The real understanding is to understand the mechanism as it is. It's worse to understand wrongly than to not understand at all. Thus someone may see someone else from some wrongful direction and thus see all they do as evil, or one can see what is actually going on. The misogynist types look at any part of the female mechanism with the eye toward demonization, and everything that is discovered gets misconstrued by being portrayed from the angle of the misogynist's interest: To damn everything that is found. This mechanism can be also stood on its head - by looking at all the misogynist's representation and finding the actual thing that it misrepresents.
Thus, a woman being beautiful can be misrepresented as vanity or as an attempt to manipulate men. One sees this misrepresentation and asks what it actually is portraying. From the perspective of the misogynist, anything the woman does is a function of evil, so he will look for any way that he can to misrepresent what the woman is doing as if it was something wrong. Based on his own portrayals, knowing this basic quantity of his perception, it then becomes possible to recognize what is actually going on behind his misrepresentation.
This misrepresentation function can be calculated out of the result to find the real situation. h(x)=f(g(x)): We see h(x) - the person's interpretation, g(x) is the function of what the person is describing or depicting, so g(x) - the actual phenomenon - is found by factoring f out of h: g(x) = f'(h(x)).
Say someone thinks in terms of self-esteem and he feels that another person is lacking in self-esteem. We look at how this judgment is occasioned. One thinks that person who is being treated well by her partner has self-esteem and that person who does not lacks it. We get the judgment call ("she lacks self-esteem"); then we factor out the function of the person's perception (that someone who is in a bad situation lacks self esteem) and get the original fact of someone being in a bad situation. This is reverse functionality: You look at the judgment; factor out the person's perceptions; and then get the original event.
A Christian may claim that someone is prideful. How do they define prideful? In most cases, it is someone who follows anything other than their parish's party line. So when you hear a Christian claim that someone is prideful, we know that they are doing something other than what the parish wants them to do; which can be anything from cultivating knowledge and intelligence to producing art to having romantic relationships to wanting to make things better for other people on the planet.
A woman may think that another woman is a "slut." Whom would this woman be seeing as a slut? Probably someone who is sexually willing or enjoys sexuality. We factor out the judgment term and find the original fact: That the other woman is sexually willing or enjoys sex.
People may see the light spectrum, but not see the rest of the electromagnetic spectrum. Factor out the term of people's perception, and you get the entire range of the electromagnetic radiation that's coming at them.
The accurate understanding of the phenomenon is achieved therefore by factoring the person's perception function out of the person's description. What his perspective consists of must be factored out of his judgment. Thus based on second-hand information it becomes possible to have a clear picture of what the person is describing - by knowing both the person's judgment and the function of the person's perceptions and factoring out the person's perception from his judgment.