Thread by @HZiauddeen

Systematised and casual misogyny: a 🧵 for men

If you have not heard it, I highly recommend listening to this fantastic interview performance from @dgurdasani1, both for the clear communication of information and risks and for calling out the misogyny is real time.
(1/21)

https://twitter.com/dgurdasani1/status/1452561027976114177

She doesn't call it out as misogyny in the interview. She just calls out, names and challenges the inappropriate treatment she receives.
That inappropriate treatment is misogyny and she calls it out in this tweet. And very rightly.
(2/21)

When women call out misogyny, the most typical male response (and to some extent, the female response) is outrage, 'how dare she accuse me of misogyny?'.

This is based on a very literal and incorrect view of misogyny based on intentionality 'you're saying I hate women!'.
(3/21)

Truth is there are a fair few men who do hate women or at least have a serious issue with women. That is misogyny++ but not what I'm focusing on her.

I am going to focus on misogyny as described beautifully by @kate_manne, as a pervasive property of patriarchal systems.
(4/21)

Misogyny is linked to who has power (see QT) and can be thought of as:
-expectations of how women should be and what they should do
-beliefs about how women can be treated
-the enforcement of both the above incl punishment for violating them.
(5/21)

https://twitter.com/HZiauddeen/status/1319015850209366017?s=20

This so hardwired into patriarchal societies & their systems that it is the norm. It's how people behave & how women are treated, specific intentions do not have to come into it at all.
Girls and women learn this norm very early even if it takes a while to articulate it.
(6/21)

They know what they can't say, how they can't be, what they can ask for, what they are expected to say, do & endure. They know they will be penalised if they violate the rules & no matter how right they are. Even other women will punish them for violating the rules.
(7/21)

And if they do want to call out wrongdoing, if they want to ask for what they rightfully deserve (respect, recognition, rights, justice), they have to make sure that they are completely spotless because they any error will be used to try and crush them.
(8/21)

For many women, this internalises a particular kind of self doubt very early on, 'Did I do something wrong? Can I be sure that it was not something I did?', when they are treated unfairly or badly. A major contributor to this is repeated gaslighting.
(9/21)

Basically, women know what misogyny is and when it's happening. Just like people of colour know what racism is and when it's happening. And when you look from the outside without knowing this, you think about intentionality, 'but did he say it with that intention?'
(10/21)

I'll emphasise just one particular expectation of women here, that they will perform emotional labour i.e. they will carry other people's emotions, understand them, soothe them and make them feel better, even when they are the victims.
(11/21)

This includes asking them to consider the viewpoint and the intentionality of the person who attacked them. To consider how hurt he is by them calling out his misogyny, to understand his pain, to help him understand.
'Have some himpathy!'
(12/21)

'He didn't mean it, he didn't know.'
Well, it doesn't matter if he meant it or not, it was still hurtful/unacceptable/wrong etc.
And if he didn't know, he knows now. And it's not his pain that is center stage here.

Btw, I'm not even getting into intersectionality here.
(13/21)

So about this interview.
One important aspect of power is controlling the frame of reference i.e. let's just look at this one conversation. Except you can't. In this context, this interview is taking place 19 months into a pandemic.
(14/21)

We know now about COVID so at this stage so bullshit is inexcusable. Trying to present false balance and different viewpoints at this stage of the game is frankly irresponsible. It is especially egregious to set this up without telling one person you are doing this.
(15/21)

Especially when the other person is going to present such a nonsensical argument. This is all part of the set up prior to the interview.

When men are interviewed, respect is readily given. They are addressed by titles, their affiliations are mentioned.
(16/21)

They are more often allowed to complete their sentences, less often interrupted, less often challenged with incredulity or told to mind their tone or their language. They get far less 'How can you say that?' and more 'Why do you say that?'
(17/21)

They are given both the respect and power of their arguments as well as their credentials. They can make a manifestly crap argument and still have it upheld and defended on the grounds of their credentials (your credentials don't make crap, less crap).
(18/21)

They're much less likely to get the other person's credentials thrown at them in the 'what do you know compared to this guy?', because their own credentials are respected. And they call other male experts by name, or 'my colleague', certainly not 'your caller'.
(19/21)

A common response to having misogyny called out is 'how do you know I wouldn't treat a man the same way? how can you say it's because you're a woman?'

So I've given you what would usually happen with a man. Now have another listen to that interview.
(20/21)

Here's the thing. A lot of people listening to that interview will think it was very normal. Because it is the norm for men to speak to women like that. And for women to be told they are being too sensitive & should try and understand his viewpoint.
It is a shitty norm.
(21/21)