Antimisandry.com: An Introduction

**frostyboy** · 16th-November-2008

From "A Radical Profeminist": Antimisandry.com: An Introduction

Here's some information about an online community who call themselves "antimisandrists" (people who are opposed to the hatred of men).

The age range of its members is charted here. The entire list of members is listed here (there are seventeen pages of member names with a bit of additional information about each one).

As one reads through the site's many pages, one can see that one of several sore spots for "antimisandrists" is their claim that the degree to which women do harm in the world is not sufficiently reported. They have no facts to back up such claims, however.

From where I stand, I see harm women do to other human beings: white women do harm to women of color; wealthy women do harm to poor women; too many women hurt themselves; white women hurt other white women; women of color hurt women of color; some women hurt children in relationships, but statistically--and in real life, men harm children more often and more severely, including by raping their daughters and other girls; and women are fully capable of being hurtful to men in relationships in many ways, because, as many of the comments at that link express, men are human too.

No post at A Radical Profeminist indicates that men are not human beings or are destructive human beings in any "natural" ways. Unlike many men, for example, I do not agree men are inevitably and "naturally" rapists. Every feminist I have ever known has argued against the theories of Randy Thornhill and Craig Palmer. Men disagree. Men keep insisting, in various ways, or behaving as if "I had no other choice". Why aren't you going after those men who malign you, antimisandrists? I hear and have heard men, often, call one another many demeaning names, gender specific ones, that allude to the fact we know what we men do, to women, to children, and to one another because we have to prove we are "real men" or to regain status lost in other arenas, such as economically or racially.

I am opposed, for example, to men calling men who are abusers terms like "monsters". Men are human, even if we have behaved or behave horrendously and atrociously to other humans. Ted Bundy was a human being. So was Adolph Hitler. To think they weren't is to not understand the depth and breadth of what being human can mean, in practice.

I disagree with comment 8 of 10, at the site linked to above, linked again here. That comments reads: "Ofcourse men get Hurt. They don't show it though, they should though".

I understand that commenter to be saying men don't express our hurt (but ought to) in non-aggressive, non-violent statements such as by saying "I'm hurt" or "When you did that, it hurt me very much." I hear her wishing men did just that. JUST and ONLY that.

What men (not ALL men) DO instead, is smash women in the face, throw them across the room, break their bones, stab them, punch them in their pregnant bellies, murder them, rent women as prostitutes and abuse and kill them, denigrate, humiliate and degrade them, and, all the while, blame "women" for one bad relationship with a woman. What men do instead is join groups like "antimisandry.com" devoted to promoting ridiculously false ideas about feminism and feminists, all the while pretending Western white male supremacy, domination, and cultural-economic imperialism isn't a real force aggressively and callously destroying women of all ethnicities, men of color, many children, and the Earth and its other creatures.

The Western white male-dominated world I've lived in my whole life does systematic sexualised violence (read: harm and hurt) to all groups of women and to men of color--because they are women and men of color. Women, nowhere, do systematic, sexualised, violent harm to men of their same ethnicity or race or economic class. And no group of women harms white men, systemically, structurally, and endemically.

I hope that the predominantly pale male human beings over at antimisandry.com will move themselves more into reality, so that they might better attend to their own wounds humanely, without inflicting injuries on women and the Women's Movement that has been working for a long time for women's (and men's) human liberation from white male supremacy.

**themanonthestreet** · 16th-November-2008

Uhuh....riggghhhttttttt...

One good thing about this joke of an 'article'.... I project an additional membership bump...

TMOTS

**GrizzlyPenguin** · 16th-November-2008

They have no facts to back up such claims, however.

I suppose this ignorant mangina didn't thoroughly look throughout this site if HE claims we have NO facts to back up what WE find. At least, however, this shows that people are actually paying some attention to us and our FACTS that are posted THROUGHOUT THIS SITE are poking at their temporary bubbles of [in]security. I'm proud of everyone here, in that case, that the more work the best of us put into this, the smaller the politically correct view and defense of feminism becomes. If this keeps going, I can see them trying to shut down this site itself, lol.

Unfortunately, it kind of makes me sad knowing that as a young adult I really haven't contributed to much of this. Being away so long has thrown some guilt on top of my busy-life. Luckily, I was able to get photoshop back and now I'll be looking forward to making new pictures.

OH, on that note Marx, you should open up a merchandise store, lol. I could design T-shirts and such, and you could make them. It shouldn't cost too much.

**Stan** · 16th-November-2008

Quote from GrizzlyPenguin

OH, on that note Marx, you should open up a merchandise store, lol. I could design T-shirts and such, and you could make them. It shouldn't cost too much.

At least for the US, a company called Cafe Press does lots of t-shirts, coffee mugs, bumper stickers and so forth for causes. Many feminists use them. Not sure if they can ship elsewhere in the world or not. But it is super easy and convenient FWIW.

www.cafepress.com

Samples:

**Marx** · 16th-November-2008

https://www.cafepress.com/antimisandry

**Stan** · 16th-November-2008

Marx..for real? If true this should help with the site budget I hope...

**John Dias** · 16th-November-2008

I would probably never buy such merchandise, because rather than being useful to persuade, it's instead useful for expressing one's identity. That's all it is. If you recognize that, then you might notice an opportunity. We could set up a pro-feminist site at CafePress, raise some money, and then use it for MRA purposes.

**Marx** · 16th-November-2008

Quote from John Dias

We could set up a pro-feminist site at CafePress, raise some money, and then use it for MRA purposes.

LOL

**John Dias** · 16th-November-2008

Quote from Marx

LOL

Sun Tsu said that all warfare is based on deception.

**Stan** · 16th-November-2008

Quote from John Dias

Sun Tsu said that all warfare is based on deception.

The Gays are doing a lot of fund raising for their efforts to redefine marriage.

I wonder if any anti-gay-marriage groups are actually funded by the gays...

**John Dias** · 16th-November-2008

Quote from Stan

The Gays are doing a lot of fund raising for their efforts to redefine marriage.

I wonder if any anti-gay-marriage groups are actually funded by the gays...

Sometimes the deception is that the two most identifiable warring parties represent opposite views. When it comes to marriage licensing, have you noticed that no one has questioned why we need marriage licenses in the first place? All you see is people fighting over the right for their marriages to be government-recognized. Conservatives want to use government policy to validate their straightness; gays want to use government policy to validate their gayness. Both sides fail to question why such validation is so important in the first place. Here we are as a species, having existed perhaps for hundreds of thousands of years, having married during all that time -- and suddenly marriage is "under attack" because of some trifling with government policy.

**Stan** · 16th-November-2008

Quote from John Dias

Sometimes the deception is that the two most identifiable warring parties represent opposite views. When it comes to marriage licensing, have you noticed that no one has questioned why we need marriage licenses in the first place? All you see is people fighting over the right for their marriages to be government-recognized. Conservatives want to use government policy to validate their straightness; gays want to use government policy to validate their gayness. Both sides fail to question why such validation is so important in the first place. Here we are as a species, having existed perhaps for hundreds of thousands of years, having married during all that time -- and suddenly marriage is "under attack" because of some trifling with government policy.

What an astute point John.

If memory serves, marriage licenses in the US have only been used for about 80-90 years.

If there were no marriage licenses...family court would be a lot less busy...

**John Dias** · 16th-November-2008

Quote from Stan

If there were no marriage licenses...family court would be a lot less busy...

Exactly. Far too often we fixate on the injustice of bad policies, when in fact we should be questioning the need for politicization itself. Families would probably be in much less danger of breakup if government policy didn't make divorce such an attractive proposition to at least one of the parties.

**Stan** · 16th-November-2008

Quote from John Dias

Exactly. Far too often we fixate on the injustice of bad policies, when in fact we should be questioning the need for politicization itself. Families would probably be in much less danger of breakup if government policy didn't make divorce such an attractive proposition to at least one of the parties.

Sadly...you cannot escape a government marriage.

If you don't get a licence...after a number of years (usually 7) you are then "common law married". Hence to end that you need a divorce?

Even if the duration is less than that and a couple is just living together, alimony can kick in at surprisingly low time durations. Like 6 months.

And of course if there is a kid...there is child support. Even from boys who were raped, in some cases sperm donors, in others guys with wallets who are not the actual Dad and may not realize this fact, sometimes even if they do and fight it.

Some of the outrages can be fought and won but you have a long project ahead of you. You may need to create new legal precedents in order to get basic rights that should be there in the first place. Like the guy who is fighting in court but may never be able to raise or see his son since the Mom adopted the child out.