Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Feminism is to Misandry what Socialism is to Communism Watch

Announcements
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Feminism isn't as extreme as misandry but does share some of the same things in discriminating against men. The difference is that feminism is not as blunt and open with the discrimination as misandrists are.

    However, for men there is no movement equivalent to feminism. Misogyny would be the equivalent of fascism on the other end of the spectrum. It is the opposite of misandry, the two extremes, hatred of the opposite sex.

    Equality on the political spectrum would be the centre.

    For arguments sake we shall include a male equivalent to feminism on the spectrum. This inclusion will help aid the argument. We will as other men have done beforehand call it meninism. Yes it's as stupid as it sounds just like feminism but it will help paint the picture.

    So now we have from left to right on the spectrum of gender focused attitudes:

    Misandry - Feminism - pure equality - Meninism - Misogyny

    As you can see pure equality falls in between the two gender focused movements of feminism and meninism. However, in reality only feminism exists. When you take meninism out of the spectrum you're left with equality and the extremist misogyny.

    (Black) Misandry - Feminism (grey) - pure equality (white) - Misogyny (black)

    If a man does not support equal rights (he should) then due to there being no feminism equivalent for men he is a misogynistic man and a sexist.

    However, if a female does not support equal rights (she should) then they use the feminism label to stop themselves being labeled misandrists. It is a fail safe option in the modern world. Women have created themselves a grey area of opinion between the extremist misandry and equal rights called feminism to hide their true underlying gender bias. Men do not have this so its black or white for them. Men are either sexist or not sexist. Women are either pushing for equal rights, feminists (which they claim is the same thing) or sexist.

    Will this ever be resolved? Probably not in the same way political parties go to and fro because of a constant change in public opinions. In fact, just like in politics, the rise of feminists speaking out and being more extremist and vocal has led to a rise in misogynists speaking out.

    So yes whilst feminism is more tolerant of men than misandry it is not the equal rights movement many claim it is. For those of us who want equal rights, men and women, it is not tolerant enough and neither would meninism be if it existed as a movement. Feminism is not the equal rights movement many claim it is and if it were then many of its followers would not hold the gender biased opinions they hold.

    People who want true equality would not promote feminism or meninism if it existed just as a centrist would not promote the Greens or Labour.

    Its time to drop misandry, misogyny and feminism (thinly veiled misandry lite) and to work together as two genders that respect one another towards pure equality. None of that will be achieved through feminism or an equal movement promoted by males. All that does is help more extreme attitudes manifest creating the very monsters within society you sought to do away with in the first instance.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    very true
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Under many branches of Marxism socialism (called the Dictatorship of the Proletariat) is an essential step in achieving the ultimate goal of communism.

    So could you make the argument that feminism is an essential step in achieving the ultimate goal of a misandrist society?
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    A beautifully written piece that actually makes perfect logical sense. Well done.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Algorithm69)
    Under many branches of Marxism socialism (called the Dictatorship of the Proletariat) is an essential step in achieving the ultimate goal of communism.

    So could you make the argument that feminism is an essential step in achieving the ultimate goal of a misandrist society?
    Yes you could. The problem is as feminism rises so does misogyny because men rebel against what they see as discrimination. Misandrists then rebel and fight back actually creating two extremist attitudes in society. This is what is happening now. Certain men have become hateful towards women because of the feminism rise (which isn't striving for equality - that's the truth) and then women, often extreme feminists who are misandrists lash out. In fact the rise of misogyny within society is largely thanks to feminism.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    The silence from feminists is deafening.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Sanctimonious)
    Feminism isn't as extreme as misandry but does share some of the same things in discriminating against men. The difference is that feminism is not as blunt and open with the discrimination as misandrists are.
    Feminism is defined as: ''The advocacy of women’s rights on the ground of the equality of the sexes'' by the Oxford Dictionary. These rights include the right to vote, the right to free speech, the right to an education, etc etc. Feminism does not inherently have anything to do with discrimination against men.

    Are you referring to people who call themselves feminists but want discrimination against men? If so, please specify exactly what who/what kind of people you are talking about.

    (Original post by Sanctimonious)
    However, for men there is no movement equivalent to feminism. Misogyny would be the equivalent of fascism on the other end of the spectrum. It is the opposite of misandry, the two extremes, hatred of the opposite sex.

    Equality on the political spectrum would be the centre.

    For arguments sake we shall include a male equivalent to feminism on the spectrum. This inclusion will help aid the argument. We will as other men have done beforehand call it meninism. Yes it's as stupid as it sounds just like feminism but it will help paint the picture.

    So now we have from left to right on the spectrum of gender focused attitudes:

    Misandry - Feminism - pure equality - Meninism - Misogyny

    As you can see pure equality falls in between the two gender focused movements of feminism and meninism. However, in reality only feminism exists. When you take meninism out of the spectrum you're left with equality and the extremist misogyny.

    (Black) Misandry - Feminism (grey) - pure equality (white) - Misogyny (black)

    If a man does not support equal rights (he should) then due to there being no feminism equivalent for men he is a misogynistic man and a sexist.

    However, if a female does not support equal rights (she should) then they use the feminism label to stop themselves being labeled misandrists. It is a fail safe option in the modern world. Women have created themselves a grey area of opinion between the extremist misandry and equal rights called feminism to hide their true underlying gender bias. Men do not have this so its black or white for them. Men are either sexist or not sexist. Women are either pushing for equal rights, feminists (which they claim is the same thing) or sexist.
    Feminism by definition would be a part of ''pure equality''. Meninism would also be a part of ''pure equality'' as it too would strive for equal rights. It may aswell just be:

    Misandry - Pure Equality - Misogyny

    Even then it is still possible for someone to hate men/women but still accept equal rights for men/women, in a similar way to how someone can hate homosexuality but accept gay rights.

    (Original post by Sanctimonious)
    Will this ever be resolved? Probably not in the same way political parties go to and fro because of a constant change in public opinions. In fact, just like in politics, the rise of feminists speaking out and being more extremist and vocal has led to a rise in misogynists speaking out.

    So yes whilst feminism is more tolerant of men than misandry it is not the equal rights movement many claim it is. For those of us who want equal rights, men and women, it is not tolerant enough and neither would meninism be if it existed as a movement. Feminism is not the equal rights movement many claim it is and if it were then many of its followers would not hold the gender biased opinions they hold.
    As a continuation of what I previously said: you can have biased opinions about a gender but still want equal rights.

    (Original post by Sanctimonious)
    People who want true equality would not promote feminism or meninism if it existed just as a centrist would not promote the Greens or Labour.

    Its time to drop misandry, misogyny and feminism (thinly veiled misandry lite) and to work together as two genders that respect one another towards pure equality. None of that will be achieved through feminism or an equal movement promoted by males. All that does is help more extreme attitudes manifest creating the very monsters within society you sought to do away with in the first instance.
    I accept that, in the western world, we can just replace feminism with 'equalism' as men/women just about have equal rights. However in, say, Saudi Arabia and Iran feminism would be very relavent as women do not have the same rights as men.

    ------

    I believe you're in effect confusing correlation with causation. It is true that there are some feminists who hate men (''You cisgendered ****lord!''), but their hatred for men does not necessarily come from them being a feminist. Likewise, them being a feminist is not necessarily a product of them hating men.

    Hatred and the advocasy of equal rights are separate things: one does not necessarily cause the other or accompany the other. It's like euroscepticism and xenophobia: some eurosceptics are xenophobic, but not all are. Euroscepticism is not inherently xenophobic, but one could cause the other. Once again: they are separate views and beliefs.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    Not a great analogy, a much more apt one would be to say feminism is to misandry what black civil rights and racial equality groups are to black supremacist groups. In both cases, the latter do exist, and there is inevitably some overlaps in some theory and membership. This does indeed blur the line relative to the other extreme, which only has misogynists/white supremacists (of course, there are neutrals as well).
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Feminism is about equality for all sexes. It's silly to label the movement as (even indirectly) anti-male just because you've experienced prejudice from some feminists.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Pasta6163)
    Feminism is about equality for all sexes. It's silly to label the movement as (even indirectly) anti-male just because you've experienced prejudice from some feminists.
    But it isn't a single movement. It is a group of different movements with different ideals and values. While one movement says "Ban Page 3" the other is saying "Free the Nipple" and then the other is saying "All men are rapists". Which one is it?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DiddyDec)
    But it isn't a single movement. It is a group of different movements with different ideals and values. While one movement says "Ban Page 3" the other is saying "Free the Nipple" and then the other is saying "All men are rapists". Which one is it?
    I agree. Still, if OP blankets the term feminism in his argument, I will do so in response as well
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SHallowvale)
    Feminism is defined as: ''The advocacy of women’s rights on the ground of the equality of the sexes'' by the Oxford Dictionary. These rights include the right to vote, the right to free speech, the right to an education, etc etc. Feminism does not inherently have anything to do with discrimination against men.
    The Oxford Dictionary definition is massively outdated and may be applicable to feminism back in the day. The modern movement of feminism within western societies is fundamentally and intrinsically different from feminist roots.

    Are you referring to people who call themselves feminists but want discrimination against men? If so, please specify exactly what who/what kind of people you are talking about.
    I'm not talking about people. I'm talking about the movement as a whole as opposed to individuals who as you state later blur the divide between misandry, feminism and equality. This is no different from politically motivated people who blur the line between communism, socialism and centrist. If you were to use a Venn Diagram for illustration purposes you'd have some overlap between the three groups but socialism would not be a subset of centrism in the same way feminism would not be a subset of pure equality. Feminism cannot be a subset of pure equality because it is purely female focused and driven as opposed to being multi gender focused. The current myth is that feminism is a branch pushing towards pure equality and whilst it is closer to equality than misandry and whilst many feminists do fall in between the union of feminism and equality it is ridiculous to suggest it is the equivalent of pure equality.

    Feminism by definition would be a part of ''pure equality''. Meninism would also be a part of ''pure equality'' as it too would strive for equal rights. It may aswell just be:

    Misandry - Pure Equality - Misogyny
    And as already stated above modern day feminism is world's apart from the aims of the true roots of feminist women.

    You're in effect trying to say that feminism is a subset of pure equality and whilst many feminists do fall in that grey area that wouldn't make them pure equality seekers either and yes many men are guilty of that too on the other side of things but with men there is no middle ground established thus they're either misogynists or equal rights seekers when many fall in between and have male dominated attitudes that are equal to feminism, difference is there is no label for it.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Sanctimonious)
    Feminism isn't as extreme as misandry but does share some of the same things in discriminating against men. The difference is that feminism is not as blunt and open with the discrimination as misandrists are.

    However, for men there is no movement equivalent to feminism. Misogyny would be the equivalent of fascism on the other end of the spectrum. It is the opposite of misandry, the two extremes, hatred of the opposite sex.

    Equality on the political spectrum would be the centre.

    For arguments sake we shall include a male equivalent to feminism on the spectrum. This inclusion will help aid the argument. We will as other men have done beforehand call it meninism. Yes it's as stupid as it sounds just like feminism but it will help paint the picture.

    So now we have from left to right on the spectrum of gender focused attitudes:

    Misandry - Feminism - pure equality - Meninism - Misogyny

    As you can see pure equality falls in between the two gender focused movements of feminism and meninism. However, in reality only feminism exists. When you take meninism out of the spectrum you're left with equality and the extremist misogyny.

    (Black) Misandry - Feminism (grey) - pure equality (white) - Misogyny (black)

    If a man does not support equal rights (he should) then due to there being no feminism equivalent for men he is a misogynistic man and a sexist.

    However, if a female does not support equal rights (she should) then they use the feminism label to stop themselves being labeled misandrists. It is a fail safe option in the modern world. Women have created themselves a grey area of opinion between the extremist misandry and equal rights called feminism to hide their true underlying gender bias. Men do not have this so its black or white for them. Men are either sexist or not sexist. Women are either pushing for equal rights, feminists (which they claim is the same thing) or sexist.

    Will this ever be resolved? Probably not in the same way political parties go to and fro because of a constant change in public opinions. In fact, just like in politics, the rise of feminists speaking out and being more extremist and vocal has led to a rise in misogynists speaking out.

    So yes whilst feminism is more tolerant of men than misandry it is not the equal rights movement many claim it is. For those of us who want equal rights, men and women, it is not tolerant enough and neither would meninism be if it existed as a movement. Feminism is not the equal rights movement many claim it is and if it were then many of its followers would not hold the gender biased opinions they hold.

    People who want true equality would not promote feminism or meninism if it existed just as a centrist would not promote the Greens or Labour.

    Its time to drop misandry, misogyny and feminism (thinly veiled misandry lite) and to work together as two genders that respect one another towards pure equality. None of that will be achieved through feminism or an equal movement promoted by males. All that does is help more extreme attitudes manifest creating the very monsters within society you sought to do away with in the first instance.
    This isn't a terrible post, but I feel that presuming that everything that makes up feminism is simply "misandry lite" is a bit unfair to many gender-equalitists who simply are involved with feminism as it is the only serious route towards a conversation on gender relations and equality.

    I know everyone says the "feminists care about men too!" and then there's the response of "when? where?" but there are legitimate cases of topics on male equality and men as a gendered subject. If you've ever heard of bell hooks, for instance, she is a prominent feminist who writes about men and the issues they face (she has a book dedicated to black masculinity and men on the theme of love) and strongly believes that it should be encouraged - and she's described as a radical feminist, probably because she talks about race a lot which upsets some of the western feminists. There are quite a few books written by feminists or male feminists on the subject, and there's an increasing interest in studying men as a gendered subject - I know at my university you can now study men and masculinity between 1860-1960 (a history module obviously), I'm sure there are modules like that cropping up.

    So from my perspective, menism, or studying men, actual stems off from feminism in its own little stubs, and can run alongside it and entwine. Admittedly not part of its core (its certainly a modern development) but a little subsection which some feminists do want to look at, in the same way you get feminists who want to look at class differences between women or women of various nationalities.

    I think another issue is that feminism is not directly rights for women, its gender equality - but on presumption that women are worse off. I think if "menists" can really organise themselves into a sensible debate which aren't created to try and debunk feminism, it could become a legitimate issue in feminism, because I (someone who does identify as a feminist) can see that's not totally the case right now.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Pasta6163)
    Feminism is about equality for all sexes. It's silly to label the movement as (even indirectly) anti-male just because you've experienced prejudice from some feminists.
    Nonsense. It is a female focused movement thus the name of it. By being female focused from the outset it is without a doubt anti male. It may be closer to pure equality than misandry but to suggest its a subset of pure equality is as absurd as suggesting a spectrum of shades of purples are equivalent to pure blue.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Sanctimonious)
    Nonsense. It is a female focused movement thus the name of it. By being female focused from the outset it is without a doubt anti male. It may be closer to pure equality than misandry but to suggest its a subset of pure equality is as absurd as suggesting a spectrum of shades of purples are equivalent to pure blue.
    Oh, so are you also against the "gay rights movement". **** that right, it should be the equal rights movement.

    Feminism fights the patriarchy, which is a societal system that hurts women and men alike through its enforcement of gender roles, position and hierarchy. Feminism strives to achieve equality through giving women the same political, social and economic rights as men. It is NOT named to force men into a subservient position to women.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by brendonbackflip)
    This isn't a terrible post, but I feel that presuming that everything that makes up feminism is simply "misandry lite" is a bit unfair to many gender-equalitists who simply are involved with feminism as it is the only serious route towards a conversation on gender relations and equality.

    I know everyone says the "feminists care about men too!" and then there's the response of "when? where?" but there are legitimate cases of topics on male equality and men as a gendered subject. If you've ever heard of bell hooks, for instance, she is a prominent feminist who writes about men and the issues they face (she has a book dedicated to black masculinity and men on the theme of love) and strongly believes that it should be encouraged - and she's described as a radical feminist, probably because she talks about race a lot which upsets some of the western feminists. There are quite a few books written by feminists or male feminists on the subject, and there's an increasing interest in studying men as a gendered subject - I know at my university you can now study men and masculinity between 1860-1960 (a history module obviously), I'm sure there are modules like that cropping up.

    So from my perspective, menism, or studying men, actual stems off from feminism in its own little stubs, and can run alongside it and entwine. Admittedly not part of its core (its certainly a modern development) but a little subsection which some feminists do want to look at, in the same way you get feminists who want to look at class differences between women or women of various nationalities.

    I think another issue is that feminism is not directly rights for women, its gender equality - but on presumption that women are worse off. I think if "menists" can really organise themselves into a sensible debate which aren't created to try and debunk feminism, it could become a legitimate issue in feminism, because I (someone who does identify as a feminist) can see that's not totally the case right now.
    You have a point but feminism whilst started as a movement closer to equal rights is actually heading further towards misandry. Men are partly to blame for that I will admit. Backlashes create reactions which instigate extreme responses and people become stubborn and unwillinging to compromise. This has led to a lot of the current misogynist and misandrist attitudes within our current societies.

    Feminism, I do believe and always have believed, started as a just and rightful cause in a different time to now. In modern society though it has gone left on the scale away from equality towards misandry, as said men backslashing has helped this advance further. This was always going to happen though.

    Now, there are of course a majority of feminists who are probably closer in their beliefs and wants to equality and want to push towards that but whilst the extremist minority speak out, the silent majority become irrelevant.

    Throughout history the majority have disagreed with things and the silent and peaceful majority have therefore become irrelevant as the bad things happened anyway. Only through the majority of peaceful feminists condemning the extremist feminists will the movement save face. Thankfully in modern society some women withput chips on their shoulders are starting to do just that. They deserve respect for that.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Pasta6163)
    Oh, so are you also against the "gay rights movement". **** that right, it should be the equal rights movement.
    I'm against movements that support self segregation that fundamentally undermine the true belief system of the cause they are fighting for.

    I support movement promoting equality for all with no favourable agenda from the outset.

    Feminism fights the patriarchy, which is a societal system that hurts women and men alike through its enforcement of gender roles, position and hierarchy. Feminism strives to achieve equality through giving women the same political, social and economic rights as men. It is NOT named to force men into a subservient position to women.
    If feminism is fighting on behalf of women and men, why is it called feminism? Were the NAACP fighting for the advancement of white people then? No and they never pretended they were. They were fighting for the advancement of coloured people which is actually part of the name.

    If feminism was named the equality and anti patriarchal movement then a lot more men would get behind it but as it is so female focused with little regard in fact for men a lot of men couldn't give a ****. Funnily enough I know women who won't support it either due it being so female focused from the onset.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DiddyDec)
    But it isn't a single movement. It is a group of different movements with different ideals and values. While one movement says "Ban Page 3"
    No it doesn't. It says "No More Page 3", which is not quite the same thing. Undoubtedly there are some women within that movement which do support an enforced ban, but from what I've seen it seems to be mostly aimed towards pressuring The Sun to end Page 3 of its own accord, rather than pressuring the government into introducing a ban.
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    Nice to see a post (and its counter replies) based on logic rather than misplaced opinion for once
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Sanctimonious)
    You have a point but feminism whilst started as a movement closer to equal rights is actually heading further towards misandry. Men are partly to blame for that I will admit. Backlashes create reactions which instigate extreme responses and people become stubborn and unwillinging to compromise. This has led to a lot of the current misogynist and misandrist attitudes within our current societies.

    Feminism, I do believe and always have believed, started as a just and rightful cause in a different time to now. In modern society though it has gone left on the scale away from equality towards misandry, as said men backslashing has helped this advance further. This was always going to happen though.

    Now, there are of course a majority of feminists who are probably closer in their beliefs and wants to equality and want to push towards that but whilst the extremist minority speak out, the silent majority become irrelevant.

    Throughout history the majority have disagreed with things and the silent and peaceful majority have therefore become irrelevant as the bad things happened anyway. Only through the majority of peaceful feminists condemning the extremist feminists will the movement save face. Thankfully in modern society some women withput chips on their shoulders are starting to do just that. They deserve respect for that.
    I think we are both clashing because of an issue of perspectives. I don't think we're moving towards misandry at all - instead I think we're getting an increase of involvement and more diversity in interpretation, which may lead to increased extremist behaviour, but also increased opposition within feminism, again like the increase of men-in-feminism which I hope will grow further to let itself be more accepted.

    I think what you consider misandry is also important, and also where you're getting it from. I know this sounds a bit stupid, but what exactly are you considering misandry to be - could you be specific? There are elements (actually a few elements) about "mainstream feminism" (the sort of feminism in The Guardian, or like Caitlin Moran) which irritates me, but its more because its regurgitating cliches without a full thought surrounding it, rather than outright misandry.

    Also, I don't mean to be patronising when I mention this, but are you sure your belief of the "good old feminism" (and it was good imo so I don't think you're specifically wrong) is not just hindsight? At the time, many people still feared misandrists and there were some very radical speakers, part of the reason why I don't feel misandry is a huge issue today. The only difference is that now we can see the good it did in adjusting laws and increasing women's positions in society, rather than we can't see the full good (or bad) feminism is doing right now as we don't have that element of looking back yet.
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: July 23, 2014
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Will you be richer or poorer than your parents?
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.