Piers Paul-Read

Misogyny is not just for men

Piers Paul Read says that the liberation of women, and the decline of their archetypal nurturing role, has given misogyny a new and extended lease of life

issue 03 July 2010

‘Was it Vauvenargues or Chamfort,’ asks Pierre Costals in Henri de Montherlant’s novel Pity for Women, ‘who said that one must choose between loving women and understanding them?’ Most men would rather love women than understand them, and most women would rather be loved than understood. Women particularly resent men taking a scalpel to dissect, let alone disparage, the feminine psyche, which makes it difficult for a man to write about misogyny; yet there are signs that it is on the rise and, since good relations between the sexes is so fundamental to human happiness, it is perhaps pertinent to ask why.

Misogyny is found in pagan antiquity but today is frequently blamed on the Christian tradition which denigrated the daughters of Eve as a source of temptation: they lured men to have sex and, since almost all sex was sinful, jeopardised the salvation of their souls. However, Christianity also venerated a woman as the mother of God and empowered women by insisting upon a life-long, monogamous marriage; and much of the most vociferous misogyny appears after the Enlightenment, particularly in the 19th century.

Comments

Join the debate for just $5 for 3 months

Be part of the conversation with other Spectator readers by getting your first three months for $5.

Already a subscriber? Log in