Misotheism, Misandry and Men


Strangely, this book by Schweizer is one of the few on the theme of hatred of God as a philosophical or ethical position, and one of the first to use the technical term for hatred of God, namely misotheism. It is well worth a read, being accessible and clearly written. The author takes the literary route to philosophy and ethics, and most of the misotheists he discusses are literary figures: Mark Twain, Rebecca West, Philip Pullman, Peter Shaffer, Algernon Swinburne, Zora Neale Hurston and so on.

Although he touches on William Blake, whose vision was Gnostic, he does not situate misotheism in the tradition of Gnostic theology, with its emphasis on the claimed evil nature of the god of the Old Testament and its concept of the creator as an inferior god or demiurge. The book reads rather as if Schweizer wants to focus on the more emotional and literary expressions of misotheism, and typically the more recent such expressions, although he does refer back to Milton and the perennial question of whether the poet makes Satan a tragic hero in Paradise Lost.

On the other hand, there are some literary figures whom Schweizer does not touch on, such as the Marquis de Sade, whose attitude to God and enjoyment of blasphemous fantasies would repay some analysis. James Joyce and his character Stephen Dedalus, with his Luciferian non serviam, is also surprisingly not touched on. This particular non serviam , “I will not serve”, is echoed and helps to forge an important bond between two of the corrupt characters in the recent Scorsese film “The Departed”.

I have long felt that progressivism, Leftism, whatever one might choose to call it, is motivated by a fairly obvious hatred of the father. At bottom, I also suspect it is motivated by a hatred of God the Father, which might mean (as I wrote once before, to howls of annoyance from feminists) that their hatred of men, misandry, is really “misplaced misotheism”. I also asked rhetorically, at the time, if anyone doubted that there were feminists in the crowd that shouted “Crucify Him!”.

“ContentWoman” has argued here and here recently, as a guest blogger, that women are inferior to men, tout court. If this feeling is shared by many of her “sisters” – whether it is true or not – it is not hard to imagine that women might hate God for making them merely women. And hate men and especially fathers as earthly avatars or epigones of God the Father.

Women might naturally feel that they were wounded by God and then left to bleed on Earth.

In any case, much of the progressive rhetoric, especially the slogans, sounds like the kind of thing an adolescent says at the dinner table to annoy Dad. “Why can’t women become priests?”, “Why can’t men marry each other?”, and so on. Progressives have a problem with father figures, be they the pope, a father, a husband, or indeed any form of masculine authority. The puzzle of why so many men are belligerent feminists is solved once one realises that they are motivated, in part, not by zeal for justice, but by resentment of father figures.

For a brief period recently, Australia was practically run at the Federal level by a cabal of feminists, led by Julia Gillard. She played the feminist card hard as her prime ministership unravelled due to her gross incompetence. Her party replaced her with a more popular man, but lost the election to a party led by another man, Tony Abbott, who is clearly hated by a small minority of women, largely because he represents traditional masculine values and is a fatherly type. Hatred of his Catholic faith and his traditionalism melded together in fierce attacks on him as a man, which seem to have largely been ineffective. In any case, the people elected him and his party to government. Deo Gratias. It was good to see misotheism and misandry defeated on this occasion at least.

38 responses to this post.

  1. “it is not hard to imagine that women might hate God for making them merely women. And hate men and especially fathers as earthly avatars or epigones of God the Father.”

    I don’t know any women who hate men, Julian. Though I am sure there ARE bound to be some out there. I’d call them either fruitcakes or feminists. 😉

    I’m pretty happy being a mere woman. I’m glad that my husband is calling the shots and taking care of me and the kids. I’m happy to look after him and the kids and keep house.

    Problems do occur I think, when a woman starts entertaining thoughts above her station in life, and disturbs the natural order of marriage


    • Kathy, you believe yourself to be an inferior being, lower in the natural order than a man. Correct me if I am wrong. And you have no problem with your place in life. But there are many women who do have a problem in this area.

      By the way, if you want to write a piece as a guest post here along the lines of your comment, expanding it a little, I would be pleased to publish it here.


      • In any case, it is good that you are happy as a “mere woman”, Kathy.

        I suppose the question I would ask you, Kathy, and feel free to reply here or in a guest post, is do you not resent God even a little bit when you, for example, 1) have a bad period or 2) suffered in childbirth or 3) felt you had to obey and serve your husband when you felt least like it or 4) knew that you could never be a priest in your religion?

    • “I don’t know any women who hate men”

      I can attest to once being one of these women. Of course when I was one of these women I didn’t see it that way.

      With women in general things take on a subtlety. Though blatant hatred surely exists (just youtube feminists) the type of man-hating that goes on now is rather passive-aggressive (as, like I said, women tend to be). This is painfully obvious in the media. I shared this on Tempest’s blog not too long ago and I will share it here (an excerpt from the book The Flipside of Feminism):

      Author and journalist Natalie Angier begins an article in the New York Times by writing, “Women may not find this surprising, but one of the most persistent and frustrating problems in evolutionary biology is the male. Specifically . . . why doesn’t he just go away?”

      In a CNN interview with Maureen Dowd about her 2005 book, Are Men Necessary? Dowd says, “Now that women don’t need men to reproduce and refinance, the question is, will we keep you around? And the answer is, ‘You know, we need you in the way we need ice cream—you’ll be more ornamental.’”

      Several years ago Katie Couric interviewed a young brideon the Today show who had been jilted at the altar. Jokingly, Couric asked the young woman if she’d “considered castration as an option.”

      Lisa Belkin, a blogger for the New York Times whose work is provocative but not overly biased, wrote, “We are standing at a moment in time when the role of gender is shifting seismically. At this moment an argument can be made for two separate narrative threads—the first is the retreat of men as this becomes a woman’s world.”

      In an article in the Atlantic titled “Are Fathers Necessary?”author Pamela Paul wrote, “The bad news for Dad is that despite common perception, there’s nothing objectively essential about his contribution.”

      My point is that I bet you do know man-haters, Kathy, because we live in a society that hates men. Just remember women show hate differently.


      • Margery, I have watched this for decades. Given a media platform, a lot of women use the opportunity for crude bigotry and often write things that they would like to be true, not what is the case.

  2. First of all, thanks for you kind offer, Julian. I’ll think about it. Mostly I am just happy to read what you post here, and comment from time to time.

    Never once have I resented God in those questions that you posed, Julian. .. It just never occurred to me, to do so, actually. I think this is because, I came from a traditional Catholic background where my father was the breadwinner and head of the household and my mother was the homemaker.

    I slipped easily into my God-given roll because I had good examples from my parents.

    I have always been happy being a woman and serving my husband. I have never wondered what it would be like to be a man, because God knew what he was doing when he made me a woman.

    I never wanted to be a leader. Women are not cut out for that job.Too much emotion and histrionics. 😉

    Men are calm, logical, more rational and are suited to leading because that is how God made them..

    There has always been that tacit acceptance, for me, (that men are the leaders and women the followers) because of my traditional Catholic family background.


    • Yes, I assumed that in your case it was partly family example. I think you have mentioned being of dual Calabrian and Croatian origin, both groups with strong traditional roles for men and women.


  3. Yes, Julian, you are correct. Good memory too. 😉

    I also meant to say, that yes,I do think women are inferior to men..

    The man is in charge and the woman is his subordinate.

    That’s how God designed us. Ya can’t have two Captains, otherwise you have chaos. o-O


    • So, you believe that woman is subordinate to man by reason of her inferior nature. Thank you for the clarification, Kathy.


    • “Ya can’t have two Captains, otherwise you have chaos.”

      Is it just me or does it seem that women trying to rise above their station has turned into a societal movement of “extreme equality” where the idea of having anyone above you is considered the worse of the worse? Women unhappy with not having power now demand that that power structure be done away with in its entirety. Not only the power structure but the idea of “good” and “bad”, “right” and “wrong”, and what is and isn’t desirable (think: fat acceptance). It’s no longer good enough that women be allowed to be Captains, too, EVERYONE must be Captains. Except the white man. He had his turn so now he is the proverbial piñata.

      This relates to God in that He has power where everyone wants their own power. “How dare you suggest I am not my own master!” and all of that.


  4. “I have long felt that progressivism, Leftism, whatever one might choose to call it, is motivated by a fairly obvious hatred of the father.”

    That strikes me as a special case of a more comprehensive malady. Note how the Left persists in denying both the reality of the senses and all the laws of Nature. They act perpetually surprised, even offended, by the Universe’s enforcement of those laws. That points to a very deep shortcoming indeed.

    Some have opined that those assumptions and reactions could be explained by positing solipsism. I think it’s a bit more complex than that. It appears to me as a form of megalomania that demands the submission of all that exists. In that regard, it comes very close to Satanic arrogance…the degree of which allows Satan to imagine that he can someday triumph over God Himself.


    • One thing I see I forgot to say was that even ardent feminists tend to refer to God as “He”, at least in unguarded moments. Most people see Him as Big Daddy in the Sky.

      Francis, on your general point, I am not sure. Some postmodernists do, notoriously, seem to act as if reality is only constructed, certainly social reality and sometimes even physical reality. I had a friend who used to refer to the “Cosmic No”. People keep being surprised that men outpace women still in inventiveness, for example. That is the Cosmos saying “No. Women are not men, intellectually.”

      And yes, the loss of a sense of hierarchy has unravelled everything. I like animals, but they are not humans, for example. Women are not animals, but nor are they men. And so on. It is remarkably hard to get any women, even Christians, to admit that men are higher in the hierarchy than women. All men. All women. And yet no-one disputes that angels are higher than men.


      • Given the breadth of the overarching / underlying topic — it’s an examination of essentials, after all — you might enjoy this essay.

      • Fine. But you exaggerate the radicalism of ContentWoman’s position, which is simply that always held by the majority of people. It is also all through the New Testament. St Paul positively labours the point. “The head of every woman is the man …”, “the woman was made for the man, not the man for the woman”.

      • Also, many women will never submit … until they do. Most women still tacitly accept their ancient position, to a greater or lesser extent, at least at the level of symbolism. For example, it is notorious that women must have their man taller physically. This rule is rarely broken. And women’s hypergamy points in the direction that women may not submit to Man, but they will to “one man”.

      • And, of course, the evidence that is staring Christians in the face. God became man. He was embodied as a man, Christ, not a woman.

  5. […] I have discussed misotheism and its connection with hatred of men (misandry) before, here: Misotheism, Misandry and Men. […]


  6. Posted by Julian O'Dea on August 10, 2014 at 5:38 am

    A review of a book by CJ Werleman with the title, “God Hates You, Hate Him Back”.


  7. On the topic of theism, what do you make of atheist churches, a la: http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2014/08/12/peter-foster-inside-one-of-the-u-s-bible-belts-growing-number-of-atheist-churches/

    I recall Alain de Botton wanting to make an atheist temple, but it looks like others have the same idea. The ‘church’ in the photo appears to have more males than females.


    • Posted by Julian O'Dea on August 13, 2014 at 12:11 am

      I am no expert. I am told that the French revolutionaries tried to create an atheist religion, with the Goddess Reason, and so on.

      I suppose my rather plain reaction is “what is the point?” At best, they could produce what Malcolm Muggeridge once called a feeling of “vague uplift”.


      • Posted by Julian O'Dea on August 13, 2014 at 12:22 am

        Another way of looking at it is that I think that there are some people who are, genuinely, as the cant phrase goes, “spiritual, not religious”. There are indeed spiritual “geniuses”, with strong spiritual feelings, who don’t take to formal religion. Perhaps an atheist church is ideal for them.

  8. Posted by Julian O'Dea on February 2, 2015 at 9:17 am


    “Stephen Fry calls God an ‘evil, capricious, monstrous maniac’”

    Perhaps not true misotheism, because I don’t think he actually believes in God, and you cannot hate somebody who does not exist.

    Like many egotists, he obviously does not want God to exist. Or maybe he just resents God for existing and not giving boys vaginas.


  9. Posted by Julian O'Dea on June 8, 2015 at 12:15 pm

    A discussion including Phil Sandifer, who is perhaps close to being a misotheist:


    “I am, of course, not an atheist. Indeed, there is a real sense in which I believe in the existence of your particular god, although I imagine him as a sort of Reverend Harry Powell figure; a sort of conniving charlatan, running a scam that is chilling in its efficacy.”

    If I am reading him correctly, he believes in a god that he detests.

    (I have been thinking about the possibility of some kind of median point. That is, not a true hatred of god, or misotheism, but rather a dislike or distaste for god or a belief that god is foolish or gets some things wrong. One might call it semi-misotheism perhaps. Some feminists seem to be “semi-misotheists”. They think that god exists but that he got some things wrong, about women for example.)


    • Posted by Julian O'Dea on June 12, 2015 at 2:19 am

      The late English philosopher Antony Flew seems to have been what I called above a “semi-misotheist”:

      “He supported the idea of an Aristotelian God with “the characteristics of power and also intelligence”, stating that the evidence for it was stronger than ever before. He rejected the idea of an afterlife, of God as the source of good (he explicitly states that God has created “a lot of” evil) …” [bold added]



  10. Includes interesting links, some possibly relevant to the above:


    “Briefly: The FUCK YOU DAD rotten fruit of the Enlightenment project that lifts the autonomous individual above all other aesthetic and moral considerations is destroying the West.”


    “Philosopher-turned-motorcycle repairman”


  11. Stephen Fry, sounding like a misotheist:


  12. Posted by Julian O'Dea on September 26, 2015 at 1:44 pm

    The father of the philosopher Soren Kierkegaard once “cursed God”:


    “His father, Michael Pedersen Kierkegaard, was raised a shepherd boy. He experienced what is now considered to have been an event seminal for both father and son, considering the influence of the former on the latter. Michael experienced great suffering and loneliness while alone on the heath. One day, while still a child, he cursed God for his hardships.”


  13. Posted by Julian O'Dea on January 20, 2016 at 7:36 am


    “I am the only person I may know, with certain knowledge, as “not loving God.” I do it rather often. I resent him, ignore him, insult him, delight in what he detests, detest what delights him, and I do it willfully, as a free choice of the will, a choice present to me by virtue of the nature of the God-relationship.”


  14. Posted by Bee on November 12, 2017 at 3:22 pm

    “Erik von Kuehnelt-Leddihn, in his magnum opus, Leftism Revisited, described leftism as “the overthrow of the Father.””

    from Uncle Bob’s Treehouse blog.


  15. Posted by Julian O'Dea on January 19, 2018 at 8:25 am


    Also refers to alatrism and misotheism.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: