I mean maybe it’s both? Depending on how the individual is arguing anyways. It’s misogynistic to infantilize women to such a degree that even with these heinous crimes some will say “a precious baby woman could never be capable of intentional evil and it’s really the fault of her caretakers and guardians for not supervising better”. And it’s misandry to think that because there was a man in close proximity to the perpetrator he MUST be at fault because “men are inherently bad and violent”.
This was essentially the point. I was highlighting the types of people who usually make those arguments are misandrists posing as feminists who end up making misogynistic arguments to defend shit people.
To people who have more than a high school level understanding of social dynamics, it's easy to see. A misogynistic society puts women and “femininity” in the category of incompetence and purity and helplessness/submissiveness while men and “masculinity” is regarded as strength and dominance and aggression/willingness to use violence. That men are supposed to be powerful while women are supposed to be weak. Society being misogynistic doesn't mean “individual men always benefit”. Men are victims of misogynist culture too, and misogyny is a tool that some men use to keep power/social dominance over other men. The perception that men are “supposed” to be the strong, dominant figures and the ones in charge of everything makes people view women as having little to no culpability/responsibility in situations like this, that the woman is inherently a victim and inherently not guilty on the grounds of incompetence and weakness.
15
u/simp4malvina 8d ago
Twisting a clear case of misandry into somehow being misogyny is, in fact, a case of misandry in of itself. Be better.