What constitutes Misogyny?

[Canadian_watcher]

I intend to give a thoughtful reply to Kate's post at some point (when I can pry myself away from the astoundingly horrifying reality in Japan which has affected me in a most profound way...) I want first to make two comments that require less brain power:

Norton - that opera was HILARIOUS!

crikket - well, given that the very existence of douchebags might be thought of as misogynistic, I don't have a problem with that word being transformed into an insult.

[barracuda]

Well, I do believe you two have just discovered the un-popped cherry atop of the cake of your infuriatingly, mystifyingly uninformed, and insensitive contributions.

I'd like to return to what Nordic and 82_28 said for a moment, and explain why I tend to empathise with Project Willow's statement.

Can women be misogynists? And if so, how does this contribute overall?

First of all, it seems as if both posts suggest a degree of equivalency between the participation of both sexes within the skein of the misogynist culture. I think Nordic's question can be rephrased as "Can women hate women for being women?" And while the answer to that is obviously yes, the very question can be viewed as an attribution of guilt to women for the existence of misogyny in some way. It assumes complicity in the oppressive regime of patriarchy, and, to my mind seeks to dilute the issue by distributing the causes between both sexes, all the while the benefits of the cultural bias accrue continuously to the male oppressors. As well, some conjectured general hatred by women of women can only be viewed sensibly as a reaction to that culture, and imbued by the milieu of their oppression.

82_28's post has a variety of issues for me:

But you bring up a great point, Nordic. I just don't think misogyny is a gender specific issue, but rather a cultural one and a cultural issue that indicates a built in decline.

Again, here we see an attempt to move the discussion away from the issue of gender, which I see as counterintuitive and unproductive. Misogyny affects everyone, and colors our lives and thoughts, but it acts as an oppressive force specifically on women. I guess you could say that living as a beneficiary of an oppressive hegemony is arguable deletirious to the oppressor, especially with regards to becoming a complete person or in terms of living a satisfying, self-realised life, but I'd like to be forgiven for weighing my sympathies in favor of those who are oppressed over the hardships of having to do the oppressing.

However, our common languages have built in genders. We're kinda "lucky" with English as we do not observe linguistic/etymological genders. I do not know what role this plays in the formation of a human mind as the child learns its respective language and customs. So, I really have no idea.

I'm not really understanding this part of your post, because my understanding is that our language is imbued with gender specificity and male-centric bias so entirely as to totally reinforce the hegemony of men. In some ways, language itself is a male construct, at least from the point of view of our cultural myths. You know, like the Gospel of John says, "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." And that right there was pretty much the end of the matriarchy.

But on a person to person basis, misogyny need not exist if common respect is not only observed, but lived. There are just as big of assholes on the male or female end.

In some ways I think there's a parallel to certain discussions of wealth nequalities and class issues to this thought process. For example, in discussing the plutocratic nature of our society, one might say, "There are just as big assholes on the rich or the poor end." And people do say that sort of thing all the time, and attempt, quite successfully I might add, to dilute the causes and ills of plutocratic society across a spectrum of classes, drawing equivalencies all the while the benefits accrue to the most wealthy. I mean, you can blame the poor for acceeding to the power of concentrated wealth, but somehow that seems misguided to me. And here, the question isn't really about whether or not there are an equal number of assholes on either side of the gender line, is it? That seems like an entirely different thread, probably titled, "What constitutes assholery?" or something.

[Nordic]

the very question can be viewed as an attribution of guilt to women for the existence of misogyny in some way.

Well, sure it can be viewed as anything, by anybody.

I can view what you said about how you settled on your user name in another thread as an example of extreme penis-proud misogyny, but I won't, because I know you were just joking.

My wife can view my washing dishes as an insult to her, some sort of passive-aggressive comment where I'm attempting to communicate to her how angry I am that she didn't wash them. When in reality I'm just washing dishes.

I can hear voices in my head and view them as God speaking to me. But they're just voices in my head.

[Nordic]

The term "douchebag" rolls off the tongue far better than the other disgusting thing I can think of which is "used condom" or "full condom".

"Douchebag" is just fun to say, like "Fuck!" or "GodDAMNit"

[beeline]

The term "douchebag" rolls off the tongue far better than the other disgusting thing I can think of which is "used condom" or "full condom".

"Douchebag" is just fun to say, like "Fuck!" or "GodDAMNit"

Funny, the colloquialism of 'used condom' is 'scumbag,' which I find not particularly offensive, and I don't think 'douchebag' is necessarily misogynistic, insofar as the term is rarely applied to women.

On edit: However, my standards as to what constitutes 'offensive' or 'inoffensive' are much, MUCH lower than society's in general. So don't listen to me when it comes to this topic.

[Canadian_watcher]

Well, I do believe you two have just discovered the un-popped cherry atop of the cake of your infuriatingly, mystifyingly uninformed, and insensitive contributions.

I'd like to return to what Nordic and 82_28 said for a moment, and explain why I tend to empathise with Project Willow's statement.

Can women be misogynists? And if so, how does this contribute overall?

First of all, it seems as if both posts suggest a degree of equivalency between the participation of both sexes within the skein of the misogynist culture. I think Nordic's question can be rephrased as "Can women hate women for being women?" And while the answer to that is obviously yes, the very question can be viewed as an attribution of guilt to women for the existence of misogyny in some way. It assumes complicity in the oppressive regime of patriarchy, and, to my mind seeks to dilute the issue by distributing the causes between both sexes, all the while the benefits of the cultural bias accrue continuously to the male oppressors. As well, some conjectured general hatred by women of women can only be viewed sensibly as a reaction to that culture, and imbued by the milieu of their oppression.

Well.. I see it differently. I think that women do participate - in large, large numbers - in the misogyny of our culture. Whether they've been essentially 'brainwashed' into it is irrelevant since I'd argue we're all brainwashed into the culture from the start. The thing is, some of us grow up and look around and read and learn and disengage from the (in this case) misogyny and others decide it will be more profitable for them, on an immediate personal level. to participate.

Women who subjugate other women, who criticize them on their looks, who cleave to men, who disparage feminism, who pressurize each other to conform.. these are powerful misogynist influences on other women.

[Canadian_watcher]

The term "douchebag" rolls off the tongue far better than the other disgusting thing I can think of which is "used condom" or "full condom".

"Douchebag" is just fun to say, like "Fuck!" or "GodDAMNit"

Funny, the colloquialism of 'used condom' is 'scumbag,' which I find not particularly offensive, and I don't think 'douchebag' is necessarily misogynistic, insofar as the term is rarely applied to women.

I'm on your side with douchebag not being sexist.. but that's a terrible argument for it. "You throw like a girl" is never applied to women, yet is highly sexist and insulting to women, as a group.

[barracuda]

Well, sure it can be viewed as anything, by anybody.

Really? Wow. Thanks.

[Nordic]

Well, thanks to you I know now that all misogyny comes from men, even if it pollutes women.

(....ahem .... stating the obvious alert .....)

My point wasn't to state the obvious. My point (in bringing up female to female misogyny) was to bring up how much this has spread into the culture, how much women themselves do to perpetuate it (Fashion magazines anyone?) and that sort of thing.

Why do women buy clothes from American Apparel?

Maybe we should start there.

[crikkett]

The term "douchebag" rolls off the tongue far better than the other disgusting thing I can think of which is "used condom" or "full condom".

"Douchebag" is just fun to say, like "Fuck!" or "GodDAMNit"

I find it distasteful. It grosses me out. Not because I don't like women or being one, but because when I finally learned what the word meant, which believe it or not was after I left home, it was accompanied by a mental image that I can't shake lo these many years hence. But it's so popular and accepted and I guess therefore, unavoidable.

I'm not down on you. Still: gross.

Nobody says, "enema bag". Yet everyone has an asshole, and most could use the therapy. And nobody uses the genderless 'colostomy bag,' yet as my inner preteen insists, "it's even more grossening."

[Canadian_watcher]

The term "douchebag" rolls off the tongue far better than the other disgusting thing I can think of which is "used condom" or "full condom".

"Douchebag" is just fun to say, like "Fuck!" or "GodDAMNit"

I find it distasteful. It grosses me out. Not because I don't like women or being one, but because when I finally learned what the word meant, which believe it or not was after I left home, it was accompanied by a mental image that I can't shake lo these many years hence. But it's so popular and accepted and I guess therefore, unavoidable.

I'm not down on you. Still: gross.

Nobody says, "enema bag". Yet everyone has an asshole, and most could use the therapy. And nobody uses the genderless 'colostomy bag,' yet as my inner preteen insists, "it's even more grossening."

well, can't argue with you there!

[barracuda]

I think every conversation I've every had on this subject eventually wound up with someone saying, "Well, women do it too!" And then everyone walks away satisfied and no one is really guilty.

[beeline]

I'm on your side with douchebag not being sexist.. but that's a terrible argument for it. "You throw like a girl" is never applied to women, yet is highly sexist and insulting to women, as a group.

I don't disagree with that. Just in my/my friend's common parlance, I don't think I've ever heard 'douchebag' applied to a female...you may be right, however, now that I think about it, it is in a similar vein as 'you throw like a girl,' in that you're feminizing a male in order to make him feel/appear to be less masculine.

Duly noted.

[marycarnival]

I would like to apologize to PW for my name-calling. No excuses, I was (am) angry, but that was one toke over the line.

That is all.

[crikkett]

Funny, the colloquialism of 'used condom' is 'scumbag,' which I find not particularly offensive

I never knew that's what 'scumbag' meant.

Now I'm going to giggle every time I see a republican use the word on TV. Like 'teabagging'. My inner preteen is delighted to be so thoroughly grossed out.