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.
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.
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.
Because people are lonely and the internet is telling men it’s the women’s fault.
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.
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 derogative 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. 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 it.
Pray, therefore it’s all BS.
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
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?
Yep
Is there even an incentive for solving men’s problems?
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.
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.
Capitalism can appease men to promote consumerism wrapped in misogyny. Corporations can capitalize on women’s loneliness and low self-worth.
Patriarchy can use women to portray the 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 have noticed that women with low self-worth find meaning in work, which ultimately profits corporations. The money they earn will be spent on consumerism/addictions, which again can be profited by capitalism and corporations.
I can’t comment on this, as it was anecdotal from my side, and this can be anecdotal from your side.
The rich can have as many resources as they want, so why solve it? Other than individuals (women) taking matters into their own hands and rescuing each other, I don’t think there is enough incentive to help women as a community or as a whole.
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.
-
Is there even an incentive for solving men’s problems?
What are men’s problems? What problem do we suffer that also doesn’t affect women?
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.
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?
Capitalism can appease women to promote consumerism wrapped in feminism. Corporations can capitalize on men’s loneliness and low self-worth.
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?
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.
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.
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
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.
What are men’s problems? What problem do we suffer that also doesn’t affect women?
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.
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?
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.
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?
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.
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.
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.
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?
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.
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.
'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:
- Women gain on current situation so it makes sense they don’t act.
- Corporations gain on current situation so it makes sense they don’t act.
- Rich gain, and even if not then loose nothing on current situation so it makes sense they don’t act.
Which are answers to question at the beggining:
Is there even an incentive for solving men’s problems?
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.
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.
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.
Same stereotypes which isolate men and make them suffer in silence and alone, making showing any sign of weakness a fatal mistake.
And who propogates and sustains this stereotype? Sounds like you should be mad at men.
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.
That would imply it’s not simply a mens problem…
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
That doesn’t explain the blatant misogyny in this thread and in the youth in general.
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.
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.
Women gain on current situation so it makes sense they don’t act.
- Corporations gain on current situation so it makes sense they don’t act.
- Rich gain, and even if not then loose nothing on current situation so it makes sense they don’t act.
How do women gain? Who runs the corporations?
, 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.
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.
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.
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.
This fucking thread is crazy… especially these dudes trying to wrap their misogyny in faux leftist babbling.
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.
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.
Lol, I’m the same because I’m upset that people aren’t engaging in class consciousness?
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.
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.
Sure men talking about their problems is misogyny,
It is when you talk to them about their problems and all they do is bitch and moan about dei.
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
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.
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.
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.
Bring back periods in initialisms. U.N.
Bring back punctuation altogether at this stage!
100% lol
I haven’t laughed this hard in a long time, thank you
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.
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.
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.
https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/movies/movie-news/women-hollywood-female-leads-1235830860/
Can’t believe I’m reading defence of the manosphere on Lemmy, but here we are.
Also the Simpsons, family guy, American dad etc.
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.
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 what about the women in that same boat? I’m confused by your argument
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 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’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.
https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/2023/03/01/the-enduring-grip-of-the-gender-pay-gap/
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.
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? 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?
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.)
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.
I’m arguing that to fix misogyny you have to fix the fundamental economic crises affecting young people
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.
blaming young men and pretending these problems simply don’t exist.
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.
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.
Again failure to discuss the substance of the argument and just making it personal. It’s crystal clear what your objectives are here.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
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.
According to the Movember Foundation, a leading men’s health organization and partner of UN Women, two-thirds of young men regularly engage with masculinity influencers online.
While some content offers genuine support, much of it promotes extreme language and sexist ideology, reinforcing the idea that men are victims of feminism and modern social change.
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 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.
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 statistics is bullshit that would be 66% of all young men
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.
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?
Sounds reasonable.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
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.
Am I tripping, out of touch with reality? These people really don’t seem to understand the problem
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.
I’ve seen two things out of “Men’s Health Awareness Month”:
- The rainbow hair squad bawling about “No it’s Pride Month”
- People posting lazy image macros with lies like “It’s okay to show your feelings” in them.
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.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.
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”.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
You’re straying from the point which is that this content exists, is widespread, and is ultimately the root cause.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
deleted by creator
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 a fairly well-written and nuanced take that mostly aligns with my experiences.
If you try to defend yourself or talk about your own problems as a man, it is labeled as misogyny.
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.
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.
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.
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”.
By who? This is pure projection. Look at who is being up votes and down votes in this very thread.
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.
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…
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.
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.
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”.
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.
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.
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.
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
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 https://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
Men huh, Finland is a feminist govt that has a male-only draft.
Men still make up the majority of the parliament in Finland, though that particular country has a long history of promoting equity.
Oh & EU is feminist led
You mean that the EU has leaders who are feminist… Men still hold the majority of the seats.
Feminists & women are pandered to by those men. Those men are kinda like you.
Oh no… People who believe in equality…the tragedy.
Of course some like you is going to victim blame men
How exactly are you being victimized while I am not… and we’re both men?
Another example is the white feather movement
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.
You don’t believe in equality, PERIOD. Because people like you oppose women being drafted.
Wrong fuck face, I don’t believe in the draft for men or women.
You also deny systemic misandry like the alimony laws & even support policies like abolishing prisons for women & reduced sentencing for women & only 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?
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”
Lol, you really think the white feathers was a feminist movement?
Finland has a women-majority govt](https://www.forbes.com/sites/carmenniethammer/2019/12/12/finlands-new-government-is-young-and-led-by-women-heres-what-the-country-does-to-promote-diversity/), of course the diversity part is a lie.
“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.
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
Lol, I don’t think you know what equity, feminism, or majority means.
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.
Lol, name a time in modern history where a woman was the leader of a nation who started a war…
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)
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.
Reminder women in the military are placed in either guard duty or administration.
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
And these are real words.
Yup, in the UK women MPs were talking about bringing in curfews for MEN
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.
I only see women being pushed into places with traditionally male majority, but not men being pushed into places with traditional female majority.
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.
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.
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.
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.
The gender equality narrative got too focused on excluding men
As a man, I’ve never been made to feel excluded by gender equality in any way whatsoever.
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.
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.
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?
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.
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.
I only see women being pushed into places with traditionally male majority, but not men being pushed into places with traditional female majority
Genuinely curious, got any examples of “traditional female majority places” that masculine individuals cannot enter/participate in?
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.
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.
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.
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…
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.
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).
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.
positions like nurses or teachers are very female dominated.
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.
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.
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.
I’m sure it varies from country to country, but in the US women could not study medicine until the late 1800’s
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.
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.
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.
