Man hating: what is it?

[Wherenextcolumbus]

Something I have just been thinking about - what is man hating? It almost always comes up when having any feminist discussion which is why we wanted this forum in the first place.
But I was wondering exactly what man hating is within feminism and is there any legitimacy to it being asked to be addressed within feminist discussions? Personally I just see it as a distraction from the real issues, but I've never quite known what it meant.
I for one have a mistrust for men that is different from my mistrust for people in general. I trust women more in my personal private space in general than I ever would with men in general, because of sexual harassment. Would this count as "hating men?"
EDIT: In general means in general, not with every single man every single time.

 

[Erebus]

As with any ideology there will be some people who twist or corrupt it to suit their own purposes. Using feminism as justification to hate men is just another example of that. Unfortunately the people who do this provide a juicy target for those who oppose feminism.
I suppose anger towards men who actively seek to prevent gender equality is understandable. However the anger should be directed at those men, not all men and it should be kept in mind that women are just as capable of doing the same thing (though it is admittedly less common).

As for your own mistrust of men, I couldn't tell you whether or not it's justifiable as I don't know you or your background. I will say as a misanthrope though that I understand not trusting people, I just do my best to distrust everybody equally

 

[Sunstone]

...what is man hating?

It's those strange, hard to define feelings you have towards me, don't you know?

 

[Sunstone]

I trust women more in my personal private space in general than I ever would with men in general, because of sexual harassment. Would this count as "hating men?"

Well, a feminist hating or woman hating person would be very likely, I think, to condemn you as a man hater on those grounds. But those grounds merely reflect your rather common sense realization that you are more likely to be sexually harassed by a man than by a woman. That's kind of a d'uh thing.

 

[Sunstone]

As with any ideology there will be some people who twist or corrupt it to suit their own purposes. Using feminism as justification to hate men is just another example of that.

Yup! First, in any movement or with any ideology, there''s always going to be people who use it to legitimatize their ugly hate, crude stupidity, or some other mischief.

Second, feminism is no exception and never will be -- so anyone who says feminism (or any movement/ideology) is too pure for there to be corrupt individuals in it is just delusional, and adding to the problem.

 

[Wherenextcolumbus]

Yup! First, in any movement or with any ideology, there''s always going to be people who use it to legitimatize their ugly hate, crude stupidity, or some other mischief.

Second, feminism is no exception and never will be -- so anyone who says feminism (or any movement/ideology) is too pure for there to be corrupt individuals in it is just delusional, and adding to the problem.

I was thinking maybe political lesbianism, but I'm even sympathetic to political lesbianism, I just don't agree with how they condemn other women for their relationships with men.

 

[Wherenextcolumbus]

It's those strange, hard to define feelings you have towards me, don't you know?

Oooohhh, that's what those are!

 

[Kilgore Trout]

I generally find that hate is more accurately described as fear - this applies to men who hate women and women who hate men.

 

[Kenaz]

As someone who is biologically male, that is, I have a penis; I don't find your preference towards trusting someone based upon what genitalia they have very rational. Sure, there is the sexual factor, but there are women who find women attractive and visa verse that make your stance irrational. That is not to say that it is not valid or that you need to change it, but I do want to point that out.

I love feminism and support it because it has an essence of equality to it, seeing beyond the sex or gender of a person. However, in that same respect, I feel it is counterproductive to view it in terms of women vs. men -- it should be, in my opinion, about seeing beyond those things and equality of all, regardless of their differences of sex, gender, race, and so forth. It is then that we get to the root of oppression against women, and do not remove one and add another form of oppression.

Just my .02 cents. It's cheap, but I try to polish it up good. ;-)

 

[Sunstone]

...I don't find your preference towards trusting someone based upon what genitalia they have very rational. Sure, there is the sexual factor, but there are women who find women attractive and visa verse that make your stance irrational....

It seems we disagree on that point, Kenaz. I believe her stance to be rational in so far as her stance takes into account the odds or probability of being sexually harassed by a man versus the odds or probability of being sexually harassed by a woman. I've never read the odds are actually equal, but I have been given plenty of reason to believe that men perpetrate sexual harassment greatly more often than women. So I not only see her view as rational, but -- much more importantly -- as realistic.

Now, if she was saying she is scared of any and all contact with men because some men harass women, then I would not view that as either a rational nor a realistic position, and I would recommend to her a therapist.

I love feminism and support it because it has an essence of equality to it, seeing beyond the sex or gender of a person. However, in that same respect, I feel it is counterproductive to view it in terms of women vs. men -- it should be, in my opinion, about seeing beyond those things and equality of all, regardless of their differences of sex, gender, race, and so forth. It is then that we get to the root of oppression against women, and do not remove one and add another form of oppression.

We're in substantial agreement on those points.

 

[nilsz]

Personally I think sperm banks should exclude sperm from people who espouse this kind of nonsense.

As someone who is biologically male, that is, I have a penis; I don't find your preference towards trusting someone based upon what genitalia they have very rational. Sure, there is the sexual factor, but there are women who find women attractive and visa verse that make your stance irrational. That is not to say that it is not valid or that you need to change it, but I do want to point that out.

Lesbians and bisexual women are less common, and I suspect less likely to sexually harass other women. It seems a tad misplaced to call someone irrational for preferences that concern primarily themselves.

I love feminism and support it because it has an essence of equality to it, seeing beyond the sex or gender of a person. However, in that same respect, I feel it is counterproductive to view it in terms of women vs. men -- it should be, in my opinion, about seeing beyond those things and equality of all, regardless of their differences of sex, gender, race, and so forth. It is then that we get to the root of oppression against women, and do not remove one and add another form of oppression.

Just my .02 cents. It's cheap, but I try to polish it up good. ;-)

What is important is that we treat everyone with the dignity and respect that is due. We are still different.

 

[Sunstone]

I generally find that hate is more accurately described as fear - this applies to men who hate women and women who hate men.

I agree. In my experience, almost all -- or even all, so far as I have found -- hatred has roots in fear.

 

[freethinker44]

I for one have a mistrust for men that is different from my mistrust for people in general. I trust women more in my personal private space in general than I ever would with men in general, because of sexual harassment. Would this count as "hating men?"

Yes, this would count as "hating men"? Hate is a pretty strong word though, it's more of a prejudice, or I guess sexist would be an apt word. Let's use your quote and switch out gender with a race and use a common stereotype associated with that race to highlight the prejudice within your statement.

I for one have a mistrust for black people that is different from my mistrust for people in general. I trust white people more in my personal private space in general than I ever would with black people in general, because of theft. Would this count as "Racism?"

With this statement, it is a clear-cut case of racism, without a doubt. So why shouldn't the original statement be a clear-cut case of sexism? To make a generalization about anyone, especially based on appearance alone, is wrong.

 

[Sunstone]

Yes, this would count as "hating men"? Hate is a pretty strong word though, it's more of a prejudice, or I guess sexist would be an apt word. Let's use your quote and switch out gender with a race and use a common stereotype associated with that race to highlight the prejudice within your statement.

,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

With this statement, it is a clear-cut case of racism, without a doubt. So why shouldn't the original statement be a clear-cut case of sexism? To make a generalization about anyone, especially based on appearance alone, is wrong.

You make a good point, but I think you're overlooking something. There's a significantly higher probability of a woman being sexually harassed by a randomly selected male than by a randomly selected female, but is there a significantly higher probability of someone being robbed by a randomly selected black person than there is by a randomly selected white person? I'm not so sure about the latter. What do you yourself think?

Also, I took the OP to mean only that she is more cautious opening up with and trusting men than she is opening up with and trusting women. I didn't take the OP to mean that she is set against opening up with and trusting men. The latter would be the equivalent of racism, but not the former, in my opinion.

 

[Sunstone]

I trust women more in my personal private space in general than I ever would with men in general, because of sexual harassment.

I think your statement, as you've phrased it, could easily be taken to mean that you would never trust any man as much as you would trust a woman. But I assume that is not your intended meaning. Rather, I've taken your meaning to be more along the lines of, "Initially, I would not trust a man as much as I would initially trust a woman." or, "I am always more cautious about trusting men than I am about trusting women". Have I adequately understood your intended meaning?

 

[Kilgore Trout]

I find that gender itself is a poor indicator of how much to trust someone, or how good/bad their character is. In fact, it's a rather poor indicator of most things, other than what somebody's gender is.

 

[Wherenextcolumbus]

I think your statement, as you've phrased it, could easily be taken to mean that you would never trust any man as much as you would trust a woman. But I assume that is not your intended meaning. Rather, I've taken your meaning to be more along the lines of, "Initially, I would not trust a man as much as I would initially trust a woman." or, "I am always more cautious about trusting men than I am about trusting women". Have I adequately understood your intended meaning?

Yes and also I mean I wouldn't trust them in my personal private space, e.g being alone with them in personal spaces like my flat for example. Whilst I would be more trusting with women in those kinds of situations.

 

[freethinker44]

You make a good point, but I think you're overlooking something. There's a significantly higher probability of a woman being sexually harassed by a randomly selected male than by a randomly selected female, but is there a significantly higher probability of someone being robbed by a randomly selected black person than there is by a randomly selected white person? I'm not so sure about the latter. What do you yourself think?

Also, I took the OP to mean only that she is more cautious opening up with and trusting men than she is opening up with and trusting women. I didn't take the OP to mean that she is set against opening up with and trusting men. The latter would be the equivalent of racism, but not the former, in my opinion.

It's wrong to have a general mistrust of an entire group of people based on physical appearance. There are certain situations where it might be warranted, but to just have a general mistrust of a group is prejudice. Even if the statistics back up your opinion, it is still wrong to generalize. For example, Asians are commonly stereotyped as being better at math. This source says that Asian American SAT scores in math average almost 60 points higher than any other group. Statistically, Asian Americans are better at math than other American races, does this make it not racist to generalize Asians in math? No, it is still racist, even if they are better.

No matter how you look at it, generalizing is wrong.

 

[Sunstone]

I find that gender itself is a poor indicator of how much to trust someone, or how good/bad their character is. In fact, it's a rather poor indicator of most things, other than what somebody's gender is.

True enough in most cases, but suppose you came to a fork in a dark road, and looked down one path to see a man, while you looked down the other path to see a woman, which path would you feel was the safest path to take? I mean, all else being equal.

I'm trying in my clumsy way to suggest that, while I agree with your excellent point that gender is typically a poor indicator of whether to trust someone, it does have some merit, however little merit that is. I see it as of value -- to the extent it's of any value at all -- when you don't know anything else about a situation.

 

[freethinker44]

True enough in most cases, but suppose you came to a fork in a dark road, and looked down one path to see a man, while you looked down the other path to see a woman, which path would you feel was the safest path to take? I mean, all else being equal.

But that doesn't make it right. If your scenario was one path was someone of your race and the other path was someone of another race, it would be racist to choose the path with your own race if that decision was simple based on race alone. Similarly, it would be sexist to choose a path based on gender alone.