"And it’s not inconsequential when little boys grow up hearing that they’re all scum." THIS is a huge contributor IMHO to the persistence of gender ideology. So many boys and young men don't want to be men anymore. Your article is spot on and covers nicely why misandry is harmful to feminism and to women generally, but this is an important point as well and I would love to see you cover it in a followup article.
Wow, Kaeley, you nailed it: "Misandry is a conscientious choice NOT to heal. It’s a choice to project one’s bitterness and wounds onto an entire group of strangers, many of whom do not deserve it. It’s a choice to be dishonest and see the absolute worst in people. It’s a choice to kill hope. It’s a choice to pour fuel on an already blazing inferno between the sexes. In my opinion, it’s ultimately an act of cowardice reserved for those who’ve decided to quit because the work was just too scary to continue."
These women need healing. I have gained enough wisdom, finally, to stop being angry with people who lash out, and realize they are suffering. They need prayer.
As for women-only communities, they are incomprehensible. Where would we be without men who are willing to work long hours in hard jobs, so we can have electricity and food and transportation and a million other things we take for granted? Few women are physically capable of doing many of those jobs.
Thank you for your always-wise words, and the faith you bring to difficult situations.
Very very well said, especially “Misandry is the conscious choice not to heal.” I keep thinking of Lewis’ Great Divorce and all the people who kept choosing to remain in hell. People do that. I’ve done it sometimes. It’s weird how I kept choosing to remain bitter - I have to fight this tendency to confuse resentment with meaningful “revenge.” An outstanding and helpful essay - thank you.
Everything in this essay rings true and wise, with the exception of this one paragraph:
“As one reader put it, it’s kind of like people who try to make a federal case about “reverse racism,” insisting it’s a national crisis when the nation hasn’t even begun to contend with the carnage or the scope of the racism people of color have endured since the inception of our country. How can you expect people to care about these seemingly minor infractions if they’ve repeatedly proven they don’t give a damn about the big ones?”
The idea that America “hasn’t even begun to contend with the carnage and scope of the racism people of color have endured since the inception of our country” just doesn’t compute. Without a doubt there is still serious work to be done, but a LOT of progress has been made, and dismissing the reality of reverse racism doesn’t fit with the essence of the argument I see you making. “Anti-racism” (per Kendi and his ilk) is all about punishing or promoting people based on their skin color, similar to misandrists treating all men as culpable for the crimes of a few. How is that morally defensible when it amounts to painting innocent people guilty and rejecting them accordingly, which is what the rest of your argument seems to be standing against?
In my calculus, you don’t fight injustice with injustice, just like you don’t fight hate with hate. What am I missing?
I may have overstated my case. I merely meant to communicate that there are a lot of stones still left unturned in the racial reconciliation discussion. The bulk of the racism suffered in our country is on the shoulders of black people. There’s still a lot of work left to do, and a widespread choice to deny this reality makes it hard to start discussions about reverse racism.
"And it’s not inconsequential when little boys grow up hearing that they’re all scum." THIS is a huge contributor IMHO to the persistence of gender ideology. So many boys and young men don't want to be men anymore. Your article is spot on and covers nicely why misandry is harmful to feminism and to women generally, but this is an important point as well and I would love to see you cover it in a followup article.
Wow, Kaeley, you nailed it: "Misandry is a conscientious choice NOT to heal. It’s a choice to project one’s bitterness and wounds onto an entire group of strangers, many of whom do not deserve it. It’s a choice to be dishonest and see the absolute worst in people. It’s a choice to kill hope. It’s a choice to pour fuel on an already blazing inferno between the sexes. In my opinion, it’s ultimately an act of cowardice reserved for those who’ve decided to quit because the work was just too scary to continue."
These women need healing. I have gained enough wisdom, finally, to stop being angry with people who lash out, and realize they are suffering. They need prayer.
As for women-only communities, they are incomprehensible. Where would we be without men who are willing to work long hours in hard jobs, so we can have electricity and food and transportation and a million other things we take for granted? Few women are physically capable of doing many of those jobs.
Thank you for your always-wise words, and the faith you bring to difficult situations.
Very very well said, especially “Misandry is the conscious choice not to heal.” I keep thinking of Lewis’ Great Divorce and all the people who kept choosing to remain in hell. People do that. I’ve done it sometimes. It’s weird how I kept choosing to remain bitter - I have to fight this tendency to confuse resentment with meaningful “revenge.” An outstanding and helpful essay - thank you.
Everything in this essay rings true and wise, with the exception of this one paragraph:
“As one reader put it, it’s kind of like people who try to make a federal case about “reverse racism,” insisting it’s a national crisis when the nation hasn’t even begun to contend with the carnage or the scope of the racism people of color have endured since the inception of our country. How can you expect people to care about these seemingly minor infractions if they’ve repeatedly proven they don’t give a damn about the big ones?”
The idea that America “hasn’t even begun to contend with the carnage and scope of the racism people of color have endured since the inception of our country” just doesn’t compute. Without a doubt there is still serious work to be done, but a LOT of progress has been made, and dismissing the reality of reverse racism doesn’t fit with the essence of the argument I see you making. “Anti-racism” (per Kendi and his ilk) is all about punishing or promoting people based on their skin color, similar to misandrists treating all men as culpable for the crimes of a few. How is that morally defensible when it amounts to painting innocent people guilty and rejecting them accordingly, which is what the rest of your argument seems to be standing against?
In my calculus, you don’t fight injustice with injustice, just like you don’t fight hate with hate. What am I missing?
I may have overstated my case. I merely meant to communicate that there are a lot of stones still left unturned in the racial reconciliation discussion. The bulk of the racism suffered in our country is on the shoulders of black people. There’s still a lot of work left to do, and a widespread choice to deny this reality makes it hard to start discussions about reverse racism.
Ah. Okay. I appreciate the clarification. I can definitely see that point. Thanks!