You're clearly trolling, but talking about the empirical lack of inclusion when it comes to female aspects, is in no way connected to misandry, and you're just

You're clearly trolling, but talking about the empirical lack of inclusion when it comes to female aspects, is in no way connected to misandry, and you're just being deliberately obstinate and facetious in a transparent attempt to cause drama. Not sure you should be the judge on what is "clearly famine" when you falsely equate being inclusive of women, as being related to misandry. Poor trolling attempt. As for your fake "facially-divergent" comment, there is a way to go in terms of visibility of disabled people, which would include people with a variety of facial differences from the "norm" -- it's a shame you weren't serious, because you could've almost made a valid point there.