I dont think misandry is a real thing.
Posted: 18 Nov 2025, 06:42
The manuresphere blasts us all the time with these terms that end up being bad or wrong or poor analysis.
I get it, there is this word "misogyny" and they changed it so now it says "misandry" its a childish behavior. Its a kid who says "no you". I dont like it.
Yes, individuals can have distaste of men. Sure, some women dislike men due to ideology or because they read feminist literature. Some policies or norms can harm men that much is true.
But there isnt centuries of misandry and no institution was built around it. If you are dishonest and a piece of shit you can say military is misandry because they were drafting men only. Or you can say that widespread cultural narratives give men "a role" and that is misandry. That would be dishonest, revisionist and shit analysis because the roles we men got were not driven by hatred of men, it was simply a logical thing to do given the society of the past.
Theres no comparison between misandry and misogyny. Theres no history of men being legally barred from rights due to gender, but there is history of men being outcast or sent to die or sacrificed for petty rich man reasons. There is no narrative that says men are lesser creatures or unfit to live. There are some feminists like spanish tribunals who write new constitution or these korean bitches who hate men, so in the future this definition of "misandry" may have a context and maybe will be useful. For now is just junk.
Anti male outcomes in society arent misandry. Depends how you define misandry. If youre dishonest like a manuresphere redpiller then anything antimale is misandry. I think this is political rather than a good analysis. It only helps to boost redpill personalities on social media, I dont use this definition of misandry because is a meaning that is under control of redpillers. And I think redpiillers are part of feminism.
I get it, there is this word "misogyny" and they changed it so now it says "misandry" its a childish behavior. Its a kid who says "no you". I dont like it.
Yes, individuals can have distaste of men. Sure, some women dislike men due to ideology or because they read feminist literature. Some policies or norms can harm men that much is true.
But there isnt centuries of misandry and no institution was built around it. If you are dishonest and a piece of shit you can say military is misandry because they were drafting men only. Or you can say that widespread cultural narratives give men "a role" and that is misandry. That would be dishonest, revisionist and shit analysis because the roles we men got were not driven by hatred of men, it was simply a logical thing to do given the society of the past.
Theres no comparison between misandry and misogyny. Theres no history of men being legally barred from rights due to gender, but there is history of men being outcast or sent to die or sacrificed for petty rich man reasons. There is no narrative that says men are lesser creatures or unfit to live. There are some feminists like spanish tribunals who write new constitution or these korean bitches who hate men, so in the future this definition of "misandry" may have a context and maybe will be useful. For now is just junk.
Anti male outcomes in society arent misandry. Depends how you define misandry. If youre dishonest like a manuresphere redpiller then anything antimale is misandry. I think this is political rather than a good analysis. It only helps to boost redpill personalities on social media, I dont use this definition of misandry because is a meaning that is under control of redpillers. And I think redpiillers are part of feminism.