Feminism vs Misandry: Part Two The Empathy Portion

Where I left off in my first blog post was about the differences between feminism and misandry and where Dr. Elizabeth Drews, a feminist activist from the 1950's(ish), wrote in here essay "The Second Sex and The Third Force" was stating more about how women could solve the world's issues than men because it was almost an advertisement:

Give women more rights, you won't regret it.

Obviously, that's not meaning that what she's saying isn't more misandrist than feminist. Stating that women only have the capability to solve world issues based on their innate ability with empathy.

I would argue that, back then, Drews was simply making a case for feminism the way a business man may overexaggerate the usefulness of a simple kitchen utensil to get it to sell--it's not a bad product and purchasing wouldn't be a regret, but it's meant to appeal to the buyer right then and there. Drews is making a sales pitch for women's rights at that time.

However, now, that's a misandrist way of thinking in my own opinion.

Yes, cis-women have a higher empathy success rate in all terms speculative simply because they can carry babies in their bodies and give birth to them. This simply causes a deeper bond between mom and baby because of mom literally carrying baby inside her for three quarters of a year.

This is not just a character trait of women--and not all women as well.

Empathy is a natural capability in all human beings--regardless of sex or gender identity. The animal race is capable of empathy and have proven their ability to show it.

Empathy can also be taught. A major developmental turn in children is when they go from the overall "I" and learn that other people around them also have feelings and conditions of their own. This usually starts occurring around three-years-old consistently; however, it can start showing as early as one-years-old based on my own experiences.

One thing I would do if I had a problematic three-year-old who liked to hurt other friends is sitting down with them and saying, "would you like it if (so and so) did this to you?" and the answer is almost always "no" to then most educators in early childhood education may respond with, "well then, why do you think it's okay for you to do it to them?"

And around then is when you'll start to see a behavioral change--depending on how many times you need to ask the question for them to understand.

Regardless, I have worked with a few different rounds of young people. I started in daycare when I was 17-years-old, left after I turned 20, then returned at 22. My youngest group of kids from my first daycare are 6-7 now (babies when I began) and my oldest group are in their tween years. Believe me, that's weird to realize.

However, I never saw a major difference in empathy in my kids based on sex. My male-assigned friends and my female-assigned friends all had the same capabilities of empathy--the only differences being familial background (older/younger siblings, etc.) for most. Regardless, every child had a fairly even playing field on being able to experience and also express empathy.

So, saying that only women (assuming cis-women) can solve the world's issues because of their "natural" ability to feel empathy is borderline misandrist in this day-and-age because anyone is capable of empathy and if that empathy is what will solve the majority of the issues in the world, then anyone is capable of solving said issues.