We might begin addressing these curiosities by suggesting that due to the social impact of feminism in the ‘70s, we gained some important awareness regarding how hatred of females was being manifested. We came to understand that contempt for girls and women was alive and well expressed by socio-economic oppression as well a drastic number of females being subjected to rape and domestic violence. Hence, the word misogyny took its rightful place in our vocabulary, as we were willing to be receptive to how hatred was hurting girls and women. Could it be that we have not yet come to that place where we are willing to see how hatred injuriously impacts boys and men, and if so, what is our resistance all about?
A simple explanation might be that we are not interested in knowing how hatred hurts males, especially white, straight males, since they are members of the privileged class. Who wants to know the suffering of the privileged? However, there may be two other explanations for the impoverishment of our language pertaining to contempt for boys and men.
The first is that we may have some resistance to define females as perpetrators. Yet, we are reminded time and time again that victims typically become perpetrators. We have plenty of evidence supporting the ongoing violation of females by males. Is it possible that the leap from females being victims to perpetrators fueled by misandry is just too much to hold? Is it beyond us to imagine Mom, Grandma and Aunt Helen harboring disdain for boys and men?