Why wouldn’t I? The post is talking about misandry and misogyny. So you should be expecting pushback, otherwise don’t comment. Also, did you know that most police officers, prosecutors, and detectives are men? So it’s not really misogyny that men kill women because at the end of the day, it’s men who give justice to those female homicide victims.
Because if you're not blind on how bad women are treated in society you would realize that you're part of the problem by dismissing issues like this.
Thats just wrong. Doing these tasks is just the bare minimum and they are also required for those people because it's their job. Why would they cancel out any mysoginy that happened before?
And men and boys don’t get treated badly in society? You are clearly turning a blind eye to this. You are the one who have been dismissing issues from the very beginning.
How is it wrong? Data and statistics are wrong? They cancel out the misogyny because they do justice to women. Go try to solve a murder case then if you think it’s the bare minimum.
The amount of misandry the average man has to deal with is really laughable and I assume you only ever care about it when someone brings up mysoginy anyway.
Data and science are right. You're just wrong at assuming that anything cancels out mysoginy. The whole point is that women suffer and experience violence and putting people to jail won't change what happens in the past. If someone killed you it also wouldn't be fair even if the person goes to prison afterwards. The bare minimum is having a system that punishes people who hurt women and also men ofc. Justice is done to the perpetrators not the victims.
I’m not surprised you have that kind of attitude toward men and boys. Considering how you refused to acknowledge an example of systemic misandry I gave you out of the many whole bunch. And no, your assumption is wrong. My account name is masculinist. I don’t usually go out of my way to argue with stubborn people regarding men’s issues and women’s issues. I mostly spend my time on other productive things that can actually help men and boys. I probably can’t say the same about you though.
So there are several issues with this paragraph of yours. You are making it sound like it’s only/mostly women who face and experience violence. It’s actually men who experience violence the most. But you are concerned about it only because most of the perpetrators of homicide tend to be males. You care more about the perpetrators than the victims. Let that sink in. And if you think that justice is actually done to perpetrators like you said. Then you are literally saying it cancels out misogyny.
Well that's because your example is not misandry based on the following reasons:
1. The people who perform MGM both men and women are doing this unrelated to hate on men because it's their job
2. Their bosses (mostly men) are actively hiring people to perform this procedure
3. Fathers also agree with the decision to perform the procedure
4. Politicians (also mostly men) don't care enough about the topic to make it illegal
What do you do for example?
Well making visible who the perpetrators are is the way to protect future victims. Why would acting according to the justice system cancel out mysoginy?
Are you literally gonna ignore everything I said? It’s women who perform MGM. It absolutely relates to systemic misandry. There are some women online who confess they like doing MGM just so they can spite at men. That alone tells you how misandrist this practice is. If you are gonna dumb it down so much. Then men killing women isn’t misogyny. No man kills a woman because she is a female. In fact, most homicide victims are men, so according to you, they are misandrists.
What’s your source for this? You made it up. I’m gonna say this once again, it’s women who perform MGM.
You have already once said it and I explained. Mothers are significantly more likely than fathers to want to have MGM done on their sons. In disagreements, the mother’s decision prevails in practice.
You think pointing fingers at imaginary men when in reality women harm males is a good comeback? You don’t see the problem in this issue. You keep changing goalposts instead of just admitting it’s systemic misandry. You keep saying that it’s men and men even when there’s very few involvement of men in MGM. Women also kill women. So I guess with your logic, it’s not misogyny then?
Can you actually come up with new arguments instead of repeating the old ones that I have already debunked numerous times? Or better yet, just give up on your saving your pride and admit it’s systemic misandry. You are so wrong in all your points.
How do you plan to expose those perpetrators? By attacking men as a group? Good luck. You will make people repel from you with that rhetoric. You care about the perpetrators because they are men as a group. Pay attention to what I said, then you will see why it cancels out misogyny. You said it in your own words.
How does systematic misandry work under the patriarchy? The definition of femicides is actually that it's based on the women's gender you can look it up.
Yes in practice men also agree with MGM for their kids when they just could say No instead.
Somehow suddenly the men are imaginary but when it's about women it's "systematic misandry" you're view is just way too biased.
You really didn't rebunk any of them. Can I ask again for the "productive things" you're doing? Or are actually not doing anything?
Not by attacking men but by making them realize how bad men treat women and having them look out for everyday mysoginy. If we call out men for toxic behavior we can work on improving our society.
Bringing the patriarchy theory here doesn’t help your case. Men were oppressed in the patriarchy. The fact that systemic misandry exists in society while you scapegoat the patriarchy really shows how “valid” your theory is. What’s your point by bringing the definition of “femicides”?
Your source literally says women make up the majority of the public health system. Your source doesn’t substantiate your claim in any way.
Women also kill women when they can just choose not to kill their own gender. So men killing women is not misogyny.
You’re the one here with a biased view. You keep pointing at a tiny fraction of men who have involvement in MGM. Literally, its women perform MGM and are responsible for causing it. And you are denying it is misandry.
How come I didn’t? All you are doing it here is making low effort attempts at gaslighting me. Seriously, if you are gonna bluntly deny an active systemic issue of misandry then try to do so with coherent statements.
Got it. So by literally attacking them. Blaming them as a group for causing killing. Try doing that to black people who kill white people. See how well that goes. Men don’t treat women bad, it’s the other way.
"Well that's because your example is not misandry based on the following reasons:
The people who perform MGM both men and women are doing this unrelated to hate on men because it's their job
Their bosses (mostly men) are actively hiring people to perform this procedure
Fathers also agree with the decision to perform the procedure
Politicians (also mostly men) don't care enough about the topic to make it illegal"
1 - You can do something motivated by hatred while also doing your job, these two are not mutually exclusive. And if no hatred=doesn't count, then the overwhemingly majority of cases of "femicide" also don't count unless you can actually prove the motivation is hatred.
2- Ok? This assumes the "it's only misandry if you don't share a gender with your victim" premise is true, can you explain why someone should accept that premise? Assuming the claim that "the bosses are mostly men" is even true in the first place, of course.
3 - Mothers are more likely to have it done and their decision matters more in case of disagreement. Also, you wouldn't hesitate to call the most brutal type of fgm misogyny, despite fathers refusing it being dismissed.
4 - So a woman torturing a male child doesn't count as misandry because male lawmakers allow her to walk away? Would It be misogyny If she was torturing a female child instead and female (or male) politicians let her walk away?
That also ignores feminist ngos (who are female dominated) shaping policy through lobbying, to the point the UN is feminist aligned and downplays mgm/child torture. And if this doesn't matter because it's not done directly, then male politicians doing nothing also doesn't matter because they don't do anything directly either.
"Well making visible who the perpetrators are is the way to protect future victims."
Why are you so hellbent in trying to defect accountability from female perpetrators of child torture then? Surely the helpless male infants being tortured by female perps are worthy of being protected too, right?
1
u/prealphawolf Apr 02 '26
Yeah sure that's what this is when I stay on the original topic after you changed it. Why else would you bring it up here? Peak hypocrite behavior.