Lavender-Colored Discrimination

[DISCLAIMER]

I recently engaged in a discussion with someone about the effects of feminism, as both an ideology and movement. Anyone who remains familiar with my blog (the tens of you who’ve actually read a single post in its entirety) likely knows that I’m not a fan of feminism.

In common parlance, feminism is defined as a belief in and advocacy of the political, economic, and social equality of the sexes, expressed especially through organized activity on behalf of women’s rights and interests. Not many people I personally know would disagree with this aim.

However, colloquial use of a term and practical application of an ideology aren’t necessarily congruent. Although I could yammer on about the various aspects of feminism with which I disagree, I find it useful to provide specific examples of my critiques when challenging ideas.

For instance, the individual with whom I recently spoke was unaware of the contradiction about the aforementioned definition, as it concerns irrationality (not in accordance with both logic and reason). To demonstrate this logical inconsistency, first consider the following syllogism:

Form (modus ponens) –

If p, then q; p; therefore, q.

Example –

Premise 1: If feminism represents a belief in and advocacy of the political, economic, and social equality of the sexes, then both males and females will be uniformly represented.

Premise 2: Feminism represents a belief in and advocacy of the political, economic, and social equality of the sexes.

Conclusion: Therefore, both males and females will be uniformly represented.

The premises and conclusion of this syllogism follow logical form. As well, I argue that by strict doctrinal standards (not necessarily practical application) the syllogism is reasonable (justification in support of the proposed logical form).

Second, consider whether or not the practical application of the syllogism is represented by observed evidence. Addressing this ideal-world versus real-world distinction, psychologist Orion Taraban stated in an April 7, 2025 video on his YouTube channel PsycHacks:

It very much used to be a man’s world. The business world, in particular and work in general, used to be a male space. Not anymore. Women are in the workforce and they’re not going anywhere. Then, it used to be sports. No, no. Every broadcast now has female commentators or reporters or announcers.

Then, it used to be social clubs. No, those were discriminatory and have been legally dismantled. I mean, even the Boy Scouts doesn’t exist anymore, because it was too traumatic for girls to be excluded from that organization. However, this infiltration of unisex spaces has not been bilateral.

Women want men to surrender male spaces, but they want to retain their own. The Boy Scouts have been disbanded, but the Girl Scouts are alive and well, and they don’t intend to admit boys anytime soon. Indeed, these female spaces are proud, if not a little misguided, about their identities.

For instance, there is a blogpost on the Girl Scouts website entitled: In a World of Boys’ Clubs, Give Her One of Her Own. Like, I don’t know what world the Girl Scouts is looking at, but it’s not the world I see. There are no male spaces anymore.

Teraban’s proposition is similar to something I stated in a February 10, 2025 blogpost entitled The Huddle:

I wouldn’t be opposed to either: (1) segregating the military into male and female with no authority given to those over others who don’t compete at an equal standard or (2) set a high unitary standard for both males and females and allow equal opportunity to win or fail. This is rational.

If you’re logical and reasonable enough to consider these proposals, then perhaps you’ll also be open to re-segregating (or “separating,” if you prefer) the Boy Scouts of America and other traditionally all-male social institutions. Or, does advocacy huddle in only one direction?

Identifying the syllogism that underpins the standard upon which feminism is colloquially understood is one matter. However, observation of the practical application regarding feminism as an ideology and movement reveals its hypocritical effects.

In specific, feminism doesn’t represent equality (the quality or state of being equal—like for each member of a group, class, or society). Rather, it embodies discrimination (prejudiced or prejudicial outlook, action, or treatment, often categorically rather than individually).

Of course, the Boy Scouts versus Girl Scouts example doesn’t fully evoke the gravitas warranted in regard to discriminatory treatment between males and females. Therefore, allow me to provide a final example herein. Before doing so, some context is needed. According to one source:

As part of the Gaza war, the Israel Defense Force (IDF) has used artificial intelligence [AI] to rapidly and automatically perform much of the process of determining what to bomb. Israel has greatly expanded the bombing of the Gaza Strip, which in previous wars had been limited by the Israeli Air Force running out of targets.

These tools include the Gospel, an AI which automatically reviews surveillance data looking for buildings, equipment and people thought to belong to the enemy, and upon finding them, recommends bombing targets to a human analyst who may then decide whether to pass it along to the field. Another is Lavender, an “AI-powered database” which lists tens of thousands of Palestinian men linked by AI to Hamas or Palestinian Islamic Jihad, and which is also used for target recommendation.

Critics have argued the use of these AI tools puts civilians at risk, blurs accountability, and results in militarily disproportionate violence in violation of international humanitarian law.

As reported, Lavender specifically targets men—not women. However, women are purported to play some role in Hamas. Why then, in the vain of equality, aren’t female terrorists treated in the same manner as male terrorists? Regarding Lavender, a separate source states:

During the early stages of the war, the army gave sweeping approval for officers to adopt Lavender’s kill lists, with no requirement to thoroughly check why the machine made those choices or to examine the raw intelligence data on which they were based.

One source stated that human personnel often served only as a “rubber stamp” for the machine’s decisions, adding that, normally, they would personally devote only about “20 seconds” to each target before authorizing a bombing — just to make sure the Lavender-marked target is male.

This was despite knowing that the system makes what are regarded as “errors” in approximately 10 percent of cases, and is known to occasionally mark individuals who have merely a loose connection to militant groups, or no connection at all.

Make no mistake about my position herein. Identification of the hypocritical and discriminatory effect of feminism – whereby males, boys, and men are viewed as disposable in nature – has real-world consequences. Not only are humans behaving irrationally, AI acts this way as well.

Lavender-colored discrimination is but one proverbial drop in an ocean of unequal treatment between males and females. Where are feminists at on this matter? Oh, wait. Is this going to be another women-most-affected moment? (It is, isn’t it?) According to one source:

Women and children are the main victims in the Israel-Hamas war, with some 16,000 killed and an estimated two mothers losing their lives every hour since Hamas’ surprise attack on Israel, the United Nations agency promoting gender equality said Friday [1/19/2024].

Whenever discussion arises about the challenges faced by boys and men, one can almost set an accurate countdown timer to predict when an assertion about issues faced by girls and women being more impactful. Somehow, Lavender didn’t get the female-specific kill list memo.

In any event, I’m not advocating more destruction in Gaza. In fact, I abhor the treatment of Palestinian people (also known as Gazans) at the hands of both Hamas and Israel. Still, as long as the senseless killing (perhaps “murder” is a more fitting descriptor) takes place, I’ll continue advocating improved treatment of males. May the people of Gazan soon experience peace.

If you’re looking for a provider who tries to work to help understand how thinking impacts physical, mental, emotional, and behavioral elements of your life—helping you to sharpen your critical thinking skills, I invite you to reach out today by using the contact widget on my website.

As a psychotherapist, I’m pleased to try to help people with an assortment of issues ranging from anger (hostility, rage, and aggression) to relational issues, adjustment matters, trauma experience, justice involvement, attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder, anxiety and depression, and other mood or personality-related matters.

At Hollings Therapy, LLC, serving all of Texas, I aim to treat clients with dignity and respect while offering a multi-lensed approach to the practice of psychotherapy and life coaching. My mission includes: Prioritizing the cognitive and emotive needs of clients, an overall reduction in client suffering, and supporting sustainable growth for the clients I serve. Rather than simply trying to help you to feel better, I want to try to help you get better!

Deric Hollings, LPC, LCSW

Photo credit, property of Palestinian News & Information Agency, fair use

References:

Abraham, Y. (2024, April 3). ‘Lavender’: The AI machine directing Israel’s bombing spree in Gaza. +972 Magazine. Retrieved from https://www.972mag.com/lavender-ai-israeli-army-gaza/

Associated Press, The. (2024, January 20). Women and children are the main victims of the Israel-Hamas war, U.N. says. NPR. Retrieved from https://www.npr.org/2024/01/20/1225790904/women-and-children-are-the-main-victims-of-the-israel-hamas-war-un-says

Girl Scouts. (n.d.). In a world of boys’ clubs, give her one of her own. Girl Scouts of the United States of America. Retrieved from https://www.girlscouts.org/en/raising-girls/happy-and-healthy/happy/girls-only-single-gender-empowering-girls.html

Hollings, D. (2025, April 22). Bad ideas deserve to be mocked. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/bad-ideas-deserve-to-be-mocked

Hollings, D. (2022, November 18). Big T, little t. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/big-t-little-t

Hollings, D. (2022, March 15). Disclaimer. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/disclaimer

Hollings, D. (2024, April 2). Discrimination. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/discrimination

Hollings, D. (2023, September 8). Fair use. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/fair-use

Hollings, D. (2024, May 17). Feeling better vs. getting better. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/feeling-better-vs-getting-better-1

Hollings, D. (2023, February 9). Feminism. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/feminism

Hollings, D. (2023, October 12). Get better. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/get-better

Hollings, D. (n.d.). Hollings Therapy, LLC [Official website]. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/

Hollings, D. (2024, April 27). Ideal-world vs. real-world. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/ideal-world-vs-real-world

Hollings, D. (2025, March 4). Justification. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/justification

Hollings, D. (2023, September 19). Life coaching. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/life-coaching

Hollings, D. (2023, January 8). Logic and reason. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/logic-and-reason

Hollings, D. (2025, February 5). Logically inconsistent. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/logically-inconsistent

Hollings, D. (2025, March 16). Modus ponens. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/modus-ponens

Hollings, D. (2024, May 5). Psychotherapist. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/psychotherapist

Hollings, D. (2023, October 17). Syllogism. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/syllogism

Hollings, D. (2024, November 2). The disposable male. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/the-disposable-male

Hollings, D. (2025, February 10). The huddle. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/the-huddle

Hollings, D. (2025, February 28). To try is my goal. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/to-try-is-my-goal

Hollings, D. (2023, October 11). Women most affected. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/women-most-affected

Jad, I. (n.d.). Islamist women of Hamas: Between feminism and nationalism. OpenEdition Journals. Retrieved from https://journals.openedition.org/remmm/6971?file=1

PsycHacks [@psychacks]. (n.d.). PsycHacks [Official YouTube channel]. YouTube. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/@psychacks

PsycHacks. (2025, April 7). Who speaks for men?: the disappearance of male space [Video]. YouTube. Retrieved from https://youtu.be/Xfl4zaPU8IQ?si=U97e9ijuvV6Z07pZ

SAIS Review, The. (2024, April 16). The failings of Israeli and Palestinian leadership [Image]. Retrieved from https://saisreview.sais.jhu.edu/the-failings-of-israeli-and-palestinian-leadership/

Taraban, O. (n.d.). Orion Taraban, Psy.D. [Official website]. Retrieved from https://oriontarabanpsyd.com/

Wikipedia. (n.d.). AI-assisted targeting in the Gaza Strip. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AI-assisted_targeting_in_the_Gaza_Strip