Misandry - Real or imaginary?

[ZombiePuffinsAreREAL]

This is being discussed on another thread, which was started by someone else about a completely different subject, so I felt that it would be better and more polite to start a new thread where it could be discussed properly, and without stealing someone else's thunder, if you will.

Except that Buffy's got a point that the word has been appropriated by MRA twats to help paint feminists are man-haters. I'd also agree that it's not a natural fit for what you're alluding to, which is something more sophisticated and subtle than 'man hatred'. I think (iii) above is important enough to merit a name but to my mind 'misandry' ain't it,

I think misandry in the sense it is commonly used is imaginary because women don't hate men. Not even the woman who posted the other thread. She was still trying to please her boyfriend, for example, trying to get him to understand. Women are conditioned to please men.

Plus it's a word that's used to waste a lot of women's time jumping through hoops to deny and dealing with semantics (sorry Buffy - I have appreciated your time and effort on this ).

If people want to believe I'm misandric or other feminists are because we look at men as a class and don't like what we see, then meh.

We are not interrupting men as they go about their daily life or invading their personal space, just because we feel entitled to. We're not applying harmful stereotypes to them to conform to societal norms. We don't think we should be listened to just because of our genitalia. We're not sending death threats to them or saying derogatory things about their genitalia just because they have an opinion. We're not paying to fuck men because we feel entitled to have sex when and how we want it and they are interchangeable objects for that purpose. We're not cutting off part of their penis because we don't want them to be sexually autonomous. We're not sexually harassing or abusing them. In fact we're not abusing them at all. We're not out there killing and raping men. We're not killing baby boys, because they are male.

We are just trying to remove their privilege, peacefully, without violence because we believe men should be better than this.

But hell yeah. We're misandric .

And I have to say I don't think we can reclaim a word that hasn't just been appropriated by MRAs but was invented by them for the sole purpose of discrediting feminism.

Someone is doing a very good job of misdirection.

Men really are something! Despite ALL they do to women....the physical violence, the mental torture, the brutality, the questioning, rapes, assault, the fucking goddamn HURT......they still manage to make it all about THEM!!! How do they do it? Plus they convince some women to ally WITH them??

There really is NO accounting for stupid!

If it could be a word that described the way that some men suffer under the patriarchy,that would be one thing.

The only way I have seen it used is to criticise feminist s when they talk about men as a class.

Someone is doing a very good job of misdirection.

What exactly are you accusing me of Scallops?

Buffy, it wasn't for the fact that you seemed to get where I was coming from, I'd think I was going mad.

I don't think there is any doubt that men suffer under Patriarchy is there? I've never known a single feminist who wouldn't agree, there probably are some, but.....

However, and I am trying really hard to find words which won't make the more excitable start jumping up and down, the problems patriarchy causes men, such as a drift toward seriously toxic masculinity, can only be effectively solved by men. It is toxic masculinity, not feminism that is what men who want to see reduction in the numbers of young male suicides need to deal with. I've worked in the field. However, this probably isn't the thread to go into the reasons why the gender suicide gap is what it is, and how the picture changes when you include parasuicide...

I'd agree with Scallops as well, that reclaiming a word which was coined by MRAs and their pals in order to try and show how feminists, not women or other men, were screwing the world up is going to be problematic.

So, while I don't think it's imaginary, I don't think it's a 'thing' in the same way as misogyny is. Misogyny being the systematic and systemic hatred and subjugation of women. If used as an equivalent, it makes no sense.

Puffins I'm not a million miles away with regard to your second paragraph.

the problems patriarchy causes men, such as a drift toward seriously toxic masculinity, can only be effectively solved by men.

I'm not trying to suggest that its feminists' responsibility to assist with progression here, only that it make sense that they should want to, bearing in mind that toxic masculinity (good phrase!) is the main factor in the abuse of women. I think I've been relatively clear on this point. "Meh; men's problem' just seems a strange attitude.

Is there merit in seeing division in responsibility though? As already discussed, these stereotypes are hard-wired into the fabric of our society and women have a great deal of influence, both positive and negative. I don't think we can suggest otherwise. Most men are raised primarily by their mothers; their daily lives lived in cooperation with their wives... A key enabler of women enjoying better lives is dismantling the social constructs of masculinity in addition to the social constructs of femininity.

I think everyone's pretty much agreed that equivalence isn't an issue.

Women have, as the famous person said, no idea how much men hate them.

And the oppression that men feel under the patriarchy is for men to combat. This idea that women need to address the issues men have in society first before men will join the feminist cause is is just.....well, I have no words.

"Why are there no refuges for battered men?" "Well, there weren't any for women before women set them up. Feel free to do the same for men. We'll even show you how we did it. But it's for you to do."

I agree with you to a point. However, I have also seen how boys 'bring each other up' if that makes sense. Boys are with their mothers a lot until they go to school, and then that's where societal expectations of masculinity are impressed upon him. This is especially true as they reach about age 7-8, suddenly playing with or even speaking to girls is seen as wrong and boys punish each other for it. This 'punishment' seems to continue for most of mens' lives. Speaking out on the side of women makes you a white knight, a mangina, a SJW. Women suggest that unless their husband is built a certain way and doesn't act like a 'woman', then he's not some amorphous 'real man'.

I have no answers, sorry, I wish I did. I agree that toxic masculinity must be dismantled, but again... over to you guys. (I'd LOVE to lay claim to toxic masculinity as a phrase, but alas no)

This is especially true as they reach about age 7-8, suddenly playing with or even speaking to girls is seen as wrong and boys punish each other for it.

I agree Puffins. I need to muse further on where that comes from - yes, it's propagated within the group, but...

How's this for a definition; 'misandry: attitudes and actions that create and reinforce toxic masculinity'? Can we roughly get on board with that?

I can get on board with the thought. The word has some majorly NRA connotations which would make me and a lot of other people really leary of it though.

I get that, but as I said before, I don't think those noisy few should be allowed to set the conditions for anything.

"How's this for a definition; 'misandry: attitudes and actions that create and reinforce toxic masculinity'? Can we roughly get on board with that?"

Wouldn't it be better to find a new word? Machotoxic or something?

imaginary

I quite like machotoxic Yonic.

I was going to say that I'm not sure we need a new word when there already is one, but MitchyInge has declared the matter closed - so I'm packing up and going home

Feminists already have a term for what you are trying to make "misandry" out to be.

We use "hypermasculinity" or sometimes "culture of hypermasculinity".

Well exactly Beachcomber.

Liking your style Mitchy. Short, to the point, no messing about, everyone knows where you stand

Say more, needaholiday?

I think I've made my points here. As ever I'm getting rather cross with the people that come on just to tell me that we're not allowed to talk about an issue becuase they've already decided what the answer is.

That'd be excusable as an attitude if feminism was winning a landslide victory against all the things it was battling against.

But Buffy I'm still not convinced by this idea that there's a division of responsibility and feminism shouldn't be shouldering a burden that ought to be 'owned' by men. We'd agree, surley, that women's oppression is everyone's reposnisibility? Why does making things better have to be segregated?

The problem is that we struggle to keep focus in women as it is. If we abandon efforts to do this, the result will be even less focus on what's good for women and more focus on what we can all do for men. That's unlikely to benefit women - we already have centuries of experience of how that goes.

DS, I'm not sure that's what's happening. Misandry has a definition already - even if everyone here agreed with you, I'm not sure ten of us could change the word.

People are responding to your points, just not agreeing!