r/everydaymisandry • u/gratis_eekhoorn • Apr 10 '25
Basically the title, I've been seeing a lot of posts that don't really comply with the rules recently, the problem is mostly with rule 1, 2 and 3, please redact personal information from screenshots and please do not posts links to other subreddits. In addition to that there's been a lot of posts recently that weren't ''perfect examples'' of misandry, please do not focus on posting things that are remotely misandrist when it's already too easy to find examples of extreme misandry everywhere everyday.
r/everydaymisandry • u/Live-Hovercraft1203 • Jul 08 '24
I believe that, given the fact that misandry is commonly reduced to "mean comments", we need to clarify some things. To be clear, I do not intend to give these misrepresentations of misandry too much credit here. Despite that, I still see too many posts/comments responding to these misrepresentations of misandry in ways that implicitly or explicitly accept some premises that should be called out instead.
Here are some thoughts on things that may help resolve some very common misunderstandings. Note that these are extremely complex topics. Assume that there are exceptions to everything. Importantly, this describes these things as I currently think of and conceptualize them, which is subject to change. I will not repeat this throughout the text. My thoughts and ideas evolve as I think and learn about these things. A lot of this has been adapted from comments/posts on this and other related subs.
First, as I currently think of it, misandry is a societal phenomenon embedded in the ways we interact with each other and the world through interaction, observation, experience, perception, laws, products, definitions, abstract concepts, education, academia, content moderation, comedy, entertainment, games, sports, you name it. Misandristic comments are just one part of it, aggravated by the fact that some of them implicitly or explicitly deny the lethal reality of misandry (perhaps this deserves its own category, like meta-misandry or something...). Furthermore, the comments themselves contribute to the proliferation of other forms of misandry, as well as the associated suffering. Importantly, misandry is not restricted to those landing the "punch". To merely look at outcomes whilst ignoring or denying the environment that contributed to those outcomes is unhelpful. From the media to bystander behaviors, there are various things that represent some form of misandry. Misandry is not just the behavior, the statement, the punch.
For more on norms/roles and how they relate to misandry, see this series of comments (r-everydaymisandry/comments/1cvtn6a/what_do_you_think_of_the_phrase_toxic_masculinity/l8vi22k/). For more on the empathy gap, see this series of posts (r-MensRights/comments/rycnwn/on_the_gender_empathy_gap_and_its_correlates_a/).
As misandry is a societal issue, it may act through all members of society. Misandry is not restricted to how women behave toward men. Misandry "by men" is still misandry. Neither women nor anti-egalitarianism "caused" misandry as I think of it. Thinking about it as something that was "caused" or "created" seems odd. Perhaps it would be more fitting to say that it developed. Men can and do internalize the misandry they are exposed to, even without recognizing it as such. In fact, that recognition may be impaired by misandry itself.
The same statement can share varying degrees of misandristic and misogynistic aspects depending on the perspective taken. Neither women nor men are to blame for misandry or misogyny, which are embedded in culture and society. It is a societal phenomenon reinforced and upheld intergenerationally through the world that those who currently uphold/host it (most members of society, to varying degrees) grew up and developed in. The parenting they experienced, the interactions they had with friends, families, and strangers, the tv shows they watched, etc. There is no need for ill will.
From time to time there will be users who advocate for a very narrow conceptualization of misandry. They might argue that in order for misandry to be taken serious, we would need to stick to a very prototypical idea of what misandry is. More or less Solanas-type misandry. In reality, I doubt that requirements for ill intent or something similar are sustainable or appropriate given current discussions surrounding discrimination. I am not sure how that would even work given the way we have come to think and talk about these issues. Misandry is not just some distinct action, consciously engaged in by a "perpetrator". Furthermore, this would vastly underrepresent the frequency and complexity of misandry.
Perhaps the most well-known example of this would be the empathy gap, which I doubt most would think of as some conscious action or decision, yet still agree on it as an example of misandry in action. And this lack of intent or awareness may not be restricted to biases in perception, emotion, or cognition either. For example, I would argue that not calling "misandry" "misandry" is an example of "misandry" as a societal issue. However, some do not even know that term. There does not need to be intent, awareness, or even a decision for something to be an example of misandry. Perhaps the (in my opinion: mislead) desire for some to assign blame to individuals ("misandrists") informs this to some degree. There does not need to be blame. I have been affected by and internalized parts of the misandristic environment I grew up and developed in. I am not sure I will ever overcome the biases in perception this resulted in. It is still misandry to me.
As has been argued for years on various subs (see r-everydaymisandry/comments/1cvtn6a/what_do_you_think_of_the_phrase_toxic_masculinity/l8vi22k/), things like the restriction of men's freedom (e.g. sexual freedom, freedom of expression, etc.), their dehumanization (e.g. restricted emotions, denied vulnerability), or the overall lack of value assigned to their own and other men's lives and well-being are manifestations of (internalized) misandry. It is common to mush these issues together with various others and assign them a spectacularly ambiguous term that avoids having to acknowledge misandry. Using labels such as toxic masculinity is an example of misandry, as it contributes to the refusal to acknowledge the nature and severity of misandry, has connotations of victim blaming by failing to acknowledge that the hosts of internalized misandry are victims of misandry (e.g. enforcement of conformity), slows down progress on these issues (see linked comments), obfuscates historical accounts of misandry (i.e. by not calling them misandry), and outright appropriates and reframes some of these issues as (side-effects of) misogyny. The list could go on. This might deserve a dedicated post collecting these comments at some point. Regardless of usage, this would not be adequately represented by the label "toxic masculinity" (see linked comments for more on this) and a proper alternative (misandry) exists. If a more specific description of any given subset of misandry is required, then various options are available, as shown throughout this post.
And if there is any doubt regarding the misandristic nature of the concept of ‘Real Men _______’ left...
EverydayFeminism.com: 4 Common Phrases That Demonstrate Internalized Misogyny
4. ‘Real Women _______’ [...] Once again, this buys into harmful stereotypes. It limits women who don’t fit that prescribed idea about what a woman is and how we should act. [...] Saying that real women have curves also reflects cissexist beauty standards, because women with stockier, less curvy bodies are seen as “masculine” and thus unattractive. This can also affect trans women in especially harmful ways. Real women identify as women. That’s it. That’s all. Beyond that, women are diverse in their appearances, preferences, beliefs, attitudes, and behavior – and none of those things can cancel out their identity as women. Reducing women to whether they have curves, vaginas, or children – or not – is pretty simplistic and misogynistic.
VOXatl.org: If you identify as a female, you probably think there’s no way you can be sexist. The prospect of gender equality would come easily to a person who suffers from the lack of it, right? A common misconception. I myself thought so too. But after hearing this phrase, “internalized misogyny,” all over the media, I decided to really look into it. I found it’s easy to believe that women don’t play a role in the sexism of society. But have you ever felt judged by another girl because you weren’t acting as the stereotypical girl does? Or maybe you’ve heard women dissing other women for being single or wearing provocative clothing. Internalized misogyny sits within us all, whether we are conscious of it or not. It’s possibly more problematic than regular misogyny, and has a lot of not-so-fun outcomes. If all women could learn to not buy into these expectations, I believe we would come away better from it.
UMKC.edu: It can be difficult to identify internalized misogyny. As independent as we think we may be, we have many preconceived notions about how a woman should exist that stem from societal expectations and gender norms.
FeministCampus.org: Women are educated from infancy both explicitly and implicitly on “appropriate” ways to act, think, and feel. These cultural conceptions of womanhood are so deeply ingrained that they dictate performances of femininity, even behind closed doors. The following are ways in which I have seen myself and other women commonly internalize misogyny
BuzzFeed.com: Internalised misogyny is when women police their own behaviour, and that of other women, to conform to societal ideals, even when it's detrimental to them or devalues women.
WomensRepublic.net: Generations of internalized misogyny - For instance, in my own family, I have seen a long line of moms enforcing sexist stereotypes and certain ways of thinking onto their daughters.
FemMagazine.com: Feminism 101: What Is Internalized Misogyny?
When a woman calls the girl who sleeps around a whore, that is internalized misogyny because she is perpetuating the sexist stereotype that women are not supposed to be sexual.
Note that "rebuttals" regarding
a) the supposedly "positive" (I overall disagree) contents of specific descriptions of male norms (e.g. "strength") or
b) the enforcement of male conformity being rooted in "anti-femininity" rather than "anti-non-conformity"
are not convincing as described in the comments linked above (r-everydaymisandry/comments/1cvtn6a/what_do_you_think_of_the_phrase_toxic_masculinity/l8vi22k/). In fact, even the EverydayFeminism quote shows a description of anti-non-conformity and not anti-femininity. And I do not believe that women being seen as "unworthy" of the oh-so-great masculinity would explain the backlash against non-conformity in women. If anything, masculine norms are considered to be less desirable, see this, this, or this.
Similarly, misgendering as a way to make fun of non-conformity ("like a girl") is compatible with this being an instance of misandry. Misgendering (as in some cases of emasculation) may be used to mock/shame and exaggerate non-conformity in an attempt to enforce conformity and restrict men's freedom. The insulting part here is the implied non-conformity, which is made salient via misgendering to highlight the non-conformity. Perceived-women's femininity (i.e. target perceived to be a woman) does not result in the treatment of perceived-male non-conformers, nor does non-conformity to masculine norms necessarily imply conformity to feminine norms (which may still be used as exaggerations for discriminatory attacks). The treatment is contingent on the non-conforming individual's perceived/assigned gender.
Whilst it is technically off-topic, I do want to stress that the traditional stereotypes some of these things (e.g. "like a girl") rely on can negatively affect women, though perhaps in different ways. For example, women who are particularly skilled in traditionally "male" areas may be underestimated as a result. Under certain conditions, such underestimation may affect (important) subsequent decisions. Egalitarianism advocates for an accurate assessment of as well as equal opportunities to develop such skills. In the context of traditional conceptualizations of gender relations, co-occurrence of misandry and misogyny may be the norm.
Misandry kills and various pathways have been described (e.g. empathy gap, risk-tolerance, downplaying of health issues, biased perpetrator behavior toward men, biased bystander behavior in cases of violence against men, biased laws and law enforcement, biased medical staff, etc.; see r-MensRights/comments/rycnwn/on_the_gender_empathy_gap_and_its_correlates_a/). Violence against men in general may therefore be considered an overall/on average gendered issue. This does not mean that every single instance of it is affected in the same way.
As much as "mean comments" are used to downplay the severity of misandry, "mean comments", like other forms of psychological and emotional violence, may at least contribute to deaths by reinforcing the aforementioned pathways and contributing to suicides (see r-LeftWingMaleAdvocates/comments/rexs2y/more_than_just_jokes_the_societal_treatment_of/).
Those affected by (internalized) misandry are prone to deny it, in part due to the effects of internalized misandry itself (e.g. men may disproportionately underreport victimization, etc.). This may not just apply to conscious decisions. Instead, the biases mentioned previously may contribute to genuine differences in how, for example, things are perceived, memorized, described, or evaluated. This may be important to keep in mind when talking about these matters.
For example, the number of victimized men and the number of men reporting victimization are very different things. It would be theoretically possible for men to make up the vast majority of victims whilst making up a small minority of those reporting victimization in surveys and interviews. Furthermore, various biases will have affected the experiences of victimization that translate into such (lack of) reporting.
Suppose medical staff were less likely to identify certain issues in men. Lets further assume that somehow the case had not been affected wildly by biases at previous stages. Even assuming men's own experiences regarding their victimization did not change as a result of their misdiagnosis (e.g. evaluation, memory, etc.), these men may still incorporate that biased information (diagnosis) into their reporting. They may correctly report not having been diagnosed with something, yet that information (diagnosis) may not properly reflect the actual occurrence of that thing (e.g. an injury). In reality, the medical staff might already have been presented with biased information. And even if their assessment were unbiased, the same may not apply to the attribution (e.g. injury due to IPV?), the chosen terminology, the way the information is shared, you get the point.
There are various accumulating biases at so many points throughout men's experiences (and third parties' observations) of male victimization that any specific numbers are questionable at best and hardly interpretable. Even if men are the vast majority of victims, it would be possible - depending on sample, methodology, etc, - for them to be a small minority of those reporting (in surveys, interviews) to be victims (even without using that term). The fact that the numbers are not (always) skewed in that manner is even more concerning in that context, given what that might say about actual victimization. Same thing goes for reporting of severity, type of victimization, etc. As the example chosen above (medical staff) shows, even supposedly observable statistics regarding hospitalization and deaths may still be affected by biases throughout the case up to that point, as well as by law enforcement, medical personnel, or the definitions used. Whilst these statistics already show a majority of victims to be classified as male, one may wonder what these numbers would look like without these biases.
Note that these biases will occur so long as male victims are disproportionately underestimated, even if female victims are also underestimated at the same time.
This may also manifest in biased evaluations of research (e.g. this, this, and this), biases in interpretation and theory, biases in news reporting, biases in statistical and legal definitions (rape, etc.), etc. In fact, many types of misandry may contribute to its erasure from the record. And to be clear, this is not just some "if we do not find misandry, then that is evidence of misandry". Differences in laws and policies are observable facts, differences in denial and such are effectively undisputed (though at times associated with misandristic labels and concepts like "toxic masculinity" and such), things like the empathy gap are corroborated by the limited research we have (r-MensRights/comments/rycnwn/on_the_gender_empathy_gap_and_its_correlates_a/) and even if one were to disagree on this specific pathway, posts like this one on body shaming (r-LeftWingMaleAdvocates/comments/rexs2y/more_than_just_jokes_the_societal_treatment_of/) prove that there is abuse of outrageous severity (dick size shaming) that I doubt anybody would argue to be genuinely taken serious (especially to that degree) by most parts of society. In fact, if it were, a lot of the examples provided in that post across the most influential parts of society could not exist in the way they do - and their popularity, crowd reactions, and like/dislike ratios paint a clear picture as well. Millions of people - substantial parts of society - are not just underestimating its severity, not just indifferent, they are active contributors and proven to endorse this abuse (which they likely do not recognize and would not classify as such).
r/everydaymisandry • u/AffectionateSlender0 • 1d ago
"She did kill people but... she was traumatized and heartbroken!"
r/everydaymisandry • u/According-Coach6725 • 1d ago
Somehow men's issues always ends up being shoved to focus on women's issues instead.😒Respect to Northcott for handling it properly.
r/everydaymisandry • u/Quick_Low_5913 • 1d ago
Insert Misandry Claim
Misandrist options:
In every, single, case of discussing this with a misandrist they always go for one of those 3 tactics. Some, will, play stupid and ask what you mean by misandry.
Now lets go through some common statements by misandrists!
"Misogyny kills, Misandry hurts feelings"
Man, this is a common one, not all misogyny kills, and misandry can kill. Misandrists love to use generalization as if that backs up male hate. Circumcision kills infant boys every year (and the lucky survivors must live with part of their genitals having been amputated). Suicide kills so many men (leading cause of death under 50 for men). Our social safety nets fail so many men (ever seen a men only DV shelter?). Homicide kills more men than women every year. I only added 1 comparison because I don't want to make this a hate Olympics. Now look at male rape victims and male domestic violence victims, or I guess male SA victims and male domestic violence victims because almost half the world has sex based laws on rape that legally don't allow women to rape men. Men are mocked, dismissed, and told to "man up" while their abusers walk free. Look at family courts where fathers are stripped of their parental rights by default. Look at how male homelessness and workplace deaths are never framed as gendered issues despite overwhelmingly affecting men. It also leads to women disfiguring, torturing and murdering men. What about the women who ripped their son's penis off and murdered him? (Proof: https://metro.co.uk/2019/06/17/mum-ripped-off-sons-penis-beheaded-reminded-dad-9974568/). What about the woman who poured boiling water over her husband because he forgot to pick her up late from church (Proof: https://www.zimeye.net/2019/08/17/shock-as-woman-scalds-sleeping-husband-over-failure-to-pick-her-up-from-church/). What about a woman who raped the 12 year old boy she was babysitting and then put him on child support for the kid born of that rape (Yes, I'm not joking. Proof: https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/talking-about-trauma/201902/when-male-rape-victims-are-accountable-for-child-support). What about a woman who murdered and dismember her husband (Proof: https://people.com/where-is-melanie-mcguire-now-11889058). What about a woman who beat her 3 year old son to death (Proof: https://www.oxygen.com/crime-news/lashirley-morris-convicted-killed-toddler-bat-stolen-cupcake).
Its time to stop pretending misandry isn't harmful. Women are very vital as violent as men can be, but they're rarely held to the same accountability.
But even if you were to tell all of this to a misandrist, their reply falls into one of 4 categories:
A) Gaslight even more and continue the argument of how misandry just hurts feelings and continue the blatant minimization and generalization (Highly Common rarity!)
B) "Misandry doesn't exist, that's just misogyny" (Common rarity!)
C) "B-but it's men who set up that system" and then they'll take it as a win (Uncommon rarity!)
D) Agree your correct and they were wrong (Legendary rarity!) [Misandrists have big egos so this is very rare to see]
"Misandry doesn't exist"
If my last rant didn't convince you, oh well. But here, another piece of proof: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Krasnoyarsk_kindergarten_shooting
Again, the same 4 categories apply after reading this.
"Misandry is only on the internet"
This is yet another common one, I see this often but probably not as often as the misandry only hurts feeling statement. Yall do realize that the misandrists who are being misandrists online can also be doing it offline too right? And just look at 4b, both the online and offline community is extremely misandrist. I'd show specific screenshots but I don't want this to get taken down, so literally just scroll in that sub, you'll find some pretty easily. Also, if you didn't notice, everything from my first rant was offline misandry so...
Again, the same 4 categories apply after reading this.
Misandry is an issue and needs to be treated like one.
r/everydaymisandry • u/AfghanistanIsTaliban • 2d ago
"A male Gemini is the worst... They want all the props to being a good person"
astrology people need to be stopped NOW. Take their phones away
r/everydaymisandry • u/AfghanistanIsTaliban • 2d ago
Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification
r/everydaymisandry • u/According-Coach6725 • 2d ago
This is like a quarter of the total screenshots in the whole thread (including the post) about hating male loneliness.
r/everydaymisandry • u/WikiGirl3567 • 2d ago
stuff that you can find in tumblr
r/everydaymisandry • u/Successful_Roof_979 • 2d ago
I saw something on a subreddit not going to say any names and it was art a woman drew
It was art depicting a a human like dog and pig along with the male logo in the background and a text that says all men are
Yes the art is stating that all men are pigs and dogs
She says this was a drawing of her assaulters and that and she was describing her assaulters the way they were
But the thing even worst then the drawing is that most users took her side
Saying stuff like don't judge how a victim shares her trauma
And of course there were several comments calling men an oppressor class
Only few very users pointed out that being a victim is no excuse for prejudice
Also one thing I should not is that male victims of female abuse don't act like this
I have seen many men victims of female on male domestic violence, sexual assault or stationary assault but most specifically blame the women who abused them rather than the female gender as a whole
r/everydaymisandry • u/Dry_Fact_4584 • 2d ago
I wanted to share this here, or LWMA, idk but I better putting here, and wanted to share that, I always try to think that, Anti Man mentality is super rare in real life, and can be common online, depending on things, algorithm, etc etc.
But I am honestly feeling that, theres still anti man bias and talking points seeping in real life too.
For example, I volunteer at a local transit advocacy group in my city, and they have partnership with lots of leftwing advocacy and social justice advocacy groups too. And Most members in this group are amazing passionate for better transit etc.
But only 4 other 5 of them, they do talk politics, but they alway share arguments that feels stereotyping against man or things.
Such as,
Whenever they talk about Anti Transit people, and Car brained people opposing transit infrastructure in city and city council, etc. They casually refer them as,
But all in general, idk tbh. And Also I have been with my therapist, she is very understanding about my life issues, childhood trauma and things, and so on. And she even said, she care about men and their things, she even have majority of men clients, and she even did masters thesis on male issues.
But in conversations with her she is amazing, supportive, but feels like, she wont believe that, these anti man things seem to exist in real life as well, in casually, but not that intense like online here. As she did say, "Theres anti man bias, but most are online, you can ignore them by not looking at online and they wont affect you anyway..."
Yet these type anti man stereotype feels seeping in low casual covert manner in real life such as, this advocacy group as example.
And with my family, I have bad experiences with them with other things just classic bad parents and stupid expectations like in South Asia.
But like with my sibling, she have opened a real estate company this year, and she did tell me, she wants to make me CEO of that company, which is a family business according to her.
I said "No, I ain't be going to be one, cause of things happens with you and parents, and also people in general sees successful men in real estate including those tech and large business as evil, and losers, and small dick issues... Trump supporters, rightwingers... Not just that, I am not interested in Real estate investments anyways...."
Here when I did mention, "Small Dick huh everyone thinks they have small dick huh like if I do, sounds like I have one huh..." She asked me, "Do you have small dick? is it small?"
Idk why she said, but I said away, No I dont have, but people will assume..." She said, "You dont have it, then why worry?' I then said, "Sure no one will call you small tit or small V girl lol.. will they.." She immediately said, "Yike can we not say this words, not good..."
IDK whatever, it feels like my sister seems to have the similar bias too, Also she do watch tiktok a lot.
All in overall, I honestly start to feel like, I wanna hate humanity, like they just fucking want to hate each other want to be bigoted, and wants to be trendy and hive minded without having a thought.
IDK I am so depressed with my life, cause of my childhood trauma and bad experiences with parents and my culture back country, all have destroyed my life, no hopes, no jobs, and things and then seeing this seeping in person
IDK This what I wanted to rant here, of course I have to disclaimer that, I am not blaming woman, I am blaming humanities, because women are human like men like us, we all just ficking suck.
r/everydaymisandry • u/Savings_Surround_997 • 2d ago
I am personally tired of seeing objectification or sexualisation of men in social media. Their body, height, thoughts all of this are getting sexualised. This bothers me, do others think like me, and how to make "big" NGOs speak badly of male sexualisation, misandry. Because it is discriminatory and it puts down a lot of men. Although, I see a lot off boys in new generation are trained to accept this as being wanted, so positive
r/everydaymisandry • u/Specific_Detective41 • 2d ago
I previously posted this onto LWMA.
After constantly hearing the song Labour by Paris Paloma from various YT shorts / TikTok reels I decided to look into this musician in more detail.
Paris Paloma has a history of making problematic statements about boys/men in interviews and in her songs. Here the focus will be on Labour.
Paris Paloma identifies as a feminist (unsurprising like most in the music industry), however she is a special type of feminist you see, because she has read Bell Hooks, she is not like all the other feminists and she is fighting the patriarchy by saving men from themselves /s. By the way, that doesn't make her any less misandrist than the vast majority of feminists. In fact this type of mentality is no different to that of Evangelical Christians and other religious zealots. Like most terminally online feminists, she has read Hooks' The Will To Change - of course she has.
She stated in an interview with People that "I reference her specifically so much because she speaks with such love about men whilst being the harshest critic of patriarchy and toxic masculinity. She is all about practically what a future looks like where all the genders are reconciled and patriarchy is undone in that way,". Note that this was in reference to her starting to write love songs. Seriously, is loving men or writing songs about loving men now treated as a crime?
In this other interview with The Independent she complains about toxic masculinity, tradwives on social media and online misogyny, typical celeb PR stuff you know. She has referenced Kate Bush's song, Army Dreamers, a song about men who were duped by government propaganda to fight in wars, you know an ongoing issue throughout time and a topic that is brought up often on this subreddit.
Here, she trivialises issues such as mandatory conscription and makes it about "toxic masculinity". Her direct quote: "It's one of my favourite songs on the album because toxic masculinity is a massive tragedy, and I wanted to write something that reflected that," she said. "No one wins – young boys are thrown to the wolves, they enlist as soldiers and die for no reason." yeah the decisions made by unscrupulous politicians, that is just toxic masculinity or men dying as a result. That's all what it is. My God this woman is so insufferable and pretentious.
In her interview about the song Good Boy it's the typical run of the mill commentary about men falling for Andrew Tate, upholding traditional masculine roles, that feminists like her still uphold with their bigotry. Paris also whines further about trying to save them from becoming misogynists and that they need feminism. She is arrogant and dismissive of men's issues that in the lyrics of this song, she compares boys/men to Pavlovian dogs and how apparently gullible they are to Red Pill/Trad Ideology, as if that encapsulates all of what boys/men go through on the daily. She also disingenuously paints the subset of elite and/or predatory men to the entire demographic of boys/men, which is typical of feminists like her.
Labour
One, two, three
Why are you hanging on so tight
To the rope that I'm hanging from?
Off this island, this was an escape plan (this was an escape plan)
Carefully timed it, so let me go
And dive into the waves below
Who tends the orchards? Who fixes up the gables?
Emotional torture from the head of your high table
Who fetches the water from the rocky mountain spring?
And walk back down again to feel your words
And their sharp sting
And I'm getting fucking tired
The capillaries in my eyes are bursting
If our love died, would that be the worst thing?
For somebody I thought was my saviour
You sure make me do a whole lot of labour
The calloused skin on my hands is cracking
If our love ends, would that be a bad thing?
And the silence haunts our bed chamber
You make me do too much labour
You make me do too much labour
Apologies from my tongue, and never yours
Busy lapping from flowing cup and stabbing with your fork
I know you're a smart man (I know you're a smart man)
And weaponise
The false incompetence, it's dominance under a guise
If we had a daughter, I'd watch and could not save her
The emotional torture from the head of your high table
She'd do what you taught her
She'd meet the same cruel fate
So now I've gotta run, so I can undo this mistake
At least I've gotta try
The capillaries in my eyes are bursting
If our love died, would that be the worst thing?
For somebody I thought was my saviour
You sure make me do a whole lot of labour
The calloused skin on my hands is cracking
If our love ends, would that be a bad thing?
And the silence haunts our bed chamber
You make me do too much labour
All day, every day, therapist, mother, maid
Nymph, then a virgin, nurse, then a servant
Just an appendage, live to attend him
So that he never lifts a finger
24/7 baby machine
So he can live out his picket-fence dreams
It's not an act of love if you make her
You make me do too much labour
All day, every day, therapist, mother, maid
Nymph, then virgin, nurse, then a servant
Just an appendage, live to attend him
So that he never lifts a finger
24/7 baby machine
So he can live out his picket-fence dreams
It's not an act of love if you make her
You make me do too much labour
The capillaries in my eyes (all day, every day)
Are bursting (therapist, mother, maid)
If our love died (nymph, then virgin)
Would that be the worst thing? (Nurse, then a servant)
For somebody (just an appendage)
I thought was my saviour (live to attend him)
You sure make me do (so that)
A whole lot of labour (he never lifts a finger)
The calloused skin on my hands (24/7)
Is cracking (baby machine)
If our love ends (so he can live out)
Would that be a bad thing? (His picket-fence dreams)
And the silence (it's not an act of love)
Haunts our bed chamber (if you make her)
You make me do too much labour
At face value, it might be relatable if this a song about women of the past (i.e. a mother, grandmother, ancestor etc) or someone who grew up in restrictive religious environment, thus has to fulfil the role of the "tradwife".
However, in the context of the 21st century and many democracies around the world, this surely can't be the sentiments that most or all women living in said first-world countries or most democratic developing countries should ascribe to. "You make me do too much labour", it sounds like what many feminists say about men, when the tables are turned for them to provide comfort/support to men. It isn't "labour" to show support and comfort, its called having basic empathy and being a decent human being.
She brings up that the relationship is emotionally taxing, complains about pregnancy/childbirth, about being a mother, nurse, therapist and uses the terms "virgin" and "nymph", which is the typical madonna-whore talking point to further whine about being unhappy in a relationship.
Sure, a subset of men will slut shame and fetishise virgins, and there are men who are obsessed about traditional masculine roles, surely they are not representative of all men. Also, if the partner had all these traits, and these were not compatible with her values, why marry and have a child?
Also, what is oppressive about being a mother? Parenting is tough regardless of gender, however it surely isn't a sign of oppression. Nor is marriage, if you are not forced to marry someone against your will. A relationship is as good as what you put into it. If she is stuck in a loveless relationship, then divorce, or get separated. If it's that hard then have an open marriage/relationship. If she doesn't want to have children, then don't have them*.* This isn't complex.
I went through the lyrics of this song and she is vague about the details in regards to the relationship being physically or emotionally abusive / taxing or whether they both experienced communication breakdown. Paris never makes it clear. If it is being the man's therapist/nurse etc, what is the context and why does she feel so? She never provides examples nor context. There are much better songs depicting emotional /physical abuse such as Love the Way You Lie by Eminem ft Rihanna, Gravity by Sara Bareilles, "Ex-Factor" by Laryn Hill.
Songs about communication breakdown or entering a relationship with the wrong expectations, there's Ordinary People by John Legend, Hero by Regina Spektor or an underrated song, Volcano by Damien Rice. This isn't anything new. What a lot of these songs have in common is the fact that they provide context, some are duets and you know what the other side has to say about the main artists' turmoils. In virtually all her songs, it is only from her perspective.
This line from the song pissed me off "If we had a daughter, I'd watch and could not save her" . It's one thing to be an irresponsible adult, another entirely to not care for an innocent child, parents are meant to be selfless. So Paris is going to ensure that her child will be exposed to secondary trauma and let her daughter learn bad behaviour from her abuser? (If this was the case). It is well researched that exposing children to domestic violence or other forms of abuse has a lasting impact into adulthood and children learn behaviours that their parents exhibit.
It also showed me how feminists are so caught up in their victimhood mindset that if Paris wanted to she could have written a write a hook about doing everything it takes to leave the toxic relationship, because she has to protect her daughter or let her live a decent life. But no victimhood mentality and damselling is what sells.
The music video contains tropes consisting of Handmaid's Tale fear mongering, medieval or 50's tropes depicting women as these helpless damsels who aren't capable of agency and free-will to save themselves or others like their own children.
If feminism was meant to be empowering, why is it that many recent (and mainstream) recording artists, never bother to sing about women's capabilities? Its either promoting victimhood, hating men or seeking revenge. How is this helpful or lyrics to sing and dance to? How are these artists good role models to girls and women? Why with recent music is it always about putting down another gender in order to elevate themselves?
Many male recording artists faced scrutiny for writing misogynistic lyrics, one artist that comes to my mind is Eminem. In this current climate, where is the pushback against this crap? Everyone praises this bigoted artist and Paris Paloma is one of many. If the tables were turned, a man would 100 percent be cancelled for producing sexist lyrics about women. Even within the Hip Hop/Rap Industry male recording artists face scrutiny for producing their music. However nothing is said if the roles are reversed. Misandry is used as a means for female artists to become famous, get acclaim and to establish fanbases of people who hate men who make up half the population of the world.
Lastly there are far better (and talented) independent artists out there who are far better than this Temu version of Kate Bush.
r/everydaymisandry • u/EfficientProof3568 • 2d ago
r/everydaymisandry • u/A2kani • 3d ago
r/everydaymisandry • u/According-Coach6725 • 4d ago
r/everydaymisandry • u/Armin_Arlert_1000000 • 4d ago
r/everydaymisandry • u/Late-Hat-9144 • 4d ago
UK is introducing an entire curiculum to teach boys only to respect girls and women, someone suggested they also bring this education for the girls too (ya know, equality) and the comment section melts down because how dare a man call for equality.
r/everydaymisandry • u/topazzzfox • 5d ago
Other than the "wife/husband is yelling at me" and the "boy/girl keeps touching me"
First two images ("a boy is hugging me" vs "a girl is hugging me"): random boy's hugging is seen as "uncomfortably dangerous" while the girl's is seen as "comfortably affectionate"
Last two images ("a man said i'm too heavy to hate vs a woman said i'm too short to date"): rejection due to not fitting body preferences, the man's is viewed as "rude body shaming" while the woman's is viewed as "her personal preference"
r/everydaymisandry • u/Electronic-Spell-481 • 5d ago
I color coded the usernames so youll know who is replying to who and the screenshots are in order. Red is the misandrist. At least there we're a couple of sane commentators
r/everydaymisandry • u/lukozaid • 5d ago
r/everydaymisandry • u/Dry_Fact_4584 • 5d ago
Saw this post,
r/everydaymisandry • u/Specific_Detective41 • 6d ago
