Muinteoir_Saoirse [she/her]

Educator/Múinteoir (she/elle/sí)

  • 0 Posts
  • 6 Comments
Joined 11 months ago
cake
Cake day: February 26th, 2025

help-circle
  • Even if it was used to sue a man the logic would still be misogynist. Let’s say a man sleeps with a married woman, and her ex-husband sues him. He is suing this man for sleeping with his wife, an extension of himself, his property. The man who participated in the affair would owe him damages for taking what belonged to the husband.

    In the case of a woman suing another woman, it’s a reinforcing of the idea that a woman is to blame for the transgressions of the married man. That she tempted him away from his marriage.

    Does this seem hypocritical? It isn’t. The crux of this all is the misogynist underpinnings of the bourgeois matrimonial contract that staples a legalistic framework for cisheteronormative, patriarchial family modes onto a relationship. The idea that intimate personal relationships are contractual obligations regulated and governed by the state and enforceable through property law is the thing that is misogynist, not whether the perpetrator of harm is a man or a woman, or whether the person being harmed is a man or a woman.

    Misogyny can also be perpetuated by women, and men can also be victims of misogyny. In fact, that is the norm.