misandry/misogyny
Ever since I learned the word for hatred of men (misandry), I've wanted to know when it was entered into the English lexicon, and how it compared, historically, to misogyny. Today, thanks to dictionary.com, I found the answer:
Misogyny, the word for hatred of women, was entered into the lexicon sometime around 1650-1660.
Misandry, the word for hatred of men, was entered into the lexicon ~1945-1950. 300 years later, and (I think significantly) the same time the Rosies of WWII were displaced by men returning from the war.
What does this mean? Does it mean, as Carl Sagan and Ann Druyun suggest in Contact that the "male lexographers" couldn't imagine a use for the word, or does it mean that hatred of men is historically more likely to be ignored? There are at least a dozen other explanations I can think of off the top of my head, but first I'd like to know what you think. What accounts for the 300 year gap?
Labels: feminism, linguistics, masculinism, politics, psychology, sexuality
3 Comments:
Hi Clara
Check out this link
http://ark.cdlib.org/ark:/13030/ft809nb586/
Well, here's what one author says:
"The word misogyny was created long ago within a patriarchal culture. It was not invented by feminists. It was designed not to protect women, but men, separating good patriarchs—who were nevertheless patriarchs—from the bad. Those were the men who went too far, who needed be too rude or too rough in order to control the women they held as property; their failure was sign of weakness and infirmity. “Misogynist” was as an insult towards men who were, in a sense, women, possessing the worst traits of femininity: irrationality and a lack of restraint in behavior or appetite. The word misandry was also created in a patriarchy, as a specific, momentary solution to a problem faced by antifeminist men. They simply lacked a sophisticated enough word to describe their complaints against complaining women." (http://adonismirror.com/10152006_leader_misandry_and_misanthropy.htm.)
I find most of the article from which the above is taken to be badly in need of citations, full of generalizations, occasionally self-contradictory, and arguably misogynist in a few spots. But - I do think he's on to something about the word origins (and what he says is linked to the Contact quote).
Because women had so little power (of every sort) at their disposal until comparatively recently, the word undoubtedly was a male invention. It's a lot like Spivak describes in "Can the Subaltern Speak?" ;). Like the article I quoted says, 'Misogyny' (the word) probably arose from an attempt by one group of men to protect women from another group of men (and, in the process, propagate a certain set of values).
'Misandry,' then, emerged when women held enough power to pose a threat. As you suggest, it makes a lot of sense that this would've been post-WWII.
To answer your question more specifically, I think hatred of men was ignored until relatively recently, b/c it was inconsequential. I'm sure there were women who hated men (and men who hated men - whom the article I linked says would've just been called misanthropes) between 1650 and 1950. But without the economic/educational/social/etc. power to voice publicly their opinions, there was no reason to conceive of the concept of 'misandry' - easier to chalk it up to eccentricity, hysteria(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Female_hysteria), and the like.
That all said, it should be noted that the article I linked and the post he disparages (http://www.randomhouse.com/wotd/index.pperl?date=19980603) both state that there is some precedent for the word 'misandry' existing in Ancient Greek. I assume the same is true of 'misogyny.' I wonder when the words arose (if they have) in other languages.
Also, the second post (equally in need of citations) suggests that ‘misandry’ first appeared in the 1930s. That undermines the WWII connection, but it’s not too long after the 19th Amendment in the US and full women’s suffrage in the UK, so the basic idea still works.
'Misandry,' then, emerged when women held enough power to pose a threat.
I echo Lanier - but with a slightly different cast - under pre-industrial family structures, women were consistently repressed to the point of rarely, if ever, being able to successfully demonstrate gender-hating behavior across wide swaths of maleness. Only when liberated with independent careers/self-sufficiency could they act with scorn towards men across the full spectrum of social environments.
Whereas men could always do that.
Basically the same idea, but instead of the implication that it was created as a demonization/reaction to power, instead as a reaction to behavior that was only observable after the acquisition of power.
I've adopted a rule about never using my name on Teh Internets.
Post a Comment
<< Home