Why can’t we hate men? (Washington Post Editorial)

[Wazzzup]

We have a racial absurdity thread . Well this is certainly some gender absurdity right here.  Just goes to show how low the Washington Post has sunk that they would print this trash.



Suzanna Danuta Walters, a professor of sociology and director of the Women's, Gender, and Sexuality Studies Program at Northeastern University, is the editor of the gender studies journal Signs.



It's not that Eric Schneiderman (the now-former New York attorney general accused of abuse by multiple women) pushed me over the edge. My edge has been crossed for a long time, before President Trump, before Harvey Weinstein, before "mansplaining" and "incels." Before live-streaming sexual assaults and red pill men's groups and rape camps as a tool of war and the deadening banality of male prerogative.



Seen in this indisputably true context, it seems logical to hate men. I can't lie, I've always had a soft spot for the radical feminist smackdown, for naming the problem in no uncertain terms. I've rankled at the "but we don't hate men" protestations of generations of would-be feminists and found the "men are not the problem, this system is" obfuscation too precious by half.



But, of course, the criticisms of this blanket condemnation of men — from transnational feminists who decry such glib universalism to U.S. women of color who demand an intersectional perspective — are mostly on the mark. These critics rightly insist on an analysis of male power as institutional, not narrowly personal or individual or biologically based in male bodies. Growing movements to challenge a masculinity built on domination and violence and to engage boys and men in feminism are both gratifying and necessary. Please continue.



But this recognition of the complexity of male domination (how different it can be in different parts of the world, how racism shapes it) should not — must not — mean we forget some universal facts.



Pretty much everywhere in the world, this is true: Women experience sexual violence, and the threat of that violence permeates our choices big and small. In addition, male violence is not restricted to intimate-partner attacks or sexual assault but plagues us in the form of terrorism and mass gun violence. Women are underrepresented in higher-wage jobs, local and federal government, business, educational leadership, etc.; wage inequality continues to permeate every economy and almost every industry; women continue to provide far higher rates of unpaid labor in the home (e.g., child care, elder care, care for disabled individuals, housework and food provision); women have less access to education, particularly at the higher levels; women have lower rates of property ownership.



The list goes on. It varies by country, but these global realities — of women's economic, political, social and sexual vulnerabilities — are, well, real. Indeed, the nations in which these inequities have been radically minimized (e.g., Iceland) are those in which deliberate effort has been made to both own up to gender disparities and to address them directly and concretely.



So, in this moment, here in the land of legislatively legitimated toxic masculinity, is it really so illogical to hate men? For all the power of #MeToo and #TimesUp and the women's marches, only a relatively few men have been called to task, and I've yet to see a mass wave of prosecutions or even serious recognition of wrongdoing. On the contrary, cries of "witch hunt" and the plotted resurrection of celebrity offenders came quick on the heels of the outcry over endemic sexual harassment and violence. But we're not supposed to hate them because . . . #NotAllMen. I love Michelle Obama as much as the next woman, but when they have gone low for all of human history, maybe it's time for us to go all Thelma and Louise and Foxy Brown on their collective butts.



The world has little place for feminist anger. Women are supposed to support, not condemn, offer succor not dismissal. We're supposed to feel more empathy for your fear of being called a harasser than we are for the women harassed. We are told he's with us and #NotHim. But, truly, if he were with us, wouldn't this all have ended a long time ago? If he really were with us, wouldn't he reckon that one good way to change structural violence and inequity would be to refuse the power that comes with it?



So men, if you really are #WithUs and would like us to not hate you for all the millennia of woe you have produced and benefited from, start with this: Lean out so we can actually just stand up without being beaten down. Pledge to vote for feminist women only. Don't run for office. Don't be in charge of anything. Step away from the power. We got this. And please know that your crocodile tears won't be wiped away by us anymore. We have every right to hate you. You have done us wrong. #BecausePatriarchy. It is long past time to play hard for Team Feminism. And win.
[/quote]

[@realAzhyaAryola]

The Washington Post is run by leftists who are still crying over the loss of their democratic presidential candidate. To me, it has sunk low indeed. Down with The Washington Post.

[Angry White Male]

The Washington Post is run by leftists

What news rag isn't these days?

[Anonymous]

We have a racial absurdity thread . Well this is certainly some gender absurdity right here.  Just goes to show how low the Washington Post has sunk that they would print this trash.



Suzanna Danuta Walters, a professor of sociology and director of the Women's, Gender, and Sexuality Studies Program at Northeastern University, is the editor of the gender studies journal Signs.



It's not that Eric Schneiderman (the now-former New York attorney general accused of abuse by multiple women) pushed me over the edge. My edge has been crossed for a long time, before President Trump, before Harvey Weinstein, before "mansplaining" and "incels." Before live-streaming sexual assaults and red pill men's groups and rape camps as a tool of war and the deadening banality of male prerogative.



Seen in this indisputably true context, it seems logical to hate men. I can't lie, I've always had a soft spot for the radical feminist smackdown, for naming the problem in no uncertain terms. I've rankled at the "but we don't hate men" protestations of generations of would-be feminists and found the "men are not the problem, this system is" obfuscation too precious by half.



But, of course, the criticisms of this blanket condemnation of men — from transnational feminists who decry such glib universalism to U.S. women of color who demand an intersectional perspective — are mostly on the mark. These critics rightly insist on an analysis of male power as institutional, not narrowly personal or individual or biologically based in male bodies. Growing movements to challenge a masculinity built on domination and violence and to engage boys and men in feminism are both gratifying and necessary. Please continue.



But this recognition of the complexity of male domination (how different it can be in different parts of the world, how racism shapes it) should not — must not — mean we forget some universal facts.



Pretty much everywhere in the world, this is true: Women experience sexual violence, and the threat of that violence permeates our choices big and small. In addition, male violence is not restricted to intimate-partner attacks or sexual assault but plagues us in the form of terrorism and mass gun violence. Women are underrepresented in higher-wage jobs, local and federal government, business, educational leadership, etc.; wage inequality continues to permeate every economy and almost every industry; women continue to provide far higher rates of unpaid labor in the home (e.g., child care, elder care, care for disabled individuals, housework and food provision); women have less access to education, particularly at the higher levels; women have lower rates of property ownership.



The list goes on. It varies by country, but these global realities — of women's economic, political, social and sexual vulnerabilities — are, well, real. Indeed, the nations in which these inequities have been radically minimized (e.g., Iceland) are those in which deliberate effort has been made to both own up to gender disparities and to address them directly and concretely.



So, in this moment, here in the land of legislatively legitimated toxic masculinity, is it really so illogical to hate men? For all the power of #MeToo and #TimesUp and the women's marches, only a relatively few men have been called to task, and I've yet to see a mass wave of prosecutions or even serious recognition of wrongdoing. On the contrary, cries of "witch hunt" and the plotted resurrection of celebrity offenders came quick on the heels of the outcry over endemic sexual harassment and violence. But we're not supposed to hate them because . . . #NotAllMen. I love Michelle Obama as much as the next woman, but when they have gone low for all of human history, maybe it's time for us to go all Thelma and Louise and Foxy Brown on their collective butts.



The world has little place for feminist anger. Women are supposed to support, not condemn, offer succor not dismissal. We're supposed to feel more empathy for your fear of being called a harasser than we are for the women harassed. We are told he's with us and #NotHim. But, truly, if he were with us, wouldn't this all have ended a long time ago? If he really were with us, wouldn't he reckon that one good way to change structural violence and inequity would be to refuse the power that comes with it?



So men, if you really are #WithUs and would like us to not hate you for all the millennia of woe you have produced and benefited from, start with this: Lean out so we can actually just stand up without being beaten down. Pledge to vote for feminist women only. Don't run for office. Don't be in charge of anything. Step away from the power. We got this. And please know that your crocodile tears won't be wiped away by us anymore. We have every right to hate you. You have done us wrong. #BecausePatriarchy. It is long past time to play hard for Team Feminism. And win.

[/quote]
I pledge to never vote for feminist women..



My husband has no interest in running for office, but if my son, my brother or my nephew do, they will all be better candidates than your misandry lunatics..



My husband is in charge of many skilled trades people and does a good job......does that bother you?



You step away from your position at Northeastern University and stop poisoning young minds..



And the only tears that should be shed for you are tears of pity.

[Anonymous]

I've seen some far left rags print some pretty extreme enviro ed-ops. But, this is just a nut screaming I hate fifty per cent of the world's population. No serious news source should be giving her a platform.

[cc]

I agree. However "should" and "does" are separate things - Most  media does glom onto crap like this



I peeked in on a few lately. It is ludicrous the things they are parroting and saying  .. embarrassing to see humans so crazy  and hateful of everything they cannot relate to .. oh, and so biased

[Anonymous]

I agree. However "should" and "does" are separate things - Most  media does glom onto crap like this



I peeked in on a few lately. It is ludicrous the things they are parroting and saying  .. embarrassing to see humans so crazy  and hateful of everything they cannot relate to .. oh, and so biased

I've never read anything one tenth as crazy as professor Suzana Sanuta Walters on Global.

[cc]

Don't know that person



Just looked her up - is this her?  > The Tolerance Trap: How God, Genes, and Good Intentions are Sabotaging Gay Equality (NYU Press), explores how notions of tolerance limit the possibilities for real liberation and deep social belonging.



Professor of Sociology; Professor and Director, Women's, Gender, and Sexuality Studies Program  @ Northeastern U?



Name slightly different - Suzanna Danuta Walters

[Frood]

Suzanna Danuta Walters is a stupid c*nt.

[Anonymous]

Suzanna Danuta Walters is a stupid c*nt.

She is a loony frickin cunt.

[Odinson]

White women are the true privileged ones..



They never had to develope a brain since some1 else always fought their battles and paid for their stuff.

[Anonymous]

White women are the true privileged ones..



They never had to develope a brain since some1 else always fought their battles and paid for their stuff.

That stupid cunt professor is not disadvantaged. The fact that taxpayers are subsidizing her six figure salary to say loony shit is proof of that.

[Wazzzup]

No doubt this woman will keep her job, but Roseanne Barr will not.



she could be dismissed as a one off crank, but then the Washington Post appears to be trying to mainstream this kind of opinion.



The self proclaimed tolerant left SAY they are against hatred based on race and gender.  yet ironically they are trying to make it socially acceptable, even virtuous, to hate certain groups-- whites, especially heterosexual males, and Christians.

https://i.pinimg.com/564x/a0/60/6d/a0606dbd75252bfb95fe7cdf5bf43e60.jpg">

[Rancidmilko]

No doubt this woman will keep her job, but Roseanne Barr will not.



We could dismiss her as a one off crank, but then the Washington Post appears to be trying to mainstream this kind of opinion.



The self proclaimed tolerant left SAY they are against hatred based on race and gender.  yet ironically they are trying to make it socially acceptable, even virtuous, to hate certain groups-- whites, especially heterosexual males, and Christians.

https://i.pinimg.com/564x/a0/60/6d/a0606dbd75252bfb95fe7cdf5bf43e60.jpg">

And to this day, I can't say for certain if that thing there is a man or a woman.

[Rancidmilko]

Suzanna Danuta Walters is a stupid c*nt.

Who was viciously beaten with all the ugly sticks someone could find.



http://freshfiction.com/images/authors/23775.jpeg">