's for the recipient of the touch to decide what's acceptable, not the instigator of contact or other people not involved in the situation. A woman also has the right to withdraw her consent of any touching at any point. Thinking back I probably overstepped a few boundaries when I was younger; I used to feel that I'd hate to be young again because it's all a bit of a minefield these days, now I think it's more a case of I wouldn't get away with what was potentially unacceptable behaviour. I fully support women who are standing up and saying that they won't be pawed at because it's 'just a laugh' or 'just harmless flirting'; they are quite right to say '**** off and leave us alone'. If men really feel the same about inappropriate contact from women then maybe rather than decry the women standing up they should stand up themselves and do something similar.