In the News... Hyperfeminist virtual vigilantes

The past two weeks have been a heady time, as women (and men) across Canada challenge a recent National Post editorial, "Women's Studies is still with us."

Ostensibly about the renaming of programs from "Women's Studies" to "Gender Studies," it's a rant against the percieved influences of these programs; like, for example, how the "radical feminism behind these courses has done untold damage to families, our court systems, labour laws, constitutional freedoms and even the ordinary relations between men and women."

Written in response to a series of articles published over the previous month (gleefully entitled "Women's Studies, R.I.P.," "What price for feminism" and "The end of the gender wars"), the editorial seems to be a long-sought climax to the papers' build up of anti-feminist angst.

Now one of its most popular online stories, it's possible even the National Post is surprised (and, in these hardluck times for newspapers, undoubtedly pleased) at its spike in readership.

The National Post sniffed out the apparent demise of feminism when articles in The Globe and Mail (Margaret Wente: "Montreal massacre death cult: Mourn, yes, but let's stop insisting these women were victims of deep-rooted cultural misogyny") and The National Post (Jonathan Kay: "How did the École Polytechnique anniversary get transformed into a festival of cynical, hyperfeminist propaganda?") were "sharply critical of the emotive and irrational linkage of the [Montreal] Massacre with the phenomenon of domestic violence against women."

At the time these articles were published, Elsie Hambrook (Chairperson of the New Brunswick Advisory Council on the Status of Women) wrote a scathing call to action in the Times and Transcript called "Get over it, or get outraged?"

Why can't we give it a rest? We can't. First, advocates of social change are subjected to intense scrutiny. If we don't take an issue consistently -- if we react to this commercial but not that one, to that form of violence but not, yet, the other -- we are accused of hypocrisy. Also, we can't give it a rest because the issues we address affect people -- us or people we know. People's lives are, too often, literally at stake.

After a few weeks and a few more baiting articles in the National Post (including an opinion debate: Jo-Ann Wallace vs. Anne Marie Owens) ... responses have been pouring in... generating thousands of tweets, Facebook shares, likes, and comments.

Some of my favourites:

To the National Post’s Editorial Board (The Walrus)

The women’s studies debate goes on: Is there still a place for women's studies in universities? (Erin Millar, Maclean's)

Why women's studies programs are needed (Canice Leung, Metro news)

When women knew their place: Feminism, equality, and the National Post (Mike Cowie, Straight.com)

National Post fails Women Studies homework (Beisan Zubi, Rabble.ca)

meganmcchesney: Takin' a break from the #grammys to read the Post's insane diatribe against women['s studies] (Twitter)

donnaidh_sidhe: I'm pretty sure this is trolling. Right? ...right? (Twitter)

Do you think its worth it to respond to articles obviously written to stir up anger - and increase readership?

What's your favourite response to National Post trolls?