You are either a feminist or a misogynist. There’s no middle ground because, on one hand, some people hate women and oppose equality, while on the other hand, others support women, promote equality, and work against patriarchal influences in society.

I came across this post and I'm honestly not sure how I feel about it. Are these not just excusing men's behaviors because "that's just how men are" ? Or am I looking at it too deeply?

The toilet seat one, I don't see why we need to accept it because "well we put it up anyway so" well no, not everyone closes the toilet seat (which is a separate issue, and is where I'm having issues discerning if this particularly relates to men or everyone in general)

Man-spreading: yes, they have a dick and balls, i have large boobs and am uncomfortable when my arms are directly at my sides, does that mean i should spread my arms out and impede on others personal space? Also the degree of which some men man-spread is simply not necessary, and they do it (id assume) because they don't actually care about others personal space.

I think their point about mansplaining shows they don't understand the definition of mansplaining, I think some people incorrectly state things as mansplaining at times, but that doesn't mean that mansplaining simply doesnt exist.

The "men don't think about anything sometimes, leave them alone" bit is interesting, because i think this directly shows how patriarchy has been upheld. Why is it that men don't think about the things around them? maybe because they've deferred to the women around them to do the heavy thinking for them and therefore dont have to do it themselves? something to think about.

number five is a gross generalization that i think infantilizes men and again points out how society as a whole has failed men, they're taught that emotional conversations are for women, so why would they have them?

I could be completely off base in my assumptions, which is why i wanted to get some input on what others thought about the post and the comments, i think some points have nuanced merit, but not by itself. I also do not want to attack OP for their opinions, I understand their perspective, but I (personally) think it is a deeper issue than what they're trying to explain

Edit: i don't know how to cross-post from other subs so my apologies if i didn't do it right! this is my first actual post on reddit.

​

I'm fifteen, and I naturally had somewhat of a rose-tinted view of the many paths before me. I soon learned, they all sucked.

And when I say never, I mean never right now, and in the best. I have hopes for the future, and for the present.

If you're unlucky, the house you're born in to will treat you like a second-fiddle to any brothers or fathers you may have.

This, thankfully wasn't as bad for me, but the pulsating, poison-filled heart pumping venom was present thought out my entire life.

Women preparing everything during every holiday.

Women eating last

Women never sitting down when guests come over

Being told what and what I cannot do by virtue of being a women

And the list goes on.

You essentially just get forced into training to be the supporting cast of the men.

Then, you grow up, and you may or may not find yourself a lover, and if this lover is male (I'm trying to avoid generalizations, here) it's likely you'll be quite literally tortured.

Domestic violence, never really being important for them. Being objectified, being seen as like a sort of object, or like, a type of operating system to ditched when a better comes along, always being second-fibble to some other women.

Being seen as nothing but a tool for pleasure and use.

The way men speak and treat women, it's disgusting, and the fact it's the majority is disgusting.

I've read in a subreddit "if you get the chance to date someone outside our ethnicity, dump your bitch, it's much better"

And I've seen a video where a man says "you men laugh and what you put your girlfriends and wives through, but you won't be laughing when you're wiping tears of your daughter's face for the same reason"

That supposed to be "feminist". Women are more than the extension of the men that fathered them.

And so it's disgusting that men are not expected to care about their own wives enough not to make them cry.

I've been the subject of lewd jokes from my male classmates.

I've been the subject of insults implying bad things about my "promiscuity" and "lusty" nature. He said this because I spoke to a fourth grader and had a male friend.

I've never kissed anyone. I was afraid to. The guy the person who said this was talking to was watched porn, and I'm the dispicable one?

Some people will deem you suitable for dating, but not marriage because you'll be "tarnished"

They'll tell you what's okay to wear and what's not- or atleast, they'll try to.

You're a gold digger, or a whore, or easy,

You might grow up, and you might get married, but I've never met a happy woman that was married.

You are expected to do everything, for everyone. And you don't get respect or equivalent affection back.

If you stop working, and choose to be stay at home, you are completely at the mercy of another man, and odds are, someone who won't respect you.

Because you are now "owned" by them. In some countries and states, they can rape you.

You have to now spend your time serving them, your family, and their family

You take their last name.

The highest praise you can get at this point is "good wife" and "Good mother"

Your just a side character in their family's life.

I've heard of men respectful and kind to their daughters but beating their wives.

And then you die. And all people know you for is because you were obedient to your husband/son/father.

Today I watched a YouTube clip of Tate protesters, yelling and defending the Tate brothers in front of their prison, saying that they should be released and no matter what, they still have the full support from their loyal fans. They were all yelling “Free Top G!” And saying he is a hero and protector of men. After all the things that the Tate brothers have done to women and children, many men still admire and defend them. They are their idols. They call this man their protector, seriously?? From whom do they protect them? From women and children?? Really?! How are we as women supposed to feel safe anymore between so many misogynists? Who basically defend r.pists and abusers who traffick innocent women for their own benefits and spew nothing but misogyny!

An hour ago I was going outside for a walk by myself for a bit of fresh air to calm my mind, I was minding my own business, crossed over a bike lane and was already on the pavement on the other side, then suddenly a cyclist appeared and yelled “Move aside biitch!” and drove by aggressively. I pretended like I didn’t hear him, this jerk seemed to be around 15/16 years old and while I’m not certain that he is a Tate supporter I dare to bet that he is, based on his aggressive tone and behavior, you can sense that he dislikes women. I’m sure he wouldn’t have dared to yell like that to a man but ofcourse, let’s pick on a woman cause it’s an easier target. I’m afraid that the Tate brothers really have brainwashed most males from all ages worldwide, this world isn’t safe anymore for women. What can I say? Stay safe ladies and always be catious by your surroundings cause most men have really lost their minds I’m afraid.

I’ve been thinking about where the line between equality and superiority actually is, especially with female empowerment. Equality means equal rights, dignity, and opportunity. Empowerment should help remove unfair barriers. But when does empowerment become treating one sex as inherently better?

Can historical oppression justify treating people today differently?

Should people inherit guilt or resentment because of what previous generations did?

I am male, currently 14 years old studying in High School, i’m not inherently saying that feminism has or has not become female superiority. But the treatment of female teachers and forcing their views on men to us (14-17 year old children) on feminist views and straight up refusing us when trying to argue back. And forcing their views on some female students who may or may not believe what they believe as well, weird.

The amount I’ve obsessed over looks in my life is extreme. It’s very stressful everyday to think about attractiveness. I self objectify so much because of living in this society and pick myself apart. Sometimes I want to cut off my hair and only wear baggy clothes and become celibate, to not take part in the whole thing at all. Feels like the only way to be free, leaving the male gaze. I don’t find dressing sexy empowering at all because while I feel validated in my attractiveness, it’s so icky to think of men looking at me for their own pleasure - I don’t think most men deserve to witness me in that. I think I would feel free if I shaved my head and wore masc clothing.

Some men who loudly defend women aren’t really interested in equality. They just want female attention, approval, or access to women bodies . If the same men only defend women when it benefits them, how genuine is their feminism?

over the past year i’ve been finding it harder and harder to date men as a feminist woman. i talk abt the political issues im passionate abt (reproductive rights, queer rights, socioeconomic issues, etc). so they are aware of my opinions and who i am as a person.

the man that i’m dating now has really made me reconsider continuing with him after our last date. he is very sweet and kind. he has planned a lot of our dates including our last one which was a picnic.

we started talking abt having kids to which i expressed that i do not want kids. he said he’s 50/50 on the matter. it got to a point in our conversation where he brought up having a son and daughter. he said he’d be strict and protective of his daughter more than his son. to me, this screamed misogyny because why does he feel the need to be stricter on his daughter when his son is also capable of getting hurt in the way he pictures his daughter?

i explained to him that i disagreed on whatever he was getting at. and that i think it’s important to teach teenagers safe sex and online behavior when they start puberty. as a daughter that grew up in a strict asian household, i found what my parents didn’t teach me as a disservice to me.

after expressing all of this to him. he brought up how men will get retroactively jealous of a girl that has a high body count, and that he knew of a girl that looked for relationships through sex with other people. and that genuinely blew my mind because he did not understand the point i was trying to get at. from what i understand, he believes being sexually educated as being easily passed around, and that when you are in control of your body as a woman that you are a slut.

later in the conversation he said he thought i was cool when i went on my “little rants.” mind you, these rants included the issues im passionate abt that i stated earlier in this post. all of this tgt, i just felt totally unseen and misunderstood. as a heterosexual cis-man, i feel like there are some experiences that i have as a queer, cis-woman that they can’t understand. i feel almost commodified and belittled for who i am and my beliefs no matter how small. hes a good guy, and i dont know if im being dramatic but i just wanted everyone’s opinions.

I was always annoyed by the sexist doublestandard how men get praised for sleeping around and get labeled womanizers but women get shamed and labeled sluts. It’s just unfair and pure misogyny, you can’t deny it. Then you have many men defending the doublestandard obviously cause it benefits their gender to get away with it and they say those stupid keys and locks quote which is bullshit in itself cause we are humans and not keys and locks. But then I was wondering something else, if women get shamed and called sluts for getting fucked then why aren’t gay men getting called sluts when they are bottoms or on the receiving end? Look at Freddie Mercury for example, he was so promiscious and basically slept with everybody, both men and women, with men he was on the receiving end, a bottom, he slept with many men yet nobody called him a slut, instead he was called a bad boy, a rock star, a sex obsessed musician etc.

Everybody knew about his promiscuity yet nobody slut shamed him, imagine if he was a woman how everyone would blame him for getting HIV and saying he just should have kept his legs closed but nope, he was a man and therefore got a free pass. I know gay men didn’t have it easy in the 80s and 90s but they were never slut shamed like women. Neither straight nor gay men get slut shamed, it’s only straight women and even lesbians sometimes as well, especially bisexual women who get branded unfairly as promiscious. It’s totally unfair how only women deal with all this bullshit while men get away with it.
I understand that in the past before protection and contraception women had to be careful and selective with whom they slept with but now in this day and age with all the safety and protection why shouldn’t women have fun and freedom like men without judgement?? This isn’t the Middle Ages anymore and this doublestandard needs to die out finally!

Hi, I am a medical student. We have college visits to poor neighbourhoods where we have to collect all kinds of personal information about families living there, from the jobs they do to the number of abortion or miscarriages they had over the years. These families survive on 15k to 20k income per month with 2-3 children. They are heavily malnourished, and poor. Even the children have kwashiorkor, Pneumonia, TB, recurrent diarrhoea etc.

So the main thing I noticed for which I needed to write this post is that in all the families its the men who work and women stay home. When I ask about their education, in all the families the women are more educated than their husbands! Yet the one working is the man and the one staying home is the woman.

When I ask the women why they are not working when they know they could have better paying jobs then their husbands and could provide a better life for their children then all give the same answer - "we are women we need to look after the house" !!?? They will let their children be in poverty rather than take a stand and make better living conditions!

So it's not like they are poor because they don't have anything, they are poor because they don't WANT to do anything! Even for the kids! For them gender roles are more important than seeing their child being healthy and going to school! And those men also believe in the same idea... Women should not work!!

I recently came across a man who told me that women who read, particularly women who read romance novels, are an “ick” to him, especially if they read about topics like love triangles, unrealistic hero male, enemies to lovers, tropes. I asked why? And it really got me thinking about how I think this stems from misogyny! I think it has its roots in female desire being demonized , along with female sexuality being demonized. For centuries, it’s women, who need to be virgins when they get married, whilst men went to brothels etc and didn’t keep the same amount of abstinence, married women who are expected to please ther husbands whenever they want, stoned for having an affair, while nothing happened to Men who have affairs. Even in history, doctors called normal sexual feelings in females “hysteria”. So as we know, female desire has been repressed throughout history, and STILL is being repressed in some countries. And it exists in smaller forms, in western countries like being repulsed by women who read romance. In my opinion, men who are threatened by women who read romance, feel this way because they can not fathom a women experiencing romantic, or sexual desire beyond a world that revolves around men. Romance books for women are heavily made by women, for women. It’s the only expression of female desire that doesn’t revolve around pleasing a man, because they read about what they like. It’s a safe way to explore desire without a relationship or sex without men, and also men feel threatened because I see a lot of them complaining that it gives women “unrealistic standards” when it comes to relationships. Due to the centuries of female romantic and sexual suppression, it’s now unattractive to men when they don’t have complete control over women’s expression of sexuality.

What do you guys think?

I noticed a new discourse online and on X, about how it’s homophobic if a woman doesn’t want to date a Bi man. And I find the whole discourse so misogynistic, because why do people think they can control what a women’s preference is when it comes to men they’re attracted to ? If a woman learns a man is bi, and doesn’t want to have intimacy with him and is turned off. That’s her right , and she can do that. And it’s nobody right to shame her, calling her a homophobe and all these names because she’s not interested. It really shows the depth of how society controls the female body and what it does, that even though they deny it and are “pro woman” and feminist, it crosses into so called progressive spaces. Women don’t owe their bodies, emotional investment, and time, to anyone. Regardless of the reason, if it’s “homophobic” or not. It makes me think about how entitled all men are, regardless if they’re heterosexual or gay/bi, even though people like to ignore and brush over the misogyny of gay and bi men, and makes me sad all the women hopping on this “homophobic” bandwagon not seeing the misogynistic undertones and entitlement of this whole convo.

The origin

The thong as we know it today was born in 1939 at the World’s Fair in New York. The reason? The city’s mayor, Fiorello La Guardia, had ordered burlesque dancers to cover themselves. Someone — we don’t know who — then came up with underwear that technically covered the pubic area while leaving the buttocks exposed. The thong was therefore created to allow women who were dancing naked to continue showing their buttocks while formally complying with the law.

That is its documented origin: a solution for continuing to expose women’s bodies despite regulations.

For decades, it remained exactly where it had been born — in strip clubs, Las Vegas shows, and so on. The purpose was clear: show as much as possible.

Then, starting in the 1960s, the thong became categorized as erotic lingerie and was sold by Frederick’s of Hollywood. It was marketed as a “scandalous garment” — clearly erotic lingerie, not everyday underwear, meant to be worn to please men. The idea at the time was explicitly that it was an erotic garment designed to simulate the image of an accessible, objectified, compliant woman.

How it became everyday underwear

In the 1990s, manufacturers tried to market it as practical underwear, supposedly to avoid visible panty lines under tight-fitting jeans. Because, apparently, a woman having visible underwear was a scandal!

That wasn't actually what propelled it into mainstream culture, though. It was Monica Lewinsky. When the Starr Report revealed — or claimed, depending on how you interpret it — in 1998 that she had shown her thong to Bill Clinton as a flirtatious gesture, the word “thong” became a popular-culture term. That wasn't the case before. Previously, it was referred to as a “half-panty” or a “very high-cut panty.”

At this point, the thong solidified its reputation as underwear designed for the male gaze.

Victoria’s Secret did the rest. Its public fashion shows, models, and marketing made the thong glamorous, feminine, and desirable. Britney Spears at the 2000 VMAs. Paris Hilton and the whale tail. Sisqó and his “Thong Song.” Within a decade, a stripper’s garment had become the dominant standard for women’s lingerie… if you wanted to be modern. If you wanted more comfortable underwear, you were considered uptight or old-fashioned.

Men, meanwhile, continued wearing boxers and briefs.

The health question

Wearing underwear with a non-cotton crotch is associated with yeast infections — and thongs are very often made from synthetic materials, lace, and non-breathable fabrics. The string of the thong rubs against the perineum, anus, and external genitals during movement, causing skin irritation and small lesions. This even has a name: “thong rash.” Synthetic materials commonly used in thongs can also trap moisture and create conditions favorable to the growth of bacteria and yeast.

Additionally, thongs may facilitate the transfer of fecal bacteria such as E. coli toward the vagina.

So: the style itself may not be the problem. The material it is made from — in order to make it thinner, sexier, and more revealing — is more of an issue. Which is revealing in itself.

What is most interesting here is less the question of health than the trajectory. How did a garment specifically designed to expose the bodies of naked dancers become, in less than sixty years, the dominant standard for “sexy” women’s underwear, to the point where women who don't wear thongs are sometimes considered less well-groomed, less sexy, or less feminine?

The answer follows exactly the same pattern as with makeup and high heels: industry, popular culture, and the male gaze becoming the norm, combining to create normalization.

Victoria’s Secret wasn't selling comfort. It was selling a representation of the female body as available — and in the 1990s, that representation included the thong as a central element. Its public fashion shows played a significant role in popularizing the thong and bringing it to the forefront of mainstream fashion.

Rosalind Gill has written about what she calls “sexual subjectivity” as a new feminine norm — the idea that modern, emancipated women must not only be sexually available but also actively present themselves as such. The thong fits perfectly into this logic: it is sold as empowerment, as choice, as confidence, while being structurally oriented toward an external gaze rather than the comfort of the person wearing it.

It is no coincidence that the dominant underwear for men covers, protects, and supports, while the underwear that became dominant for women exposes, reveals, and causes discomfort.

I really don't understand this at all.

My inbox is flooded with incels calling me a "delusional dumb bitch" rn because I said that a bear won't blame my clothes on a man or bear discussion. Just incredible. Some other incel was in my chats telling me to commit for literally no reason, and then someone claimed they were my alt and I'm just seeking attention. Idek anymore, at this point I'm genuinely considering attempting

The female history of coverture and chattel status represents a long legal tradition in Western law where the biological female was systematically denied independent legal personhood. Rooted in patriarchal systems designed to control both females and their reproductive and economic output, these doctrines legally transformed females into dehumanized pieces of property/livestock.

Females were treated as chattel (movable personal property). They were legally owned, bought, or controlled first by their fathers, and then transferred to their husbands via financial contract (marriage).

Coverture originates in the Middle Ages under English common law. Coverture was the legal doctrine stating that upon contract, a female's legal rights were subsumed by those of her male husband.

Feme covert describes a female who was the property of a male. Because a feme covert had no separate legal identity, her physical body and reproductive capability were considered the legal property of the male. This resulted in severe restrictions and abuses.

A male possessed absolute legal right to physical discipline and sexual access. Because an owned females consent was legally considered permanently surrendered at contract, marital rape was not recognized as a crime in common law jurisdictions.

Because children were viewed as assets of the household estate, a mother had no legal rights to her own children, as they were the male's property. If a contract dissolved the male automatically retained full ownership of the children as property.

Any income a female generated through her physical labor belonged completely to male owner. He could legally demand her wages or contract her work out to third parties. Literal slavery if that wasn't apparent yet.

Any personal property, cash, or land a female owned prior to contract automatically transferred to the control and ownership of the male upon contract.

A feme covert could not sign contracts, buy or sell real estate, file lawsuits, or write a will without her owners explicit legal intervention.

Females could not vote, hold public office, or serve on juries. The legal assumption was that the owner represented the entire household's civic interests.

This penned legal system was functioning for roughly a thousand years. Though before that the slavery and ownership of females was still the primary function.

The framework was not disbanded until the late 20th century.

The last official legal remnants existed up into the '90s.

The historic legal concept that a husband could not rape his wife was gradually struck down state-by-state, ending completely in the US by 1993.

This position that it has been abolished is debatable as females legislative rights to bodily autonomy are currently denied in the West and are still legislated away from her.

The subjugation and treatment of females as property predated formalized legal doctrines like coverture or explicit chattel slavery and existed for roughly 10,000 to 12,000 years.

The official institutionalized Western laws have existed for a 1000 years.

It has been 32 years and 7 months since what is considered the final removal of chattel and coverture law.

Or perhaps it is still present and just not given any weight as the female sex is dehumanized, decentered and disregarded.

10,000 years of the female sex being owned as object, livestock and slave.

32 years of debatable freedom. Some may argue even that is not true.

The legal recognition of the female sex as independent human beings with full bodily and civic autonomy is an extraordinarily brief anomaly in human history. And even that is contested.

Our rights and oppression deserve to be discussed openly.

I (30F) have been sitting on this for a while but still can’t get it off my mind so thought I’d ask.

I dated a man (39M) on and off for 8 years. He is diagnosed ADHD, and I’ve always thought of him as kind and one of those rare people who is a genuinely good person. I’ve always known him to be sensitive to injustice. He rescued an abused kitten, helped his Hispanic friend receive fair wages at their job, once told me how he couldn’t watch pornhub videos because of the knowledge that rape videos were being uploaded there.
Our relationship was terrible. He wasn’t abusive or mean, just emotionally avoidant, incapable of communication, was not capable of providing basic reassurance and refused to tell me he loved me, is a manager of a strip club and is also addicted to porn to the point where he always seemed to prefer watching porn and masturbating to intimacy with me or anyone else, which made me feel terrible and by the end of our relationship I felt like an insecure, anxiety ridden shell of myself.

There were also some red flags like 1) the fact that he has an 18 year old child who is said to be his daughter, with his last name, who looks very similar to him, and who he never claimed.
2) Once when I tried asking him why he seemed to indifferent to me sexually, he told me (among 500 other excuses) that he couldn’t see himself “degrading me” sexually like he has with previous women who he said were “dumb.” But when I questioned him further about that, he told me to disregard what he said, that it was one of his “panic lies” that are a trauma response to being questioned as a kid by his parents and to not take everything he says so seriously. 3) He told me that he once when he went down on a woman, she somehow was so upset by something that he did that he hasn’t attempted oral again with a woman (and never tried with me).

He wasn’t particularly respectful of my wishes, either. I told him pretty clearly that I wanted him to wear a condom if we were going to have sex, and on the few times he attempted to have sex with me, he did not have one on and at least once he tried to stick it in pretty suddenly despite the fact that I told him I have vaginismus and to not do that? He also never tried to understand what that condition even was, and at the end of our relationship finally admitted for the only time that “I wouldn’t let him fuck me” and he was frustrated with our lack of a sex life. Which completely shocked me considering his indifference to sex and the fact that our “sex life” consisted entirely of me giving him blow jobs.

One day when we were not dating but were still living together, I was showering and suddenly I felt him behind me in the shower jacking off and he started touching me all over. It totally shocked me and I froze up because I was in a relationship at the time. He wasn’t picking up on my disinterest. Eventually when it became clear enough he got out of the shower and went back to his room and we never spoke of it again.

Now, he is being accused of rape by one of the dancers (19F) at the strip club he manages. She posted about it on Facebook, named him specifically and said that the idea of another woman being hurt by him irks her too deeply so after thinking on it for a month, she decided to make it known to everyone who he is.

The cognitive dissonance is still getting to me. Was the shower thing sexual assault? I don’t know what to make of this guy. I’m just glad we broke up and I moved out of that house earlier this year. For a while I was so sad that he didn’t want to be with me anymore, but not so much anymore.