The Second Sexism: Discrimination Against Men and Boys

by David Benatar

Does sexism against men exist? What it looks like and why we need to take it seriously This book draws attention to the "second sexism," where it exists, how it works and what it looks like, and responds to those who would deny that it exists. Challenging conventional ways of thinking, it examines controversial issues such as sex-based affirmative action, gender roles, and charges of anti-feminism. The book offers an academically rigorous argument in an accessible style, including the careful use of empirical data, and includes examples and engages in a discussion of how sex discrimination against men and boys also undermines the cause for female equality.

Genres: Philosophy, Nonfiction, Feminism, Politics, Gender, Sociology, Contemporary

304 pages, Hardcover

First published February 21, 2012

About the author

David Benatar (born 1966) is a South African philosopher, academic and author. He is best known for his advocacy of antinatalism in his book Better Never to Have Been: The Harm of Coming into Existence, in which he argues that coming into existence is a serious harm, regardless of the feelings of the existing being once brought into existence, and that, as a consequence, it is always morally wrong to create more sentient beings.

Benatar is vegan, and has taken part in debates on veganism. He has argued that humans are "responsible for the suffering and deaths of billions of other humans and non-human animals. If that level of destruction were caused by another species we would rapidly recommend that new members of that species not be brought into existence." He has also argued that the outbreak of zoonotic diseases, such as the COVID-19 pandemic, is often the result of how humans mistreat animals.

Benatar is an atheist and has stated that he has no children of his own.

Reviews

[Kaethe]

From the book cover:

While the manifestation of sexism against women is widely acknowledged, few people take seriously the idea that males are also the victims of many and quite serious forms of sex discrimination.

You know who takes sexism seriously? Feminists, who argue that sex discrimination is bad for everyone. You know who doesn't take sexism seriously? People who only complain when sex discrimination hurts men.

[B · Rating 4 out of 5]

The Second Sexism, a play on Simone de Beauvoir's The Second Sex, is a book that will piss off many women as evidenced by the only comment it has at the time of this review. Without even reading the book, the woman in question decided to assert that feminism cares about sex discrimination and therefor that men who complain about sex discrimination should not be taken seriously. Apparently only women have a say in the matter. This is exactly the type of rationale that we see in the feminist movement today; the interests of women are pursued in spite of everything else and this is justified trough a false and dogmatic feminist theory. In The Second Sexism, Benatar starts by defining key concepts like discrimination, sex discrimination and wrongful discrimination and then goes on to explore the role of men in society (past and present), the disadvantages that men experience simply because they are men, and the instances where men are wrongfully discriminated against. Throughout the book, Benatar debunks several myths that are seen as fact by feminists while at the same time engaging with the opposing arguments and responding to a myriad of objections. Just like in his previous book, Benatar's writing style is extremely clear and his arguments very carefully constructed. In essence, another great book by this great thinker. Recommended for anyone who cares about justice/social fairness, rationality and truth.

[Jody Lundy · Rating 5 out of 5]

A brave, honest and clear starting point for further discussion of sexism against males. Every self-proclaimed feminist should read this and be enlightened by what they find.

[?0?0?0 · Rating 4 out of 5]

Some reviewers of this book either did not read this book or they read a bit of it somewhere and ran to goodreads to express their disgust. These goodreads people, all women, see this book, one in which the argument that sexism goes both ways is provided, and it's as though their ideologically-poisoned brains simply stop working and instantly devolve into word vomit that's devoid of an argument, only a sense of confusion and anger that a philosopher would dare to look around the world and through history at the topic of sexism with both genders in mind and come to a conclusion that doesn't match the propaganda that they've been taught in their gender studies courses.

So, with a book like this, of which I'll need to review in full later, I might as well clarify first off that I despise both the ideology of the Mens Rights Movement and that of third-wave feminism equally. All ideology, including Benatar's pessimism (though quite often correct), is deluded.

And I'll need to stop there for now, and only add quickly that, "The Second Sexism", like any literature about sexism toward women, should, if we're being equal here people, be read rather than dismissed or skimmed through.

[Лора Дулова · Rating 3 out of 5]

I found some of the author's arguments quite convincing and thought there were a few interesting examples. Still, I'd like to point out some aspects of the book that I personally didn't like. First of all, it was too repetitive. The structure and persuasiveness can be kept in half the size of the book. Furthermore, there were only a few not too"mundain" examples of the second sexism. Would've definitely liked if there were more precise scientific experiments.

[Andrei Khrapavitski · Rating 5 out of 5]

David Benatar is better known for his antinatalism manifesto "Better Never to Have Been: The Harm of Coming into Existence." But the claims he makes in "Second Sexism," in my opinion, are better argued but might seem just as controversial to many. I'd recommend this book to readers of both genders. Pretty good read even if you are not into philosophy.

[Jolly McFats · Rating 4 out of 5]

Somewhat rigorously academic, and not particularly polemical, this investigates what, exactly, can be considered sexism and argues that even by lenient standards men experience institutional and systemic problems.

[Billy Fuss · Rating 5 out of 5]

Rating: 5 - Must Read
I was actually lucky enough to have David Benatar come to my graduate classes in Psychology where we could question him on his books, so my thoughts on this book are heavily influenced by additional information he provided through questioning. First off, this book isn't about sexism as a whole. It has nothing to say about sexism against women. There are enough books that do that. This book is purely about sexism against Men and Boys, just like the title says. I think many of the reviewers of this book should look at the title again. I personally agree with everything in this book. My biggest problems were that a lot of the arguments and discrimination are tied so closely to socioeconomic status and racial discrimination. It's not Benatar's fault that these are linked and this book doesn't aim to cover those links. However, by not examining them one isn't getting the entire picture. Like looking at a problem through a keyhole instead of a window.

[Dio Mavroyannis · Rating 4 out of 5]

Very well argued book. Does a particularly acute separation of its chapters. This separation is both a blessing and a curse. On the one hand if you are looking for notes this book is perfect, on the other hand, some things which you feel that ought to be together are not.

For instance, in the first chapter he explains that men are discrminated against but does not attempt to give "reasons" for this. If you are merely looking at aggregate stats it is of course true that men are more likely to go to prison but he only tackles "why" they are more likely to go to prison in a later chapter.

While I can see the appeal of grouping things into "discrimination, beliefs...etc" and putting things in one place, it is ultimately not pleasant to read because it makes the chapters unnecessarily disconnected.

Nevertheless, content is clear is incisive.

[Darnell · Rating 3 out of 5]

Tepid three stars. There's a place for this sort of book that carefully and methodically argues that things like "being conscripted into a war you don't want to fight" are negatives, but this isn't engaging reading for most.

If I were to try to formally state why I didn't love this, I'd say that I think few reasonable people disagree about the formal logic of such issues, and the majority of the discussion is in the specific facts of discrimination and efforts to alleviate it.

[Matthew Adelstein · Rating 5 out of 5]

Convincing catalogue of instances of sexism against men and arguments for why they are unjust.

[Yash Arya]

About the book
In Who Stole Feminism? How Women Have Betrayed Women, Sommers describes how sexism against women (while real and serious) is often greatly overstated by feminists (which has the effect of diverting focus away from real victims), The Second Sexism does not question the existence or degree of sexism against women at all. Instead, it describes how sexism against men is greatly understated.

"Sexism negatively affects not only women and girls, but also men and boys. While the former manifestation of sexism is widely acknowledged, few people recognize or take seriously the fact that males are the primary victims of many and quite serious forms of sex discrimination. The central purpose of this book is to draw attention to this “second sexism” and to respond to those who would deny that it exists."

"This book is about the second sexism. Accordingly it is not about that sexism of which females are primary victims. This is not because I deny the existence of such sexism. It clearly exists and has existed for a very long time. .. Some of these forms of discrimination are more serious than others, but none are trivial or justifiable. Their impact on the lives of women and girls should not be underestimated. However, all these forms of discrimination, as well as many others, have been widely discussed. Discrimination against females has been the subject of almost all discussion about sexism. I do not plan to add to it here. Instead I shall focus on the neglected side of sexism. My topic is the second sexism rather than the first sexism. This selectivity is not unfair. Because my aim is to show that there is a second sexism, rather than to show that there is not a first sexism, I need only cite cases of the second sexism to establish my conclusion. It is only if I were also arguing that females were not the victims of sexism that my failure to consider instances of unfair discrimination against them would be relevant."

Why Read This Book?
"Many men are far more oppressed than many women, and any feminist who was determined to
support women in all situations would certainly encounter some where her support of women
against men would increase the level of injustice in the world. … No feminist whose concern for
women stems from concern for justice in general can ever legitimately allow her only interest to be
the advantage of women." - Janet Radcliffe Richards, The Sceptical Feminist

It is a common feminist view that while men and women may both be sexist, women are primarily the target of sexism. This is the defining feature of a patriarchal society. But if institutional sexism against women is exaggerated and against men is understated, then we're likely to get a false answer on whether a certain society is patriarchal (male centered and male dominated) or not.

Further, either sex feeling that they're vastly and disproportionately oppressed leads to societal polarization that doesn't benefit either sex. It also discourages accountability and personal responsibility by externalizing blame to either "men" or to systems of "patriarchy" that may not exist, or at least may not be as bad as they're made out to be. Living in a perpetual state of victimhood is ultimately not the path to success.

Obviously, if it were true that only one sex faces serious sexism, then this bitter truth must be accepted and everyone would benefit from changing that. But if the facts indicate severe disadvantages/sexism faced by both the sexes, then everyone would benefit from addressing both sexism against women as well as against men. Ultimately, the aim should not be to view progress from a lens of a battle of the sexes, and the aim of this book is not for men to now bask in their victimhood instead.

Sexism Against Men
"So unrecognized is the second sexism that the mere mention of it will appear laughable to some. Such people cannot even think of any ways in which males are disadvantaged, and yet some of them are surprised, when provided with examples, that they never thought of these before. Male disadvantages include the absence of immunity, typically enjoyed by females, from conscription into military service. Men, unlike women, are not only conscripted but also sent into combat, where they risk injury, both physical and psychological, and death. Men are also disproportionately the victims of violence in most (but not all) non-combat contexts. For example, most victims of violent crime are male, and men are often (but again not always) specially targeted for mass killing. Males are more likely than females to be subject to corporal punishment. Indeed, sometimes such punishment of females is prohibited, while it is permitted, if not encouraged, for males. Although males are less often victims of sexual assault than are females, the sexual assault of males is typically taken less seriously and is thus even more significantly under-reported. Fathers are less likely than mothers to win custody of their children in the event of divorce."

Benatar distinguishes between disadvantage, discrimination, and wrongful discrimination on the basis of sex. Not all disadvantages are a result of discrimination, and even when it is a result of discrimination, not all discrimination is wrongful.

"demonstrating the existence of male disadvantage is, by itself, insufficient to show that males are the victims of sexism. Not all disadvantages somebody suffers on the basis of his or her sex amount to sexism."

"For there to be discrimination the disadvantage must be at least partly the product of agency, or, on some views, of social structures or practices. Thus an individual, an institution or a state might discriminate against people of one sex. Or it might be the case that particular social structures or practices have the effect of favoring one sex over the other."

"We cannot conclude, however, that whenever some disadvantage is experienced as a result of
discrimination on the basis of sex that the person suffering the disadvantage is the victim of sexism."

"sex is not always an inappropriate basis on which to discriminate between people. Thus once one has established that a disadvantage is the product of discrimination on the basis of somebody’s sex, one then needs to establish whether or not that discrimination is fair, just or justifiable. That is to say, one must determine whether or not a person’s sex provides an appropriate basis for the differential treatment. For example, one might say that middle-aged males are discriminated against if their medical insurance does not cover them, but does cover females of similar age, for routine mammography. However, one might argue that the discrimination is not unfair on account of a relevant difference between men and women. Women, given the nature of their breasts, are more likely to get breast cancer, and thus the cost of routine scanning may be warranted for them but not for men."

On the other hand, "If, for example, a teacher were to fail work that deserves to pass and does so on account of its having been written by a student of a particular sex, race, religion, ethnic group or sexual orientation, then that teacher has also acted unfairly and wrongly."

Benatar thus defines sexism as wrongful discrimination on the basis of sex. He also defends his definition against alternative definitions, and while he doesn't agree that the wrongful discrimination has to be systemic for it to qualify as sexism, many of the examples that he talks about in the book are indeed examples of systemic wrongful discrimination on the basis of sex - i.e., of institutional sexism against men.

It's also worth noting that just as both men and women may be sexist against women, so to both men and women may be sexist against men.

In the rest of the book, Benatar goes on to show that most of the disadvantages mentioned above are not merely disadvantages but also examples of institutional sexism against men.

[Marrei · Rating 3 out of 5]

V některých ohledech velmi zajímavá kniha, protože - buďme upřímní - nad něčím se přeci jen tolik nepozastavíte. Zajímavé poznatky, místy děsivé argumenty ze strany feministek, kdy tak trochu vrtíte hlavou nad tím, co je někdo schopen říci.

Bohužel jsem ale nakonec z knihy byla spíše zklamaná. Je sice kratšího rozsahu, ale s ohledem na obsah je dlouhá až moc - respektive, autor často opakuje. Členění (krátce představím jev, pak něco, pak vysvětlím, proč si myslím, že daný je diskriminace,...) dost vede k tomu, že se na můj vkus až příliš často opakuje. Místy jsem z toho měla dojem, že pokud je něco dle autora skutečně špatné, tak to bude natahovat a natahovat, pokud je něco tak na pomezí, kdy to není tak zřejmé, tak je to spíše ve stylu - něco tam napíšu, rychle to odbudu, ale stále to budu považovat za relevantní a hodné zmínky. Tím nechci říci, že by se v těchto případech nemohlo jednat o sexismus, ale místy mi to skutečně připadalo ne příliš věrohodné. Téměř jako hledání něčeho za každou cenu - i když to tam může být/je, osobně bych prostě potřebovala více dat, lepší statistiku a ne dvě čísla, která autor prezentuje. Ale odkazy na další literaturu a studie jsou super, to nepopírám, pouze mi nesedl ten styl prezentace od autora.

[Beth · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is a very important book to discuss from any viewpoint: student, teacher, boy, girl, mom, dad, etc. I think everyone could learn something from this book. A book for any true feminist.

[Basma Salem]

أنصح الدكتور ديفيد بينطار يخليه في الفلسفة ويسيبه من الfeminist theory عشان هي مش طالبة بضان.
حزق رجالي بيور.

[Kate Atonic · Rating 2 out of 5]

May I begin by noting the author frequently refers to “females” instead of “women” - but not always.

The author defines sexism as discrimination based on gender. Rather than go forward with this definition and explain how men are also affected, he needs chapters to differentiate between first and second sexism by whether women or men are affected and convince us it’s wrong. Just because men are not disempowered or subordinated by women (yet!) doesn’t mean they don’t SUFFER. Well, yeah. I can see why you’d be upset, but men are still in control of most everything. Shouldn’t y’all get together as the natural leaders and rational ones to fix this?

As to his assertion that it’s absurd to think women in the US are still oppressed, does your bodily autonomy and access to medical care change depending on what state you’re in?

These are a few examples of discrimination:
1. Absence of immunity, typically enjoyed by females, from conscription into military service.
ANY conscription is wrong. If you can’t garner support for your war games, leaders will have to rely on diplomacy. The decision to bar women from the military, especially combat, was made by men. Women have led armies and fought in wars for thousands of years. It’d be cool if we weren’t sexually assaulted by our own troops though.

2. Men are disproportionately the victims of violence in most (but not all) non-combat contexts. Most victims of violent crime are male, and men are often (but again not always) specially targeted for mass killing.
Query - which gender is commuting this violence? Shocker: it’s predominantly men! 98-99% of the perpetuators of mass killings? MEN.

3. Fathers are less likely than mothers to win custody of their children in the event of divorce.
This is a talking point of Men’s Right’s Activists, but studies of court records show that fathers who request shared custody of their children are generally granted shared custody, even in cases where there are allegations or proof of abuse, substance use, infidelity, and unsafe living conditions. Very often abusive men will use the weight of the courts to continue to harass their ex, seek custody to punish, to maintain control, or avoid paying child support. Other men waive their rights in court documents but may lie about it to save face in the community.

5. Men are more likely to receive corporal punishment.
Is he upset men are getting it or that women aren’t? It’s a barbaric practice, so… maybe let’s stop doing that? In Asian counties only around 10-30% of judges are women. Most teachers are women, but for a long time it was men who were promoted to principal. Who writes the laws?

6. We don’t take the sexual assault of men as seriously as SA of women.
My sweet summer child, we don’t take SA of women and girls seriously. Just look at who we elected President, who sits on the Supreme Court, the shocking backlogs of rape kits, the yawn about the Epstein files, the victim blaming, the male outrage over safety measures like female-only Uber rides and train cars. Every time a female teacher is caught with a student there are Greek choruses of gross dudes chuckling “lucky kid.”

7. Boys drop out of high school at higher rates than girls, and earn fewer degrees in college.
Can’t argue with the statistics, but the author doesn’t explain why. With access to contraception, are girls not getting pregnant as often? When the playing field is level, are boys not able to compete - so they quit? Are little girls socialized to sit still, follow orders, pay attention, and focus in ways little boys aren’t? Are boys parentified to take care of younger siblings at the expense of their education? All I know is that when anonymous candidates compete (for seats on orchestras, for medical schools, for jobs) the success rate of women skyrockets.

8. Paternity Leave
Giving birth, especially via C-section, is a major medical procedure. Women need maternity leave to recover. Of course, men can take unpaid leave through FMLA to bond with the child and support mom. That said, paid paternity leave would be wonderful. Guys? You can contact your political leaders and demand it. While you’re at it, let’s go ahead and make paid MATERNITY leave mandatory.

9. Bodily Privacy
His example involved male prisoners being examined by female wardens. It is troubling, yes, a gross abuse of power. Have you read about the shit the Olympic committee does to female athletes, especially volleyball and gymnastics? Or how girl’s bodies are policed for dress code violations at school? Maybe we should respect bodily autonomy for everyone?

The author talks about whether discrimination is ever justifiable, such as insurance covering routine mammograms for women but not men based on low probability of breast cancer. Fair point! Can we also discuss the funding profiles of erectile dysfunction and hair loss treatments versus endometriosis, perimenopause, PMS, and auto-immune disorders, how women weren’t required to be included in medical trials until the 1990’s, how it takes a woman 6-10 doctor visits to get a diagnosis, how we are forced to undergo painful gynecological procedures like IUD insertion and cervical biopsy sampling without pain relief, sent home from c-section with ibuprofen, denied access to medicine for chronic conditions because we MIGHT get pregnant, how often our conditions are dismissed as attention seeking or anxiety, how medical students performed pelvic exams on unconscious female patients without consent, and so much more?

[Szymon Skalski · Rating 2 out of 5]

The Second Sexism: Discrimination Against Men and Boys” autorstwa Davida Benatara to książka, która na pierwszy rzut oka imponuje bogactwem statystyk i przykładów, jednak jej argumentacja okazuje się powierzchowna i miejscami wręcz naciągana. Autor wprowadza dychotomię między dyskryminacją a, powiedzmy, „niekorzystną sytuacją” (ang. disadvantage), która stanowi podstawę wielu jego argumentów. Niestety, w wielu miejscach te rozróżnienia wydają się być konstruowane na siłę, a autor posługuje się uproszczeniami, które nie wytrzymują głębszej analizy.

Książka podejmuje ważny temat, ale sposób jego przedstawienia nie wystarcza, by przekonać osoby sceptycznie nastawione, szczególnie te, które analizują seksizm w kontekście strukturalnym. Zwolennicy tego podejścia – wskazujący, że seksizm czy rasizm wymagają istnienia systemowej dysproporcji władzy, aby mogły być uznane za pełnoprawne formy opresji – znajdą tu wiele argumentów, które łatwo poddać krytyce. Tak poważny temat wymaga znacznie bardziej pogłębionego podejścia, by uniknąć zarzutów o redukcjonizm i nieprzemyślane wnioski.

Książka może zainteresować czytelników poszukujących statystycznych danych na temat nierówności dotykających mężczyzn i chłopców, ale niestety nie oferuje solidnej podstawy do prowadzenia szerszej, dobrze ugruntowanej dyskusji. W efekcie lektura przypomina bardziej szybkie przeszukiwanie internetu i korzystanie z takich narzędzi jak ChatGPT, niż wnikliwą analizę problemu. Potencjał tematu pozostaje niewykorzystany.

[Sergio · Rating 4 out of 5]

The author plays the uno reverse card and applies feminist thinking to show that we live in a society that discriminates against boys and men.
For whatever it's worth, I'm glad this book was written.

[Notael Elrein]

I thought about reviewing this again as I noticed its not on goodreads for some reason, but I do not remember it that well now. It supports the second sex book and tries to establish a second discrimination, an altenative view to view cases where men get less advantages. It could be described as men hurting themselves and then getting their due, but there are a lot of men who can't contribute to the rules the other men make and so they are discriminated against their own. I guess I can get behind that concept.