Subscribe English
look up any word, like hipster:

143 definitions by a censored, inconvenient truth

 
1.
Dear editor, this entry does not violate any of the rules on the editor homepage. "Rule 3. Publish opinions. Don't reject an entry just because it's opinionated. Opinions are useful to readers unfamiliar with a topic. Don't reject an entry because you disagree or are offended. Don't reject an entry because you think it's inaccurate." It's not sexist as it's a view which can be held by any gender, doesn't generalise entire groups and citing another's opinion isn't personal approval or promotion. "Rule 2. Entries can document discrimination but not endorse it."

Generally, "misandry" refers to the hatred and oppression of men on a genotypic basis.

As sociologist Allan Johnson notes, "misandry" has no place in a male-identified, male-centered world. Moreover, Johnson states: “And it takes almost no criticism at all in order for men to feel "bashed," like it's "open season on men." In fact, just saying "male privilege" or "patriarchy" can start eyes rolling and evoke that exasperated sense of "Here we go again.” (Allan Johnson, “Privilege, power and difference,” p. 197) "Accusations of male bashing and man hating work to discredit feminism because people often confuse men as individuals with men as a dominant and privileged category of people. Given the reality of women's oppression, male privilege, and some men's enforcement of both, it's hardly surprising that EVERY woman should have moments when she resents or even "hates" men.” (Allan Johnson, "The gender knot," p. 107
“Both movements (white supremacists and male supremacists) attack women and people of color for playing the victim card because they see white men as the real victims. (Michael Kimmel, "Privilege: A reader," p. 325)

The slightest deviation from male and white centeredness is perceived as a profound loss of privilege. This is why with each tiny step that women and minorities take toward equality, the outcry of white and male supremacists about how "oppressed" white men are has been getting louder.

The conservative backlash is in overdrive to protect their illegitimate, unethical, hierarchal system of privilege. Many White heterosexual men feel "oppressed" and rave about the mythic "misandry."
30174 4940
 
2.
Dear editor, this entry does not violate any of the rules on the editor homepage. "Rule 3. Publish opinions. Don't reject an entry just because it's opinionated. Opinions are useful to readers unfamiliar with a topic. Don't reject an entry because you disagree or are offended. Don't reject an entry because you think it's inaccurate." It's not sexist as it's a view which can be held by any gender, doesn't generalise entire groups and citing another's opinion isn't personal approval or promotion. "Rule 2. Entries can document discrimination but not endorse it."

Generally, "misandry" refers to the hatred and oppression of men on a genotypic basis.

As sociologist Allan Johnson notes, "misandry" has no place in a male-identified, male-centered world. Moreover, Johnson states: “And it takes almost no criticism at all in order for men to feel "bashed," like it's "open season on men." In fact, just saying "male privilege" or "patriarchy" can start eyes rolling and evoke that exasperated sense of "Here we go again.” (Allan Johnson, “Privilege, power and difference,” p. 197) "Accusations of male bashing and man hating work to discredit feminism because people often confuse men as individuals with men as a dominant and privileged category of people. Given the reality of women's oppression, male privilege, and some men's enforcement of both, it's hardly surprising that EVERY woman should have moments when she resents or even "hates" men.” (Allan Johnson, "The gender knot," p. 107
“Both movements (white supremacists and male supremacists) attack women and people of color for playing the victim card because they see white men as the real victims. (Michael Kimmel, "Privilege: A reader," p. 325)

The slightest deviation from male and white centeredness is perceived as a profound loss of privilege. This is why with each tiny step that women and minorities take toward equality, the outcry of white and male supremacists about how "oppressed" white men are has been getting louder.

The conservative backlash is in overdrive to protect their illegitimate, unethical, hierarchal system of privilege. Many White heterosexual men feel "oppressed" and rave about the mythic "misandry."
29374 4393
 
3.
Dear editor, this entry does not violate any of the rules on the editor homepage. "Rule 3. Publish opinions. Don't reject an entry just because it's opinionated. Opinions are useful to readers unfamiliar with a topic. Don't reject an entry because you disagree or are offended. Don't reject an entry because you think it's inaccurate." It's not sexist as it's a view which can be held by any gender, doesn't generalise entire groups and citing another's opinion isn't personal approval or promotion. "Rule 2. Entries can document discrimination but not endorse it."

Generally, "misandry" refers to the hatred and oppression of men on a genotypic basis.

As sociologist Allan Johnson notes, "misandry" has no place in a male-identified, male-centered world. Moreover, Johnson states: “And it takes almost no criticism at all in order for men to feel "bashed," like it's "open season on men." In fact, just saying "male privilege" or "patriarchy" can start eyes rolling and evoke that exasperated sense of "Here we go again.” (Allan Johnson, “Privilege, power and difference,” p. 197) "Accusations of male bashing and man hating work to discredit feminism because people often confuse men as individuals with men as a dominant and privileged category of people. Given the reality of women's oppression, male privilege, and some men's enforcement of both, it's hardly surprising that EVERY woman should have moments when she resents or even "hates" men.” (Allan Johnson, "The gender knot," p. 107
“Both movements (white supremacists and male supremacists) attack women and people of color for playing the victim card because they see white men as the real victims. (Michael Kimmel, "Privilege: A reader," p. 325)

The slightest deviation from male and white centeredness is perceived as a profound loss of privilege. This is why with each tiny step that women and minorities take toward equality, the outcry of white and male supremacists about how "oppressed" white men are has been getting louder.

The conservative backlash is in overdrive to protect their illegitimate, unethical, hierarchal system of privilege. Many White heterosexual men feel "oppressed" and rave about the mythic "misandry."
28868 4246
 
4.
man
Dear editor, this entry does not violate any of the rules on the editor homepage. "Rule 3. Publish opinions. Don't reject an entry just because it's opinionated. Opinions are useful to readers unfamiliar with a topic. Don't reject an entry because you disagree or are offended. Don't reject an entry because you think it's inaccurate." It is not sexist as it is a view which can be held by any gender, does not generalise entire groups and does not mention any approval or promotion of discrimination. "Rule 2 Entries can document discrimination but not endorse it." So act with a little integrity, for once.

90% are useless, worthless arseholes who vote up and post misogynistic definitions. when they're not doing that they're probably whining their egocentric hearts out that people are complaining about their stupid misogynistic arses whilst desperately trying to distance themselves from that fact. despite this they'll often either a) not vote down male chauvinism and only recognise sexism exists when (shock, horror!) it's directed at them (useless, worthless arsehole) or b) laugh at misogyny and casual sexism and vote it up. c) the absolute rarity on urbandictionary: feminist male who votes down chauvinistic, masculist sociopathy and who doesn't expect people to simply accept casual chauvinism and irrational prejudice because some other oblivious, privileged arsehole who only empathises with their own interests (fuck you) finds it amusing.
"i laughed my head off at the notion of the delusional man who claimed UD was not a repository of the racist, sexist sentiments of antisocial, teenage white heterosexual males, they need to find a clue. off the top of my head: rape (15 out of 20 pages = misogynistic bullshit), domestic violence, domestic abuse, sexual harassment, patriarchy, women's rights, feminist (5 of 11), feminazi (5 of 8), surprise sex, faggot, dyke, mangina, slut, slut shaming, whore, bitch, cunt, cum dumpster, woman (16 of 20 - chauvinistic bullshit), women (8 of 10), female brain, female logic, 50 facts about women... cba to write any more, you only need to open your oblivious eyes to see what is evident, if you've been an editor you'll also know that almost every other definition that's submitted is a made up sexist term where the female is sexually degraded anyway or something racist/homophobic... which often still gets accepted, DESPITE it being against rule 2 on the editor homepage which states "2. Reject racist and sexist entries. Entries can document discrimination but not endorse it."(pissed off pirate, alabama hot pocket, red sock, anybody?), but what do you expect when 90% of the editors themselves are other egotistical antisocial, teenage white heterosexual males?"
3505 1203
 
5.
man
Dear editor, this entry does not violate any of the rules on the editor homepage. "Rule 3. Publish opinions. Don't reject an entry just because it's opinionated. Opinions are useful to readers unfamiliar with a topic. Don't reject an entry because you disagree or are offended. Don't reject an entry because you think it's inaccurate." It is not sexist as it is a view which can be held by any gender, does not generalise entire groups and does not mention any approval or promotion of discrimination. "Rule 2 Entries can document discrimination but not endorse it." So act with a little integrity, for once.

90% are useless, worthless arseholes who vote up and post misogynistic definitions. when they're not doing that they're probably whining their egocentric hearts out that people are complaining about their stupid misogynistic arses whilst desperately trying to distance themselves from that fact. despite this they'll often either a) not vote down male chauvinism and only recognise sexism exists when (shock, horror!) it's directed at them (useless, worthless arsehole) or b) laugh at misogyny and casual sexism and vote it up. c) the absolute rarity on urbandictionary: feminist male who votes down chauvinistic, masculist sociopathy and who doesn't expect people to simply accept casual chauvinism and irrational prejudice because some other oblivious, privileged arsehole who only empathises with their own interests (fuck you) finds it amusing.
"i laughed my head off at the notion of the delusional man who claimed UD was not a repository of the racist, sexist sentiments of antisocial, teenage white heterosexual males, they need to find a clue. off the top of my head: rape (15 out of 20 pages = misogynistic bullshit), domestic violence, domestic abuse, sexual harassment, patriarchy, women's rights, feminist (5 of 11), feminazi (5 of 8), surprise sex, faggot, dyke, mangina, slut, slut shaming, whore, bitch, cunt, cum dumpster, woman (16 of 20 - chauvinistic bullshit), women (8 of 10), female brain, female logic, 50 facts about women... cba to write any more, you only need to open your oblivious eyes to see what is evident, if you've been an editor you'll also know that almost every other definition that's submitted is a made up sexist term where the female is sexually degraded anyway or something racist/homophobic... which often still gets accepted, DESPITE it being against rule 2 on the editor homepage which states "2. Reject racist and sexist entries. Entries can document discrimination but not endorse it."(pissed off pirate, alabama hot pocket, red sock, anybody?), but what do you expect when 90% of the editors themselves are other egotistical antisocial, teenage white heterosexual males?"
2899 1018
 
6.
man
Dear editor, this entry does not violate any of the rules on the editor homepage. "Rule 3. Publish opinions. Don't reject an entry just because it's opinionated. Opinions are useful to readers unfamiliar with a topic. Don't reject an entry because you disagree or are offended. Don't reject an entry because you think it's inaccurate." It is not sexist as it is a view which can be held by any gender, does not generalise entire groups and does not mention any approval or promotion of discrimination. "Rule 2 Entries can document discrimination but not endorse it." So act with a little integrity, for once.

90% are useless, worthless arseholes who vote up and post misogynistic definitions. when they're not doing that they're probably whining their egocentric hearts out that people are complaining about their stupid misogynistic arses whilst desperately trying to distance themselves from that fact. despite this they'll often either a) not vote down male chauvinism and only recognise sexism exists when (shock, horror!) it's directed at them (useless, worthless arsehole) or b) laugh at misogyny and casual sexism and vote it up. c) the absolute rarity on urbandictionary: feminist male who votes down chauvinistic, masculist sociopathy and who doesn't expect people to simply accept casual chauvinism and irrational prejudice because some other oblivious, privileged arsehole who only empathises with their own interests (fuck you) finds it amusing.
"i laughed my head off at the notion of the delusional man who claimed UD was not a repository of the racist, sexist sentiments of antisocial, teenage white heterosexual males, they need to find a clue. off the top of my head: rape (15 out of 20 pages = misogynistic bullshit), domestic violence, domestic abuse, sexual harassment, patriarchy, women's rights, feminist (5 of 11), feminazi (5 of 8), surprise sex, faggot, dyke, mangina, slut, slut shaming, whore, bitch, cunt, cum dumpster, woman (16 of 20 - chauvinistic bullshit), women (8 of 10), female brain, female logic, 50 facts about women... cba to write any more, you only need to open your oblivious eyes to see what is evident, if you've been an editor you'll also know that almost every other definition that's submitted is a made up sexist term where the female is sexually degraded anyway or something racist/homophobic... which often still gets accepted, DESPITE it being against rule 2 on the editor homepage which states "2. Reject racist and sexist entries. Entries can document discrimination but not endorse it."(pissed off pirate, alabama hot pocket, red sock, anybody?), but what do you expect when 90% of the editors themselves are other egotistical antisocial, teenage white heterosexual males?"
2162 859
 
7.
man
Dear editor, this entry does not violate any of the rules on the editor homepage. "Rule 3. Publish opinions. Don't reject an entry just because it's opinionated. Opinions are useful to readers unfamiliar with a topic. Don't reject an entry because you disagree or are offended. Don't reject an entry because you think it's inaccurate." It is not sexist as it is a view which can be held by any gender, does not generalise entire groups and does not mention any approval or promotion of discrimination. "Rule 2 Entries can document discrimination but not endorse it." So act with a little integrity, for once.

90% are useless, worthless arseholes who vote up and post misogynistic definitions. when they're not doing that they're probably whining their egocentric hearts out that people are complaining about their stupid misogynistic arses whilst desperately trying to distance themselves from that fact. despite this they'll often either a) not vote down male chauvinism and only recognise sexism exists when (shock, horror!) it's directed at them (useless, worthless arsehole) or b) laugh at misogyny and casual sexism and vote it up. c) the absolute rarity on urbandictionary: feminist male who votes down chauvinistic, masculist sociopathy and who doesn't expect people to simply accept casual chauvinism and irrational prejudice because some other oblivious, privileged arsehole who only empathises with their own interests (fuck you) finds it amusing.
"i laughed my head off at the notion of the delusional man who claimed UD was not a repository of the racist, sexist sentiments of antisocial, teenage white heterosexual males, they need to find a clue. off the top of my head: rape (15 out of 20 pages = misogynistic bullshit), domestic violence, domestic abuse, sexual harassment, patriarchy, women's rights, feminist (5 of 11), feminazi (5 of 8), surprise sex, faggot, dyke, mangina, slut, slut shaming, whore, bitch, cunt, cum dumpster, woman (16 of 20 - chauvinistic bullshit), women (8 of 10), female brain, female logic, 50 facts about women... cba to write any more, you only need to open your oblivious eyes to see what is evident, if you've been an editor you'll also know that almost every other definition that's submitted is a made up sexist term where the female is sexually degraded anyway or something racist/homophobic... which often still gets accepted, DESPITE it being against rule 2 on the editor homepage which states "2. Reject racist and sexist entries. Entries can document discrimination but not endorse it."(pissed off pirate, alabama hot pocket, red sock, anybody?), but what do you expect when 90% of the editors themselves are other egotistical antisocial, teenage white heterosexual males?"
2121 857