- The Macquarie Dictionary's decision to change its definition of misogyny after Prime Minister Julia Gillard's speech in Parliament last week has caused outrage and division on social media.
Some say the move to broaden the definition from a 'pathological hatred of women' to include an 'entrenched prejudice against women' is ludicrous.
They have accused Macquarie of lowering its standards, saying Ms Gillard simply misused the word when she described Opposition Leader Tony Abbott as a misogynist in her fiery speech.
Others say the decision is sensible, and it is about time the definition was changed.
There are even calls - for gender equality reasons - that the word misandry also be redefined.
See how the debate unfolded. For the change
Language evolves...and that evolution did not stop when dictionaries were written. New words and adjusted meanings are included in every edition. As I understand it, this is not 'a PM having the power to change a meaning' or anyone being 'forced to buy a new dictionary', it is simply a considered response to the evolution of language.- liveonce 10:23 AM on 17/10/2012 Language evolves over time and should reflect current useage & context - otherwise we would still be grunting to each other or using the convoluted language of Chaucer or Shakespeare. Of course - it should be relevent to our current useage, so well done Maquarie for being on the ball.
Against the change
WTF did I just read? Don't we already have a word for that? Changing one word's definition because people refuse to use the language properly is lazy. Call a sexist a sexist, a misoginist a misoginist, and a damn spade a spade!Or perhaps we should just call them all spades!? That would make it easier for the stupid people right?- therealclownfish 10:15 AM on 17/10/2012 This is the very epitome of 'dumbing down'. Humpty-Dumpty would be proud. 'The English language ... becomes ugly and inaccurate because our thoughts are foolish, but the slovenliness of our language makes it easier for us to have foolish thoughts' - George Orwell.
By diluting the meaning of the word misogyny to including the description of sexism (a term that already exists and is more accurate) Macquarie has diluted the impact of describing someone as a misogynist. Perhaps they should take it one step further and incorporate anyone that views any distinction between men and women. That way we can all be called misogynists. Will they also be updating the meaning of the term misandrist to reflect the changes they have made to the feminine form of this word? It is all just a little bit silly and semantic in my opinion.- the professor 9:37 AM on 17/10/2012 So is the Macquarie Dictionary now the new Wikipedia...? Does relentless misuse of a word for political reasons mean that the deliberate misuse is cause enough for a re-definition? If I now unilaterally decide that "shoes" really means "socks" and if I say it out loud hard and long enough, will the Macquarie then go ahead and broaden its definition of shoes to include socks? Such loose adherence to standards is a poor look for a Dictionary; even if the person misusing the term had been an authority of some sort...how much worse it looks when the causal agent is merely a politician with a poor grasp of language. It's entirely the Macquarie's right to be whatever it chooses...however if it has now decided to simply be a reflecter of the latest language whim and error, perhaps it should go public and formally advise us that it now ceases to cling to any pretence to being a Dictionary.
That would be right. When found to be so very wrong in her statement regarding Tony Abbott let's just change the whole meaning of the word. For goodness sake I know the English language is an evolving and growing language but hang on a minute now we have a word changed to accommodate the incorrect usage by our PM.- spin sick 9:52 AM on 17/10/2012 What??? seriously??? You can't just change the meaning of words because people use the extreme (incorrectly) to make a point. It the PM had said "sexist" she may have been right ---- but misogynist means "hatred". Now a dictionary is retrospectively changing the definition to make its use now correct??? Then what does that mean for the other associated words that hang together? Does misandry now mean entrenched prejudice against men?
'Caught up in semantics'
- herr kaleun 11:09 AM on 17/10/2012 I find it worrying that meaning is dependent on how people people perceive a word or due to political spin. Racism and terrorism are two words grossly misapplied. Why can't sexism mean discrimination/prejudice, and mysogyny mean hatred of women? Heck, even the latin roots of the latter word are very explicit to its meaning.
Did you find this story interesting? like or comment as 10 already did!
Liked!
- Ian HilliardOne group of sexists has been denigrating another group of sexists by calling them misogynists. Was the meaning of the word changed because it was being...more2012-10-18T07:45:44.867Z
- Alain NeoHow funny that 99% of the people against the change of definition are men and of them, 99% blame Prime Minister Gillard. Hmmm, misogyny at work?2012-10-17T12:15:17.347Z
- Phill O'FlynnShe knew exactly what she meant .. no room for being misquoted there Julia. An embarassment to this country. I won't be voting for anyone in particulary just...more2012-10-17T11:44:57.704Z
- Stephen Blackburnyes it is interesting... meaning of word change and maybe it is about time this one change... things in the "olden days" tended to be black and white. We can...more2012-10-17T08:52:37.649Z
- Stephanie Cook-CurrieSo, to be held to hold a pathological hatred of women you have to actually admit your contempt and go off and hide in a cave somewhere for years at a time to...more2012-10-17T06:27:54.303Z
- George TheodoridisMoreover, Martyn, Not only do words evolve -like all organisms- with the passing of time, they are also used differently by different nations. The same words in...more2012-10-17T06:27:43.162Z
- George TheodoridisMartyn, how poor we must look to other English speaking nations when some aussies feel that the meaning(s) of words are petrified fossils! Words change...more2012-10-17T06:18:00.083Z
- Martyn MurrayHow poor we must look to other English speaking nations when our own leader is ignorant of correct word usage.2012-10-17T04:27:18.697Z
- Peter McMurrayThe change simply brings the Macquarie in line with the Shorter Oxford which has had the broader definition consisten with modern usage for many years.2012-10-17T04:17:41.396Z
- T. C.What a ridiculous decision from Macquarie. I don't think too many people will argue that Julia Gillards speech was otherwise pretty much on the mark, and that...What a ridiculous decision from Macquarie. I don't think too many people will argue that Julia Gillards speech was otherwise pretty much on the mark, and that Mr. Abbot probably is sexist but when it comes to the word misogynist, why reward the use of incorrect and abusive language? Apparently if you don't understand the meaning of words that you wish to use as weapons to insult people with and use them incorrectly, never mind because the dictionary will be changed to suit. What's particularly embarrassing about this situation is the person misusing the language is the leader of our country, what a poor example to set. It's also interesting to note the reverse engineering of the language to suit this nod to misinformation by potential changing the word "misandry". Will we also change the word "misanthropist" as well to suit this? more2012-10-18T11:22:22.549Z
- Ian HilliardOne group of sexists has been denigrating another group of sexists by calling them misogynists. Was the meaning of the word changed because it was being...One group of sexists has been denigrating another group of sexists by calling them misogynists. Was the meaning of the word changed because it was being chronically misused or because the PM's office brought pressure to bear? If it is because of chronic misuse, then the word “irony” also needs to have its meaning changed ever since Alanis Morissette totally misused the word in a song.more2012-10-18T07:45:44.867Z
- Alain NeoHow funny that 99% of the people against the change of definition are men and of them, 99% blame Prime Minister Gillard. Hmmm, misogyny at work?2012-10-17T12:15:17.347Z
- Phill O'FlynnShe knew exactly what she meant .. no room for being misquoted there Julia. An embarassment to this country. I won't be voting for anyone in particulary just...She knew exactly what she meant .. no room for being misquoted there Julia. An embarassment to this country. I won't be voting for anyone in particulary just you out!!more2012-10-17T11:44:57.704Z
- Stephen Blackburnyes it is interesting... meaning of word change and maybe it is about time this one change... things in the "olden days" tended to be black and white. We can...yes it is interesting... meaning of word change and maybe it is about time this one change... things in the "olden days" tended to be black and white. We can do better... this is good newsmore2012-10-17T08:52:37.649Z
- Stephanie Cook-CurrieSo, to be held to hold a pathological hatred of women you have to actually admit your contempt and go off and hide in a cave somewhere for years at a time to...So, to be held to hold a pathological hatred of women you have to actually admit your contempt and go off and hide in a cave somewhere for years at a time to avoid any and all association? A correct but rather limited definition by which those who would deny all girls an education aren't misogynist either, because they're prepared to marry 20? Oh please! Abbott and Gillard weren't playing scrabble! Ms Gillard amplified her remarks spelling out, and referring to, a wholly consistent, legitimately and widely held and properly documented point of view that such pattern goes considerably beyond mere charges of sexism. I'm not sure that I support the proposed new definition either though, because it misses the crucial charge that misogyny includes a certain contemptuous or smug indifference which goes beyond mere sexism. Legitimately held fear, bitterness and despair are open to change and reason. Hatred lies in smug or contemptuous indifference held for the harm done by a stubbornly held contempt for any rational argument which might reasonably erase a cruel or cheapening disregard. Couple that with a grandiosity, intensity or opportunism to establish the same and that epitomises the politics of Tony Abbott. The only rationale which partially rescues Abbott from charges of misogyny is that his pathology is principally a pathologically held grandiosity of self, holding his own perceived status as a wealthy white establishment married middle class man above all others, with undiscriminating disregard for the alleviation of anyone's needs except by way of motive of political gain for himself, not specifically directed at women. So he's a race baiting opportunistic bully too - hardly lets him off the hook. Define him as you like, the guy wilfully incites and exploits the worst in people, seeking to divide rather than unite, with no particularly inspiring vision for Australia's future whatsoever, for his personal political gain at others' expense and dragging the political dialogue of country and its reputation down in the process. Play all the semantic games you like. He deserved every charge Gillard uttered, and more.more2012-10-17T06:27:54.303Z
- George TheodoridisMoreover, Martyn, Not only do words evolve -like all organisms- with the passing of time, they are also used differently by different nations. The same words in...Moreover, Martyn, Not only do words evolve -like all organisms- with the passing of time, they are also used differently by different nations. The same words in Ireland could well mean different things in Oz, or the USA or the Bahamas. Words are not made of steel.more2012-10-17T06:27:43.162Z
- George TheodoridisMartyn, how poor we must look to other English speaking nations when some aussies feel that the meaning(s) of words are petrified fossils! Words change...Martyn, how poor we must look to other English speaking nations when some aussies feel that the meaning(s) of words are petrified fossils! Words change enormously with time. "Pedophilia" should simply mean "love for children" but in fact, common usage has turned it into "lust for children" if not, in effect, "hatred for children." Once there was a second person, singular personal pronoun, "thou" (and "thee" and "thine" fr possessive); now there is only the "you" (and your/s) for both, singular and plural. The word "misogyny" implies an attitude, more than a characteristic. An attitude built over a period of time by constantly treating women with disdain and disrespect. The word "sexist" is no longer adequate to describe how the victim feels. It is not a mere bias or predisposition but an entrenched attitude supported by pertinent behaviour. more2012-10-17T06:18:00.083Z
- Martyn MurrayHow poor we must look to other English speaking nations when our own leader is ignorant of correct word usage.2012-10-17T04:27:18.697Z
- Peter McMurrayThe change simply brings the Macquarie in line with the Shorter Oxford which has had the broader definition consisten with modern usage for many years.2012-10-17T04:17:41.396Z
