jump to navigation

Sorry, Anti-Feminists: There’s No Such Thing as Misandry August 30, 2009

Posted by FCM in authors picks, liberal dickwads, MRAs, pop culture, sorry!.
Tags: , , , ,

its a modern, made-up word that makes you look stupid. and its misogynist as fuck.  so stop using it.

“misandry” is a word that doesnt represent any real thing, a kind of a placeholder in our consciousness for an experience that does not, and indeed cannot, exist.  so why have i been accused of perpetrating it about a million times in the last month?

i have come to see the word “misandry” as a euphemism for feminism, and “misandrist” as a euphemism for feminist, rather than anything that actually exists in real life, to any troubling degree, or in any meaningful way.  while anti-feminists and misogynists bandy the terms about with glee, in reality, its just another flaccid jab at feminism, and feminists, by privileged men whose perverse denial of reality leads them to believe (or pretend to believe) that they are on the receiving end of institutional sexism as much as they benefit from it.  and that they suffer relational abuse just as frequently as they dish it out.

heres an excerpt from the very excellent analysis in ‘adonis mirror‘:

While men have long enjoyed attacking ungrateful women as “man haters,” the epithet seems more than a little bit silly when transposed onto the printed page—something demanded by the burgeoning market for so-called Men’s Studies materials. It certainly lacks the gravitas required to reflect the widespread injury and social disadvantages that many white males believe they endure on a daily basis. Thus a more scientific-sounding term was needed for “the hatred of men” and antifeminists crafted one out of their own perverted imagination of antiquity: misandry. (link).

as the author notes, only an anti-feminist would think to define misogyny’s ‘opposite’ as the hatred of men: more reasonably, woman-hating would be opposed to woman-loving, would it not?  but leave it to a misogynist to define all things in relation to mens experience: they wouldnt think to define anything without evoking a male image, and considering (even imagining, with no basis in reality) not whether but how that “thing” would affect men.

and whether misandry even exists is entirely beside the point, isnt it?  in fact, whether an inversion of the word “misogyny” was even necessary appears to be irrelevant.  its striking that power-grabbing and reclaiming behaviors are triggered whenever privilege is challenged, and that the power-grabbing often takes the form specifically of creating made-up words.  privileged males have historically held power over the rest of us through language, including of course the written word and literacy, but also the making of language itself. they have historically chosen how certain issues are framed, by the way they are referred to, by words. referring to sexual intercourse as the man “penetrating” instead of the woman “enveloping” for example.  more broadly, those who have traditionally benefitted from social and political privilege coined the new, made-up term “politically correct” to undermine and denigrate those doing the questioning.  the intellectual dishonesty is dizzying, truly.

theres a lot of great reading in the adonis mirror article, but the thing it does exceptionally well is to put the word “misandry” and those who use it in their proper historical and social context.  whats revealed is that its a very recent invention, and an entirely gratuitous and unnatural inversion of an existing term that really has no corresponding “opposite” used to evoke a decidedly modern sense of, literally, terror.  heres another excerpt:

As words, misandry and homicide-bomber have everything in common. Both are attempts to deliberately reframe an existing concept: neither makes any empirical sense without prior knowledge of “misogyny” and “suicide-bomber” as a reference point. Both attempt to invert power structures through their rhetoric: women and developing nations are seen as cowardly oppressors who refuse to honorably fight, and lose, on an uneven footing. Both are also tied to specific political groups: antifeminists and American conservatives. Yet while one term is a laughing stock of the liberal community, misandry has been making significant headway.

see the discussion on newsvine here.  its an excellent, excellent piece that i plan to link to, every time the subject is broached.  which is pretty much every day, if you are a feminist, or a bitch.

when this word is used here or anywhere, i invite readers to put it in its correct context, and to identify the anti-feminist and misogynist agenda thats being pushed.  there are those who will push back with made-up bullshit when their privilege is questioned, and its our responsibility (and my delight) to push the fuck back.



1. lenfirewood - September 12, 2009

Listen if you want to try and prove something doesn’t exist it isn’t very smart to demonstrate it’s existence like you did with this fatuous attempt at a denial. The fact that even the word ‘misandry’ only began to be recognised in a tiny handful of dictionaries 10 years ago attests to how rife misandry ALREADY was within our culture. The word ‘misogyny’ on the other hand was ubiquitous in all but the most compact dictionaries. I’m sure you and many of your sisters really think ‘black’ is really ‘white’ but please don’t assume the rest of us have sacrificed the use of our brains in order to stay in lockstep with an ideology demonstrably based on nothing better than animus.

factcheckme - September 12, 2009

sorry, len. misandry doesnt exist, and feminists do not “demostrate” misandry by being feminist. furthermore, to attempt (like you and other anti-feminists do) to equate an individual woman “hating” men (i dont) with the cultural, institutional, and relational misogyny that women experience is disingenuous.

2. earwicga - September 13, 2009

“The fact that even the word ‘misandry’ only began to be recognised in a tiny handful of dictionaries 10 years ago attests to how rife misandry ALREADY was within our culture.”

One of the funniest comments I have EVER read on a blog post. Well done Len, you should be on the stage…

factcheckme - September 13, 2009

very much agreed, earwicga. i am sick of these whiners claiming that “they have it bad too.” or in other words, “what about teh MENZ?!” its so cliche as to be included on the anti-feminist and concern-troll bingo cards. thanks for stopping by!

3. Undercover Punk - September 13, 2009

this is fucking awesome. thank you!

seriously. and in WHAT WAY would misandry, even if Real, NOT be an ENTIRELY RATIONAL RESPONSE to the tragic statistics on sexual assault, generalized violence, emotional abuse, abandonment (see single motherhood), and social domination perpetrated BY men AGAINST women? WHAT. WAY. add to that disparities in pay, professional advancement, and political representation; and hey, “misadnry” starts sounding downright reasonable!

when i can safely walk the streets ALONE at night IN THE DARK, as a man can, i’ll consider the MRA’s outrageous claims of male oppression.

thanks for blogging! i love it!

factcheckme - September 13, 2009

“misandry” starts sounding downright reasonable!

it certainly does, doesnt it? thats what often gets left out of these discussions is the reasonableness of womens fear/avoidance/hatred or whatever of men. its immimently reasonable considering the circumstances. and even so, most women do NOT hate or avoid men. if a woman has been violently victimized by a man (or many men) and many, many women are, she would have that much more reason to hate them. but again, most women dont hate men, no matter whats been done to her, by any man. there are a hell of a lot of woman-hating men out there though, who have never been victimized by a woman, or by a “matriarchal” or “misandrist” culture that hates or victimizes them. makes you wonder WTF is wrong with these woman-hating men doesnt it?

4. factcheckme - September 14, 2009

LOL heres a “critic” (MRA) taking issue with my article.


personally, i rate it an epic FAIL…and thats after correcting for my obvious bias. see what you think.

5. Undercover Punk - September 14, 2009

Omg, he talks about me too! HA! FAIL! FAIL! FAIL!!

What he doesn’t realize is that I’m a lesbian separatist with no interest whatsoever in playing nice with men. I gave up on caring about men after approximately 20 years of being consistently treated as less-than by them. This was a completely rational decision on my part. And if he, or any other men, think I should turn the other cheek and keep taking the abuse, they have another thing coming!

I assume what he means here is that men prefer to murder their equals rather than to sexually assault them:

Nevermind that if women were to become equal to men in terms of likelihood of being a victim of violent crime they would see a sharp decrease in the likelihood of being sexually attacked and a sharp increase in likelihood of being murdered.

” Um, sexual assault IS a violent crime. And it usually goes unreported. I don’t know what “likelihood” he’s referring to, but I don’t usually talk to men on the internet so I probably won’t every find out.

Also, NO, it is NOT OK for me to complain about my middle-class oppression or my white oppression. Because poor people and people of color face MUCH MORE social oppression than I do & we need to fix that FIRST. So, no, it is also NOT OK for men to complain about their male oppression–I don’t want to hear their whining while I can’t walk the street at night alone. So hell YES, shut up! you’re privileged!! when it’s matter of comparative oppression.

If misogyny ain’t a joke, and it’s not–it’s a fucking EPEDEMIC–then this analysis of misandry ain’t a joke neither!

factcheckme, GO ON!!

factcheckme - September 14, 2009

speaking of “playing nice” with the MRAs, that guys blogroll is a laugh a minute. one blog is called “the nice feminist” which about says it all. i checked out a few of his blogs, and they are more of the same. his mission statement is a fail. and “gender critics” is an unabashed MRA group. ugh.

6. Joce Claire - September 15, 2009

Hello! Great post. The whole “politically correct” thing drives me crazy. Men talk about “having to be PC” like it’s equivalent to a form of governmental censorship, but what they really means is, “I want to be able to use racist, misogynistic, homophobic, ableist, etc. language without ever being asked to explain myself or have anyone be offended or avoid me because of it.” They think it is more important that they get to say what they what, without anyone thinking badly of them (which is not fucking censorship!), then try to avoid using words that make less privileged people feel bad. Another instance of white men thinking their feelings and their intentions are more important than the feelings of the less privileged.

7. Joce Claire - September 15, 2009


What. The. Fuck. According to wikipedia, misogyny is comparable to misandry? Even though one is a (at least) millennia-old systematic cause for the oppression of half the species, and one is … what, two women in a bar complaining about men? Fuck you, wikipedia.

factcheckme - September 15, 2009

Another instance of white men thinking their feelings and their intentions are more important than the feelings of the less privileged.

very true. i would take it a step further, and speculate that they want to be able to say whatever they want and still have sexual access to women. thats part (or most or all) of the “not wanting people to take offense or avoid them” for saying such horrible things. its definitely part of their entitlement mentality, as you note, and mens sexual entitlement to women is always in the forefront.

factcheckme - September 15, 2009

Fuck you, wikipedia.

this made me LOL. i thought i was the only one who told inanimate objects to go fuck themselves. wiki also has an entry for misandry, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Misandry and says its the parallel of misogyny. the author of the adonis mirror article is cited in the footnotes (thankfully! at least that):

Leader, Richard (2007). “Misandry: From the Dictionary of Fools”. Adonis Mirror. http://adonismirror.com/10152006_leader_misandry_and_misanthropy.htm. Retrieved 2007-12-28. article critical of the use of the term

critical of the use of the term? hardly. he totally blew it out of the water, and verbally castrated any asshole ignorant enough to use it.

Joce Claire - September 15, 2009

Oh, absolutely. I actually had a male “friend” tell me he wanted a relationship with me, after weeks of him calling me a “man-hating feminazi dyke” and referring to other women as “skanks,” “bitches,” “whores,” and “cunts.” When I told him I couldn’t date him because of his politics, he naturally assumed I meant because he was unattractive. And then he continued to tell me about how he had weird S&M fantasies of me beating him up. Yikes.

I don’t think sexual entitlement is always the case, though, because I know men who think they should be allowed to say the N-word and not be called racist (because being called racist is the worst insult! And besides, I only hate “certain kinds” of black people! Not all black people!)

Joce Claire - September 15, 2009

And yes, I have terrible friends. I am working on it.

8. Undercover Punk - September 15, 2009

it makes me LOL when you use the terms flaccid and castrate in the context of political debate about misandry! love it!

factcheckme - September 15, 2009

check out the MRAs stroking his ego, and watch him enjoying the hell outta it. its fucking disgusting. oh, and totally making me LOL. screw you, MRAs. they dont even have the language to criticise feminist material. read their words, and see if thats not the truth of it. look at their *words.* then, as a completely seperate exercise, see how they dont even make an ounce of rational sense. ugh. its painful to read.

9. berryblade - September 16, 2009

This was a fantastic read, thank you for writing this 🙂

factcheckme - September 16, 2009

glad you enjoyed it berryblade. thanks for stopping by!

10. Sorry, Anti-Feminists: Theres No Such Thing as Misandry - antimisandry.com - September 18, 2009

[…] […]

factcheckme - September 18, 2009

oooh, a pingback from an MRA chat…

11. cacophonies - September 21, 2009

I think that “misandry” is a perfectly acceptable term, and most certainly exists, but that there are two clearly different definitions of sexism/racism/homophobia/etc. in general, and often when there are arguments about them, it’s generally because the parties involved aren’t discussing the same version of the word. A fear or hatred of men certainly exists in individual people, there is no arguing that, and giving that behavior a name is not wrong. I get that you’re saying that misandry doesn’t exist because women have no power to use with their (implied) prejudice, and by that definition of sexism, I think you’re right on and I agree with you.

On the other hand, I’m willing to bet that the people who disagree with what you’re saying in this post aren’t using that same “prejudice + power” definition when they’re doing it. They’re only thinking of the individual aspects of sexism against males that they may experience or witness regularly. It’s valid on it’s own, but not when discussing the dynamics of “prejudice + power” structure.

(Also, I’m finding it very amusing that, as I write this comment, my spell check isn’t recognizing “misandry” as a word.)

Undercover Punk - September 21, 2009

Yes, indeed! The MRAs don’t seem to understand the very real & critical difference(s) between *SYSTEMATIC* *INSTITUTIONALIZED* oppression based on gender and the de-centralized, non-coordinated, even circumstantial experiences of some men who have suffered at the hands of some women. I thought about trying to elucidate this for them…but, you know, I have better things to do–like discussing lesbian chivalry!

cacophonies - September 21, 2009

I thought about trying to elucidate this for them…but, you know, I have better things to do–like discussing lesbian chivalry!

ha. I get that, for sure. I try to help people who complain this understand the difference while also respecting their complaints of de-centralized, circumstantial sexism against them, because they all come from the same place, which is the horrid patriarchal system that we live in. I’ve found it helps. But that’s only my own blog, as a resource for people who are not all that well-versed in patriarchal structures and think that feminists are mean, angry, man-hating bitches. I definitely understand how not everyone has the patience for that, and how we shouldn’t expect everyone to have the patience for it. My blog, for example, is directed at these people, not seasoned feminists who want to complain about men and the patriarchy, ya know? They all have their purpose and benefit, I am just more inclined to be non-confrontational and try to cultivate understanding, because I find incessant arguing to be exhausting and nearly fruitless. Maybe I’m just bad at it. Who knows.

Undercover Punk - September 21, 2009

cacophonies, goddess BLESS you! No, NO ONE is good at incessant arguing because it CAN’T be done well–it’s dominating behavior of the righteous. Yuck. Cultivating mutual understanding, respect, and self-awareness ARE feminist values that we should be practicing–I just choose to limit my dealings to women. If you’re interested, here’s my take on schooling men.

factcheckme - September 22, 2009

Cultivating mutual understanding, respect, and self-awareness ARE feminist values that we should be practicing.

thanks for the reminder UP. sometimes i argue with other feminists, and its amazing that you dont get anywhere with them, either. specifically, there was a post on feministe today that really set my hair on fire about hitchhiking and rape…the author was for females solo-hitching and said it wasnt “that dangerous”. i disagreed. i would at least hope that feminists would never accuse another woman or another feminst about getting “hysterical” or “too emotional” when discussing emotionally-charged material. but unfortunately it doest work that way. it would be nice if there were some ground rules…and i like the ones you described here. thanks!

12. Undercover Punk - September 22, 2009

My pleasure. I think we’re going to get along quite well! 🙂 Thanks for reminding me, I really need to move along with my Cliff Notes version of Lesbian Ethics. I’ve been procrastinating for months!!

OMG, I’ve never had so many MRAs talking about me in my whole feminist life!! And then blaming YOU for things that I said–they can’t even READ!! Nor, again, do they comprehend the reality of INSTITUTIONALIZED oppression. I’m so tempted to be like, DUH and post them a picture of my ass! But I come here instead. 😉
funktardtroll . blogspot . com

13. wriggles - September 29, 2009

I can’t agree with you at all.

I heard about misandry as a child, many centuries ago, when I thought to myself, what’s the opposite of mysogny and looked it up in the dictionary.

It’s clear that there is such a thing, how could there not be are you seriously saying no one is going to hate men? Pur-leease.

Although I have to agree that misguided MRA types do misconstrue it, hypocritically to be interchangeable with feminist. Where I find it most turns up is amongst right wing, traditional women, they hate men with a vitriol that is alien to me. I’ve come across it time and time again. On more than one occasion I’ve been accosted by them, insisting, assuming that I must be sympathetic, on venting their spleen on males.

If anything, I’d say that feminists hate men the least, when there is any misandry, it is usually hugely unconvincing in the main.

No, the more traditional the woman, the more likely she’s a misandrist, think about it guys.

14. SheilaG - October 9, 2009

It’s simply reversal. Men reverse things to hide their crimes, to hide their privilege, and to maintain power. That’s how all groups in power try to hide the power in the first place, because men must convince women (50+ %) of the population to believe in the myth of male superiority to begin with.

Feminism is making true gains when the menz attempt lying diversionary tactics like this, when men deny the statistics that document their nefarious purposes, and it is the same stuff the conservatives use when they say things like black people are “reverse racists.”

Men want to control language and frame debates, but now that more and more women are framing the language, they’re getting mad. They really believe that men are being attacked AS MEN as often as women are being degraded AS WOMEN. Reverse racism, politically correct… etc. etc. It’s from the same people with the same anti-woman agenda that they’ve always had, nothing new. Now how many more women are going to be stabbed or killed in university labs by men this year?

factcheckme - October 9, 2009

Feminism is making true gains when the menz attempt lying diversionary tactics like this, when men deny the statistics that document their nefarious purposes, and it is the same stuff the conservatives use when they say things like black people are “reverse racists.”

the MRAs are the perfect example of these “lying diversionary tactics” you speak of. as if society itself, already, isnt a “mens movement” that caters specifically and exclusively, already, to “mens rights.” what a bunch of shit! of course it is, it so clearly, obviously is. im not sure that i see it as a gain that feminism has made though…unless all backlashes can be read as inroads, and success? that at least they have noticed us, and found it necessary to respond (thereby attempting to re-re-frame the issues back to their own favor?).

15. factcheckme - October 11, 2009

to the MRAs who keep trying to leave rude, obscene, harassing, and misspelled comments: keep stalking, stalkers! ROFL and thanks for the page views, links, and traffic.

oh. and go fuck yourselves.

16. Undercover Punk - October 11, 2009

**Female SEPARATISM *is* The Way Forward**

-U 😛

17. joe - October 12, 2009

fuck off you fat, ugly, loser 😀

factcheckme - October 12, 2009

i published this comment to illustrate the depth of the depravity of these MRA/misogynist trolls. this happens all over the internet, if you are a woman, or a feminist. its the SMILEY FACE that follows the verbal abuse thats the kicker. ted bundy, jeff dahmer and other serial rapists and killers never lost their ability to smile and ridicule, even as they were perpetrating the grossest of abuses on their victims. this is the behavior of extremely sick men, who get great enjoyment out of the abuse they perpetrate against women and other vulnerable persons. the irony with the MRAs is that they honestly steadfastly believe that THEY are the victims, and that its WOMEN, not men, who are doling out the lions share of the hurt, around the world. NOT. EVEN. CLOSE.

18. Fingon Celebrindal - October 13, 2009

Child support and alimony are institutionalized *SYSTEMATIC* *INSTITUTIONALIZED* oppression based on gender. A women can make a decision to abort a baby because it’s her body and she can also keep the baby and make the man pay for it because its his baby now.That’s sure some equality. Draft of men for war is *SYSTEMATIC* *INSTITUTIONALIZED* oppression based on gender. Women sadly have forgotten to fight for equality here. I wonder what sort of *SYSTEMATIC* *INSTITUTIONALIZED* oppression based on gender women face today could you please enlighten me ‘Undercover Punk’. Women were not oppressed over the millennia. They were afraid to venture out of the cave because the world was not safe enough for women and children. When it was safe with all the checks and balances in place men let the women out. And thankless beings that women are they spat on the men on their way out. Feminist are just angry because they will never be as good and noble as a man. Jealousy is the most potent form of envy and admiration.

factcheckme - October 14, 2009

then stop making babies you dont want, with women who dont respect your wishes. keep your fucking dick in your pants, if you dont know the difference. women have to do this all the time, to avoid consequences they dont want. and hey….the twenty-first century called….it wants you to know that THERE IS NO DRAFT! if you dont like the fact that men are fighting wars…men should stop making war. the things that men do TO EACH OTHER is not misandry, and its not women who are perpetrating these abuses on men. perhaps YOU hate men? sure sounds like you do. if you did, you would have every reason to, for the reasons you note.

your reasons for hating women, however, are completely invalid, at least from what youve written here. if you have mommy issues…well then take it up with her. better yet…ask yourself whether you were/are a good son? if not, she probably gave you exactly what you deserved.

19. factcheckme - November 1, 2009

oh for christs sake.

20. Sheri - November 2, 2009

Great post! I definitely agree how misandry doesn’t really exist (and actually, the WordPress spell checker doesn’t even think that word exists either). I really also about the whole language thing. Language is extremely powerful and I think most of us don’t even realize it.

21. factcheckme - December 27, 2009

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA read up on both racism AND misogyny if you dont get the difference between them. i certainly am not going to explain it to you. and i didnt even bother approving your 2 other posts which you shot off in rapid-fire succession, immediately after this one, swinging your dick around my blog like you own the place. you dont. way to demonstrate male privilege though. well done. even as you claim you dont have any, and that you (and other men) occupy the most oppressed class/es. YOU DONT.

22. April - December 29, 2009


You’re really just talking about racism. The issues you face as a black man do not affect white men in the same way. You’re not discriminated against because you’re a man, but because you’re black (judging from the examples you gave in your comment). Obviously that is a problem, but not the one being discussed in this thread.

Sorry comments are closed for this entry

%d bloggers like this: