Excerpt of http://www.thornwalker.com/ditch/devlin_home_ec_01.htm:

...

First, a caveat: most critical discussions of feminism concentrate on refuting its doctrines, such as the ascription of feminine traits to upbringing rather than nature. My approach will be different. While such formal refutation of doctrines is not valueless, it seems to me to mistake the fundamental character of feminism. The feminist movement consists essentially not of ideas at all but of attitudes, or even mere emotions. Feminist "theory," as it is grandiloquently called, is simply whatever the women in the movement come up with in post facto justification of their attitudes and emotions. A heavy focus on feminist doctrine seems to me symptomatic of the rationalist fallacy: the assumption that people are motivated primarily by beliefs. If they were, the best way to combat an armed doctrine would indeed be to demonstrate that its beliefs are false. But in the case of feminism, even more than Marxism and other political ideologies, it is rather the beliefs that are motivated by various personal and nonrational needs. I propose, therefore, that feminism may be better understood through a consideration of the feminist herself.

A feminist in the strict and proper sense may be defined as a woman who envies the male role.

Misandry on Madison Avenue

by Marc H. Rudov

Moronizing & Marginalizing Men

Your spellchecker doesn’t recognize misandry, the hatred of men, because the developers at Microsoft, when creating Word, weren’t conscious of it. But, they sure knew about misogyny, right? HR sensitivity programs ensured that. Bashing women is so verboten in Corporate America that people can lose their jobs over it. Excoriating men, on the other hand, is so infused -- and apparently profitable -- that, like breathing, most people accept it without question. And, nowhere is misandry practiced more than on Madison Avenue, the advertising capital of the world, the source of the male-bashing TV commercial.

Today’s TV spots are moronizing and marginalizing men, with impunity. Why do they persist? Quite simply, most Americans -- including a lot of self-hating men -- approve. The genesis of every TV campaign begins by matching an advertiser’s sales objectives with an assumption about the zeitgeist. The advertiser bets that a TV campaign’s message will resonate with its targeted customers, who, hopefully, will respond by purchasing the promoted products or services. When earning my MBA at Boston University, I obviously missed the lecture on how to boost revenues of cameras and mutual funds by alienating men and fathers.

By Ross Mackenzie

After two generations of concern scrupulously focused on girls — their education in all its many manifestations, their alleged victimization by male dominance, their brain development, their sorrows and strengths and even the word employed to describe them (are they not, after all, young women?) — boys are coming in for new attention.

Applause, please. Yet at this late hour, with masculinity so politically incorrect, the task at hand is Augean.

Carey Roberts

Women Who Batter, Proudly

October 5, 2007 at 6:10 am

Chivalrous men resist the image, but it’s a problem that has become so pervasive that we must summon up the courage to face it – an epidemic of women who pummel their husbands and boyfriends.

More than half of women questioned at a Glasgow university said they approved of wives hitting their husbands.

Original article here

MISANDRY

THE HATRED OR OPPRESSION OF MALES

misandry (mis'-an'-dre') n. the hatred or oppression of males.

How man hating and man bashing harms women:
the making of a misogynist

Misogynists are not born they are made.

I still remember the first time I saw the feminist slogan "A woman without a man is like a fish without a bicycle." It was clearly intended to be a gesture of spitting in my face and telling me how useless and irrelevant I was as a male. I was offended, angry, and hurt.