"

Slpl1, Please!! The situation is NOT ""an exact parallel"" to the examples you've given, especially the first. In that example you're comparing a matter of hard science to a highly subjective jouranistic description. Basketballs to oranges. We don't have a choice as to what causes AIDS. We can't say, for example, that it is caused by a severe deficiency of Vitamin C because that would simply be false. But in the case of the men's rights movement there are all sorts of descriptions, ones used by ""scholars"" no less, that would not be false. We could say that the MRM is a countermovement to feminism, a reaction to feminism, a response to feminism, a rebellion against feminism, etc. And, by the way, were we addressing the subject of AIDS, we also wouldn't say ""It is considered to be a caused by the HIV virus"" would we? Rather, we would say that ""AIDS is caused by the HIV virus"" or, to more explicitly bring in outside authority, ""AIDS has been determined to be caused by the HIV virus."" That's because ""is considered to be"" also brings in a degree of subjectivity to the statement.

Your second example is closer to our situation and, to be honest, it isn't all that obviously unacceptable to me. However, in the case of Holocaust denial we are almost invariably dealing with clear-cut antisemitism and scholars and editors should call a spade a spade. In the case of the MRM, I think that both scholarly and popular literature will reflect that we are not dealing with the same degree of monolithic hatred. Moreover, unlike Holocaust denial, standard issue MRM causes don't reflect a flat-out denial of historical fact.

What I see in the present ""It is considered to be a backlash to the feminist movement"" wording, are editors taking the most negative description of the movement that they could ""get away with""  (saving the even less acceptable ""misogynist"" for a segment of the movement later in the lead) and then framing it in the least subjective manner that they could ""get away with"": ""It is considered to be"". I don't particularly like ""backlash"" in lead, but at least in should be framed in the more NPOV ""many scholars and other observers have described it as a backlash . . . ""   "