The Psychology of Hate
Years back, in another life, I used to teach at seminars and conferences that provided continuing education units for professional re-certification.
In one particular module, I used a portable grease board in a room in front of my waiting audience. Without introducing myself or saying anything else, I used a grease pen to write the words “Men are…” at the top of the board, and then silently invited the audience to finish the sentence.
Almost invariably, “pigs” or “dogs” was the first offering, accompanied by a room full of good-natured chuckles. I would nod my head and write it down on the board and return to the audience, still silent, for more.
“Controlling,” says one. “Afraid of commitment,” says another. “Aggressive.” “Macho“ “Afraid of intimacy.” “Violent.” “Sexist,” and “Power hungry.” More of the pejoratives, and almost only pejoratives, would come from the audience till the board was full.
I then flipped the board to the other side.
“Women are…” was the cue, and the answers were even more rapid fire than they were with men.
“Strong.” “Capable” “Empowered” “Sensitive.” “Nurturing,” and the like would fly from the audience to the grease board like a barrage of arrows, till that side too was full.
“What do you imagine,” I would ask, taking a strategic pause for a sip of water, “that these answers tell us about the real nature of sexism in the way we view men and women?”
Asking them a question with actual spoken words must have thrown them for a loop, because the stock response to that question was almost invariably a room full of nonplussed, cognitively dissonant faces. And that confusion usually gave way to irritation, clearly at me, though every answer on both sides of that board had come from them.
And by the way, the participants in the crowd? They weren’t accountants or nurses or teachers or financial advisors.
They were mental health professionals.
Counselors, psychotherapists, social workers and the lot. The very people we love to imagine possess the objectivity to rise above the mindset of bigotry and sexism. And the people, despite our want of faith in their work, least likely to actually do it.
I wanted a little more pressure so I asked more questions. “How could this affect our therapeutic alliance with clients?- Could it make our relationships with females enabling?- Punitive with men?” And always, the final question I asked was “Do we carry sexism, against men, unconscious or conscious, into our work with each and every client?”
With that question the anger usually intensified.
In one talk, a female participant, a social worker, jumped out of her chair and threw her papers everywhere. “You’re the sexist!” she hissed at me, and stormed out of the room. She later wrote letters of complaint both about my topic and the fact I would not sign off on her attendance.
Welcome to the wacky world of mental health.
It is a telling study in the psychology of hate. Indeed, as we peel back the layers of fantasy from the profession, we are forced into a most disturbing conclusion.
Psychology is hate. At least as it is practiced in western culture.
It’s most evident in the junk psychology market. Since the mid-eighties, get-rich-quick psychology gurus have often made their way to bestseller lists. Books like Robin Norwood’s Women Who Love Too Much, Susan Forwards, Men Who Hate Women and the Women Who Love Them and others have been runaway hits, all predicated on rigid stereotypes of men who hate and women who love; all just more additions to the already crowded grease board.
Recently, MRA Mark Rudov appeared on Fox News in a brief debate with Karen Salmansohn on women executives. She was given a nice plug for her new book, Bounce Back. They could have, and probably should have in the interest of balance, given her credit for her previous publication, How to Make Your Man Behave in 21 Days or Less Using the Secrets of Professional Dog Trainers.
I don’t make this stuff up. Unfortunately, I don’t have to.
Currently, male bashing monarch Phil McGraw reigns in the ratings, and it won’t be long before another emerges, fighting to be top dog in dogging men. All you need is a warped worldview and a nod from Oprah.
And these are just the media hucksters. At least we can say that the men and women who embrace their misandry-for-profit schemes are just another dumbed-down group in a dumbed-down media culture.
The more culpable and dangerous are the ones with the air of legitimacy. These folks don’t write, or don’t just write. They teach, do research, and most dreadfully, hang out their shingles and help infect the world, one gullible client at a time.
The world of psychology in academics and practice has become a weapon in the realm of gender politics. Almost all pretense to objectivity and academic integrity has been forced aside by ideologues with an ax to grind against men and who are using the loathsome disguise of helping professionals to further their agenda.
If you think that is extreme, read on.
Allaboutcounseling.com is purportedly an information and referral resource for people seeking mental health services. What it is in reality is a portal, a conduit that induces women into the mentality that it is the vile scourge of manhood at the root of their problems.
And they offer feminism as the solution before the first session is booked.
Some tidbits from their site include some detailed hype about the fundamentals of feminism and some reassurances that not all feminists are lesbians.
I suppose they figure heterosexual women need such basics. And it’s good pre-sell to overcome objections before they are raised. Ask any used car salesman.
They even have a nifty section promoting a new masculinity. These Freudettes have the key to re-engineering men for the better, with the implication, of course, that the way men are now is defective and in need of an overhaul.
Part of that overhaul is a gag. This is just one of the standouts, as it appears word for word on the site.
Openness- To others (especially to women) criticism of our behaviors and attitudes, listen, listen some more, and only speak if the critic wants feedback.
This isn’t even speak when spoken to. It is shut up and take it. Speak with permission only, from whichever woman is attacking you at the moment.
Ah, the finer aspects of mental health.
They have much more there. Enough bogus stats on domestic violence, rape and sexual abuse for a N.O.W. convention, and staunch defenses of feminism tied in directly with the counseling message. Their ultimate point is clearly that sound mental health for women depends on embracing feminism, and with it the hatred for men.
Sound advice for those seeking love and intimacy if I ever saw it.
At this point, the grease board is showing more grease than board.
I wish I could say that this was the bottom of the pit; that the infection stopped there, but we are still dealing more with the symptoms than the actual disease.
Enter the American Psychological Association, and it’s Division 51 group The Society for the Psychological Study of Men and Masculinity. (SPSMM) You can pronounce the acronym spasm if you want to. I do. And it fits.
Here are two of the bullet points from the Mission Statement on their home page, out there for the world to see.
Aye, there‘s the rub, and with it goes the last remaining bit of room on the grease board. Men are defective, pernicious banes to civilized society. And feminism is the answer.
Even our most revered experts in human nature are saying as much.
And this is how it worked in the old Soviet Union. It is wise to consider that in the Solzhenitsyn era of gulags and iron fisted reaction to political dissent, that most of the dissidents were imprisoned in “mental health facilities,” the logic being that if you disagreed with the state, there must be something wrong with your mind.
It was also a strategy of, and yes, I will say it without reservation, the Hitler regime, to poison the minds of the populace with disinformation about Jews, prepping the people to look the other way while they were dispatched in the name of a master race.
The plans for men may be less extreme and of longer duration, but it is happening nonetheless. Men are being marginalized year after year. Their numbers in college graduating classes are waning; 42% at last count. They have lost over 80% of the jobs in the current recession. They are dying by suicide and all other manners of death at rates that make women’s lives look like vacations in Fiji.
It’s hell having all this power. It is a wonder how we find time to oppress the world with it, much less twirl our moustaches and snicker while we do it.
But the anti-male hate machine keeps grinding away. Spasm would no doubt classify the MRM as a mass shared psychosis, and MRA’s individually as antithetical to humanity.
I used to remember that social worker who threw the tantrum in my class with a smile. It was a funny image. But that was some years ago. At the time, I knew the sexism was there, but it was not entrenched as deeply as it is today. And I naively thought it would go away.
I am not smiling about it any more.
Paul Elam is the publisher of A Voice for Men
Possibly related posts...
Bio available at my website | More from Paul Elam
Stumble It!
It’s not going away overnight. We’ve been marinating in it for decades. I’m 36, and I still remember one day in grade school when my sister, 1 year younger than I, came home, head held high, proclaiming she learned in school why girls are more mature and less violent than men. Because girls are pure and boys are hybrid. Nice thing to teach a room full of grade schoolers, half of whom are boys. And its only gotten worse.
Hat tip to Paul and like minded individuals who use their influence to try to counter sexism, regardless of the gender of the victim. I have little doubt that the inplacable hostilities of feminists is not the most pleasant of reactions you receive, but please do not doubt you are appreciated.
@ Melody
Thanks for your supportive words. As you are part of that field, I trust you are doing what you can to combat this awful paradigm.
Kind regards.
Paul,
Accolades to you for speaking up on this topic. Its such a subversive part of our culture and I see no signs of it going away. Only education holds any hope of making this change. Watching Oprah this week was a frustrating experience, not only did she have understanding for the woman who on her show who described despicable behavior toward men, she then described men as being “jerks” for doing the same things! Then, the psychologist on the show said “women are the better of the species….” I mean, it’s great the he loves women, but to say the are “Better”? Its insidious in our culture, in our thinking and in our literature. We need to wake up if our divorce rate is ever going to change!!!
I didn’t really get how mental health workers acknowledging stereotypes of women and men automatically equates to them being /worse/ than the rest of the population for sexism. Equal, perhaps, but I would attribute that to their tendency to be human.
Yes, this is a problem. But I just didn’t get how they could necessarily be condemned as worse than anybody else.
John Gordon, in his 1982 book “The Myth of the Monstrous Male”, outlined a quite similar greaseboard exercise to the one described here, with one added important twist.
Start with two columns marked Male and Female. Under each of these main headings have two more columns labeled Good and Bad, as in characteristics. Then fill in the four columns with 3-4 of the stereotypical parameters everyone would be familiar with — though it’s more difficult to do the Men/Good column now than it was when Gordon wrote his book.
Now here was Gordon’s important and brilliant contribution to the men’s movement and anti-feminism: he noticed that the essential feminist gambit was to call the items under the Female/Good column “inherent” to women, and those under the Female/Bad column “socially imposed”, while for men the “explanations” were reversed — i.e., men’s Bad qualities were inherent, while their Good ones were the result of “social privilege” (which of course had to be done away with).
It’s almost so clever and conniving it escapes nearly everyone’s attention. So thanks for giving me an opportunity to recall it. The gambit is all the more devious because it relies on the notion of sex differences, which feminism had officially been totally against since the second wave got under way (the main reason being cause these could be used to discriminate against women in the workplace).
Anyway, Gordon’s Feminist Gambit deserves wider consideration, appreciation, and circulation.
One other thought: the difficulty for most people in coming up with things to list under the Men/Good column might have something to do with the evaporation of all social privilege for men, which hadn’t quite been accomplished by 1982. One is almost tempted to speculate that True Equality will be reached when people have the same difficulty filling in the Women/Bad column. :>
[...] is the reward men get for being nice? For accommodating feminism, for being a good boy? Here it is, read it in it’s entirety. Read every last word until the full meaning of what our society [...]
@ Jay
Of course, as long as proper credit is given, and I see you did that, feel free to use any of my material you like.
Regards, Paul
And in the future you can reach me at paul@mensnewsdaily.com
Paul:
I appreciate your excellent article here today. It is on a topic that I have written on myself (in a general way) and, because it is one of my interests and it is something that I want my readers to be familiar with, I have mildly appropriated a portion of your article.
I have done so prior to asking permission only because I cannot figure out how to contact you directly from the article page. I have duly linked to your original and have given appropriate authorship credit.
Please take a look at http://objectifygirls.blogspot.com/2009/09/modern-psychology-full-of-femtards.html. With your permission, or with your required modification, I would appreciate your allowing me some minor “fair use” of your article.
I’ve experienced the Men are _________ enough times to where I do not like being around women. Why do I want to be around those who try to bring out the worst in me just to further their man-hating agenda?
The place where I work operates under the assumption that men are always threats. Whenever there is a disagreement with a female supervisor and the disagreeing male employee is fired, there is always a flyer immediately posted around the building with his picture on it notifing everybody to call the police if he is seen near the area. I never see this alarm used against disgruntled female employees.
Interestingly, I agree with both Bernard and Paul.
Disciplines, which is what we call them because we can never extrapolate anything empirical from their practice, can be like wading through a bog in search of a lost coin. And they are always subject to political abuse and misuse. But of course we see that with the hard sciences, too.
Still, the study of the mind is of real importance. When it is practiced with some degree of integrity, and it often has, it produces tangible benefits.
It can be said of Freud’s work, though much of it is dismissed in modern disciplinary circles, that it gave us an ethical responsibility toward childhood. The same of Piaget.
I think it is a given that the lack of empiricism does not discount the value of a pursuit, nor does the presence of it assure that same value won’t be twisted to fit political objectives.
Excellent essay. I think the MAIN problem is indicated by the example that the above commenter Mr. K. gives: he provides a link to a fantastic article, but then proclaims it “too long to read”. WTF? Football games are to long, not articles that help us understand what is going on in the/our world.
Put down the damned remotes, guys, and take part and action in our lives!! We need to stand up to courts, lawmakers, and others who want to institutionalize the eradication of manhood.
Bernard Chapin could be right, but with respect I am not convinced. I write as one whose life has been devoted to mathematical physics. If you will permit I will refer to this as one of the hard sciences as opposed to the others that are soft sciences. So what my point?
It is this the hard sciences have been spectacularly successful in describing the physical world. The problem is that the soft sciences think they can do the same and in my view they can not. The point about the physical world is that it is essentially ’simple’. That does not mean that it is easily understandable to most but yes it is simple, and obeys simple laws.
Just because physicist understand say a hydrogen atom does not mean that any of the soft sciences can understand anything with the same precision, or indeed understand it at all.
Also soft sciences in so much as they have any basis at all usually borrow from statistics, which is a mathematical science. They have independent life of their own. The best you can say is that they collect data which they analyse using techniques they barely understand. Do you really think psychologists even understand statistics beyond stuffing numbers into a computer and ad few basic concepts like central tenancy and spread. No of course they don’t.
Instinctively I actually detest psychologists and the like. This is because they demean me and indeed the entire human race by trying to reduce human dignity to a few basic concepts that they, the new witch doctors, have the arrogance to insist upon.
Psychology–studying the way the mind works–is very important. However, like many other disciplines it is dominated by those with a political agenda. Leftists run the upper strata of most of the organizations I’ve seen but studying the mind is not by itself ever suggestive of hate unless you distort your perceptions to fulfill a hateful political agenda.
Hard as the governments in SE Asia try to mimic the silliness of the West, gender specifics are much more ingrained as the cultures are centuries older…in short, common sense trumps political correctness. Its a place where men are respected until they prove they deserve otherwise. And a place where girls can excel without losing their femininity. For any man reading this, I urge you to Google “Angeles City Philippines.” Your life may never be the same.
Excellent article. I’ve been wanting to do an article on biased (misandrist) curriculum for my local college newspaper. I doubt it will get printed. This provides a good basis to begin the article. The problem described in this article begins in the classrooms on our college and university campuses, IMO, extends to the entire liberal arts department and beyond.
I did read the article suggested by Mr. K. It was a bit confusing but some of it boiled down to some feminist are now a bit bored with feminism and now look for a bit of excitement in other directions. Well BS to that. The point of the MM is not that we want just to respond to feminism but find a way of our own which does not include them. Should some feminist start to decide that may be we are not such pigs after all then and think ‘real men’ are more sexually interesting then all I can do is laugh. That boat has already left sister and your not on it.
Anyway I don’t want to depart from Paul Elam excellent analysis of how feminism has turned psychology into a tool of man hating. It does not surprise me that he tells us that even in Singapore Feminism is having its effect. It looks like feminism could in the end be the only true global mental disease.
Paul Elam
I had read that in some Europian countries (except in former Soviet block) feminism has taken control and now has backlash for fear of “totalitarian feminism”, particularly in Scandinavia. Googling this NYT article, gives a glimpse but it’s too long to read.
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/06/travel/06iht-feminists.html
Paul,
I have been recently communicating with a man in Singapore who cites the growing problem with feminist ideology there.
A truly terrifying read. But what you describe is happening in America and western societies. Is it also happening in other societies? I don’t know but think it might not be. Could it not be that we need to look for strength from outside and not just from those who are around ?
In a recent podcast AMFORTAS speculated than men in western society might no longer be willing to fight to preserve the nation from an invader. Would men die to preserve female privilege he asked. He was making the point that men where loosing their protective instinct. But I say that if this invader was from a society that was not feminist then they should be welcomed as liberators. I think we need to understand that we have only one enemy and I for one will never support men who go abroad to wage war against non feminist societies as they are doing in Afghanistan.
Caveat, Paul Elam
Those of us who have ben involved in civil litigation, it’s tough to stay silent when wrongful accusation is made by opponent.
Also, during reciprocal pleadings (paper war before Court’s ruling) either party can admit undisputable facts, such as name, address, age, etc. But if one fails to respond to opponents allegation at isue, it is assumed to be admitted.
Similar thing happens both-gender organizations such as Parent Without Partners. (PWP).
The main organization is feminist dominated. Local chapters hold discussion groups and if a woman makes an allegation, men rarely dare to disagree. If some man makes a counterpoint, other men don’t support or even attack the argument (maybe for future benefits from women).
So the “conventional wisdom” is propagated to new members and those who hear or read about it in newsletters.
Paul Elam,
It’s unique to read from a professional to validate what many lay people have suspected for a long time. The junk-psycholgist have been popular with media and metastasized the mass mindset against men. Your quote also apply to ordinary men. The adage “Silence is golden” to survive in feminized world.
“Openness- To others (especially to women) criticism of our behaviors and attitudes, listen, listen some more, and only speak if the critic wants feedback.
This isn’t even speak when spoken to. It is shut up and take it. Speak with permission only, from whichever woman is attacking you at the moment.”
It is sad to see the Profession become so hate-filled and quite blind to it. Blind-hatred takes on meaning. I posted a letter here on MND just a week or so ago from a young woman counsellor I know who – against express orders – gave a seminar on Misandry to 30 odd clients in a drug and alcohol clinic. Integrity can be found like isolated tufts on grass on a barren cliff-face. Don’t desspair, Paul.
Let us wade into the tide and fish for sanity.
I did the same thing with high school kids twenty years ago, and with adult friends, same results.
I pointed out that what KKK types told me about blacks while I hitch hiked through the south in the 60’s was much like what feminist have TAUGHT our children to think about men, while castrated males sat their like “good dogs” waiting for a pat on the head from women … men are too aggressive, tooviolent, too focused on sex, to violent, on and on. Today feminist pretend not to be racist while they attack ALL men, white or black.
Thanks for your recent articles here at MND and for this one in particular.
Refreshing clarity.
The humor is also helpful.