There is no such thing as a "misogynist" society.

submitted by PeddaKondappa from (self.debatealtright)

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]FoxySDTWhite Nationalist 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

I will bite a little

A misogynist is one who hates women. (Definition of misogyny)

This is actually not true. Here is definition of misogynist from Cambridge dictionary:

a man who hates women or believes that men are much better than women

So by this logic, even if some men loved their mothers they can still think they are worse than men. Therefore an example misogynist society is the one where men believe they are better than women.

[–]PeddaKondappa[S] 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

This looks like an attempt at redefining the meaning of words. The word "misogyny" has a very clear and unambiguous meaning, derived from two Greek roots: misos referring to hatred, and gyné referring to woman. Together, these two elements make a word simply indicating hatred of women. See Merriam-Webster as an example.

Expanding the definition of "misogyny" to include any belief that men are superior to women is problematic, because a belief that Y is superior to X does not imply that X is an object of hatred. For example, it is a biological fact that the average human adult male is much stronger and more physically capable than the average human adult female (it's not even close). However, it does not follow that the men who acknowledge the fact of male biological superiority must be haters of women. On the contrary, traditional patriarchal societies expected men to defend their women and children, and lay down their lives if necessary to protect them. So if you expand the definition of "misogyny" in such a way, you conflate two things which are actually separate: the hatred of women, and the belief that men are superior to women. This conflation is a consequence of the liberal worldview, where all fundamental hierarchies and inequalities are seen as oppressive. In the liberal worldview, if Group Y maintains that they are intrinsically superior to Group X in some way, then that indicates Group Y must hate and oppress Group X. The liberal mind cannot conceive otherwise.

[–]AFutureConcern 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

It is a redefinition - but you're doing the same thing when you claim in (1) that a misogynist is one who hates all women. According to your definition, a man who proclaims that he hates all women except his mother would not count as a misogynist. The reality is that the word has never been used in such a restrictive sense.

Misogyny is an example of a social construct that has been weaponized by feminist agitators in order to degrade society. The word was used in media to describe everyday phenomena such as men using discipline on their wives to keep them in line. The implied subtext, because of the supposed meaning of the word, is that such men "hate women". The reality is that such men probably didn't hate their wives. Once the accepted social norm is that slapping a woman is only something "misogynists" do, good men avoid doing it, and the definition of "misogyny" concept-creeps its way leftward, such that today, even believing that some psychological differences between men and women are natural, even if supported by evidence, can get you accused of "misogyny" and fired (as happened to James Damore).

You are correct that there is no such thing as misogyny - in its restrictive form, as you note, it doesn't exist because men don't unilaterally hate women. In its general form, its definition is free-flowing and like a puddle of water will fill whatever shape society is in. Since it has utility to women to accuse men of "misogyny", no matter how women are treated, the least compliant men will always get accused of it.