How many women here will admit they are a misandrist?

[meerkat stew]

I can spot a misandrist from a mile away yet most of them will deny it all day. They usually give the response that they love men or adore men which to me is like when racists say they have black friends. They claim not to hate men but when push comes to shove they show their true colors. What women here have the guts to be honest enough and tell us how they really feel?

 

Woggle,

Thanks for an interesting thread. I owe you an apology. Despite having well-defined beliefs about gender relations, I didn't take your OP seriously to begin with, and so posted parody "who I hate" lists, jokes about starting a "Misanthrope Club," and created (in response to Grogster) a Monty Pythonesque discussion on the applicability of Gresham's Law to internet forum posts (a fairly obvious absurdity) in your thread. I did not respect your right to create such a thread, participated in much off-topic derailing and in so doing, violated one of my own principles of honoring people's right to be heard on the net. "Shouting down" the views of others is a pet peeve of mine, yet I am guilty of it via derail and off-topic posting to your thread. I have done plenty of OT posting in other threads, but not to the extent I have here. Again, I am sorry for that.

 

Based on the responses you have received here, I now agree with you that wholesale misandry in U.S. culture is a legitimate and valuable topic for discussion. The misandrist attitudes you are calling out here show through in so many replies to your OP, I knew the pervasive attitudes about men were bad, but had no idea that misandry was entrenched as it is.

 

Here are my thoughts as to where this misandry comes from:

 

1. The truth about women's rights and status in the United States is that, rather than the outcome of a campaign or battle for such rights by some "women's movement," such status is part of an inevitable historical process that began with the industrial revolution. Prior to the advent of the technological explosion that the industrial revolution sparked, core family units were structured as such in order to survive the harsh living conditions of the mass of humanity. In order for the species to survive, the reproductive capacity had to be protected at all costs.

 

The post WWII economic expansion and the nascent white collar service economy created an intense demand for labor, a demand not experienced before in U.S. history, which required the addition of women to supply. Previously this was problematic, as most jobs were dangerous and required significant physical strength. The advent of technology, both in the home and workplace attacked this problem from both ends. Women were rapidly integrated into the working economy, albeit in primarily administrative roles at first.

 

As the economy grew, the process of the Cold War tested the ability of capitalism to outgrow a communist economy on the other side of the world. The primary American weapon in the Cold War was the raw economic power of capitalism. The primary Soviet weapons in the Cold War were espionage, propaganda and subterfuge, a viable strategy for a combatant that realized from the start that there was no way it could ever level the economic playing field.

 

As the U.S. economy expanded, and other wars were engaged, the economy required women in all aspects, not just menial or administrative and had grown to the point that it could withstand such pressure. Moreover, the rise of the welfare state via Johnson's Great Society added social insurance that protected the core family unit should the addition of women en masse to the work force threaten the ability for that core unit to provide for itself.

 

Finally, the development of reliable birth control by men, its marketing by men, its acceptance by a male legislature and the legalizing of abortion by an almost completely male Supreme Court established women's reproductive rights.

 

So, counter to there being any fight against an oppressive patriarchy by feminists, or a women's movement crusading for their rights, the process of the equality of women has been merely a necessary progression of various social forces with no real historical conflict involved. Unlike the Civil Rights Movement, there was no real blood in the streets. It was a peaceful, welcome social process. The above represents plain historical facts, subject only to limited debate.

 

So if the above is true, what was the necessity of the fabrication of feminism as a social force? why was the "women's movement" created wholesale out of thin air? Why the rise of "women's studies" departments in universities? Why would the simple historical truth of women's rights not suffice? Who would have a vested interest in creating the lies of feminism and the women's movement? And most importantly, how does this bear on the phenomenon of misandry?

 

2. Institutionalized misandry is the primary political tool of the left in the United States, and the pervasive attitudes of misandry in women in general, and posters here in particular, is the product of a long, calculated, and well-fought propaganda campaign of the left to polarize men and women against each other.

 

In essence, the left, in accordance with the Soviet tactical playbook of the Cold War, invented feminism and the women's movement to serve its own political agenda. In order to manipulate the female constituency, the left, via media, university and political propagandizing has a) created a victim mentality in women (and sympathetic men) via the lie that men have been oppressing women, denying them their rights, and threatening their children throughout history, while simultaneously engaging in the b) vilification of men by portraying us as violent, purely sexually motivated perverts, predators, pedophiles, cheaters, misogynists, deadbeat dads, etc., both politically and in the media, and focusing the social discourse as it concerns men on the lowest common denominator of our gender, and finally c) creating a social and political climate equivalent to a religion of the deification of children, ironically in a time when children have never been safer, and long after technology has obviated the need to worry about protecting the reproductive capacity of the species; children, as a population subset, have never in history been the focus of the lavishing of political "attention" they receive currently.

 

Currently the left has set up a political situation where any plank of its agenda can result in political action by way of either a) telling women that evil men are "holding them back" in some way, so political action is required to remedy the situation, or b) telling women that evil men are threatening the welfare of children, so political action is required to remedy the situation. Regardless of whichever methodology is chosen, the necessity that there be "evil men" in the equation requires the continuation of institutionalized misandry. The left can never, and will never admit an equitable state of affairs, or that children are relatively safe in the United States, as it has become so dependent on these pet methodologies to achieve its political goals.

 

Now of course, there are real social issues that require attention, real wrongs to be righted, but in examining the ostensible "calls to arms" that the left initiates, it is almost always the case that the real underlying social issue has been massively overblown, and is a mere cover for a more sweeping underlying goal. For example, there is an ongoing campaign against internet sexual predation. One may see billboards announcing as "statistical fact" that "70% of children have been sexually molested on the internet" in giant letters. No reasonable, thoughtful person could possibly believe this claim is accurate, yet combined with institutionalized misandry, anything is possible as far as manipulating a thoroughly indoctrinated and naive constituency into political action. The government is highly likely to capitalize on this and other claims in an effort to regulate and tax the internet. It is only a matter of time. (and as an aside, the most chilling aspect of this example and others is that the right is catching up with the left's success in using institutionalized misandry to forward political agenda, and is aping its methods in certain respects, so men are now "catching it" from both ends of the political spectrum, both right and left).

 

So, because the left (and with greater frequency, the right) must continue to manufacture and exaggerate social ills, and such manufacture necessarily involves the vilification of men, the phenomenon of institutionalized misandry will continue to amplify.

 

3. Women (and leftist men, and increasingly members of the right) who have been manipulated in the above ways will never admit even the factuality of the above state of affairs, despite that the historical facts speak for themselves, and despite the fact that this political process described above is wholly transparent and conducted in broad daylight right in front of our faces. There is no smoky room here, no hidden agenda, the constituency in question is so naive and subject to manipulation, and so used to the "party line," that they will do anything in their power, engage in any kind of disingenuous fallacious "argument" to avoid the realization that they have been had and had again.

 

Woggle, your claim that "when push comes to shove they show their true colors" is spot on. Many of the replies to this thread, QED of that statement. Whereas I originally thought your argument that "they are misandrist, and if they say otherwise they are lying" was laughably fallacious, now, in light of what has gone on in this thread, I tend to agree with you. Thanks again for an interesting thread.

Edited January 11, 2010 by meerkat stew

[Mary3]

Yes I do. I think deep down most women are misandrists.

 

Well thats strange : My mom loved my dad for 40 years , she died.., my sis and her husband run a business together 25 + years together and she adores her husband.... My brother and his wife have been together 20 years . All of my friends love their husbands and have good marriages...

 

Where do you get your pool of men-hating women from ?

 

Something is obviously askew in your world and in your mind.

 

I have RARELY if EVER ( only here by YOU ) heard a woman say " I hate MEN "...Unless she is a lesbian and prefers the taco over the sausage...

[donnamaybe]

Someone on this thread (and many others) apparently LOVES to hear himself talk!

[Mary3]

I wonder if Woggle put up here for his title thread : " How many men think their Penis is Small ? " I wonder if that too would have started a forest fire of comments or died a quiet death....

[meerkat stew]

I wonder if Woggle put up here for his title thread : " How many men think their Penis is Small ? " I wonder if that too would have started a forest fire of comments or died a quiet death....

 

I posted several times to the "small penis" thread recently, as did several guys. What was your point again? ... and QED of my points.

[Mary3]

I posted several times to the "small penis" thread recently, as did several guys. What was your point again? ... and QED of my points.

 

Was the small penis in relation to this post or a different one ?

 

My point : None really other than Woggle wasting his life on imaginary grievances....

[meerkat stew]

Someone on this thread (and many others) apparently LOVES to hear himself talk!

 

You know, I -do- love to hear myself talk, interestingly enough, but since no "talking" or "hearing" is going on on an internet forum consisting purely of the written word, what exactly is your point? Did you mean to say that I like to "see myself write?"

[meerkat stew]

My point : None really other than Woggle wasting his life on imaginary grievances....

 

Are the grievances categorized as "imaginary" because said grievances don't apply to you? or how exactly? They seem to be real to him.

[grogster]

Woggle,

 

In essence, the left, in accordance with the Soviet tactical playbook of the Cold War, invented feminism and the women's movement to serve its own political agenda. In order to manipulate the female constituency, the left, via media, university and political propagandizing has a) created a victim mentality in women (and sympathetic men) via the lie that men have been oppressing women, denying them their rights, and threatening their children throughout history, while simultaneously engaging in the b) vilification of men by portraying us as violent, purely sexually motivated perverts, predators, pedophiles, cheaters, misogynists, deadbeat dads, etc., both politically and in the media, and focusing the social discourse as it concerns men on the lowest common denominator of our gender, and finally c) creating a social and political climate equivalent to a religion of the deification of children, ironically in a time when children have never been safer, and long after technology has obviated the need to worry about protecting the reproductive capacity of the species; children, as a population subset, have never in history been the focus of the lavishing of political "attention" they receive currently.

 

 

So feminism is a creation of the US Left, which followed "the Soviet tactical playbook of the Cold War." (By the way do you have a copy?)

 

So much for those tactics, the Soviets lost the Cold War back in 1989.

 

Women are mere dupes manipulated by a vast left wing conspiracy to demonize men, deify children and implant a false sense of victimization in women.

 

That's all you have?

 

That's your narrative?

 

That's it?

 

Did the Seneca Falls Conference on Women never happen way back in 1848--well before the Soviet Union existed?

 

Your paranoid style has no sense of history.

[Mary3]

Do you think men with small penises are hated by women ?

[Taramere]

Your paranoid style has no sense of history.

 

Unless we're talking about very recent Loveshack history. I wondered what had become of calizagg. I thought perhaps he'd been abducted by feminist aliens. Maybe he has, and they're forcing him to post in a bid to spread war between the genders...with the cunning master plan of dividing and conquering life on Planet Earth.

[meerkat stew]

So feminism is a creation of the US Left, which followed "the Soviet tactical playbook of the Cold War." (By the way do you have a copy?)

 

Read a history of the CIA, or watch the miniseries "The Company" on DVD for a description of Soviet Cold War strategy, nothing I posted about Soviet tactics is even remotely controversial. I'm no expert on the Cold War, but I did live through much of it, how bout you?

 

One needn't be an expert though to realize that the intial "fighting" of the Cold War required economic growth in a labor starved economy that necessitated bringing women into the workplace in every capacity, not just menial and administrative, and so that's... exactly what happened. Simple economic progress hastened by the necessity of an ideological superpower conflict. Feminism and the women's movement are just window dressing retroactively attached to very plain, established historical fact to further political agenda.

 

The left had tremendous success in capitalizing politically on the Civil Rights Movement, which involved a true struggle and much real conflict, after the fact, so just wanted to recreate that success with the women's movement. Unfortunately there was nothing resembling conflict in the ascendancy of women to equality, just natural economic historical progression, so they had to create "feminism" and the "women's movement" wholesale by revising the actual import of several very admirable female movements from the past and downplaying the historical economic imperatives that were the true forces active in the peaceful social change that was women's equality.

 

BTW, we should all, women and men alike, be proud of how we moved women forward together as a country the very historical instant it was possible. It is one of the few drastic social changes in history that happened so bloodlessly without immense upheaval and economic chaos. And it is amazing how completely the left was able to coopt this immense social success of capitalist market forces for its own gain.

 

So much for those tactics, the Soviets lost the Cold War back in 1989.

 

Simplistic... despite "losing" the Cold War, do you think that the consequences and infrastructure of massive Soviet espionage, propaganda and infiltration into academia and the media just "went home" when that happened? Or did such infrastructure change its focus and remain? Look, the right engages in institutionalized misandry towards political ends also, I'm not just vilifying the left. The left just happened to have been the historical origin, the prime mover as it were, of feminism and the women's movement for political gain. I'm sure the right wishes it had thought of it first in retrospect, but they are catching on.

 

Women are mere dupes manipulated by a vast left wing conspiracy to demonize men, deify children and implant a false sense of victimization in women.

 

No "vast left wing conspiracy" necessary. There's no grassy knoll, no mafia in the wings, no CIA, nothing hidden. The process is completely transparent.

 

That's all you have?

 

That's your narrative?

 

That's it?

 

Type this over and over, its still not any kind of substantive response. Do better. But your reaction here -does- demonstrate how simple the plain truth is. Note that the only straws you have to cling to are 1. That the Soviets have lost the cold war (so what? irrelevant anyway), and 2. That you'd like to oversimplify my statement of plain political, economic, and historical fact into some sort of a "conspiracy," which is inapt.

 

Ask any politician, they'll reply "so what? that's how politics is done, that's what politics is, manipulating a constituency to keep -me- in office." Nothing novel there, despite -your- shock and amazement. I'm just pointing out where institutionalized misandry -comes from-, not that the political process is somehow insidiously evil and insincere. "Insincere political process," a fairly funny tautology maybe?

 

Did the Seneca Falls Conference on Women never happen way back in 1848--well before the Soviet Union existed?

 

Your paranoid style has no sense of history.

 

Funny that they had to go all the way back to 1848 to find enough window dressing, isn't it? There just weren't enough female role models and "fighters" in the 20th century to manufacture feminism and the women's movement otherwise. We truly are a gullible people.

 

As far as my "paranoid style," you'd like that, wouldn't you. Do better. And what exactly is a "sense of history?" I'm quite aware of historical fact, yet this concept "sense of history" eludes me.

[meerkat stew]

and they're forcing him to post in a bid to spread war between the genders...with the cunning master plan of dividing and conquering life on Planet Earth.

 

Interestingly enough, acknowledging the real historical truth of women's social progress, that feminism and the women's movements were/are mere political constructs not representative of historical fact, is the path to unity, the path to acknowledging that we are all, men and women together, responsible for our social destiny, the achievements and mistakes of the past, and will be mutually responsible for the future.

 

It is the path of institutionalized misandry, creating gender polarization not based on historical fact for political purpose, that is divisive.

[Mary3]

Things that ( some ) men are * wrong * about :

 

That they can mind ____ a woman and she won't figure it out.

That they may not be as attractive as they think they are..

They can never be sure or not if she is faking an orgasm...

 

That they can post hateful messages like Woggle does on LS and do it pretty randomly and then wonder what the fuss is all about...

 

Is that better Woggle ?

[Mary3]

Its a shame Woggle....you have a beautiful wife...

[meerkat stew]

Yes if you consider all the rapes, broken bones, black eyes, pounded heads, children molested, punched up boobs, mental abuse, felt up bums in the work place, mutilated bodies thrown in dumpsters after they were sexually abused, female limbs used as ashtrays, drunken beat downs, social positions rejected, jobs rejected, opportunities rejected a:

 

"bloodless social transition lacking immense upheaval," then sure smooth as butter indeed!

 

The transitions was seamless. I for one am very proud of our past, for sure! Black people should be proud of breaking out of their slave shackles too, after all the transition was a pretty smooth one from slavery to social acceptance and integration, and it was relatively cost efficient too.

 

Perfect, by the book. Focus on the statistically insignificant lowest common denominator of male to justify vilification of the whole gender, and thus polarization. Am going to call this the "Hannibal Lecter Defense" going forward, as I had termed it previously. Yes, grogster, see how easy it is to dupe women into a victim mentality? Easy as pie. And coincidentally the backbone of institutionalized misandry. QED of Woggle's position.

 

Note also, the tendency to disingenuously equate the women's movement with the very real struggle of the Civil Rights Movement despite the fact that there is no similarity whatsoever. Would be convenenient for the creators of feminism if there were, so they endlessly compare the two, as if mentioning them together makes them the same. And incidentally, this is a thoroughly obnoxious comparison which devalues the very real struggles of minorities in this country.

[Sam Spade]

I particularly agree with the bit about the ridiculous fetishization of children in the US. (But, it makes sense - what better way to control the population than reducing their life to the support of a bunch of brats and an outsized mortgage.)

 

This has reached ridiculous proportions. You can be jailed for abuse or neglect if you leave a kid under 16 unsupervised, or if you let your kids go off in the neighborhood and play unsupervized :lmao::lmao:

Gimme a F*CKING break . I was roaming the neighborhood for hours since the age of 7, used public transportation to go alone to school at the age of 7, and was (necessarily) illegally working to make pocket money since the age of 14.

(Not to mention that this is the primary reason why we are raising generations of fat, disgusting slobs with zero will power, zero coping abilities, zero curiousity about the world, and zero everything. Which is rather ironic, considering that we expend the most money and effort on our ofspring, but get the worst results by any measure.)

Edited January 11, 2010 by Sam Spade

[thegreatmoose]

In other words it is all men's fault and no matter how well a man treats a woman he should just except his payback. Men are not individuals to you but some figureheads of the patriarchy and if a man is hurt or mistreated that is just evening the score in your book.

You just don't get it, do you?

 

I have no patience to even reason with you, because I know it's impossible and I'd just be wasting my time.

 

Women deserve to have equal rights. I have a feeling that makes me a male misandrist in your eyes. Oh well.

[meerkat stew]

It wasn't the lowest common denominator of males, it was our grandfathers and great grandfathers that objectified, oppressed, and treated women like second rate citizens.

 

I don't know about your family, but in mine, like Sam Spade's, such didn't exist. In fact, of all my thousands of male acquaintances, I know fewer than a handful who -may- have ever struck a woman, and no rapists at all.

 

Have you deluded yourself to such extent that you think all the acts of violence that were perpetrated onto women whether small and domestic or big and heinous were only acted out by the scum and degenerates of the time?

 

Yes, I believe that the vilification process requires focusing on the lowest common denominator of men, and perpetuating the lie that that bottom class is representative of the whole. It's no delusion. Just simple fact. Cognitive dissonance can hurt, I know, as can realizing you have been lied to as a dupe for political interests.

 

I lived and grew up with my uncles, grandfathers, and other male role models, you know absolutely about my family background, nor do I know about yours, so dispense with the "just ask your parents" BS. It's insulting.

 

Don't tell me the shift in movement and the full integration of women into society was a smooth transition and painless transition, how condescending and utterly offensive to say that to any woman!

 

How dare I know the plain, obvious truth, available to any reasoning person capable of reading a non-partisan history book. How dare I expose the lie that has fueled your plain hatred of men.

 

But lets assume for the sake of argument, that everything you are saying is true. It doesn't change the fact that you fairly obviously and steadfastly hate, loathe and detest men, consider nothing wrong with that, and that it is your social birthright to do so. You aren't unique though, there are millions out there just like you, and lots in this thread. I couldn't ask for a better poster child for my theory of institutionalized misandry than you, Poker Face.

[meerkat stew]

Woah, Sam...the reason threads like this exist is because Woggle starts them, and the reason for that is to do with his own family matters that none of us had input into. He and his refusal to let go of the past, despite his allegedly happy and contented present, are the reasons for this thread starting.

 

Your advocating what Poker Face is saying as "just reaching the end of her tether" is amusingly self-serving, and makes you just as bad as she is.

 

Plus, your post partially quoted above is pure 100% ad hominem. Go buy a Logic 101 textbook, you desperately need one.

[Woggle]

Grogster should realize that hating his own gender will not get him any special treatment from women. He will not be considered one of the good ones because he hates his penis. I bet he reads infidelity and divorce thread and thinks that betrayed men are getting their just desserts.

 

I actually respect Poker Face because she admits that whatever happened in her family gives her the right today to mistreat men because of it.

[Taramere]

Your advocating what Poker Face is saying as "just reaching the end of her tether" is amusingly self-serving, and makes you just as bad as she is.

 

Plus, your post partially quoted above is pure 100% ad hominem. Go buy a Logic 101 textbook, you desperately need one.

 

 

How many times must Woggle explain to the board the reasons behind his hatred of women before I can refer to this without being accused (yet again) of being ad hominem? It's not ad hominem. For a start, Woggle did not initiate this thread with any particular point that I would be presenting an ad hominem argument to counter. His purpose, as stated, was to invite women to express misandrist feelings against men.

 

Rather than me buying a Logic 101 textbook, I suggest that you take a trip to court, start chucking out these ad hominem accusations in a proper debating forum and see just how far you get. It takes a little more than wikipedia to understand the true meaning of these phrases. Practical experience in the proper environment tends to help.

[Woggle]

Of course my father has probably at some time made a sexist remark. Do you mean to tell me that you and your friends have never made any male bashing remarks?

[Woggle]

That's funny since I hear my female coworkers male bashing all the time and nobody cares.

 

You say you don't hate men but you think that we deserve it if we are cheated on and mistreated. This is what I mean when I say women do not want to admit they hate men. You just get done saying that men are just getting their just desserts when we are treated badly but then say you are not anti-male.

 

For the record the original intent of the feminist movement was good but the hypocrite Gloria Stenien hijacked it and turned it into the mess we see today.

[grogster]

Grogster should realize that hating his own gender will not get him any special treatment from women. He will not be considered one of the good ones because he hates his penis. I bet he reads infidelity and divorce thread and thinks that betrayed men are getting their just desserts.

 

I actually respect Poker Face because she admits that whatever happened in her family gives her the right today to mistreat men because of it.

 

 

Whoa, wait a minute. I'm quite fond of my penis as penises go.

 

However, I'm just as much a fan of clear thinking and writing, which, if this sad Thread is an example, the Angry White Men (AWM) lack. Even a bad idea can be expressed well.

 

More importantly, after being raised by a loving Mother and having a wonderful daughter of my own, I don't view women as the enemy or some foreign bacillus. My Mother, daughter, female colleagues and friends and even ex-lovers are not the enemy. They're simply human beings who want live to their potential without violence or discrimination. That's not too much to ask, is it?

 

When bitter, paranoid AWMs politicize their inadequacies there's often Hell to pay.