Imagine reversing feminism

Ed: It seems a little odd to accuse the person being instructed to ‘shut the f*ck up’, and invited to block the author, as being the one who isn’t able to handle a conversation. My perception is that the author is doing everything she can to discourage her reasoning from being subjected to discussion.

To your point on literacy, which means ‘competence or knowledge in a specific area’. Take, for example, the author’s attempted explanation for a 3x higher male suicide rate. Testosterone, we learn, is lethal. It’s men’s reckless behaviour which kills them. Only God, apparently, can do anything about it.

When we compare pseudoscientific feminist prediction with reality, we observe that suicide is in fact strongly correlated with socioeconomic status — poorer men kill themselves more. It’s strongly correlated with unemployment — suicide has risen strongly since 2008. It’s correlated with disease, the female treatment of which receives proportionally more funding. It’s correlated with breakdown in the family unit.

In the author’s account of feminist pseudoscience, in other words, poor, unemployed, diseased, and socially isolated men kill themselves because they are reckless and produce testosterone, rather than because they are poor, unemployed, diseased and socially isolated. Furthermore, only God can address these social issues. Women have problems, but men are problems. Shut the f*ck up.

I think that demonstrates (to put it mildly) a lack of competence or knowledge in this particular area. Which is to say, illiteracy.

But to fully appreciate the truly peculiar nature of this world view, try this thought experiment: imagine we lived in a society in which 3x more females commit suicide than males; oestrogen is lethal; it’s women’s sensitive dispositions which kill them. Only God can do anything about it. Shut the f*ck up.

Could you imagine a man writing a piece like this, in a world like that? Wouldn’t anyone advancing such a grotesque hypothesis to explain that data be a misogynist? Wouldn’t a society that perpetuated such a world view be one in which power relations between men and women were at best questionable? What conclusion follows from such a thought experiment about misandry and gender power relations in this world?

The challenge of protecting the theory that society manifests some structural bias towards men (for which the only solution, conveniently, is yet more political power to women) from observations that directly refute such claims is highly problematic for gender feminists. So problematic, in fact, that when the problem is pointed out, the only response frequently is, “Shut the f*ck up and block me”.