“Having internalized the image of the oppressor and adopted his guidelines, [the oppressed] are fearful of freedom.” – Paulo Freire
Internalised misogyny refers to a phenomenon by which misogynistic beliefs are instilled in women. Women, having been socialised in a male supremacist society, project sexist ideas onto themselves and other women. This internalised misogyny is expressed through minimising the value and competency of women and believing sex biases that place men as the superior sex class. Women use the methods of the oppressor class against themselves and other women which works to maintain the subordinated role of women in society.
Feminists like Andrea Dworkin consider this an intentional method of oppression and a form of psychological colonisation:
“The woman herself takes one kind of responsibility absolutely and thus commits herself to her own continuing inferiority: she polices her own body; she internalizes the demands of the dominant class and she constructs her life around meeting those demands. It is the best system of colonization on earth”
How is it being misused?
In recent years, liberal feminists and their fellow woke activists have appropriated this useful term by using it in a way that is totally contradictory to its actual meaning. The misuse of this term serves a similar purpose as screeches ‘choice!’. It is used as a means of shutting down debate and deflecting criticism for patriarchal institutions and practices. The accusation of internalised misogyny is most often hurled when women criticise industries and practices like the sex industry, the beauty industry and other activities and ideals that reinforce male dominance.
To illustrate the misuse of this term we can look at one major point of contention between radical and third wave feminists, prostitution. Radical feminists recognise prostitution as a system of male violence that is rooted in male supremacy, male sexual entitlement and the dehumanisation of women and girls. Prostitution preys on and exploits society’s most vulnerable. Women and girls, the impoverished, people of colour and LGBT individuals are all disproportionately represented in prostitution. One study conducted across 9 countries found that 89% of prostituted women wished to leave the sex industry but simply did not feel they had any other means of survival which tells us that these women are in this position not out of choice but a profound lack thereof.
This is an institution that allows men to take advantage of women’s dire circumstances and circumvent the need for mutual attraction and consent through financial coercion. Men buy their way into the bodies of women who would never have sex with them for any other reason than survival and leave them with detrimental impacts on both their mental and physical health. Men denigrate women from human beings down to commodities and sex objects. Prostitution is not only based on the perception of women as inferior and subhuman but also works to reinforce that notion. Radical feminists believe that prostitution, in reinforcing female inferiority, bolsters male superiority, justifies and perpetuates violence against women and is therefore completely antithetical to female liberation and sex equality.
However, when radical feminists put forth this analysis, or in fact when any woman has an opinion on the sexual exploitation industries that doesn’t toe the “empowerment” party line held so dearly by liberal feminists, accusations of internalized misogyny are sure to ensue. Often accompanied by other accusations such as jealousy, sexual repression and “denying women agency”.
Likewise, daring to suggest that beauty practices like the use of makeup, removal of body hair and the wearing of high heels that harm our feet tends to attract the same response.
I personally have been accused of internalised misogyny after I shared my belief that women’s removal of pubic hair is self harming and only serves men as it is practice conceived by the porn industry that pressures us to inflict unneeded pain on ourselves by removing a secondary sex characteristic that is there for the good of our health. When I questioned how my criticism of such a practice was misogynistic, I was told that I was “infantilising women by questioning their choices”. That is to say that by believing women are capable of thinking critically about their own behaviours and the external forces that influence them, we infantilise women whereas culturally enforced beauty standards that say women must have totally bald vulvae resembling those of toddlers do not. Hm.
The failure of liberal feminists to comprehend this term is blatant given that these women are actually exhibiting quite severe cases of internalised misogyny themselves. What we see being done here is that patriarchal ideals are being misunderstood as true representations of what it is to be a woman. Practices that are socially imposed on women are being misunderstood as some sort of innate female inclination. What feminists for centuries have asserted are lies about women, third wave feminists now seem to believe to be truths, thus any criticism directed at certain patriarchal forces and fabrications is immediately misconstrued as an attack on women.
We also see this exemplified in the liberal feminist’s affinity for regressive and sexist gender ideology. Gender ideology is yet another area in which dissenting opinion can have you branded a victim of internalized misogyny. According to gender ideology and contrary to radical feminism, women are not a sex-class who are and have been oppressed throughout history and around the world on the basis of their sex. Instead, those who subscribe to gender ideology believe women to be an identity that one can opt in and out of based on some obscure feeling through simple self-declaration.
When women point out the sex differences which are essential for us to be able to acknowledge in regards to medicine, sports, analysing women’s oppression and cementing women’s rights, we are commonly tarred with the ‘internalized misogyny’ brush yet again. This is possibly the most bizarre misuse of all. Knowing that women are female and have different bodies to men and speaking openly about female anatomy is not misogynist. On the other hand, denying the very existence of women as sex-class and demanding we abandon the word ‘women’ which acknowledges us as adult human females in favour of dehumanising terms like “menstruators” and “birthing people” that literally require us to identify ourselves based on these bodily functions absolutely is.
We also see women, including JK Rowling, being told they have internalised misogyny for their reluctance to be defined by sexist stereotypes. While feminists since the beginning have maintained that gender is a socially constructed tool in oppressing women based on the reality of their sex, liberal feminists and TRAs instead consider the acknowledgement of sex and the rejection of these sexist stereotypes to be anti-feminist. In this perversion of reality, being female is not inherent to womanhood but the patriarchal social construct of femininity is.
Again, what we see demonstrated here is the accuser, having been groomed by patriarchy since childhood, so strongly identifying with sexism that she’s come to recognise it and herself as one in the same. This internalisation runs so deep within her that it has manifested as a devout allegiance to her oppressor. She is willing to cut down disobedient women, vehemently defending her opressor’s construction of her as his resource and his inferior on his behalf.
Male TRAs also join in on weaponising this language against gender critical women, totally condoned by their female counterparts.
What’s the impact?
The misinterpretation of this term has allowed certain women to remain comfortable in their socialisation without ever having to confront the unsettling, depressing reality of patriarchy and its pervasiveness. While this may be a more comfortable way to live in the world, avoiding and preventing other women from thinking critically about their socialisation, the culture they live in and how this might be harming or inhibiting us actively harms us.
Not only are women discouraged from conceptualising themselves outside of the confines of male supremacy but to make matters worse, men are emboldened even further in upholding patriarchy. Misogyny refers to hatred, contempt or prejudice against women and girls. When we mischaracterize women who rail against woman-hating as misogynists, actual woman-haters and woman-hating institutions are absolved of all guilt. In the demonisation of the feminist critique of the sex industry lies an implication that prostitution, pornography, stripping and so on are actually good for women. This allows the men who buy, sell, objectify, dehumanise, molest, denigrate and beat prostituted women to escape any repercussions or condemnation for inflicting the abuse. In fact their abuse of women is now frequently referred to and accepted by liberal feminists as “supporting sex workers”. Similarly, cosmetic surgeons who instill insecurities in women and then exploit those insecurities for their own profit are sanitised as ‘service providers’ who cater to women who wish to alleviate their insecurities or “do what they want their bodies” and men who decide they can identify into women’s biological realities end up centered in feminist activism.
Internalised misogyny exists and it’s important for us to call it out in ourselves and our fellow women. However, we might encourage you to learn what it actually means before attempting to do so.
Student, 25, Radical Feminist. If you enjoyed her work, donate to this writer.