Please help me to not hate men

[LastGirlOnTheLeft]

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. When I read about their abuse of women and children and animals as well, I really feel HATE!!

I don't want to hate them. I don't want to be anything like those god awful woman haters, those soulless losers who obsess over women and who are lost, probably forever. I am NOT like them, because I do feel love and like for the men in my life. Just no other man.

Any advice?

I think saying any class should behave in a particular way is nonsensical.
Men as a class are a lot more violent and a lot more prone to sexual abuse than women as a class. Therefore any woman who is wary of men has a valid reason to be so. Doesn't mean all women should be.
There is an interesting paradox in society telling women not to walk alone/not to get too drunk/not to wear short skirts and being horrified that a woman might say she's wary of men.

I do think you have an interesting point though.

Of course most men are good, my father, OH and adult son are all peaceful people- 90% of violent crimes are committed by men, 95% of the prisoners in the UK are men ( despite the fact that women are more likely to be given a custodial sentence)

Testosterone has side effects!!

I come from a particularly close and loving family. All my male relatives, without exception, are lovely, kind people. I also have several clos male friends, indeed the closest friend I ever had was male. This bias that does not change the fact that if I'm being followed down an empty road by a stranger I know I have far more grounds for wariness should that stranger be a man. I don't hate men. Doesn't mean I'm not aware that they are responsible for nearly all violence and that women pose zero physical threat.

Male violence is so deeply embedded in our society that we hardly notice. If a little child disappears or a body is found we all know that the perpetrator is overwhelmingly likely to be a man. Indeed, should a woman commit what I might call "male pattern violence" this is so unusual that it becomes a cause célèbre.

There are three times as many men in prison for sex offences as there are women in prison for anything.

"Pitting two groups against each other can only be destructive."

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.

British Crime Survey and police crime figures from 2009-10 show men were perpetrators in 91% of all violent incidents in England and Wales.

81% for domestic violence
86% for assault
89% criminal damage
96% for mugging
98% for robbery
98% for sexual offences
99% for child rape

I understand hating men. People hate what they fear.

Prawn, being wary of an individual man walking behind you on a deserted street on the basis that he statistically poses a greater threat than a woman is completely reasonable. For all you know that man could be dangerous. Men do tend to be more violent for lots of complicated reasons, but they are also to be feared in certain contexts because they are stronger. Indeed I'm sure most men would feel alarmed by another man walking behind them because they are more likely to be physically assaulted by another man themselves.

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. 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. It is akin to hating a cultural or racial group for similar reasons, and nothing can come of it but a further reinforcement of the dehumanising divisions that are the source of all the problems in the first place.

Spillage you raise an important point, but I would be wary of police stats. Sexual offences committed by females are woefully under-reported for example.

Is there evidence for that. mouse?

"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.

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.

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'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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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?

" 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."

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

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.

Certainly.. give me a minute.

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.

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.

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.

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?
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