Please help me to not hate men

I love my son and my partner and many other men, as individuals. But as a collective class? Nope.

Nobody is saying you should love all men.

To actively hate all men however is ott.

Women as a class are oppressed by men, as a class. It's not unreasonable to hate and fear your oppressors.

I love my son and my partner and many other men, as individuals. But as a collective class? Nope.

The OP did explain that she meant all other men

I know but it still doesn't follow through. Others don't know her family so is she ok with others hating 'her' men.

The OP did explain that she meant all other men.

However, if she has five men that she loves dearly, I don't really understand why she does not assume most men are more like them than the nasty stereotype which only, in reality, applies to a small proportion of men.

I have a wonderful dad and husband. I have sons, and I love them all to pieces. But I do believe that I am starting to hate men.

That statement is contradictory.

So if you hate men that surely you hate your DH and your DS. After all, they are men.

www.independent.co.uk/life-style/love-sex/taboo-tolerance/female-sexual-abuse-the-untold-story-of-societys-last-taboo-1767688.html

Cannot find the original source but here is a reference to the incident within an Independent article. Link to follow...

"Understandably, this is a sensitive and highly emotive subject, the fallout from which Michele Elliott of Kidscape has witnessed at first hand. In 1992, she held a conference in London while compiling her book on the subject of female sexual abuse. She recalls how 30 women turned up to disrupt her address: "They stood up and started yelling about how terrible it was that I was detracting from the fact that male power was to blame. It is very disappointing when you encounter such extreme and closed-minded reactions. I was simply responding to what victims had told me."

But would you counsel particular suspicion of young Muslim men on planes as they're likely to be more of a threat than Western ones?
It's so much bollocks. You're more likely to die from a bee sting than a terror attack. But 1 in 4 women have been raped. 1 in 20 men admits to being a rapist.
So to me- fear of Muslims blowing up your plane is an irrational overreaction to the risk inflated by the press/media.
Fear that a man might rape you - not an overreaction given it happens to many women.
This kind of post equating these scenarios is gaslighting

I'm not 'avoiding current reality'. The majority of violent and sexual crime undoubtedly is committed by men. I absolutely believe women shouldn't submit to being controlled by men or be subject to male violence. I've no idea how you extrapolated what you think my position is from what I said.

Maybe 'tribalism' wasn't the correct term. I can't quite think how else to put it at the moment and real life calls ... I'll ponder, obviously I must have been unclear.

But would you counsel particular suspicion of young Muslim men on planes as they're likely to be more of a threat than Western ones?

I'm not sure I'd guarantee that Muslim men are more of a threat than other men in any context. Personally, I think that's part of the distraction from male violence, pretending there are subsets of men more likely to be violent in certain situations.

The problem arises when one attempts to translate the general to the particular.
Haven't seen anyone doing that on this thread so maybe we shouldn't be discussing it. It derails the thread.

I have been struggling with similar sentiments recently OP. For me I think it's because my feminist awakening has only been over the past couple of years, so I have been questioning lots of things.

I have lots of nice men in my life and in my past, but when you hear of high-profile cases such as Adam Johnson or Ched Evans and there's massive backlash against the women involved you realise there's lot of sexist, misogynist men out there and then you begin to doubt the nice men in your life and what they really think under the surface. That's how it is for me anyway, I think.

Certainly.. give me a minute.

A few years ago a conference on female paedophilia was disrupted by a group of 'feminists' outraged that the focus was not squarely on male perpetrators
Have you got a link because it seems unlikely that happened and I can't find anything similar? Or even the name of the conference.

I see your point Devi. The problem arises when one attempts to translate the general to the particular.

" tribalistic"

What does this adjective mean to you?

Your avoidance of the current reality translates into discouraging women from defending themselves when men violently attack and try to control them.

It's a response to rape that says, "If rape is inevitable, lie back and think of what a better person you are than your rapist."

But a tribalistic us v them response is unlikely to have a good outcome.

So pretend that violence is a thing that some people with no distinctive features in common do and who can imagine why? It's just an entirely random, pattern free event?

That's a good point Dusty. But would you counsel particular suspicion of young Muslim men on planes as they're likely to be more of a threat than Western ones?

I do agree overall, but would just advise against looking at the world through one lens. Looking at the world through a gendered lens in order to discern structures and cultures of power is perfectly valid just so long as it's the only one you use when looking at every particular situation. That's the best way I can put it.

A few years ago a conference on female paedophilia was disrupted by a group of 'feminists' outraged that the focus was not squarely on male perpetrators. That's the kind of thing that results from such a narrow perspective that anything that doesn't conform to it is rejected. Men can be said to oppress women on a very general level, but in particular situations in everyday life that is not necessarily the case.

What's much worse is ignoring when one group has dominated, raped, humiliated, exploited, forced births on, and sexualized the suffering of another group globally and for centuries.

I wouldn't for one moment suggest we should. But a tribalistic us v them response is unlikely to have a good outcome.

without making judgments about men as a class
Class analysis is about data, not judgment.
Men are more violent than women.
Men are taller than women.
More men have higher paid jobs than women.
Globally, more men are educated than women.
These statements are supported by data not judgment.
I don't think you can have feminism without class analysis, because patterns only emerge when things are studied at a class level.
Individually, some women are taller than the average man and some men are shorter than the average woman. Doesn't alter the fact that men as a class are taller than women as a class.

Interesting that you mention demonisation of Muslims. As with all other forms of violence and coercion, it's Muslim men who commit the violence associated with Islamic terrorism. Of course, the fact that it's men is widely overlooked but make no mistake, if there is violence associated with any community or group, it's men in that group. We don't say that though because we're so inured to male violence. The prejudice this allows victimises the women and it's completely overlooked.

I'm just arguing for a less ideological and more nuanced approach to a very complex array of problems.

No concessions should be made to male violence, but it is not possible to fight hate with more hate. That's a cliché but it's true. There are serious tensions between the Muslim community and other demographics at the moment, but the answer to that is not to demonise Muslims.

I think we can object to those who commit and support violence against women and be wary of men who we know nothing about without making judgments about men as a class.

That is all very different from hating men as a class. I believe it counter-effective for feminism to engage in that kind of homogenising class politics
I've yet to encounter a feminist who hates all men as a class. Sure, they are probably out there but so are MGTOW and red pillers, neo nazis and various groups with views most people would think are unreasonable.
It's a shame when posters come on here with the "feminists hate ALL MEN" strawman and proceed to throw the baby out with the bathwater.
OP seems to hate more what (some) men do than all men.

I don't put this into practice in my own life by any means but perhaps if more women hated more men and acted accordingly a lot of problematic behaviours might start to disappear.
When women are raped or assaulted they are invited to trust the criminal justice system to deal with it and just get fucked over a second time. If violence was met with instant violence the bastard might think twice next time.

"Because if you keep telling men that they're all potential rapists to be regarded with suspicion, then that is what they'll come to believe."

This is shite. Women have given and continue to give boys and men an uncountable amount of benefit of the doubt that they can be non-predatory friends and lovers.

Men have always rewarded our magnanimity with enslavement, debasement, and destruction.

It's a stupid move to try and blame women for men's violence because we didn't stroke your egos well enough to coax the will to rape and destroy from you.