It doesn't matter how long this talking point has been around because feminist talking points don't survive on merit. They are not arguments intended to provoke thought, but a series of PR campaigns cooked up to create a nebulous impression of female victimhood from invisible sources. Objectification, patriarchy, rape culture, male gaze, phallocentrism... they're all goofy myths with no connection to reality, whose staying power is temporary and survives only from trendiness among feminist allies, or fear of being character assassinated, when it comes to neutrals or anti-feminists. Objectification is merely one of the more successful PR campaigns, because it thrives off the muddle that normies feel when the different definitions of the word 'object' - 'goal' (benign meaning) vs 'inanimate object' (malign meaning) - blur together in their heads.
Just take 'rape culture' and one of the possible reasons you don't hear that buzzphrase spouted so much any more (another being that Brits in particular know what the real rape culture is, but I digress...): in 2014, RAINN - the Rape Abuse & Incest National Network, essentially the go-to organisation for abuse victims - said that rape culture simply doesn't exist. It was not a thing:
In the last few years, there has been an unfortunate trend towards blaming “rape culture” for the extensive problem of sexual violence on campuses.
...
Rape is caused not by cultural factors but by the conscious decisions, of a small percentage of the community, to commit a violent crime.
I imagine that they felt compelled to say this, despite being a probably feminist org, because they are forced to live in the real world and deal with real people to some degree. Feminists, who don't have these constraints, responded by attacking RAINN. I don't recall there coming a peep from RAINN on the issue after that.
All they have is bluster and shame. Logic is secondary to contempt when arguing with feminists. They won't listen to the former, but at least the latter will enrage them and entertain you.
It doesn't matter how long this talking point has been around because feminist talking points don't survive on merit. They are not arguments intended to provoke thought, but a series of PR campaigns cooked up to create a nebulous impression of female victimhood from invisible sources. Objectification, patriarchy, rape culture, male gaze, phallocentrism... they're all goofy myths with no connection to reality, whose staying power is temporary and survives only from trendiness among feminist allies, or fear of being character assassinated, when it comes to neutrals or anti-feminists. Objectification is merely one of the more successful PR campaigns, because it thrives off the muddle that normies feel when the different definitions of the word 'object' - 'goal' (benign meaning) vs 'inanimate object' (malign meaning) - blur together in their heads.
Just take 'rape culture' and one of the possible reasons you don't hear that buzzphrase spouted so much any more (another being that Brits in particular know what the real rape culture is, but I digress...): in 2014, RAINN - the Rape Abuse & Incest National Network, essentially the go-to organisation for abuse victims - said that rape culture simply doesn't exist. It was not a thing:
I imagine that they felt compelled to say this, despite being a probably feminist org, because they are forced to live in the real world and deal with real people to some degree. Feminists, who don't have these constraints, responded by attacking RAINN. I don't recall there coming a peep from RAINN on the issue after that.
All they have is bluster and shame. Logic is secondary to contempt when arguing with feminists. They won't listen to the former, but at least the latter will enrage them and entertain you.