You need to sign in or sign up before continuing.
Take a photo of a barcode or cover
4.15k reviews for:
Men Who Hate Women: From incels to pickup artists, the truth about extreme misogyny and how it affects us all
Laura Bates
4.34 AVERAGE
4.15k reviews for:
Men Who Hate Women: From incels to pickup artists, the truth about extreme misogyny and how it affects us all
Laura Bates
4.34 AVERAGE
challenging
informative
inspiring
I was very impressed by Bates’ writing style and brevity with which she both informs and dissects the various wings of the Manosphere, whilst ensuring not to underestimate their power and insidious creep. The last few chapters felt the most urgent and powerful to me, synthesising the themes and ideologies of the previous few into effective critical analysis that felt satisfying and moving in places. Chapters 9 and 10 were especially poignant. Perhaps could be more concise in the earlier chapters, but still remains a very potent and persuasive read.
Entiendo lo que quiere hacer esta autora con su libro y es respetable. Me parece que Laura Bates hace tal análisis de la masculinidad tóxica que revuelve el estómago. No es el momento de leer este libro.
challenging
dark
emotional
hopeful
informative
sad
DNF @ 88% because i have absolutely no motivation to finish the last hour and i keep spending my commutes in silence rather than pick this back up lmao.
obviously i think this is an important topic to talk about, and was really excited about it at the beginning, but it started to feel very repetitive and i found it difficult to focus on towards the end. my biggest problem with it though is that it isn't /saying/ anything, in my opinion. the author never truly acknowledges the fertile breeding ground of misogyny that gives these groups life. it reminded me a lot of how women who are into true crime will focus on serial killers instead of acknowledging the fact that the majority of women who are victims of homicide are killed by intimate partners. like, yes, serial killers do exist, but they arent who women should be afraid of. yes, incels and mras exist, but most women who are victims of violent crime/discrimination/harrassment will not be hurt by extremists, they will be hurt by the men they know. The men who hate women are all men, not just extremist groups. Western society has misogyny so deeply ingrained into it that you cannot act as if these extremist groups crop up out of nowhere, or that they are the sole drivers of misogyny in society. I don't want to dog on this book too much because I do think that these groups should be seen in the same category as extreme alt-right/neo-nazi/white supremacy groups and i think that this could be a more eyeopening read for someone with less of a preexisting knowledge of their existence, but it just wasn't for me.
obviously i think this is an important topic to talk about, and was really excited about it at the beginning, but it started to feel very repetitive and i found it difficult to focus on towards the end. my biggest problem with it though is that it isn't /saying/ anything, in my opinion. the author never truly acknowledges the fertile breeding ground of misogyny that gives these groups life. it reminded me a lot of how women who are into true crime will focus on serial killers instead of acknowledging the fact that the majority of women who are victims of homicide are killed by intimate partners. like, yes, serial killers do exist, but they arent who women should be afraid of. yes, incels and mras exist, but most women who are victims of violent crime/discrimination/harrassment will not be hurt by extremists, they will be hurt by the men they know. The men who hate women are all men, not just extremist groups. Western society has misogyny so deeply ingrained into it that you cannot act as if these extremist groups crop up out of nowhere, or that they are the sole drivers of misogyny in society. I don't want to dog on this book too much because I do think that these groups should be seen in the same category as extreme alt-right/neo-nazi/white supremacy groups and i think that this could be a more eyeopening read for someone with less of a preexisting knowledge of their existence, but it just wasn't for me.
Unfortunately, very little of this book was news to me, but it might be to you! This is a vital topic and the book is expertly researched and cited. Even if you don't read it, it does raise a couple of points that are worth mentioning:
(1) This is well-known by this point, but many social media networks use algorithms to promote extreme content. "Writing in the New York Times, sociologist Zeynep Tufekci described how, no matter what average video she started out with, YouTube's algorithm would quickly send her down a spiraling rabbit hole of associated but far more hardcore content. 'Videos about vegetarianism led to videos about veganism. Videos about jogging led to videos about running ultramarathons.' A Wall Street Journal investigation revealed the same phenomenon.... for impressionable young people who start out looking at quite mainstream political content, it has much more serious implications" (pg. 277).
I tried a similar experiment in an incognito window, to prevent any previous search history from influencing my results. A search for "kittens" came up with "stray kittens invaded my backyard". Once I clicked on that video, I was presented with "Most STRESSFUL rescue EVER! When a kitten rescue goes wrong!!!", which led to "WHY??? Why would anyone throw a kitten on the freeway??? Please share."
After feeling stunned and horrified, I watched the first video again and all became right in the world. But humorous experiment aside, what if impressionable young men don't reject extreme content? It's a legitimate concern, especially since I'd be willing to bet money that the amount of daily exposure to online communities and social media is rising.
(2) Violence against women is an epidemic, and incels are a domestic terrorist threat. Both of these issues are neglected in favor of things like environmental activism, weirdly enough. And it's also worth nothing that a history of abusing women is something that most terrorists have in common, regardless of their ideology.
A quote from page 301-02 (all emphasis is mine)
"For example, a 2017 report on countering violent extremism from the U.S. Government Accountability Office begins by starting, 'Violent extremism - generally defined as ideologically, religiously, or politically-motivated acts of violence - has been perpetrated in the United States by white supremacists, anti-government groups, and radical Islamist entities, among others.' A further breakdown of those 'others' includes 'groups with extreme views on abortion, animal rights, the environment, and federal ownership of public lands.' It is quite extraordinary, given the fact that the report spans the dates 2001-16 (a period including the massacres carried out by George Sodini, Elliot Rodger, and Chris Harper-Mercer, explicitly in the name of male supremacist and incel ideologies), that any misogynistic form of violent extremism does not even merit a mention. Meanwhile, environmental and animal rights extremism are included, even though the document states, 'During these period, no persons in the United States were killed in attacks carried out by persons believed to be motivated by extremist environmental beliefs, [or] extremist 'animal liberation' beliefs.'"
(1) This is well-known by this point, but many social media networks use algorithms to promote extreme content. "Writing in the New York Times, sociologist Zeynep Tufekci described how, no matter what average video she started out with, YouTube's algorithm would quickly send her down a spiraling rabbit hole of associated but far more hardcore content. 'Videos about vegetarianism led to videos about veganism. Videos about jogging led to videos about running ultramarathons.' A Wall Street Journal investigation revealed the same phenomenon.... for impressionable young people who start out looking at quite mainstream political content, it has much more serious implications" (pg. 277).
I tried a similar experiment in an incognito window, to prevent any previous search history from influencing my results. A search for "kittens" came up with "stray kittens invaded my backyard". Once I clicked on that video, I was presented with "Most STRESSFUL rescue EVER! When a kitten rescue goes wrong!!!", which led to "WHY??? Why would anyone throw a kitten on the freeway??? Please share."
After feeling stunned and horrified, I watched the first video again and all became right in the world. But humorous experiment aside, what if impressionable young men don't reject extreme content? It's a legitimate concern, especially since I'd be willing to bet money that the amount of daily exposure to online communities and social media is rising.
(2) Violence against women is an epidemic, and incels are a domestic terrorist threat. Both of these issues are neglected in favor of things like environmental activism, weirdly enough. And it's also worth nothing that a history of abusing women is something that most terrorists have in common, regardless of their ideology.
A quote from page 301-02 (all emphasis is mine)
"For example, a 2017 report on countering violent extremism from the U.S. Government Accountability Office begins by starting, 'Violent extremism - generally defined as ideologically, religiously, or politically-motivated acts of violence - has been perpetrated in the United States by white supremacists, anti-government groups, and radical Islamist entities, among others.' A further breakdown of those 'others' includes 'groups with extreme views on abortion, animal rights, the environment, and federal ownership of public lands.' It is quite extraordinary, given the fact that the report spans the dates 2001-16 (a period including the massacres carried out by George Sodini, Elliot Rodger, and Chris Harper-Mercer, explicitly in the name of male supremacist and incel ideologies), that any misogynistic form of violent extremism does not even merit a mention. Meanwhile, environmental and animal rights extremism are included, even though the document states, 'During these period, no persons in the United States were killed in attacks carried out by persons believed to be motivated by extremist environmental beliefs, [or] extremist 'animal liberation' beliefs.'"
challenging
dark
informative
reflective
sad
tense
fast-paced
Depressingly realistic and scary. Learnt quite a lot and I will be recommending.
Let me say, this book is VERY informative. I learned a lot. However, I could not finish it because it was so bleak and I’m already so depressed and anxious about the state of our country this book was making me more angry at everyone and everything. I tried 2x to power through and I just couldn’t.
challenging
emotional
slow-paced
challenging
informative
medium-paced