Well, you said you don't like how "phobia" is attached to things. "Misandry" seems to communicate what you want without that baggage. Also, when you're trying to brand something, create a strong message, etc. it's probably best to have a single term rather than multiple redundant terms, because consistency leads to recognizability and coherence.
If you think "androphobia" communicate something that "misandry" doesn't, or vice versa, then sure, it might make sense to use both at different times for those different use cases. If you're just saying "here's a word that means this thing, although I do have complaints about it," then the question becomes "why not use the other term that also means that and doesn't come with the thing you don't like instead"?
I don't like it, but it's not a hill I wanna die on, either. changing things up once in a while puts another tool int he box, so to speak.
plus the more I think about it, people know what a phobia is, and misandry doesn't exactly roll off the tongue smoothly... fewer syllables but a little bit more awkward to say.
not saying you don't have point by the way, you do.
There's a subtle advantage to language like "phobia" if we're feeling like being as manipulative as they are. "Misandry" is like "sexism." It suggests a conscious choice to be negative towards men. The person holding that position has agency. But "androphobia," means the person holding it has a defect that they're broken and can be rehabilitated.
It's the exact reason they love to use "homophobia" and "transphobia" so much.
The implication buried in the word choice is that the person expressing those views is the abnormal thing. It signals a false consensus and lets you medicalize your opposition. You see, your critic isn't just an asshole, he's in need of reeducation. For his own good of course.
Well, you said you don't like how "phobia" is attached to things. "Misandry" seems to communicate what you want without that baggage. Also, when you're trying to brand something, create a strong message, etc. it's probably best to have a single term rather than multiple redundant terms, because consistency leads to recognizability and coherence.
If you think "androphobia" communicate something that "misandry" doesn't, or vice versa, then sure, it might make sense to use both at different times for those different use cases. If you're just saying "here's a word that means this thing, although I do have complaints about it," then the question becomes "why not use the other term that also means that and doesn't come with the thing you don't like instead"?
I don't like it, but it's not a hill I wanna die on, either. changing things up once in a while puts another tool int he box, so to speak.
plus the more I think about it, people know what a phobia is, and misandry doesn't exactly roll off the tongue smoothly... fewer syllables but a little bit more awkward to say.
not saying you don't have point by the way, you do.
There's a subtle advantage to language like "phobia" if we're feeling like being as manipulative as they are. "Misandry" is like "sexism." It suggests a conscious choice to be negative towards men. The person holding that position has agency. But "androphobia," means the person holding it has a defect that they're broken and can be rehabilitated.
It's the exact reason they love to use "homophobia" and "transphobia" so much. The implication buried in the word choice is that the person expressing those views is the abnormal thing. It signals a false consensus and lets you medicalize your opposition. You see, your critic isn't just an asshole, he's in need of reeducation. For his own good of course.
not sure if that's a plus one or a negative one, but either way, i'll take it, lol.