Misandrist feminists do not exist.

PendingDecision · 2026-06-11T05:26:40+00:00

You're protecting your claim by changing who counts as a feminist. If every counterexample is dismissed as "not a true feminist," your claim becomes unfalsifiable. That's exactly what the No True Scotsman fallacy is.

abaxeron · 2026-06-11T09:10:51+00:00

at somepoint we have to use words as they are defined and feminism has objective definitions and a army of researches / authors... a whole hell of a lot of the world that think they are feminist, are not.

Give us the list of 5 real feminists with published written works on feminism.

If you can't, then feminists basically don't exist.

Spicy_take · 2026-06-11T05:22:28+00:00

Equality between genders is egalitarianism. Feminism by definition is to push for women to have the same rights as men at a minimum. Many times exceeding the rights and privileges of men.

Neither of these factor in feeling. You can still despise men and be a feminist without breaking any of the fundamentals of the ideology. You can even be sexist to a degree as far as just disliking one group or the other and still be egalitarian, so long as you can shelve your feelings as to not affect your actions.

Kreeps_United · 2026-06-11T05:05:55+00:00

With this in mind; there are no misandrists feminist. There are people that are misandrist and call themselves feminist, but I can call my self the tooth fairy and that doesn't mean I am.

Honestly, do you actually ever say something like this to feminists who are misandrists?

Gold_Sheepherder6569 · 2026-06-11T05:23:24+00:00

Feminism is advocacy for women, it only incidentally happened to promote equality because of the lower socioeconomic status of women. If you look at the early first wave feminist causes none of them said anything about the injustices that men faced in their time such as universal draft/mandatory militia service or the fact that sexual offences like rape could only be committed by men. They even introduce a new injustice in the form of the tender years doctrine for custody as opposed to a decision being made on which custody is best for the child or shared custody.

statsfodder · 2026-06-11T05:46:58+00:00

I'll have a go at this one ...

You can be misandrist and a feminist because feminism is about female supremacy not equality. Therefore the sexism is baked into the pie.

I.e. feminists want only C-suite jobs to be equalised, not labouring jobs nor wanting men in already female majority jobs. Once the pro female c-suite has control rules and regs are implemented to lock men out and relegate them to only blue collar labouring roles.

Feminists only want "equality of the sexes" when it lifts them up or pushes men down. This is not equality but supremacy.

As you said lots of people claim to be feminist while espousing supremacist beliefs and agendas, we should listen to them when they tell us who they are.

Misandrist Feminists.

Welcome to my TED talk.

M3taBuster · 2026-06-11T05:10:25+00:00

Well if that's the case, then 99% of people who claim to be feminists are not feminists. So it kinda ceases to be a useful definition, doesn't it? Going by your example, if 99% of humans start calling themselves tooth fairies, well I guess that's what we're called now, like it or not.

May as well just accept that in actual common parlance, feminism = misandry. A better term for what you're describing that hasn't been bastardized yet is egalitarianism. So just say that.

What you're doing is equally as futile as insisting that everyone stick to the original meaning of incel, despite everyone now using it as a synonym for misogynist. Or insisting that gay means happy. Or that liberal means right-wing. Or that libertarian means leftist.

ImmaDrainOnSociety · 2026-06-11T05:03:22+00:00

Scotsman ahoy.

One of the most famous feminsts ever is really known for only 2 things: Trying to murder Andy Warhol and getting away with it & writing a book that is cover to cover misandry.

Narsauce_Alpha · 2026-06-11T15:15:54+00:00

Lemme take this one on the nose. There is no reason a feminist cannot be both a feminist and a misandrist.

Feminism, by its function, is about equality between the sexes, insofar as it relates to areas wherein men are advantaged as compared to women.

Feminism makes no claim to directly assist men in areas wherein men are disadvantaged and women are not, and it tends to ignore those areas in its theories. Where it doesn’t, it typically attributes the disadvantage that men’s suffer is of their own making and it is men’s responsibility to solve, or the problem also effects women and to solve the problem for men, it must first be solved for women.

Not all feminists are necessarily misandrists, but feminism itself makes no claims of being against misandrists.

IcyTrapezium · 2026-06-11T06:55:02+00:00

The issue is there is no agreement among feminists as to what a feminist is. Some civil rights leaders genuinely hated white people (and were misogynists). They still were civil rights leaders.

So a woman who hates men could call themselves a feminist. Anyone can. There is no licensure exam for the title.

chamomilecloud · 2026-06-11T05:19:50+00:00

> But for things that can be made equal - pay, freedoms, opportunities, education, dating

LMAO snuck it in there did you? How can dating be made equal when:

- Men do not fear women like women fear men in dating on the basis of biological differences that make it easier for men to harm us.

- More men are more open to casual sex, NSA sex, than women are.

- Women carry risks in sex that men do not.

- Sexual nature is gendered; women are inherently more selective.

AchingAmy · 2026-06-11T05:28:50+00:00

Do you think Valerie Solanas wasn't a true feminist then? I have to agree with what someone else said. Feminism is broader, meaning it's advocating for minimally women to have equality, but it can go further and still fall under a sub-ideology of feminism. All the folks(except the creepy males who joined because they have a femdom fetish.. idk if the sub still has that issue) over in the seriousgynarchy subreddit generally agree with feminism. They have a lot in common, just they want to take it further.

wolf2424b · 2026-06-11T09:04:01+00:00

There are a bunch of women out there who

(1) make selective demands for equality as well as demands for special treatment and the net effect of these demands is female privilege and supremacy;

(2) regularly disparage men and promote the narrative that men are wrongdoers and women are their victims;

(3) generally speaking, selectively deny inherent differences between men and women when it is advantageous or convenient to do so.

(4) blame essentially all of their problems on men as a group;

(5) use vague, poorly defined concepts such as "patriarchy" and "objectification" to provide principled-sounding justifications for their activities and positions.

(6) call themselves "feminists";

(7) are generally considered to be "feminists" by the common usage of that term; and

(8) when called out on their hateful and selfish behavior, insist that "feminism is the radical idea that women are people" or "feminism is just about seeking equality for women" or some other very reasonable sounding definition.

Meanwhile, there are essentially zero prominent women who call themselves "feminists" but do not in practice subscribe to this hateful, selfish ideology.

Obviously you are free to define words any way you like for purposes of discussion. But if you define a "feminist" as someone who sincerely seeks equality for women rather than using "equality" as a fig leaf for their hateful and selfish behavior, it's not a very useful or productive way to define the word.

Because (1) in practice essentially no actual feminists exist by your definition; and (2) you now need a new word for the large number of women who call themselves feminists, are considered by society to be feminists, but are not actually feminists by your definition.

To me, this seems like a silly waste of time and amounts to a bunch of word games.

abuse of the term rather than a culture shift

I doubt that there have ever been any actual feminists by your definition of the word. At least in the West, women have always enjoyed enormous privilege in comparison to men. Did early feminists loudly demand that women be stripped of all of their traditional privileges? I tend to doubt it.

Comfortable-Dare-307 · 2026-06-12T08:35:57+00:00

Modern feminism isn't about equality. It's about hating men, special treatment, and zero accoutability. All modern feminists are misandrists. Feminism used to be about equality. But that was 70 years ago. It is no longer.

baby_sociologist · 2026-06-13T12:25:51+00:00

No true Scotsman fallacy.

Yeah, I know, in theory, Socialism is great. I just hasn't been implemented correctly! /s

criticalcry-tactic00 · 2026-06-11T11:06:00+00:00

Suffragettes were literally misandrist. They refused equal duties (draft) and shamed men refusing draft and prevented them from funding wives. What's that? Sexism. Feminism was always like this. Since the beginning.

Main-Tiger8537 · 2026-06-11T05:50:49+00:00

well since feminists of all branches are in conflict about what feminism is about or what a feminist is or what patriarchy is and how to eliminate it i would say you have no clue what you are talking about or just try to ragebait for fun + trivialize toxic behavior like ironic misandry hiding real misandry...

how toxic behavior or equality vs equity gets evaluated is very questionable and way too many people "including feminists" make it a zero sum game instead of advocating + fighting for liberation...

do you even know what statistical parity or consent violation is about? the majority within a movement dictates the rules it is built on...

before any feminist thinks i would bash feminism/feminists my comment mainly critics the misleading -> there are no misanrists/misandry is trivial or it is all mens fault/patriarchy got built by men or arbitary equity is needed for equality...

Narsauce_Alpha · 2026-06-11T15:31:03+00:00

The “it’s not going to be viable for centuries” argument doesn’t really hold water. It took humanity less time to get from it’s first flight to putting people on the moon then it did getting from the first steam engine to that first flight. We already have some form of artificial wombs that, while not really able to incubate a foetus from day 1, it can after a certain point.

And regarding the second point, thank you for being honest. You want the right and authority to kill a potential human being.

AutoModerator · 2026-06-11T04:57:58+00:00

Attention!

You can post off topic/jokes/puns as a comment to this Automoderator message.
For "Debate" and "Question for X" Threads: Parent comments that aren't from the target group will be removed, along with their child replies.
If you want to agree with OP instead of challenging their view or if the question is not targeted at you, post it as an answer to this comment.
OP you can choose your own flair according to these guidelines., just press Flair under your post!

Thanks for your cooperation and enjoy the discussion!

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

AutoModerator · 2026-06-11T04:57:59+00:00

Hi OP,

You've chosen to identify your thread as a Debate. As such you are expected to actively engage in your own thread with a mind open to being changed. PPD has guidelines for what that involves.

OPs author must genuinely hold the position and you must be open to having your view challenged.

An unwillingness to debate in good faith may be inferred from one or several of the following:

Ignoring the main point of a comment, especially to point out some minor inconsistency;

Refusing to make concessions that an alternate view has merit;

Focusing only on the weaker arguments;

Only having discussions with users who agree with your position.

Failure to keep to this higher standard (we only apply to Debate OPs) may result in deletion of the whole thread.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

calcato · 2026-06-11T06:06:00+00:00

Idk why this got a downvote. Truly there is no such thing as a misandrist feminist. Just like there is no such thing as a misogynist feminist (this'll sound crazy but I am finding some folks in the "feminist" sub have that very issue and it is making me about as insane as progressives being anti-progress and liberals being illiberal, 😭 smdh).

Current_Tax4903 · 2026-06-11T11:04:42+00:00

You said it yourself. For things that are fundamentally unequal this is tricky. What if everything about men and women is fundamentally unequal? What if women and men naturally have a proclivity to behave in different ways and want different things?

Just as you claim calling yourself a feminist doesn’t make you a feminist, neither does call yourself not misandrist, make you not misandrist. I believe you that you truly believe you’re creating a system to benefit everyone fairly. But what if your system excludes the proclivities and desires of men, to accommodate the ones of women, all in the name of your metrics of equality? What if everything that you’re fighting, disenfranchising and denouncing , is essentially what makes a man a man? That would be peak misandry.

feminism is pure woman’s solopsism. Either society is built to the extent where women are (and want to be) in completely equal dynamics as men regardless of any inherent biological realities. Or all men are oppressive patriarchs who’s evil desires shouldn’t be considered anyway.

Title	Misandrist feminists do not exist.
Author	AggravatingFlow1178
Upvotes	0
Comments	238
Date	June 11, 2026 4:57 AM UTC (1 month ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/PurplePillDebate
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/comments/1u2pht2/misandrist_feminists_do_not_exist/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/PurplePillDebate/misandrist-feminists-do-not-exist.1582545 https://theredarchive.com/post/1582545

Comments