Why is the manosphere on the rise? UN Women sounds the alarm over online misogyny
(news.un.org)
from Pro@programming.dev to technology@lemmy.world on 21 Jun 07:49
https://programming.dev/post/32609094
from Pro@programming.dev to technology@lemmy.world on 21 Jun 07:49
https://programming.dev/post/32609094
A growing network of online communities known collectively as the “manosphere” is emerging as a serious threat to gender equality, as toxic digital spaces increasingly influence real-world attitudes, behaviours, and policies, the UN agency dedicated to ending gender discrimination has warned.
threaded - newest
So, 2/3 of young men are risking to become incels, right? Because it is hard to imagine a young girl who is looking for a partner with hyperfocus on his own masculinity as well as a partner, who portraits himself as victim? That is sad…
That statistics is bullshit that would be 66% of all young men
Sounds reasonable.
Yes, so you can see how that would be a problem
I guarantee 100% of ravens are getting together for a human murder party. Do you see how the ravens would be a problem?
It depends how broad their “masculine influencer” definition is…
I think whether it actually matters would depend more on if they’re consuming “masculine influencer” content exclusively , without any concept of other world views.
White, Gen z men literally went 67% for Trump
they also showed increased support from gen-xers and milleneals for trump too. when alpha come of age, i fear for them too. this also goes for POC men that went for trump.
It’s worth diving into what they are classifying in this influencers group. They even point out that some of it offers helpful and genuine support. But it sounds like they would even consider a men’s therapy or coaching business in this group, or even something like that Mankind Project. I am just guessing but that kind of group is a world away from the typical toxic manosphere stereotype.
FD Signifier and Noah Samsem are “masculine influencers” too, this is too broad of a definition when there’s a lot of dudes doing it in a healthy way too.
Hasan Piker as well
probably better to call them hypermasculinity/toxic masculnity influencers.
Masculine influencer. Another masculine influencer. Not going for “male influencer” here that’s just the top of my head list of people who a) happen to end up in my youtube feed and b) look really cool to pubescent boys. Silverback energy: Big, strong, just, kind.
That wording you did there is perfect, that’s the exact kind of precise wording people need to be hearing, not this other relational wording junk.
people like peterson, tate are largely responsible for thier recent changes too, although they are the latest symptom. peterson specifically is well funded by russia. i also see them discuss incel-ism in many online games too. almost always certain youtube videos like trek, star wars and disney will get these people in knots.
I thought that was dying years ago.
Tate’s influence took a step back, but a lot of dudes are trying to take his place.
Tate is a symptom of the problem, though he does exacerbate it.
i was thinking j peterson, and roegan. they convinceed alot of men to switch sides. both ironically are funded by putin.
It’s quite simple, gender equality should stand for equal opportunity for both genders, but it’s not. I only see women being pushed into places with traditionally male majority, but not men being pushed into places with traditional female majority. And worst of all, equal opportunity should not mean we will hire a less competent woman that a more competent men, to fill out some 50/50 quota.
This is exactly the result of abusing gender equality.
Genuinely curious, got any examples of “traditional female majority places” that masculine individuals cannot enter/participate in?
Not OP, but positions like nurses or teachers are very female dominated. It’s not like males cannot reach those positions, but there are social obstacles to that. To make an example from my country, in Italy primary school teachers are > 90% female. I believe in kindergarten they reach 97 or 98%. This is also partially the result of strict gender roles than discriminate both men and women in terms of caring for children (I.e., women are de facto forced to do that, men are pushed away), which then reinforces the social practice of women doing all the caring jobs.
This is IMHO a problem for both men and women, but probably it’s not from the same perspective as what OP meant…
I’m sure it varies from country to country, but in the US women could not study medicine until the late 1800’s and the US Army did not allow female physicians until 1940.
It’s not unlikely to think we have many people today who were alive before women practicing as physicians was common place.
I’m convinced it’s less of a matter of a group “dominating” a space but rather being pigeonholed/forced into it due to a lack of options, and these circumstances have impact that are still felt to this day.
I’m not sure about Italy but in a lot of the US becoming a school teacher requires a college degree and has wages that do not keep up with the cost of living.
You can look up articles of teachers losing their jobs for doing sex work or provocative modeling to earn extra income because their job does not pay enough.
Doesn’t seem like that big of a win? Unless I’m missing something?
Edit: re-read your reply and realized I did not read it properly the first time. That’ll teach me to comment in the wee hours LOL. I greatly appreciate your response! Leaving the original reply in place for the sake of context.
In Germany at the moment around two thirds of medicine students are women and I wouldn’t be surprised if it’s the similar in most western countries.
It’s a little over 50% in the US, and is largely due to women out performing men in school.
Like another comment stated about Germany, even in Italy medicine faculties have a majority of women today as well.
I agree that in general teacher jobs are not glamorous or high-paying, but it’s still a very important role in society and we can still discuss how it’s a problem that there is an effective (social, mostly) barrier for males accessing (lower level) education jobs.
I do believe that this is essentially another symptom of a wider problem related to gender roles.
Certainly agree with you there and I really appreciate your nuanced take.
I think many miss the greater overarching message that forcing gender roles only serves to hold us back as a human race.
The difference is that, typically, the lack of women in male-dominated fields is due to them being actively pushed away from things they want to do, while the lack of men in female-dominated fields is due to those fields being less prestigious/well-paid (often due to being traditionally female) and them not wanting to pick them in the first place. But when they do decide to enter those fields, nobody’s actively trying to stop/discourage them.
Superficially there may seem to be similarities in circumstance, but the amount of agency men and women have to enter opposite-gender-dominated careers is vastly different.
It’s the same in female fields, it’s not just prestige. Men face increased scrutiny when working with children. Male nurses are expected to perform the more physical parts of the job almost exclusively.
There are 2 issues here that are being mixed.
One is women not being allowed to positions of power. The other is with women being underrepresented in certain fields (e.g., stem).
The second issue is what I am talking about and I don’t think at all that men “choose” not to try certain careers in the same way women don’t “choose” not to study stem and pursue stem careers. For both, social pressure and expectations, an existing field dominated by the other sex with all its implications are factors of discrimination. Strict gender roles are damaging for both men and women, and this is a perfect example.
I think it’s fair to mix them, to an extent, because I think the degree of underrepresentation is often directly proportional to the prestige/pay/power of the field. Both are symptoms of the same underlying issue, which is bigots discounting women’s competency and refusing to entrust them with things of importance.
But, whats the difference from a male that also wants to get to the same position, and is also not entrusted with the thing of importance? I see plenty of this scenarios play on a daily basis by males who want to get on top but are blocked by fellow males. Its the same situation, why would we need to provide help for the women but not for the men? Would you say that properly competent person would overcome this issue, regardless of their gender?
Better paid jobs are usually more risky, competitive and harsh with short deadlines, that why the are paid more than jobs where you can just do your shift and happily go home like daycare or teaching. It happens that men simply naturally want the adrenaline and excitement that comes with the first because they want to prove themselves.
If you look into history, men where those that went hunting which can be dangerous, while women were those who collected berries and nursed children, not much danger there.
As a man, I actually thing women are crazy for not wanting to keep being a houswife a thing. It’s like being the CEO of the house. WFH guaranteed, you are the one making plans and deadlines, minimal stress, and you have probably enough spare time to do whatever you want as a hobby on the side (unless you have small children). I truly don’t see the downside, I would thrive in home improvement and gardening…
The extreme depression and anxiety exhibited by women in the 1950s contradicts your claim.
True, if we are talking as if today was 1950 and the socioeconomic situation were the same. But it’s not. There’s almost 80 years of progress and the socioeconomic situation is not even comparable. So, although true it was a problem 80 years ago, its a bit shortsigthed to claim same applies today.
The 1950s was when women were relegated to the role of housewife. You are asking why women don’t want to be relegated to that role.
There was nothing wrong with that role then, and there is nothing wrong with the role now. The main difference is that in 1950 women had no choice but to be a housewife, and today women have choices, and when comparing them, being a housewife doesn’t look half as bad.
The lack of income independent from your spouse is a huge argument against being a housewife.
And how are women pushed out of “man jobs”?
And how are we fixing that?
Is it bosses that aim to have male coworkers turning down women? How is that different than bosses wanting artificially 50/50 turning down men?
Is it not being represented in advertising? How is that different than what happens now. Where most advertising displays just women? Or if there is both a man and a woman, the woman is usually centered in the picture or doing a more important/powerful role.
By “encouraging” women in the workplace, what you see is things being done to men that you complain was done to women.
Daycare, men who work with children in general. It feels like taboo, and I assume it’s because the general opinion seems to be that men that want to be around children are most likely pedophiles. I never heard of a program to include more men in daycare.
Excellent example, and I sincerely appreciate you engaging in good faith discussion!
I agree that being masculine should by default not be a barrier - social or otherwise - from working with children.
How do we begin to change that as a society?
Although I can’t think of the solution myself, I also don’t see how advancing equality for feminine individuals would hold back equality for masculine individuals.
As mentioned in another comment, a lot of these problems seem to stem from the enforcement of dated gender norms.
This is one where I think the ball is very much in the women’s court.
I’ve seen a trend of vertical videos of fathers playing with their children, with a caption similar to “my latest ick.”
Millennial men are the most engaged cohort of dads in living memory, and women have responded pretty poorly to this.
Thank you, I am actually shocked by such positive feedback, as I never expect anything positive in online discussions :D
Well, there is not much that needs to be adjusted in traditional values. Or, to put it lightly, that was never the problem to begin with. In traditional roles, both genders use their advantage to the max, and it has worked for millenia.
The issue is that there is a smaller % of both genders, who wish to do something “out of the norm”. Men who want to work in childcare and women who want to drive trucks. That small % should be able to do so, without discrimination. That’s it. That’s all to it, why this entire woke thing blew up. We should preserve the traditional roles as they have proven themselves to work effectively, but we need to adjust it to be flexible for things that don’t fit in the traditional norms.
From somewhere came the narrative that men are gatekeeping women from all important positions, and women in fight for their rights to be equal went the same route to basically gatekeep men in the name of equality. And now we are in this weird limbo where the genders seem to undermine each other whereever they can.
I feel like a Cassandra since I was warning about this for years now.
The gender equality narrative got too focused on excluding men specifically, instead of including the less represented gender in each profession. Somehow the idea was that men are privileged in the system and women oppressed, while the truth is that both men and women are oppressed.
Divide and conquer was a small step away from that point.
I think there is nuance here. My understanding is that there is a very small but loud percentage of women that want to exclude men. When DEI (inclusion of less represented individuals) is encouraged, it’s often cut down by “only the most qualified should be hired”, detracting from the core topic which is bias. Most of the discourse around privilege was to help understand that men aren’t actively oppressive, but many are blind to the ways in which they contribute to the oppressive issues due to cultural programming. In parallel to what we’re seeing with protests - inaction is not helpful. Those that are privileged are more likely to be able to change the minds of those that are actively oppressive. TL;DR privilege is just the ability to apply peer pressure.
As a man, I’ve never been made to feel excluded by gender equality in any way whatsoever.
Same here. However, I suspect you and I are not zero-sum thinkers, and can conceive of a future in which both men and women can apply themselves to their full potential.
But it seems like a key part of the counter-movement to gender equality is based on the notion that every time a woman gets a job, they are taking it away from a more qualified man. It seems to be built on a mountain of insecurity more than anything else.
That may be, but you are not all men ? So some have.
There have been several cases here in Australia where men have been denied access becase they are men and taken it to court… and lost, I suspect that’s sort of what the person posting is referring to. Theres a carve out in the law to allow womens only spaces.
Now, whether you agree with the ruling of the courts or not, is to some extent ilrrelevant to the discussion (the courts are notionally after all just following the law) because gender equality then isn’t about what’s on the tin and that’s when you get push back.
I like how you were down voted for it. Hell there’s a free online course in my country right know that is not open for everyone, it says in the description that anyone can apply for a chance but only women will be allowed to participate.
I mean it’s specifically a girl’s coding class, I suppose there’s also open classes. Segregated resources are not the same as one side lacking resources.
The trouble with that kind of stuff is usually that the gendered version is some half-assed feel-good BS. There’s not a single martial artist, gender doesn’t matter, who respects “women’s self defence” courses because the stuff they teach there is, at best, useless. More often it’s actively dangerous placebo and reading the instructions for your pepper spray will be much, much more helpful.
When businesses commit to having a certain percent of employees/managers/board members/etc be women, that means it’s at the exclusion of men. Maybe you’re not in the category of men who miss out on jobs and promotions simply because they need to hire a woman instead of a more deserving man, but that doesn’t mean it doesn’t happen.
You can’t commit to “diversity” without taking away opportunities for progressives natural enemy, the straight white males.
Honestly I think examples like this are counterproductive, the average man will never be considered for one of these positions, nor will the average woman. It is useless to get angry at such a situation as it only serves to engage people in the “gender war” which only serves to distract you from the real issues which are almost completely class issues. Instead of getting angry that some woman “took away” the job of some man who was “more deserving”, you should get angry that that person is most likely getting paid a hundred times more than you and will cut your job in an attempt to make the company appear more profitable.
It’s not only executive/board level jobs that have “diversity quotas” now.
So if a company traditionally had 10 men employees and now has committed to having gender equality, you see this as 5 jobs where men are no longer considered, rather than it historically being 10 jobs where women weren’t considered?
But that’s not true.
Hire the best person for the job. Period. If the best 10 people for the job - ie the most qualified, the most experience, interviewed the best, the best culture fit, etc - are all men then that should be fine. Hiring less qualified, worse people simply because they’re women or a minority is ridiculous, and it means that more deserving people are missing out.
There are absolutely jobs where hiring the most qualified person for the job is critical. There are a lot of jobs where the threshold for good enough is far below that, and most companies are at least as concerned at getting the cheapest labor that can fulfill the position as they are at getting the best person (at that lower rate). Adding additional constraints like diversity isn’t going to affect those jobs any more than the company’s desire to save a buck.
Hiring someone over someone else purely because of their race or sex is discrimination, racism, and/or sexism.
It sounds to me like you’re talking about jobs that illegal immigrants do, especially once you brought up cheap labor. Jobs like those don’t have diversity quotas, because they almost entirely hire from the “diversity” pool.
Every once in a while my uni has some interesting events (at least based on the description), public announcement sent to everyone, and the last sentence has almost always been some form of “women only”. There is usually no gender neutral equivalents to these events and they’re done in the name of gener equality. So I very much feel excluded by gender equality.
Oh no, a place you couldn’t go as a man?!?!? How could you ever survive?!?
You’re part of the problem
Nah, I’m just not a fucking loser
Same, I’ve been saying it for a decade that the current anti-men direction can only mean that young men will push against that and not in a nice way.
Well, guess who was right? Feminism has come all the way from something great and noble towards utter shit.
And it started from that valid criticism and then takes the viewer on a tour by various faces and influencers to pull them into more and more into right-wing territory to radicalize them. Once in that box, they’re not getting out again. It’s a right-wing conveyor belt.
It blows my mind how comments that don’t fit the narrative of the liberals get down voted to doom and canceled, by the same groups that want “equality”, but only if it’s their definition of equality.
I’m all for equality, which is why I can’t stand left-wingers or right-wingers. They’re all full of shit.
Personally, I don’t mind seeing when comments are heavily down voted. If an opinion is unpopular, that’s ok, especially in some areas where you generally know there’s a likely bias in the audience.
What annoys me is seeing comments removed / silenced by mods when the comments dont align. If the comments calling for explicit violence or using overt slurs, by all means censor. But many online spaces will eliminate even respectful / neutral comments simply because they aren’t in line with that narrative.
Point in case. The moment I mentioned it, the down votes started pouring in.
Humanity has lost the capacity for critical thinking and civil communication.
Explain how you can cancel a comment ?
As a positive counter-example, I’d like to give a shoutout to German childcare. In 2022, 17.9% of under 20yolds, 12,6% of under 30yold childcare professionals were men, contrast with 2% among 60 and older. There’s been an active effort both from the professional organisations as well as operators to increase the ratio, right-out masterplanned it, and they’re making strides. As a side-effect: Plenty of young female childcare workers now don’t feel weird at all about wrestling with the boys. Not that “boys need movement because their gross motor skills develop before fine motor skills” was unknown back in my days but the vibe was either “grandma watching you build wood block towers” or “grandma watching you at the playground”.
There’s three aspects to this: They recognised that “women know better than men when it comes to childcare” is BS and recognition was given to masculine styles of parenting, with that the pattern of dealing with the few men that were in the field by “promoting them out of sight”, that is, into administration, was abolished, and finally an active push to advertise the job to men.
Not sure whether the ratio will ever reach 50:50 or whether that’s even important at all, stabilising at 1/3rd or such would be plenty to ensure that things are even-keeled. If you rather become a construction worker I’m not going to tell you to go into childcare instead, and vice versa, not everything that’s not 50:50 is due to gatekeeping. Women aren’t going to become saturation divers en masse, and that’s fine.
There is nothing that needs or requires 50/50 nor is there any benefit to society by forcing it besides being able to say “now it’s equal”. Childcare should ideally be 30% men and 70% women because women are natual caretakers and excell at emotional and social tasks. Men are needed there to provide strict authority for kids when they are not behaving well and for developing skills such as sports, engineering and emotional reslilience.
Your first sentence is completely sensible, the rest is completely toxic and also BS gender roles. Don’t project your emotional and social incapacity on me.
If my wife were to tell my kids “wait until your father comes home” a) they’ll get off 110% scot-free because they already suffered enough dread and b) she’ll get an earful. Ideally, though, of course, you’ll date someone emotionally and socially mature enough so that won’t be an issue. Someone who can stand up for herself, is actually competent, and doesn’t make your kids hate you.
Also please explain: Women are good at emotional stuff but then you need the man to do the emotional resilience thing… what? I know plenty of women who I’m pretty sure could beat you up and work with plenty of brilliant female engineers, and are you accusing me of not caring. Am I just pretending to care about people? Does caring about people not come natural to you? Maybe that’s a thing you should mull over.
You went into extreme edge cases to prove your point. Of course both genders can do both, but why would I want to put the burden of getting the kids in check with my wife when I am supposed to be the man in the house? Will I just put the burden on my wife and say “hey, you are mature and strong and independent - handle it and let me get a beer”.
As for the emotional part - women can teach kids empathy, men can teach kids not to cry immediately if you fall down once. Both are emotional aspects but they are exactly the opposite aspects and complement each other. Kids do need both. Women happen to be better at empathy, and men tend to be better at regulating emotions.
Whats the problem in gender roles, if it suits the people? Why force people into a different role, that they don’t want to be in?
You want to be a housekeeper? More power to you then but if your wife is an engineer and earns the money why do you suppose she can’t teach kids about it?
She’s the housekeeper and does tell the kids “just wait until your father gets home”? She’s training them to hate you, alienate them from you, that’s a giant red flag. Make sure to connect up with them or you’re going to have a hard time in custody court.
Nope. Both are very capable of doing both. Again: Please don’t project your hangups onto others. Female fainting is just as much a trained behaviour (ultimately, an act the actor believes themselves), as male callousness.
I’m not forcing anyone here, it’s you who’s drawing lines in the sand, “men shall do this, women shall do that”.
Boys, on average, like to wrestle a hell a lot more than girls, are interested in mechanical things more, when playing they care about outside things. Girls, on average, develop their fine motor skills well before boys, and their play focusses on social scenarios, in a bounded (inside) context.
Let them learn in the order and manner as they see fit, that’s absolutely fine and natural. But you’re an adult, not a kid, your competencies should, by now, have expanded beyond that initial set and focus. If you’re under the impression that “women are better at this, men are better at that” then you’re either 12 and/or are living in a society which actively stifles human development.
I absolutely never said most of the things you claim here that I have said. I never said that one gender can’t do what the other can. Will you stop putting words in my mouth?
This seems awfully ignorant. I guess you think also men are equally good at giving birth and breastfeeding? If so, no need to discuss anymore. Let’s agree to disagree.
No I think you’re better at putting words in my mouth than I am – allegedly – at putting words in yours. Speak about going to extremes to attempt to prove a point.
Well, after your 2nd post with the same thing I thought this is how you wanna communicate.
Let’s try this again: If, as you say “women do empathy, men do resilience”, then why should childcare be 70:30? Why not 50:50 so the kids get taught empathy and resilience in equal measure? Also, how can you even be empathetic if you lack in the resilience department.
Because more women than men want to be in daycare, it’s unrealistic to expect the same amount of men want to be in daycase as women. And the gender ratio of employees doesn’t mean thats also the ratio of what kids will take away from this. Does this mean that in daycare without any men the kids have only 50% of the care they need? Of course not.
Again, ONE DOESNT EXCLUDE THE OTHER. Everyone has empathy and resilience, but so far in general women tend to be better at empathy and men in resilience. Why force one to do both, when both can thrive in what they do better?
I don’t expect it. It is you who is insisting for no discernible reason that 70:30 is, and I quote, “ideal”. It is you who is saying “guys get some other job I don’t care how much you want the job and how good you’d be at it, we already have a quota of 30%”.
Did I say anywhere that the 30:70 means a really had 30:70 cap and that nobody after that is free to join or leave the job? Did I say that the 30% is exactly, not more not less, the amount of men who want to for ex. work in daycare?
You said, verbatim:
and then went on to justify it with
implying that more men would mean worse results “because women are so much better at it”: If the ideal is 70:30 then everything else is worse, no? And you were also being very essentialist, saying that “women provide one thing, men another”.
The trouble with childcare in Germany wasn’t absence of men as such – it was absence of male insight into childcare. Doing things in way that make a lot of sense but women aren’t as prone to do instinctively, but are very capable of doing. As long as there’s a baseline level of diversity such that both approaches are present, things are just fine. There’s no ideal ratio, there’s a wide span of equally good ratios that ensure that everything is covered.
And btw you don’t teach emotional resilience by being authoritarian. You teach it by being there, hold watch, while the kid figures out how to control their emotions, maybe some gently encouraging words. Shouting at them might shock them into silence but it’s not going to teach them anything about actual emotional regulation. The very presence of the word “authority”, on top of that “strict authority”, in what you say betrays your ignorance about childcare. If you have kids I feel sorry for them.
Am I tripping, out of touch with reality? These people really don’t seem to understand the problem and that makes me seriously question their methodology.
How so? Can you explain what do you mean here exactly?
In my experience the problem isn’t the masculinity influencers. Those are just the symptom of misandry in media and a near-total lack of support in society for men, especially young men. When you go on social media almost all discussion concerning men is about how they are the root of all evil, and everything they do is wrong. It’s a never ending stream of shaming with no clear way out. You’re damned if you do and damned if you don’t: If you try to defend yourself or talk about your own problems as a man, it is labeled as misogyny. “Be vulnerable and open up” they say but if you do it’s “don’t center men you privileged fuck” or “you’re being a crybaby”.
All this pressure is an impossible equation to solve for a young man who has been pushed by misandrists into insecurity and longs to be accepted in his community. Not just because society’s demands are internally inconsistent, but because they clash with patriarchal ideals among the typical women you’ll meet IRL.
I’m past 40 and while in my head I still consider myself progressive, I used to show it much more when I was younger. I was honest about my insecurities, I would try not to take up too much space as a man, would try to split responsibilities equally, and so on. At every turn this has caused me problems in relationships, not least with my wife of 10 years who left me for some muscular macho guy because she “doesn’t feel like I can take care of her”.
So now, while I wish society was different, I try to balance on the needle of acting like I’m not as progressive as I am so women don’t “get the ick”, while not tripping into what would be labeled misogyny. It’s an extremely difficult game to play and it frustrates me to no end that this is where we’re at. I’m moving in soon with a woman who I’ve been dating for a couple of years and it’s clear that she desires that I take a leadership position in the home, whereas I’m just longing for a partner who will share the burden with me instead of becoming my subject. But I feel like I have to play that game or she’ll eventually lose interest. Too many women want someone to replace their dad.
Bell Hooks wrote about this already in 2003. But somehow it is completely lost on these UN Women pundits that nothing will change unless everybody (including women) change. You can’t just blame it on “masculinity influencers”. Why are these influencers gaining popularity? Because they offer some way out, some positive message for young men who are completely starved for positive role models.
I am convinced that a woman’s voice will count 10x more than the manosphere, if it offers compassion and guidance rather than hate. But such voices are extremely rare.
FWIW, the “men’s health awareness month” has brought me some hope in this. It’s the first time in a decade that I’ve seen women in media stand up to defend and show compassion for men, and I think young men will suck that up like a sponge.
This is a sentiment often repeated by manosphere influencers and there’s no actual tangible evidence it exists and I think that’s the real issue. The influencers aren’t at all a symptom of a problem men are facing, they are selling men on a problem that doesn’t exist (for money).
I have never at any point in my life (which encompasses the entire lifespan of the internet) been subjected to any significant amount of misandry online or in person. When men talk about experiencing misandry online, it’s almost always in the context of them making comments on content geared towards a women’s issue and invalidating the women’s issue while simultaneously making it about themselves.
You mention being a progressive at heart, forced to cloak yourself in more perceived masculine features as if they are at odds with each other. I too am a progressive and I have never felt like that’s been at odds with my masculinity. I’ve never had a problem taking leadership roles, using force to solve problems, even violently when necessary, and I know how to put my emotions aside in order to get things done. At the same time I have no problems sharing my feelings or being vulnerable with the people I love and trust. I’ve never had an issue following a woman or being in an equal partnership like my marriage is. You can be all these things and my experience with women is that the right ones love you for it.
The real issue is solely man-created and exists solely in the mind, and the manosphere exists to tell you in its not in your mind, that’s it’s real, and that it’s everyone’s fault but your own. They monetize your attention, they sell you supplements and books, none of which are actually designed to help you solve your problems, because if you escape your cycle of self destruction, the money stops.
You mentioned that you’re dating a woman and you feel like you have to hide who you are for her to love you? My friend that’s not you being masculine, nor is it you being “progressive”.
Real masculinity, the kind that these influencers refuse to sell you, is having enough self respect to be yourself. If you want to open up and share your feelings with someone then that’s what you’re damn well going to do. And if she isn’t ok with that then she can find someone else.
Nah, I can attest. Misandry has populated a lot of online spaces with most content that even mentions men painting them in a terrible light. (Man or Bear is the most prominent example). The fact that teens are growing in this ambiance that hates them just for being CIS male is going to be terrible for them. Modern feminism has lost most of their male supporters because they’ve just gone down the deep end instead of keeping with their originals ideals of equality. Tho, I geniely believe that feminism should have ditched the name for equality, in the 2015s. It’s more associated with misandry than equality right now among other men.
.
I can attest that that isn’t at all true. Your perception has been warped by these influencers very much on purpose to see conflict where there isn’t any. Society, or women, do not “hate men” just for being men. And this persecution complex and victim mentality is what’s destroying the minds of these young men today.
Believe me, when you give up looking for ways to feel victimized on a daily basis, you’ll stop finding them.
No? I don’t genuely see any of those “Influencers” you keep mentioning. This is talking about my own experience online. I go online and I see hate and the only one being called out is the mysoginistic one. I don’t follow Jordan Peterson nor Andrew Tate (I can’t really even name any others). This is the perception of someone that accepted feminism on their growing years and basically has just grown completely detached from the movement. Following their advice has led me nowhere so I had to find my own way.
This is why I feel there is such a disconnect. I just have to open TikTok to see this, so if researchers are not finding evidence then I’m very curious how that’s possible. Heck, you just need to look at the same masculinity influencer content they are talking about to see it, because it’s not just them making shit up from nothing - they will often use clips of misandrist women to get their point across. So they basically find the evidence for you.
During men’s mental health awareness month this has been particularly easy to encounter as there was a trend of women making as much noise as possible with the caption “me when it’s time to take a moment of silence for men’s mental health”.
I’m glad that you never felt being progressive was at odds with being masculine. But many men, especially younger men, are struggling with this. The fact that you don’t doesn’t change that.
TikTok is incredibly algorithm driven and ultimately driven by the content you consume and interact with. When you go online and “see something everywhere” you have to look at it under the lens of what’s being targeted at you, vs what you encounter in more neutral spaces. When you open TikTok, the percentage of misandrist content you encounter is not representative of all content on the internet. No matter how niche or rare any given subject is, your algorithm will find it and server it to if it thinks you’ll engage with it, positively or negatively.
My TikTok contains zero misandrist content, but that doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist at all either. In order for the researchers to experience what you experience, they’d have to build an algorithm profile tailored to that content. But that would be useless, because it would prove nothing. It’s a question of “Is the world full of misandrists out to get men” or “have the men surrounded themselves with misandrists”.
You have effectively done the latter. Both online and in your personal life. Now when I say this is “your fault” I don’t mean to say that you’ve gone and done this on purpose. The algorithms have a heavy hand to play in this of course and that’s a real issue. But at the end of the day, how the algorithms target you is a result of your engagement and behavior. The more you rail against your perceived world of misandry, the more the algorithm is going to inundate you with it. “Society” hasn’t done this to you, nor have women as a group of people.
I don’t want to delve too much into your personal life here, but you’ve shared that you’ve intimately connected yourself with a woman who you don’t trust will accept you for who you are. I won’t call your girlfriend a misandrist, but you’ve painted her as one of the women who are part of the problem you’re perceiving. You live with her now, so you have to experience that frustration every single day of your life. But like… is she holding you against your will? Should I contact the authorities? If not, then this is another example of you imposing this issue on yourself. You’ve literally surrounded yourself with someone who you perceive to be part of a problem that has deeply and negatively affected your life. Why would you do that, and how is that very personal decision you’ve made society’s fault?
What these manosphere influencers have done, is taken a very personal issue with young men, and instead of addressing the problems these young men have, it expands the issue into a global, societal one that doesn’t exist. And because these men now blame society, they won’t work on fixing the actual issues they have, which only makes their problem worse, and cements their negative world even further. It’s a giant pit of quicksand and the more you struggle the faster you sink.
You’re straying from the point which is that this content exists, is widespread, and is ultimately the root cause. This isn’t hard for a serious researcher to see if they could just be bothered to sit down with the people they are “researching” and actually discover what their online life looks like. Whatever opinions you have on my personal life and choices are irrelevant. The reason I brought my personal experience up is that I think it is representative (and at odds with what UN Women is saying) and an obvious reason why men seek their refuge in masculinity influencers. You can criticize my life all you want, but as far as I’m concerned that only underscores my point.
The misandry is also not limited to algorithm-heavy outlets like TikTok - when I talk about media I mean all social media including Facebook, Reddit, Instagram but also old media such as newspapers. When the #killallmen and #ihatemen hashtags were popular on Twitter the women promoting it were given their own columns in newspapers and a platform in podcasts by national state radio, at least here in Sweden. One popular “feminist” profile, Natashja Blomberg, would for example publicly say “I wonder if it’s a daughter or an abortion” when she was pregnant. She garnered support and was platfformed both by prominent political party leaders and news outlets. She was given her own column and given space in podcasts, where she could complain how disgusting she found her own son to be and how nobody is interested in what men think.
You can’t just let this go on for years, without being challenged, without offering alternative positive messages, and believe that men will just shake it off. They’re turning to these influencers because they were pushed there. I whole heartedly disagree with your assertion that the problem is only in people’s heads, but even if it is, society has a responsibility to help those people and it doesn’t.
The content does exist, but there’s no evidence it’s widespread and it’s definitely not the root cause. It looks widespread to you because you’ve surrounded yourself with it, and you were enabled to do so because of the abundance of manosphere and maybe concurrently, misandry content that you’re engaging with. I hear you that there is a real problem aggravating this whole thing, but I don’t think it’s society, or women, or feminists. I think it’s male grifters preying on the vulnerable.
And to be clear I’m not criticizing your personal life. You are living the life you’ve chosen and I’m not passing judgement on it. It’s just perfectly representative of the fact that the problems you’ve explained that you’re facing were directly caused by decisions you made for yourself. You are the one who’s criticizing your relationship because it isn’t what you want, yet, it’s the one you’ve chosen. If you told me instead you were perfectly happy, I’d be nothing but happy for you.
Ultimately what I’ve chosen is to be the person I want to be. I have no guilt associated with being a man, nor am I ashamed of my masculinity. I don’t listen to influencers who tell me that women hate me, nor have any women told me they hate me. I have had no shortage of women who love me exactly as I am, despite the insistence of those who are convinced society hates men. I’ve met women who didn’t like men, but they have certainly been in the minority and I am not going to get all bent out of shape because there is some subset of people in the world who don’t like me.
I am very happy being a man and I just wish that for others. But I think that comes from getting right with yourself, not making society fix you.
Why has no one here said “links”?
People here just talk in circles instead of providing concrete support.
Dadvocate would be a good source for this stuff especially if you don’t fancy your watch history to get infested by misogynists. Just a gal who doesn’t pull guard.
Quick sidebar, I’m just some random dude reading this thread but thanks for introducing me to Dadvocate. She rules, she’s now my “Pedro Pascal,” goals if you will, gives me hope lmao.
That’s because most of the misandry is ironically caused by men. You can’t fucking breathe the way you want, without another man finding a weakness in that, and shitting all over you.
Yeah this thread is fucking wild. I can't believe people here are up voting literal manoshpere shit. Oh well, it was nice while it lasted.
This is a fairly well-written and nuanced take that mostly aligns with my experiences.
I think this is one of the bigger parts of the issue. There seem to be two types of responses when men open up. One is to shut them down for one reason or another, and the other one is the manosphere saying “yes, that is a problem, and I have a solution”. That option is obviously going to be more appealing.
We need a third option of commiseration for problems without simple solutions. Guys need a space to vent about these issues, without it being seen as an effort to take those opportunities away from others. Of course, we need to pick our forum. Not every space is a place to vent frustrations, which is probably why you get rebuked.
So how do we develop the third option? Well, open up to your male friends. Ask them how they’re doing, and actually listen for an answer. If they just give you “I’m good, how about you?”, that’s your moment. It’s probably going to feel unnatural, and you might not get the response you’re looking for. If you’re worried about how it will be received, maybe start small. Explain something you’re concerned about. You can acknowledge solutions offered, but try not to focus on them. If you get shut down among your friends, maybe it’s time to re-evaluate that friend group.
I’ve seen two things out of “Men’s Health Awareness Month”:
I have no fucking interest in National Whatever Day or Something Awareness Month. They always end up an exercise in worthless busybody tokenism, and the more of them we put in place the more hilarious collisions we’re going to find. I got a great idea, let’s start observing National Temperence Week as the first week of May, so that we can generate pointless anger at the people drinking Corona and margaritas on Cinco De Mayo. I can hear Latinos now saying “Oh what the fuck have the white people made themselves mad about now?”
The messaging I have seen about “Men’s Health Awareness Month” has mostly been addressed to men saying things like “It’s okay to share, it’s okay to cry, there are five lights.” His lived experience has shown that no, it is not. He is overwhelmingly expected to be stable, and any display of weakness will permanently lessen his worth in anyone’s eyes. Telling HIM to open up when those are the consequences he knows await, addressing the problem as a change HE needs to make is just pissing up a rope.
I’m going to use the movie Fight Club as an illustrative device here: Pretty much all of the men in this setting find their social and emotional needs unmet by the structure of society. The buzzword you see thrown around today for this is “lack of third spaces.” The men in the testicular cancer group have basically only one pain to share with each other: loss of family, marriages, jobs etc. The men respond strongly positively to Fight Club, which at first is basically an underground bare knuckle boxing ring started by a mentally ill man. I have a hypothesis that something like a pickup game of basketball would have served much the same function, that what the men in this setting really need is time to do physical activities with other men, to form those bonds the way men actually do.
On that note, I’ll be right back.Gentlemen, let’s go on a hike
You’re a sensible fellow and I appreciate your rational perspective and positive, encouraging attitude to your fellow human beings. Good idea on the virtual hike too, I’ll do that next time I’m out and about if I remember.
Oh yeah…I’m totally feeling that in this thread and every other one on this site talking about gender. Sure really needs like it’s women attacking us men and not the other way round /s. It’s not like the largest social platform on the Internet (reddit), and the largest podcast on the Internet(Joe Rogan) and the largest news network (fox) is biased against women or anything.
By who? This is pure projection. Look at who is being up votes and down votes in this very thread.
Is the misandrist in the room with us right now? Where are these misandrist? I’m man, I don’t have any misandrist hounding me. But maybe that’s because I don’t consider women defending themselves as misandry…
As a fellow middle aged man, I can already tell you have an epic serving of highly divorced man energy. Being progressive isn’t about withdrawing and shriveling up like an old wrinkly penis. It is about defending the people who need it and making space for people who deserve it, it is about class solidarity.
Yep, I was right. I am a “muscular macho guy”, you know what I also am… A feminist. Don’t hate on feminism just because you have no game.
Get the ick? You said you were fourty…right? You can be masculine and still be a feminist dude, women like being respected…you know because they’re people. I can tell you this now, if you keep taking relationships advice from a bunch of influencers, it’s not going to end well.
You can be masculine, have class solidarity, and be a feminist. I rebuilt my own house, work with my hands, lift 3-4 times a week, and am currently building an AR-15…I’m also a leftist who believes feminism is a foundational theory of class consciousness.
Guess what, Ive been happily married to a professional dancer for 10 years… maybe the feminism isn’t the fucking problem bro.
It always seems to come down to traditional gender roles being dehumanizing. Men traditionally aren’t allowed to be “weak”, women traditionally aren’t allowed to be “strong” (but there’s been some work done on that). It took me a while to fully internalize (not just know) that, first and foremost, both are people with all the complexities that come with that. I personally would rather die alone than live every day in fear that I’m not pretending well enough to fit a stereotype. I’m probably over-dramatizing though, just really can’t stand stereotyping.
I legit can't believe that a comment which unironically contains the phase "media misandry" and recounting a tale about getting left behind for chad is getting upvoted on the fediverse. Damn it reall did not take long for this place to jump the shark.
The manosphere is easy to understand. People hate doing work and taking accountability. So just blame the problems on someone else, and watch my podcast and buy my shit.
The manosphere is one symptom of a much larger problem. Look at it in isolation and you’ll miss the big picture. Authoritarianism is on the rise globally. Loneliness is reaching epidemic proportions. Society’s traditional institutions are a distant memory. All we have remaining are loose groups of people shouting at each other as the spectre of war lurks in the background.
But the manosphere doesn’t need to be a symptom of those problems. That’s a choice.
Another choice could be that men band together to identify the real problems and address those.
For example. In the manosphere, women are considered gold diggers. Well, because of the patriarchy, men are told that it is their job to provide, and that their value is tied to how well they provide. So you have men who think it’s their job to provide money, and then are complaining when women see them as a source of money. This is stupid. Men could stop trying to be providers, and instead try being people who are interesting to talk to and nice to be around. That would solve both the golddigger problem and the loneliness problem. It would also start to address some of the capitalist problems, where people are willing to self-exploit, just to get a little more money than their neighbor.
Indeed. Capitalism breeds this crap by focusing on competition excessively and creating an environment where it’s almost mandatory to participate. People need to be looking to exploit people at all times and that is a deflating concept for people.
People also need to go offline. The apps have been taken over by scammers and bots. It’s time to flush again. Which is also related to capitalism.
Yes, it is a choice. However one of the biggest problems is that so many of the good choices are gone. I’m talking about the positive social institutions and community organizations people used to belong to. The third spaces.
Communities have fragmented. Neighbours hate each other. Both of my neighbours hate our family. One is a childless, alcoholic husband and wife who also hate each other (they used to be nice years ago) who also hate us and give us creepy looks all the time. The other is green lawn-obsessed neighbour who hates us for the pine trees we have growing on our property and refuse to cut down (at our own expense) to suit their tastes.
We’re a society of severely mentally ill, isolated, confused, and angry people. Our villages and communities are all gone. We’re all a bunch of islands unto ourselves.
I like saying that society is a hot gas.
It is a mass of small particles that barely interact with one another, heated up by the heat of anger and hate, floating in a large space aimlessly.
My type of society would be a liquid, where particles are free to move but close to other particles.
We should expand the volume of society then! PV=nRT baby
Why are they called unwomen?
Edit: ffs. I need to get off the phone and drink my coffee. United Nations Women. Third shift is killing me.
I haven’t laughed this hard in a long time, thank you
Bring back periods in initialisms. U.N.
100% lol
Bring back punctuation altogether at this stage!
“Unwomen” rings a bell for me.
I looked it up, and in Margaret Atwood’s novel The Handmaid 's Tale, Unwomen were infertile women sent to clean up toxic waste in the colonies.
:(
Bill maher touched on this last night on his show, and i cant believe im seeing more of it.
He argued men are shat on far to often in todays media with female leads taking more lead roles.
He also brought up countless movies starting in the 80s that pushed the dumb dad/male narrative that persists today.
Does he have a point? Yeah idk really.
Pretty much. Misandry feeds misoginy and viceversa, if you don’t temper your discourse and make it reasonable someone else will come and make you temper it
I think it’s far more fundamental than that.
You’ve got a generation of young men who did what they were supposed to culturally: went to school, got good grades, went to college, never broke any laws, and their choices in life are permanent debt and struggling to afford a roach-infested studio apartment, living with their parents, or joining the military to survive. Here in the United States minimum wage won’t even buy you a cup of coffee in large swaths of the country. (And 2/3 of the states still use that as their standard.)
The social contract has been broken, and for the first time, you’ve got a generation who are not going to live more fulfilled and enriched lives than their parents largely by no fault of their own.
Of course they’re pissed. Governments should be addressing this, but it’s more fashionable to blame young men instead, and the right-wingers are the only ones willing to admit there are fundamental economic crises for men.
And? Why should they be special? You’re arguing that because young men were given special status before we should bend over backwards by sacrificing others to their success? Women should continue to be underpaid, undervalued, treated as secondary to men’s success? Nevermind the barriers to any sort of professional and societal success as a woman to begin with.
What social contract? Again, the one that puts male wants and needs ahead of others?
That is what you’re arguing, no?
No, this is a misrepresentation of my argument.
From the 70’s to a few months ago, governments have made it a fundamental priority to elevate women and minorities, and it’s worked. (Go look at the demographics of college enrollment, at least here in the US, if you don’t believe me.)
I’m arguing that to fix misogyny you have to fix the fundamental economic crises affecting young people.
But I appreciate that you were very quick to demonstrate the point I made about the fashionability of blaming young men and pretending these problems simply don’t exist.
Way to misrepresent my argument. Thanks for the downvotes without trying to have a discussion.
My opinion is that society in general has elevated men above others. That is still mostly true, from entertainment to employment. Yes, there is no argument that there has been effort, more or less to offer others some of the same benefits men get, but it’s still token in many ways.
Now pay attention, I said society, I did not blame men for this (though they had a hand by aiding and abetting the status quo), there’s an huge cultural momentum behind male over-representation.
As far as the economy, a nebulous “we need to fix it” is gesturing nebulously at an economy that effects everyone, but it’s hard to take you seriously when you only discuss the economy needing to be fixed in the context dealing only with young men.
Respectfully, your hostile and reactionary tone demonstrated quite well that you had no intention of discussing things in a rational manner. You toss around terms like ‘redpill’ like they’re Halloween candy, and it demonstrates that even having the discussion is enough to set off your temper. I even gave you an example of the imbalance in economic opportunity favoring women and minorities, and you just ignored it.
And that’s fine.
Be angry, but the least you could do is try to be productive.
The problem is the systemic impoverishment of young men is the root cause of all this, and that is what needs to be fixed if you want to fix misogyny.
In nearly every society on earth, since the beginning of recorded history… Men have achieved nearly a totalitarian monopoly in nearly every hierarchy of power.
Even today, what gender are the majority of ceo, the congressmen, the senator, the judges, prosecutors, and the police? Examine the leadership of nearly any hierarchical body of control and the majority of these positions are men… So what power is attacking men, what industry, what laws…If it’s men attacking young men…then it’s not a gender issue, it’s a class issue you fucking children.
You are using misogyny as a negotiation tactic? “Guess will just have to let bad things happen to you until boys get their treats again…”
What a fucking loser. Can’t cope with not getting insta middle class for nothing so they become a reactionary chode… Real great class solidarity bro.
Again failure to discuss the substance of the argument and just making it personal. It’s crystal clear what your objectives are here.
I can’t believe how much shit you are getting while having perfectly valid and rational claims. The fact this fucking chode is claiming your being reactionary while he froths at the mouth with accusations nof misandry is making me feel insane.
You are being too kind, but I will use the privilege reserved for middle aged man to fucking yell at emotional little boys throwing tantrums.
Surrounded by incels, I guess. Mad they aren’t special anymore.
“When you’re accustomed to privilege, equality feels like oppression.” – Franklin Leonard
Yeah… I didn’t think the culture was as ubiquitous. Kinda scary to see on a platform with so many self professed “leftist”. You can’t seriously think you are on the left when you only care about providing for your specific demographic.
The kids are not alright apparently.
IMO the limited subset arguing here support authoritarianism. Generally a male dominated profession. Seems to be a burgeoning market these days.
True, but does that make Giorgia Meloni a fascist DEI hire?
Yeah, they seem to be more on the side of “national socialism” than actual socialism. Socialism…but only for a certain demographic that happens to encompass me and people who look and act like me.
Well If it helps I think you made really good points, and in a much more civil manner than what that guy deserved…and he still tried to frame you as having a “hostile tone”. Misogynistic never fucking change.
Keep up the good fight
No one even brought up sex or dating. The logical jump to incels here is baffling.
And when exactly did those college enrollment demographics change? Oh yeah, the moment college degrees became worthless. White men are choosing not to go to college, they aren’t being forced, were not running out of colleges.
Well, you’re not just saying that… If we were to say start a program to fix the economic crisis that is effecting the youth, how would you go about doing that? Oh by targeting the most disadvantaged demographics…oh no, that would be…DEI.
You are the one pretending as if this was only a problem for young white men. You’re just taking your licks for the first time and being a baby about it.
Your argument and vitriole is a nice example of weaponized self-righteousness. You think because you’re aware of a class of people that has a disadvantage in labor, that makes your opinion on that group more valuable than others, and instead of having the conversation about labor or why some men fall prey to bullshit, because of vitriole like this that serves only to alienate, you’re playing right into the hands of people who divide labor and reap profits.
Instead of stating anything at all respectfully and with a level head, you’re shoving things down someone’s throat (LMAO) for having something to say about what misogyny is to a group of people (some men) that understand where misogyny comes from, how young men internalize misogyny and then go into management to perpetuate it, and how’s it’s used in terms of capital markets to sell vibes to people (men and women) that feel attacked by a real issue.
People like you are a dime a dozen.
That’s not what I said. That’s not what I said at all. And “falling for bullshit” was encompassed by the premise that men have been told since forever that they are special, not necessarily directly but often indirectly by omitting the difficulties others face. Of course you’d make up some redpill crap that even discussing the outgroups that somehow the act places them above men’s issues. But hey, whatever smug rationalizations you’d prefer for your narrative instead of discussing the substance of what was written.
I think this person sees someone pointing out the problems facing young men and automatically thinks ‘incel’. It can be disorienting to see people who don’t hate women advocating for young men.
Lol, you aren’t accepting their argument because they didn’t say please and thank you?
You are accepting that women are a more disadvantaged labour class, but are being a prissy little prick because they are upset about it? That’s the softest shit I’ve ever seen.
Show some class solidarity for your sisters, the most disadvantaged need to be lifted first. Stop whining like a 4 year old, we men have every advantage in this system compared to our counterparts. Though I’d hardly acknowledge nearly anyone in this thread as a man. Weak shit.
Speaking of toxic masculinity…
“toxic masculinity is when men judge men harshly for being sexist”. Totally got me there.
Sure. Real men don’t cry. Real men aren’t weak. Real men toughen up and don’t complain. Real men don’t care about injustice if it’s them who are affected. That’s you.
Nothing to do with people in this thread being sexist: That’s your addition to justify your toxicity to yourself. Even if that is the case, that this threat is full of sexist assholes: You’re still taking a toxic approach to facing it.
Lol, falsely conflating me telling you not to blame POC and women for late stage capitalism with telling you not to cry is pretty hilarious.
What injustice are you facing that generations of women and immigrants haven’t been receiving the whole time?
I’m not telling you not to communicate or build support networks, I’m saying don’t blame minorities for the lack of those support networks.
I did what?
I’ve been using this thread as an opportunity to talk about a positive example, and that’s the marked increase in male childcare workers in Germany. I pointed out some masculine influencers doing good work. I bemoaned that much “X for women/girls” stuff is half-assed feel-good BS, prone to causing more harm than good (because half-assed, because it’s done for optics instead of the thing itself).
I’ve been constructive. I didn’t lash out and try to put people down for caring about their issues. I didn’t wrap people up in ass-long back and forth threads demanding justification after justification why they care just to find an excuse to pounce, then ride my high horse into the sunset.
Oh, and I also shot the horse of some guy.
Oh I’m sorry I mistook you for someone who was blaming minorities for their woes… You’re just a guy defending him.
If that’s your take on this thread then you’re just as complicit as the rest of these incels.
It’s my take on my own contributions. Note that those didn’t include “defending some guy”, it really was an exhaustive list. How you managed to get that wrong in a post in which you apologised about getting something wrong is something you’ll have to ask your dead horse, I suppose.
An exhaustive list of babying and validating young men who are being radicalized. You aren’t challenging their beliefs, you’re just patting yourself on the back for being tolerant of the intolerable. Which is ironic for someone who seems to be obsessed with an analogy about high horses.
Lol, because you keep beating it with a stick. Try a new analogy never once and a while.
And as usual, in an act of irony, men are the biggest misandrist, and my biggest source of pain. I don’t like this social contract where I get fucked over no matter what. I’m just going to abandon it, and lead a massive exile with me. I already have a solar panel, and plan to get more.
I think you’re confusing misandry with people just not liking you. It’s exceedingly rare for men to be harassed or oppressed simply for their gender.
Lol, what are you talking about? Everyone keeps saying this shit, but no one is giving any real world examples. I am a man, if there is some social contract that sets men up to lose, why am I not experiencing it? I’m married, I have friends who are women, I work with several women, I don’t have any problems with the opposing sex? Maybe it’s a you problem and not a societal one?
Lol, your username is apt. You think you’re going to be the Moses of incels and lead a bunch of morons off to the woods with nothing but a solar panel?
I’m literally fucking gaslight by being told I don’t have ADHD, told my stomach issues are just because I eat fast, planning is stupid and other incredibly dumb shit. I have to listen to an anti-waxxer father talk shit for over an hour. I had to watch friends sprout sigma shit, called a woman I brought into the server “the huzz”, and called me a fucking pussy. Actually, I don’t have to deal with your bullshit either.
What does that have to do with your gender? These are problems we all go through because our healthcare system is failing because they put profits before people.
Sounds like you have shitty sexist friends… Again I fail to see how that has anything to do with misandry. That’s toxic masculinity, not misandry. You aren’t being targeted because you are male, you are being targeted because your shithole friends don’t see you as male enough.
Solidarity with women is not the same thing as accepting ad hominem and infantilization from a stranger on the Internet. Soak your head.
Lol, what part of her comment was an hominem, how did she infantalize anyone?
His response was inappropriate and completely avoided her points. Telling a woman to watch their tone is about as common as a misogynistic dog whistle as you can find.
Just because he didn’t call her a slur doesn’t mean he wasn’t being an asshole. The substance of his response was more offensive than any ad hominem.
I dont respect anyone defending sexism, so throwing ad hominems at incels is fine with me. I also don’t care about the opinions of misogynist, so please fuck off and go be a disappointment to your mother elsewhere, thanks.
Edit: oh I thought it was some once defending you, you were the fuckface in the original post. Yeah you can go fuck yourself, Lord knows you’re never going to find someone else to do it for you.
And what about the women in that same boat? I’m confused by your argument
I’d suggest you read the entire thread.
I did and it seems to have gotten even more off track and deeply into this magical idea that women and other minorities (not sure why they were brought into it) somehow have easier lives?
Thank you for reading it.
There are two factors here in the US that correlate significantly with a person’s lifetime earnings potential: their zip code of birth and attainment of a college degree. It’s exceedingly significant (in a positive way) that women constitute the majority in college enrollment. I think that’s a good thing, but it also demonstrates inequality.
I want to see policies here that mirror those in more progressive European countries: Free college, a federally-mandated living wage that adjusts with inflation, and universal health care. I also want to see universities’ federal funding tied to expansion of enrollment rates, as there are many that keep them artificially low and yet still raise tuition rates every year. These benefits should target low-income communities without regard to race or gender.
In short, I want to see the economic ship lifted for the poor, and that’s how it should be done.
Most young people, and in particular young men, have three choices when entering adulthood: Work for sub-standard wages and struggle alone and/or live with their parents, join the military, or take on permanent debt on the hope of a college degree and an elevated life. (If they’re fortunate enough to land a spot in enrollment to begin with.)
Rampant misogyny has spread because people who consider themselves progressive have ignored these economic calamities and right-wingers have, conversely, highlighted those inequalities, created communities for young men, and gotten rich in the process. Currently the functional unemployment rate in the United States is 25%.
The solution, is creating an economy where prosperity is distributed among a more diverse population of people.
(But I suspect people will continue to vote Democrat and Republican and this conversation won’t matter much in the grand scheme of things.)
Correlating education to wealth is fine overall but you are intentionally avoiding more direct metrics of wealth and inequality to make it seem as if this is direct causation for women having some upper hand.
Women absolutely make less and hold a significantly smaller portion of the overall wealth in this country.
Women routinely have to leave their careers to manage the home and their family (due to archaic misogynistic gender roles). There is also just straight up bias in management decisions about pay.
pewresearch.org/…/the-enduring-grip-of-the-gender…
No. I’m illustrating that the machinery of government can and has elevated women and minorities in measurable ways.
What I’ve suggested above would benefit them as much as men.
Sometimes yes, hence why there needs to be more regulation, as I’ve suggested.
Your inference that I’m blaming women is projection. What I’m doing is essentially advocating for DEI, but income-based and not based on any one demographic with the dual goals of lessening poverty and improving the overall functionality of society. (So we don’t have entire generations of people being radicalized.)
Exactly…that’s been the status quo for young white men only. People of color and women have been getting the shit end of the stick the whole time.
If a woman is going homeless there are resources. If it’s a man there’s almost nothing. I work serving the unhoused.
Having been homeless before, the resources were not different for me or my partner, male, at the time. Separate sleeping quarters obviously. But the same exact resources.
Genuinely what are you talking about…Where is this?
Ohio. Cincinnati, specifically. It’s not 100 to 0 women resources to men, it’s more like 55 to 5. There are some cold weather shelters for men, and places to eat, but mostly there are zero beds unless you’re willing to sign up for a drug testing program, and even then there are costs and limited spaces. There are quite a few women’s shelters in the area.
I mean, there are reasons that women need to be away from men sometimes. And it’s not because we’re having a wonderful time in life. And this “manosphere” is only creating more dangerous situations for us.
I would agree here. Shelters are hell for both genders.
I was homeless with a three months old. Without a kid, I would have done as I always did and couch hopped or slept on benches til I got back on my feet, but I had a baby and wanted to get stable fresh out of a DV situation.
The shelter I stayed at had a “single” floor with both men and womed (divided by rooms) and the top floor was families.
Everyone likes helping a single moms out. And I made it out, got stable and its been 12 years without homelessness. It was because of those programs.
I know a lot of men slip through the cracks. I have met a handful who chose homelessness because thats where they find thier community. I get that, the most community I ever felt was in low places surrounded by others also in low places.
I’ve also met men like my bio father, who after years of addiction, homelessness, violence and prison time, was able to reach resources and get housed and remains comfortable.
These resources, especially now, are being cut. It’s definitely scary. I do think there are a lot of well, Walter Whites of the world, where rather than take help and admit vulnerability, they do it their own way, on thier own terms, fuck the consequences. All because being vulnerable and admitting you need help are like, anti-masculine traits in our current culture.
I think there are a lot of things that lead to men being homeless. There are programs, but usually worh strict requirements and some people, you just cant box them.
I will say for people with children, there are many more programs available.
To note, you don’t see many homeless women, and there is reason you don’t see them. When my mother was homeless she lived deep in the woods and moved around constantly as to avoid being detected. You wouldn’t have known she was homeless, if only because she had a car, but still.
I had to do community service in Tennessee, i chose to help feed the homeless at a soup kitchen, anyone could eat there, but there were only permanent beds for women. It was nice they fed the men too but thinking back, where did they go at night?
This was not the case in North Carolina
Im glad to hear it! We have enough empty buildings and houses that there shouldnt be any homeless.
I read the first paragraph, and as a woman, I feel the same! Solidarity!
Poverty isn’t just for men
When a person has a systemic privilege, sometimes equality feels like oppression to them.
Or maybe it feels like oppression because it is. Nobody in this thread has their mind open to the possibility that structural changes disadvantaging (young, predominantly white) men can happen even when other groups are continuing to be held back.
Oppression being committed by who exactly? What demographic currently holds the reigns of power in our governmental and economic hierarchy?
What you don’t understand is that if they are coming for young white men now, it’s only because they’ve run out of minorities to disenfranchise. So if everyone nis getting abused now…it’s a class struggle.
The reason no one is responding to the blooming problems of young white men is because those have been problems everyone else has already been experiencing. And guess what, the majority of young white men didn’t ever want to hear about the problems of everyone else.
Now that you are experiencing the same issue…does this make you more empathetic to the troubles of your fellow workers…No, you bitch and moan about anyone trying to say it’s not just a problem for young white men. You still care nothing about class solidarity, you just want to bitch about your own demographic being kicked out of the free treat club.
Like what privilege? Not being able to vent or show negative emotions ever? Being shit on for having a penis? Fear and loathing? Being first one to be drafted for war? Being threated as an expendable resource that has no right to complain about anything, and that should just shut up, and work in some hellish factory until their health gives out, then die?
Power isn’t everything you know. It’s why I’m more than happy to become as independent of society as possible. Why I’m happy to see the nukes fall. You just want to use me, and leave a corpse behind. Just want to accuse me of other men’s crimes.
Well good luck ever manipulating me again, now that I know what’s up.
The dumb dad is fucking disgusting, it’s in pretty much every animated show for kids.
And sitcoms.
Don’t watch those, though the few I’ve watched didn’t really have that. But it wouldn’t surprise me.
But I think with kid shows it’s much more dangerous, they soak up the patterns and internalise them.
Also the Simpsons, family guy, American dad etc.
Get told you’re evil, and the cause of societies problems enough times, you start to believe it.
My ex wife did it to me, always assumed the worst. So I became the worst. It wasn’t even a conscious decision. I just checked out.
Simplistic take, but I see it every day.
If you’re hearing men are evil, you may be spending too much time online, or in the wrong places.
You and your ex are not the whole of society. I’ve dated shit bags too, I’ve seen both women and men be shit bags. This is what needs to be avoided, you cant generalize the entire female population because you and your ex wife had a shit fallout. Women shouldn’t generalize men in the same way either. I’ve seen it on the womens side, I call it out or leave the space.
Sometimes people just arnt meant for eachother. Keep hope and find new love.
It’s good practice to try and not judge new people in your life, based on how an old one treated you. Learn red flags sure, learn your own boundaries, learn what things in life you value, but the whole population is not you, nor your ex.
I completely agree if you call someone a bitch/dog/liar/asshole/whatever long enough, some people will respond by giving em what they ask. It’s tough. I hope youve found healing post divorce and feel happier today
Bill Maher is Joe Rogan for people who think they’re too smart for Joe Rogan. He never has an important point to make about anything and is usually completely misinformed. This is a rich white Jewish guy that rarely sees any value in issues raised by any other demographic, yet always complains any time there is even a mild issue facing rich/white/Jewish guys.
Women make up more than 50% of the population, but make up 30% of the leads in Hollywood roles, up from the previous 15% - conspiracy of the woke! Or, maybe… The marketing teams figured out that women would rather watch a movie with a female lead more often. Or maybe… its a load of horseshit.
hollywoodreporter.com/…/women-hollywood-female-le…
Can’t believe I’m reading defence of the manosphere on Lemmy, but here we are.
Believe it. There’s a single community in the Lemmyverse that is “women only”. And it’s a fucking magnet for passing men who absolutely have to make sure they’re heard in this one single community when 99.44% of the other communities are so dominated by men that women participating is practically a unicorn.
Even the “leftists” of Lemmy can’t stand a women’s space. Lemmy is the manosphere!
I know exactly the community you mean but I haven’t interacted with it much beyond occasional visits and upvotes. It’s sad to hear that perspective of Lemmy, because it does get rose-tinted as a bit of a leftist utopia and this is the first time I’ve seen the ugliness. I really appreciate it being shared.
you sound pissy and project hate in every of your responses and on to everything you perceive to involve a man. I feel sorry for you. However, you’re making up facts that the other communities are “so dominated by men” to appease your distorted perceptions of the world.
Let me guess, the men will have their internet traffic monitored & have curfews ??
Oh & be put on a watchlist for merely talking in a raised voice against women.
Because I kid you not, these are real suggestions
And these are real words.
Yup, in the UK women MPs were talking about bringing in curfews for MEN
And a Missisipi Lawmaker proposed making ejaculation without fertilisation of an egg illegal.
…wikipedia.org/…/Contraception_Begins_at_Erection…
Sometimes these things are done for effect and aren’t entirely serious. Please learn to tell the difference.
These are lawmakers who have the power to change your lives & your instinct is treat any issue that may affect men’s lives in a negative way as a joke.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=wBQybc2l-gU
E.g: Trump is sending foreign men to El Salvador to a torture camp. Yeah, it’s only funny when it happens to othet men, when your govt does this to YOU, you will be singing a different tune.
I think I’ll speak up for men here, You need a Men-Only Lemmy/Mbin/PieFed instance. So that you can at least speak up about your issues without being laughed at or downplayed by misandrists
What you are saying doesn’t quite tally with reality. Your argument style seems to be to take things which have some element of truth to them and then take them entirely out of context inferring some kind of semi-paranoid hatred in others where it may not exist.
I could imagine that some people might say you have extreme views.
I am a man who believes that more needs to be done for men, but I think your jingoism does a disservice to the true problems many men face. It is so paper thin, overly simplistic and easy to see through that I believe you are only riling up hatred and will not possibly solve any real mens problems with your current approach.
Honestly, your arguments are a parody of real issues. Stop.
Lol, by who?
Who would even be able to enforce this… The politicians who are mostly men, the CEO who own silicon valley…mostly men. The police who would enforce the law…oh also men.
You guys are just scared of your own shadows… Some real soft shit going on in this thread.
Men huh, Finland is a feminist govt that has a male-only draft. Oh & EU is feminist led www.youtube.com/watch?v=BtXnRwT8K9A
Feminists & women are pandered to by those men. Those men are kinda like you. Of course some like you is going to victim blame men. Another example is the white feather movement
www.youtube.com/watch?v=sSEg3DMGThk
Men still make up the majority of the parliament in Finland, though that particular country has a long history of promoting equity.
You mean that the EU has leaders who are feminist… Men still hold the majority of the seats.
Oh no… People who believe in equality…the tragedy.
How exactly are you being victimized while I am not… and we’re both men?
Lol, that was a nationalistic movement to get people to go to war. I don’t really think women were really in control of the war effort during WW2.
You don’t believe in equality, PERIOD. Because people like you oppose women being drafted. You also deny systemic misandry like the alimony laws & even support policies like abolishing prisons for women & reduced sentencing for women & only women.
There are multiple documented evidences of feminists shaming men into getting drafted while they get to be safe & secure & one of their excuses was “We have a crisis in masculinity” & Finland has a women-majority govt, of course the diversity part is a lie.
EU is led by feminists & BTW, pandering to women is also feminism, there are literally reserved seats for women & a male-only draft. These are all Equity to you huh
I like how you’re putting in so much effort into pushing the narrative that it’s men who do it, when the biggest warmongers just so happen to be women & there’s not a single word of opposition to the draft by feminists.
Like the White-feather movement being nationalistic, yet it was still women who shamed men into fighting the war (women didn’t want to go to war & even today women as a whole are opposed to conscription for women)
Reminder women in the military are placed in either guard duty or administration.
Wrong fuck face, I don’t believe in the draft for men or women.
The majority of law makers are men, the majority of judges are men, the majority of law enforcement officers are men… How is men making rules that you perceive to negatively affect men = misandry?
Lol, you really think the white feathers was a feminist movement?
“Moreover, almost half (47%) of the country’s” having a woman as the leader doesn’t mean they have the majority. You’re either lying or you can’t fucking read.
I like that you posted an article praising the quality of living and equity in a country and think it helps your argument.
Lol, I don’t think you know what equity, feminism, or majority means.
Lol, name a time in modern history where a woman was the leader of a nation who started a war…
And you think I like the white feathers? Being a feminist doesn’t mean you support every decision of every woman… That’s just insane. That would be like me blaming every man, for WW2 because Hitler was a dude.
Lol, that’s not even true… Women have been allowed to be in combat roles since 2013.
And guess what, it’s not the women who say they shouldn’t be
.
Except the feminists actually do not oppose the male draft via their collective silence you gaslighter, just like how they don’t promote anti-false allegation laws or gender-neutral laws.
Stop trying to move goalposts & absolve feminists of their lies when feminists now use the “crisis of masculinity” excuse to bring back the draft in EU.
But then I wouldn’t expect any empathy for men’s plight from anyone who comes from LazySoci.al
You purport to being intelligent so you know what you’re doing with your inflammatory responses of explicitly “opposing the draft for women”.
Oh and yet more insults in your responses. I sense a theme here :(
Really? Finland had the far-right Finns party in coalition in the last few years.
Can I ask a question ? Why do you assume that feminists were ever pro-left ?? Seriously
That has nothing to do with my remark. The far-right is anti-feminist.
As to you question, there are many different strands of feminism and Marxist feminism, anarcha-feminism, intersectional feminism, queer feminism etc. are very much pro-left.
Sure Finland’s female-led coalition party is not feminists according to YOU<br> www.bbc.com/news/stories-55020994
So pro-left they are & yet so pro-war, TERFs are a thing too & guess what ? The feminists do not oppose the draft. (Finland has a male-only draft & wants to join NATO which totally a defensive alliance)
"2Sure Finland’s female-led coalition party is not feminists according to YOU<br> www.bbc.com/news/stories-55020994"
If you see feminism as every time there are women in government, why do you oppose feminism?
“So pro-left they are & yet so pro-war”
They’re a right-wing austerity government but I’ll bite, which war are you talking about?
“TERFs are a thing too”
Sure, I never said all feminists are left-wing. There are reactionary strands of feminism (if we accept that they are indeed feminists) such TERFs for example. My point is that feminism is not a monolith and the bulk of it is left-wing.
“The feminists do not oppose the draft.”
Correction: A country right next to an expansionist dictatorship does not oppose the draft. I’ll probably get shouted at buy when you are right next to a country like Russia, the draft is a necessary evil.
“(Finland has a male-only draft & wants to join NATO which totally a defensive alliance)”
Perhaps the draft should be extended to women. In any case, irrelevant to your “point” about feminism.
Is there even an incentive for solving men’s problems? Feminism can use men to portray the ultimate evil; influencers can use that portrayal to criticize men, engage in rage bait, get attention and secure brand deals.
Capitalism can appease women to promote consumerism wrapped in feminism. Corporations can capitalize on men’s loneliness and low self-worth.
I have noticed that men with low self-worth find meaning in work, which ultimately profits corporations, the money they will earn will be expanded on consumerisms/additions which again can be profited by capitalism and corporate.
The rich can have as many resources as they want, so why solve it? Other than individuals (men) taking matters in their own hands and rescuing each other I don’t think there is enough incentive to help men as community or whole
A commercial incentive?
If you want to commercialize solving the ills of society, you end up with death camps as being simply the end result of efficiency.
If you want to solve the problems of various demographics rather then viewing them as gender-specific instances in order to benefit the whole of society you get, among other benefits, a lot less genocide.
Incentives don’t always have to be of commercial value; they can also be moral and assumed.
You don’t usually receive commercial value for rescuing an animal, helping a child, or sheltering a woman. What I am saying is, why can’t we offer the same moral incentive to men? They are often portrayed as oppressors, and more value can be extracted from the “oppressor bogeyman” than from actually addressing and solving the problems.
What you are describing is not solving the problem; it is, at best, putting the problem under the rug, or at worst, getting rid of the problem altogether.
You make some good points, but i cant resist the thought experiment:
Is there even an incentive for solving women’s problems? Patriarchy can use women to portray the ultimate evil; influencers can use that portrayal to criticize women, engage in rage bait, get attention and secure brand deals.
Capitalism can appease men to promote consumerism wrapped in misogyny. Corporations can capitalize on women’s loneliness and low self-worth.
I have noticed that women with low self-worth find meaning in work, which ultimately profits corporations, the money they will earn will be expanded on consumerisms/additions which again can be profited by capitalism and corporate.
The rich can have as many resources as they want, so why solve it? Other than individuals (women) taking matters in their own hands and rescuing each other I don’t think there is enough incentive to help women as community or whole
I understand your thoughts experiment, and I assure you that I am not assuming that this thought comes from a place of malice. The second thing is that I would be using an LLM model to fix my grammar, so it might sound like an LLM response, and my word choice might not be as precise as native ones.
I want you to understand that my comment wasn’t in contrast to women but to society. Helping women isn’t coming from goodwill or a soft spot but as a means to an end. What end? Exercising soft power for powerful people¹, brownie points for PR², and more consumers for capitalism.³
Saving women and children is still shown as a positive attribute, not as some general attribute. The thing is, people doing this are well aware of that. Recently, when Trump blocked the USAIDs and some other beneficiaries that helped victim groups, a lot of people who championed feminism and the welfare of the weak straight up on camera started babbling about how the USA will lose its soft power in other countries. You can call me naive, but it baffled me. You don’t have to pretend that there is no soft power, but at least keep people’s welfare as the central piece of your argument or concerns.
Brownie points: Saving women or appearing to work for helping women is used for PR by political figures, corporations, and people who want to be at the center of attention. Though recently, this one isn’t going very well because, due to the internet and the large availability of information, it is very easy to check for credibility. However, there is still enough bias that can be exploited.
How can I explain this one? Think about it: you don’t want half of your customers locked away and banished when you can sell them consumerism as rebellion (the search for cigarettes as feminism).
If you paid attention, all these three situations are beneficial only as long as women are presented as victims or oppressed. Since there is no David without Goliath, we get men as the oppressor or ultimate evil.
No, these both can’t be promoted to the same extreme, as it will lead to people resorting to gender roles while expecting others not to, creating extremely competitive conditions for men, as the patriarchy will push the gender role of men asking out, taking financial responsibility, etc. If we assume misogyny is high too, they will soon check out of the dating scene, leading to a fall in the birth rate, which isn’t too great for capitalism. We have a whole country as an example of why capitalism’s incentives don’t lie with promoting misogyny; can you guess that country? :::Yes, it is South Korea.:::
For capitalism to thrive, it needs just enough modulated patriarchy and misogyny where men remain competitive with each other, and even those who give up remain consumers in the form of some consumerism addiction. If misogyny and patriarchy are promoted enough and spiral out of control, people will check out of society.
I can’t comment on this, as it was anecdotal from my side, and this can be anecdotal from your side.
You are completely wrong on this one. The divide is very important. If they (the rich and powerful) let go of this illusion of helping women or the underprivileged or making it all appear as meritocracy, it will turn into rich vs. poor, and this has never worked in favor of the rich. To maintain this illusion or facade that they are not the perpetrators of the current worsening of society, they need bogeymen, which, of course, we know who they are, and make them appear as saviors they need victim too, and we are back to square one.
You know what is ironic? This portrayal of bogeymen and its consequences isn’t backfiring on the rich and powerful but is becoming a tool to exchange power between different factions of the same wealthy individuals.
What are men’s problems? What problem do we suffer that also doesn’t affect women?
Isn’t that what you are doing to feminist right now? Isn’t that what the article is talking about with the man-o-sphere?
Lol, like we men are immune from corporations promoting masculinity? Old spice, axe body spray, every sports based commercial… What gender do you think the majority of the CEO for these companies are?
Capitalism isn’t a fucking gender problem…it is the thing making everyone’s lives miserable. If we wanted to examine gender in capitalism we can take a look at which of the genders gains more from the system. What percent of the oligarchs are men, how many billionaires are men, how many senators and judges that keep the system going… it’s mostly dudes.
And the rich switch genders or something? Women can’t be part of the struggle against capitalism? What is wrong with you guys, do you not have mothers, sisters, women in your lives who are just friends?
I can’t be the only one here who thinks this is insane, right?
Young white men are being squeezed out of the ownership class for the first time and it’s because it’s the only demographic that hasn’t already been squeezed at this late stage of capitalism. The problem isn’t with women, it is the economic system that dangles a carrot for some, so they’ll wield the stick against others…and we’re all out of carrots. Welcome to the party, everyone else has been getting the stick the whole fucking time.
Eh. Nothin’ to lose.
Women have strong support movement on their side. It’s not something they gain only through their sex, but rather something they gain I think mostly due to the same gender stereotypes that also act against them.
Same stereotypes which isolate men and make them suffer in silence and alone, making showing any sign of weakness a fatal mistake.
I honestly don’t see your point here - what commenter above you said is right, and sure as hell they didn’t mention that it doesn’t work the other way around.
What are men problems, huh? Like, dunno, expectation to always go after that false masculinity. Also, as far as I understand it, what you quoted above this part is just continuation of the point above it, nothing to add here.
Yeah, but affects genders differently. Men are eaten, ground to a paste and then spat out. Women are bellitled and their work is seen as substandard. One side doesn’t make the other any less, both are problems and commenter above you didn’t say men have it worse, just that they suffer from it.
What commenter above you is alluding to is the point of the whole post - Men do not get help. We do not have the same societal networks that women have to get together and stand up. And even if women decided to fight for us, it’s for naught until we are able to start getting up by ourselves.
'kay. What’s with that obsession with women? Commenter above you mentioned once that feminism can use men to portray them as evil, which they do because guess who makes them suffer most, and yet due to that you immediately went and threw everything they said as if they did nothing else but accuse women of men’s suffering.
All in all, as far as I understand the comment above you, all boils down to:
Which are answers to question at the beggining:
IMO, the incentive is for us to move our asses, take notes from women and build our own support networks. But that is actually fought against by conservatists/right-wingers, because lonely and lost men make cheap and easily influenced canon fodder.
That seems like a self inflicted issue… What are women supposed to do about this? In my life it has usually been women begging their husbands to speak to them or to go to therapy.
And who propogates and sustains this stereotype? Sounds like you should be mad at men.
That would imply it’s not simply a mens problem…
The person I responded to was saying women were being targeted by capitalistic marketing… How is that a mens problem. My point is that it’s not a mens problem it’s a capitalist problem.
Lol, so it’s a class problem… Of course the poor suffer, that’s why we’re supposed to have class solidarity, not become misogynistic.
That doesn’t explain the blatant misogyny in this thread and in the youth in general.
This whole thread and post is about the gender dynamic and the blooming network of misogyny. And because his interpretation of economics is devoid of class consciousness, he and you only focus on the problems of young men, which is a demographic and not a class.
How do women gain? Who runs the corporations?
Who do you think runs the fucking world already…its us, men.
So obviously nwe don’t need much support that is just based on gender. Of the people doing well right now…it’s mostly men.
What separates us and the people who run the world isn’t gender…its class. You can’t build a supportive class network and only focus on young men.
I hope you realize how alienating a sentence like this is, for someone who is as stomped by society as many women are.
This narrative is exactly what prevents any form of class solidarity, and I really can’t understand how someone can write it in the same comment where class struggle is raised.
How? How am I alienating anyone by telling them something they already know?
What the fuck are you talking about? Did you not read the rest of the post… My point was that if being a man isn’t the inherent source of your struggle then it must not be the real problem…the real problem is class war.
Saying “it’s us, men” (to rule the world) is inherently a narrative that avoid discussing the class division, because being a man is not being part of a social class.
I might have misunderstood what you meant, but this argument is put forward quite often by certain groups that lost completely touch with the class struggle, hence my remark.
I wasn’t the one who claimed white young men were being systemically oppressed… If you are examining class division through gender then it is an impossible topic to avoid.
You can’t have it both ways. I’ve been saying the whole time it doesn’t make sense to examine class struggle through the lens of gender, my claim about “us men” was made to highlight the contradictory nature of the original claim.
That is what I’ve been saying the whole time…
The reason I brought it up was to dispel the claim that white men were being specifically targeted in the first place.
Did you not read the context of the post?
And you think we don’t have expectations foisted on us? Expectation to raise the children. Expectation to do the housework. All while conforming to standards of beauty that range from the uncomfortable to the literally lethal.
Compassionate fucking Buddha, there’s a reason why the manosphere is pointed at in disbelief and it’s right fucking here!
Hey. Nice try. My own comment tho, slightly higher.
I never said women don’t have expectations on them, in fact I literally said the opposite ^^ In the part you quoted I underlined just the fact that men face certain problems, not that only men face certain problems.
Thank you for making sense!
This fucking thread is crazy… especially these dudes trying to wrap their misogyny in faux leftist babbling.
There is no struggle but class struggle. They’re just pissed they missed the bus on being invited to the ownership class and now they’re stuck down here with everyone else.
The same can be said about you too, you know you are not getting shit done against the ownership class so resorting to insulting and demeaning anyone who appears privileged to you.
You want to really fight a class war? How about starting by not out of frustration humiliating anyone who has different symptoms of the same problem as you.
Sure men talking about their problems is misogyny, you can’t gate keep the left, and anybody who is reading this, some people at left accept you and adversiory despite of your gender . your are not abonded. Seek out help. There are still people who will help you.
Lol, I’m the same because I’m upset that people aren’t engaging in class consciousness?
I’m making fun of people who claim to be leftist, but only care about their own demographics. You can’t be a leftist and abandon the very basic idea of class consciousness.
It is when you talk to them about their problems and all they do is bitch and moan about dei.
Again … This isn’t about their gender. I’m a dude. Its about how they’ve abandoned class consciousness and are demeaning the struggles of their fellow working class by claiming they somehow have it worse than everyone else. And when you ask them why… You just end up getting thinly veiled misogyny.
Uh, yes? Obviously. If there wasn’t then “manosphere” content would never be monetized.
Mate, what many of those so-called gururs of “manosphere” do is called capitalising on misery of others, not solving. Which I have already covered in my comment above.
Don’t think for a second that I’m approving of Andrew Tate types lol. I’m just saying if there wasn’t incentive then they wouldn’t be able to profit off of it. Maybe we’re using different definitions of incentive. Or maybe you mean to actually make a true working long term fix for men as opposed to just content that monetizes off of it.
Yep
Men are by default worth less really. One man can impregnate many women. If you look at society from a more cynical perspective as just resources, it makes sense that men are inherently far less worth than women.
Value as people? Pfft, forget it. When was that ever practiced?
Women are the big spenders online.
Spenders? That’s not what it’s all about. You simply need less men to keep humanity going, and you basically just exist to do the heavy lifting, and protect women from beasts (that are no longer a threat). So if you are born a man, you lost the lottery. You are forced to engage in dumb, detrimental behavior, or be ostracized. You are forced on a death march.
Or you start being a ‘man’ or rather human, and create the life that you want.
If you see yourself as human resource, you are not worth more than that commodity and that value is all you have. Instead, meet other people and start creating.
I’m sick and tired of hitting a wall. I can’t live with a hostile family constantly sabotaging my efforts. I’m supposed to at least have some respite at home, people aren’t supposed to laugh at you when you try to improve yourself. I have no other recourse, I will just finally blow my fucking head off next pay. Then maybe they will finally ask if they did something wrong.
Get some counceling first. Seems like you could use some help communicating your needs.
Listen to me: try putting maximum effort into improving yourself.
What makes you think that people who have not acknowledged your efforts until now will suddenly gain enough self-awareness to realize that they are the problem after you take your own life?
Join an offline community, engage in fieldwork, sports, or anything where you don’t have to be the best—just be there. Just know that I am rooting for you.
I just want to point out, men are not by default worth less.
Well said, I will note Women have been the target of beauty ads for over 100 years already. Media will make us feel ugly so we buy thier products. They feed on our insecurities for profit, and it’s been this way for generations of women.
In the last 10-20 years, I have definitely noticed an uptick with capitalization on men’s insecurities. The whole manosphere schtick is about just that, exploiting insecurity.
I can’t reject the idea that with the current P2025 goals, and the billionaires pushing for their techno fudalism, that these things are related in some way.
Because people are lonely and the internet is telling men it’s the women’s fault.
And internet is telling women it’s men fault. And poor people it’s immigrants fault. And insecure people it’s trans fault.
We are the most narcissistic generation ever: it’s always someone else fault… and while we are arguing online changes go in the wrong direction (more inequality, more war, less affordable education that means less social mobility)
well they have a point. it’s not all men who do messed up shit, but if messed up shit happens, it is usually because of men.
YEAh and because a woman gave birth to that man, it’s women’s fault.!!1
Logic is good.
? what do you even mean?
I mean it’s just as nonsensical as claiming that most bullshit is done by men, women are just as capable.
So what do you mean, what do you even mean?
no, it is factual? the vast majority of violent crimes are committed by men.
This wikipedia article lists all different studies why. The short answer is patriarchy - men have more occasion to commit crimes and it’s more acceptable from gender role point of view for men to do so.
It also list studies of crimes and offenses where women are found to be more often perpetrators than men, including a very comprehensive guide to domestic violence studies.
To sum it up - you’re both correct, men do more bullshit, women have similar capacity for it, we are expected to express the bullshit differently.
Not all women are becons of morality.
While statistically women are more likely to have empathy and emotional understanding and more communication thus, we are not perfect by any sense.
Your underlying rhetoric here is deeply divisive. I agree men are more prone to violent action, whether in a leadership role or just as a person. It’s why more women attempt suicide but more men are successful.
We cant just throw men away. We start with the culture, we start with teaching boys emotional intelligence, language, and how to reach for support. Then, we don’t reject them for reaching for such support.
It should be considered masculine to show vulnerability, it is one of the hardest things to get used to, if you’ve not been allowed/able to for so long. However, vulnerability leads to personal growth. Real vulnerability, followed by acceptance from peers, will give personal growth, understanding, and acceptance.
Fathers, hug your sons and tell them you love them. Teach our sons better. Cultural change is slow, you jumping on to say it’s always mens fault is a shallow and lazy thought. You’ve put so little thought into the “whys”.
The men/women culture war has been amplified enough now, we need to come together and find how we can support eachother.
I’ve been a victim of multiple men. Like, it’s truly stupid, where somedays I hate myself solely for letting myself in these situations. But I don’t harbor hate for men. I feel bad for the ones who are lost, because I too have been lost.
I want us to focus more on solutions than just, bitching
Thank you for taking time to type this out. This is quality content on the topic, and should be posted under each gender war thread
Lots of feminists want to blame every problem on men. That backfired and now a lot of men are doing the same.
Loneliness and being disconnected from the community doesn’t help either.
But no one owes us any attention. That is why we have AI.
Really? Like who? I only ever see or read feminists blaming issues on systemic issues of the patriarchy. Which is not the same as blaming all men at all.
Much the same as saying ‘the healthcare system in the US is fucked’ is not the same as saying ‘all healthcare workers are fucked’.
.
What conversation though? The guys that lap this up dont even have conversations with women and feminists to begin with, which is why they can be manipulated to accept such a slanted view of their arguments - they have no point of reference. Akin to how people with no Muslim friends or colleagues in their lives are more easily misled to believe fearmongering and misinformation spread about them. I think you touched on the real root of the problem: influencers and social media funneling people into echo chambers.
I get that both sides sometimes talk past one another, but in my experience the young guys I talk to (via gaming mostly) have never spoken to a feminist or read a lick of literature and when bored online have just sought out a voice that tells them they are the good guy, or shits on a demographic that’s not them. Those voices usually start in the ‘feminist fails #38’ style YouTube videos (cut and edited to misrepresent of course)… then the Stephen Crowders… and the Andrew Tates. The pipeline to the manosphere / red pill scumbags, or worse incels or blackpill.
These guys existing and their views increasing is not necessarily a symptom that feminists are messaging incorrectly or that academics need to use different words to explain systemic issues - IMO they’re just another wonderful side effect of the “eyeballs = money, damn the content” algorithm preferences on social media, coupled with a very accepting attitude towards mysogyny and redpill content in Facebook, YouTube and other major social media content curation teams. All you have to do is look at who they censure and ban and who they don’t (and who they unban), and who they promote. Go use a fresh install of one of these platforms on a new device to see what their algorithm promotes in the main feed to a fresh new user. The angry rich white guy influencers get peppered in amongst the Mr Beast and music videos from the first couple of pages, so it’s no wonder more guys are exposed to this bullshit.
I tell the guys I’ve spoken with that those ‘entertainers’ are poison, chipping away at their empathy and compassion and pushing them to more isolation and fear - and that they need to be critical of what the influencers claim, and show curiosity for the community around them and engage with it rather than accept the simplistic charade. I’ve converted a few but its an uphill battle and that conversation takes months. The article points out that this is an issue that needs to be addressed - not that ‘boys need to be fixed’… but that the rise of this manosphere is damaging to all - men and women, and should be addressed systemically. Be that by parents paying closer attention to their kids content consuming habits, regulation for social media giants, laws against those who encourage sexual assault or violence, enshrining rights and protections more clearly into law, and so on - multi-pronged. The trouble is, a huge amount of guys commenting on this very article didn’t bother to read it and went straight to the usual talking points. I don’t think that’s you, but I think you can see the comments I mean.
Serious question, and I’m not trying to troll here. Do you tell this same piece of advice to your female friends about more radical feminist content creators?
I haven’t seen any radical female content creators personally, and there certainly doesn’t seem to be a large industry of them forming. If there is they’re very well hidden and poorly advertised.
But if that happens I’d absolutely be for talking people away from listening to them.
Like with #YesAllMen
But there is no formal ‘system’ like the healthcare system. Anytime a man is perceived as being in charge (for whatever reason and context), it becomes the “patriarchy” and subject to feminist ridicule and hatred, thus generalising hatred on men.
Really, there is no formal system of patriarchy? No kings in your world?
The Catholic church still to this day refuses to ordain any women into the priesthood: men only.
Ask a girl in Afghanistan or Saudi Arabia if there’s any formal patriarchy when they try to go to school, or drive, or go outside without head to toe covering, or simply go outside unaccompanied by a man.
In the west there are hundreds of industry bodies, clubs and business societies that wield enormous power and are exclusively men-only - or were men-only until the Civil Rights Act and were then taken to court to have their rules banning women overturned, or pressured for many decades to change their stance, such as the Garrick Club in the UK whom only finally opened their doors to female members last year.
I’m a man but I’m starting to hate men too with these replies.
Oh dear.
Not my world, but so what? There are also the
Roman Catholic Women Priestswho felt left out so made up their own story.Again, not my world. But… Have you asked if they want to go to school, drive, go outside, or have you assumed they do? Not being a dick but there are very different opinions generally held by women of different cultures and religions that contrast with others - who’s right? (Historically people die over such issues). Also, beyond what Fox news states, there are schools in middle Eastern countries, some are voluntary. Such issues are very complicated and are not black or white.
So? "The Garrick Club is a private members’ club in London, founded in 1831 as a club for “actors and men of refinement to meet on equal terms” - you’re whining that a men-only club is not ok, but a women-only club is?
A string of strawman arguments. I think you think your opinions make you look cool though. But it’s ok, hate me for my opinions because you can only accept those that are marketed to you.
These exaples are “not my world”, what does that even mean? You live on a different world? Examples have to be specifically from your zip code to be relevant discussion on a global web forum do they? Did you actually argue maybe all women are ok with being oppressed in Saudi Arabia and Afghanistan? Because many have famously vociferously opposed it, up to the point of being executed and being shot in the head. One of them works at the UN now, putting together work like whats in this very article. www.bbc.com/news/magazine-24379018
The Garrick Club has incredibly powerful members including kings and prime ministers and hundred of members of Parliament. If you cannot see how excluding women from such a club is an issue of patriarchy then you are really not trying very hard to understand anything here.
And of course, everything is a strawman argument nowadays…
A strawman argument is stating a false weaker argument (or premise) of your opponent, to then argue against more easily than their real argument.
Your claim: there is no ‘formal’ system [of patriarchy]
Me: here’s several examples of formal systems of patriarchy.
You: I am being strawmanned!
Or, maybe you can’t accept man-only clubs because you’ve been manipulated into not doing so, but can accept women-only because “omg oppression they need a safe space wah wah”.
I’m banging on about it? You highlighted it from my list and came up with the false narrative that I am somehow OK with womens-only clubs, something I’ve never claimed (that’s a strawman FYI).
You’re not interested to learn, nor to have an honest debate. Good luck with that attitude, you’ll need it.
Women and men-only clubs have a lot of value. We have women only clubs at work because our industry is pretty male-centric, so getting women access to good female mentors is super important because they’re distributed across the company. Men can be good mentors for women too, sure, but anytime there’s a minority, it’s important to connect them to help them recognize and point out implicit biases. We have groups like that for racial minorities as well, and I think it’s great.
Men and women also bond differently, so having a gender-specific club can lower barriers to connecting and finding support. That’s true for other characteristics as well, like sexual and gender identity, race (I’m a huge fan of our black chamber of commerce in our predominantly white area), age, etc.
We should embrace and celebrate our differences, not try to hide them away. Let everyone have their own club, and maintain rules against intolerance as well.
This right here. But no one wants to do that because it’s easier to create groups based on existing hatred rather than inclusivity and the people who run such communities do it for the power, not the cause.
The less time we talk about exclusive characteristics to isolate people, the more time we as humans can spend together. But it’s easier to market to and capitalise on smaller groups of excluded people rather than one large mass.
Women: it’s all about us, we have our own “online safe spaces” where only women are allowed because in history, men were bad to women, It’s filled with vitriolic chronically-online women where we go around calling men “cunts”. Men should respect this and start up their own community if they want.
Men: <they do that>. It’s given a derogatory name so public opinion can be manipulated - marketing 101.
Women: We don’t like it. It’s not all about us, men are bad to us. They threaten equality - it’s all their fault.
I got banned from two communities on Lemmy recently asking if it really should be host to communities that are exclusionary based on protected characteristics such as gender (to stop extremism). Lots of women moaned and were vitriolically abusive - how dare I call their army out. Community hosts really need to get a grip on such things and encourage inclusionary communities, not exclusionary. Whilst this practice goes on, racist/sexist/other extremist opinions will be fostered on the host and in those communities.
Politics such as “yeah, well, populist opinion makes us feel like we need to separate ourselves from you because you’re not <insert protected characteristic we only like>…” but we totally respect you and want to talk to you as normal in other communities when we want to, is incongruent to the whole concept of an inclusive community that fosters equality such as Lemmy should be.
(And if I had to guess, I think there are some bots on Lemmy also spouting vitriolic replies to stir up such hatred amogst these who isolate themselves - making themselves prime targets for manipulation - all to stir up chaos on a national level)
people who face systemic discrimmination often strive to create environments that are safe and respectful for their own group. They don’t do that because they want to be exclusive, but because they don’t have the power to make the spaces they are in respectful and accomodating for them.
So if we have the intention to create inclusive spaces and we have the power to do so, then we shouldn’t go after the ones who segregate themselves to avoid discrimmination, but instead we should change our own environments so that they don’t feel the need anymore to have their own space.
“we” unequivocally means “men”, right? And how is this done… by preventing exclusive communities and only having inclusive communities. “Online” and “safe spaces” are oxymorons.
by “we” I mean everyone who has the ability to do so.
you cannot just claim a community is inclusive. When members in it don’t feel comfortable, then it is not inclusive for them.
We just have to let people who constantly suffer any sort of discrimination have their own space. When they feel welcome outside of it they’ll feel less need to be in their own “exclusive” space. Blaming them for segregating themselves is thinking of it the wrong way.
I don’t think they are. The fediverse is a great tool for it. There are servers that have the intention to offer a safe environment for certain identities.
Of course it’s possible. If they don’t feel comfortable, then more questions need to be asked as to why they the individual do not and nothing will change until the focus is on individual feelings of those who <feel> marginalised so then inclusive communities can be fostered to work together, and not manipulating the world to pander to those who feel marginalised using anger, derision, and hatred. This leads to better inclusivity, better understanding, which in turn allows for better rules/systems to develop. They can not be fostered by force/anger/because we say so’s.
“Constantly”? But they don’t. They may feel they do due to some mental illness, manipulation by e.g. exclusionary groups that breed hatred of a target etc, but they don’t “suffer” constantly. That’s just polluted rhetoric in the Western world.
Exclusive communities don’t “help” those people who think they’re discriminated against to become inclusive, they only strengthen the isolation and strengthen the hatred against those they feel discriminated by, run by people who enjoy the power they have over their victims - the community members.
What some people seem to generally be writing in this thread is that women can have exclusive groups but men cannot because women don’t like such groups, all without seeing the irony.
so systemic forms of discrimination do not exist in your opinion? your wording seems to imply that there is no actual discrimination/bigotry happening. If that’s what you believe we have no basis to discuss on. We have a different perception of reality.
It’s silly to just claim your community to be inclusive and then invalidate anyone’s experience who feels differently
People can disagree with each other but still respect each other.
You mean like the women criticising the “manosphere” because they feel differently?
what do you mean by “criticising the manosphere”?
.
Very well said. I wish I could articulate this as well as you have here.
thank you!
I don’t know. Look at all the Tate Todgers around. Also, it does not help that women basically treat men as super-predators. With resentment and contempt nowadays. Leading to…well, men doing the same.
Really, kiss the decency we used to have goodbye. It’s all gone now. Best everyone focus on protecting themselves, let the population collapse.
let’s do without these stupid kinds of generalizations, alright? Very few women actually have resentments towards (all) men. And many of them do so as a result of trauma.
Cool that someone is at least against generalizations.
So it’s ok to hate men based on certain criteria you define? Even if it’s due to (your) trauma, that still doesn’t make it ok to project hatred towards men.
you,'re right, it’s not okay. But that can be something genuinely difficult to overcome. And it wouldnt be right to blame them the same way we blame bigots who never experienced anything similar.
Those bigots surely will have experienced lots of similar things (like everyone else) making them not bigots. Maybe the person projecting hatred onto this ‘bigot’ lives in such an isolated world. Inclusivity would help them understand here.
I agree! My point is this: People choose to self-seggregate because of their, in many cases, valid experiences of discrimination. That’s how it is and it is okay. And instead of blaming them for “isolating” themselves, we should instead strive to create environments where these people feel welcome to be a part of. We cannot do that by invalidating the experiences they have.
This is what happens when you take a gender, destroy their ability to develop emotional regulation and meaningful connections outside of the sexual and then dump them online in a slow rolling apocalypse.
The ones who haven’t found a way out have killed themselves or gravitated to mad idolatry of shysters and fools to fill the dopamine void.
We have failed our men.
These are the type of feminists the world needs.
I have commented stuff like this before, and gotten it deleted (or gotten summarily banned). I have been searching for spaces where this sort of discourse is even allowed, where non-vagina-havers get to say that many men suck but it’s not only their fault and they certainly can’t fix it in a vacuum.
.
Yep, and this is how marginalised communities are formed. Same with the text below.
And is why both POV are bad and should be removed from Lemmy. The owners of such communities get off on having their own army, not that they think they’re helping the cause.
Problems is also that you can’t help people that don’t want to be helped. Since accepting help means for these young men that they have to accept that they themselves are partially to blame for their situation. Yes society has failed them but they have failed themselves as well. They have to own up to their own failures and not just put all the blame on the rest of the world.
I know some young men that haven’t gone full mgtow manosphere yet. And even at that point it’s hard to help them. When you reach out they basically reject it. You can basically see in their eyes that they rather want to stay in the bubble and gaslight themselves than to accept the truth and get help. It’s much easier to blame everyone else than to take responsibility.
Men are often failed, that’s totally true. They’re also harmed by patriarchy eg being told to “man up” leading to them not seeing a doctor, work on themselves etc.
Ive read up on this and I’m a DA outreach worker so I have experience. A common theme with the Manosphere is blame shifting, and refusing to take action on their issues. Their mindset is wrong, and they don’t help themselves.
Interesting you should mention this because other than more suicides, this is the #1 reason why the average lifespan of men is less - procrastination of serious symptoms which are initial warning signs that become fatal illnesses.
Yep exactly and men’s health matters
Not false at all but a big part imo is also learned, it’s like if I have 10 problems, 5 of which are totally my fault, and the only one talking about the other 5 says “ALL your problems are not your fault.”
It’s like one person actually fully reflected their experiences back to them, but then peddled a ton of lies along with it.
Yes and also that men are evil. Literally that they feel excluded and scared to participate because of their gender. They don’t dare talk to girls. Because of the other assholes that ruined it. They are told it’s what women like. It’s not true. But these are the ones being caught in the net. Not the asshole, but the timid ones.
The problem with this is that it cedes all conversations about personal responsibility to the bad actors. I have a very similar story to you in terms of being an ideal candidate for manoshpere recruitment but understanding that it is bullshit. So why didn't we fall into the trap? All these men have the same access to information. Many of them are actually quite privileged as well. What other area of society to we see an adult throwing a childlike tantrum and immediately turn to "well obviously society has failed them." Do we say that about "Karens" making a scene? Do we say that about athletes who get DUIs?
Honestly I don't feel like society has failed me at all. I think that's a very fragile cop out for very fragile assholes. To me it evokes the idea that men should be coddled as society reconciles the consequences of centuries of patriarchal injury. The same people who will be all "we've failed men" will turn right around and say that the homeless person is clearly there because they are lazy, or that black neighborhoods have higher crime because black people are naturally violent.
It’s called emotional intelligence. It helps you not fly off the handle when minor bad things happen. Having the same reaction to a franchise movie being bad as someone totalling your car is not good, yet it’s all too common
To be fair, ghostbusters 3 was really bad.
Or the new star wars “movies”
I like how both of you knew what I was referring to :)
Sounds like they need the shit slapped out of them.
Maybe they should just take the advice that we’ve been giving to women and minorities for the last 100 years and tell them that if they want to succeed they should just fucking work harder at it.
If a dam is leaking, smacking it and tell it to be more ‘dam-like’ will only break the dam eventually. For the people drowning, “the dam should have held, because that’s what dams do”
For people who want to improve our world, the goal needs to be defined as reducing gender conflict by increasing mutual gender respect. These words you’ve shared do not invite respect, but conflict. It is a phrase of someone who does not offer support, but demands submission.
Now it’s easy to reply “yes, I am demanding that men to stop killing women, and if that’s “submission”, so be it”. It’s of course a correct position.
But it would not be what you said. And there are a thousand ways to twist that phrase to deepen the conflict, out of context, or even subverting that context. And the conflict then only depends.
Resentment is a knife. It’s a tool of division, not unity. We should not use it to divide people by gender.
Succeed at capitalism? That’s a fool’s errand. Better to point them to the real enemy which is the bourgeoisie and the real solution which is for the working class to form democratic organizations aimed at overthrowing the ruling class and form worker led democratic ways of organizing society.
I did it. Lots of people I know did it. The main trick is cutting toxic people out of your life, moving to a better place, and making new friends who are also dedicated to succeeding.
Tell that to a child slave in a cobalt mine.
Being “dedicated to succeeding” is a one-way ticket to burnout.
I can see that parents failed young men and the education system failed young men. But these men aren’t entitled to a woman or a high paying job. And quite frankly they probably aren’t capable of those things or they would be solving their own problems instead of blaming women for them
Manosphere men fall pray to the XY problem: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XY_problem?wprov=sfla1.
They demand the X which is a girlfriend and money in order to solve problem Y which is a lack of social connectedness and decreasing standards of living.
They believe themselves entitled to X because of that. Actually, everyone (including Manosphere men) is entitled to a solution to Y which affects everyone appart from the bourgois (who still lack social connectedness) but the solution to that is Z which is a wholesale restructuring of our society and economy to one that is maximally democratic and socialist.
Was with you until that last bit. I’m not opposed to democratic reforms or testing socialist ideas piecemeal. But massive restructurings of society towards utopia have… a history…
[Hint: lots of people die]
Lots of people die in the United States as it is. Homelessness is rising drastically. How long until you’re next to be put out onto the street? Your employer can’t wait until they can automate your job and fire you.
Also, the United States has a long history of carrying out genocide even prior to Gaza. Odd given your fallacious implication that capitalism is peaceful
…wikipedia.org/…/Indonesian_mass_killings_of_1965…
Top tier whataboutism.
Anyway, my point is that any time someone says “I know exactly what I’m doing. Follow me in my massive restructuring of society!” The results typically land somewhere between a massive waste of money for unappealing infrastructure, to everyone dies in war and starvation. The particular political bent doesn’t matter. Restructuring a society is like cutting all the leaves off a tree so you can put them where you think they should go.
The current structure of society is wrong and is extremely harmful. Oligarchy is an abomination which produces terrible outcomes.
You wouldn’t choose this system in a vacuum. Therefore, the system must be fundamentally altered. To oppose this restructuring is both cruel and irrational. It is the epitome of letting the perfect be the enemy of the good - you’re so afraid of change that you’d rather keep an evil system in place.
Such paralyzing cowardice is not reasonable, and it is even less reasonable to feel smug about such cowardice. If you are going to protect this harmful system, then the more appropriate emotion to feel is shame.
Not necessarily. Lots of people haven’t died in Rojava or in the areas of Southern Mexico controlled by the Zapatistas. Authoritarianism was the problem with restructurings you allude to, not socialism.
You are making an excellent point right up until your last paragraph. What 15 year old boy wants to be Mr Fucking Rogers? Sure, maybe they want to be him in like 40 years (but only the version of him who was secretly a marine sniper covered in tattoos everywhere his sweaters hid). What does a 15 year old boy who is vulnerable to the manosphere want? He wants to get paid and get laid.
Trying to shove a 15 year old’s raging hormones and desire for rebellion and independence into a Mr Rogers box will only lead to… more rebellion. Give the kids role models who are good people, who also succeed at things they care about.
I don’t understand how you think they would not want to be Mr Rodgers? It’s not in their biology. They look for role models and only grifters pretend to know how to get girls. It’s so idiotic. Mr Rodgers gets girls. If they only understood that truth they would flock to imitate him
You do realise that the behaviour you’re describing is largely programmed, yes?
Apart from the urge to blow loads everywhere
Nothing against the article but why is this in /c/Technology ?
If something has word online/Internet on it does not mean it has something to do with technology.
So… What exactly is your definition of what should be posted in the technology community?
I personally browse this community for tech news and updates, this seems more like an American societal problem. Not something happening all around the world. Personally i won’t be interested in reading the article because I live in Asia and the society here is completely different. This kind of misogyny is not seen by me.
the manosphere continuing to build power is all from capitalism, which has removed upward growth and community spaces for young white men. I say white because men from minority groups already have those problems but they don’t have the inherent privileges that allow angry white men to make their problems into everyone’s problems. also parents and schools dont have any resources to deal with children who are already sucked into the manosphere, short of cutting off access to the Internet
FYI, the manosphere is replete with non-white males, and that is not even including the inherent male chauvinism in other cultures. I’m sorry but the critique on whiteness is a little lazy intellectually.
I think its got merit. Do you recall Steve Bannon when he was just starting out and I quote : “In describing gamers, Bannon said, These guys, these rootless white males, had monster power. … It was the pre-reddit. It’s the same guys on (one of a trio of online message boards owned by IGE) Thottbot who were [later] on reddit” and other online message boards where the alt-right flourished, Bannon said"
this was him talking about World of Warcraft…
I mean yes race does intersect, it’s a longer discussion, I guess I’m just tired of this “whiteness” critique because it feels cheap and easy, hence intellectually lazy. Anything that happens in the west politically can be linked back to whiteness one way or another. I don’t think it’s been particularly helpful as a critique, in fact I think it has backfired and probably needs to go.
I think backfiring would be the wrong phrasing, Caucasian people after all statistically get the best outcome in pretty much every demographic of life IIRC.
For instance i remember as a youngster feeling like life was tough in the USA–until i visited Africa. I don’t think its right though to for instance blame current people from England for the occupation of say, India, but I also don’t think right for them to claim their country hasn’t somehow benefited from it and through that, they themselves.
I am optimistic about the future though. I am biracial and I feel as mobility/travel/the acceptance of others has grown eventually we will all be one–and yes I realize how sappy that is.
Are you saying non white people don’t know how to use the internet, I’m confused
Why aren’t people asking why are there so many television series where male characters are written as idiotic fops (like really low level 2yo stupidity) who, in every episode, need a woman to come along and save the day,year,universe? Or perhaps where a woman helps convert a male character to what they want the man to be?
It’s all just selling to the idea of feminism and those idiots lap it up whilst men have to keep quiet about their lampooning. And now, these women are Pikachu face over a small backlash against it all?
Honestly, as a women, so it’s not my opinion that matters, but even that meme/joke/trend that “men are simple creatures”, “keep your belly fully and balls empty and we’re happy” ect, like, is that not demeaning to men?
The men in my life are just as complicated and multifaceted as anyone else. These kinds of jokes, or online rhetoric, to me, feel like y’all are calling men simple and dumb.
The men in my life are not simple or dumb.
Your opinion matters as much and you should be publicly challenging such shows - as a woman. Is it demeaning? If you have to ask, the answer is most likely, ‘yes’! Would it be demeaning with shows where women characters are stupid and only good for sex? Would it be demeaning with black characters who shout all the time, eat chicken and watermelon and so on…the abusive stereotypes could continue. What’s disappointing for me are that the actors/actresses who play the roles are setting equality back many years for a quick short-lived buck.
I do find the upvote / downvote count on my question interesting though!
Personally, not inherently, no. And definitely not in context, context here being the existence of “men are primitive” and “men only want one thing and it’s disgusting”. Is it reductive, yes, but that doesn’t mean it’s wrong.
Catch some fish, chop some wood, smoke the critters, unclog the sink so that stubbles will actually flush instead of cling to the rim, annoying the wife (for incomprehensible reasons, but a well-functioning drain is its own reward), be a rollercoaster for the kids, kick back on the sofa, get your balls emptied, if that’s not a satisfying day then you have issues.
Complexity is not a good in itself. Be only as complex as is necessary to stay simple.
But as you describe, is that every man?
Certainly not.
I’m mom and I’m the rollercoaster, the house repair gal, and I have a higher drive than my husband, though I would never describe our booty time as, “getting my balls emptied” or some female equivalent. It’s more like, activity time with my best friend, alas,
You just sterotyped an entire cohort of people in your description, I hope you understand that.
I refuse to sterotype my fellow women. I know women, we are all different, and I myself, don’t hit many of the sterotypical markers.
You describe your version of the every man’s day here, then say any man who lives differently has issues, because that day isn’t satisfying for them. Is that kind towards your fellow men you think?
You are completely overthinking it. I readily acknowledged it is reductive. And my example was an example, a vibe. I do not, in fact, fish. Nor consider desert dwellers to be less masculine or something.
A typical male experience in a hetero relationship is that women are overly fussy over many things, I think most of it is culture (a generalised fear of a catty mother in law not considering you good enough for her son causing a fear of losing your partner because he might listen to her instead of you) so when we hear “men are simple” we don’t hear “men are stupid” but “finally, someone who understands the pointlessness of having seasonal napkins”. If you wanted to say “men are stupid” you’d have said “men are primitive”, it’s not hard to tell apart. We do, in fact, have social and contextual awareness, I freely admit that we use obliviousness as a conscious strategy.
Are there men who are totally into decorative towels? Sure, but if we hedge everything with “but not everyone does that”, “of course, all people are unique and different” then communication becomes a chore. It’s like hearing “sunscreen is important” and insisting “of course, if it’s winter that’s a different issue, we wouldn’t want to essentialise weather to be carcinogenic”. Come on.
And our interaction here, ironically, falls into a similar pattern. “No, really, it’s fine that we don’t have decorative towels” – “There must be a deeper meaning behind this, a social force, someone pulling his strings, why would anyone not want to have complex things like decorative towels, what is the meaning of this, am I on top of the situation”… no. He meant what he said, exactly that, and nothing more: My hands are dry, the towels didn’t make them dirty again, that’s all I need from a towel. I want my pants to have pockets so I buy them with pockets instead of worrying whether they ruin the silhouette and agonising over compromises. There’s a lot of freedom in simplicity. That inner mother in law, though? Of course everything is complicated, how else would she be able to drive you crazy.
I’ve got a song for you.
Bruh 🤢
You just sterotyped women so fuckin gross here. Jesus christ
I was pointing at a pattern, cultural at that, and all patterns are reductive. If you can’t see the pattern I alluded to you have my condolences, and if it hit you like a brick then you also have my condolences.
The only thing I won’t stand for here is saying is “pointing at patterns is bad”. These kinds of conversations need to be had if issues are to be understood. And they need to be understood, assumptions have to be questioned, before anything can change for the better.
And if you just don’t care about the issue, which is perfectly fine, then FFS don’t womensplain the male perception of “men are simple creatures” to men. You came out swinging, remember.
Fuck the gender division, let’s all be misanthropes together.
youtu.be/v0dUnoecoZ0
To paraphrase Jon Lovett, they have “back of the classroom energy” while the left has “front of the classroom energy”.
“Teacher teacher, he said something some people might find offensive! Send him to the principal’s office”
“Thanks for narcing me out, r****d”
“Teacher teacher, he just said the r-word!”
The left just isn’t equipped to deal with the manosphere. Everything the left does just makes the manosphere seem even more cool to the kids.
“The UN is worried about these guys, they must be really badass!”
in my experience it was the kids in the front whining “Why come they have a black student union and we dont have a white one waaaaah! i am now a victim! DEI! why is that white girl dating a minority waaaaah!”
the victim complex is strong with them, like the dark side of the force it seduces them. (nice I got some white boys angry)
There are tons of young black men in the manosphere, too. Or else with whom manosphere ideas resonate. Don’t be racist.
there was also tons of jews who supported hitler. The ‘manosphere’ pretends to be inclusive to men when its just a white nationalist spin off.
“see we have some black supporters! dont mind what we have planned for them after we take-over please! grrr! those pesky woman wont let us get laid! focus on that not the swastika in the background!”
Wat?
The manosphere is literally a bunch of losers that can’t get laid and are making excuses for it.
Work out. Have a career. Don’t be a asshole. Do that and you can get laid but that’s too hard for some folks.
They’re groomed from a young age by the manosphere to be losers that can’t get laid, so they’ll continuously buy self-help books from the manosphere.
They still vote though. And this all happens because to a teenager, the manosphere are the cool guys making fun of the whiny nerds.
There no way Andrew Tate is cool at a party.
Someone watches his shit.
Just because the youtube algorithm promotes outrage doesn’t make it right.
Obviously… but kids aren’t going to stop watching because of some tut tuts and wags of the finger. That just makes them like it more.
Kids in my daughters class did a project about ‘an issue that is important to you’. They could pick anything.
Most of the kids talked about interesting and positive fields like environmental protection/space exploitation or some sport they love to participate in. Three of the boys chose to talk about ‘men’s rights’, and according to the teacher who I spoke to about it afterwards they were echoing Andrew Tate shit.
They were 10 years old at the time.
None of their parents are divorced either, so theres no ‘woe story’ from dad in the background to put any framing around this.
However, their parents are all conservative and all let their kids access Youtube with no oversight. So social media and lax/indifferent parenting are very much grooming the next generation into hateful misogynists like Tate.
No only in a podcast of his environment with slave girls that are punished if they don’t agree
That’s kind of the thing, we want to think they’re a bunch of sexless losers, but the basic tenets of advice you get from the manosphere will probably get you laid if you follow it. Following manosphere advice works because it’s the exact same advice you just laid out but packaged in a more attractive and focused manner. It just happens to be with a side of right wing politics and more than a bit of misogyny.
Oh, finally. The sexless/incels is a tiny part of the manosphere. We see them because we want to. You don’t need to respect women in order to get affection, you need it to build love and trust
Right, listen to that manosophere and you can commit some R or SA … Is that what you mean by “get laid”?
Yes. Correct. But talk to a boy in Jr. High. They aren’t as smart about this as you might hope.
.
They are losers for not following positive role models in their lives like coaches, older siblings, and teachers. They follow the youtube algorithm shoved down their throats.
I do feel bad because there is no job market for young men and women that pays anything.
And yes, having having coached little league ball for decades, kids will be assholes for no reason.
I think someone is missing what “losers that can’t be laid” actually means.
Short answer: no.
Longer answer: Aw HELL no!
I haven’t heard men say shit this stupid my whole life. This isn’t ‘tradition’ it’s a growing hate movement.
Pretty sure I’ve commented this on Lemmy before, but I’m gonna drop a link to this Struthless video again because I think it’s pretty good at getting the point and really reflected my experience as someone who was once a “young man on the internet”, too.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=DHHqQDKzjTg
The code section in particular is gold and exactly the type of online content we need. A big reason why chuds like Tate are successful is because they provide a code (“compass, outlets, who you’re with, how it feels”), which before the internet was something everyone built for themselves, actively picking and choosing, while nowadays the algorithms do the picking+choosing for us. Or, well, before the algorithmic internet boomers largely got that stuff from old institutions (be that church or the party), Gen X from rebellion, then come us sweet-spot millennials seeing the boomer/X conflict and having access to previously unheard of amounts of information to actively choose from, and then Gen Y and younger getting fed by the outrage machine.
So what we need is algorithm-compatible content that challenges the whippersnappers to build their own code, in an active manner. Give guidelines, give examples, but don’t decide for them (that makes you no better than the algorithm or for that matter Gen X and boomers) and definitely don’t make it a list of don’ts: They’re in the process of adapting instincts to currentyear, good living requires finding a configuration that denies none, our task is to help them not being maladaptive, steering away from both neurosis (denial of instinct) as well as asocial BS (exploiting in/outgroup instincts for power plays, oxytocin can be vile). To do that you need to point out the various fundamental drives, validate all of them, make that shit resonate as deeply as possible so they spot the drives themselves instead of some social construct painting over it, enable them to draw a map of their needs, then give examples, plural, of how it can all be integrated in a coherent fashion.
Because they are being completely alienated. The hater haters are also on the rise. Those have even more troubled minds and it’s the same on and on until the bottom. It’s very easy to reach out to these young males, and fix them. But instead whine. They are straight up looking for role models and only dickheads speak their language. Like… Tell a lost male to “man up” instead of expecting young males to have feelings is kinda dumb. It’s been happening in history over and over. It’s just on the rise to then start to wane to then rise again slightly lower the next time when people forget about caring for young males again. They aren’t easy so I get it but Jesus with the influencer dicks becoming their fathers… It’s so pathetic