An oldy but a goody: Here Xamry F contemplates a “world without men” and comes to a male-positive revelation. But first, what caused her to contemplate such a thing in the first place? Let’s take a stroll down misandry lane:
What with sperm banks and the near obsolescence of muscle labor, the acceptance of single motherhood, and what the media is presenting as the “lesbian chic,” it’s getting easier and easier these days to imagine a world without men—a world where men are subjugated or banished or never were. From the myth of the Amazons to Barbie Land, many such worlds have been imagined.
“Leonard Sax, Ph.D. and M.D., asks of feminists: ‘What are they after? If you read what their leaders say, you get the impression that their paradise would be a world without men.”’ Quite a few literary feminists have devoted themselves to imagining just such worlds. Among the most prominent was 19th century feminist Charlotte Perkins Gilman who wrote of Herland, a female-only utopia “where women would lead placidly sexless lives and reproduce by parthenogenesis.” Joanna Russ imagined Whileaway, a colony supported by high technology, a female-only world and therefore “a serene garden paradise.” Author Steve Moxon:
“Mary E. Bradley in Mizora (1990) describes a world of blonde, powerful, Brunhildes whose discovery of “the Secret of Life” permitted them to eliminate all men. . . . In Joanna Russ’ The Female Man (1975), most men were killed by a mysterious disease that affected only their gender. The rest were dispatched by Jaël, a man-hating fury with retractable steel fingernails. Children were created by bringing ova together. In The Wanderground (1978), Sally Gearhart achieved the same feat by “implantment” and “egg merging.”’
Twenty-first century advances in reproductive technology lend credibility to scenarios that envision a male-less paradise of peace and harmony, a world without violence, aggression, fear . . . or war? “In the very near future women might be quite capable of dispensing with men altogether,” proclaim preeminent science writers Jeremy Churfas and John Gribbin. “The technology of test-tube babies already exists, and if an adequately supported team were to put their minds to the problem it would be no time before women could do without men entirely.” Announced in 2022: “Fatherless mice have been created in the lab using only unfertilised mouse eggs, in a move that could one day pave the way for creating one-parent babies.”
Novels like Herland attempt to show readers how idyllic a world without fathers would be. To serve feminist ideological purposes, these “serene garden paradises” are imagined in depth and detail enough to linger in the mind as a kind of “proof” of paradise that could be if only there were no men. Such scenarios will also linger in the court of public opinion convicting men and masculinity as charged.
Says author Lionel Tiger, “The automatic and virtually universal assumption is that the source of evil is male.” “Could it be that men are determined to be greedy, aggressive, and brutish?” ponders Sam Keen, author of Fire in the Belly: On Being a Man. “Does some selfish gene, some territorial imperative drive us blindly into hostile action?” The prestigious American Psychological Association would seem to think so. It has officially declared “traditional masculinity” as “harmful.” A column by Laurie Fendrich in the highly influential Chronicle of Higher Education concludes: “The real problem is, very simply, the existence of men,” (emphasis in the original) and she dreams of a “wonderful new world” without men, “No more war, rape or pillage!” Conviction of Man’s guilt creates a hard-heartedness toward men that has reached prejudicial levels such that what would otherwise be recognized as hate speech is instead tacitly accepted as “truth telling.”
Says author Andrew Kimbrell, “a little-known defective mythology about masculinity has been indelibly encoded into our social structures and psyches. Men live and breathe this myth on a daily basis. It is the basis for many of their dysfunctional daydreams and most of their nightmares. It has now led society into a dangerous ‘misandry,’ a belief that masculinity itself is responsible for most of the world’s woes.” “Why Can’t We Hate Men?” asks Suzanna Danuta Walters of the Washington Post; “it seems logical to hate men.” Indeed, we believe that hating men is so justified, that the word “misandry”—a word that would censure hostility toward men in the same way the word “misogyny” censures hostility toward women—is deemed unnecessary. So much so that, for decades, our efforts to get the word added into dictionaries failed time and again. To this day it remains a word shunned by the major media. Few people use the word, many have never even heard of it.
But despite all the hateful feminist rhetoric, Xamry F contemplates a world without men and, in place of a “serene garden paradise,” she sees instead a nightmare world: