Reviews

Down Girl: The Logic of Misogyny by Kate Manne

goosemixtapes's review against another edition

Go to review page

challenging informative reflective medium-paced

4.5

EXTREMELY good book. manne's basic thesis is that misogyny isn't a personal hatred of women that some men harbor because of psychological issues, but an intricate and structural system forcing women into the role of Giving (attention, affection, power, etc; sometimes, in the worst circumstances, their lives). it's not that men don't see women as human--it's that they see them as "human givers," and women who refuse to play this role are punished. i knew a lot of this already, but manne is an excellent writer who lays out her argument with careful and incisive craft and very readable prose. her writing can be a little dense at times (especially when manne, a philosophy professor, dips into academic philosophy), and sometimes it gets repetitive (as many of these chapters are adapted from disparate essays and thus cover some overlapping ground), but i was honestly never bored; this book spent 300 pages rearranging my brain and fine-tuning my understanding of misogyny and structural oppression in general.

probably the most salient lacking point is (and manne admits to this up-front) that a lot of the specific examples focus on white cishet women, because that allows for the examination of misogyny without other compounding oppressions. honestly, this didn't totally bother me, because one book can only do so much, but i would love to see manne's theories critiqued or built on by women of color and trans women. that said, for what it aims at, this book is brilliant, and i highly recommend it even to people who already know that misogyny is real and bad; the clarity and depth of its argument makes it well worth the time.

taylorthiel's review against another edition

Go to review page

5.0

I am a sl*t for books with great footnotes and epigraphs and boy did this one deliver.

This is one of the best modern books I’ve read on misogyny in a hot minute. This lady came with facts and facts only. Also reminded me how much the world was robbed when we voted for trump and not Hillary. I had annotations on every page. BANGER.

But be warned:

1) all the trigger warnings for violence and crimes against women

2) this boi is academic as fk. Reads like a PhD dissertation on level 10. Not for the faint of heart. Not easily digestible if you haven’t already read this caliber of academic writing. (Still worth it and I do think still manageable for all levels of readers. Some just might need to go slow WHICH IS OK. Take your time with this one anyways because marinating in this is really great).

adamchalmers's review against another edition

Go to review page

5.0

Awesome read. Points out a bunch of weird confusing contradictions in gender politics, then explains them. Argues that misogyny isn't about hating women - it's about punishing "bad" women. "good" women like subservient housewives, the "cool girlfriend", etc, don't experience misogyny. Women who go against patriarchal norms (e.g. activists, women working in masculine fields, women who don't give men enough attention/emotional labor/sex/etc) experience the kind of "down, girl!" responses that punish them and put them back in their place.

Although it's accessible to a general audience, it's definitely written like a Philosophy Book and aimed at an academic audience. She very formally defines her terms, pre-empts criticism, uses a lot of philosophy jargon, makes a lot of defensive qualifications that are helpful to philosophical reading but might bore an average reader.

Really liked it - its treatment of misogyny as reinforcing certain power structures was awesome. She criticizes the idea of sexism as "not seeing women as people" - the problem is men do see women as people, but people who owe them sex/emotional labor/status (good) but can also be threats, rivals or emasculate them (bad, needs punishment).

Uses lots of literary and political references to support her points, esp. the Trump/Clinton election, Julia Gillard, and Elliot Rodgers, which lends a lot of real-world flavour to a book that sometimes gets a bit academic.

Her background in formal logic and computer science shines through when she talks about the flaws in normal decision-theoretic models of "agents" - as a logic/CS person myself, I found that part really fascinating!

brittney_seitgeist's review against another edition

Go to review page

3.0

When I was initially recommended this book I wasn’t expecting it to be as heavy. I was expecting this to be a light weekend read and I was wrong. No matter the case it was a well written book on the topic.

My only gripe I had reading The Logic of misogyny is for the first couple chapters I had to constantly reference my dictionary in order to understand what the author was saying. After that point it was a very easy breezy read.

The author provides multiple examples throughout using recent news in the media, stories, and current politics in the last 10 years. With those examples I felt that it made their thesis understandable as well as to provide a new interpretation of those events that I have not considered before.

Content warning: sexual assault, rape, murder

khaver14's review against another edition

Go to review page

challenging informative slow-paced

3.75

lindseyjones's review against another edition

Go to review page

challenging informative slow-paced

5.0

Best book I read all year

rockin_robyn's review against another edition

Go to review page

informative slow-paced

3.75

dfostermartin's review against another edition

Go to review page

4.0

There are some excellent points about the logic and function of misogyny in this book. Manne also coins some excellent terms, such as himpathy, and reminds the reader of other (misogynoir) that are both memorable and helpful for remembering some of the key points that she makes. I also really appreciated some of the case studies (both true events and fictional) that she weaves in throughout to illustrate what she’s saying.

Despite some excellent content, for me there was a bit too much internal book referencing (in chapter 2 I’ll speak about, in chapter 8 I’ll unpack this further, as I discussed in chapter 1, etc). This was also a book that relied heavily on academic language. That is not necessarily a negative for every reader (as many readers may enjoy that) nor anything against the author (she IS an academic), but it made it a struggle for me to stay focused in several sections and it will probably keep me from recommending the book to too many others.

aleex's review against another edition

Go to review page

informative medium-paced

4.0

lovelife1008's review against another edition

Go to review page

challenging informative reflective medium-paced

4.0