This sort of shallow, flippant analysis may feel good but it misses the point & does harm. Not just by equating homosexuality with misogyny but also in erasing that this is how patriarchy socializes heterosexual men. This is standard male heterosexuality under patriarchy.

https://twitter.com/Zoya_ki_batein/status/2025156499555704945

I often get responses to this that it's homophobic, which is equally as shallow an understanding of what it's describing. The homosociality, homoeroticism, & misogyny of straight men is male heterosexuality under patriarchy. Patriarchy distorts & poisons but they are straight.

I keep seeing Adriana Smith "gave birth." She didn't "give birth," a fetus was cut from a corpse. She & her family were denied any dignity in her death. She was dehumanized, designated an incubator, & desecrated. By the very system that killed her. A neat trick the sexual sadists are playing now is to call for the fainting couch over pointing out the fact that a dead body is a dead body, while simultaneously declaring Adriana Smith (& her family) had no rights because she's a dead body. Personhood is a game for them.

Hero shit. She did more for his community than cops do. They wouldn't have wanted me on the jury.

They refused to pursue rape charges but found the energy to investigate, collect evidence, & charge her. And she'll do more time than he would have had he killed her after he raped her.

"Choose better" but note how much investment men have in scolding women to ignore misogyny. Not All Men, it's just a few/rare/outlier men, it's just trolling/joking, it's not that serious/important, it's not men it's feminism/media, don't be so sensitive/picky/judgy/unforgiving.. The truth is that men are socialized to hate, exploit, & abuse women & men have to recognize that & unpack their conditioning or they will never be decent men. All Men. And some do! But more men will be invested in cowardice &/or preserving patriarchy.

Saw a man's tweet declaring women's lives end at 28 & men insisting that isn't hate. Expected from conservatives so committed to their bigotry they pretend it starts with gas chambers but even men who claim to be decent feel justified in debating misogyny to normalize it. And that's the problem. Men can hide behind claims of not seeing it but women point it out regularly & men insist on trying to exhaust women into compliance. It isn't that men don't know, it's that they like it & don't want the dehumanization to stop. It might balance power.

This Vulture article on Gaiman's history of sexual abuse was interesting, particularly in its focus on his wife. I'll never forget the people who dismissed his victims, even after reading their traumas they dismissed as consensual, acceptable, & regret (or an agenda). (TW) I'm all for holding complicit women accountable & we do need to have a deeper dive into the Ghislaines of the world who pursue & offer vulnerable young women (& girls) to their partners for some sense of power & male approval, but they could not exist w/o the men who consume them

Despite all the manipulative self-pity men denouncing "mean" feminists & justifying worshipping misogynists do, what I've observed of men in feminist spaces who know a statement about men isn't a condemnation of them individually is they feel released of patriarchal pressure. I've seen it referred to as a box men are put in, & it very much is, & what I've noticed from men commenting in feminist spaces is a relief that they can be the kinds of men patriarchy doesn't allow but they'd rather be.

Resent how women's responses are viewed as aggressive, hostile, & rude if they're not deferential to men, requiring women to kneecap their statements & coddle men. Particularly since I intentionally work to remove that from my language to counter that conditioning. 🧵 Especially resent how men who think themselves not like those red hat misogynists enforce this too. Words that from a man would simply be viewed as neutral or confident become uncivil when from women. And men will show no curiosity about their biases.

When people, particularly men, inform me a topic isn't serious, like pockets, there are bigger issues - I know. I am capable of caring about lots of things. I'm also aware of how discrimination is normalized & enforced. The small facilitates the large. 🧵 When I'm informed I shouldn't care about the microaggressions, the inconveniences, the casual misogyny, bc the sexual assaults, domestic violence, & femicide (which they also don't care about) should be my focus, I'm struck by the lack of curiosity about how the latter happens.

One of the more obnoxious parts of bear discourse is all the women & men taking time to hold men's hands & explain the point of the hypothetical to alleviate men's self-pity to justify their harassment. The endless coddling & centering men so they wouldn't be sad bois (& abusive) A hypothetical highlighting women feeling unsafe, the trauma & anxiety we're forced to carry, became about men's feelings. Which is how it always goes when women try to talk about oppression, abuse, or even asking a partner to be a partner. That manipulation is exhausting & evil.

Imagine if women were declaring they wouldn't care or do anything if they saw a child being assaulted. They'd even whip out a phone to film it & laugh. They even think kids deserve to be murdered for not being deferential enough. Because we don't owe kids, we'd only protect ours. There would be death threats.

But men do this regularly while still trying to sell their "protector" nonsense. Because women are expected to be nurturers, mothers, & failure to do so means the woman is an aberration, despite this role being placed upon women, not chosen.

Not All Men, Real Men, he's gay, he's a boy - all these deflections & derailments are meant to preserve the title of (het) Men as noble, heroic, & strong. It's how men signal they do not care about the issue & will not address it but polishing the shine on their title is priority Man isn't just a gender to them, it's a station of superiority, a title synonymous with dominance & admiration. Women being hurt by men is an individualized experience but calling out men who harm is a stain on their pristine title, which cannot stand.

When we talk about men using women/girls' bodies in their power larps to impress other men, the "I'll kill my daughter's boyfriend" is a glaring example. The "protection racket" of patriarchy extends to daughters. This is also rape culture. To be clear, the chance this man would ever hurt a boy/man for harming his daughter is practically nonexistent. More likely he'd blame her. This performance is for men. Hero larps are power fantasies to impress men. Girls are merely props to facilitate them.

Something sad about this, if it's understood to mean he was enduring sexual exploitation so early in his life, is how normalized his abnormal journey is & how victims are vulnerable to re-victimization. Predators benefit from previous abuse. It's also disturbing the response. There appears to be less anger over the grooming of a child by a powerful adult & more at the rejection of the predator not being attractive enough to "deserve" her victim. Such a twisted & misogynistic take.

I'm going to tell a story about Good Ones, why I don't vouch for men, & how all men benefit from the violence of other men. 1/12 Years ago I had a friend online who was trying to escape an abusive husband. She had no support system, by design, not even from her own family. She did have some online friends & we had a lot of mutuals. One was a man who was charming, well-liked, & seemed kind & supportive. 2/

Misogynistic men often push back on the description bc they claim they love women (bc they love sex). They can't be misogynist bc they love the labor their mother or wife provides them, the adoration of a daughter. They love what women provide them & call that love. They'll claim since they don't describe their bigotry as hate, it isn't. Hate can look like/acted on in different ways. The belief women are inferior, deserving of different treatment, existing to fulfill different roles - that they wouldn't accept it for themselves.

Nice is hugging someone who is sad. Kind is asking them if they'd like a hug bc some ppl are averse to touch.

Nice is telling someone you'll pray for them. Kind is recognizing your beliefs aren't the default, some ppl have trauma or find them offensive, & offering them support. Nice is what the majority have deemed socially acceptable. It's a performance of conformity, often with little consideration for others. Kind is thoughtful. Nice is often used by cruel ppl who are "nice" bc they have the appearance of goodness & don't go against social order.

Don't think forced-birthers, & men in general, realize the shift forced birth has created in their responsibility in sex. Until now women accepted the burden solely upon them for men being thoughtless, irresponsible, even predatory in their ejaculations bc they could correct it. Once a joke to illustrate a point about men not experiencing any gov interference in their sex lives or over their bodies is now a sincere issue. Consent to sex is no more consent to preg than transportation is consent to crashes. Accidents happen but ppl are still held liable.

So much of men's insults for women are blatant confessions of their own fears. They're terrified of dying alone, of one day learning their transactional relationships resulted in no one truly loving them, so they project this on women. 1/ They're horrified of aging, of becoming irrelevant, powerless, of not obtaining all they believe they're owed & were promised. A friend posted this comment on why he thinks suicide rates are highest among middle age white men. 2/

The claim that men don't protect women because feminism is frankly laughable. Men have never protected women. Never. The protection racket is all promise (and threat), no protection, to extort submission from women. Feminism didn't make men cowards, it acknowledged it. 1/ Men claiming they won't protect women "now" because women said this, feminism said that, is victim blaming. If you're claiming you wouldn't help a woman because feminism hurt your feelings, your hollow claims of heroism are entirely self-serving. 2/

When men call women "gold diggers" (to reverse power dynamics), they're indicating they're capable of understanding a transactional relationship. Yet when you point out misogyny, there's usually the claim they can't be misogynists because they have a wife/gf. 1/ Suddenly they don't understand using someone to extract a good. Het men who hate women pursue & marry women because they enjoy the services they extract without compensation. They understand the role they expect of women & desire that, not the human being. They don't love her. 2/