Was Greer Right When She Said Men Hate Women?

I do wonder what it was like before the advent of Christianity? Eve certainly came under a lot slack in the bible...which is basically an instrument of female control by men. Since then it's been a hoot and a half for women....beheadings, being property of...............men, witchcraft accusations, the suffragettes and the real biggy in the 60's...contraception!! Which meant oh my god women could shag away, without being unencumbered by pregnancy. I've actually heard men say the worst atrocity in history was to give women the vote.....but no they love us really.........😉

Also missy I’m talking about the current state of trials - which is so tightly regulated you wouldn’t believe.

But those regulations were drawn up only in response to some truly shocking human rights abuses - the Nazi medical experiments, tunguskee experiments, portion down etc etc. Pharma has t regulated itself out of altruism, it’s fone so because it got caught doing some really awful stuff

Women have historically been treated very badly indeed by medicine. Look at the Magdalen laundries - spurious excuses of ‘looseness’ or ‘nerves’ to lock women away.

There are still massive issues with sexism. Why is there no decent contraception that’s not painful to have I stalled or hormally distributive? Trials on men’s contraceptives were halted because the side effects were deemed unacceptable- even though they were exactly the same side effects women put up with in their billions

I think that medicine is still deeply misogynistic. I had hg in my first pregnancy (and have it now in my second) and I was truly shocked at the level of suffering g I was expected to endure. My husband must have said ‘men wouldn’t put up with this’ about a thousand times. And he’s right. My first pregnancy has left me far more a radical feminist because I’ve seen first hand how even a stoic, non complaining, scientifically aware woman can be treated like a hysterical vessel.

It’s not ok. Dismissal, belittling, hatred of women. It runs deep

Science is science- its objective and peer reviewed, very little room for bias and gender influence.

Men hate women- is too simplistic. If it were broken down into specific categories which could be reviewed with actual evidence and all variables, factors considered- then you could look at it objectively. I refuse to form an opinion on if men hate women, because it's too wide and I cannot look at it objectively.

Susan- a poster has just said, who works in trials this isn't true, except where it is necessary to reduce the variables!

I know, I know. What I am saying is that science in general has been developed by men- it's only in the past 50 years or so that women have had any input at all. Methods have been developed with a certain type of person in mind. If women had developed science, we may well have different ways of carrying out trials.

I am not saying that scientists are deliberately excluding women etc- this is something more subtle and most people just unquestioningly accept that it's the right way to do things.

The question of why men hate women is the real one.
Why? Do they fear us? Do they see emasculation in us? Are we a threat to their core being? Or is it ‘just’ that humans seem to have a desire to form hierarchies, and suppressing the physically weaker half allows all men, not just the big strong ones, to feel powerful? I suspect the latter

Well how about the historical perspective then Missy, as highlighted above? Have you read the online abuse that famous women get, Dianne Abbot, Rebecca Adlington, Rose McGowan currently......I suggest you have a look and then ask if men hate women. You've been given vast amounts of evidence, you still don't see it?

But if a group of people poses no threat to you, why rape, murder and assault them?

Good question. If there’s no concrete threat then at some level there must be fear. People hate what they fear.

Susan- a poster has just said, who works in trials this isn't true, except where it is necessary to reduce the variables!

But if a group of people poses no threat to you, why rape, murder and assault them?

Susan it's not a personal thing against women, their hormones are more varied during menstrual cycle and science likes to keep variables to a minimum so they can measure the factor theyre supposed to be. It's not saying women aren't normal.

It is. If men had hormonal fluctuations and women did not, the trials would specifically be based on how the drug interacted with those fluctuations, because those fluctuations would be deemed to be the norm.

They do, but they also disproportionately attack, rape and murder a group of people who are of very little physical threat to them.

Rape is not disproportionate because the offence requires a penis- 100% rape perps are male

It's not disproportionately against females, more males are killed by males- 68percent. The stats show it's not disproportionately female therefore in a 50-50 population of males and females.

You are just wrong, Missymoo, and you just keep doubling down in spite of people sharing the facts with you.

And the poster that said white males- why white males out of interest?

Do you really have to ask that?

That's why I'm sceptical when people say men hate women- it's important to look what this is based on.

They do, but they also disproportionately attack, rape and murder a group of people who are of very little physical threat to them. They fight each other, but this is a symptom of a tendency towards violence, not a wider-scale oppression.

How do you explain the extreme repression of women throughout history? How can we be living in a world where civilisation has existed for thousands of years, yet it's only 100 years ago that some women were given the right to vote and 90 years since all women got it? Does that not say something to you?

I think there are some men who really do actively hate women and it passes down thru their family. I had an ex who was incredibly violent and his dad had been violent to his mother and his grandfather to his gran etc etc Seem to gain self esteem from exterting control and fear over women. Seems to be ingrained in them that their masculinity is dependant on how under the thumb they can keep the women around them.

Then there are men who dont actively hate women but also live in a society where women are perpetually objectified and demeaned so that is subconsciously part of them.

I do think men have to actively be aware of their attitude to women and question it regularly if they want to avoid 'hating' them.

It depends what's on trial and how it would affect the research

But that's the whole issue though. The assumption is that the 'norm' is someone without hormonal fluctuations. Women are 'other'- their biology makes them unfit for scientific trial

Susan it's not a personal thing against women, their hormones are more varied during menstrual cycle and science likes to keep variables to a minimum so they can measure the factor theyre supposed to be. It's not saying women aren't normal.

I had a relationship with a man who’s mother hit him often for something he couldn’t control. He must of hated her because of the way he couldn’t maintain a relationship without anger issues.

And the poster that said white males- why white males out of interest?

I do actually work in clinical trials.

Fitting g the population of the trial to the population that it’s intended to treat is actually something they do these days - however it’s still not perfect by any means. The aim is to get roughly a half half sex ratio in an age and ethnic spread that matches the population the drug will be used in.

Women are used. The differences between ethnicities is tricky because some parameters do differ (the main one is creatinine clearance) which differs in black African-origin populations. However ‘race’ is genetically quite meaningless as there are more genetic differences within populations than between them. Also trials have limited budgets so it’s impossible to ever account for every single combination of age sex and ethnicity. Running trials in certain countries is a nightmare (India, China, for example due to epidemic levels of corruption)

In short things are getting better. Still not perfect but I don’t think it’s accurate to say that women are not represented in trials. Obviously v v strict rules about contraception for both partners.

Actually the populations most failed by trials are children and pregnant women.

Is that because women's hormones change and cause physical changes like rise in temperature at certain times in cycle- therefore throwing in an unnecessary variable into scientific research?

But that's the whole issue though. The assumption is that the 'norm' is someone without hormonal fluctuations. Women are 'other'- their biology makes them unfit for scientific trials that prefer the constancy of the male body that does not change on a cyclical basis. Can you not see that this prioritises men? I can bet you any money in the world that if men had fluctuating hormones that this would be at the forefront of any scientific research and any drug would be specifically tested on how it interacted with those hormones.

Lettuce-
What's the answer to why men assault mainly other men, murder other men.... I've been through this and feel I'm repeating myself

Not ready-
All of it, the medical trial I suspect I'm right- females have variable hormones, males are more stable- therefore it's an unnecessary variable.