Misandry

[Metamorph]

Has anyone else here encountered at least one too many misandrists? Misandry makes me sick (and so does misogyny, but that gets talked about a lot more.) MRAs and cringy and should be shamed, but that's not what I'd like to talk about. I'm talking about what seems to be an entire "female culture" that thinks you should throw rocks at sensitive little boys who might not even know what being a boy or girl means, who think that, pardon my French, boys' shit stinks while theirs doesn't (I have literally heard this complaint and it was ridiculous,) who don't like it when people listen to music by male artists when there are female artists and ditto for painters, sculptors, novelists, poets, etc. and who also go off and hate tomboys, butch lesbians, and even girls cutting their nails short for being supposed traitors to their sex. Most of these people are either housewives who think their husbands are their slaves, or self-hating men who marry them, and they watch a ton of dumb talk shows and exactly what you'd expect. I've met at least one gay femme like this too though, and I'd imagine some lipstick lesbians but not generally butches are like this. Yes, misogyny is completely on-topic and I don't care if this thread becomes a misogyny thread for a while, but it's definitely not a case of men just oppressing women and then getting what they deserve from bored housewives as recompense. Discuss.

[ouronis]

I mean, of course. But also, no.

[Metamorph]

I mean, of course. But also, no.

That is nowhere near as thorough as my post. I guess MRAs and radical feminists are ruining discussions on sexism for everyone by tainting the words misandry and misogyny.

[Tonatiuh]

There are plentiful of garbage people in the world.

[perpetuus]

We're conditioned to be pretty oblivious to misandry. I'm not sure if it's biological or cultural conditioning; perhaps a bit of both? I imagine our survival as a species probably depended on devaluing men to some degree in the past, and modern day forms of misandry are probably a holdover from that mode of thinking.

The feminists might be right that there's plenty of misogyny coded into our thinking, our culture, etc, but there's definitely a lot of misandry as well, it just tends to be overlooked, unchecked, or tolerated a bit more, although I think that's slowly changing.

[ashlesha]

I used to distrust and generalize about men in conjunction with radical feminist beliefs.
I don't see myself returning to that, but I find it kinda understandable with my Personal Experience, and statistics about violence, and it seems like a relatively innocent vice - at most, an obnoxious personality quirk - all things considered. My experience with misandry is different. They were mostly women who didn't strongly identify with gender and hated porn and macho shit.

I will still react different with my body language and eye contact when I'm approached by a man versus a woman at the bus stop so maybe that makes me stil a misandrist instead of a normal person, or maybe it's just the fact that I'm willing to acknowledge it.

[perpetuus]

I used to distrust and generalize about men in conjunction with radical feminist beliefs.

I don't see myself returning to that, but I find it kinda understandable with my Personal Experience, and statistics about violence, and it seems like a relatively innocent vice - at most, an obnoxious personality quirk - all things considered. My experience with misandry is different. They were mostly women who didn't strongly identify with gender and hated porn and macho shit.

I will still react different with my body language and eye contact when I'm approached by a man versus a woman at the bus stop so maybe that makes me stil a misandrist instead of a normal person, or maybe it's just the fact that I'm willing to acknowledge it.

I think that's really just common sense pragmatism to be a little more nervous around a strange man versus a strange woman. I wouldn't consider that misandry, just survival instincts. I get nervous on a dark city street if I see a male approaching from the opposite direction.

The misandry I was thinking of is more in how we think of and portray men as stereotypical oafs and dumbshits who need "women's intuition" to see the wrong in their ways, or in the common understanding many have that men are undiscerning fuckbois who will gladly stick it in any warm, moist hole.

[Singu]

The misandry I was thinking of is more in how we portray men as stereotypical oafs and dumbshits who need "women's intuition" to see the wrong in their ways, or in the common understanding many have that men are undiscerning fuckbois who will gladly stick it in any warm, moist hole.

Oh really, so that's what misandry was about. I thought it was just a ploy for the guys to turn around and say "See? Women rule over us, and we're actually the victims", while they exploit the living shit out of them.

[perpetuus]

Oh really, so that's what misandry was about. I thought

it was just a ploy for the guys to turn around and say "See? Women rule over us, and we're actually the victims", while they exploit the living shit out of them.

no, you're repeating a strawman used to dismiss people expressing legitimate concerns like

-dying earlier than women (on average)
-being far more likely to die in any war or violent conflict
-being more likely to be murdered if walking down a street in a bad neighborhood
-being legally expected to sign up for selective service and subject to prosecution when avoiding selective service enrollment, when the other sex is free to choose whether they want to serve
-being the last person allowed to board lifeboats
-being more likely to be assumed an aggressor and rapist after a night of drunken regret sex.
-being more likely to be assumed the instigator in relationships with mutual domestic violence; even sometimes being assumed by authorities to be the instigator when he is the one at the receiving end of domestic violence (you can thank the Duluth Model for this)
-having little or no say in deciding to keep or abort a child, not even being allowed to opt out with a "financial abortion" should the mother want to keep a child.
-comprising 93% of workplace fatalities
-being more likely to end up homeless
-receiving longer prison sentences for the same crimes (on average, and with no prior convictions); when on trial for cooperating with women in crime, being more likely to be assumed as and labeled the "ringleader" by prosecuting attorneys, even when evidence suggest equal complicity
-being more routinely fucked over in family courts (where divorce lawyers often encourage wives to falsely accuse husbands of assault and rape to win the court's sympathies and thus more or full child custody and child support/alimony)
-being more likely to be dismissed or laughed if a victim of rape, assault, or domestic violence
-receiving no special grants or loans when attempting to start new businesses
-being dismissed as patriarchal bigots anytime misandry, issues that affect both sexes at similar rates yet receive more attention for only one sex, or other concerns are brought up

[Singu]

no, you're repeating a strawman used to dismiss people expressing legitimate concerns like

You just trivialized it yourself by saying that misandry is about men being portrayed as "dumb oafs" in the media.

Also most of what you listed have little to do with misandry.

[ashlesha]

I take it for granted now that "the things that nobody ever talks about" will be a major focus of discussion here, like on Facebook

[Aeris]

A lot of people treat biological sex as indicating something about people, assumptions, prejudices, but this happens with almost any observable caracteristics ime. Yeah, men get shit for being males, and women get shit for being females. Blonds get shit for being blonds, androgyne people get shit for looking androgyne... it's never ending.

[Alonzo]

So many threads around here centered on false balances; it all reeks of unabated intellectual dishonesty. Just because one side (misogyny) [deservedly] gets more attention, does not mean that the opposing side (misandry) warrants the same scrutiny. This strikes me as petty, tit for tat diversion tactics. Misogyny has had a far greater objective-material-hardened impact (detrimentally so) on human society than anything misandry has wrought.

Furthermore, oftentimes misandry is a byproduct of misogyny. I'm so tired of all of this patriarchal "pissing in the wind." Don't get mad when socio-culturally pervasive/entrenched notions of male masculinity centered on dominance, hyper-aggression, and a lack of empathy (vs. weak, docile, subservient narratives centered around femininity) come back to bite you in the ass. Within every (unjust and inefficient) system, there are glaring flaws waiting to be exploited. I can't get too riled up when the historically victimized find ways to gain leverage and add more balance to the scales, so to speak. Is it somewhat unfair? Sure, but a lot of shit is unfair. Either change the system (socially, culturally, politically, economically) so that is is equitable for all, or don't complain when the tables turn.

Lastly, women are human beings, and so, obviously, among their number will always be those naturally predisposed or inclined to bigotry and prejudice. It's just that the overarching patriarchal system often prohibited them from directly voicing their biases. With greater equality and equity, they are finally getting the chance to voice what they really think/feel/believe. I'm not saying it's "right" necessarily, but if men are allowed to be prejudiced, then should't women be afforded that right as well, if "equal treatment" is the objective?

[perpetuus]

So many threads around here centered on false balances; it all reeks of unabated intellectual dishonesty. Just because one side (misogyny) [deservedly] gets more attention, does not mean that the opposing side (misandry) warrants the same scrutiny. This strikes me as petty, tit for tat diversion tactics. Misogyny has had a far greater objective-material-hardened impact (detrimentally so) on human society than anything misandry has wrought.

Furthermore, oftentimes misandry is a byproduct of misogyny. I'm so tired of all of this patriarchal "pissing in the wind." Don't get mad when socio-culturally pervasive/entrenched notions of male masculinity centered on dominance, hyper-aggression, and a lack of empathy (vs. weak, docile, subservient narratives centered around femininity) come back to bite you in the ass. Within every (unjust and inefficient) system, there are glaring flaws waiting to be exploited. I can't get too riled up when the historically victimized find ways to gain leverage and add more balance to the scales, so to speak. Is it somewhat unfair? Sure, but a lot of shit is unfair. Either change the system (socially, culturally, politically, economically) so that is is equitable for all, or don't complain when the tables turn.

Lastly, women are human beings, and so, obviously, among their number will always be those naturally predisposed or inclined to bigotry and prejudice. It's just that the overarching patriarchal system often prohibited them from directly voicing their biases. With greater equality and equity, they are finally getting the chance to voice what they really think/feel/believe. I'm not saying it's "right" necessarily, but if men are allowed to be prejudiced, then should't women be afforded that right as well, if "equal treatment" is the objective?

Is this satire?

[Alonzo]

Is this satire?

To the stupid and dishonest, perhaps.

[sbbds]

So many threads around here centered on false balances; it all reeks of unabated intellectual dishonesty. Just because one side (misogyny) [deservedly] gets more attention, does not mean that the opposing side (misandry) warrants the same scrutiny. This strikes me as petty, tit for tat diversion tactics. Misogyny has had a far greater objective-material-hardened impact (detrimentally so) on human society than anything misandry has wrought.

Furthermore, oftentimes misandry is a byproduct of misogyny. I'm so tired of all of this patriarchal "pissing in the wind." Don't get mad when socio-culturally pervasive/entrenched notions of male masculinity centered on dominance, hyper-aggression, and a lack of empathy (vs. weak, docile, subservient narratives centered around femininity) come back to bite you in the ass. Within every (unjust and inefficient) system, there are glaring flaws waiting to be exploited. I can't get too riled up when the historically victimized find ways to gain leverage and add more balance to the scales, so to speak. Is it somewhat unfair? Sure, but a lot of shit is unfair. Either change the system (socially, culturally, politically, economically) so that is is equitable for all, or don't complain when the tables turn.

Lastly, women are human beings, and so, obviously, among their number will always be those naturally predisposed or inclined to bigotry and prejudice. It's just that the overarching patriarchal system often prohibited them from directly voicing their biases. With greater equality and equity, they are finally getting the chance to voice what they really think/feel/believe. I'm not saying it's "right" necessarily, but if men are allowed to be prejudiced, then should't women be afforded that right as well, if "equal treatment" is the objective?

I mean if you know any men in your life who have been exploited and not afforded the emotional outlets and other support women in developed societies have for such exploitation, it would move you towards awareness that there is an issue there too, with the more fundamental issue being that humanity could use a little more empathy in general. Having more for one group does not take it away from another; it doesn’t work like that. How about that for a false balance? Rather, it adds to the habit of more compassion in general, benefitting everyone. You’re right that by weight misogyny deserves more attention though ... which is also why misandry getting some attention too won’t affect some kind of balance there.

[Alonzo]

I mean if you know any men in your life who have been exploited and not afforded the emotional outlets and other support women in developed societies have for such exploitation, it would move you towards awareness that there is an issue there too, with the more fundamental issue being that humanity could use a little more empathy in general. Having more for one group does not take it away from another; it doesn’t work like that. How about that for a false balance? Rather, it adds to the habit of more compassion in general, benefitting everyone. You’re right that by weight misogyny deserves more attention though ... which is also why misandry getting some attention too won’t affect some kind of balance there.

I'm inclined to agree with you, but I'm just highly skeptical that, especially around here, folks raise the issue of "missandry" from a place of having been on the end of intense bigotry and prejudice at the hands of women and/or that they are concerned citizens/advocates just trying to spread awareness about some open secret that demands a much needed spotlight. I don't believe this topic is broached from a place of good faith--it strikes me as whataboutism or bothsidesism, but I could be wrong, of course.

Having said that, I personally know of several instances where young guys were pressured into sex acts that they regretted but were shamed into doing because "real men always want it" or men who have been unfairly destroyed in divorce/custody proceedings that tend to favor women. I don't think any of that is good/right/fair/OK; but aggro feminists going around gang raping defenseless nerds is not a thing; that's just not a reality, but the reverse is far more likely. I have never ever in my life worried about possible sexual assault. But that's a potentiality that any prudent woman must be aware of. The average male doesn't get the cumulative psychological toll that type of shit takes. Lastly, the same men who blindly uphold, enforce and weaponize patriarchy (via the entrenchment of stereotypical gender roles, hyper-masculinity and aggression) against others usually fail to see that they also fall victim to these same stifling, problematic metrics. Until there is full gender equality, it seems fitting (cosmic justice) that there should be exploitable holes in the system that allow women to gain some leverage and men to be hoist with their own petard.

[Raver]

Overall, it is roughly equal between the genders give or take a few IMO. Objectively speaking, one of the genders are probably slightly better off. Also, men and women have distinct advantages and disadvantages that are very different, but in the 21st century it roughly cancels out.

Women are treated poorly in several middle eastern and African countries. Also, there are a substantial amount of sex slaves that are mostly women that are living terrible lives. Effort needs to be put to helping women in these awful situations rather than worrying about minor differences in 1st world western nations.

[perpetuus]

Overall, it is roughly equal between the genders give or take a few IMO. Objectively speaking, one of the genders are probably slightly better off. Also, men and women have distinct advantages and disadvantages that are very different, but in the 21st century it roughly cancels out.

Women are treated poorly in several middle eastern and African countries. Also, there are a substantial amount of sex slaves that are mostly women that are living terrible lives. Effort needs to be put to helping women in these awful situations rather than worrying about minor differences in 1st world western nations.

We're all in this together. There was always a trade-off. One sex tended to sacrifice themselves for the other and the children, and generally they were granted more authority in the public sphere, as they tended to be the predominant risk takers in the public sphere (it's only fair that authority and responsibility go hand in hand). The other sex tended to sacrifice autonomy in the public sphere, as a tradeoff for more protection and security. To pretend one benefitted unequally at the expense of the other involves a willful ignorance of history and biology, as well as an overly simplistic and one-sided narrative, as both sexes faced and still do face their own unique hurdles, not to mention all of the tiny little micro hurdles individuals face in their lives that gender-based ideologies like masculinism and intersectional feminism often fail to consider. It wasn't an ideal situation for either sex, but it was the best we could do with the societal hardware we were running, which simply couldn't handle more advanced software at the time.

We're at a point where it's very balanced in the first world, yet people have been so inundated with a pseudo-religious narrative that pits one gender against the other and uses gender-specific language to articulate all of the past and current evils of the world. So when people are that brainwashed by that narrative, it's very easy to dismiss any opposing viewpoint as "patriarchal pissing in the wind" or bigotry or whatever we're calling it these days.

[Raver]

We're all in this together. There was always a trade-off. One sex tended to sacrifice themselves for the other and the children, and generally they were granted more authority in the public sphere, as they tended to be the predominant risk takers in the public sphere (it's only fair that authority and responsibility go hand in hand). The other sex tended to sacrifice autonomy in the public sphere, as a tradeoff for more protection and security. To pretend one benefitted unequally at the expense of the other involves a willful ignorance of history and biology, as well as an overly simplistic and one-sided narrative, as both sexes faced and still do face their own unique hurdles, not to mention all of the tiny little micro hurdles individuals face in their lives that gender-based ideologies like masculinism and intersectional feminism often fail to consider. It wasn't an ideal situation for either sex, but it was the best we could do with the societal hardware we were running, which simply couldn't handle more advanced software at the time.

We're at a point where it's very balanced in the first world, yet people have been so inundated with a pseudo-religious narrative that pits one gender against the other and uses gender-specific language to articulate all of the past and current evils of the world. So when people are that brainwashed by that narrative, it's very easy to dismiss any opposing viewpoint as "patriarchal pissing in the wind" or bigotry or whatever we're calling it these days.

The social narrative pushed on us by mass media via corporations and the education system via the government is merely a psy op that has successfully brainwashed the majority of the population. False dichotomies are artificially created to get the proles (~95% of the population) divided and fighting with each other.

Religion (Christians vs. Muslims), Gender (Patriarchy/Males vs. Females), Class (Middle Class vs. Poor), Sexual Orientation (Cisgender/Straight vs. LGBTQ), Race (Majority whites vs. Minorities) Politics (Left vs. Right). While the real enemy of everyone mentioned above (the top ~0.1% or whatever it is) successfully carry out their plans and everyone else fights with each other.

[Singu]

Well actually, after reading things like Adam's posts, I'd have to say that from women's point of view, men really are clueless dumb oafs that constantly misread their intentions.

For better or worse, "women's intuition" are a one notch above men's, and it is generally true that women tend to be more emotionally mature than men. So from women's POV, yes, men really do seem like dumb oafs.

However I don't want to say that this means that men are victims or women are manipulating men.

[Hot Scalding Gayser]

Well yeah I'm sure it exists, just like heterophobia probably exists but the thing is with discrimination against somebody it is more or less based on institutional abuse of a group of people not 'well, the opposing group can be hateful assholes too!' Ya know? Even if many times women (and gay men) were cruel bitches to poor widdle str8 male feelings (and I admit it, I can be an asshole sometimes OK? I'm sorry if I hurt anybody.) - we still clearly didn't and don't have the institutional/governmental power that white str8 men do. I'm speaking generally on a wider scale, of course there is still going to be women in high places of power and men in lower class blue collar jobs of course. But throughout history there is still no women president, women still got the right to vote way later, had less basic rights and economical opportunities... and then black people were once assholeishly thought of their votes only counting as 33% as good and things like that. All of this is institutional abuse and discrimination.

I don't think PC programs that point this out though are all that helpful either, because its like corny and kind of heartless too in a way. But that's another topic...

Cruel hateful women don't do anything to help the cause of course - but why should they make all women look bad. We are individuals.

Now I think power itself corrupts anybody, so I don't think things like if we had a gay or female president, the world would somehow be some nice utopia or anything lol but it does expose the true nature of discrimination when things like this happen. You could perhaps argue there is some sort of biological or nature reason why we want some bossy asshole Te valuing (usually white) str8 man to tell us what to do and how to behave and what to think in life or whatever but yeah.. I hope you get my point.

[Metamorph]

Well yeah I'm sure it exists, just like heterophobia probably exists but the thing is with discrimination against somebody it is more or less based on institutional abuse of a group of people not 'well, the opposing group can be hateful assholes too!' Ya know? Even if many times women (and gay men) were cruel bitches to poor widdle str8 male feelings (and I admit it, I can be an asshole sometimes OK? I'm sorry if I hurt anybody.) - we still clearly didn't and don't have the institutional/governmental power that white str8 men do. I'm speaking generally on a wider scale, of course there is still going to be women in high places of power and men in lower class blue collar jobs of course. But throughout history there is still no women president, women still got the right to vote way later, had less basic rights and economical opportunities... and then black people were once assholeishly thought of their votes only counting as 33% as good and things like that. All of this is institutional abuse and discrimination.

I don't think PC programs that point this out though are all that helpful either, because its like corny and kind of heartless too in a way. But that's another topic...

Cruel hateful women don't do anything to help the cause of course - but why should they make all women look bad. We are individuals.

Now I think power itself corrupts anybody, so I don't think things like if we had a gay or female president, the world would somehow be some nice utopia or anything lol but it does expose the true nature of discrimination when things like this happen. You could perhaps argue there is some sort of biological or nature reason why we want some bossy asshole Te valuing (usually white) str8 man to tell us what to do and how to behave and what to think in life or whatever but yeah.. I hope you get my point.

BandD, that's like saying we're not going to prosecute murders because they're not genocides and exactly what I'm trying to critique. Even if there was just one murder in the world, it should be prosecuted, but as it happens there is a rather large number of murders.

[Singu]

Now I think power itself corrupts anybody, so I don't think things like if we had a gay or female president, the world would somehow be some nice utopia or anything lol but it does expose the true nature of discrimination when things like this happen. You could perhaps argue there is some sort of biological or nature reason why we want some bossy asshole Te valuing (usually white) str8 man to tell us what to do and how to behave and what to think in life or whatever but yeah.. I hope you get my point.

I think men tend toward more vertical, hierarchical relations, while women tend toward more horizontal, "egalitarian" relations. Of course there are individual differences and this doesn't necessarily have to do with males or females, but it might have something to do with testosterone and oxytocin.

But both have their pros and cons. Pros are hierarchical structures create "chains of command" that get things done and create personal responsibility at the top, while horizontal structures create more peaceful cooperation. Cons are hierarchical structure creates corruption, arbitrariness and abuse of power, while horizontal structures create situations where everybody is equally responsible, and hence nobody is responsible for anything and issues get muddled and swept under the rug.

The negative effects of hierarchical structure is artificially mitigated by things like the law and democracy (criticisms of authority). I'm not really sure how the negative effects of horizontal structures can be mitigated. Maybe someone will find a way that can combine both that can get the best of both worlds.

[sbbds]

Hating men is not productive towards feminist/equal-rights/liberal goals anyway

[gone]

Yes, usually from women who've had bad relationships with men and who blame everyone else but themselves for it, failing to realise that it's their own responsibility who they choose to enter a relationship with.

[sbbds]

@Alonzo Two very important men in my life were heavily sexually assaulted when they were young and powerless to fight back.

The first was assaulted by a female family member. He ended up becoming an MRA. Very damaged to this day.

The second was assaulted by a male stranger. He became a women’s rights activist and is doing comparatively well, but has still told only maybe one or two people after several decades of struggling and distorted relationships.

So it does happen and the consequences are not great. And the more the negativity comes from women, the more it has a boomerang effect on women’s rights. IME.

[para]

''The thing that hath been, it is that which shall be; and that which is done is that which shall be done: and there is no new thing under the sun.''

[Metamorph]

Not pressuring men to have sex is a good idea even if insane men are going to be insane anyways.

[ooo]

objectively, women have been tamed/shamed/attacked for millennia because of their "weakness"; it is cruel and not fair, especially if to do so are the "stronger" men. but in a proper balance of things it's the "stronger" party that gets what they can handle better. if you want power, brace yourself. and women have a millennial history of segregation to draw upon.. "because weakness is a great thing, and strength is nothing".

[gone]

Really appreciate the content! This is getting me through a rough patch in my life, as my recent divorce has left me without half of my assets, including my entire home and all three of my children!

[ooo]

yeah, but it's funny to see how the ones who want respect for the virgin guys are not granting the same basic respect for the girls who are sexually active... if you want double standards, deal with the consequences.

[gone]

When discussing these sorts of things it's so childish when people go "oh but women have it so much worse!!!!111". Completely missing the point. Yeah, and there are people who have it so much worse than women in the West, but that's not what we're fuckin talking about is it. It's not a competition in who's the biggest victim, acknowleding unique injustices towards one gender doesn't mean that you somehow relativise the unique injustices towards the other.

[ooo]

When discussing these sorts of things it's so childish when people go "oh but women have it so much worse!!!!111". Completely missing the point. Yeah, and there are people who have it so much worse than women in the West, but that's not what we're fuckin talking about is it. It's not a competition in who's the biggest victim, acknowleding unique injustices towards one gender doesn't mean that you somehow relativise the unique injustices towards the other.

well can you describe some examples of actually occurring misandy-hate for men in virtue of their gender-?

chances are that you'll find the most hate for men belongs to the feminist extremists (and I think, rightly so, since they target their oppressors). so you see how the 2 things go hand in hand. yes, misandry is the other side of misoginy.

the point is... is it really the case misandry is a thing outside of some "SJW" movement? I really doubt it... it looks more like a charged answer to the women's sentiment of oppression and injustice, that drew light on to them/their conditions... and some men just wanted to have that light for themselves.

[gone]

well can you describe some examples of actually occurring misandy-hate for men in virtue of their gender-?

Whether it's actual misandry or not is another question, and I don't want to get mixed up in semantics - let's just say that there are cases in society in which men are treated differently/have different things happen to them (for the negative) by virtue of their own gender. @soulless ginger mutant listed a good amount of examples in this post: https://www.the16types.info/vbulletin/showthread.php/58835-Misandry?p=1346653&viewfull=1#post1346653

Again, I'm NOT trying to reduce the fact that women face injustices that should be worked against.

chances are that you'll find the most hate for men belongs to the feminist extremists (and I think, rightly so, since they target their oppressors). so you see how the 2 things go hand in hand. yes, misandry is the other side of misoginy.

Well, if you think hatred is a good method then maybe we should just end the conversation here. No matter, this hypothesis of yours that misandry is the other side of misogyny is definitely interesting, although I'd also say that it's potentially a bit simple. Do you really mean to say that literally all hate/injustice towards men in particular - throughout history as well as now - exists because of men's hate/injustice towards women? Like some sort of original sin? Because ultimately, that sounds to me like what you're saying.

the point is... is it really the case misandry is a thing outside of some "SJW" movement? I really doubt it... it looks more like a charged answer to the women's sentiment of oppression and injustice, that drew light on to them/their conditions... and some men just wanted to have that light for themselves.

What other people do has nothing to do with me or the views I'm expressing here.

[ooo]

@atlascog

I've read ginger's list, I don't think it had any particular case of misandry= hate for men in virtue of being men. some points looked exaggerated, as the loans mostly for women (personal case, it didn't happen to me, because I'm a woman and the man I consulted to receive a loan didn't see me fit to run a particular activity), or receiving longer sentences for the same crimes (law is a complex system, and much goes to the attitude you display in the phase of judgement, so yeah, men are disadvantaged in this, as they can show less guilt and more pride, which doesn't help... but hate?)

the point about misoginy--> misandry is that you can't get men to hate other men, or it would be self hate. who hates women? the men who think women are their personal property and can use them as they wish. who hates men? only women can...

but women's nature is not as aggressive as men's one, in general. if an act of hate happens to a man, it's more probably the result of an individual trigger, rather than a battle against men-kind altogether.

[gone]

I've read ginger's list, I don't think it had any particular case of misandry= hate for men in virtue of being men. some points looked exaggerated, as the loans mostly for women (personal case, it didn't happen to me, because I'm a woman and the man I consulted to receive a loan didn't see me fit to run a particular activity), or receiving longer sentences for the same crimes (law is a complex system, and much goes to the attitude you display in the phase of judgement, so yeah, men are disadvantaged in this, as they can show less guilt and more pride, which doesn't help... but hate?)

They are negative differences based on the virtue of gender though, just like I said. I told you I didn't want to get involved in semantics, as it's another discussion whether actual misandry/misogyny is the root cause of gender inequality. My main point is this: it's flat-out wrong to say that there aren't gender differences that negatively affect men in particular. But you can continue relativising those differences how much you want, it doesn't really change my point.

the point about misoginy--> misandry is that you can't get men to hate other men, or it would be self hate. who hates women? the men who think women are their personal property and can use them as they wish. who hates men? only women can...

Sorry, but I don't really get what you're trying to say. Men can't hate other men... what?

but women's nature is not as aggressive as men's one, in general. if an act of hate happens to a man, it's more probably the result of an individual trigger, rather than a battle against men-kind altogether.

Interesting, it looks like you have an essentialist view on gender. Are you a 'difference feminist' by any chance? And what are you basing all this on by the way?

[Metamorph]

you can't get men to hate other men, or it would be self hate. who hates women? the men who think women are their personal property and can use them as they wish. who hates men? only women can...

Sometimes it seems like most men hate other men depending on where you are and just want women as an escape from themselves.

[ooo]

yup, you liked several posts directed at shaming my sexual conduct.

[Grendel]

yup, you liked several posts directed at shaming my sexual conduct.

Ahhhh, alright. I didn't have much of a comment on that matter but saw a lot of burns there I thought sounded too savage to pass up. But I guess that counts as "having" an opinion if that's the end effect.

I guess a conduit like that demands one be more discerning because there's a lot less information going across. Sorry about that.