I’ll be honest: I never thought about misandry seriously. The only times I ever came across something about misandry would be on TikTok or Instagram reels and the caption would always just be enough out of pocket to make me giggle. It wasn’t until I stumbled on a blog piece on misandry and feminism that I began to think more critically about misandry and its connection to the feminist movement.
What is misandry?
The general meaning refers to feelings of hating men, according to Cambridge dictionary, and academics have expanded on this to clarify that misandry is rooted in gender. The term was coined in the late 19th century after feminists were referred to as “man-haters” by newspapers and is commonplace within men’s rights activist language.
Feminism and misandry
Feminism has always been a movement focused on gender inequality and aims to transform systems of oppression, however there has been a consistent misrepresentation of feminism as an anti-men ideology (Wardell, 2024). The equation of misandry with feminism brings forth the question of whether misandry has a place within the movement or if it actively discourages participation. Such discussions are rife among online chatrooms and there appears to be a common assumption that to be a feminist is to be a misandrist, which has been dismantled across academic literature. Articles by Amber Wardell (2024) and Hopkins-Doyle et al.(2023) both describe misandry as a ‘myth’, and highlights how the general public’s misrepresentation of feminists as “man-haters” allows for the persistent perception of misandry as a belief of the feminist ideology.
Hopkins-Doyle et al.’s (2023) study on the ‘Misandry Myth’
One of the most significant studies into the misandrist attitudes of feminists, Hopkins-Doyle et al. investigated the accuracy of the stereotype that all feminists are “man-haters” by interviewing feminists about their attitudes towards men. Findings indicated that there is a gross inaccuracy in the perception of feminists’ attitudes towards men, and found that feminists were more likely to have a warmer attitude with men if they had a warm attitude towards women. The warmth of feminists towards men was grossly underestimated, including by feminists themselves, which the researchers described as “an error associated with hostile sexism”. In fact, feminist women’s attitudes and views towards men were not so different from the men’s attitudes to other men.
They went on to discuss the implications of misandry for the feminist movement, recognising that the perception of anti-male sentiments fuelling feminist ideology has placed severe restrictions upon the movement and allyship with the cause. Whilst perceptions of all feminists being misandrists isinaccurate, it is critical to remember that some feminists label misandry to be a rational response tothe long-standing male mistreatment towards women.
Online discussions about misandry
When I decided to look a little more into the history of misandry and people’s thoughts, I came across a Reddit thread that asked why misandry is common among feminists. And like any Reddit thread,debate was rife and polarised. A popular reply framed misandry as a response to the history of men’sviolence women and opposing comments described their comment to be a “disgusting” justification forthe hateful rhetoric of misandry.
Another popular Reddit threat from this year discussed whether misandry was harmful to the feminist cause, and whilst the responses didn’t directly answer the original question, they were still interesting to read. One user wrote that we should avoid describing misogyny and misandry as two eggs of the same basket, as misogyny stems from men’s hatred of women purely because of their gender whereas misandry stems from the violent actions of men towards women.
The big question
So, with all this in mind, let’s discuss the big question surrounding this article. Does misandry have a place within the feminist movement?
Many have considered misandry to be a response of resistance to the systematic patriarchy, with Wardell (2024) noting that some feminists labelling it a way to “keep the boot to the throat of oppressive systems” that place endless limitations on women. Referencing another Reddit thread, some consider misandry to be a response to misogyny and a label placed on those who dare to criticise men and their masculinity – something which is commonplace in the ‘manosphere’. It is possible to situate misandry in this context as a targeted reaction towards patriarchal practices rather than a generalised hatred for a gender, which can benefit the feminist movement in terms of motivating collective action for social change. However, others believe misandry to be antithetical to the feminist movement, viewing it to hinder support for gender equality causes and some branding it as a “toxic brand of feminism”.
As previously discussed, Hopkins-Doyle et al. (2023) highlighted how misandry has been used to delegitimise the feminist movement, a popular tactic among the online ‘manosphere’ community to fuel opposition to the gender equality cause of feminism. Whilst there is a somewhat popular line of thinking that misandry can fuel a passionate commitment to the movement, many have denounced the role of misandry within feminism. bell hooks, a social critic and author known for her works on feminism, recognised the suffering of men under the patriarchy, particularly those from marginalised communities. Like hooks, many feminists harbour a positive attitude towards men that manifests in advocating for reforms that benefit women and men alike, including the repeal of rape laws that have previously excluded male victims (Javaid, 2016).
The most important aspect to consider in this debate is women’s safety. In an era where the ‘manosphere’ and online hate can manifest into real-life violence, it is crucial to dispel notions that misandry guides feminist ideology. Wardell (2024) argues that feminists should urge women to turntheir anger towards men into collective action aimed at dismantling systems of oppression. Given the prevalence of gender-based violence towards women, it is important to consider the safety of women when online hostility and anti-feminism spills into the real world.
Perhaps this debate about the legitimacy of misandry should be reframed to consider how this rhetoric can be strategically used to mobilise support for gender equality causes without falling prey to the existing perceptions of misandry.