squeers

The difference between misogyny and misandry in a patriarchal culture is that misogyny is seen as normal behaviour among both men and women, whereas misandry is viewed as pathological and subversive.

Also, your grotesque diatribe against women as little more than holes for men’s pleasure on the one hand, and petty ball and chains of domesticity on the other, is nothing new in cultural expression, and is very common in the revered literature of Henry Miller, John Updike, Phillip Roth and many others.

So far, the feminist movement has lifted the centuries old taboo against any form of misandric discussion in the culture, but it still has to struggle to be properly heard in a society that still views men and masculinity as sacred.

Cuunt. It registers 10 on the NO-NO-ometer!

It does indeed Poirot. No word is worse in our Australian lingo, and in America and Britain and presumably throughout the English-speaking world.

Yet it is in such common usage, especially among the rougher sectors…. and in our schools and generally amongst the under-aged cohort.

The thing that concerns me most about the use of words like this is our totally confused attitude: Common and totally acceptable in some circumstances and absolute taboo in others.

And no, it’s use is not misogynistic, it is generally used as a strong expletive to indicate frustration, anger or insult, in a manner that is not at all derogatory to women.

It is well and truly time that we freed up and just allowed all of these taboo words to be used across the board.

What we need is safeguards against defamation and abjectly unfounded insults. Where swear words can be used in ways other than these, then they should be allowed…everywhere.

That would eliminate one (of our many) totally unnecessary hangup.

And of course, when these words come into mainstreamly acceptable use, they will lose their punch…. as has happened with bastard, bugger, bloody, etc, etc.

This thread is spawning some interesting comments. Good one, Squeers.

Vacuousness in either gender is a turn off, in my opinion.
I've always thought a "contrast" was arousing. When I was young I once went out with an overtly sexy "experienced" man who turned out to be a wet blanket. Conversely, at another stage of my life, I had a fling with a quiet well-mannered accountant (who actually owned books on etiquette!). I'd only seen him cloaked in suit and tie and he turned out to be a gentle Adonis underneath - an extremely erotic experience.

I do agree that it's all a social dance and charade. Our libidos are never far from the surface. We're all a bit precious, in fact.

Killarney; you did not understand Squeers post; he said that women expect men to be men but similtaneously spend their life emasculating men. Poor buggars, how is that fair?

Anyway, time for another cuunt story.

Old codger was in the public bar when a young spiv came in.

Spiv to barmaid: Tickle me arse with a feather.

Barmaid angrily: What did you say?!

Spiv: Typically nasty weather.

Old codger thinks this is great and goes into the Ladies Lounge.

Old codger to barmaid: Tickle me arse with a feather.

Barmaid angrily: What did you say?!

Old codger: Cuunt of a day.

Killarney,
that's nonsense, indeed back to front. The pc police are trying to censor anything remotely, or by inference, derogatory of women while they remain at liberty to be as scathing as they like of men--witness Jocelynne's last few articles, utterly partisan and unreflective in their victim feminism.
"your grotesque diatribe against women as little more than holes for men’s pleasure on the one hand..."; I lament the fact, m'dear, that our ideals are thus offended, but such is our overarching biological imperative, as is woman's for the c0ck, the rest is window dressing. "...and petty ball and chains of domesticity on the other". Well men don't drag women off to wage war or build pyramids, why must we be slave to their inanities? The fact that we endure the white picket fence mentality is concession enough; I will not willingly submit to more credulousness than that.
"So far, the feminist movement has lifted the centuries old taboo against any form of misandric discussion in the culture, but it still has to struggle to be properly heard in a society that still views men and masculinity as sacred".
Good grief what tripe! Men sacred? Reformist feminists are an affront to genuine feminism, indeed they are patriarchal! looking merely to reform the patriarchal structure according politically correct dictums, to feminise and infiltrate hierarchy along gender lines yet maintain the inequity that remains in terms of class and exploitation. Such feminists are merely men with c--ts, possessed of the same ruthless will to power.
War is rape and pillage, whatever the pretext, and women are perennially as guilty as men in their support of the war effort, and in their will-full denial of what really goes on.
The gender distinction's a crock and our institutional lies are maintained 50/50.

Claims of males thinking of "…women as little more than holes for men’s pleasure on the one hand..." are easily countered with jokes like, "What's the useless bit of skin on the end of a penis?"

"A man."

And what is it with prepositions? People are either coming across or going down or getting one in – it's so confusing I don't know which way to turn. Why is it always a cock up? What's wrong with a cock down?

That's why genuine feminists – like myself – are automatically misanthropes. We dislike all people equally and so are equally fair to everyone.

(Though I dislike them less if they're someone really good-looking and who 'puts it out a bit' in my direction)