Well, I can say I value and enjoy the company of cows, and then enjoy a nice juicy steak dinner. It's not about value. There is a difference between being valued for utility or pleasure, and respecting someone's personhood/self ownership as an individual. I don't think misogynists particularly have a problem with valuing women or seeing their utility to society. They have a problem with seeing women as a property/ extension of the self, as an object, and projection for the parts of their own nature/psyche they want to reject.

"What else is woman but a foe to friendship, an unescapable punishment, a necessary evil, a natural temptation, a desirable calamity, a domestic danger, a delectable detriment, an evil of nature, painted with fair colours! Therefore if it be a sin to divorce her when she ought to be kept, it is indeed a necessary torture; for either we commit adultery by divorcing her, or we must endure daily strife."  - Malleus Maleficarum

Think for a second. Why are women so often symbolically and mythologically associated with nature, calamity, evil, and strife? Masculine order and feminine chaos. Eve causes the fall of man in the garden. Taking a more metaphorical and Jungian view of the garden, perhaps it is the case Eve does not represent the first human woman at all-- but a man's anima, and his soul. But of course she was formed from his rib/side, for she is a part of his pyche. But of course she is the bringer of sin and strife, for she exists in his subconscious, repressed, and obscured by the shadow. What is misogyny if not the fear of one's own shadow, the other, and the unknown?

The opposite sex becomes a container for all of the things we don't consciously identify with. Like emotions. Nurturing. Or irrationality. Misandry works exactly the same way. What is masculinity to a woman, if not fear of the serpent in the garden and the devil himself?