Des fleurs, des fleurs, des fleurs for you… ‘Misogyny’: a functional definition courtesy of #auspol

Who could have known that Australia would so rapidly come to terms with misogyny and how to engage meaningfully in a debate?

But perhaps you were one of the bystanders as Twitter and MSM, as Left and Right, as Male and Female duked out the Gender Wars.  Here, I make it easy for you to follow the New Paradigm of Gender Discourse, based on a functional interpretation (that is, a definition based on usage) derived from my encounters in the discussions.

Person S is a misogynist if…

… S holds political views incompatible with mine; and

… S is male; and

… S is a female stating that person T is a misogynist even person T holds political views compatible with mine; and

… S does not have daughters; and

… S does not have a wife; and

… S was not of woman born (screw you, MacDuff… you misogynist); and

… S is not less misogynistic than some other person, S2 (‘misogynist’ is sort of like Highlander: there can be only one); and

… S is not strategically important to the aspirations of the political party I support (this point can’t be stressed enough); and

… S did not found Wikileaks.

It is important to discuss misogyny and to get it on the national agenda, unless the people discussing misogyny will disagree with each other, in which case people disagreeing with my assertions should just learn to listen to my assertions and accept them without question.  Also, this discussion about misogyny is a distraction from the real issues, such as the prevalence of misogyny in politics.

There is an objective thing called ‘misogyny’.  If people disagree with you, they’re being sanctimonious.

Any person can use the word ‘misogyny’, unless they are…

… a columnist for the mainstream media; or

… a male who disagrees with me; or

… have a Twitter account; or

… are a female politician (in which case they are playing the ‘gender card’, which is against the rules).

It is important to remember that misogyny is an objective, scientific attribute.  If you have a chemistry kit, you can titrate the misogyny against six moles of hydrochloric acid (to the back of the hand).  It is not possible for two rational people to disagree about whether a person is a misogynist.

‘Misogyny’ and ‘sexism’ are completely different words.  They are even spelled differently.

‘Misogyny’ and ‘sexism’ are interchangeable words.  They have the same number of Is, Ms, and As.