Reddit Reddit reviews Legalizing Misandry: From Public Shame to Systemic Discrimination against Men

We found 26 Reddit comments about Legalizing Misandry: From Public Shame to Systemic Discrimination against Men. Here are the top ones, ranked by their Reddit score.

Books
Social Sciences
Gender Studies
Men's Gender Studies
Politics & Social Sciences
Legalizing Misandry: From Public Shame to Systemic Discrimination against Men
Used Book in Good Condition
Check price on Amazon

26 Reddit comments about Legalizing Misandry: From Public Shame to Systemic Discrimination against Men:

u/blne · 52 pointsr/KotakuInAction

Don't get me wrong, I don't support any "hate crime" or "hate speech" legislation, hence why I said it would almost be worth it. I just think it would be hilarious to see people like Jessica Valenti and Jess Philips and The Guardian charged with hate crimes. Trolls in the UK could have a field day (actually they already could, given current hate speech statutes; what are they waiting for?).

Ironically the epidemic of "misogyny" is mostly imaginary (at least in mainstream British culture), while the epidemic of misandry is mostly real. So who are the real trolls? You can read explicit anti-male "hate speech" on any given day in mainstream news publications, but feminists have to search far and wide (cat-calling, fat-shaming, attractive women in video games etc.) to find their misogyny boogeyman. Indeed according to some academics in Canada, misandry has now become institutionalized in the western world.

There is an argument to be made that making misandry illegal could force feminists to realize their own stupidity/solipsism/irrationality, and therefore put an end to hate think laws, but unfortunately I wouldn't bet on that. Due to aforementioned stupidity/solipsism/irrationality.

u/actingverystrangely · 21 pointsr/OneY

I down voted you because the content of your post is so poor. Erasing male experience of domestic violence and portraying men as sole perpetrators is the purpose of the Duluth model. This is not "try(ing) to make the world a better, safer place", this is part of a structured program of communication and actions to discriminate against men.

Think I'm exaggerating? Read this

>"...doesn't do it exactly right"

In the same way that Jackie at UVA was trying to win back her crush, but didn't exactly do it right?

u/Vwar · 20 pointsr/MensRights

Misandry is not only normal it is institutionalized

u/LucifersHammerr · 20 pointsr/MensRights

A Reference book of men's issues is probably your best bet for finding relevant studies.

[MRRef] (https://www.reddit.com/r/MRRef/) is more extensive but will require more digging.

Videos:

The Red Pill (NYA)

Everything by Karen Straughan

Everything by Janice Fiamengo

Books:

[Is There Anything Good About Men?] (https://gendertruce.files.wordpress.com/2014/04/baumeister-roy-is-there-anything-good-about-men.pdf) (full book online) by Roy Baumeister

The Myth of Male Power: Why Men are the Disposable Sex by Warren Farrell

The Privileged Sex by Martin Van Creveld

The Second Sexism: Discrimination Against Men and Boys by David Benetar

The Fraud of Feminism (full book online) by Earnest Belford Bax

Who Stole Feminism? by Christina Hoff Sommers

The War Against Boys by Christina Hoff Sommers

Spreading Misandry: The Teaching of Contempt for Men in Popular Culture by Paul Nathanson and Katherine Young

Legalizing Misandry: From Public Shame to Systemic Discrimination Against Men by Paul Nathanson and Katherine Young

Sanctifying Misandry: Goddess Ideology and the Fall of Man by Paul Nathanson and Katherine Young

Replacing Misandry: A Revolutionary History of Men by Paul Nathanson and Katherine Young

No More Sex War by Neil Lyndon

A few works that I think deserve more attention. Some are directly related to Men's Rights, others tangentially.

Hierarchy in the Forest: The Evolution of Egalitarian Behavior by Christopher Boehm

War, Peace, Human Nature: Converging Evolutionary & Cultural Views by Douglas Fry et. al

Female Forms of Power and the Myth of Male Dominance: A Model of Female/Male Interaction in Peasant Society (paper online) by Susan Carol Rogers

Favoured or oppressed? Married women, property and ‘coverture’ in England, 1660–1800 (paper online) by J. Bailey

The Mothers: A Study of the Origins of Sentiments and Institutions (full book online) by Robert Briffault

Gynocentrism: From Feudalism to the Modern Disney Princess by Peter Wright

Sex and Culture (full book online) by J.D. Unwin

The Manipulated Man (full book online) by Esther Villar

Unknown Misandry (website)

Real Sexism (website)

u/Mytecacc · 18 pointsr/MensRights

A lot of it is born out of feminisms covering up of abuse and using the false claim that abuse is mainly patriarchal to demonise and legislate against men.

The fathers rights movement is in response to feminist jurisprudence in family and divorce law discriminating against men.

The issue with education is feminism making false claims that girls were being held back in school back when boys and girls were doing equally well, and using the false claims as justification to slant the system in favour of girls.

The issue with patriarchy theory is that its a hatefully conspiracy theory.

The objections to the feminist abuse industry is that its discriminates against everyone bar heterosexual women.

http://www.amazon.com/Legalizing-Misandry-Systemic-Discrimination-Against/dp/0773528628




u/Dreamboe · 8 pointsr/MensRights

>There can be no law that says "you're not allowed to hate other people", even though society considers it a big taboo.

lol hating men is the last thing from a "big taboo." It's literally institutionalized in every aspect of Western society.

u/CesarShackleston · 8 pointsr/WayOfTheBern

>It's important to note that this is a cultural phenomenon, not a political one.

I may be misunderstanding you but I'm not sure you're correct on this particular point. Cultural misandry is indeed being reflected in actual laws. See Legalizing Misandry by the Canadian academics Paul Nathanson and Katherine Young (both left-wingers, incidentally).

Indeed analyses of political discrimination against men go back to at least the late 19th century when the socialist Earnest Belfort Bax wrote The Legal Subjugation of Men (1896).

The very idea that males can suffer gender-based discrimination is extremely counter-intuitive for both men and women. This is in part because the male gender role is rooted in strength. The other problem is that most people in positions of overt power are male; however powerful men do not actually try to "privilege" other males; quite the opposite; males (unlike females) lack in-group preference and indeed tend to favor the opposite sex. Powerful men loving being chivalrous. Study after study has determined that there is a very large "empathy gap" between the sexes. Several have found eg if forced to choose between killing an innocent man or woman, both sexes will choose the man.

One academic, albeit an Israeli right-wing military strategist, has even claimed that females are and always have been the privileged sex. I wouldn't go that far, but it's pretty clear if you look at the statistical data alone that "patriarchy" hypothesis is fundamentally irrational. No, men don't want to oppress their own mothers and daughters, and no, males aren't privileged. Rich men, sure.

Since we're talking about feminism and political power, it's very interesting to note that there is probably a Machiavellian aspect to this as well. The first "gender studies" courses were financed by the Ford and Rockefeller foundations, and extreme anti-male feminism (what we would now call mainstream feminism) arose during the "COINTELPRO" era.

Left wing media analysis Mark Crispin Miller stated the following during Occupy Wall Street, after being accosted by feminist Laurie Pennie:

"It’s interesting to note that Ford and Rockefeller and the other foundations with strong CIA connections started giving grants in the early 70s to study race and gender. It was a sudden move towards identity politics by these organisations and the theory is that the reason they did this was to balkanise the left and to prevent it from pursuing any kind of a class or economic analysis. Without denying the justice of what you’re saying, this is not an irrelevant theory. I don’t think, anyway."

His opinion is bolstered by an FBI document from 1969:

"The Women’s Liberation Movement may be considered as subversive to the New Left and revolutionary movements as they have proven to be a divisive and factionalizing factor.... It could be well recommended as a counterintelligence movement to weaken the revolutionary movement.” This was from an August, 1969 report by the head of the San Francisco FBI office.[4] Within several years, the Rockefeller and Ford Foundations were pumping millions into women’s studies programs on campus.







If you actually look at the statistics you find that men and boys fare worse on practically every quality of life indicator. So at minimum, leftists need to abandon this "male privilege" nonsense.

u/kanuk876 · 7 pointsr/reddit.com

misandry: (mis·an·dry): noun, hatred of males (Wikipedia link)

Books by Paul Nathanson and Katherine Young:

Spreading Misandry: The Teaching of Contempt for Men in Popular Culture

Legalizing Misandry: From Public Shame to Systemic Discrimination Against Men

u/[deleted] · 6 pointsr/MensRights

I read the article when it came out, that's what I was talking about.

This is the sort of thing that that the author doesn't know about ...

http://www.amazon.com/Legalizing-Misandry-Systemic-Discrimination-Against/dp/0773528628

u/ManAid · 3 pointsr/MensRights

Title: Legalizing Misandry: From Public Shame to Systemic Discrimination Against Men
Link: http://www.amazon.com/Legalizing-Misandry-Systemic-Discrimination-Against/dp/0773528628/ref=pd_sim_b_4

Title: Spreading Misandry: The Teaching of Contempt for Men in Popular Culture
Link: http://www.amazon.com/Spreading-Misandry-Teaching-Contempt-Popular/dp/0773530991

Title: The Manipulated Man
Link: http://www.amazon.com/The-Manipulated-Man-Esther-Vilar/dp/0953096424

u/Goodard · 3 pointsr/MensRights

I think you are ignorant about what feminism actually does


http://www.amazon.com/Legalizing-Misandry-Systemic-Discrimination-Against/dp/0773528628

And as Othompson said, fuck off.

u/Rygarb · 3 pointsr/MensRights

Check out the books:

Spreading Misandry: The Teaching of Contempt for Men in Popular Culture



Legalizing Misandry: From Public Shame to Systemic Discrimination Against Men

They are described as "massive and massively-researched volumes", and "thoroughly documented scholarly work". These two books are must read material.

u/DavidByron2 · 3 pointsr/MensRights

So I'm reading the Amazon reviews of the second book mentioned. Does anyone know if this statement is accurate?

> Perhaps the single most important thing Nathonson and Young do is refuse to draw back from saying that academic feminists--most of the feminists they discuss are professional scholar-teachers, most with PhDs--are unabashed hatemongers. In going so far they only stop short of annoncing that the "gender war" is in no way a metaphor, that feminists are just as determined to wreak damage on males as they contend males are determined to wreak on them.

> In a way, it will be interesting to see just how far this gauntlet thrown down to academic feminists will be picked up by them and responded to. To admit that feminists are explicitly anti-male, for instance, is to open up the whole academic industry of "Women' Studies"--which includes the female professors who teach in them--to the charge that they violate federal, state, and institutional regulations against hostile environment sexual harassment.

http://www.amazon.com/Legalizing-Misandry-Systemic-Discrimination-Against/dp/0773528628

u/890989 · 3 pointsr/MensRights

That wasn't the claim. The claim was that misandry is much more common than misogyny -- it appears literally every day in mainstream newspapers, is taught every day in schools etc.; indeed it is institutionalized. Police have to investigate hate crimes when a complaint is made. Therefore feminists would come under direct threat, legal precedents would have to be set etc. It would certainly make for some interesting debates, because most "misogyny" is just a figment of the feminist imagination. It would also force feminists to deal with fundamentalist religion, which is arguably misogynistic in some respects (and misandric in others).

Don't get me wrong, I don't support hate crime/speech laws.

u/NiceIce · 2 pointsr/MensRights

Not what I mean at all. Where the hell do you live? As I told you, I live in SoCal. Give me examples that are somewhat remotely relavent to me. Do you think that Egalitarians/MRAs support ANY of those things? Are you new to this subreddit? If you are trying to justify the evils of feminism by comparing them to the Taliban, you're setting the bar pretty damn low.


For over half a century, feminism has been Spreading Misandry, Legalizing Misandry and Sanctifying Misandry.


Waging a war on men and sadly, even a war against boys.

That is why I, like most members of this subreddit, are vehemently antifeminist.

u/kloo2yoo · 2 pointsr/Equality

Erin Pizzey, author of prone to violence

also, Paul Nathanson and Katherine Young, authors of Legalizing Misandry and Spreading Misandry

u/neofool · 2 pointsr/MensRights

The misandry series.


u/thedarkerside · 2 pointsr/KotakuInAction

I am reading this book right now and it is also draws a pretty bleak picture and shows this has been going on for 40 odd years.

> Wehret den Anfängen ;)

Way too late for that I am afraid.

u/mnemosyne-0002 · 2 pointsr/KotakuInAction

Archives for the links in comments:

u/Feminism_Is_Evil · 1 pointr/MensRights

Legalizing Misandry by Paul Nathanson and Katherine Young.

u/Operator77 · 1 pointr/IAmA

>I would say you're completely entitled to that opinion

Nice to know!


>But a lot of the sites you've been linking me to don't just argue that, they argue that all the women in these movements are also sexists who want female superiority over men.

Yes, because that has been my experience in dealing with feminists.

>Not only that, but the sites can't even back up their claims with anything other than hearsay and misleading quotes.

Check out the books:

Spreading Misandry: The Teaching of Contempt for Men in Popular Culture



Legalizing Misandry: From Public Shame to Systemic Discrimination Against Men

They are described as "massive and massively-researched volumes", and "thoroughly documented scholarly work". These two books are must read material.


I see the incredible destructiveness that feminism has brought. It has waged an all out war against
boys,
men
and fathers.


Feminism has poisoned the minds of the majority of American women. Consider the book My Enemy, my love by Judith Levine.
One of the most depressing books I have ever read. From the reviews:

>Here, a contributing editor to New York Woman convincingly argues that some degree of man-hating (misandry) is practically universal among American women today. For evidence of man-hating, Levine draws on 80 in-depth interviews with women of various social classes, ethnic backgrounds, occupations, and sexual orientations. Nearly all women, she finds, perceive men as fitting one or more stereotypes: either that of needy Infant,'' exploitativeBetrayer,'' or testosterone-poisoned ``Beast.'' Levine goes on to describe the genesis of such attitudes in women's first relationships with their fathers, and represents the feminist movement of the 60's and 70's as the first time that women recognized the commonality of these feelings and claimed the right to express them. Her discussion concludes with portraits of individual women and the strategies they have found for dealing with their hatred or ambivalence: total avoidance of men; intimacy marred by strife; rage and disappointment; utter capitulation.

u/Inconnu2u · 1 pointr/MensRights

I have done extensive research, which is why I hate feminists. I am an antifeminist - someone who is against the feminist movement, which for the past four decades have been systematically Spreading Misandry, Legalizing Misandry, waging an all out War Against Men and sadly even a War Against Boys.

u/satanic_hamster · 1 pointr/PurplePillDebate

> Seriously you expect me to watch all that?

Watch however much you want whenever you want to.

> Please summarize.

They hate divorce court. They hate the institutionalized and legally codified misandry (here, here, here, here, here, etc.). They hate contempt for men in society.

The reasons have been accounted for, documented and published all over the place.

u/kanuk877 · 0 pointsr/business

Yes and no.

If this advertising stuff was an isolated incident, then yeah you might call this article an overreaction.

But anti-male advertising is not an isolated incident.

Nathanson and Young have dedicated 1020 pages in two books (Spreading Misandry and Legalizing Misandry) listing and discussing misandry in our culture. Misandry is so pervasive in North America, most people don't even notice it.

But the anti-male advertising is so bad, people are noticing it. We only hear about it occasionally when someone bothers to ask around what people's sentiments are. Because getting upset when men are maligned... that's not PC.

How do you fight something like misandry? Part of the battle is calling people out when they cross the line. And you keep doing it until some semblance of balance is restored.

If you want to learn more about misandry, you can read the above mentioned books or Warren Farrell's "Women Can't Hear what Men Don't Say" or "The Myth of Male Power" are quite good. Farrell was a feminist and served on the board of the American National Organization for Women.