A woman hitting a man and feeling he deserved it is not misandry. It's still misogyny: SOCIETY views women as not being truly capable of harming men physically (or at least to the same extent that a woman can be harmed by a man) and we internalize that programming to different degrees. If a woman does hit a man, it's seen as next to harmless. At the very least something that he "can take". The whole idea is predicated on the idea of women being weaker therefore unable to truly hurt the man. However, that behavior is not excusable just because of how we view it as a culture: putting hands on anyone out of anger or frustration is an abusive behavior that can escalate. Also, when you say "bi-directional violence", are you trying to imply that the violence is equal, or at the very least that both parties are physical with each other? Because either way, it doesn't prove misandry: just more misogyny. Even if a man is being abused by a woman, he won't be taken seriously most times because as a man, SOCIETY deems him as capable enough to subjugate a woman to stop hurting him. Or at the very least does not take psychological/emotional/mental abuse into account. This idea is still predicated on the misogynistic idea that women cannot hurt men, and that men cannot be hurt unless he has a defect, i.e., he is not masculine enough to subjugate the woman.

@@pinkyapple333 funny how EVERYTHING proves misogyny and NOTHING demonstrates misandry. In your opinion what would misandry even look like IF you could even imagine such a thing?

​@@MaxPowers2.0 think of it this way if the woman's behavior is rooted in misogynistic beliefs then it's not misandry. For example if a woman verbally abuses her boyfriend or husband for not making enough money because "a real man is supposed to provide for his woman" that's rooted in misogyny. If she physically abuses him because "only a weak man will let a woman hit him" that's misogyny We don't live in a mythical world where patriarchal beliefs are not deeply ingrained in both men and women but if I think there was an episode of The Outer Limits back in the 90s that was a pretty good example of a misandrist society in which men are inherently viewed as more violent and therefore dangerous because of their gender and were wiped out due to it. If male children were born they uh... you probably get it.

@@fangal12 The pervasive assumption that female violence directed at men is tolerable or can be ignored is not just based on a belief that women are weaker, as women ARE statistically less strong on average than men. It’s mostly based on the belief that men are not worthy of protection in the same way that women are. Which is misandry. You speak as if misandry can’t exist under a patriarchal system. I would imagine we greatly disagree on what a patriarchal system implies. I would argue that patriarchal systems (as a result of evolutionary necessity) include a healthy dose of male disposability, which DOES allow for culturally engrained misandry. Patriarchal systems also allow for in many ways the prioritization of female life over male life, admittedly to the detriment of some personal freedoms for everyone. We see this misandry in our impulse to excuse female violence, especially against men. Even when a woman wounds or kills a man the first thought is usually “well what did he do to make her do that to him” where if the genders were swapped that would obviously be victim blaming. We see that Misandry in the framing of DV using the Duluth Model which characterizes all abuse as a tool of mainly male domination, despite the fact that statistics contradict that assumption.

@@MaxPowers2.0 yikes, that's a lot so I'll try to address your paragraphs one at a time. It's interesting that you immediately jumped to physical weakness because typically when a man is referred to as "weak" it's not in reference to his physical strength but to his personality characteristics. With the implication being he does not have "masculine" therefore good qualities and instead has qualities perceived as "feminine" and are therefore bad qualities. That's misogyny, that's patriarchy. You try to throw in the baseless evolutionary argument for a reason why society should be male centered which is patriarchal on its face. Men are only treated as disposable in service to other men because patriarchy is hierarchical. Women are also disposable and also on a hierarchy, being always lower in the hierarchy to men within their own socioeconomic level. First I'm going to say I don't agree that most people excuse female abusers. I think some people excuse female abusers for the same misogynistic reason I started in my first reply. I also see people immediately excusing male abusers/life enders using the same "but what did she do" ridiculous reasoning. Even in the Cassie video I saw countless people using that victim blaming nonsense. Honestly after reading your essay it's clear to me that you've fallen into the woman haters MRA rabbit hole. Your biggest concern isn't actually male issues but with the assertion that women are the cause of it. I hope you eventually get out of that one day and wish you all the best

Props to bro for making it clear that it's wrong for a women to put hands on a man just because he's man.

Well, what are the paychecks looking like? Is that a determining factor in the forgiveness department?🌝🍿

@@ReshonBryant People stay with abusive partners in which the victim is the breadwinner. No one is staying in abusive relationships for financial gain 🙄

@@fangal12 I know. It's why your Black ass ain't set foot in Africa yet🤣🤣🤣🤣

It’s one thing to pursue a guy, i.e. let someone know that you find them attractive vs. proposing to a man whether it be relationship or marriage. I’m of the mindset that if he wanted to be with you he’d undoubtedly ask to be exclusive with you. Like damn we have to chase and propose too? At least put in some effort!

@@beatrixxkiddo3572 I can understand where you're coming from, but I do think this sort of thinking is backwards and endemic of patriarchy. If you feel the only 'effort' your partner, especially a socialized male, can show is by proposing to you, then that speaks more about the frailty of your relationship. Your partner should be putting in the effort throughout the entirety of the relationship. And that effort should be recognized as such by all involved. The point is not that you 'have' to do anything. It's that you are Both empowered, allowed, and welcome to chase/propose to each other. There's no reason why only one partner should be expected to show their commitment through proposal. And once again, the man, or whoever, should already be putting in the effort to show that he is committed to an exclusive relationship. But sometimes, the man (or whoever) just may not be ready to propose. Perhaps they want to get their finances straight, or do some more internal work, or are unsure if their partner is ready. If Allll the pressure is on him to propose, then that not only leaves the power with him, but also makes for a weak foundation. If both people know that they are welcome to propose, than both parties can signal when they are ready to move forward and empower each other to do so.

Agreed. Been there myself. It's awkward obviously. But, again be a man. Stand on your square and realize who she's leaving with. You can only control your actions.

I don't completely agree, but I could see other Black Men rocking the role and doing it as well or better. Laurence Fishburn, Don Cheedle come to mind. I think Don would be AMAZING if he really leaned into this one...

That eye is looking all types of GYAT in the thumbnail🧐🎩

I'm a bit confused by your comment. Could you please elaborate?

Empirically, it is still likely in that scenario that the woman will do most of the housework, community building, and household “management” for both parties. Until we fix those issues, which admittedly are getting better as generations progress, I don’t think the one-way “egalitarianism” is useful.

@@louenatnine51 no it stands to reason that in are modern society women don't have to do that. Why they choose to do that in any given relationship and why the men they are with let them do that could be conditioning. Equal pay equal amount of time equal skill set same goal which in general is to live a comfortable life with each other. All things being equal anything after that is a choice. A equal relationship is attainable if everybody does everything in the relationship and yall stop assigning roles which is a choice. Otherwise those involved don't actually want that.

@@phillipj1135 There’s no gun to women’s collective heads, but the reality is that that work is still shouldered by women. Solutions that include phrases like “everyone should” or “everyone could” only serve to curtail the reality of what is actually happening, and don’t actually provide reasonable means for better solutions. Even so, ironically, your response would be an additional burden of emotional duty on the backs women, rather than an equitable solution to “solving” equal partnership. These lopsided relations don’t happen solely because people are outright assigning roles in their relationships - we are working against hundreds of years of compounded domestic inequality that expects mountains of women and less of men in the home.

@@louenatnine51 now and days marriage is mostly a legal contract and a gesture that people like you confuse with the domestic situations that happens on both sides of the event of signing and ceramoney. Realizing my error I got into a aside with you about domestic situations (which are still optional) people entertain while being in a relationship. I actually was just saying that Allen's statement as proposed was a nothing burger that generalized marriage as a absolute win for men and a absolute loss for women which is a fiction. The behavior of people in relations was not attached to that as that happens regardless if there married or not.

100%

Yeah, I know what you mean. I've known of an interacial couple in which DV was going on and there was not much I could do. I was friends with both parties, dating the sister of the female being abused, and it just wasn't in my best interest to confront the guy on his territory. Plus, the sister I was dating had her own issues. To make a long story short I left.

There are *Good* partners out there that are worth asking. Some of them are shy or try not to assume based on hints or behavior. Them not asking does not always mean they don't value you.

@@b.c.9619 which is why I said I have no problem making the first move. Then he knows I’m interested. After that it’s on him

👏🏾👏🏾👏🏾👏🏾 I’ll approach a guy but i for damn sure ain’t getting down on one knee for him. Whether it be relationship or marriage.

I think the current version is dry, sure. Girl boss energy can be great but It doesn't resonate with guys when a character is an instant Mary Sue/Gary Stu. I do think comic book Carol Danvers can be very interesting and you might want to check out when she lost her mind and powers to Rogue and became Binary.

@@b.c.9619 I get what you’re saying, but most of the people who watch that movie are men and women just don’t care about Captain Marvel

​@@Aaronovesfood🎯

If I could give this comment an Award, I would. to quote the Mighty Mos Def, "This song NEEDS to be out. NEEDS to be a hit!" ( - kzfaq.info/get/bejne/sLpyfNl6qdTSpmw.htmlsi=My-Z-nPlscUYerjN)

This! Working in human services gives you a huge reality check on a lot of these topics podcasts talk about so glibly.

​@TrillyThough I wonder why they didn't get someone who has worked with DV survivors for this episode if they were going to discuss it? I believe F.D Signifier has stated he worked with human trafficking survivors or something similar and he has been on this podcast before. I think this discussion could have used a bit more nuance.

@TrillyThough everyone should be required to do human services work at least once in their life. Understanding how complex humans are allows for compassion and empathy.

@squirrelsinmykoolaid Agreed about the nuance. I am always scared having these types of conversations without neance is harmful for survivors because they ultimately hold them responsible for "staying" and abusers because we'll never invite them to get help.

Same and spot on