What do you think?
Rate this book
269 pages, Kindle Edition
First published August 11, 2020
’misogyny may be a purely structural phenomenon, perpetuated by social institutions, policies, and broader cultural mores.’
‘Boys will be boys, but women who get pregnant have behaved irresponsibly. We are so comfortable with regulating women’s sexual behavior, but we’re shocked by the idea of doing it to men.’
’[T]he anti-abortion movenent’s supposed pre-occupation with life belies the fact that it undermines the health and lives of cis girls and women, along with other people who may also become pregnant. Similarly, the anti-trans movement’s supposed preoccupation with sexual safety and lives of a particularly vulnerable class of people: namely, tans girls and women, who are disproportionately liable to be attacked, assaulted, and murdered, at rates that recently prompted the American Medical Association to declare this an epidemic.’
the “law enforcement” branch of patriarchy—a system that functions to police and enforce gendered norms and expectations, and involves girls and women facing disproportionately or distinctively hostile treatment because of their gender, among other factors.
the theoretical and ideological branch of patriarchy: the beliefs, ideas, and assumptions that serve to rationalize and naturalize patriarchal norms and expectations—including a gendered division of labor, and men’s dominance over women in areas of traditionally male power and authority.
As we’ve seen, misogyny need not target girls and women universally; it often singles out those who are “bad” by the lights of patriarchal norms and expectations, and punishes them for their misdeeds, be these real or apparent. It’s important not to misunderstand this point by overgeneralizing it, however. There is ample room in my framework to acknowledge the obvious fact that misogyny can target or victimize almost any girl or woman, regardless of her individual, gendered “good” behavior. This is partly because women are often treated as representative of a certain “type” of woman, and effectively blamed or punished for the misdeeds of the whole collective. It is also partly because misogynistic aggression can stem from myriad forms of dissatisfaction (resulting from men’s being subject to capitalist exploitation, for example). And it may then involve displacement—colloquially, “punching down” behavior, directed at those who are vulnerable and available, who often happen to be women. If a woman faces this displaced aggression because she lives in a historically patriarchal world—in which men have long had, and continue to have, social permission to “act out”—she is still a victim of misogyny, according to my analysis. Finally, it bears mentioning that misogynistic social structures may have a reach that vastly exceeds their aim, and thus may punish a vast swath of women, beyond the intended or first-line targets.
In particular, I believe that mansplaining typically stems from an unwarranted sense of entitlement on the part of the mansplainer to occupy the conversational position of the knower by default: to be the one who dispenses information, offers corrections, and authoritatively issues explanations. This is objectionable when and partly because he is not so entitled: when others, namely women, happen to know more than he does—and he ought to anticipate this possibility, rather than assuming his own epistemic superiority from the get-go.
There is a certain kind of man who is unable or unwilling to cope with others expressing views that threaten his own sense of what has happened, or ought to happen. Such men cannot abide girls and women, in particular, evincing their own, legitimate sense of epistemic entitlement to state what is happening in the world, or what has to change, going forward.
An important corollary of the dynamic Bettcher identifies is the sense of entitlement, upon taking in someone whose gender presentation is that of a woman, to know her genital arrangements at a glance—even when she is fully clothed—without doubt or ambiguity. The entitlement to know a woman’s reproductive capacities at a glance seems a plausible extension of this—which would imply her obligation not to present herself as a woman, if she is not capable of “giving” cisgender men heteronormatively sanctioned sex and biological children.
The sad truth is that, like many oppressors, incels perceive themselves as being the vulnerable ones. They feel like the true victims, even as they lash out violently against others. And they feel they are in the right, even as they commit the most deplorable acts of wrongdoing. All the more reason, then, that we should be skeptical about incels’ self-reports about occupying a low rung, relative to other men, on an unjust hierarchy of attractiveness. More likely, they are looking for an unjust hierarchy to locate themselves on, thereby vindicating their preexisting feelings of inferiority and aggrieved resentment. Often, we might suspect, there is little to these complaints: they are merely a post hoc rationalization for an extant, and unwarranted, sense of victimhood—of being oppressed or persecuted by people who aren’t in reality wronging, thwarting, or even rejecting them. In particular, the women incels resent for these supposed sins are often just living their own lives and minding their own business.
What explains this apathy, this hostile, pointed indifference? Don’t we regard rape as a heinous, monstrous crime? Yes, in the abstract. Very well then, but in practice, why do we refuse to hold certain perpetrators accountable vis-à-vis certain victims?
One explanation that has the virtue of not only parsimony but sheer coherence is that we regard certain men as entitled to take sex from certain women. A white man who is in a relationship with an equally or less privileged woman, or who was once in such a relationship, is often deemed sexually entitled to “have” her.
Similarly, Warren plausibly lost a significant amount of support in some progressive quarters due to her decision, during the death throes of her campaign, to accept super-PAC money. Whether one agrees with this decision or not, it’s at least unclear that, for a would-be Warren supporter, it should have been a deal-breaker. But, again, women are held to gendered double standards, when it comes to both their steadfastness and their purity: any supported lapse on this front tends to be seized on mercilessly.
"Although I am still far from hopeful, I am not so despairing anymore. I think it's because I made an intellectual mistake : I confused the intransigence of some people with the unwillingness of most people to think soberly and deeply about the problems facing girls and women."
"Giving up no longer feels like a viable option. I increasingly feel the need to keep fighting, regardless of the outcome. Hope, to me, is a belief that the future will be brighter, which I continue to not set much store in. But the idea of fighting for a better world - and, equally importantly, fighting against backsliding - is not a belief; it's a political commitment that I can get on board with.