# What is misogyny? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [April 15, 2013, 4:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-misogyny/655771 "2013-04-15T16:18:37Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 5
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2013, 1:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-misogyny/655771/81 "2013-04-18T13:25:19Z")
> [@pjnlsn](#): > > Misogyny is truth as women exist to serve men. > [@dropzone](#): > > Sir, I cannot adequately describe my reaction to your post in this forum. Nor is there any reason to keep talking about it in this forum instead of Great Debates or the Pit, where there are threads on this topic already. And **Shodan** , your example seems calculated to annoy - which also doesn’t belong in this forum. ---
**Author:** ![Renee\_RL](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/7c8e57/32.png) [@Renee\_RL](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Renee_RL)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2013, 1:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-misogyny/655771/82 "2013-04-18T13:28:43Z")
> [@Dangerosa](#): > > On the same topic, I get angry when anyone - including other women - tell women that they have some sort of responsibility to succeed in these fields - or any field. Feminism is about choices, not about having as many female CEOs as male CEOs or if there is a 50% 50% proportion at a tech conference. If I want to climb the corporate ladder only as far as ‘cube dweller’ or want to be an elementary school teacher or a nurse, or want to be a stay at home mom, those are my choices. If external forces are stopping women from becoming programmers - we need to address that - and if its internal forces - women would rather do something different, then that’s what women want. The idea here is not to turn women into men. When we give boys freedom to be nurses and stay at home dads we will all be liberated. As long as women’s roles are roles boys are discouraged from, there is still femiphobia ---
**Author:** ![Mijin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mijin/32/9369_2.png) [@Mijin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mijin)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2013, 1:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-misogyny/655771/83 "2013-04-18T13:49:51Z")
> [@Jragon](#): > > It’s not even always sexist so much as “has some norms and atmospheres that make it unappealing to women” (which I consider different, though might be hair splitting). Or of course, as a generalization, fewer women may find the subject itself interesting. If a sentiment like this is not sexist (and it’s not, IMO): > [@Peremensoe](#): > > women had distinct approaches to various kinds of tasks and solutions, and that these could be superior in their own right …then I don’t see why it would be sexist to say that perhaps the subject is of interest to a lower proportion of women than men? (btw: the quote was **Peremensoe** paraphrasing a particular feminist viewpoint rather than necessarily his/her own opinion) ---
**Author:** ![Dangerosa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/22d042/32.png) [@Dangerosa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dangerosa)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2013, 1:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-misogyny/655771/84 "2013-04-18T13:57:28Z")
> [@Prejteach2](#): > > When we give boys freedom to be nurses and stay at home dads we will all be liberated. As long as women’s roles are roles boys are discouraged from, there is still femiphobia I agree that men need the societal acceptance to follow their muse into traditionally female roles and that will help break down barriers. But I think it’s important that people get to define success for themselves. And I have no problem with the idea that since we need more people in STEM fields, we make those fields more attractive to a wider audience. But too often it’s sold as some sort of feminist or societal duty…we need more women in engineering, not we need to make engineering more attractive to more people. ---
**Author:** ![you\_with\_the\_face](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/ecccb3/32.png) [@you\_with\_the\_face](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/you_with_the_face)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2013, 1:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-misogyny/655771/85 "2013-04-18T13:57:35Z")
> [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](#): > > Someone else posted, basically, “Women should take better care of their safety.” I find that position really problematic as well, and there’s pretty good reason to analyze it as sexist, but it’s not misogynistic. Rather, it’s paternalistic. I have to applaud you for saying this, as well as your participation in the Pit threads that helped inspire this one. You and I have had our histories of squabbles, no doubt, but the fact that you seem to understand the rape issue like you do means that I have to respect your brain and integrity. I remember arguing with you and others in[this](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=608090&page=5) thread a couple years ago. After skimming that thread again, I found some of the comments in there (not from you but from others) a lot more disgusting than the stuff posted in recent days. What was even more more disappointing was the low number of men who saw fit to argue against these positions. But I’m glad that thread exists, otherwise we wouldn’t have such blatant evidence that there are folks among us who are rape apologists. I’m encouraged to see that it’s not just woman now who are challenging the sexist BS that mires discourse on rape prevention. More men are starting to see the light and are speaking up. Thanks for being one of them. ---
**Author:** ![Jragon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/e19b73/32.png) [@Jragon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jragon)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2013, 2:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-misogyny/655771/86 "2013-04-18T14:29:20Z")
> [@Mijin](#): > > Or of course, as a generalization, fewer women may find the subject itself interesting. > > If a sentiment like this is not sexist (and it’s not, IMO): > > …then I don’t see why it would be sexist to say that perhaps the subject is of interest to a lower proportion of women than men? > [@Dangerosa](#): > > I agree that men need the societal acceptance to follow their muse into traditionally female roles and that will help break down barriers. But I think it’s important that people get to define success for themselves. > > And I have no problem with the idea that since we need more people in STEM fields, we make those fields more attractive to a wider audience. But too often it’s sold as some sort of feminist or societal duty…we need more women in engineering, not we need to make engineering more attractive to more people. Well, the curious thing is that in 1985 37% of computer and IT grads were women, and the number of women declined by 79% between 2001 and 2008. In addition, there have been studies done to this effect, and it appears to just not be the case > [@](#): > > In this paper we focus on the process by which women students who enter with high enthusiasm and interest in computing quickly lose faith in their ability and their interest in the subject. We believe it is critically important to gather carefully rendered accounts of how these women students lose interest in computer science, particularly in light of the commonly-held belief that girls and women are not as “intrinsically interested” as males in technology. We look at the ways that interest in a subject area is influenced by factors beyond an individual’s intellectual preference for an abstract body of knowledge. We have found women’s departing statements that they are “just not interested” to be a misleading endpoint to a complex process we’ve seen over time, involving the interplay of gender-biased norms of interest and eroded confidence. We look at the mechanisms that promote a male focus of interest as the standard for success, while casting doubt upon women’s interest and ability in computing. > > […] > > Our data suggests that many of U.S. women who persist are ones who have found a way to get the grades they are satisfied with, are able to reconcile a different relationship to computing, and maintain confidence in the face of more experienced peers. They also conclude that they don’t have to measure themselves against the male norm of interest. For instance, a female student who plans on using computing to improve tutoring programs for children, described how she has refused to conform to the image of the myopically focused “computer geek” who “hacks for hacking’s sake.” And since she is “getting really good grades without changing myself” she is ever more confident that she can remain in the major and be herself. When the interviewer asks her if she feels a need to conform to the stereotype, she answers “I refuse to.” Then she adds: > > I was worried…will I need to conform to that? Will I need to read books on computers all of my free time or something to survive here? And I feel like so far I haven’t. I’m getting really good grades without that…without changing myself. So I feel much more confident now that I don’t have to. It’s kind of nice, I can prove them wrong or something. [The Anatomy of Interest: Women in Undergraduate Computer Science](http://www.cs.cmu.edu/afs/cs.cmu.edu/project/gendergap/www/papers/anatomyWSQ99.html) Further, atmosphere may contribute [Ambient Belonging: How Stereotypical Cues Impact Gender Participation in Computer Science](http://depts.washington.edu/sibl/Publications/Cheryan,%20Plaut,%20Davies,%20%26%20Steele%20(2009).pdf) (Some have used this study to suggest that we require professors to not make sci-fi references in lectures, tutorials, homework, etc (even very well known ones like Star Wars), and that having computer parts lying around drives off women. I say that’s throwing the baby out with the bathwater. Ah well.) But no, it’s not inherently sexist to ask the question “maybe they’re just not interested?” Unfortunately (or fortunately, depending on your point of view), that doesn’t seem to be the case, as evidenced by the fact that many try and quit, as well as the fact that they used to be just fine with it for whatever reason. I could go on for a while on other potential reasons and what I think of the proposed solutions, but this ain’t the thread. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2013, 2:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-misogyny/655771/87 "2013-04-18T14:39:07Z")
> [@you\_with\_the\_face](#): > > I remember arguing with you and others in[this](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=608090&page=5) thread a couple years ago. At the risk of opening up a can of worms, I still think that in certain contexts, advice on how to minimize the risk of rape is appropriate. I will certainly talk with my daughters about things they can do to keep themselves safe from a lot of different dangers in the world: food poisoning, civil unrest in countries they might travel to, communicable diseases spread by other people’s poor handwashing techniques, and yes, sexual assault. As their dad, I’m allowed to be paternalistic :). To the extent that other people in that thread suggested that advice on avoiding sexual assault was never appropriate, I still disagree with that position. (There’s a very real chance, of course, that I misunderstood in that thread and nobody held that position.) But lately what I’ve seen is women saying, “Don’t tell us something we’ve heard a thousand times already, and don’t tell us what we should have done after an assault, and don’t pretend that we can avoid rape entirely by taking common-sense measures.” And all of that is totally reasonable to me. ---
**Author:** ![Jragon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/e19b73/32.png) [@Jragon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jragon)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2013, 2:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-misogyny/655771/88 "2013-04-18T14:45:08Z")
Oh, also, a 1974 paper that I can’t link to entitled “Issues in Programming Management” purportedly claims (haven’t read it myself) that at that time close to 50% of programmers were women (though census data from around the same time said closer to 22.5%, still fairly high compared to what current levels of graduates would suggest if you assume that some graduates never enter the field despite their degree). ---
**Author:** ![you\_with\_the\_face](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/ecccb3/32.png) [@you\_with\_the\_face](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/you_with_the_face)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2013, 2:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-misogyny/655771/89 "2013-04-18T14:59:45Z")
> [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](#): > > To the extent that other people in that thread suggested that advice on avoiding sexual assault was never appropriate, I still disagree with that position. (There’s a very real chance, of course, that I misunderstood in that thread and nobody held that position.) If you can find one person on this board who has posted such a position, I will buy you a car. No BS. ---
**Author:** ![Jragon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/e19b73/32.png) [@Jragon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jragon)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2013, 3:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-misogyny/655771/90 "2013-04-18T15:05:26Z")
Man, you know it occurs to me, out of the blue with no provocation having not read any posts other than my own since 7:38 this morning that advice about avoiding sexual assault is never appropriate, even when talking to, say, your daughter. Yup, I definitely do think that. Edit: :eek::eek::eek: My! What a coincidence! You better send that vehicle to LHOD posthaste! So when do I get my cut? ---
**Author:** ![Mijin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mijin/32/9369_2.png) [@Mijin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mijin)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2013, 3:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-misogyny/655771/91 "2013-04-18T15:08:14Z")
> [@Jragon](#): > > Unfortunately (or fortunately, depending on your point of view), that doesn’t seem to be the case, as evidenced by the fact that many try and quit, as well as the fact that they used to be just fine with it for whatever reason. > > I could go on for a while on other potential reasons and what I think of the proposed solutions, but this ain’t the thread. FTR I would dispute that. I’ve worked with some great female software developers and my girlfriend is a DBA. But on the whole, women just do not often find software engineering or low-level roles very interesting IME, and it would take more than just that paper to convince me otherwise. The high number of comp sci graduates in 1985 I don’t think says very much either way. This field (if it can still just be called a field) has changed beyond recognition. But you’re right, this is a topic for another thread (a good topic I think). ---
**Author:** ![you\_with\_the\_face](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/ecccb3/32.png) [@you\_with\_the\_face](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/you_with_the_face)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2013, 3:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-misogyny/655771/92 "2013-04-18T15:14:57Z")
> [@Jragon](#): > > Edit: :eek::eek::eek: My! What a coincidence! You better send that vehicle to LHOD posthaste! > > So when do I get my cut? Ha! But my use of the past tense disqualifies your post. So no car for you! ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2013, 3:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-misogyny/655771/93 "2013-04-18T15:54:50Z")
> [@Frylock](#): > > The meaning of a word is not always the same as the intention that is conveyed. If I say “cats are reptiles,” what I said doesn’t mean snakes are reptiles, even if I _intended to convey_ that thought. Rather, what I said means cats are reptiles. Meaning and intended communication are distinct concepts. They often coincide in extension, but not always. Thanks for the completely meaningless nitpick, but it has nothing to do with anything. The intended communication is what we are talking about. > [@](#): > > Again, it _does not matter_ if you thought she was actually hoping you’d have sex with her. Indeed it does not matter if she _really did_ hope you’d have sex with her. If what the woman wants is irrelevant, then the examples posted of women giving reluctant consent, or saying nothing, when pressured for sex were not raped in any sense. Is that a conclusion you want to live with? After all, the only significant element is the meaning of what they said. If they didn’t say anything, they didn’t mean anything, “stop” included. Intended communication is not important and can be disregarded. Or take **Jragon** ’s “safe word” counter-example. “Anti-disestablishmentarism” is only significant for its common meaning. So go ahead with the whipping. Trying to sum up the complexities of the courtship dance into iron-clad binaries misses some of the point. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![Fotheringay-Phipps](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/d9b06d/32.png) [@Fotheringay-Phipps](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fotheringay-Phipps)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2013, 4:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-misogyny/655771/94 "2013-04-18T16:04:58Z")
> [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](#): > > But lately what I’ve seen is women saying, “Don’t tell us something we’ve heard a thousand times already, and don’t tell us what we should have done after an assault, and don’t pretend that we can avoid rape entirely by taking common-sense measures.” And all of that is totally reasonable to me. Assuming that people are actually telling them those things. ---
**Author:** ![Peremensoe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ce7236/32.png) [@Peremensoe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Peremensoe)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2013, 4:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-misogyny/655771/95 "2013-04-18T16:48:05Z")
> [@Prejteach2](#): > > Women filling well paying and powerful positions would be an “absolute failure of feminism” if they acted like men? The fact that they are in the same place speaks for the success of feminism. It’s a very limited kind of success, shall we say? Good for _those_ women, if they’re doing what they want to do and are good at. But I see feminism as being much deeper than the career aspirations of that small group. In the previous post I was not _precisely_ describing my own view, but it is one whose basic premise I agree with: women are both equal, in every moral sense, and distinct. While allowing for the immense variation of individuals, there are perspectives and aptitudes that belong more to women than to men, and our society benefits from the full expression of these. The problem with sexism is not that it distinguishes genders, but that it denigrates the attributes of one group relative to another, and binds members of both to the unequal expectations of the groups. So if individual women are _only_ able to break those strictures, and succeed in male-dominated areas, by ‘acting like men,’ that reinforces rather than tears down the prejudice that women qua women have no place in that field. It does little for the liberation of other women, or of men. ---
**Author:** ![Frylock](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/ce7236/32.png) [@Frylock](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frylock)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2013, 5:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-misogyny/655771/96 "2013-04-18T17:04:52Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > Thanks for the completely meaningless nitpick, but it has nothing to do with anything. The intended communication is what we are talking about. That is certainly not what I’ve been talking about. I do not think it is what “we” in this thread have been talking about. What is under discussion is the significance of an utterance of “no” as this concerns the prospective actions of the male in the scenario. The intended communication is irrelevant to what the male ought to do in the scenario. What is relevant is what is said. If she says “no,” it does not matter what she really wants, or what he thinks she really wants. What matters is what she said. She said “no,” and that is a withdrawal of consent. It does not matter what was intended or desired, what matters is what was said. A possible rejoinder: “So then if she says ‘yes’ but her body language indicates in every way that she doesn’t really want to have sex, should I have sex with her anyway?” The reply to this would be that the general principle is one of caution. If a “no” is accompanied by positive body language, the principle of caution recommends following what is said, and not what is unclearly indicated by nonverbal means. Meanwwhile, if a “yes” is accompanied by negative body language, the principle of caution recommends doubting the accuracy of what is said, at least until clarity is reached. The reason for following the principle of caution is simply the fact that violation of withdrawn consent to sex is a far, far worse thing than failure to follow up on an invitation to have sex. ---
**Author:** ![TriPolar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tripolar/32/3008_2.png) [@TriPolar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TriPolar)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2013, 5:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-misogyny/655771/97 "2013-04-18T17:07:08Z")
> [@Peremensoe](#): > > The problem with sexism is not that it distinguishes genders, but that it denigrates the attributes of one group relative to another, and binds members of both to the unequal expectations of the groups. I agree completely with this. Unlike many other -isms, there really are differences between men and women. Generic sexism would be nothing but the recognition of such, but by extending that to consider one group or the other superior outside of narrow specific criteria causes the problem. Women not wanting to be tech nerds is not a great concern, but regulations or attitudes which prevent women from becoming tech nerds would be a great problem. ---
**Author:** ![Peremensoe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ce7236/32.png) [@Peremensoe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Peremensoe)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2013, 5:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-misogyny/655771/98 "2013-04-18T17:08:18Z")
> [@Prejteach2](#): > > When we give boys freedom to be nurses and stay at home dads we will all be liberated. As long as women’s roles are roles boys are discouraged from, there is still femiphobia That’s right. At least, this would be a necessary _part_ of a full liberation from sexism. I would just add that the boys and men there must not be required to ‘act like women.’ If women can, potentially, make _distinct_ contributions outside traditionally-female roles (as opposed to simply taking positions that would have once gone only to men, without _changing_ anything), then the corollary statement about men must follow. ---
**Author:** ![Amara\_1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/7993a0/32.png) [@Amara\_1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Amara_1)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2013, 5:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-misogyny/655771/99 "2013-04-18T17:12:41Z")
> [@Jragon](#): > > But no, it’s not inherently sexist to ask the question “maybe they’re just not interested?” Unfortunately (or fortunately, depending on your point of view), that doesn’t seem to be the case, as evidenced by the fact that many try and quit, as well as the fact that they used to be just fine with it for whatever reason. > > I could go on for a while on other potential reasons and what I think of the proposed solutions, but this ain’t the thread. My anecdotal experience supports the former statement and I had some studies to back it up. I agree that this isn’t the thread though. ---
**Author:** ![Frylock](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/ce7236/32.png) [@Frylock](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frylock)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2013, 5:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-misogyny/655771/100 "2013-04-18T17:15:30Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > If what the woman wants is irrelevant, then the examples posted of women giving reluctant consent, or saying nothing, when pressured for sex were not raped in any sense. Is that a conclusion you want to live with? Doesn’t follow. Rape is sex without consent. Someone who has said nothing has not consented. As for “reluctant consent,” this phrase describes a variety of phenomena so I’d have to know exactly what kind of scenario is being discussed before I could make a judgment as to whether a rape was involved. (Relevant to this, see my previous post for a discussion of cases where an uttered “yes” is accompanied by negative body language.) > [@](#): > > Or take **Jragon** ’s “safe word” counter-example. “Anti-disestablishmentarism” is only significant for its common meaning. I have not said or implied that words’ significance is always only to be determined by their common meaning. Indeed, if a woman says explicitly before a bout of sexual activity, “When I say no I mean yes and when I say yes I mean no, got it?” then she has just made “no” the consenting utterance and “yes” the nonconsentiting utterance. In fact this is relevant to the scenario under discussion. When she invited him to her apartment, she said explicitly “I know this is often used as a signal of interest, but I am explicitly telling you right now that it is not such a signal in this case.” And he said he understood that. So even if there may have been “mixed signals” had she not said that, she _did_ say that, and thereby established exactly what she was communicating, absolutely clearly and explicitly. > [@](#): > > Trying to sum up the complexities of the courtship dance into iron-clad binaries misses some of the point. I know, because it makes it harder for guys to get away with things. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-misogyny/655771.md?page=4) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-misogyny/655771.md?page=6)