The Roots of Misogynistic Rage

[womanformallyknownaswoman]

When one has been on the receiving end of it, it’s like the male is trying to murder(silence) women by destroying them, their lives and spaces in any way possible. They will not bear any woman denying them what they perceive, in their disordered thinking, is their entitlement - to sex, to access to children (as their possessions and /or sex), to unfettered free rein to use and abuse as they see fit for their own ends.

And new research suggests the anger, hostility and short fuse that accompany a man's narcissism tend to be directed toward straight women.
”Heterosexual, narcissistic men become enraged at people who deny them gratification, whether it's social status, having a trophy partner or sexual gratification," said lead study author Scott Keiller, a clinical psychologist and assistant professor of psychology at Kent State University Tuscarawas in Ohio.

www.medicinenet.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=118736

From my observation and experience, I think its projected anger often. Many males are conditioned to believe that women owe them. Women are the ideal slaves in their minds. Somehow half-males' character hasn't developed sufficiently to separate out from the idealised slave to the reality of a separate human being. So when a woman says no, disagrees and/or rejects them and their behaviour, the misogynists can't contain that - it doesn't compute in their minds. Somehow their sense of self is immature and toddler like in the “Mum must give or I'll tantrum”. However adult male tantrums are extremely dangerous and harmful to women.

I’ve also observed misogynists have a lot infantile rage at their father, frequently because he is unavailable/violent/ gaslighted them, but the mother's the one more present and available to take their anger out on. She’s also most concerned with their wellbeing often, and is frequently emotionally available for them. When a child can’t take their anger to their father, they displace onto their mother. They copy their role models and it cements into adulthood.

This isn't the source of my supposition however is evidence towards it.

In their final statements, inmates express the most gratitude and sorrow to their mothers. This isn’t too surprising: studies have shown that nearly all death row inmates “have a history of parental abandonment, foster care and/or institutionalization.” Typically, the mother is more present than the father in their lives.

priceonomics.com/what-death-row-inmates-say-in-their-last-words/

The ones on death row are the ones who haven’t been groomed into covert abuse – they are the “low-hanging fruit” so to speak. The equally dangerous ones imo, from a societal and individual perspective (unless of course you have already paid with your life), are those who abuse covertly using coercive control, as we see in the latest thuggish behaviour at Bristol. They operate within the letter of the law, if not the spirit, and are enabled by wilful blindness on behalf of politicians, the law, plus its enforcement in its different guises.

And like most DV victims, patriarchy victims also don't know they are in that situation.

patriarchy victims also don't know they are in that situation

I think many do. They deliberately suck up to men and fuck over other women in the hope that they will get some crumbs from the men's table.

Very interesting thread. My misogynistic father never knew his father, and neither did my abusive boyfriend.

Would it be too much of a thread drift to ask why it is that men are more violent outside of misogynistic violence - most mass murders, murder-suicides, acts of terrorism, etc. are committed by men. I always wonder when I see media reporting of these why they focus on faith, culture, or individual circumstances (such as in Canada recently) - surely this should be seen as a problem of masculinity?

Another one here wanting to repeat AngryAttackKittens' brilliant advice:
This is why I've always said, before you get too far into a relationship with a man, say no to him clearly and without any softening language, and see how he reacts. I am definitely sharing that piece of wisdom wider.

This is a really interesting thread... Am reading with interest.

I'm really not convinced by the "absent father" explanation.

A lot of the transmission of patriarchal values is from father to son, so of course the patriarchy as a whole thinks that a great damage is being done to boys who don't have a father figure to properly induct them in the ways of the patriarchy, but I think it's a mistake for feminists to buy into that narrative. In the days before divorce was common place the world wasn't a significantly less misogynistic place as far as I can see.

My husband does the wife-work round here (the boring tidying/cleaning/laundry).

When I met his father I saw that his father did the same and so therefore gave him "permission" to take responsiblity for it without feeling deficient as a man.

I guess that's the sort of fathering we're talking about?

I wish I could say I was surprised, but I remember being that age. Was it a boy her age or a teenager or adult man?

The good father argument isn't just a narrative, it's an evidence based position. For what it's worth I've seen similar research that reveals that a child's intelligence correlated in a similar way from the quality of the bond and influence with the mother.

Another component I've raised before, but am usually shouted down, but to hell with it I'll raise it again, women are more likely to physically spank/ physically discipline their children, and additionally little boys are more likely to be spanked/ physically disciplined than girls. It doesn't take a genius to figure out a boy who was hit by his mother is going to have complex issue when it comes to women!

The take home from this is we cannot afford to let boys grow into men thinking that the stronger have the right to physically dominate the weaker. Which is essentially the message they are getting if they are hit by either parent! I'm also hugely In favour of testing and ensuring any man who may be potentially violent/ abusive, and ensuring they never make it a light year close to fatherhood. Just think if none of them were able to breed they wouldn't be able to perpetuate the cycle. I think the problem would correct in a couple of generations if that were to happen!

Oh very interesting re corporal punishment CritEqual

Some people have criticised me in the past for victim blaming when I bring it up, as if I am blaming women as a class for their own abuse, but that isn't really my intention. As obviously we are all responsible for our own actions, but anyone who violates the non-aggression principle is culpable in my view.

I am not bringing it up to let men off the hook as it were, but merely to widen the discussion.

It's an interesting theory CritEqual. I think the use of physical punishment for children really dropped off in the 70s (maybe earlier or later) so we'd expect to see a lower rate of DV about now if that is the case. Are we seeing anything like that?

@NotDavidTennant

I agree that for some children not having a father around is not an issue. For those boys who end up in care etc or having violence in the home - they're the ones who really seem to be at a higher risk of going off the rails seemingly i.e. violent anti social behaviour.

Also I'm not using absent solely as in not around but to cover those fathers who are around but not emotionally available for their sons - these latter ones do condition them to follow in their shoes - like any good cult leader. Hence cult patriarchy continues to reign, reinforced by boys only schools etc plus male privilege and the guys looking after the guys. Rinse and repeat…..

After reading some of the sexiest comments here i am not surprised that some men find women hateful and bitter.
I have found that when it comes to nasty sexiest behavior women are much the worst.

I was astonished at the number of people who do not seem to grasp the difference between punishment and discipline.
Brilliant work done by Alice Miller and others and people repeat the generational abuse they experienced.
Is there a society that does not glorify violence? That does not view violence as a viable solution to a problem?

I have also experienced and observed the covert weaponising of support support as payback for disagreeing/crossing a narcissist/migosogynist. Thus it's not always overt rage that's the problem but the covert undermining and taking away of someone's liberty that is the real problem - i.e. coercive control.

Most publicity etc focuses on the overt methods of control (withholding finances/ physical assault etc) but the covert are the ones that do most damage - isolation from friends and family, escalating control when woman vulnerable (pregnant and / child caring), deliberately being unpredictable in joint contributions - childcare/housework/finances - leaving the woman with no option but to pick up the slack and end up being overly responsible and thus over burdened and exhausted

It occurs to me that enabling male violence is a convenient way to keep people insecure, especially women. Being insecure on a base level produces anxiety and makes us easier to control.

Withholding survival conditions e.g. personal safety, housing, baseline financial support, food and so on creates conditions to make people wither not flourish.

Thus those with resources, money and privilege can sneer, putdown and scapegoat those who are withering to make themselves feel better/ create a personal status. I.E. enables bullying on a personal and societal level - those withering become the kicking posts.

So enabling male violence, as happens at present throughout our so called pillars of democracy, is the covert means of controlling women.

Thus this is why males are not invested in alleviating miscarriages of justice and giving law enforcement to women- it serves their purpose all too well to maintain the status quo - the invisible wire fence.

Did you see that they think that the Toronto killer was a member of INCEL and was a violent misogynist?

Another component I've raised before, but am usually shouted down, but to hell with it I'll raise it again, women are more likely to physically spank/ physically discipline their children, and additionally little boys are more likely to be spanked/ physically disciplined than girls. It doesn't take a genius to figure out a boy who was hit by his mother is going to have complex issue when it comes to women!

This. My dh as raised by single mother (no father present) who was no doubt an agressive bully. I would consider his childhood abusive, she would consider it discipline (flushing head in loo/washing mouth out with soap/cancelling his 4th birthday for minor childhood misdemeanours) He rembers being scared of his mum, physically and mentally. He has on (rare) occasion displayed problems in dealing with anger where he will hit out at inanimate household objects, He is always angry with himself and its not directed at me (been together 15 years). It’s funny how when I wrote about this on another thread I was told he was an abusive man throwing his weight around. Far from it. It has nothing to do with how he feels about women, it’s how he feels about himself and a fear that takes over when something goes wrong. On a separate note, his relationship with his mother has essentially made him quite scared of women. He struggles to assert himself in life and is often pushed around at work becasue of it. Now if he were a person with more violent tendencies, do I think that fear and anger would manifest as hatred of women and would he use that violence to try and assert some control? You bet. It’s not always modelling the father that could cause these issues.

Yes Yet, I was actually going to mention it on here yesterday but it was more speculative then. There are a couple of threads in FWR.

I’m totally unconvinced by the absent father theory - my abuser is merrily using the local authority and courts to abuse by proxy and his father attends EVERYTHING with him.

.