This is an excellent article by Cathy Young, exposing some of the widespread misandry within feminism.

I don’t agree with every point she makes. I think the 1848 demonizing of men is way more serious and shouldn’t be so easily dismissed. But that doesn’t take away from her main point: feminism is full of misandry, and if they want to be taken seriously by men, they need to address that.

  • gapbetweenus@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    It’s biased against a power system where one gender holds most power. If you feel like you are target by that - maybe it’s not because you are a man.

    • a-man-from-earth@kbin.socialOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Feminism habitually demonizes men, not the powerful. Their boogeyman is called after fathers, not the few people who actually rule and have power. They call masculinity (the characteristics of a gender) toxic. It is misandrist to the core.

      • gapbetweenus@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        How is feminism demonizes men? Curios, since I’m a men and never felt demonized by feminism.

        They call masculinity (the characteristics of a gender) toxic

        Dude, they don’t call masculinity toxic - they say that masculinity has toxic elements. How can you not get such a simple distinction?

        is misandrist to the core.

        It’s not.

        • a-man-from-earth@kbin.socialOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          How can you not see the evidence that is staring you in the face?

          Curios, since I’m a men and never felt demonized by feminism.

          That says more about you than about feminism…

          Dude, they don’t call masculinity toxic

          They do. They always talk about toxic masculinity, never any other kind. Does that not strike you as intentional?

          And you can deny its misandry, but it is obvious to us.

          I could link you some resources, but I’m not sure if you’re willing to read them and let them challenge your views.

          And a video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3WMuzhQXJoY

          And that’s just the beginning of the rabbit hole.

          • gapbetweenus@feddit.de
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            That says more about you than about feminism…

            What does it say about me?

            toxic masculinity

            Exactly - there is masculinity and toxic masculinity. How don’t you get that simple distinction? They are not the same. Feminism is criticizing toxic masculinity not masculinity as a whole.

            I could link you some resources, but I’m not sure if you’re willing to read them and let them challenge your views.

            What exactly should I do with random raddit posts and a tedX talk? If you have arguments bring them here and let’s discuss.

            • a-man-from-earth@kbin.socialOP
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 year ago

              What does it say about me?

              That you appear to be blind to the demonization of men so rampant within feminism, either willfully or because you’re a victim of its propaganda machine.

              Exactly - there is masculinity and toxic masculinity.

              Does feminism ever talk about positive masculinity? That’s the problem: they habitually associate masculinity with toxicity. And the characteristics of a gender (what it means to be a man, or a woman) cannot be toxic.

              Instead they should be more careful with their terminology and use for example toxic gender expectations. But they don’t. And that’s telling for a movement that is so sensitive to gendered language.

              What exactly should I do with random raddit posts and a tedX talk? If you have arguments bring them here and let’s discuss.

              If you’re interested in getting familiar with our arguments and the evidence, then there are some sources. They are not “random”.

              And if you’re not interested, then I think we’re done here.