The Invisibility of Misogyny
In the summer of 2010, Mel Gibson’s phone rant to his ex-partner Oksana Grigorieva became an internet sensation. The recording of Gibson’s enraged comments was circulated under headlines about his “insane,” “racist” and “psychotic” rant. There’s no doubt about the aptness of the “insane” and “psychotic” descriptions, and Gibson’s statement that Grigorieva’s choice of wardrobe made her look “ like a fucking pig in heat” who risked getting “raped by a pack of niggers” shows plenty of overachievement in the racism department. But while commenters seemed to easily notice the general craziness of Gibson’s words and their disturbing racism, very few drew attention to his rant’s most distinguishing feature: its unremitting misogyny. Gibson proclaims, “I am going to come and burn the fucking house down … but you will blow me first. 1” (This and other threats of violence in the recording seemed to have been more than just angry talk, since Grigorieva filed domestic violence charges against Gibson in this same time period). He calls her a “bitch” and a “cunt” repeatedly during the call, and his prediction about the potential consequences of Grigorieva’s fashion sense is a classic bit of sexist victim blaming, indicting women for supposedly inviting abuse. But aside from discussion on a smattering of feminist periodicals and websites, coverage of Gibson’s rant largely ignored its blatant contempt for women.
In January 2011, a shooting at a public political event killed six people and left Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D, Arizona) gravely injured after being shot in the head. Investigations revealed that the alleged shooter, Jared Lee Loughner, had a special animosity for Giffords, and had attempted to communicate with the congresswoman about his bizarre political theories. The attack occurred after a period of particularly heated anti-liberal rhetoric from pundits, which even Giffords herself had remarked upon shortly before the shooting. News coverage in the days following the attack played up the potential connection between the heated political climate and the violence, even though no clear evidence was produced demonstrating that Loughner was influenced by political rhetoric. Even President Obama called for an end to partisan extremism in political discourse, although he was careful not to posit a direct link between punditry and the shooting. Yet, while the case for blaming the political climate was never convincingly made, ample evidence surfaced that Loughner was a misogynist who did not want women to hold positions of power, who had scrawled the words “die, bitch!” on a letter he had received from Giffords, and who apparently made Giffords the primary target in the plans for his rampage.2 Despite the clear motivation of misogynist beliefs in the shooting, there were no media discussions of the pervasiveness of misogyny, and certainly no public statements by the President about the need for us to come together as a nation to confront and end misogyny. In fact, to the degree that Loughner’s statements were mentioned at all, they were rarely presented as examples of misogyny, but rather just as more examples of a general mental instability.
In early March of 2011, actor Charlie Sheen did one interview after another bragging about his lifetime of drug and alcohol abuse. But his many interviewers barely bothered to ask him about his repeated abuse of women, which has included accidentally shooting one former lover and alleged verbal, psychological and physical aggression toward others. Nor has there been much real discussion of the rampant sexism on his sit-com “Two and a Half Men.” His abuse of women is implicitly treated as just another example of his bad boy behavior – we’re supposed to see it as a way he’s damaged himself, rather than a way he’s repeatedly damaged others.
These examples could be multiplied many times over, and aren’t limited to stories on the front pages and current events sections of mainstream newspapers. In fact, the worst cases of misogyny in the world today are rarely even deemed newsworthy. In India, a “bride burning” in which a young bride is set ablaze as punishment for unacceptable dowries, occurs about once every two hours. 39,000 baby girls under 1 year old annually die in China each year directly because of gender discrimination, which causes parents to deny them the medical treatment reserved for boys. According to some estimates, more girls have been killed directly because of being girls in the last 50 years than all of the men killed in all of the wars of the 20th century, and more girls die in any given decade than all people killed in all of the genocides of the 20th century. Additionally, a staggering number of girls and women are also victims of various forms of sexual violence. As many as 3 million women and girls worldwide are victims of sex trafficking, with hundreds of thousands of new victims added each year. Rates of rape around the world are staggeringly high, not just in areas like the war-torn East Congo, but also in the United States military, where recent reports indicate that one out of every three women in service has been sexually assaulted, and surveys of college-aged women routinely show that approximately 25% have experienced rape or attempted rape.3 And rape is abetted everywhere by ingrained cultural attitudes that still, even in ostensibly liberal democracies like the United States, blame the victim and diminish the responsibility of the rapists. Even the mainstream New York Times recently got on the victim blaming bandwagon when their coverage of the gang rape of an 11-year old girl included quotes from members of the girl’s community who observed that the girl acted older than her age, hung around too much with neighborhood boys, and obviously wasn’t being properly supervised by her mother. 4
In all of these cases, it’s striking how little awareness people have of both the frequency of sexist discrimination against women, and also of the severity and sheer contempt for women that often come with it. When misogyny plays a central role in stories that get mainstream media attention, as in the first three examples discussed here, it’s rarely called out as such. And when it is itself the whole story, as in the examples of global injustice and violence toward women, it rarely commands attention and serious analysis. It’s not just the fact that misogyny is invisible that we need to face – it’s also the fact that this invisibility is a large part of what makes it the enormous problem it is. We cannot begin to properly address misogyny and the harm it causes unless we start being able to see it.
Wherever misogyny exists, it is embedded in cultural practices and ideologies that have accrued over enormous stretches of time. It is based on a hierarchy of values, and inflexibly essentialist ideas about gender roles, that privilege “male” attributes of aggression and leadership and relegate women to backing roles of mothering and pleasure providing. And these attitudes that equate femininity with passiveness and submission, that see it as being of use only insofar as it advances male interests, are so commonly expressed in so many places in our culture that they acquire the status of common sense. They’re expressed in the commonly used insults that equate womanhood with weakness, such as the denigration of men who aren’t judged to be manly enough as being “pussies,” or as one military leader put it when addressing complaints of trauma by male soldiers, as having “sand in their vaginas.” (These comments show, as many other examples do, that misogyny and homophobia are closely related). The attitudes are expressed through fairy tales we tell our children about passive princesses rescued by handsome princes, by the movie and television scripts that update these stories for alleged adults, and by the gender stereotypes of hyper-emotional women prevalent on reality television programs. They’re expressed through the overwhelming prevalence of images of nude, sexualized women on magazine covers and advertisements, and in photo layouts and mainstream movies – coupled with the overwhelming absence of women in positions of real power in the media.
If anthropologists from another planet visited a news stand or convenience store magazine rack in any US small town, they would likely be baffled by the numerous magazines decorated with mostly naked women arranged in available poses for male viewers. They’d also likely be stunned by the fact that so many other shoppers seem to regard this display as completely normal, and an accepted part of the background of everyday life. An acquaintance recently told me about a time when her two male children were young, and she noticed that her boys were busy flipping through a “lad’s mag” loaded with pictures of nearly nude women. She complained about the easy accessibility of the magazines to the store manager, who apologetically explained that he didn’t even really notice the magazines were there, because he guessed he’d just become used to seeing them. In the busiest places in our busy world, misogyny is hidden in plain sight.
Degrading images of women like the images on those news stand magazines are hard to escape from, and nowhere are they more common or more extreme than in the pornography industry. Pornography in its most common mainstream, heterosexual varieties is often both an expression of misogyny and one of the key vehicles for perpetuating it through all levels of culture. The porn industry rakes in approximately 100 billion dollars per year, and benefits from distribution by corporate behemoths such as the General Motors-owned Direct TV, AT & T Broadband and Comcast Cable, which pump porn into cable/satellite television receivers and computers around the world. And this mainstreaming and mass distribution of porn involves mainstreaming and mass distribution of gender myths about sexuality – the adult versions of children’s fairy tales about passive women and active, conquering men. As the popularity of porn has grown and distributors and producers compete for viewer dollars, the industry has increasingly lured male consumers with misogynist content. As Rebecca Whisnant notes in a recent article,
In today’s mainstream pornography, aggression against women is the rule rather than the exception. For some initial evidence supporting this claim, one need only survey lists of titles at any online porn portal, or any website selling adult DVDs: Border Bangers, Disgraced 18, Gangland Victims, Bitchcraft, Gag on My Cock, Animal Trainer 20, Wrecked ‘Em, Butthole Whores 2, Tanned Teens. The industry further markets hostile treatment of women through publications such as Adult Video News (AVN). A content analysis of bestselling ‘adult DVDs’ – identified through AVN listings – confirms this is not simply hyperbolic marketing: physical aggression occurred in 88 per cent of all scenes and verbal aggression in 48 percent. Thus, both cursory observation and detailed research indicate that hostile, aggressive content is so prevalent in contemporary pornography that it would be hard for a regular consumer to avoid it….In online forums, consumers frequently remark on the normality of aggressive, ‘over the top’ content in today’s pornography. Some celebrate this trend and others decry it, but virtually all agree that the trend exists and is unlikely to reverse itself. 5
Some pornographic material, in fact, seems to be intentionally marketed for its misogyny to male customers who may feel confused or resentful about the social and political gains women have made due to the feminist movement. A review of a porn production called “Fuck Slaves 3” in the September 2008 issue of AVN describes the film as a “misogynistic gem that will appeal to men who have survived the social castrating of their gender.6” Misogyny may be downplayed by many defenders of porn, but its usefulness as a motivation to attract at least some male customers hasn’t been lost on some of the producers and distributors of porn.
Additionally, because of desensitization to the content of pornography over time, viewers find themselves needing more extreme varieties for arousal. A porn viewer may begin watching porn with established boundaries in mind, such as avoiding material that is blatantly violent, involves humiliation of women, or depicts sex with partners who are or who are intended to portray teenage girls. However, many viewers will cross those boundaries eventually, as the less extreme material they at first exclusively watch no longer holds their interest. This may explain the overwhelming demand for porn that shows women being violently penetrated by multiple partners, and women who are depicted as being asleep or unconscious being sexually molested. There is a great deal of continued controversy about the causal links, if any, between porn viewing and sexual violence against women. However, these controversies seem to miss the deeper question: what does it tell us that so many men are masturbating to images of women being humiliated and degraded? The fact that these men can find such contemptuous depictions of women pleasurable to view says quite a lot about both the pervasiveness of misogyny, and the failure of many people to even notice it. And since the pornography industry has had such a deep influence on the advertising industry, on fashion, and on expectations about sexuality, the repercussions of this hidden misogyny are grave.
The ubiquity of misogynist messages about women, coupled with the inability and unwillingness to seriously address it, are most tragically exemplified by the frequency of rape and the existence of a rape culture that aids and abets rapists. In the United States, studies indicate that somewhere between ¼ and 1/6 of women have been raped or have survived an attempted rape, and despite these staggering numbers of victims, the conviction rate for rape is only 6%. The majority of rapes do not conform to the stereotypical case of a stranger with a knife waiting in the bushes to assault passing women – they are attacks perpetrated by men the victim knows and may even have trusted. In fact, men who have raped are often not significantly different from men who have not, with the exception that they much more frequently express belief in “rape myths,” such as the idea that “no” might really mean “yes” or that women who dress a certain way, get drunk, or send “mixed signals” brought their assault upon themselves. Men who have these ideas acquired them through socialization, which has given them license to reinterpret a woman’s thoughts, words and actions to mean what they, as men, want them to mean. A senior thesis by a former Harvard student brilliantly describes the socialization that causes many men to adopt an adversarial and dismissive attitude toward women, and is worth quoting at length:
The man is taught to look upon his actions on a date as a carefully constructed strategy for gaining the most territory. Every action is evaluated in terms of the final goal – intercourse. He continually pushes to see “how far he can get.” Every time she (his date) submits to his will, he has “advanced” and every time she does not he has suffered a “retreat.” Since he already sees her as the opponent, and the date is a game or a battle, he anticipates resistance. He knows that ‘good girls don’t, and so she will probably say ‘no.’ But he has learned to separate himself from her and her interests. He is more concerned with winning the game. Instead of trying to communicate with her, he attempts to press her into saying ‘yes.’
Every time she submits to his will, he sees it as a small victory (getting the date, buying her a drink, getting a kiss, or fondling her breasts. He plays upon her indecisiveness, using it as an opportunity to tell her ‘what she really wants,’ which is, in fact, what he wants. If her behavior is inconsistent, he tells her she is ‘fickle’ or ‘a tease.’ If he is disinterested in her desires and he believes that she is inconsistent, he is likely to ignore her even when she does express her desires directly. When she finally says ‘no,’ he simply may not listen, or he may convince himself that she is just ‘playing hard to get’ and that she really means ‘yes.’ With such a miserable failure in communication, a man can rape a woman even when she is resisting vocally and physically, and still believe it was not rape. 7
The invisibility of misogyny thus causes some men who are not consciously hateful toward women to effectively act as if they hated them. They can and often do cause women years of trauma without ever being aware that they’ve done anything wrong. The effects of misogyny are invisible to many, but are all too real for the victims of rape, and for those who care for them.
We’ve seen from the above discussion that misogyny can be rendered invisible within a culture. But misogyny is also rendered invisible between cultures, because of the fact that sexist ideologies and actions against women are often seen as part of another culture’s identity, and therefore not rightly criticized by people outside of that culture. This attitude is ironically shared by some who consider themselves conservatives and by some who are proudly liberal. In the latter case, a multicultural belief in the rights of other cultures to self-determination is often at work – a belief that we need to recognize that not everyone in the world shares our own cultural values and norms, and that criticism of other cultures often is a form of thinly veiled prejudice against the “group rights” of other cultures. There is certainly some truth in that idea, and we need to be careful not to project our own biases onto cultures we imperfectly understand. Still, the multicultural argument is often tantamount to a blanket assumption that any and all criticisms of other cultures must be rooted in prejudice and nothing more. And often, this approach itself commits the sin of oversimplifying other cultures, and imposing a group identity on them that ignores the diversity of voices within, even when many of those voices are raised in protest against injustice.
The late scholar Susan Moller Okin made this point in her classic essay “Is Multiculturalism Bad for Women?” In the essay, Okin examines the ‘groups rights” arguments made by liberals who argue against indictment of sexist cultural attitudes on the grounds of tolerance and multiculturalism. Okin argues that such practices are often de facto validations of misogyny because of liberal refusal to “label such practices as illiberal and therefore unjustified violations of women’s physical or mental integrity.8” She observes that
When liberal arguments are made for the rights of groups, then, special care must be taken to look at within-group inequalities. It is especially important to consider inequalities between the sexes, since they are likely to be less public, and less easily discernible. Moreover, policies aiming to respond to the needs and claims of cultural minority groups must take seriously the need for adequate representation of less powerful members of such groups. Since attention to the rights of minority cultural groups, if it is to be consistent with the fundamentals of liberalism, must be ultimately aimed at furthering the well-being of the members of these groups, there can be no justification for assuming that the groups’ self-proclaimed leaders—invariably mainly composed of their older and their male members—represent the interests of all of the groups’ members. Unless women—and, more specifically, young women, since older women often become co-opted into reinforcing gender inequality—are fully represented in negotiations about group rights, their interests may be harmed rather than promoted by the granting of such rights. 9
In the zeal to show our tolerance for other cultures, we therefore can tolerate that culture’s intolerance toward cultural and political minorities. In patriarchal cultures, that means toleration of the subordination of women.
This pseudo-tolerance is made possible by the assumption that cultures are homogenous units, consisting of people who share similar values and ideas, and that therefore any cultural practices that exist must have the endorsement of all “members” of that culture. This is especially true when these cultural practices are claimed to be protected religious traditions. The professed piety of the cultural majority, coupled with their demand to protect the integrity of “their” culture, deters many liberals from questioning the real-life consequences of the cultural practices. But ironically, the democratic champions of this strain of multiculturalism forget that their own political culture is based on the idea that society is made up of individuals who do not always agree, and that difference of opinion must be respected. No one has the right to deprive the individual of her or his freedom of expression in the name of cultural unity. But when they look at other cultures, these same multiculturalists find it perfectly acceptable to believe that there is only one real set of cultural beliefs in play, and to shrug aside suggestions that any presented consensus is only an apparent one reached through the systematic oppression of dissenters. The fact that the culture they’re protecting is the culture of oppressors is ignored or simply not noticed.
Why should we believe that all of the women of Afghanistan are represented by the repressive laws passed by warlords, or all the women of Iran are represented in the culture of sharia law? Might it just possibly be true that we have to take the ideas of women like Malalai Joya in Afghanistan seriously when they tell us, no, this is not their culture, and their rights and dignity as human beings are being denied them? Identifying a culture only with those who hold power within it silences and invalidates the work of all those who risk their lives drawing attention to the culture’s inequalities. This is simply unacceptable, because honoring the rights of others has to mean honoring the rights of oppressed minorities to demand equal treatment if it is to have any real meaning at all.
There are therefore many reasons for the invisibility of misogyny, and invisibility prevents effective action from being taken against it. But we have to begin seeing misogyny, because the future of humanity quite directly depends on us doing so. Not only is there a moral imperative to end the suffering and oppression of other human beings wherever it occurs, but there is simply no way we can make real progress on any of the challenges facing us unless we end the global subordination of women. Would you like to reduce world poverty? We can’t do that unless we first recognize that the face of the world’s poor is very disproportionately a woman’s face: women do 2/3 of the world’s work, yet receive only 10% of the world’s income and own only 1% of the means of production.8 Do you want to stop the spread of AIDS and other sexually transmitted diseases? How can we do that when so many women lack reproductive health and real reproductive opportunity, and are frequently victims of sexual violence? Do you want to promote stronger families and community values? We can’t do that when such high rates of maternal death in childbirth take so many mothers away from their families, or when women have no positions of status or authority within the home, and marriage laws make them part of their husband’s property. Do you want to promote better conservation practices and environmental stewardship? How can we do that unless women have access to better family planning services, including birth control, and have real choice about whether and how often they become mothers? Do you want to reduce the social instability that leads to terrorism? There’s no long term solution that doesn’t involve empowering women to take active roles in the economy and in government, because we can’t achieve prosperity while half of the population is disenfranchised. And there is no possibility of real human rights in a world where so many women live in anxiety of being raped, and so many of their rapists avoid conviction.
Misogyny has been invisible for too long. All of us must take responsibility for confronting it and ending it.
The author would like to thank Rebecca Whisnant, who kindly shared a copy of her article “From Jekyll to Hyde: The Grooming of Male Pornography Consumers.”
Notes:
1. Highlights of the Gibson rant, packaged under a typical headline about its racism, are available here: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/07/01/mel-gibsons-new-racist-ra_n_632602.html
2. One of the few pieces about the shooting that did directly discuss Loughner’s misogyny was published here: http://www.feministpeacenetwork.org/2011/01/17/loughner-didnt-think-women-should-hold-positions-of-authority-or-power/
3. Statistics drawn from sources such as Kristof, Nicholas D. and WuDunn, Sheryl. 2009. Half the Sky: Turning Oppression into Opportunity for Women Worldwide. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, as well as violence against women summaries such as http://www.now.org/issues/violence/stats.html.
4. A discussion of the New York Times piece, with a link to the original NYT article can be found here: http://shakespearessister.blogspot.com/2009/10/rape-culture-101.html
5 Whisnant, Rebecca. “From Jekyll to Hyde: The Grooming of Male Pornography Consumers.” Published in Karen Boyle (Ed.) (2010) Everyday Pornography. New York: Routledge.
6. Ibid.
7. Quoted in Warshaw, Robin. 1988. I Never Called it Rape: The Ms. Report on Recognizing, Fighting, and Surviving Date and Acquaintance Rape. New York: HarperPerennial.
8. Okin, Susan Moller. “Is Multiculturalism Bad for Women?” Boston Review, October/November, 1997.
9. Ibid.
10. Statistic cited in Banyard, Kat. 2010. The Equality Illusion: The Truth about Women & Men Today. London: Faber and Faber.
About the Author
Phil Molé is a freelance writer who lives in Chicago, Illinois, and often writes about science, skepticism, and society.
I’m a fan of pornography but i’d have to agree with your assesment that it is largely misogynistic. While your magazine cover examples didn’t resonate all that well, I found myself thinking back to several porn sites and videos I’ve seen over the years. As anyone who’s watched any amount of porn will tell you it’s about a fantasy and an underlying theme of these fantasies is misogyny. For example MrChewsAsianBeaver, a porn site devoted to asian adult film stars. The site plays on the perception of asian women as being subservient to men because as one performer in a video put it ‘the man is the backbone and we women should be the support to the back bone.’ Not only are sexist gender roles being reinforced and pushed but there’s a clear rascism to the whole thing.
Not to bash porn, I’m a fan of porn. But a lot of the fantasies we construct for ourselves show just how much work we need before becoming a soceity that isn’t backasswards.
A superbly written article, thank you for writing it.
Minor correction: Gabrielle Giffords (D-AZ).
Oops, thanks, quite right. I’ll just silently fix that…
You know there are plenty of examples in gay porn where men are demeaning too each other, and of course the whole femdom genre.
Well, didn’t we always know that women were the lowest of the low and did not count!
I agree that sexism is mainstream and invisible, but I don’t agree that sexism is the same as misogyny. Sexism is just so widespread and men are so oblivious to it (until recently myself included) that this is an enabler for more disturbing misogynists to attempt to define what ‘maleness’ means. Visibility and raising the consciousness of mainstream men sounds like the only possible solution against the more disturbing and evil men who exploit the invisibility of women to commit their actions.
I loved how the examples of Mel Gibson, Charlie Sheen, and Giffords were used to show just how much mainstream society and the media prefer “not to notice” the abuse women suffer, but rather they just make jokes about how “psycho” and “crazy” the offenders are. As current as these examples are, I myself did not know the story behind Giffords shooting, and how he wrote derogatory remarks; or the fact that he basically tried to murder her because she was a woman in power. Many women are not even seeing the vast amounts of misogyny or hatred for females because our society is so used to these biased and ignorant gender roles. Also, the fact that many cable and television companies feel as though they have to offer porn (major oppression of women all over the world..) to their customer just to make a buck is truly insulting and disgusting. What has our society boiled down to? The need for greed and millions of dollars to make their business the best? Or just the continuing spectrum of weakening and degrading women?
Your Article is very informative. I had no idea that “bride burning” and the harsh discrimination/ murder in China still occur. It is sickening to think that people look past this and are blind to misogyny and simply make excuses for what is being done. Your questions at the end are questions that everyone should be thinking of to help make this world equal. The more I read about topics like this the easier it is for me to see it in everyday life. i hope more people take the time to witness what is going on around them.
thank you phil (male/female?) this is such an insightful article and i would encourage all who read it to post the link, sharing in whatever platforms available to them as communication is always the way forward, too many people are simply unaware…copy and paste…
Drawing attention to the ‘craziness’ of Gibson et al does more than obscure the misogynist rhetoric; it seeks to neutralise it. By suggesting that only the insane indulge in this kind of abuse, society at large is deemed not responsible. So rather than asking what kind of culture has led, and still leads, to the contemptuous outbursts outlined above, the perpetrators – and their offences – are placed safely outside that culture, allowing it to do its work unhindered and unthreatened.
Well, the yaoi stereotypes of uke and seme are essentially just furthering the misogynistic view of women being passive recipients of sex.
In my essay which provided Introduction to the anthology Women’s Work, half of which is polemic on on this subject, apart from compiling dismaying publication figures in literary world, I mention the media coverage in the run-up to democratic nomination in USA since the disparity of how Clinton was handled in press and by public was in stark contrast to general dismay and anger voiced – rightly – when it came to racism.
While there was outrage and more thoughtful commentary in the press when it came to racism, there was little of this in-depth thought given to the widespread and far more open vitriol about Clinton which invariably centred on gender insults. (Isn’t it so that blacks got the vote BEFORE women in America?) I’m certainly not disputing or demoting the importance of this issue, but merely wish to promote the other as so relevant to half the planet at least.
I had to cut down a lot more of what I wanted to say in this literary esaay but the figures I’d gathered gathered were so much worse than even I’d expected and these and some other publications in literary world and my own and other women writers’ experiences led me to conclude that the issue is indeed endemic and mostly invisible except sometimes in that tokenistic, large gesture way: for example in left-wing media ghetto-ising in women’s pages preaching to teh converted so that many with a conscience can give nod in right direction before returning to the real world, with its deep-rooted injustices in this respect. So long as this issue isn’t addressed by men too as one of seriousness and NOT a “special interest” things won’t change fundamentally. We’re talking about a sea change and I can say that my view is that having gone forward, we seem to have now stepped back.
As regards pornography, aware of and concerned about exploitaion and issues of violence, yet to think of pornography as exemplary of pervasive misogyny has its pitfalls since sexuality is deeply complex, and desire often rooted in the enactment of submission and power.
Thanks for this thoughtful article, right on the mark.
PS. Saw this article via poets listserve. Hope it gets widely aired.
The other side of this coin for me is when unspeakable horrors are attributed to some non-gender entity like Humanity or Students or Protesters, when we all know that 98% of the referenced violent crimes are committed by the males of such groups.
I learned something new by reading this article, I had no idea that bride burning was occurring . That is horrible. I also never realized how common misogyny. This is something that needs to be changed because women are great people and we are as important as any man, and we should be treated as such.
I really don’t know what distinction you’re making Egbert; they’re just shades of the same color of oppression. If you are sexist, you do not respect one gender’s individual sovereignty or rights; indeed, you fail to, or outright refuse, to understand that there’s anything to respect. A lack of respect is what makes bigotry of any kind possible; it is only when we dehumanize people that we can hate them so blithely. You seem to be arguing that there are degrees of sexism, with sexism being relatively minor, and misogyny being the worst and therefore what we need to focus on. But if sexist attitudes didn’t prevail across the globe, the worst would be unlikely to happen. But to me, they are one and the same.
Before reading this article, I was not aware of all of the details in the cases against Mel Gibson, Charlie Sheen, and Gabrielle Giffords. It is very easy to see that misogyny was the perpetrator’s main motive in all three of these cases in which women were either emotionally or physically harmed. I was very interested and saddened to read that none of the male perpetrator’s had any real motivation to hurt the women in their lives, other than the fact that they felt they were “dominant” over them. I was very shocked and disturbed to read about the “bride burning” violence done in India, and to read about the other examples of harm done to women around the world today. It is extremely sad to think about what society has come to, and to think about the other sick-minded harm that may be done to women in the future. I am now much more educated about what is really going on in the world, and will use the questions proposed in this article in my upcoming every day life. The questions proposed are ideas which we should all be concerned about each day, because they state how much women are currently being pushed down and degraded in our society.
I really enjoyed this article, it brought up a lot of viewpoints that I had not previously considered regarding this subject. I also found it interesting the connection to Charlie Sheen (given his recent highly publicized issues) because he is on and off camera known for being a womanizer. But with all of his other issues, this fact is mainly overlooked in comparison to his drugs and other such scandals.
I also especially liked the part about newspapers, since I work at a newspaper. It’s not often that these type of stories are covered, even though they happen ever day (even more than I thought given the information and statistics from this article). I think a lot of times we don’t publicize these type of stories for numerous reasons, even though they need to be paid attention to.
I’m glad I was given the opportunity to read this article, it was a class assignment that I really enjoyed.
@Sili
I didn’t mention Japanese stereotypes. But if you’re going to take male passivity as further evidence of misogyny then I think you’re backing yourself into an unfalsifiable corner. In most of the common sexual positions one of the participants if going to be relatively passive.
Thank you for this article, it brought a lot of things to light! i feel like we’re desensitized to misogyny because it has become such an inherent part of our culture. I didn’t even think about recognizing the young man’s misogynistic words in his hate letters that dealt with the shooting with Giffords. Also with Charlie Sheen; you’re so blind-sited by his ridiculous interviews and outlandish arrogance that you miss that his televised show, Two and a Half Men, is extremely sexist and disrespectful for women.
Thanks again for your thoughts!
Lessons to be learned: don’t hang with men who hold these biases and don’t waste your time trying to educate them…find the good guys, there are plenty out there…also, find good porn, there’s plenty out there that is fun and sexy without being misogynist.
As I was reading the article, I realized how desensitized I have become to all the misogyny in our world today. You make an excellent point when discussing the way we talk about other cultures. I myself know I I excuse certain things as being “history” or “just the way things are.” But I never stopped to question it. As a woman, I feel horrible that I have been thinking things that are degrading towards women, regardless of whether I felt offended or not.
You are also so right about Two and a Half Men. It is so crazy that the show has been allowed to go on for so long without much criticism.
Charlie Sheen #winning Everybody is following this man on twitter and the news. Charlie is just living his life. He is not a misogynistic man just a womanizer. If you treat your self like a two dollar hoe then you get two dollar hoe treatment. People are so quick to blame the man but never the woman, she let it go on. another thing you can’t educate ignorant people cause they are stuck in their ways. change is something they hate to see.
Two and A Half Man. i liked the show, i never paid attention to how it disrespected women.
Kristie,
I think most sexism is not based on hatred of women, but is based on a kind of assumed privilege or status among men that spans multiple cultures. Take for example the recent sexism displayed at an American Atheist discussion:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UBuYUJ4YCEI
Oh, you can no longer witness the sexism, because the video’s audio has been censored, what a surprise?
The point is, those guys didn’t understand they were being sexist, they did not seem to acknowledge their own exaggerated status in speaking on the matter; they did not acknowledge women’s voices in the audience. It was a matter of ignorance but not a matter of hatred toward women.
And I think sexism is widespread and mainstream, and probably 99% of men don’t realize that they still continue to assume a special status above women. It’s a massive problem within our culture that seems not to get addressed.
But misogyny is different and appalling and cannot be justified. Most men despise women haters, however these same men all suffer from a terrible ignorance about their own sexism.
Molé writes: “Despite the clear motivation of misogynist beliefs in the shooting …” I’m not sure I agree that Loughner was motivated by misogyny, or, if he was, that misogyny, or the widespread social acceptance of it, was the cause of the Giffords’ shooting. Loughner is a different sort than Gibson or Sheen. We can reasonably infer from Loughner’s online video postings and the accounts of his increasingly erratic behavior prior to and after the shooting that Loughner is very likely mentally ill. Beyond that, I’m not sure anyone, including Loughner, really knows what his motives were. My money is on an errant nervous system that could have been — SHOULD have been — controlled through medication and a more structured living environment . I realize this is something of an armchair diagnosis, but I can’t help seeing his bizarre and extremist political views, and his (apparent) hatred of women as a symptom of a deeper and underlying biological, not social, problem.
I also think that Molé’s argument regarding porn is too specific and yet too overly-general. There is much in mainstream society that is far more damaging to women than porn (or at least, most types of porn — the whole degradation and toilet seat sex thing goes beyond the pale for me): makeup, high heels, gender bias in the workplace, … in other words, I think he picks porn as an easy target to blame, but I think the problem that manifests itself in the kinds of pornography that is genuinely degrading to women is rampant in other, more acceptable publishing outlets as well. It’s just published on higher-quality paper and with better taste in clothing.
That said, Molé makes a valid point: guys are generally unaware of the damage that they cause women, even casually, and are usually very uncomfortable and defensive when it is pointed out to them (as Chris @ #24 handily demonstrates).
@ Egbert: I see the distinction you’re making now, and agree that that may be the case. Even my own beloved husband has a lot of trouble recognizing male privilege, even when he’s so obviously (to me) exercising it in the world.
That said, I still think that the root of both sexism and misogyny is the same: disrespect for women. Whether it is culturally inculcated and unconscious, or personally motivated and perfectly conscious, they are just different spots on the same slippery slope. As a woman, I guess I have a hard time dismissing thousands of years of institutionally imposed sexism, and the mental and physical violence it spawns, with a “Well, they don’t know any better.”
I don’t really think that’s a valid excuse anymore. We’ve had more than a hundred years of organized consciousness-raising on the revolutionary concept that women are valid human beings in their own right; men whom you suspect may not be consciously aware of their privilege sure seem to sense when it’s being threatened and fight tooth and nail to keep it. (Consider the rise of the whole Promise Keepers movement.)
It’s true that both men and women are products of their culture, and we all carry the baggage of that. However, I think it’s our duty as human beings to examine both the culture and the baggage critically, and determine whether it is serving us and our fellow human beings, and if not, make a change. It’s one thing to say that often men don’t recognize the damage they cause unthinkingly. It’s quite another to think ignorance excuses the damage, especially when women all over the world are trying to enlighten us all that it’s happening, every day, in small and large ways.
Kristie, I strongly agree with you. What are the Promise Keepers?
The Promise Keepers were (are?) a movement started by University of Colorado football coach Bill McCartney in the ’90s. It was a Christian movement that was supposed to help men take back the reins of being the guiding force in their family. It sounded pretty good, in that it encouraged men to take responsibility for themselves and their families, but a key tenant of the program was to have men sit down with their wives and apologize for having put their rightful responsibilities as men onto them, and take those back, allowing (and insisting) that women revert to their appropriate role, which was to be ruled by their husband, or at least, overruled, as his word was to be the final one. You don’t hear much about them anymore, but I still see bumperstickers, so I assume it still going on in some fashion. More info here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Promise_Keepers
Promise Keepers sounds incredibly creepy. The name alone makes me cringe.
I feel that misogyny is not invisible but that the leaders of our country and media companies make it seem that way. This is dangerous because the ads we see, products we buy, and shows we watch often show hatred and discrimination towards woman and in turn desensitize us to them and also allow us to act in those ways with no reprimand. There needs to be a change and no man will be the one to do it. Just like the fighting for women’s right to vote, we will have to stand together and fight to protect ourselves. We need to call out the companies and leaders that discriminate and are offensive towards women. We need to stop watching those shows, write letters to the companies, and voice our opinions.
In my opinion, I feel that misogyny is not at all invisible. The fact that we have so many groups and individuals fighting for women’s rights, people are aware of the problem. The problem is that the people who are not willing to help will do anything to make us women think we are fighting a never ending fight, which maybe they enjoy? I don’t know, but it disgusts me. As Carolina stated above, we all need to stand together and stand our ground, we deserve it. We need to keep pushing and pushing until we get our way and what we deserve, I mean hey, we are women right?
Wow..this article just baffles me because i did not realize how often misogyny gets looked over. Then the effect of over looking misogyny is a surprise to me too. Especially about men beating women through it. But, i see how that can happen. This article definately opened my eyes.
I found this article to be very true in the way it expresses society’s view of misogyny. The way in which our world views women is sickening, and I found this article very similar in views compared to Andrea Dworkin’s “I Want A 24-Hour-Truce During Which There Is NO Rape”. They both feel strongly about women being treated with respect, and I feel each example showed readers how women aren’t treated with respect in our world today. I enjoyed this article very much!
I thought this article was informative and crazy how misogyny gets so overlooked now. The way people are acting towards each other is mind blowing because we just let it happen and no one realizes it is happening anymore. Charlie Sheen is ridiculous how he is all over the tv and bragging about his drug addiction but like Mole said no one bothers to ask him about his repetitive abuse of women. The more I keep reading about these things the more I become aware of it in daily life. This article was great and really showed me how we just don’t think about it anymore and made me aware of this problem.
After reading this blog it blows my mind at how much hatred men show towards women, and knowing how many female children are killed annually in China because they are simply a female. However I do not believe that Misogyny has been invisible by any means, after watching Iron Jawed Angels in my WOST class it is clearly evident that men did not approve of women gaining equality. The me would spit, throw objects, and men police officers would even arrest the female protesters on BS counts such as obstructing traffic. I have never been able to understand how men can hold such hatred verse a female, when we as men came from a woman. Its like biting the hand that feeds you except worse.
My anecdotal story about how I realized just how misogynistic men are involves a friend of mine who would come over to complain about his wife. I’ve known both of them almost all their lives. He would sit on my couch complaining to his hermit bachelor friend (me) about how awful his wife was, when she was busy cooking all the food, raising their children and washing his clothes. I would sarcastically think to myself how hard it must be to have someone cooking and cleaning up after you and raising your children.
The real reason for his hostility I believe had little to do with his wife. I think it had to do with the fact that he felt trapped in his own life and economically squeezed and the first person he would vent his anger towards was his wife. I think misogyny is anger and hopelessness transferred towards the easiest target in one’s life. I believe it is enforced by what people intentionally seek out in popular media, in music or pornography or even in fundamentalist religious belief. People who feel powerless want to feel that they have power over something.
I think porn – isn’t innately mysoginistic. I think it is like most entertainment – a reflection on society as a whole. A bit like how we know racism is still around via the existance of a genre of porn dedicated to interacial fantasies. Porn, being the least acceptable form of entertainment, gets the least acceptable fantasies.
This is a great article. Thanks for writing it, seriously, a lot of this stuff needs to be said.
Thank you for writing this article! Some of those facts are astonishing. Especially the one about more women killed in the last 50 years then men in wars in the 20th century!
[…] don’t know the answer, but I suspect and fear that it boils down to Phil Molé’s point in “The Invisibility of Misogyny”: It’s not just the fact that misogyny is invisible that we need to face – it’s also the fact […]
[…] context where misogyny is so deeply entrenched that it can escape notice.As Phil Molé argues in ‘The Invisibility of Misogyny’:It’s not just the fact that misogyny is invisible that we need to face – it’s also the […]
Why is it that in all the information I’ve read on this subject, the focus is always on husband/wife or gf/bf relationships? What happens when the misogynist is a brother, father, workmate or boss? My brother is always denigrating women to the point that I avoid him whenever possible. After my parents passed away, he stood & watched my sister & I work our butts off cleaning, sorting, moving furniture & weeding the garden, but bluntly refusing to do his share to prepare the house for sale. This he did although being considerably younger and stronger than us, and devoid of the painful ailments of Arthritis etc., though he happily accepted the proceeds of the sale. My parents always doted on their only son after 3 daughters and a gap of seven years. My personal opinion is that they created a monster, a very unhappy, miserable monster at that.
Well done, an issue that needs to brought to light. The overall insidious nature is disturbing, along with this male allusion of masculinity, which in fact would slowly crush and consume most mens happiness. These are usually the same people who also feel the need to oztracise and put down other people.
Why?
The pressure of propaganda, our parents, our friends to succseed, and what is succsess? A career? A nice house? An attractive wife that you can fuck?
It’s nonr of these, succsess only comes from within, and those poor people blinded by t.v and mass media and think that they have to act a certain way in society. For these are the people who will wake up one morning in their 40’s and realize they work a job they hate, married a girl/guy who they don’t love and have kids they resent.
For ignorance is bliss, and the majority of society is euphoric.