To think not everything is ‘misogyny’

[Cuppasoupmonster]

… and that the word is massively overused on here?

I’m getting quite tired of it if I’m honest, it feels like every other conversation the ‘misogyny’ card is whipped out and anyone who disagrees has ‘internalised misogyny’ (um no I just have a different opinion).

It’s becoming the ‘BeKind’ of feminism. Overused to the point it’s getting meaningless and irritating, and just used to ‘win’ any kind of nuanced topic without any proper discussion.

AIBU? 🤷🏼‍♀️

@SlickShady So you’re a man. Ok. It makes a bit more sense now.

So you don’t believe that there’s any real sense in which there’s a ‘group’ of men? Everyone is an individual, and class analysis is bullshit, right?

Just when in history did ‘men’ as a group cease to mean anything? Because I’m pretty sure it meant something when, say, women couldn’t vote, or could essentially be viewed as male property and couldn’t own their own stuff, or had so little bodily autonomy that there was no such thing as rape within marriage. I’d say those group distinctions were pretty important then, wouldn’t you? Or maybe you wouldn’t?

It always baffles me that people can imagine that it essentially makes no difference whether you’re a man or a woman. Do you really think that, after centuries of actual, legally-enshrined oppression of women, we’ve suddenly, in less than 100 years, erased all traces of the misogyny that drove those laws? You can call it something else if the word misogyny troubles you so much - how about oppression of the physically weaker people? Does it make it better if we describe it differently? It’s still the same old bullshit as far as women are concerned.

And that’s not even taking account of the way women’s oppression still in full flight in places like Afghanistan and Saudi Arabia. Do you agree that it makes a material difference which group you belong to in those countries? I’m guessing not.

Unbelievable.

Oh ,come on.

Misogyny and patriarchy aren't narwhals. Something most people heard of ,but never seen one in real and still thought of as a myth/made up.

They are an actual thing. The evidence of it is everywhere. In the headlines in MM or SM. In legislation. In the way the justice system is set up. In adds. In books,music,movies etc. In daily interactions . In discrimination in the work place. In the current attempt to erase women. In the language used. In the abuse,attacks,rapes,murders of women and children. I could go on.

It's screaming in our fucking face every single day.

If you're to blind to see it , lucky you. They do say ignorance is bliss.

No wind up. I think highly of some women and very little of others - I judge them on their character and their gender is irrelevant.

Yeah me too. I hate this thing of judging people on what group they belong to. I don't care...I care whether you're an arsehole or not.

You can't extrapolate from that tiny minority nor does the makeup of that group have any overarching influence on how the rest of society operates

I don't know how more simply I can explain the fact that it literally does...

After your constant references to anti semitism and the 'classic stereotypical female traits' comment I'm not convinced you're discussing in good faith at all.

Regardless, hopefully at some point you'll get a better grip on statistics.

Now now girls.

The man is speaking.

Don't talk back.

🙄

You just happen to pick a marginalised ethnic and religious group who have had appalling atrocities committed against them to try and argue that women discussing patriarchy are unreasonable, whilst trying to place the dominant group (men) in the place of an oppressed group who are still enduring oppression?

For the final time (seriously).

The argument made is:
[ZZZZZ] run the world because the world's top [ZZZZZ] are [ZZZZZ].

Phrase it 'Jews run the world because the world's top bankers are Jews', and you're an anti-semitic nutter.

But 'Men run the world because the world's top CEOs are men' is a coherent argument?

But ‘gender’ (biological sex) does matter when we look at violence and spot that violent crimes are overwhelmingly carried out by men. So we either ignore that massive common factor or we don’t, and if we ignore it then how do we combat violence?

But men in charge aren’t just bankers or CEOs.

No

But the patriarchy exists because most positions of power are held by men, does make sense.

Your argument doesn't. It's not even comparable for a start

Haven’t read all the thread but this comment stands out to me and I completely agree.

That has literally nothing to do with a man and woman you walk past on the street though. I mean take your example - I'm a weightlifter and know several fighting styles. Are you saying I'm vulnerable if a skinny guy who's never set foot in a gym walks past? That would clearly be ridiculous.

Look at the people in front of you and judge appropriately.

To say that men have a hugely disproportionate amount of power and influence on a global scale (which is statistically a fact) isn't the same as saying all men are arseholes.

It's reductive and simplistic (and disingenuous if you do have a grip on statistics) to suggest that someone saying the former also believes the latter.

You can still think it's right to treat everyone as an individual and not assume all men are arseholes (they aren't) while also acknowledging the disproportionate power and influence held by men as a sex class on a global scale.

They aren't mutually exclusive beliefs.

I'm pro-life, am a women, think women are great and believe abortion is a moral issue, not just simply "health care". Does that make me a misogynist?

The men in positions of power are RICH men and a minority of men. They're about as unrelatable to the average man as a Martian is.

It's not men v women, it's the super wealthy vs everyone else.

👏👏

@Lookingforbargains

You can call it something else if the word misogyny troubles you so much - how about oppression of the physically weaker people? Does it make it better if we describe it differently? It’s still the same old bullshit as far as women are concerned.

That's the argument I made right in the beginning. Violent crime is neither systemic nor motivated by misogyny. It's individual criminals going for the easiest targets.

Not something society condones or accepts, nor is it systemic. Hence the solution isn't education or changing the 'system', as the problems don't originate from there.

@AMorningstar

That has literally nothing to do with a man and woman you walk past on the street though.

Who has said it does?

We've been discussing global level positions of power and influence for pages and pages.

You're responding as if someone has said "I walked past a man and a woman today and assume the man's a wanker and the woman's lovely. All men are like that" when nobody has said anything of the sort.

Sharing statistics that show disproportionate representation of a sex class is not the same as saying everyone belonging to that sex class is 'bad'.

Then its pointless saying men, isn't it? Given that's 50% of the population.

@AMorningstar have you ever been attacked/mugged ?

Well, you don’t know that - you don’t know the average man on the street isn’t violent. And remember, men are more likely to be a victim of violence by a stranger….but the culprit is massively more likely to be another man.

Literally nobody loses if we address male violence. Nobody.

I actually resent the assumption that I'm perfectly safe to walk past yet a man is some sort of potential horror. Are women so weak and feeble to you?

It might, why do you think it’s a moral issue?

I don’t know what this means. That doesn't relate in any way to my post.

Your assertion that women are fundamentally at risk is a misogynistic one because it relies on the belief that we are feeble.

But ‘gender’ (biological sex) does matter when we look at violence and spot that violent crimes are overwhelmingly carried out by men. So we either ignore that massive common factor or we don’t, and if we ignore it then how do we combat violence?

I'm not in any way denying this, nor am I saying you should ignore it. What I am saying is that it's not rooted in misogyny (ie a social system) but in biology (ie physical reality).

If you try to combat it by educating men not to commit crimes, not only are you bound to fail because 'men' already know that, you also alienate the men who would have been willing to help as they patronised and unfairly maligned.