Thanks for the post. Interesting...

It was an interesting read. I don't know that re-defining terms to fit your argument is the way to go, because words, and their meanings, represent wide-spread agreements. Let me illustrate:

mi·sog·y·ny
/məˈsäjənē/
noun
dislike of, contempt for, or ingrained prejudice against women. (Google dictionary)

sex·ism
/ˈsekˌsizəm/
noun
prejudice, stereotyping, or discrimination, typically against women, on the basis of sex (same source)

See the similarity?

If these are the "widely-accepted" view of these words, saying they AREN'T doesn't change anything. I mean, it's like claiming "racism" is actually about "hair color".

Her premise is, that "we" (as a culture) don't understand the words we use but SHE does. It weakens her point. It is an "argument from authority" (hers, because she's studied it). And it's too bad, because her actual point (as I interpret it) is that the real problem is that the oppression of women is systemic, not individual acts by individual oppressive men. And I agree with that (not that individual acts don't occur-they DO, and should be punished appropriately).

And the next point, which is perhaps even MORE important is: how do we change this? How do social attitudes became "better"?

My view, is, this happens on several different fronts:

1. We teach our children better ways to be (I can't do this, because, no kids)
2. We demand better protections of law, and the repeal of bad laws.
3. We educate each other through discourse (this is what your post is doing @Donotbelieve so feel good about that)
4. We vote for better leaders, and resist bad ones.
5. We educate the educators, so that these harmful ways are not ingrained in young children during the socialization that happens in schooling.
6. We follow the example of the brave women on the front lines, refusing to take it any longer.

I could list more, but you get the picture.

Our human ability to "abstract", to classify, has given us much: science, technology, and general better standards of living (it's been a long time since natural predators like lions have been a daily concern). But it's also given us a lot of "-isms", because as we classify, we don't see the ones that do not fit the labels. And in some ways "identity politics" lie at the core of this-we have to reconcile equality with diversity.

On a personal level, for me, it works something like this: I treat women better if I identify as human first, and male second. Because it allows me to more easily put myself in their shoes, and treat them like I would like to be treated. Your mileage may vary.

A very interesting way of looking at it. I'll have to think on this for a while.

Good article. Thanks for sharing!

Very interesting read! Her conclusion that it is not going to be an easy fix, and the obvious backslide of the Trump election makes it seem even harder to obtain parity.

"Misogyny is the law enforcement branch of patriarchy." Good interview.