Lorelai -- I had read that piece of Elle's previously, and I re-read it.

Overall, I agree with her core assessment that criticizing patriarchal structures is NOT misandry. In fact, Elle even clearly spells that out in the article:

"...being angry about the treatment that one has received over a lifetime at the hands of men is not the same thing as actually hating them or blaming each and every one of them."

So, if you're pointing out how many men try to misappropriate "misandry" as a smokescreen to discount the voices of women, then I'm in agreement with you.

What *is* misandry, however, is socially-conditioning boys to behave/conform to certain gender expectations because of their penises per se. Just like, when young girls face those (parallel) expectations based on biological sex, it's misogyny. It's generalizing "all" or "most" men (and yes, many women do it; in fact, many men do it, as well) based on either the toxic men in one's life and/or the sociological trends/data that exist (which, in and of itself, only makes the case for how systemic misogyny needs to be combated). What's really so galling is the hypocrisy of how so many women (and some men) do it so gallingly and unapologetically; yet, they're the first ones to chime in whenever they spot misogyny.

Elle is drawing an erroneous conclusion. She seems to be suggesting that, because misogyny is much more prevalent, systemically, than misandry is -- that somehow misandry barely even exists at all.

You can't make that declaration with any credibility if you haven't lived life as a male. In fact, men can't make that broad declaration on behalf of OTHER MEN, just like women can't discount another woman's oppression when she hasn't lived that specific woman's life.