Vincent re "

You present two cases -- the female demon devouring the man's penis, and the male demon impaling the woman with his penis -- and say that they're opposites. They aren't. Both are explicitly about the woman's relationship with the penis, destroying or destroyed by. When we call both misogyny, we're responding to the underlying commonality: the penis is power, preexistant, and the woman is defined by it.

You've taken a violent fantasy about how much we fear women and a violent fantasy about how much we hate women, and called them opposites.

Your misandrist society would have a history of the vulva as powerful and cool; it's members would be accustomed to sympathizing with the vulva and being suspicious of or disregarding the penis. (For instance, it might still use 'prick' and 'pussy' as insults, but they'd have opposite meanings: if your coworker exploited your work and took all the credit and exercised power over you, you'd call him a pussy, and your friends would say that he wouldn't dare do it if you'd stand up for yourself and stop being such a prick.)

Sexual violence will be misogyny as long as we value the penis over the vulva.

Here's a misandrist demon for you, though. He appears as a handsome and romantic young man and seduces women with flattery and tenderness. At the moment of climax he plunges his extendable jaws through her ribs and devours her heart. (See? We like women's love, culturally, more than we like their sexuality.)

Still an excellent topic.

—Vincent Baker
April 2002


Other Responses to "Misogyny"