Nathanson and Young

Paul Nathanson and Katherine K. Young are religious studies academics and co-researchers for a project funded by the Canadian government, Donner Canadian Foundation and the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council.cite web
url = http://www.marriageinstitute.ca/IM/presenters.html
title = Illuminiating Marriage conference - May 18-20, 2005
accessdate = 2007-12-21
work = Institute for the Study of Marriage, Law and Culture
archiveurl = http://web.archive.org/web/20060720092608/http://www.marriageinstitute.ca/IM/presenters.html
archivedate = 2006-07-20
quote = Bios for both Nathanson and Young.] cite web
url = http://www.mcgill.ca/news/2002/fall/alumnotes/
title = Alumnotes
accessdate = 2007-12-21
date = 2004-07-14
work = McGill News
publisher = McGill University
archiveurl = http://web.archive.org/web/20041023053256/http://www.mcgill.ca/news/2002/fall/alumnotes/
archivedate = 2004-10-23
quote = "PAUL NATHANSON, BA'68, MLS'71, BTh'78, PhD'89, began his academic career by writing "Over the Rainbow: The Wizard of Oz as a Secular Myth of America" ...] Results from the project are being published in a series of books on the subject of misandry, which the project is suggesting to be a form of prejudice and discrimination that has become institutionalized in North American society.

* "Spreading Misandry: The Teaching of Contempt for Men in Popular Culture" (2001)
* "Legalizing Misandry: From Public Shame to Systemic Discrimination Against Men" (2006)
* "Transcending Misandry" (upcoming)

These trilogy is collectively titled "Beyond The Fall Of Man". The book "Spreading Misandry" examines popular culture; "Legalizing Misandry" gives consideration to trends in law.

Concept of misandry

Nathanson and Young define their specific use of the word "misandry" as "a collectively shared and culturally propagated worldview, not a personal emotion such as dislike or anger." [cite book
title = Spreading Misandry
chapter = Introduction
url = http://mensightmagazine.com/Articles/Nathanson,%20Paul/022006.htm ] As a "culturally propagated worldview," misandry is thus, by definition, a form of sexism —
dualistic thinking analogous to other forms of prejudice such as racism, anti-semitism, and homophobia.Nathanson and Young say that there is "nothing new" about this mindset, "only the names have changed."Harv|Nathanson|Young|2001|p=007 "One specific group of people is identified as the threatening source of all suffering and another as the promising source of all healing. There is nothing new about this theory; only the names have changed. At various times ... nations, classes, and ethnicities have replaced religions as the representatives, or incarnations, of good and evil. Today that is true of the two sexes as well."] Nathanson and Young write "misogyny, unlike misandry, has been carefully monitored, declared politically incorrect, and publicly excoriated."Harv|Nathanson|Young|2001|p=xiii] They argue that "belief in the full humanity of men has been dangerously undermined by stereotypes based on ignorance and prejudice, just as that of Jews was.Harv|Nathanson|Young|2001|p=004]

They argue that men are stereotyped in various ways that dehumanize them, and that would be considered unacceptable if applied to other groups such as women and minorities.

Misandry in popular culture

In researching their book "Spreading Misandry", Nathanson and Young observed the following types of man-hating behavior, which they see as prevalent in popular culture

Laughing at Men

In this form of misandry, sexism is applied to popular forms of humor. Men are routinely made the objects of stereotypical ridicule in ways that would generate sustained outrage were the sexes reversed. Nathanson and Young note that feminists "may sometimes find it hard to laugh at themselves as feminists, though not as women, but seldom find it hard to laugh at men."

Looking Down on Men

What Nathanson and Young call "misandric" feminists "... have convinced many people that women are somehow superior to men". Like other groups, feminists interpret differences between the sexes as "an excuse to assign superiority and inferiority" in the usual hierarchical fashion.

Bypassing men

In this view, men are "not necessarily evil, just superfluous". Nathanson and Young give as example feminist writers like Andrea Dworkin, who urge as little contact as possible with men, separation of the sexes and indifference to men (rather than hostility toward men). Men are considered useless as lovers, husbands, fathers and as human beings.

Blaming Men

To blame men for all of human history, "gender-feminists" use the conspiracy theory of history to claim that "all of human history can be reduced to a titanic conspiracy" of men oppressing women. Nathanson and Young note that "evidence is often deliberately falsified to make (misandric) political claims about gender". The result is that "men are collectively or vicariously responsible for most or all of human suffering".

Dehumanizing Men

In this form of misandry, men are shown as inherently evil while women are seen as inherently good or even heroic. Men are highlighted as the evil predatory sex that preys on an innocent, morally superior sex as represented by women. In essence, men are considered morally unredeemable beasts while women are considered morally redeeming human beings.

In Nathanson and Young's critique of Disney's 1991 film Beauty and the Beast, while the "horrid Beast finally turns into a sweet prince," that "he is just another patriarchal villain for most of the story, a 'grouchy bison' who growls and snarls at everyone who fails to obey him instantly."Harv|Nathanson|Young|2001|p=161-165 "An example of this problem is Disney's acclaimed animated feature, "Beauty and the Beast" ... in which maleness is associated, both metaphorically and literally, with beastliness."]

Demonizing Men

Men are shown as demonic, like sinister subhumans and evil superhumans. Men are directly demonized by being portrayed as devils or as evil aliens. They are also demonized indirectly by being relentlessly identified with aggressive men whose actions "either are not or cannot be explained entirely or adequately to viewers in rational terms".

Misandry in law

Nathanson and Young devote their 2nd volume, "Legalizing Misandry", to identifying trends in law.

How misandry is hidden

Nathanson and Young believe that "many ordinary men have a vested interest in "not" seeing the pervasive misandry of everyday life". For a man to see himself as a victim of attacks by women he would have to acknowledge his vulnerability and therefore become less masculine. This creates a double-bind for men vis a vis confronting misandry because men "who admit to feeling vulnerable are attacked as cowards, and by no group more effectively than women". Nathanson and Young assert that women can easily shame men into silence, "a form of abuse that few women today would tolerate".

Thus despite what Nathanson and Young argue is a "massive assault" on men's identities, most men remain too confused to honor their unconscious knowledge that something is wrong. Most are not "equipped to identify or analyze" misandry. Those few men who are able to see misandry for what it is are rarely rewarded and are usually shamed for speaking about it in public.

According to Nathanson and Young, until very recently the "few feminists who dared to speak out against misandry were usually declared enemies of feminism, or even enemies of women, and thus effectively silenced." They state that "most feminists deny misandry" and that "when challenged" most feminists excuse, justify, and/or trivialize misandry. They note that "despite the vaunted capacity of women for empathy, only a few feminist publications, albeit ones of profound moral significance, have so far expressed sympathy for men in general, except as a way of encouraging men to believe that feminism is in their own interest".

Misandry and feminism

Nathanson and Young conclude that "one form of feminism—one that has had a great deal of influence, whether directly or indirectly, on both popular culture and elite culture—is profoundly misandric."Harv|Nathanson|Young|2001|p=xiv] They call this branch of feminism "ideological feminism."

Gynocentrism

Nathanson and Young argue that all schools of feminism are "gynocentric" (i.e. centered on the needs and concerns of women),Harv|Nathanson|Young|2001|p=xv] but that "being woman-centered, by definition, gynocentrism ignores the needs and problems of men."Harv|Nathanson|Young|2006|p=ix] In their view, gynocentrism doesn't necessarily to lead to misandry on its own, but "even though misandry is not an inherent feature of gynocentrism, it is an inherent "possibility."Harv|Nathanson|Young|2006|p=310] Nathanson and Young believe that gynocentrism can easily lead to misandry: "all it takes to produce misandry is the ideological proposition that 'they' are not merely irrelevant but inadequate or evil."

Ideological feminism

Nathanson and Young give two reasons for using the term "ideological feminism":

# to distinguish it from what they call "egalitarian feminism". Nathanson and Young argue that while egalitarian feminists "supported the reforms that had improved women's lives over the past century, they recognized that reforms carried too far were creating injustices for men and boys," and that "two wrongs, they agreed, did not make a right."Harv|Nathanson|Young|2006|p=xii]
# to "link ideological feminism with other political ideologies on both the political left and the political right." Nathanson and Young offer this characterization of what they call ideological feminism:

They describe features (besides dualism) of ideological feminism:

* Essentialism ("calling attention to the unique qualities of women")
* Hierarchy ("alleging directly or indirectly that women are superior to men")
* Collectivism ("asserting that the rights of individual men are less important than the communal goals of women")
* Utopianism ("establishing an ideal social order within history")
* Selective cynicism ("directing systematic suspicion only toward men")
* Revolutionism ("adopting a political program that goes beyond reform")
* Consequentialism ("asserting the beliefs that ends can justify means")
* Quasi-religiousity ("creating what amounts to a secular religion")

Nathanson and Young argue that ideological feminism has been influential in spreading misandry, or in making it acceptable to exploit misandric ideas that already existed.

The debate over institutionalized misandry

Other writers argue like Nathanson and Young that misandry is a feature of Western culture.

In "Why Men Are The Way They Are", Warren Farrell devotes a chapter to what he calls the "new sexism", sexism against men,cite book |last= Farrell |first= Warren |authorlink= Warren Farrell |title= Why men are the way they are |publisher= Berkeley Books |location= New York |year= 1985 |id= ISBN 042511094X] which he later began calling "misandry."cite book |last= Farrell |authorlink= Warren Farrell |first= Warren |title= Women can't hear what men don't say |publisher= Tarcher |location= New York |year= 1999 |id= ISBN 087477988X] Many members of the men's rights movement criticize misandry, such as Glenn Sacks.

Responses to Nathanson and Young

Criticism

In book reviews, Nancy Lewis-Horne (sociologist, SUNY) and Dorothy E. Chun (sociologist, Simon Fraser University) argue that the books have several flaws:

Lack of theoretical connection

Quote| [C] ontrary to the authors’ comment that work on gender means work about women, there is an excellent literature examining the social construction of masculinity.|Nancy Lewis-Horne|The Canadian Review of Sociology and Anthropologycite web |url=http://www.csaa.ca/CRSA/BookReview/Reviews/200311/200311NATHANSON.htm |title=Book Review PAUL NATHANSON and KATHERINE K. YOUNG, Spreading Misandry |accessdate=2007-01-06 |last=Lewis-Horne |first=Nancy |work=The Canadian Review of Sociology and Anthropology |publisher= Canadian Sociology and Anthropology Association
archiveurl=http://web.archive.org/web/20060221214150/http://www.csaa.ca/CRSA/BookReview/Reviews/200311/200311NATHANSON.htm
archivedate=2006-02-21
quote= I am not convinced that misandry is a pervasive cultural pattern.]

Quote| [B] ecause they are making moral arguments, they are free to make blanket, unreferenced assertions, such as the following: "Some people are aware of misandry but fervently believe that hatred toward men should be regarded as a legitimate exception to the general rule against hatred toward other groups".|Dorothy E. Chunn |Canadian Journal of Family Lawcite journal
quotes =
last = Chunn
first = Dorothy E.
year = 2007
title = Book Review: Paul Nathanson and Katherine K. Young, "Legalizing Misandry: From Public Shame to Systemic Discrimination Against Men"
journal = Canadian Journal of Family Law
volume = 23
issue = 1
pages = 93–103
url = http://faculty.law.ubc.ca/cdnjfl/art/2312007.html
format = fee required
accessdate = 2007-04-15
quote = "Legalizing Misandry" is an exemplar of reaction and resistance to feminism as the turn of the twenty-first century. ]

Inconsistencies in methodology

Failure to demonstrate misandry on a structural level

"Legalizing Misandry" notes that criticisms of methodology beg the question, since "Spreading Misandry" was "based primarily on moral arguments,"Harv|Nathanson|Young|2006|p=347] not sociological methodology, and urge that "Someone in the social sciences should do this research."Harv|Nathanson|Young|2006|p=438]

Praise

Charlotte Hays (editor, "The Women's Quarterly") and Jean Bethke Elshtain (neoconservative feminist political philosopher) note the quality of the analysis, and seriousness of issue.

Irrefutable

Quote| [T] hey provide straightforward and insightful discussions of many individual programs and films ... no esoteric analysis of the copious examples cited is required to demonstrate clearly that in popular television programs and films, men are routinely ridiculed, demeaned, demonized in ways that would not be tolerated if applied to women.... What they have done ... is present a basic argument that I believe is irrefutable: popular culture today is saturated with misandry.|Charlotte Hays|The Journal of Men's Studies [cite journal
last = Hays
first = Charlotte
year = 2003
title = The worse half
journal = The Journal of Men's Studies, Men's Studies Press, LLC.
volume = 11
issue = 3
pages = pp. 340–342
format = fee required
url = http://mensstudies.com/newlook/online/archive/toc/toc.php?id=81
quote = "Spreading Misandry" is an innovative and courageous book that focuses on an important phenomenon in contemporary culture that has been systematically ignored by virtually all academic authors and all but a few scholars and public intellectuals who aim their work at a general audience. ]

Impressive

Quote|The evidence they have amassed is impressive and concerning. ... Anyone who cares about the human goods of justice and equality should take note. ... Nathanson and Young do not find attractive a society that makes ugly assumptions about half of its members. None of us should.|Jean Bethke Elshtain|The Times Literary Supplementcitation
last = Elshtain
first = Jean Bethke
title = Legalizing Misandry
newspaper = The Times Literary Supplement
year = 2007
date = 30 March ]

Intelligent and insightful

Elshtain notes a threat to women's impartiality, "women now have a very heavy investment in the rhetoric of victimhood", and reflects that, "ideological feminists cannot unambiguously celebrate ... recent decades".

References

Citations

Bibliography

*citation
last = Nathanson
first = Paul
author-link = Nathanson and Young
last2 = Young
first2 = Katherine R.
author2-link = Nathanson and Young
title = Spreading Misandry: The Teaching of Contempt for Men in Popular Culture
series = Harper Paperbacks
year = 2001
publisher = McGill-Queen's University Press
place = Montreal
isbn = 9780773530997
*citation
last = Nathanson
first = Paul
author-link = Nathanson and Young
last2 = Young
first2 = Katherine R.
author2-link = Nathanson and Young
title = Legalizing Misandry: From Public Shame to Systemic Discrimination against Men
year = 2006
publisher = McGill-Queen's University Press
place = Montreal
isbn = 9780773528628

External links

*cite web
url = http://mensightmagazine.com/Articles/Nathanson,%20Paul/022006.htm
title = Introduction to "Legalizing Misandry: From Public Shame to Systemic Discrimination Against Men"
accessdate = 2007-12-26
last = Nathanson
first = Paul
coauthors = Young, Katherine K.
date = 2006-05-09
work = Mensight Magazine
publisher = The Men's Resource Network
pages =
language =
doi =
* [http://mqup.mcgill.ca/browse_archives.php?catalogue=3&page=3 Review] of "Spreading Misandry" at publishers website.
*Peter Kocan, [http://quadrant.org.au/php/article_view.php?article_id=392 Review] of "Spreading Misandry" in "Quadrant" 47 (2003).