In recent years, misogyny has become a central concept in philosophy as
well as an established concept in public discourse and political policy. But
where is misogyny’s supposed counterpart, namely, misandry? In this
paper I argue for an ameliorative analysis of "misandry", arguing that it
can be reformulated in an effort to reclaim it from its misogynistic
weaponisation. The term "misandry" is used almost exclusively as a
misogynistic rhetorical device for attributing unjust anger, hatred, or
other similar emotions to a speaker, thereby undermining their epistemic
authority. Rather than dismissing the term as conceptually flawed and
politically problematic, I argue that we ought to ameliorate misandry to
instead refer to a felt anger, hostility, or fear toward the patriarchal
social order and its valorisation and/or expression in misogynistic and
machismo behaviour. To support these claims, I begin with a discussion
of Kate Manne's analysis of misogyny before reflecting on how this can
inform our understanding of misandry. I then demonstrate the various
ways in which misandry is rhetorically deployed as a means of silencing
speakers that express dissent against the patriarchy. Following this, I
argue that we should ameliorate the term, not only to undermine these
misogynistic practices, but also to articulate a legitimate affective and
reactive attitude against the patriarchal imposition of a hierarchical
gender binary.