Muck Ryking: Petition to remove Alexander Ryking as a Tumblr politics editor
Evidently Ryking wasn't in debate club in high school.
So Alexander Ryking is a Tumblr blogger and one of Tumblr’s community “editors” for politics. He thinks of himself as a liberal.
He is also a raging misogynist who regularly calls women “cunts” and tells feminists to “kill yourselves you feminazi twats.”
In recent days he’s turned his douchebag-o-meter up to 11. As a result, there’s now a petition up on Change.org to have him removed as a politics editor on Tumblr. It’s already gotten more than 3000 signatures, with several hundred new signatures added in the time it’s taken me to write this post.
Here’s unknowable woman, a frequent target of his cyber-wrath, with more details on his recent meltdown. (Read the post on her Tumblr blog for links to the evidence of his douchebaggery.)
Alexander Ryking, who has a history of attempting to silence women bloggers (he told Jess of STFUConservatives and the other “feminazis” to “go kill themselves” several months ago, and has also been rude to women of color but I haven’t been on Tumblr long enough to have personally witnessed that), defended The Amazing’s Atheist’s violent rape threats on Reddit by tagging his posts with “I support TAA.”
I and many, many other Tumblr users were disgusted by this, so we decided to tag our criticisms of Ryking that night with “Ryking’s banana republic”—a reference to his co-opting of [social justice] concepts, NOT a homophobic dig, and the person who coined it was a queer man anyway. Someone also wrote a few jokingly romantic lines about Ryking’s blind defense of TAA and new atheism, and Ryking interpreted this as homophobic and misandric…it wasn’t, but because I reblogged it, Ryking insists that I am now a homophobe, which is hilarious given my own sexual identity but whatever.
We also responded to some of his posts with pictures of extreme close-ups of our eyes.
Seriously. That is what this guy is calling “abuse.”
We did NOT threaten him, make personal attacks against his sexuality, tell him to go kill himself, send him rude messages, or commit any other acts that could reasonably be interpreted as the “cyberbullying” Ryking claims it is. I did temporarily change my URL to rykingsbananarepublic and I make no apologies for that. Why should I? Why shouldn’t a group of feminists and their allies be allowed to respond creatively to misogyny? The only actual cyberbullying that has taken place was TAA’s initial rape threats on Reddit; I wouldn’t even go so far as to claim Ryking’s tweets to me and other Twitter users are cyberbullying, though I leave it up to the other people who were insulted by him to label their experiences as bullying or not.
Anyway, a few nights later, I tweeted something in defense of Whitney Houston’s legacy, and suddenly there was Ryking going ballistic. He found me on Twitter, called me a cunt right off the bat, and insisted that I claimed Whitney Houston’s death was “more important than the death of 5,000 Syrians” (I didn’t! Here is what I actually said!). I had never exchanged tweets with this man before, and was confused about his sudden interest in my thoughts about Whitney Houston and Syria. Naturally, I responded, told him how wrong he was, and the next day I screencapped some of the things he said and posted them … I never expected that post to get the amount of notes it did, but I think that just goes to show how widespread the dislike for him is.
Ryking, for his part, has responded to the widespread criticism by striking the pose of a victim, and pretending that it is somehow all related to race. Apparently, the evil feminazis are impugning his white manhood, though he’s not white.
So-called feminists have subjected me to white-bashing comments (even though I’m Hispanic) and sexist attacks impugning my manhood (slash-fiction scenes featuring me and heterosexual men; being called faggot; being told to man-up; insults about my body;) by people who don’t realize I’m gay. After nearly two decades online, I learned early on that when you’re attacked, you defend yourself by attacking right back and just as viciously, if not more so. And that’s what exactly what I’ve done. …
What’s really at issue here is not my rude behavior but that you and others like you want to punish any man who refuses to conform to your rancid, misandrist orthodoxy by discounting everything he says and using his gender and race as the excuse for doing so. …
You don’t want me stripped of my editorial privilege based on my behavior but because I reject your sick, bigoted, misandrist (per)version of feminism.
Yep, apparently the dude who loves to call women “cunts” is the final arbiter of what is and what isn’t “true feminism.” Who knew?
I signed the petition. How about you?
Posted on February 16, 2012, in antifeminism, creepy, douchebaggery, drama, hypocrisy, misandry, misogyny, oppressed white men, rape, rapey, vaginas, victimhood. Bookmark the permalink. 601 Comments.
SWITCHING GEARS
i saw mogwai on this tour when they were in athens. they all wore black and green adidas tracksuits which was a cool effect. i spent a ton of time drooling over their light set-up. most importantly, i can still close my eyes and still picture the blowout. they didnt have the smoke or the colored lights, it was just smart spots painting the crowd and strobing
For my part, I do believe there’s such a thing as misandry, in the sense that there are people in existence who are prejudiced against men. There is also the very real issue of men being mistreated, not for being men, but for failing to conform to society’s standards of masculinity.
But the notion that because women are gradually gaining social equality with men, we’re all suddenly living in a some sort of misandric dystopian gynocracy is just fucking laughable.
Taking away the privilege of men, as a class, to act like assholes to women with near (if not total) impunity is not the same thing as systematic oppression. Not even close.
this video i was in the crowd for. a silver mt. zion had never played georgia before and were super nervous about being in the south, but the rapport between them and the crowd was incredible. i’ve never been at another show where the band had so much fun talking to the audience.
@Dracula:
The way I figure is that Misandry is supposed to be an idea comparable to Misogyny, as in systematic oppression against a gender. In that sense, misandry doesn’t exist, though of course there are people prejudiced against men in existence.
The “failing to conform to society’s standards of masculinity” is not as much misandry as ridiculous and/or antiquated notions of masculinity and femininity, and everyone suffers from those. Funny that so many MRA talking points revolve around these standards, yet they are so insistent at keeping them.
Right, Dracula, I’d agree with that, but frankly I do think that oppression based on failing to live up the masculine ideal is misandry- it’s hatred of a certain kind of man. Ladies, if you want to call hatred for outspoken women, feminist women, or whatever misogyny, you’ve got to acknowledge the other side of the coin here.
“There is also the very real issue of men being mistreated, not for being men, but for failing to conform to society’s standards of masculinity.”
One of my biggest issues with the MRM is that they don’t give a shit about those men.
Just to be clear, the comment about gender non-conformity was just meant to be an example of an issue that effects men, not an example of misandry.
One of my biggest issues with the MRM is that they don’t give a shit about those men.
You and me both.
LET’S SWITCH GEARS AGAIN. IT’S INDIE POP TIME
@Nathan (the first comment):
See, I haven’t really seen much that show that men are not trusted around children. Mostly its been various MRAs complaining that they would be looked at as pedophiles if they hung around kids, all hypothetical or assertions. The idea that men make poor parents strikes me as rooted in the idea that mothers are the ones that need to take care of the children, and ties into the gender-role thing that you call misandry.
If that’s your definition, then sure; misandry exists. But it’s kind of a trivial victory if you are trying to relate it to misogyny (which would have to include criticizing women who don’t live up to female gender roles as well), and claim that misandry is just as big a problem.
michael stipe saw me at a camera obscura concert and was horrified by my dance moves. i was just trying to alleviate the dour hipster aura of a camera obscura concert in athens, georgia.
they played 80s fan, which is cam ob’s best song except for forests and sands
which i dont think had been written at that point, so it’s understandable.
p.s.: all my youtube ads are in spanish now. im not sure why
@Kirby – Well, look, I’m not saying. But as a youngish someone who has worked with children in a limited capacity, the perception exists that men are incompetent (or just moreso than women), irresponsible (or just moreso than women), etc. It’s not overt, it’s subtle and insidious, but (MRAs aside) isn’t a lot of misogyny the same way? And that’s certainly not the only example of misandry that I could cite.
Again- misogyny is more of a problem, obviously. But that doesn’t mean it is acceptable to deny the reality of misandry in modern society. It exists, and tbh I think some of the people here need to get out of their theoretical armchair. Much like “covert” misogyny, it’s there if you’re willing to look for it. Most feminists, to say the least, aren’t. They’ll spend endless amounts of time analyzing pop culture or their friends or whatever for “internalized misogyny”, and yet for some reason misandry needs to be very blatant for them to recognize it. That’s not really the way this stuff works these days.
Purity bear is back … and this time she’s racist!
Ugh. The first sentence should say “I’m not saying people immediately assume all men are pedophiles.”
I’d agree with that, but frankly I do think that oppression based on failing to live up the masculine ideal is misandry- it’s hatred of a certain kind of man.
Right. A certain kind of man. It’s not holding men as a group to be inferior, so personally, I can’t qualify that as misandry. Doesn’t make sense.
Drunk Sharculese does nothing by half measures.
I do think that oppression based on failing to live up the masculine ideal is misandry- it’s hatred of a certain kind of man.
But it’s hatred of men who display female traits. The implication is still that being male with traditionally masculine traits is superior.
Men with female traits are inferior–>female traits are inferior–>females are inferior–>misogyny
@nathan:
“Well, look, I’m not saying. But as a youngish someone who has worked with children in a limited capacity, the perception exists that men are incompetent (or just moreso than women), irresponsible (or just moreso than women), etc.”
Like I said, probably comes from gender stereotypes rather than anything else. It’s like how male nurses are looked down upon. It’s considered woman’s work.
Is it bias against men? Obviously.
Is it something the MRM would consider championing? Nope.
“Again- misogyny is more of a problem, obviously. But that doesn’t mean it is acceptable to deny the reality of misandry in modern society.”
We were talking about misandry as systematic oppression, not as “some people are prejudiced against men out there.” Something distinct from gender roles, which affect both men and women (and the solution to which “feminizes” men and “masculinizes” women).
“Most feminists, to say the least, aren’t. They’ll spend endless amounts of time analyzing pop culture or their friends or whatever for “internalized misogyny”, and yet for some reason misandry needs to be very blatant for them to recognize it.”
You should try actually talking to some feminists (like you are right now) rather than putting words in their mouth. Then you can see for yourself what they do and don’t do.
The contempt society displays towards certain kinds of men that we’re discussing isn’t misandry, it’s sexism, and sometimes homophobia. Society likes a certain, different kind of man just fine – society has contempt for pretty much every kind of woman. It’s not the same, and trying to pretend that it is makes you look very silly.
There’s no need to draw false equivalencies in order to address the bad attitudes that exist towards certain groups of men.
Learnt a new word today, to cover both misogyny & homophobia & “real men” – femmephobia.
@Kirby- So, by your logic, a woman in the corporate world, dealing with prejudice- that is not misogyny? The alleged glass ceiling? You’ve just invalidated a whole lot of feminist theory.
Like I said, I don’t accept that “oppression” is some kind of blanket term- *especially* in regards to gender. That’s simplistic in the extreme. There is a cultural- yes, an institutional- perception that men are dangerous, especially around children, and they are treated accordingly. That is oppression.
As to your last point, I’ve read quite of bit of modern feminist writing. Are you saying they do not analyze our culture? Pretty bold statement.
Femmephobia even happens in the lesbian community. It’s everywhere, honestly.
well, i am half shark and half hercules…
i dont do half measures sober either, tho
Cassandra, that’s ridiculous. There is sure as hell a kind of woman that society likes. Would this hypothetical ideal woman still face a level of misogyny? Of course. But not nearly as much as other women.
By your logic, unless you’re willing to invalidate any sort of misogyny that an “ideal woman” would *not experience*, you basically have to accept the reality of misandry in that sense
This leads us to the conclusion:
Hatred of fat women? Not misogyny, because it’s just a certain type of woman (fat women) and not “holding women as a group to be inferior.”
Prejudice in the corporate world? Not misogyny, because it’s just a certain type of woman (career women) and not “holding women as a group to be inferior.”
Thanks for proving that you don’t know what you’re talking about, Nathan. There are no women who are not affected by misogyny. It hurts some more than others, sure, but the actual breakdown in terms of who it hurts and why isn’t as simple as you seem to think it is. Even the most approved-of women are heavily affected by misogyny.
You may have read lots of feminist books, but you obviously didn’t understand them.
There is sure as hell a kind of woman that society likes.
Yep. Just as there’s a kind of man society likes, speaking very broadly, of course. Thing is, the ideal woman is still held to be inferior to the ideal man.
@Nathan:
“So, by your logic, a woman in the corporate world, dealing with prejudice- that is not misogyny? The alleged glass ceiling? You’ve just invalidated a whole lot of feminist theory.”
Nope. By my logic, a woman being pressured to be a mother or to be a “stay at home mom” wouldn’t be misogyny. Anyway, it’s not something I personally am particularly tied to. I’m more concerned with the comparison between misogyny and misandry, which you’ve already admitted was no comparison.
“There is a cultural- yes, an institutional- perception that men are dangerous, especially around children, and they are treated accordingly.”
I don’t see the “around children” thing like I’ve already said. The “men are dangerous” thing does exist to a degree… though usually it intersects with a bunch of horrid racial and cultural stereotypes. It’s hardly oppression (unless you use a very small definition of oppression). But again, MRAs use the word “misandry” to mean equal and opposite to misogyny. That is simply not the case.
“As to your last point, I’ve read quite of bit of modern feminist writing. Are you saying they do not analyze our culture? Pretty bold statement.”
Didn’t say that at all. I’m just sick and tired of people coming on to this blog proclaiming what feminists all do, ignoring the actual feminists they are talking to in the process. Like I said, talk to us, not to them.
Fun fact! I went to high school with an actual, bona fide supermodel. She’s from a rich family too. So – rich, beautiful, successful in her chosen career.
Is her life therefore free of misogyny? If you answered “yes”, you don’t understand how this stuff works.
The kind of woman society likes, depends very much on which bit of society you are in at the time
Does anyone have the patience to explain the whole gilded cage concept to this person? My current level of patience with willful stupidity is not very high,
@CassandraSays:
At this point we’re just quibbling over definitions… Because apparently being able to use the word “misandry” makes the situation so much different than what it actually is.
No, what’s going on is that the word “misandry” implies an equivalence to “misogyny,” and makes the “oppression” that men face on equal grounds to the oppression women face. The word shouldn’t matter, and yet it does.
I’m still lauging at the idea that idealised women don’t face much misogyny. That’s so absurd that you know that whatever comes next is going to be hilariously stupid.
Thanks for repeating exactly what I said, Cassandra.
I wrote a longer post and the internet connection crapped out on me, but here’s your logic in a nutshell:
“Society has contempt for career women, but that’s not misogyny, because it’s just “one subsection of the group”; likewise, society has contempt for unconventional men, but that’s not misandry, because it’s just “one subsection of the group.”
Of course the ideal woman will face misogyny (as I said already). But she will not experience as much- nearly as much, actually. Does this mean all misogyny she does not experience is invalidated? Of course not- just like the misandry unconventional men face is not invalidated because the ideal man would not experience it.
Again: get over yourself. You’re not a martyr. You’re using a computer; you’re privileged as fuck-all. Have you had successful relationships? A good job? Basic social skills? There are a hell of a lot of men who have it harder than you.
Found this on wikipedia:
“Misogyny …. is a central part of sexist prejudice and ideology and, as such, is an important basis for the oppression of females in male-dominated societies. Misogyny is manifested in many different ways, from jokes to pornography to violence to the self-contempt women may be taught to feel toward their own bodies.”
Misogyny probably has a broader meaning in modern circles to include systematic bias against women (with pay gaps and so forth) that stem from viewing women as less intelligent, capable and so on than men. But this definition implies that a society cannot be both misandric and misogynistic (to nearly the same degree) unless every hates everyone else (in which case no society).
Also, kirby, nowhere do I say that misandry is equivalent to misgyny; in fact, I have twice now answered that in the negative. If you want to think that calling hatred for men a word is “implying false equivalence”, well, that’s your problem.
Actually Nathan, studies have been done that show fat women are actually discriminated more than fat men. This is so because a woman’s main value is based on her appearance, thus if she does not live up to a conventional standard of beauty she will be punished for it. That is a form of misogyny because it dehumanizes women and tells us we are only worth something to society and men if we look good. What we do and who we are isn’t important. In the same way a gorgeous woman will get admired for her looks but once she loses them she’s nothing. There’s also the assumption that because she’s beautiful she must be shallow or dumb or that she uses men.
You’re going to have to link me to that, Kirby; certainly, that’s one interpretation of the word. An incorrect interpretation, and a simplistic one (IMO), but it exists. Of course it’s on Wikipedia. But it’s not the common definition.
Okay, I’ll repeat myself: Prejudice against non-conforming men cannot logically be called misandry because IT IS NOT PREJUDICE AGAINST MEN AS A WHOLE.
By your reasoning, one could argue that white supremacists getting angry at white people who like hip-hop is a result of their bias against white people. It makes no sense,
@Nathan:
“Again: get over yourself. You’re not a martyr. You’re using a computer; you’re privileged as fuck-all. Have you had successful relationships? A good job? Basic social skills? There are a hell of a lot of men who have it harder than you.”
You need a crash course in what privilege actually means. Privilege (as I recall, and everyone feel free to correct me) is a concept used to describe how different groups in society face fundamentally different obstacles in their lives. White people don’t experience racism the way black people do, mentally well people don’t face the stigma that mentally unwell people do, able-bodied people don’t face the same challenges that the disabled do.
Privilege is something that is imposed by society on you based on what you are born with. It doesn’t mean your life is better in every way than someone with “less privilege,” and in fact that phrase is meaningless. Privilege describes all of the things you do not experience, not the things you do experience, and the rhetoric of privilege is a device to remind you that just because you don’t see or recognize oppression yourself doesn’t mean that a group you don’t belong to doesn’t.
It’s also a term that’s been hijacked by people who are called “privileged” because they think it is used as a beat stick (and sometimes it is), when in reality its used to alert them to the fact that they are trying to explain to an oppressed person exactly how they are not oppressed at all. -_-
Of course, using the word privilege is useless if you don’t have the evidence to back it up, which is why the constant assertions by MRAs that there is “woman privilege” falls so flat on its head.
Right, Quackers, I agree- just like the suspicion of men around children is rooted in the misandrist idea that men are predatory. But Kirby and Cassandra seem to be suggesting that is in fact NOT misogyny, because “only a certain type of man” will be attracted to childcare in the first place.
“Again: get over yourself. You’re not a martyr. You’re using a computer; you’re privileged as fuck-all. Have you had successful relationships? A good job? Basic social skills? There are a hell of a lot of men who have it harder than you.”
LOL. And the tantrum begins.
The point you’re stubbornly refusing the grasp is that society has contempt for all women, it’s just that the degree of contempt can sometimes be variable by subgroup. Society does not have contempt for all men.
No offence, Nathan, but you’re a bit out of your depth on this particular blog, intellectually speaking.
And as I’ve repeated ad naseum, Cassandra, society does have contempt for all men in a sense- just one example of which is the idea that men are predatory. The “ideal man” won’t experience this much, but it will still affect his life.
“And as I’ve repeated ad naseum, Cassandra, society does have contempt for all men in a sense”
Notice that you felt the need to add a qualifier there? It’s because your basic assertion is not true, and on some level you know that.
And Dracula, I repeat: prejudice against non-conforming women can, by your logic, not be called misogyny because it is not something that affects women as a whole.
@Nathan:
Link to the wiki? okay.
“If you want to think that calling hatred for men a word is “implying false equivalence”, well, that’s your problem.”
Go ahead and use the word if you want. In a vacuum misandry is a very good word to have. But we don’t live in a vacuum; we live in a society where ‘misandry’ has cropped up as a reaction against the use of the word ‘misogyny’ by people who wish to show that men are just as badly off as women. In other words, false equivalence.
I wonder though… Is that all you want to do? Use the word ‘misandry’ and have feminists accept that it exists? I did that in one of my first responses.
That is not a qualifier, Cassandra. Men don’t experience misandry in every single aspect of their lives; ditto for women and misogyny. That’s all I’m saying.
The stupid is strong with this one.
Also, saying “I have repeated X ad nauseum” does not make X true.
@Kirby, actually, this weirdo fringe group called the MRAs use the word to claim that men are as bad off as women. You need to look at the bigger picture- the MRAs are nobodies in the grand scheme of things. In mainstream society, I’ve literally NEVER heard the word used. Not that the word “misogyny” is super common either, but it’s sure as hell more mainstream than the idea of “misandry”.
@Nathan:
“Right, Quackers, I agree- just like the suspicion of men around children is rooted in the misandrist idea that men are predatory.”
I’m gonna go out on a limb and say it; this “misandrist idea” doesn’t exist. It’s an idea oft repeated in the manosphere, but again only in hypotheticals and assertions. It simply is not true that all men are considered predatory towards children, it’s men who don’t look as well kept or wear a specific kind of coat or whatever. It has nothing to do with men in general, and it isn’t nearly as prevalent as MRAs would have you think.
@Nathan:
“I’ve literally NEVER heard the word used. Not that the word “misogyny” is super common either, but it’s sure as hell more mainstream than the idea of “misandry”.”
Okay… so you have two words which have precious use in the mainstream world… and you agree that misogyny is much more of a problem than your definition of misandry… so… what? So what if you’ve never heard it? I have, and I’ve used the word myself. It just isn’t that big a deal, so the word isn’t really used. Misogyny is a big deal, and it is used quite often. What else do you expect?
The stupid? Don’t think so. Anyone with two brain cells can see that men face contempt in society, and if you choose to come up with convoluted explanations so you can keep your little gender oppression all to yourself, well, whatever.
I shouldn’t have included that “martyr” paragraph directed at Cassandra. Mea culpa.
” Anyone with two brain cells can see that men face contempt in society, and if you choose to come up with convoluted explanations so you can keep your little gender oppression all to yourself, well, whatever.”
I’m just reposting this so that everyone can savor the delicious irony.
Nathan I would argue that that isn’t the result of misandry, but society’s (rightful) fear of child predators. Most pedophiles tend to be men, so it’s not hatred of men that causes that assumption, it’s just looking at the news and jumping to conclusions. We hear more stories in the news about female teachers abusing teenage boys too, the more stories we hear about that, I think the more people will start making assumptions about them too.
Also I think you’re pushing it a bit to be honest, I’ve never heard of this rampant assumption that men are afraid of going into childcare because they’re worried people will assume they are pedos. Maybe men don’t go into childcare because it pays shit and doesn’t have very much status (if one believes the studies that say men choose careers based on status and money) If men are actually discriminated against when entering childcare professions, and there are people trying to keep them out due to their own prejudice, then yes that is discrimination and it needs to be stopped.
Then you got all those conservative and MRA shits who accuse feminists of trying to feminize men when they encourage men to be “nurturing” and take a more active role in their children’s lives and even by entering childcare professions. There’s still the idea that it’s women’s work thus not as important/less prestigious.
@Kirby- Then what exactly are you complaining about, if- as you say- you hear the word misogyny “quite often” and the word misandry just occasionally? Seems about right to me, so who are these mysterious people who utilize the word to “show that men are just as badly off as women”? Do not cite the MRAs, they are a crazy fringe.
@Nathan:
“Do not cite the MRAs, they are a crazy fringe.”
O_O huh…
Well, they’re the ones raising a huge fuss over how oppressed men are. So if you take them out, then… Nobody I guess. Take out the racists and you won’t have anyone complaining how oppressed white people are.
“Then what exactly are you complaining about, if- as you say- you hear the word misogyny “quite often” and the word misandry just occasionally? Seems about right to me…”
O______O Aren’t you the one complaining that misandry isn’t a recognized term? And I’m the one responding… to… you? Ow… my head.
Quackers- fair enough- then how about the more innocuous perception that men are simply incompetent when it comes to childcare?
And Cassandra, since I’ve already stated two, three, no I think four times that misogyny is a problem- not just a problem, but a greater problem than misandry- I don’t see the irony.
Of course you don’t see it. That doesn’t mean that is isn’t there.
(Side note – this dude reminds me of my friend’s ex. I’m so glad she didn’t marry him.)
And Dracula, I repeat: prejudice against non-conforming women can, by your logic, not be called misogyny because it is not something that affects women as a whole.
This suggests that misogyny and gender policing are the same thing. Which is something I would argue against, actually. So no, you’re not using my reasoning, you’re twisting it.
@Nathan:
“then how about the more innocuous perception that men are simply incompetent when it comes to childcare?”
GENDER ROLES! Like I’ve been saying this entire time!!! ARGH!!! You don’t get to start saying everything we’re saying like we’re the ones arguing against it! That’s not how it works!!!
@Kirby, come on, don’t be willfully obtuse. You said that we live in a culture when “misandry” is often used to imply a false equivalence to misogyny, and therefore it’s a loaded term. Well, sure, maybe, if you visit Manboobz a lot and hang around all the MRA forums. Outside of them, though, I don’t see the word “misandry” being invoked at all, much less to shut down discussions about women’s issues.
That’s a real great attitude to have towards women who are trying to step up and aquire these dangerous jobs. Damned if you do, damned if you don’t with the MRM as usual.
They don’t want women to take difficult jobs. They want women to admit their inferiority and accept that their proper place in life is serving men and apologizing constantly for existing.
I was leafing through Ms. magazine at the checkout stand today. There’s an article about how women in the military should be allowed into the same combat positions as men, and an article about how exciting it was that science might be on the verge of developing a male birth control pill. It’s almost as if feminists care about issues that affect men.
Right, Kirby, and most misogyny is directed at women who fail to conform to their own gender roles. An ideal woman will still face misogyny, but not as much. Does this then invalidate all the misogyny she does not experience?
@Nathan:
“You said that we live in a culture when “misandry” is often used to imply a false equivalence to misogyny, and therefore it’s a loaded term.”
Here’s what I said: “we live in a society where ‘misandry’ has cropped up as a reaction against the use of the word ‘misogyny’ by people who wish to show that men are just as badly off as women. In other words, false equivalence.”
And earlier, I explicitly mentioned the MRAs as the ones who are doing this. Granted its not the clearest wording possible, but you aren’t reading very carefully.
“Right, Kirby, and most misogyny is directed at women who fail to conform to their own gender roles.”
Ah, at least now it’s clearer how specifically Nathan doesn’t understand the terms he’s throwing around.
Okay, Dracula, well then:
– Prejudice/bile against career women? Not misogyny, it’s gender policing. (I guess that MRA who refers to such women as “lawyerc*nts” is not a misogynist).
– Prejudice/bile against outspoken women? Not misogyny, it’s gender policing.
– Prejudice against feminist women? Not misogyny, it’s gender policing.
If you believe this, fine, but most feminists I’ve read would disagree with you.