Is the man-hating feminist a myth? Would people rather harm men or women for the common good? And are teachers biased toward females or males when it comes to dishing out grades?
Number 2 is an obvious contradiction to number 1. If you'll sacrifice men more than women then obviously you place a lower value on men and there must be some reason for that -- how that doesn't get translated into a more negative view of men is beyond me.
Re the myth of the man-hating feminist, it strikes me that the difference between 2nd wave feminism and 4th wave feminism is so great that “feminism” is no longer a useful category. Second wave feminism, as I understand it, is to the effect that women should not suffer formal discrimination compared to men and also emphasized the importance of biologically based differences between the sexes, eg in domestic violence. This version of feminism is still very widespread—I expect that this is what most ordinary women mean when they say they are feminist. There is no reason for feminists of this type to dislike men. Fourth wave feminism is a form of identity politics based on an oppressor / oppressed narrative in which men are the oppressor. This implies that they will dislike men. This is somewhat tempered by the fact that many 4th wave feminists are heterosexual. But in some ways that makes it worse, as they (unsurprisingly) can’t find the ‘right’ man, and tend to blame men, instead of their attitude towards men, for that. Since younger women are more likely to be 4th wave, controlling for age might tease this out. I didn’t read the paper closely enough to see if they did that.
It is certainly true that many feminists 'hate' men. But it is far more accurate to say that feminist ideology simply regards men as a resource, and the feminist strategy for gaining access to men's resources is to play the victim of everything (centuries of patriarchal oppression, wage gap, sexist air conditioning, manspreading, mansplaining, traditional gender roles, clothing and fashion conventions, dating etiquette, sex, parenting, depictions of men and women in movies, contraception, marriage, divorce, pornography, professional sports etc etc) and to use this status as 'society's default victim class' as leverage against men to get a never ending supply of special treatment and free resources from men ("he for she") - as a form of penance from men, and reparations for being so oppressed.
This strategy (basically 'guilt tripping' and 'playing the damsel') plugs directly into the fundamental gynocentric nature of both men and women. It exploits men's natural biological programming to be the protectors and providers to women and children.
Whereas traditional women would form a PARTNERSHIP (essentially a business) with men and provide children, housework and perhaps the occasional sandwich in return for men providing protection and resources by working in the mines/ factory/ fields/ shipyard in all weathers, the new breed of feminists use their 'threat narrative' to extract the same resources and protections from men that a marriage provides, but without having to actually marry a man and offer him anything in return.
In effect feminists are hyper-traditional women who have chosen to marry THE STATE (men with guns) rather than husbands (men with jobs). Feminists use the state to extract resources from men via taxation, and to enjoy special female privileges thanks to government policies and laws (quotas, alimony, child custody laws, women's shelters, domestic violence laws etc).
In effect the relationship between feminists and government is that of a harem. And the harem is all paid for by the labour of ordinary men... men that we accuse of being sexist, patriarchal, chauvinistic, mansplaining assholes. This constant denigration of men keeps them from ever standing up for themselves and demanding equal rights and equal treatment to women.
Any man who dares to fight for men's equal rights or men's issues is labelled a misogynist - a term which is enough to end his career. A term which would carry absolutely no weight if we ACTUALLY lived in a male dominated 'patriarchy' as defined by feminist ideology.
The gender disparity between tax contributions and tax spending means that women, as a group, do not pay taxes, only men do. Men have no reproductive rights. Underage males who are raped by women are forced to pay child support to their rapist in the event of a pregnancy, as soon as they turn 18. The greatest prevalence of institutionalised rape (AKA 'rape culture') occurs in underage youth detention facilities, perpetrated by female staff on boys. Men make up the majority of homeless. Men have shorter life expectancy and less access to gender specific healthcare. Domestic violence is split equally between men and women and yet there are only a handful of DV centres catering to men. The Duluth model of DV ensures men are arrested and dragged out the home by default, even if it is clear the woman is the abuser (she is holding the frying pan and he has a bloody face).
By every metric men score LOWER than women in terms of rights, treatment, laws and standard of living.... and yet men are the oppressors and women are the oppressed.
Whether feminists 'hate' men or not is not the issue. The issue is that feminist ideology - now universally adopted throughout all institutions as the default narrative on gender - ensures that men are defined as all powerful, invulnerable, oppressors of women.... and women are defined as innocent, weak, victims of male oppression, with no agency and therefore social responsibility and no accountability for their actions (or inactions).
This absurd (yet effective) narrative is clearly dehumanising to men.... but it is equally dehumanising (disempowering) to women. Playing the victim might ensure free stuff and special treatment, but it also makes personal growth and self actualisation impossible.
It is probably most accurate to say that feminist ideology encourages women to HATE ON men, and for men to hate themselves as a result, (and then redeem themselves by self sacrificing on the alter of feminism). But this nasty way of conducting business between the sexes also ensures feminists end up hating women too.
Masculinity and femininity are two aspects of a whole, and to hate on masculinity is to hate on femininity too.
Feminism is just hatred full stop. It's no surprise that a century of feminism has created a generation who are desperate to abandon gender altogether.
"The greatest prevalence of institutionalised rape (AKA 'rape culture') occurs in underage youth detention facilities, perpetrated by female staff on boys."
"The greatest prevalence of institutionalised rape (AKA 'rape culture') occurs in underage youth detention facilities, perpetrated by female staff on boys."
"the average feminist is just as positive about men as the average non-feminist."
Ockham's razor, they are the same people. Some women identify as feminists because it gives instant social status for zero effort; others have woken up and smelled the coffee or were just against being labelled.
Number 2 is an obvious contradiction to number 1. If you'll sacrifice men more than women then obviously you place a lower value on men and there must be some reason for that -- how that doesn't get translated into a more negative view of men is beyond me.
Re the myth of the man-hating feminist, it strikes me that the difference between 2nd wave feminism and 4th wave feminism is so great that “feminism” is no longer a useful category. Second wave feminism, as I understand it, is to the effect that women should not suffer formal discrimination compared to men and also emphasized the importance of biologically based differences between the sexes, eg in domestic violence. This version of feminism is still very widespread—I expect that this is what most ordinary women mean when they say they are feminist. There is no reason for feminists of this type to dislike men. Fourth wave feminism is a form of identity politics based on an oppressor / oppressed narrative in which men are the oppressor. This implies that they will dislike men. This is somewhat tempered by the fact that many 4th wave feminists are heterosexual. But in some ways that makes it worse, as they (unsurprisingly) can’t find the ‘right’ man, and tend to blame men, instead of their attitude towards men, for that. Since younger women are more likely to be 4th wave, controlling for age might tease this out. I didn’t read the paper closely enough to see if they did that.
It is certainly true that many feminists 'hate' men. But it is far more accurate to say that feminist ideology simply regards men as a resource, and the feminist strategy for gaining access to men's resources is to play the victim of everything (centuries of patriarchal oppression, wage gap, sexist air conditioning, manspreading, mansplaining, traditional gender roles, clothing and fashion conventions, dating etiquette, sex, parenting, depictions of men and women in movies, contraception, marriage, divorce, pornography, professional sports etc etc) and to use this status as 'society's default victim class' as leverage against men to get a never ending supply of special treatment and free resources from men ("he for she") - as a form of penance from men, and reparations for being so oppressed.
This strategy (basically 'guilt tripping' and 'playing the damsel') plugs directly into the fundamental gynocentric nature of both men and women. It exploits men's natural biological programming to be the protectors and providers to women and children.
Whereas traditional women would form a PARTNERSHIP (essentially a business) with men and provide children, housework and perhaps the occasional sandwich in return for men providing protection and resources by working in the mines/ factory/ fields/ shipyard in all weathers, the new breed of feminists use their 'threat narrative' to extract the same resources and protections from men that a marriage provides, but without having to actually marry a man and offer him anything in return.
In effect feminists are hyper-traditional women who have chosen to marry THE STATE (men with guns) rather than husbands (men with jobs). Feminists use the state to extract resources from men via taxation, and to enjoy special female privileges thanks to government policies and laws (quotas, alimony, child custody laws, women's shelters, domestic violence laws etc).
In effect the relationship between feminists and government is that of a harem. And the harem is all paid for by the labour of ordinary men... men that we accuse of being sexist, patriarchal, chauvinistic, mansplaining assholes. This constant denigration of men keeps them from ever standing up for themselves and demanding equal rights and equal treatment to women.
Any man who dares to fight for men's equal rights or men's issues is labelled a misogynist - a term which is enough to end his career. A term which would carry absolutely no weight if we ACTUALLY lived in a male dominated 'patriarchy' as defined by feminist ideology.
The gender disparity between tax contributions and tax spending means that women, as a group, do not pay taxes, only men do. Men have no reproductive rights. Underage males who are raped by women are forced to pay child support to their rapist in the event of a pregnancy, as soon as they turn 18. The greatest prevalence of institutionalised rape (AKA 'rape culture') occurs in underage youth detention facilities, perpetrated by female staff on boys. Men make up the majority of homeless. Men have shorter life expectancy and less access to gender specific healthcare. Domestic violence is split equally between men and women and yet there are only a handful of DV centres catering to men. The Duluth model of DV ensures men are arrested and dragged out the home by default, even if it is clear the woman is the abuser (she is holding the frying pan and he has a bloody face).
By every metric men score LOWER than women in terms of rights, treatment, laws and standard of living.... and yet men are the oppressors and women are the oppressed.
Whether feminists 'hate' men or not is not the issue. The issue is that feminist ideology - now universally adopted throughout all institutions as the default narrative on gender - ensures that men are defined as all powerful, invulnerable, oppressors of women.... and women are defined as innocent, weak, victims of male oppression, with no agency and therefore social responsibility and no accountability for their actions (or inactions).
This absurd (yet effective) narrative is clearly dehumanising to men.... but it is equally dehumanising (disempowering) to women. Playing the victim might ensure free stuff and special treatment, but it also makes personal growth and self actualisation impossible.
It is probably most accurate to say that feminist ideology encourages women to HATE ON men, and for men to hate themselves as a result, (and then redeem themselves by self sacrificing on the alter of feminism). But this nasty way of conducting business between the sexes also ensures feminists end up hating women too.
Masculinity and femininity are two aspects of a whole, and to hate on masculinity is to hate on femininity too.
Feminism is just hatred full stop. It's no surprise that a century of feminism has created a generation who are desperate to abandon gender altogether.
"The greatest prevalence of institutionalised rape (AKA 'rape culture') occurs in underage youth detention facilities, perpetrated by female staff on boys."
Do you have any sources for this?
"The greatest prevalence of institutionalised rape (AKA 'rape culture') occurs in underage youth detention facilities, perpetrated by female staff on boys."
Do you have any sources for this?
"the average feminist is just as positive about men as the average non-feminist."
Ockham's razor, they are the same people. Some women identify as feminists because it gives instant social status for zero effort; others have woken up and smelled the coffee or were just against being labelled.