it’s a good read. and i can’t disagree with almost any of it. i am just hoping men are doing better than the stories suggest, because i don’t want to hate men. i don’t want to hate myself.
and if the liberation of women is to be at the forefront of the feminist movement, i’m just hoping it doesn’t forget that a harmonious and empathetic society, crossing the lines of gender, should be part of the end goal.
of course that’s the end goal but I don’t think a collectively harmonious and empathetic society should be deemed as the responsibility of the feminist movement alone. even people who don’t identify as feminists should be able to recognise the need for peace.
I didn’t go into that because I didn’t want the focus to be taken away from the need for women’s liberation because that’s what tends to happen when holistic approaches to societal issues are being raised in such discourse.
i understand that! i mean, the feminist movement indeed doesn’t act in isolation. and for all women to be truly liberated, feminism necessarily intersects with other movements, from the LGBTQ+ movement to the working class movement, from the mental health movement to the anti-racist movement. i find that liberation and harmony is more easily achieved through solidarity - at least more so than allyship.
but at the end of the day it makes sense that one as a feminist first strives for women’s liberation to be prioritised.
I might have misunderstood your original point, agreed on intersectionality and solidarity where other movements are concerned.
but my prioritisation of women doesn't imply that I don't also stand with other movements. each movement exists for a reason, and allowing them to exist independently of each other is just as vital as their intersectionality.
I'm sorry to be a Reply Guy here but I have written at length on my own sub about how "misandry"-- disdain for men-in-general as collectively responsible for the worst sins of the worst men on earth-- is the sort of thing which makes trans men terrified that transitioning will make them political enemies or social outsiders to feminist women, even when these boys have a personal stake in political issues like abortion access, or fear losing solidarity with "the sisterhood" that has up to that point taken care of them and provided their political education, etc. I personally don't know how it is possible to defend hatred of men and claim that you also support trans/queer liberation. If you can square that circle, I'm all ears.
I completely understand this concern, but that's why in the post I said that misandry is exclusive to misogynists. I was not in any way generalizing it to trans men, members of the LGBTQ+ community or even cisgender men who acknowledge the issues.
this is why I emphasized that misandry is byproduct of misogyny. I have nothing against trans men because they are highly unlikely to be misogynists. (I hope this makes sense?)
I don't know, it seems like moving the goalposts to say "I hate men-- oh but only the bad ones." That doesn't fly when we're talking about women, because feminists have done a lot of good work advocating for women's fundamental human dignity, including the dignity of women who behave badly or don't fit smoothly into society's "moral" demands of them. You've explained why it is rational for women to hate men because men are so often misogynist, and I at least empathize with that position even if I don't think it deserves so much defense. But ime, women who hate men-- as an extension of their trauma or their politics-- do not simply notice that I am trans and change their minds to decide that I am One Of The Good Ones, nor would I want them to (since being trans doesn't mean I am categorically incapable of being cruel or self-serving in misogynist ways, nor that I am incapable of leveraging patriarchy for my own benefit at someone else's expense).
If you want to advocate that it is rational to hate men, that does mean all men, including the ones who are feminist-minded or well-behaved or minorities. Like, I don't look at feminist memes about drinking male tears and think they don't mean me. No matter how much feminist lit I have read, no matter how much I drink from my mug of Respect Women Juice every morning, when I push back against "misandry," I always run the risk of being mocked out of the room as a stereotype of a delicate man who just hates women and doesn't understand why they're so angry. I think when people invoke the idea of "misandry" unironically, they are talking about the collateral damage of "misandry" which is implicitly directed at "bad men" but which is mostly only internalized by the decent men, who wind up having to soak up the rational rage of women who have been deeply hurt-- the men who have done the hurting are not listening to these complaints in the first place. I hope that makes sense, too!!
this is what I mean when I say it is not a responsibility that should fall only on those who identify as feminists! a harmonious and empathetic society shouldn't rely on advocates of specific movements that concentrate on certain causes.
I guess what I mean is that I find it strange and counterproductive to frame that as an unfair burden. It seems contradictory to me to advocate that social esteem-- or its absence, misogyny-- matters, and then conclude that feminists should be free to totally abandon empathy and harmony as goals. Does cruelty matter, or doesn't it?
I'm sorry I'm not sure if you are referring to the post in general or just this thread?
because in the post I wasn’t really implying that feminism should abandon empathy. I just stated that yes, misandry exists as a response to misogyny and that I don’t see how a harmonious approach can be the solution when women are being murdered. I’m not sure how distancing myself from men -which is what I explained misandry is- can be deemed as lack of empathy?
if you were referring to the comment thread, I didn’t mean that feminism isn’t responsible, the point I was trying to make was that it is not a responsibility that is exclusive to just feminism.
I did read the piece, and I'm referring to both, and also thinking of the many other essays I have seen in the same vein which defend that it's legal for women to hate men because it is a reaction to misogyny, and how men who are not misogynists must either soak the disgust or decide that when people say "men" they don't really mean all men (even though, as the hashtag goes, they definitely do mean *all* men). I feel like I can't get on substack anymore without tripping over an essay about how the political problems of the world would be resolved if only men learned to be less misogynist, but my own unpacking of what I learned from patriarchal culture does not seem to have done anything to meaningfully help the women in my life who are troubled by political problems like poverty and homelessness, lack of access to healthcare and childcare, inability to escape their abusive boyfriends and husbands and land somewhere with their feet on solid ground, etc.
I would have to do some political organizing with other people to actually solve those problems, but thinkpieces like this give me the sense that actual organizing will require a lot of wading through disdain and shit-talking from people who believe that my gender in itself confers power and makes me an enemy to the cause, a potential turncoat whose own problems do not really matter. There is no reciprocity here-- even though women understandably do not want to organize with misogynist men, I inevitably must hang out with misandrist women if I want to organize even for *my own* right to abortion. I sympathize with women who do not want to work with like, socialism bros who sideline their issues, because I also cannot bring myself to work with people who think my problems don't matter, or that I deserve to be treated with disdain and suspicion at every turn. I would personally prefer to see advocacy which looks for solutions to how we might build the necessary mutual trust so that we can work together to change the world, rather than this endless advocacy for why it is fine for women to behave as patriarchs do because they think men are a more worthy target for dehumanization.
took a break from writing my thesis to read this, and it's phenomenal (I also immediately saved the playlist - I'm always looking for more "female rage" songs)
Great read!!
Great read! I've been thinking about this so much lately and it's so great to hear from fellow misandrists💕
this is so good
it’s a good read. and i can’t disagree with almost any of it. i am just hoping men are doing better than the stories suggest, because i don’t want to hate men. i don’t want to hate myself.
and if the liberation of women is to be at the forefront of the feminist movement, i’m just hoping it doesn’t forget that a harmonious and empathetic society, crossing the lines of gender, should be part of the end goal.
of course that’s the end goal but I don’t think a collectively harmonious and empathetic society should be deemed as the responsibility of the feminist movement alone. even people who don’t identify as feminists should be able to recognise the need for peace.
I didn’t go into that because I didn’t want the focus to be taken away from the need for women’s liberation because that’s what tends to happen when holistic approaches to societal issues are being raised in such discourse.
i understand that! i mean, the feminist movement indeed doesn’t act in isolation. and for all women to be truly liberated, feminism necessarily intersects with other movements, from the LGBTQ+ movement to the working class movement, from the mental health movement to the anti-racist movement. i find that liberation and harmony is more easily achieved through solidarity - at least more so than allyship.
but at the end of the day it makes sense that one as a feminist first strives for women’s liberation to be prioritised.
I might have misunderstood your original point, agreed on intersectionality and solidarity where other movements are concerned.
but my prioritisation of women doesn't imply that I don't also stand with other movements. each movement exists for a reason, and allowing them to exist independently of each other is just as vital as their intersectionality.
I'm sorry to be a Reply Guy here but I have written at length on my own sub about how "misandry"-- disdain for men-in-general as collectively responsible for the worst sins of the worst men on earth-- is the sort of thing which makes trans men terrified that transitioning will make them political enemies or social outsiders to feminist women, even when these boys have a personal stake in political issues like abortion access, or fear losing solidarity with "the sisterhood" that has up to that point taken care of them and provided their political education, etc. I personally don't know how it is possible to defend hatred of men and claim that you also support trans/queer liberation. If you can square that circle, I'm all ears.
I completely understand this concern, but that's why in the post I said that misandry is exclusive to misogynists. I was not in any way generalizing it to trans men, members of the LGBTQ+ community or even cisgender men who acknowledge the issues.
this is why I emphasized that misandry is byproduct of misogyny. I have nothing against trans men because they are highly unlikely to be misogynists. (I hope this makes sense?)
I don't know, it seems like moving the goalposts to say "I hate men-- oh but only the bad ones." That doesn't fly when we're talking about women, because feminists have done a lot of good work advocating for women's fundamental human dignity, including the dignity of women who behave badly or don't fit smoothly into society's "moral" demands of them. You've explained why it is rational for women to hate men because men are so often misogynist, and I at least empathize with that position even if I don't think it deserves so much defense. But ime, women who hate men-- as an extension of their trauma or their politics-- do not simply notice that I am trans and change their minds to decide that I am One Of The Good Ones, nor would I want them to (since being trans doesn't mean I am categorically incapable of being cruel or self-serving in misogynist ways, nor that I am incapable of leveraging patriarchy for my own benefit at someone else's expense).
If you want to advocate that it is rational to hate men, that does mean all men, including the ones who are feminist-minded or well-behaved or minorities. Like, I don't look at feminist memes about drinking male tears and think they don't mean me. No matter how much feminist lit I have read, no matter how much I drink from my mug of Respect Women Juice every morning, when I push back against "misandry," I always run the risk of being mocked out of the room as a stereotype of a delicate man who just hates women and doesn't understand why they're so angry. I think when people invoke the idea of "misandry" unironically, they are talking about the collateral damage of "misandry" which is implicitly directed at "bad men" but which is mostly only internalized by the decent men, who wind up having to soak up the rational rage of women who have been deeply hurt-- the men who have done the hurting are not listening to these complaints in the first place. I hope that makes sense, too!!
Is it not everyone's responsibility to seek a harmonious and empathetic society?
this is what I mean when I say it is not a responsibility that should fall only on those who identify as feminists! a harmonious and empathetic society shouldn't rely on advocates of specific movements that concentrate on certain causes.
I guess what I mean is that I find it strange and counterproductive to frame that as an unfair burden. It seems contradictory to me to advocate that social esteem-- or its absence, misogyny-- matters, and then conclude that feminists should be free to totally abandon empathy and harmony as goals. Does cruelty matter, or doesn't it?
I'm sorry I'm not sure if you are referring to the post in general or just this thread?
because in the post I wasn’t really implying that feminism should abandon empathy. I just stated that yes, misandry exists as a response to misogyny and that I don’t see how a harmonious approach can be the solution when women are being murdered. I’m not sure how distancing myself from men -which is what I explained misandry is- can be deemed as lack of empathy?
if you were referring to the comment thread, I didn’t mean that feminism isn’t responsible, the point I was trying to make was that it is not a responsibility that is exclusive to just feminism.
I did read the piece, and I'm referring to both, and also thinking of the many other essays I have seen in the same vein which defend that it's legal for women to hate men because it is a reaction to misogyny, and how men who are not misogynists must either soak the disgust or decide that when people say "men" they don't really mean all men (even though, as the hashtag goes, they definitely do mean *all* men). I feel like I can't get on substack anymore without tripping over an essay about how the political problems of the world would be resolved if only men learned to be less misogynist, but my own unpacking of what I learned from patriarchal culture does not seem to have done anything to meaningfully help the women in my life who are troubled by political problems like poverty and homelessness, lack of access to healthcare and childcare, inability to escape their abusive boyfriends and husbands and land somewhere with their feet on solid ground, etc.
I would have to do some political organizing with other people to actually solve those problems, but thinkpieces like this give me the sense that actual organizing will require a lot of wading through disdain and shit-talking from people who believe that my gender in itself confers power and makes me an enemy to the cause, a potential turncoat whose own problems do not really matter. There is no reciprocity here-- even though women understandably do not want to organize with misogynist men, I inevitably must hang out with misandrist women if I want to organize even for *my own* right to abortion. I sympathize with women who do not want to work with like, socialism bros who sideline their issues, because I also cannot bring myself to work with people who think my problems don't matter, or that I deserve to be treated with disdain and suspicion at every turn. I would personally prefer to see advocacy which looks for solutions to how we might build the necessary mutual trust so that we can work together to change the world, rather than this endless advocacy for why it is fine for women to behave as patriarchs do because they think men are a more worthy target for dehumanization.
This was great thank you for sharing
sent this to my boyfriend with just the comment 'read and understand'
obsessed with this!! please let me know what he thinks
He said it was very eye opening
Love this!!
took a break from writing my thesis to read this, and it's phenomenal (I also immediately saved the playlist - I'm always looking for more "female rage" songs)
yayyy what’s your thesis on???!!!
looking at the neural mechanisms of a potential treatment for meth use
that is so so cool oh my god ?? best of luck <3
hahaha thank you - it's due tomorrow, we'll see how we go