Ask Mr Misogyny

Comments

4 responses to “Ask Mr Misogyny”

1. 

   Papito

   Sep 24, 2020 3:24 AM

   Benny thinks he’s the boss of all women, because he’s a man. That’s who he thinks he is. Since “woman” is just a lifestyle choice, all people who choose to be “women” are agreeing to be subservient to him. Problem solved!

   The non-specific responses don’t pull any punches, though. I like this one:

   This is a general discussion thread, MNHQ, not intended to “target” an individual. Very important issues have been raised about male attitudes to surrogacy that women on a parenting forum, many with traumatic experiences of pregnancy and childbirth, need to be allowed to speak about. As we don’t seem to be able to use real-life examples to illustrate our points, but please can we talk if we stay general?

   So:

   http://www.biology-pages.info/S/Sexual_Reproduction.html

   Reproduction is dependent on two distinct types of organ systems (female and male). It is a binary, fixed, biological mechanism.

   Two males (ejaculators) alone aren’t going to be able to reproduce together.

   That’s not infertility.

   That’s not a human rights battle.

   That’s not even a medical issue.

   That’s basic biology.

   An ejaculator needs a female human, a woman, to make a baby. Both for her genetic material (egg) and her unique reproductive function (female organ system). Hers is really the significant input, with huge sacrifices, time and risks of her whole person during pregnancy and childbirth.

   Sperm-producers contribute remarkably little to this process of reproduction. They ejaculate. That’s it. There is no associated male mortality. Ejaculators’ bodies remain unchanged.

   Some ejaculators might still decide they should have a right to access a woman’s body, that a woman should be prepared to risk her own life to satisfy their dreams.

   Some ejaculators might be upset if they don’t get their way immediately.

   But what is a woman?

   Some ejaculators have been engaged in battles arguing that women, defined as a reproductive-sex-class, don’t matter. Women’s words actually mean nothing, that the concept of female biology making a material difference to our lives is outdated. We are just unknowable constellations of identity that ejaculators possess in their gendered souls. Women should not speak together about law, women should not make a fuss about policies that affect us, lesbians should be inclusive of penises, women should re-brand ourselves as cervix-havers and women should play rugby against ejaculator athletes. Women don’t exist uniquely as a sex, as adult female humans, these ejaculators say.

   If two prostate-owners who hold such views of women want to have a baby together, I ask:

   If a woman is anyone who says they’re a woman, why couldn’t one of the ejaculators just identify as a woman? If sex is immaterial – a matter of semantics “assigned” by a medic – why not ask a doctor to just “re-assign” the sex of one of the ejaculators and mark it as “female”?

   Wouldn’t that, by these ejaculators’ own logic, solve the issue?

   Or is female biology relevant when ejaculators want to use us, but the language must still not use our word, woman? Why do such ejaculators insist on calling us surrogates instead of mothers? Cervix-havers, menstruators, surrogates, egg-donors, non-men. It’s all part and parcel of the same thing, isn’t it?

   I think some testicle-havers really could work on their empathy, listening, inclusivity and kindness to women.

   So thanks for that, “witchesaremysisters.”
2. 

   Holms

   Sep 24, 2020 5:13 AM

   As much as I dislike the term, why isn’t this guy being called a Karen? “I demand answers from your boss! And an apology! And I want to have a say in what you can say about me!”
3. 

   iknklast

   Sep 24, 2020 6:58 AM

   Yesterday I was filling out a form that asked me for my gender identity. The next question asked for year of birth; I wanted to put “assigned 1960 at birth, but identify as 1972” or something like that, but unfortunately, it was just a dropdown and had no place to write in some vague, meaningless statement like that (unlike sex, with the handy “other” category that could fill a wide variety of “gender identities” that are wholly irrelevant to your sex, and could apparently include pizza).
4. 

   Ophelia Benson

   Sep 24, 2020 7:53 AM

   Holms @ 2 – but he doesn’t even limit it to “And I want to have a say in what you can say about me!” He wants to have a say in what subjects they talk about.