Apparently, for the last four years, Time Magazine, which still exists despite all evidence to the contrary, has conducted a poll of online users over which "Word of the Year" to ban. To this day, none of the winners, including "YOLO" and "twerk" have been effectively banned, as we know because people still insist on both using them, and that Miley Cyrus is being deliberately terrible in pursuit of some sort of Dada-esque artistic merit.
This year, in a fit of what is clearly masochism, Time decided to include the word "feminst," which, by all accounts, thanks to the Internet's perpetual cycle of outrage, has lost all meaning as an ideology. Their rationale? It's become a celebrity buzzword, that movie stars and 25-year-old priveleged memoir authors plaster on themselves before considering, for example, which women-only sweatshop their designer-inspired makeup bag hails from.
Lately, celebrities and celebrity politicians have been showing up in Elle Magazine UK and elsewhere sporting "This is What a Feminist Looks Like" scrawled across their chests and handbags to showcase their noble commitment to the cause of female equality worldwide. Everyone from noted spokesperson for all women Lena Dunham to my former imaginary boyfriend Benedict Cumberbatch to UK Labour Party leader Ed Milliband has turned up with the branded products which support The Fawcett Society, an "equality campaigning group" that ostensibly supports the plight of women worldwide.
For a mere $75, anyone can assuage their first world guilt and pay lip service to the organization's stated political goals, without having to ever get hands on for the cause.
July 14, according to the United Nations, is Malala Day, referring to the birthday of the Pakistani "girl who stood up for education and was shot by the Taliban."
Malala Yousafzai celebrated her seventeenth birthday by visiting the families of the kidnapped girls from Nigeria. She wrote in the Washington Post that they and other girls worldwide are her "sisters," in need of her help:
I know education is what separates a girl who is trapped in a cycle of poverty, fear and violence from one with a chance at a better future. During my school holidays, I traveled to help my sisters through my organization, the Malala Fund. I have visited refugee camps in Jordan, spent time with girls facing poverty in Kenya, and even been to New York City, where girls face bullying and violence.
When asked about sexual assaults on college campuses last night during the Miss USA Pageant, Miss Nevada Nia Sanchez, now Miss USA, delivered what most would deem a fairly noncontroversial response:
I believe that some colleges may potentially be afraid of having a bad reputation and that would be a reason it could be swept under the rug, because they don’t want that to come out into the public. But I think more awareness is very important so women can learn how to protect themselves. Myself, as a fourth-degree black belt, I learned from a young age that you need to be confident and be able to defend yourself. And I think that’s something that we should start to really implement for a lot of women.
Shockingly enough, the eternally outraged #YesAllWomen camp was not happy with Sanchez’s answer. Feminists took to Twitter to express their shock and outrage that a woman would suggest individual empowerment as a means of combatting rape.
The news is unbelievable, outlandish, and absurd! Jill Abramson has been ousted from the New York Times. This, of course, is huge news. You know that it's huge news because news outlets tell you so. NPR, Forbes, The Washington Post, and Politico (no less than four times!) have all spilled copious amounts of ink covering Abramson's departure. It has long been rumored that Abramson was a difficult boss to work for. Perhaps the Ban Bossy campaign has backfired.
The most breathless coverage came from Politico's John Harris and Hadas Gold, who proclaimed that this departure is the departure to beat all departures. The Capo di tutti capi of departures:
Yesterday the American Conservative published an insightful piece, “Here’s the ‘Missing’ Evidence for S.D.’s Sex-Selective Abortion Ban” by Jonathan Coppage.
Coppage does excellent work researching and explaining the evidence behind sex-selective abortions in the United States, sadly concluding that the facts reveal this practice does, in fact, occur within our borders.
South Dakota just became the eighth state to pass a ban on sex-selective abortions, and in doing so, ignited rage from pro-choice advocates. They immediately conjured up the race debate, claiming laws against sex-selective abortions were inherently discriminatory toward Asian-American women and were entirely unnecessary.
Citing scholarly and journalistic works, Coppage debunks the theory that these abortions never happen in the United States, but gives the opposition a break. He says their arguments that this is not America's primary domestic issue, and that laws alone won’t solve the problem, are viable.
What most of us call “love” is actually the violent oppression of women, according to radical feminists. The latest trend in feminism’s decades-long war against human nature recently inspired me to write a Valentine’s Day poem:
Roses are red,
Violets are blue.
The heteronormative patriarchy
Is raping you.
In the landmark abortion case Planned Parenthood v. Casey, Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote in his opinion, "at the heart of liberty is the right to define one's own concept of existence, of meaning, of the universe, and of the mystery of human life…" In other words, life is all about the quest to craft your own distinct identity. This viewpoint nicely sums up the approach of many contemporary liberals. The problem is that this sort of thinking can cause you to paint yourself into some pretty tight corners. A vivid illustration of this danger is the Salon.com piece entitled "The fight over the 'v' word."