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.

Yonic If I've rather pointedly explained my thinking (3 or 4 times now?) on the divisions and segregations that unpin that line of questioning, perhaps I was anticipating that you might respond to what I'd already written rather than - seemingly - ignoring it.

As I said, the answer is yes, although I have to concede that I haven't found many male-dominated forums dedicated to the dismantling of the patriarchy. Perhaps you could guide my towards some?

Interesting post pomerallights - I shall add it to my current head-scratching!

"I haven't found many male-dominated forums dedicated to the dismantling of the patriarchy."

No, me neither. Which was kind of my point - asking women to sort out both men's and women's oppression by patriarchy (within an existing movement focussed on sorting out women's oppression by same) seems disingenuous when there is no discernible male movement against patriarchy focussing on either male or female oppression by patriarchy.

To use a previously trodden analogy, if lung cancer sufferers campaign to improve staffing levels on lung cancer wards, a side effect might be increased staffing on bowel cancer wards (because some cancer wards are general oncology, say) but you wouldn't expect the lung cancer sufferers to actively campaign on bowel cancer issues; if you thought there should be campaigning on bowel cancer issues, you'd probably start by seeing if bowel cancer sufferers would start or support a campaign.

I'm obviously not making myself clear here. I am not saying that women need to resolve men's problems. The way I have framed everything has been to try and move beyond the framework of men's problems and women's problems and women's responsibilities and men's responsibilities. Somehow we keep framing the conversation in those terms though!!

I am exploring the idea that the progressive dismantling of gender stereotypes is a concept that exists within a single environment inhabited by both sexes. Anyone concerned with that dismantling might consider all tools available to them for that task. I am talking about more tools for the same job, not more jobs for limited tools.

On that basis, the fact that most people concerned with dismantling gender stereotypes is a slightly separate issue.

Stereotypes > are women < is a slightly different matter.

NB The point about home economics obviously wasn't that it benefitted men. It was that it disadvantaged women. That's been my point all along and I'm unsure why it hasn't come across. Misandry disadvantages women.

Well, not really Buffy because - as you yourself have said - it's not a group that thinks as a group. Individually most men would agree with equality and see the equity in equal solutions. There aren't so many people where you'd have to rip their privilege from them. Besides which, most of today's generation are well used to a progressively improving system of gender equality because they grew up with it.

Wouldn't examining masculinity be a method for introducing privilege?

True Buffy - like Bob Crow living in that plush London flat for cheaps and earning a huge wage relative to the average Union member. But with those kinds of people they generally have suffered discrimination/oppression in the past and have experience of living how the people they claim to represent live. But men will never have had experience of being oppressed in the way women have.

But still I feel we must find a way of successfully drawing men in and asking them to be part of the change because otherwise we are attacking the people we love.

And to return to the point of the thread... I wonder if that is why a lot of women DO think 'misandry' is a viable (not sure that's the right choice of word) word / concept. Because there is this uncomfortable feeling that feminism = division = rejection of men at some level, and it's nigh on impossible to keep that as a purely intellectual concept without extrapolating it to your own relationship and emotively thinking 'but I don't hate my husband!' Also as Damsili has put so well previously it's not helpful to tell people 'it doesn't exist, HTH' or similar. I'm not saying misandry does exist I'm just saying it's important to explore why a lot of women are prepared to entertain the thought that it does.

Am probably just rehashing what others have said... I don't really have properly formed opinions on this yet I'm afraid just getting some thoughts down!

Oops sorry thread has moved on while I've been out for coffee

Just to add to other things already said, it's challenging these things within the general discourse - something in which we all have a voice and concerns an environment to which we all belong. I can't help but be unsettled by feminist analysis that necessarily separates itself from the general discourse*

• other than for purposes of specific examination within a feminist space - and then only with a view to returning from that singular environment.

Yonic said - I haven't found many male-dominated forums dedicated to the dismantling of the patriarchy.......asking women to sort out both men's and women's oppression by patriarchy (within an existing movement focussed on sorting out women's oppression by same) seems disingenuous when there is no discernible male movement against patriarchy focussing on either male or female oppression by patriarchy.

Where you will find men discussing dismantling of society are in the areas of the anti-capitalist movement, and socialist/marxist movements. Similar aims coming from different perspectives, I guess.

I wonder how many of these men's problems would be magically solved by women being socially and economically far more inferior than we are now? My guess is 90%, and that's why men aren't keen on fighting the patriarchy.

Any notable forums jacket?

Thanks, nojacket.

The thing is Pomeral, there are different strands here. There are people that are interested in formulating a personal way of being that resonates with others; this takes a certain amount of effort, self-sacrifice and willingness to frame ones own position in a way that encourages others. The focus is change.

But it's also a bit of a hang out for people that just want to feel part of something and feel better about themselves; the focus is entirely internal.

Buffy - reading Friere, it's clear that an element of critical pedagogy was this idea of cyclical learning: learning, unlearning, re-evaluating. Why, though, do you think that the concept of re-evaluation is so problematic?

Just reading through Friere Buffy and noting this idea of cyclical understanding; how do you think the idea of unlearning and re-evaluating works in practice on FWR?

computer playing silly buggers.

My feelings on the (privileged West) position is that there are a great many ways in which people can demonstrate that there is now equality of opportunity. However, for me - whilst this is important - it's also valid to say that women are not yet in a position where they are fully able to take those opportunities. Ie there are still constraints placed by the construct of character and role that tie women's ankle together even as society holds the door open. (That may be a bad analogy)

To go back to my point, however, one of those barriers is also men's character and role. Hence misandry is indirect systematic misogyny.