Decision to publish was made consciously, with purpose
The Argonaut has received dozens of responses to the opinion column, “The poison of feminism,” by Andrew Jenson. Many were outraged by the content while others supported it and thanked Jenson for his perspective.
The piece itself was largely unpopular, and some discussion has centered on The Argonaut’s decision to publish the column in the first place.
It should be made clear: Jenson’s column does not represent the views of The Argonaut. His interpretation of feminism is his own, developed from his upbringing, beliefs and experiences.
It was the decision of Argonaut editors to publish the piece, not because we agreed with or condoned his beliefs, but because he has the right to them. Jenson — and anyone who shares his beliefs — has the same right to the platforms afforded liberal thinkers.
Jenson’s views, while unpopular among the majority of The Argonaut’s readership and most of its editors, represent the views of countless people in the U.S., many in Idaho and on the University of Idaho campus. He is The Argonaut’s one conservative voice among a sea of liberal thoughts. During his time here, our decision to publish his columns has become an annual conversation among readers.
The Argonaut’s opinion section is often tagged as “liberal” and has published far more pro-feminism columns than anything else in recent history.
But The Argonaut has an obligation to present views that may be different from the majority. It is the duty of a news organization to hold a mirror to society and reflect every aspect of it. It is our job to uphold the First Amendment and not stop people who may believe differently from expressing their views in the same ways and on the same platforms as anyone else.
Jenson’s perspectives make people uncomfortable because they do not align with the majority. But he did not advocate violence or discrimination. He did not libel anyone.
He championed an ideology that is still popular among many Americans through a broad interpretation of feminism and its purpose that some believe twisted the movement for his own devices. While offensive to many, Jenson’s column sparked a mostly civil discussion and represented the views of a significant portion of the population.
The Argonaut publishes these columns because these opinions exist. It’s important to know they exist, and it would be ignorant for for any liberal thinker to assume that they don’t.
The First Amendment provides an opportunity for a diversity of ideas, and — more importantly — open discourse.
We could sanitize content and pretend these views don’t occur, but that would not be an accurate reflection of the society we live in, nor would it fulfill our duty to promote discussion and education to eradicate views that may be considered outdated or discriminatory.
To pretend alternate, unpopular opinions do not exist is a greater disservice to the community than publishing them ever could be.
The only way change can ever be achieved is by discussing and considering the viewpoints of those who may disagree. Discussing beliefs with people who share them will only reinforce similar ideas, not bring about change of thought in others.
Instead of wondering why The Argonaut might publish an unpopular opinion, consider promoting civil open discourse on the content, writing a letter to the editor or accepting the fact that we live in a society where not everyone shares the same beliefs — no matter how much we might like them to.
— KK