What on earth is misogynist about calling all the fucking cunts who accuse men of rape of being goddamn lying bitches?
It’s a simple question, but does this simple question infuriate you? If you are a misogynist then probably not.
Those who do not hold a deep hatred for women might find the above question to be very offensive, and it is. A more important question would be; do you think the only person that would ever say something this offensive could possibly be anything other than an ignorant woman hater? Think carefully before you respond because the person who asked this question might not uphold the “neckbeard” redneck image usually placed on those evil misogynists. Who asked it? I’ll get to that later. First, I have to elaborate on a small social experiment I recently enacted on the men’s rights subreddit a few days ago.
A user posted a statement to the subreddit, which read;
For all the good work we do pointing out feminist hypocrisy, I think it important to acknowledge that there does seem to be a lot of misogyny on reddit. I don’t think it does our movement any good to pretend it doesn’t exist. Instead, I think we should create the circumstances that allows us to contribute toward determining what is and what is not misogyny.
Everything about this statement, in my opinion, is true. However, something that has bothered me since I began working with the men’s rights movement was distilled in that reddit post. The word misogyny has been used to classify everything from hatred towards women to minor disagreements between ideologues.
An individual stating the truth, that some women lie about abuse in order to gain the upper hand in a child custody dispute is likely be labeled a misogynist.
The tactic, now common; of classifying anyone with an opposing view as a misogynist woman hater has been a growing source of irritation.
To challenge this worldview I made a statement on the reddit post which received a fair amount of attention. The posting was an impulsive decision, but I felt it needed to be done. My intent was not simply to challenge this worldview with feminists but with MRAs as well. Here is that statement;
Misogyny: The hatred of women
Not misogyny: Bad taste jokes about rape/abuse/etc. Logic. Counterarguments. Disagreements. Harsh language. Saying cunt. Saying bitch. Calling women names. Being pro-life. Calling a woman who accuses a man of rape a liar.
Why are none of these things misogyny? Because you do not have to hate women to do any or all of these things. You might, but not everyone who does them hate women.
Misogyny: The hatred of women
Not misogyny: Any and every reason that a feminist would call a man (or woman) a misogynist.
The word is being applied to things that do not uphold its meaning.
I think the word most people are looking for when they react to most of the things I listed above is, asshole.
But because feminists have slung the word around so freely, labelling anyone they disagree with, any time they read something critical or disparaging of a woman, they automatically think “misogyny” when it really isn’t.
My two cents.
You will probably not be surprised to learn my posting lit a fire beneath the collectivist asses previously pushing that claim of misogyny. This was my intention. Ideologues can usually be counted on to focus on minutia, ignoring the intent of argument to attacking one word or point. Flying into full-screech, hyped up on emotion and fueled by personal outrage.
The first response was from someone who I don’t believe was a full-patch feminist. I didn’t bother to ask but the response was what I expected;
Calling every woman who accuses a man of rape a liar. hmmm…
I responded, and we went back and forth for a while. The argument was civil enough with no insults being flung from either side. The beginning of the discussion had yielded the concession I was looking for.
Referring to my statement that “Calling a woman who accuses a man of rape a liar” does not constitute hatred of women.
When my debater admitted that while it’s true not everyone who would say something like that is a woman hater, most of the people that do must be. I asked for proof in support of this claim.
This is where things went downhill.
My request for any type of proof was denied and instead proof was demanded of me to show that not everyone who says this is a woman hater. I obliged the commentator with a link to the definition of the word misogyny and was quickly told this would not be good enough. A “census, survey, study” or anything other than the definition of the word was demanded of me to prove that misogyny meant the hatred of women and calling women names was not the equivalent of hating women.
This, is where things went really downhill.
I was told that using words like cunt or bitch were misogynistic acts. That is, the act of saying a word someone finds offensive is equivalent to hating women. Next I was told that just because someone makes a sandwich joke they might not be a misogynist, but their actions are misogynistic.
By this point I was beyond baffled. Not at the fact that there were people who thought this way, but at how they attempted to justify this “logic” in their arguments. I was told an individual making such a joke must have serious contempt for women. This was only the beginning of the nonsense I witnessed, and wasn’t even the worst of it. I’ll return to the sandwich shortly.
My next detractor was slightly more thoughtful, stating agreement that the things I listed as not being misogyny were in fact not misogyny. At least not by the definition of “misogyny,” but that there are many sociological theories and representations surrounding the word that broaden its meaning. I agree with this, but that does not diminish the point I was making in my statement.
Then, what I had been waiting for happened. The feminist ideologues and trolls stormed in.
This is where the debate returned to the “inherent misogyny” of the sandwich. No, I’m not making that up or joking.
This portion of the debate was the payoff for my post. A commenter from one of the down-vote brigade trolling subreddits decided to engage me where my first detractors left off, with the sandwich joke.
I was told that a person saying a sandwich joke may not be misogynistic but the joke itself is inherently misogynistic.
Go ahead and read that again, I’ll wait.
I wondered if I was seeing things, but that was indeed the counterargument being put forth. So, propelled by curiosity, I asked this feminist how a sandwich joke could be inherent woman hatred. Her response was mind-boggling.
It assumes that the male is a command authority who can order the female to do whatever he wishes. His command to do what is considered stereotypical “woman’s work” (i.e. cooking.) It makes the assumption that the female belongs in a kitchen instead of, say, in a laboratory, on a construction site, in a boardroom, or in a space shuttle. Finally, it ignores all the wants, wishes, desires, dreams and opinions of the female. She is just someone to be ordered around by the male with absolutely no thought whatsoever as to what she thinks or feels.
Okay, I’ll admit that telling a sandwich joke, or a stove joke, or a vacuum cleaner joke, or any kind of joke in the context this feminist was describing can imply some of the reasoning behind their absurd previous statement. But is all of that inherent to the sandwich joke? Just the sandwich joke? A sandwich joke inherently represents a man as the “command authority?” I didn’t ask the feminist this next question when I replied.
I didn’t really have to ask this in order to refute the ridiculousness of the statement but… what if said sandwich joke is being directed towards a man? What if … and this is an even more radical scenario, what if it is a woman telling the joke about a man? Does the joke somehow change from being inherent misogyny to inherent misandry?
No. It doesn’t. The joke holds no inherent misogyny or misandry. The joke is misogynistic if it is told in the context of misogyny, which is the hatred of women. This feminist, like most I have met has perceptual blindness to what I like to call: “facts and common sense”. The only way she was able to field her argument was by adding on a list of things she feels is hatred towards women. I can’t really see how a man being assumed as the one in charge is equivalent to the hatred of women, but I digress.
This tactic; adding on things that actual woman-haters are known to do, is what all but a few of the trolls replying to my statement attempted. All to disprove my claim that the definition of the word misogyny is what that word actually means, rather than whatever insults or offensive jokes and phrases that they don’t like. This is a problem that has needed addressing for a long time. It is one thing to apply a statement like “women are liars when it concerns rape” to misogyny but when the word gets saturated in enough ideological dogma, sandwich jokes suddenly become the beacon of our culture’s supposed woman hatred.
Sandwich jokes.
I would like everyone to take a brief break from this article to look at a short segment from the comedian Dave Chappelle. Skip to around 1:53 in the video and listen till about 2:50. Now please ask yourself, where exactly was the inherent woman hatred in that joke? According to feminist ideologues, Dave Chappelle holds contempt for women. I don’t know the man personally so it’s possible that he does, but stating so definitively requires a huge assumption. This is amplified if we’re going to base that assumption off of a sandwich joke. But hey that’s “logic” coloured through an ideologue’s lense for you.
My final detractor, or rather my latest detractor, is none other than Mr. David “men can cause more damage with their bare hands so they are a bigger problem when it comes to domestic violence” Futrelle. For anyone who was wondering who this nefarious, neckbeard scratching, woman hating sleaze ball is I quoted at the beginning of this article, stop wondering. That’s right, Mr. Futrelle, his self-righteous, morally superior man-boobs jiggling, is the misogynist you’re looking for.
No the feminists say?
It’s difficult to claim of the writer of the question: “What on earth is misogynist about calling all the fucking cunts who accuse men of rape of being goddamn lying bitches?” is a misogynist, regardless of the reason why he said it, and still deny Futrelle’s inherent woman hatred.
Oh and because of my inherent integrity, something our depraved and futile friend dave seems to know little about, I’ll admit I took his statement out of context. I’ll do him a favor and repeat the statement in it’s entirety.
Seriously. What on earth is misogynist about calling all the fucking cunts who accuse men of rape of being goddamn lying bitches? When guys call women lying whores, they do it out of love.
But hey, in all seriousness, I have to give [blank] props here for actually raising the issue of misogyny in r/mensrights.
You see! He was only “mocking” the misogyny of people who say those things seriously. But wait, he still said it. If something as harmless as a sandwich joke holds inherent misogyny and if the simple act of uttering the words cunt or bitch, for whatever reason is misogynistic then, wow, I don’t know what to say, Dave. According to your groupies, you’re a misogynist.
The logic hasn’t sunk in yet? Allow me break it down for ya right quick, playa.
My original statement, you know the one that you quote-mined, leaving out the bottom half in order to induce that ‘anti-misogynist rage without reading an entire statement’ that your commentators are known for? Well, in that statement I said that there are things being applied to the word misogyny that do not uphold its meaning.
I said people, mostly feminist ideologues, are using the word to classify other people as woman haters just because those people happen to say something that pisses them off. The meat of my argument is the point I made at the end of my statement (the point you left out), which is classifying someone as a woman hater just because they say something that angers you or something you disagree with is more than just intellectually dishonest. It’s dangerous.
There have been men and women classified as misogynists for not only saying the one sentence you and your groupies would like to focus on, but also every other thing I listed. Words are powerful. Words can cost people their jobs or even incite violence and physical harm. Misogynist, which you toss so freely about is one of the most powerful words in our time.
There was no word of defense in my statement for the people who do any of the hurtful things I listed. In fact I called the people who do and say some of those things, assholes. I state agin, that was what you “conveniently” left out. I said the people who do and say these things might hate women. Hell, some random person plowing a field out in the middle of nowhere “might hate women” but not everyone who might do or say these things hates women. In your snark, you make the implied claim of “why else would anyone say something like that?”
Let’s examine why someone would say that all women are liars when it concerns rape. Let’s posit a man who has just lost his brother. He and his brother had always been close. They did everything together and were always getting one another into and out of trouble. One day a woman accuses him of raping her.
There weren’t any police involved and there was no trial. This was not because the woman never reported the alleged crime but it was because another man, perhaps her relative; believed her, and took matters into his own hands. In a story repeated all too often, he located the accused rapist and killed him.
He may have later learned there was no rape, and the claim was motivated by jealously, or to cover up infidelity, or for attention, or any other reason. Whatever the reason, she lied. Doesn’t matter, a man dies, another man goes to jail, their families are shattered and destroyed, the local community talks about it for years. The damage splashes outwards onto relatives, brothers, in-laws.
Now imagine some third individual witness to these events, whose father, or brother, or uncle destroyed in the narrative described. Some man whose life was touched by this outward ripple of damage. Years later, at his friend’s house a news broadcast pops up on the television. “Woman raped behind college dorm” the report says. The man in company he trusts says, “she’s probably lying like all women do.”
Oh but that scenario is bullshit right? Because no one ever loses their life over a false rape accusation, right? Ok. Well what if someone just says it out of frustration from hearing about so many people being wrongly accused of rape? Better yet, what if some quote mining jackass on the internet decides to say it in “mockery” of a valid argument? Because that never happens, right Futrelle?
Misogyny: The hatred of women
That is what misogyny means. Regardless of how upsetting it is to hear “All women lie about rape”, regardless of it’s veracity or falsehood, you don’t know what the person who said it actually thinks.
Are they ignorant for saying it? Possibly. However, ignorance might not apply, and the reason for stating an obviously hateful lie might involve a real hatred of the female sex, wrapped in a cloak of pious opportunist chivalry as Futrelle himself has demonstrated.
Another response to my statement worthy of mention flips the coin on this issue to the other side of misogyny, which is misandry.
The thing is, a lot of the things that we call misandry also cover a range of things just as wide, and yet, we use that term all the time. I just think that we should refrain from culturing a double standard.
That quote tells the truth, and I had to step outside myself to address it long before I made my statement on reddit. It is no secret to anyone who reads my articles that I sling the words misandry, bigot, and hatemonger around with relative ease. In doing so, I am just as wrong as Futrelle is for claiming anyone who says something bad about women is a misogynist. This applies to nearly every MRA I have read, as well.
This is why I said near the beginning of this peice not only to challenge the absurdity orbiting the word misogyny but also to challenge those who call out misandry. It’s no secret that I am not a fan of Jessica Valenti.
I must have repeatedly pointed out her advocation for elimination of the legal right of due process. I have called this an act of misandry on many occasions. I was wrong. Stripping people of their right to due process is not misandric. Calling for only men to loose the right of due process is not misandric. The act itself is not misandric. However, if the person advocating for that act to take place or the person carrying out that act is doing so because of their hatred towards the male sex, then the act is misandric.
I expect I just lost about 25% of my MRA fan mail with that statement. too bad. Just like there are several reasons besides hate to say something hurtful, there are several reasons besides hate to do something hurtful.
Domestic violence shelters provide another example. For the moment, let’s ignore government funded shelters which have been known to falsify statistics, thereby justify denial of assistance to men in programs that were enacted on the premise of helping both men and women.
Let’s think about domestic violence shelters which actually fund themselves. These are privately owned and the owners can admit whoever they want. Naturally, certain individuals would only allow women aid in these shelters.
Is this because some of them hate men? Probably. But do all of them? Probably not.
Not every feminist literally hates men, but why else would they deny men?
Well, some women, especially feminist women, are actually frightened of men. In fact many women who seek aid in these shelters are frightened of men. If there is only one shelter and it is owned by feminists, then most likely only women are going to be admitted. Women walking away from an abusive relationship might actually be afraid of men in general.
This might be the only reason why they would restrict access to men, even if they genuinely need help. Does the routine denial of help to male victims of domestic abuse help piss me off? Oh yes, a great deal and I have on more than one occasion, called anyone who would do such a horrible thing misandrists and/or bigots.
It gets worse. Some feminists will deny aid to men because they truly believe that domestic violence is a gendered crime that only women suffer. While this is an ignorant belief, it doesn’t necessarily have to be a hateful belief. But that is where the term misandry, like misogyny, loses some of its weight. Just because a feminist might be fucking stupid for believing something as outdated and ignorant as that doesn’t mean she or he hates men.
I do understand the tendency we humans have to lash out at those who we feel are doing great harm, and as I said I am as guilty as those I have written about. When I first saw the “a man is a rape supporter if…” list; the first words that came to my mind were “fucking misandric bigot” and that mindset carried over into the response article I wrote. That response article was a satirical copy of the list but instead of rape supporters the list read “a feminist hates men if…”
I found it interesting, after I considered how far the words misogyny and misandry have been diluted on both sides, that even though I knew the things I listed weren’t definitive actions a man hater would take, they were still pretty horrible things to do so I figured “what the hell? This asshole probably really does hate men anyway.”
Ill state clearly I strongly believe she does, but I could be wrong. She might actually believe every man is a potential rapist and still not hate all men. She might just be stupid.
Why is any of this important? Words can be dangerous. The term “hate speech” is slowly rising in the western zeitgeist. It is becoming illegal to say what others find too offensive. A false empathy, pretence of sensitivity to the bruised feelings of others is beginning to override our free will and expression. I am not suggesting that we should openly pile vitriol on those we disagree with. However, I do not want to live a world where hurting someone’s feelings is a crime.
Words are powerful, but they are only powerful if you give them power.
In an open society, people will say things which upset us.
Calling them woman haters, man haters, or assclowns does not always make it so.
After some consideration , I have decided to avoid the impulse to accuse someone of hating an entire sex when their apparently ignorant, or hateful declarations piss me off. I hold that Jessica Valenti is still a misandric bigot. But I acknowledge I could be wrong.
Oh and on a final note to my quote mining friend. Those lying bitches you speak of really wouldn’t know real misogyny if it bit them on the ass.
