Misogyny and fascism

[atommom]

All wickedness is but little to the wickedness of a woman. ... What else is woman but a foe to friendship, an unescapable punishment, a necessary evil, a natural temptation, a desirable calamity, domestic danger, a delectable detriment, an evil nature, painted with fair colours. ... Women are by nature instruments of Satan -- they are by nature carnal, a structural defect rooted in the original creation.

-- Malleus maleficarum (The Hammer of Witches), published by Catholic inquisition authorities in 1485-86


The Freikorpsmen hate women, specifically women's bodies and sexuality. It would not be going too far to say that their perpetual war was undertaken to escape women; even the motherly battlefront nurse is a threatening intrusion in the unisexual world of war. This hatred -- or dread -- of women cannot be explained with Freud's all-purpose Oedipal triangulation (fear that heterosexual desire will lead to punishment by the father, homosexual yearnings for the father, or some such permutation of the dramatic possibilities). The dread arises in the pre-Oedipal struggle of the fledgling self, before there is even an ego to sort out the objects of desire and the odds of getting them: It is a dread, ultimately, of dissolution -- of being swallowed, engulfed, annihilated. Women's bodies are the holes, swamps, pits of muck that can engulf.

--Barbara Ehrenreich, from the foreword to Klaus Theweleit's Male Fantasies


Western-style misogyny probably has its roots in a Greek/Roman culture that gave women little power, political or otherwise, despite including women in its pantheon of gods. One could also point to the deep psychological roots in the urge to civilize, particularly in the view of nature as wild, harmful, something to be repressed and tamed; as women became identified with nature, the desire to control them took root as well.

But the particular psychological component that creates the twist of murderous misogyny comes from Dark-Age Christianity: the notion of humankind -- and indeed, all of nature --as innately sinful. Because the chief burden for that sin fell on women who already had no power.

http://dneiwert.blogspot.com/2006/10/misogyny-and-fascism.html

[bloom]

1. It's something

- how ignored women are. Women's accomplishments, either in the professional or working world - or as mothers.

But that is not enough - women have to be hated too. I suppose there may be some kind of perpetuating cycle there. Women who are ignored/hated become someone to ignore and hate.

The amazing thing is how nice and accomplished and accommodating that so many women are - given the circumstances of our society.


I do encourage everyone to read "The Chalice and the Blade" -Eisler - and "When God was a Woman" - Stone.

It's nice to know that the way things are is not the only way it has to be.


One thing that I have noticed in recent years that those quotes remind me of - is how it is often the male misogynist authors who are considered to be esp. "good" - even by so-called liberal people. So you have people who wouldn't dream of thinking that they themselves hate women - but they like to support those who do - see their plays/movies/etc. And those people come to define our times.

BTW - 95% of directors are male.

I was also reading an interview of Aimee Mann recently where she was saying that "X" music company refused to sign her - because they had already signed one women - Sheryl Crow - and they figured that that was enough. They didn't figure that very many people wanted to hear women make music (I think she was talking about the 80s).

It does all matter. What movies you watch - the CD's you buy - concerts you go to. As a collective our society is defined by what is in our consciousness. There are gatekeepers that keep some of it out (esp. stuff by women). Nowadays - there are more roads around the gate - what with the internet and all. It's important to keep the roads clear. Let the voices of women be heard.

[bobbieinok]

3. liberals liking male mysogynist authors

"One thing that I have noticed in recent years that those quotes remind me of - is how it is often the male misogynist authors who are considered to be esp. "good" - even by so-called liberal people."

I remember how freaked out I got in grad school in the 60s women's liberation era when I discovered Rousseau's attitude toward women. I had the vague generalized western civ view of him as sort of some early enlightenment figure with some really 'modern' views of education.

And then to learn that his views about studying the child, discovering its abilities, and then educating it to fulfill these APPLIED ONLY TO BOYS. Each man child should ideally have a personalized, individualized education. But ALL GIRLS SHOULD HAVE THE SAME EDUCATION: they should learn how to please men!!!!!!!!!!!!

Years later I learned that he had a major fear of being unable to control women. Therefore he believed they should from a very early age be conditioned to be totally subservient to the demands of men.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

2. From what I read about the psychology behind the Taliban

they recruited orphan boys, of which there was a plentiful supply after years of war, and raised them in an all-male environment with harsh military discipline. Eventually faced with masses of horny teenagers, they did what the monks of medieval Europe did when faced with the masses of horny teenagers who had been placed in the monastery as unwanted children--they demonized women as evil creatures of the devil who tempted men away from their true missions in life.

Raised with no significant influence from mothers or sisters, the young Taliban recruits grew up to be hardcore mysoginists, but the heterosexual majority were still attracted to women, and therefore had to keep fighting their own inclinations. Hence the insistence that women be confined to the home or covered from head to toe.