Does Misogyny or Misandry Exist on a Large Scale, or Understanding your Enemy’s Motivations

Feminists talk about misogyny, and how it’s the source of many things, among those rape and words like “mangina” . MRAs talk about misandry, and how feminism is a movement of hate against men. GirlWritesWhat talked about this topic:

She talks about the Inuit society, where men had higher status and a few more rights than women, because they brought home the food, risking their lives in the process:

“Rates of injury and premature death by injury among Inuit men of the past were horrendous. I mean, here are a bunch of guys who were expected to go out in a damn kayak in -40 weather, and chuck spears at whales 200 times their size, or go out on treacherous ice that if you fell through it meant almost certain death to hunt seals, in order to bring home tons more meat than they could possibly eat by themselves, and share that meat with the women and children who got to stay home, safe and sound.”

She says that feminists insist that men should have still seen women as their equals and let them have the same deciding power in the community. Not doing so is oppression of women:

“And I know, the whole thing is so cold and uncivilized. Those Inuit men should have been willing to harpoon whales from a kayak and share the meat with women and children, and give their lives to protect women and children, without any expectation of any extra anything. They should have been willing to do it “Just because”. For nothing. THAT would have been “fair” to everyone. It was “oppression” of women that Inuit men were granted higher social status, more respect and a few extra rights in exchange for doing a ton of really difficult shit they didn’t need to do for themselves, but did anyway because women and children needed them to. And it was really “unfair” that women weren’t given power in those societies, because hey, the one who doesn’t have to risk anything, pay anything, or go out on the ice, should be given an EQUAL say in decisions that affect everyone in the community.”

And then she deduces that because feminists insist men should have given something for nothing, feminism is a hate movement:

“And you know, I think it’s perhaps that feminist framing–the duty of a man to share his labor with women, to put himself between danger and women, to risk and pay for the benefit of women during a history where the risks and burdens of doing that were so very high (which is why women couldn’t be expected to bear them)…that’s oppression of women simply because men weren’t willing to do it for nothing. I think that was the first red flag I had that feminism is based on sexism and hate. Because you kind of have to hate someone if you’re going to tell him that his kind have oppressed women all through history by doing what was necessary–including dying–to keep women safe, sheltered and fed. You kind of have to hate someone to claim that the old system only existed to benefit men at the expense of women’s enslavement, when that system is the only reason that women are still around, that women are not like the Bonobos. And it’s definitely hate to say that women were not complicit in this system, that they have no responsibility for things working the way they did. But feminists do this all the time.”

I really liked that video. However, here’s my issue with the conclusion. You do NOT have to hate someone if to demand they give you something for nothing. You do NOT have to hate someone to claim they are oppressing you, when all they are doing is offering you to either make it on your own, or accept their protection and their authority.

Just think of robbers. Do they hate their victims? Or do they just want money? How about thieves? Aren’t they just selfish people who want something, and take it, regardless of how much it hurts their victim?

I think a lot of people want something for nothing, and don’t mind resorting to childish behavior to get it. That includes saying you are mean to them because you “aren’t generous” and won’t give them what they want. A person might even sincerely believe you are unfair, because they can’t/won’t look at things through your eyes. It doesn’t mean they hate you and want to hurt you, it means they are selfish and lack empathy.

So sure, the reason for wanting something for nothing, and screaming oppression when it doesn’t happen, CAN be due to hate, but it can also be easily due to selfishness.

This entry was posted in Feminism and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

8 Responses to Does Misogyny or Misandry Exist on a Large Scale, or Understanding your Enemy’s Motivations

  1. John says:

    It seems to me that feminism is primarily ugly/poor character women complaining. They try to excuse their own failings and insecurities by inventing/creating all sorts of baddies in the world to justify their own failure. This applies to socialists in the UK today, we all live like kings over here. There are supposed “poor” people who live with abundance in comparison to anyone in human history. Yet these do gooders have to keep on ramping up the “evil bankers” the “1 per centers”. The “poor” people face the horrible reality of enough food to get obscenely fat, all mod cons, more comfort than anyone in human history yet they are “exploited” and “oppressed”. Its all bullshit and just a game to try and get stuff.

    There should be a subject in university called “Victimology” where all the modern loser philosophies can be shown for what they are. Unofrtunately most of the loser philosophies originate in Uni so not much chance of that happening.

    That ridiculous group Femen sum up the nonsense thats spouted. I rather hope that they are actually a genius satirical device for some time travelling women of the future. Secretly they are laughing their arses off at the idiocy of the world!

    • emmatheemo says:

      True, that about being “poor”.
      What about Femen? I haven’t been following them too well. All I know is that they disrupt things by showing up topless and protesting (even in sub-zero cold).

  2. Eric says:

    Basically I agree with your conclusion, but wouldn’t malignant narcissicism (an epidemic among American women) also be rooted in anti-male hatred?

    • emmatheemo says:

      I think narcissism is supposed to be rooted in self-centeredness, rather than hatered. It can mean the person only thinks about their pain (even when it’s small) and doesn’t care about that of the others.

      • Eric says:

        But still misandry is largely what’s feeding this kind of narcissicism. When women are taught to view men as inferiors and subhumans, naturally they won’t feel any empathy towards them (except a few so-called ‘femRAs’ who seem to equate treating men well with being kind to animals).

        Where I disagree with GWW is that receiving something for nothing is indicative of hate. What I think is more indicative of hate is the way that women pour abuse onto their protectors and benefactors (the male population). It’s not a matter of selfishness alone: women have been taught by feminist educators that men are not necessary. The more that feminist women need men, the more men are hated as oppressors, regardless of whatever benefits men confer.

      • emmatheemo says:

        Of course feminism can LEAD to hate, but it might not be its cause.

  3. Clarence says:

    I’d say misandry exists on a large scale among certain populations.
    I’m thinking women’s shelter personnel, most feminist in the legal and academic professions, and most feminists involved in any kind of NGO’s. Most feminists on Twitter and , esp. Tumbler, for whatever reasons. Most lawmakers involved in making sexual law.
    Misogyny, not so much. It’s scattered among extreme MGTOWERs, hides inside the larger sport culture and exists all throughout the community of broken and discarded men that feminism has left in its wake.

    • emmatheemo says:

      That is what I was thinking – I don’t have a lot of proof, just intuition – that misandry and misogyny is largely unnatural to us, but exists in certain cicrles. I don’t think misogyny is widespread in the manosphere, though, apart from certain parts of it.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s