In Defending Emma Watson, Left Exposes Its Fatal Flaw

Actress Emma Watson attends a special screening of Disney's "Beauty and the Beast" at Alice Tully Hall on Monday, March 13, 2017, in New York. (Photo by Evan Agostini/Invision/AP)

By now, if you haven’t heard that actress Emma Watson exposed more of herself than feminists would prefer, you’ve been either living under a rock, or in some wonderful place where one can live a life free from inane popular culture. Invariably, Watson’s photo shoot led to attacks, including on the actress’s hypocrisy for criticizing singer Beyonce for being too provocative in one of her videos.


Now, a leftist college student seeking to defend Watson accidentally, yet helpfully, points out one of the biggest problems many people have with the left — its unavoidable hypocrisy:

By definition, the concept of feminism is simple: equality. This idea, though, has continued to be misconstrued by a copious amount of people, even those who identify with the label. Many believe the image of a feminist is one who rejects all forms of traditional femininity and suppresses their own sexuality as a means of power.

Now, take a look at that link the writer included: the Merriam-Webster dictionary. Seems like a reasonable place to look for the definition of a term, right?

Sure, when it supports a leftist’s ideology, like feminism. But what if the Merriam-Webster dictionary doesn’t get it right on other leftist issues?

Take “racism,” for example:

  • 1:  a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race

  • 2a :  a doctrine or political program based on the assumption of racism and designed to execute its principles b:  a political or social system founded on racism

  • 3:  racial prejudice or discrimination


Nothing in Merriam-Webster about how “only white people can be racist.” The dictionary wins again, right?

WRONG! At least according to the leftists. Here, we see a leftist website that created a lengthy cartoon all about how you simply can’t use the dictionary to define racism because the whole thing is simply too complex for a simple definition.

Then there’s this individual, who argues that only white people can be racist, but presents no rational evidence for the assertion.

Affinity Magazine has also run at least one piece making the same claim.

Meanwhile, the piece defending Watson is hardly the only place one can find the dictionary definition of feminism held up as proof that the whole ideology is based on a desire for equality, and not misandrist notions of reversing the tables from past eras where women brought home the bacon and men were stuck at home, remaining quiet unless spoken to.

It’s the “Appeal to Authority” logic violation. If you’re going to use the dictionary as an authoritative voice on what terms mean, then you can’t just accept some of those definitions. Sure, it’s fine to say the subject is more complex, but the definition is either accurate or its not. If it’s inaccurate, then the other information in it is suspect.


For example, if you find a science textbook declaring the world is flat, would you then take its word on the origins of man? Of course not. Why does the dictionary suffice for one aspect, but not the other?

You don’t get to play it both ways and not get called out for your irrational arguments. That’s not how the world works, after all.


Trending on PJ Media Videos

Join the conversation as a VIP Member