Do you think this is misandry, or is it just light-hearted humour?

[traceyracer]

There's a post on my facebook which makes me a little uncomfortable. It's something like "your husband comes home drunk and in bed you find he still has a condom on, what do you do?" And all the responses are comments like "stab him, cut his dick off, set him on fire" etc. Quite violent but suggesting acts of violence against a man who has cheated is funny?

Surely domestic violence is such a serious issue it shouldn't be joked about either way?

I hate this mindset that a lot of social-justice-minded people have where this kind of violent rhetoric is a-ok as long as it is aimed at privileged groups. I don't think the facebook example is misandry.

I fucking hate that too, its a ridiculous mindset, used only by animals to be honest. Violence just for someones views or characteristics is never ok.

However, this assertion that only white people can be racist and only men can be sexist is not only blatantly untrue, it is also used as an excuse to justify all kinds of atrocious statements and actions because they are directed at the "right" targets.

I take your opinion that it is untrue. But I disagree 100% with basically blaming those who do not think racism against whites is a thing, or misandry..and laying on them the disgusting violent idiots who will act badly/violently towards people as they are 'the wrong people'? I don't really get conflating the two to be quite honest. Many things are used as an excuse for violent people to be violent. Pretty much anything can be used to justify such.

If you want to know why people on the left don't bat an eye when GC feminists are being threatened with rape and death, punched, stalked, etc, it is because violence doesn't count when it comes from the oppressed and is aimed at their oppressors (didn't you know?).

A view I find wrong. Regardless of who is on the recieving end of unwarranted violence, I would have sympathy for the victim and ire for the attacker? I do think there is a HUGE problem in the left right now in their refusal to see/acknowledge any bad within their ranks, or within the people it decides..however I would hope, that most of those on the left would see a random attack on someone as a bad thing regardless of the person on the recieving end.

Maybe I am thinking too much of 'the left' as a monolith.

White guy walking down the street with a baseball bat with racial slurs painted on it? Unspeakable. Transwoman with a baseball bat and explicit threats against GC feminists written on a shirt covered in fake blood? Fine. Totally fine. Worthy of an art exhibit, in fact.

Again, I would hope that most on the left (and those not) would take issue with either of those. I have faith most would. Its just a small section of them than think this way thankfully. Though I think that section is beyond all help. They are this countries antifa in training, to be quite honest, if they honestly think that way.

Even if you do not care at all about the people you are "punching up" at, you should care that it is incredibly hypocritical and makes you look bad. You can't ask for diversity and tolerance and then turn around and say "Except for these people; you can be as nasty and vitriolic as you like to these people because it doesn't count as bigotry."

Erm, I don't think me saying I don't think misandry exists as an actual thing is me saying that people can be as nasty and vitriolic as possible towards men as it does not count as bigotry?! How on earth does that follow?
Though as a note here, bigotry has lost all meaning with how its been bastardized by the left. The dictionary definition does not regard anyone who says anything negative about anthing you like as a bigot. Infact, if you yell bigot at them and expect them to shut up, and are not open to any view except your own, its likely you are a bigot yourself.

Anyway, I think I can ask for acceptance and tolerance for everyone, whilst also thinking misandry is not a thing and is simply a word used by MRA types and always always (from my experience) in response to women talking about feminist topics/male violence. I have not seen it used in any other context as a serious thing. Hence my dismisal of it tbh.

A woman may be sexist against men I guess. It would be rare by experience, but its possible I guess.

But misandry just kind of strikes me as something thats used to shut down womens opinions, on the whole. 'Stop talking about men being violent, NAMALT you misandrist', 'this bitch was talking about how near all sexual violence, and the huge majority of all violence is committed by men the other day, doesn't she know Myra Hindley exists and some women are bad people?! Fucking misandrist', etc..etc.

I think the FB incident is more a matter of bad taste, as far as the group goes. Some of them might be hateful, but there are also people who feel like they own their partner and fairly extreme responses to infidelity are justified.

As for misandry, yes, it is a thing. As is class hatred, hatred of those seen as having racial privilege, and similar things. It can be very ugly, not usually so much for the person being hated who may not feel the effects so much. But it can be very bad for the person doing the hating, and it tends to be counter-productive in terms of bettering the situation on a larger level.

I would also say that the view that says that power and oppression only work in a vertical kind of way is very naive. Power moves in a lot of different directions, and it can be employed in a way that is unjust toward those who seem to be in a more elevated position in the hierarchy too. And hierarchies can reverse as well, in certain contexts, sometimes more quickly that you might expect.
Think about the thread about Evergreen college for example. All about power and disguised by being a reversal of the hierarchy of power we are told to expect. But toxic and unjust for all that, and not just to individuals.

I think, BatShite, that you are taking my comment more personally than it was intended, and apologies if so. My comments come from my own experiences, unfortunately, and while I agree that most people would not necessarily condone the sort of vitriol I have seen, far too many are willing to basically ignore it or dismiss it as harmless venting or joking. I do not blame the people who originally proposed a distinction between prejudice (as something anyone can have) and institutional discrimination/oppression for the actions of those who misuse this idea. However, it is a position which can be and is abused to justify awful behaviour, and in my opinion should be dropped or modified so that more people on the left feel comfortable condemning violent rhetoric when they see it.

I understand where the argument comes from which says that racism/sexism must have institutional power behind it to really do damage, but at the end of the day I can't agree. I'm glad a pp brought up Evergreen, because if you watch the videos of the protest on YouTube you can see what I'm talking about with regards to excusing and justifying bad behaviour because a person belongs to X historically disadvantaged group.

I think you and I both agree that certain behaviour is unacceptable regardless of the target. We also agree that the term misandry is largely bogus whataboutism when encountered in the wild. But while I absolutely do think we should take power structures into account when speaking about prejudice and oppression, I have also seen the side-effects of telling people that it isn't sexism or racism if the target is a man or white (both from the people who go on to excuse violent rhetoric, and the white guys who have no problem spotting the hypocrisy and become that much more defensive against progressive arguments).

Of course misandry exists. It's why there is hardly any discussion of the 84 men a week who kill themselves.