Except that, in the context of this conversation .... the misandrist triggered the men, one of whom immediately went to genocidal thinking the minute Argumentative Penguin gave him an opening. And he went full throttle. This always happens. Always.

I'll remind you that the UN has designated the removal of children from parents as an act of genocide. And that's where this guy went. Right off the bat. And all the other men with butt hurt feelings, either didn't notice, were okay with it, support it, or don't think it matters. They're more concerned about their feelings. How dare they be hated.

Jeez. I wonder. You don't notice when some Random Barney starts hollering for genocide on behalf of your feelings and you wonder why you might be viewed with some side eyes skepticism and suspicion?

Hmm. Okay.

So, in this idea to remove children from misandrists ... how are you gonna tell who's a misandrist and who's not? When all women have reason to be wary of men? Is there a brain scan I don't know about? Just gonna roll the dice and go with that? That's fair.

So that's why I set it at self described. Because of what was already happening in the commentary and because more men than you would think cannot distinguish between misandrist, feminist, or even woman.

For the purposes of this discussion, it's useful to narrow the field. Otherwise, we women would all be misandrist and that's where the discussion would hang up, rather than developing the things that drive women toward misandry so men can undersrand.

Further, though you may not be able to see it, going through this one building block at a time is providing men with a path toward some emotional literacy that, judging by the bulk of the comments, they clearly lack.

You men are always going on about you were forced to suppress your emotions and now you don't know how to do anything else but rage. Someone tries to take you through some foundations and you fall all over yourselves to smack it away with semantic arguments.

Okay.