Legalizing Misandry: From Public Shame to Systemic Discrimination Against Men

by Paul Nathanson, Katherine Young

Lurid and sensationalized events such as the public response to Lorena Bobbitt after she cut off her abusive husband's penis, prurient fascination provoked by Anita Hill's allegations about Clarence Thomas, and the exploitation of the mass murder of fourteen women in Montreal have been processed through popular culture since the 1990s to produce pervasive misandry -- contempt for men, the counterpart of misogyny. Paul Nathanson and Katherine Young believe that this reveals a shift in the United States and Canada to a worldview based on ideological feminism, which presents all issues from the point of view of women and, in the process, explicitly or implicitly attacks men as a class. They argue that ideological feminism is silently reshaping law, public policy, education, and journalism. "Legalizing Misandry" offers lively and compelling evidence to demonstrate the pervasiveness of this new thinking -- from the courts, classrooms, government committees, and corporate bureaucracies to laws and policies affecting employment, marriage, divorce, custody, sexual harassment, violence, and human rights.

Genres: Nonfiction, Feminism, Gender, Politics

672 pages, Hardcover

First published March 1, 2006

Reviews

[Arpita · Rating 1 out of 5]

never let an incel read

[Sylvester · Rating 5 out of 5]

The second in the misandry series focused on how legal institution is promoting misandric double standard and hypocrisy. A much better improvement from the first book with various shocking facts about the ideological feminism destroying family and lives.

[Gregory Lynne]

The simple facts that my public library couldn't locate a single copy for me to borrow [!] on interlibrary loan AND the fact that I almost died from a DVT/PE while climbing the steps to the local women's college to check their collection/borrowing-privileges should tell you enough! Get it. Read it.

[Kyle Nicholas · Rating 4 out of 5]

I would have given this book a five-star rating, save for a few reasons:

1. They sort of fall into the same trap of "help, we're being oppressed!" as they accuse feminists of doing. Perhaps this is for good reason, as illustrated by the book. But don't be a hypocrite.

2. Associated with this is the occasional warning to everyone that backlash is possible by men. Again, justifiable in my opinion, but ultimately hypocritical (and dare I say, toothless? After all, women and feminists outnumber men in North America.)

3. The authors tend to privilege religion. But, I should've read the back leaf about the authors. Professors of religion. Ah. Never mind. I would argue with the assertion in the book that religion as a force for good in the world. But look at my "author" bio and you'll see I'm an atheist of the "Hitchslap" variety. Of course I'd argue against religion as a force for good.

4. The authors seem to slam the LGBT movement, even if inadvertently. Okay, I get the irritation with lesbians who might be pushing a "man-less world" idea. But don't throw other GBT people under the bus. Denying the right of gays, lesbians, bisexuals and transgender people to get married *IS* oppression; it's a privilege that others get to enjoy NOT just on a religious basis, but a legal basis. And I know you're frustrated by the fact that transsexuals want rights, too, but we don't belong under that mass transit vehicle, either. Feminists and anti-misandrists will have to cope with the fact that some of us were born with vaginas and ARE MEN. (This is one reason why I'm outspoken transgendered person, call myself a former feminist, and am a gender egalitarian reading books like this! I had so much privilege as a woman. Now that I'm a man... suddenly all those privileges dried right up! What happened? Oh yeah. Feminism.) Maybe I am a little sensitive about criticism - even justified - about the LGBT movement. But don't toss us all out the window. After all, some of us LOST privileges becoming men, and we want to fight the good fight too.

[Desert · Rating 5 out of 5]

Thoroughly enlightening and scary, further evidence that equality, in the realist terms, is all about who can be more vile to others,dogmatically;rather than building up individuals, as is professed in ideology. I came to the impression that pundits, whether MRA or Feminist, are the problem with modern equality, and villainizing is often done best by actual villians. It also seems to me that the arguments and data from this book are well received by almost any who read it, except again those with 'Motivated Reasoning'. I have heard one question repeatedly about this book from young and old, male, female, gay, ts and straight: "Why is this Data and or book not included in Gender Studies curricula and not shared by mainstream sites that perpetuate the support equality?" And for that answer, you need to read the book.

[Tommy · Rating 3 out of 5]

Feminist academics receiving immunity to criticism is the issue here but dogmatic scientism isn't really an alternative to groupthink. Science is a collective activity dealing with aggregated data, you're always going to be faced with institutional rackets. Alternative epistemologies aren't inherently bad and looking at things differently is helpful... until disingenuous statistical methods and framing of issues start affecting the legal system and cause new major social issues that can't be addressed because of certain outdated social mores. Insisting "I'm a detached individualist and you're just an emotional ideologue" isn't really a smart way about contesting all this though.

[Christine · Rating 1 out of 5]

Absolutely hilarious.

[Clivemichael · Rating 4 out of 5]

I read an unedited draft copy. Disturbing and provocative how insidious this is.