Feminism and feminists get accused of misandry all the time; it’s a major accusation for a movement that claims the moral high ground and claims to be about gender equality.
Feministe is a mainstream, high traffic feminist blog. It bills itself as “In defense of the sanctimonious women’s studies set.”
Recently there was a mess of a post and comment thread that mewled and whined about how anti-circumcision people were manhandling, as opposed to criticizing and shredding, AIDS research that suggested that adult circumcision could reduce infection. The thread quickly went into defending infant circumcision, which is even more indefensible that just lying to adults and tricking them into a useless and irreversible surgery. That was one recent post.
Then there is gender-selective rape apology. You need to read the whole thing, including the hot mess of a comment thread, to follow what is actually going on, but mostly it’s just bigoted fail. Most of the commenters are probably truly unaware of how misandrist their sophistry is, but that doesn’t change anything. Jill says in the OP:
“This, though, is one of those weird wild world scenarios. I’m not sure it even matters if we call it “rape” or not (and it doesn’t sound like the boyfriend does call it that). He was sexually violated; whether she intended to or not, that’s the fact of what happened. Or it’s possible that Dan is right and the dude is being a manipulative jackass.…”
One commenter said:
“Seriously? This is a complicated situation in which people are debating whether the woman is at fault here due to the situation’s unusual circumstances. If the sexes were reversed, there would most likely be a similar discussion about the male perpetrator.”
Well yes, they would. It’s just that they would come to the opposite conclusion, pretty predictably. Look at the thread when they discussed Julian Assange. Julian Assange was a guilty rapist “rutting on my Mayella” before the commenting even began.
It finally reached ultimate absurdity with this offering:
“Except that’s only true if we continue to insist that rape requires a rapist. If rape can occur without a rapist, then that concern is resolved. She isn’t a rapist. He was raped.”
Ah yes, the rapistless rape.
Why so much effort to find some way, any way to exonerate the rapist? Sisterhood trumps all, apparently. Women are definitioanlly dainty, frail, oure, harmelss creatures, sex is always something man does to a woman anyway and calling a woman a rapist risks collapsing the whole structure of rape culture and compromising an invlauable silencing tactic. The damned privileged neckbeard was really asking for it all along anyway.
So where could that stereotype of the man-hating feminist ever have come from?
Some commenters pushed back. Valerie Keefe left several comments but finally just summed it up with this:
“This feminist is pretty sure saying that men will take advantage of a situation to fake a rape and abuse their partners is, well, patently misandristic. No scare quotes required. And yeah, people should be warned. This stuff hurts women too. Not just in the ‘cis women are better than that’ way, but in the making closeted trans women want to crawl in a hole and die, reifying their CASAB, way.
Gettin’ sick of this stuff.”
No one even bothered to answer. The blatant misandry of the OP and the majority of the comments were just not an issue with these feminists.
Not all feminists are man-haters; see the comment quoted immediately above. But as that comment points out, man-hatred is squarely centered in mainline feminist spaces.
Latest posts by Jim Doyle (see all)
- The Woman Card - May 2, 2016
- Frat boy bachelorettes and the invasion of gay bars - April 15, 2016
- “Not my kid….” - February 22, 2016