Sexism in the Beijinger

We would like to express our concern with The Beijinger. The Beijinger’s December issue highlights “Beijingers to Watch in 2016.” The print and online versions of the Letter from the Editor, Steven Schwankert, created controversy with the statement:

“We’re disappointed by how few women seem to be making their mark. Regardless, they’re people with whom we’re happy to share a city.”

We have several problems with this feature and the Letter from the Editor. Rather than seeking out and reporting the stories of women to watch in Beijing, The Beijinger chose to feature just one woman alongside five men. Their list is not based on any objective standards nor a set of clearly-defined criteria. Instead, it appears to be a reflection of who The Beijinger’s staff believes to be important or influential. Thus, the list’s underrepresentation of women is left to speak for itself.

Yet, their “disappointment” in the lack of women featured intentionally precludes The Beijinger from assuming responsibility here, and shifts blame onto women for not making enough of an impact while also trying to paint The Beijinger as sympathetic to gender equality. Furthermore, the comment that “[women are] people with whom we’re happy to share a city” reflects a condescending attitude and reinforces patriarchal stances toward women, suggesting that it is a man’s role to share their city with women, even when women have failed to meet the magazine’s arbitrary criteria for being “movers and shakers.”  Unsurprisingly, the letter spurred backlash on the The Beijinger‘s website and Instagram account, with readers highlighting its apparent misogyny and expressing frustration that only one woman was featured.

Beijinger staff, including Schwankert, have briefly responded to the backlash only via comments on The Beijinger website, all of which fail to address any of the issues we, as well as other readers, have brought up. Schwankert’s primary argument appears to be that since the magazine has featured many women in past issues and featured a woman on the current cover, they are absolved of anything sexist or objectionable. This point is redundant, as the Beijinger should be publishing articles about half of Beijing’s population.

Schwankert later commented, “I stand by my original statement and I stand by our reporting on women and women’s issues”. An anonymous Beijinger admin addressed Schwankert’s comments as “a case of an awkward and unintentional wording, and probably the result of being penned at the last minute on a late night deadline.” While we understand that people can make mistakes, there has been no response directly from Schwankert to back this up, show any remorse, or even acknowledge the gaffe. In addition, further comments addressing readers’ concerns have been met with insults, condescension, and an overall lack of professionalism (examples here and here).

The Beijinger has not adequately responded to the criticism it has received thus far, nor apologised for the comments made. All of our concerns could have been rectified by an apology, an admission of a mistake made, or even by a simple edit of the original text in question. However, as the online responses show, The Beijinger has instead tried to deflect the problem at hand by attempting to first draw our attention to previous articles featuring women that ostensibly demonstrate their feminism, while also dismissing readers’ claims that there is bigotry and misogyny at hand. The only conclusion we can draw from this episode is that their staff does not take its readers’ comments, or sexism, seriously.

Sincerely,

Natalia Cote-Muñoz

Emily Feng

Kate Robinson

Rebecca Victor