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.
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!”
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.
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.
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.
I read the article and followed the thread. And yeah, online misogyny is a real problem. But here’s what no one wants to talk about. We’ve failed young men. Full stop.
About ten years ago, a friend of mine who’s gone now pointed me toward this thing called MGTOW. “Men Going Their Own Way.” I had just come out of a toxic divorce, so the idea of stepping back from dating and learning to enjoy life on my own terms seemed kind of healthy. At first glance, it looked like a decent idea. Just guys doing their own thing, not hassling anyone.
But once I started digging, I realized something else was going on. Beneath the surface, it wasn’t about peace or self-sufficiency. It was this boiling cauldron of resentment and hatred, mostly aimed at women. What looked like a community of self-reliant men turned out to be a recruiting ground for bitterness and blame. I didn’t buy into it, because I wasn’t angry at the world. But I could see how someone who felt isolated and ignored might get sucked in.
That’s what a lot of this comes down to. Loneliness. Disconnection. No sense of value or direction. And then someone online tells you it’s not your fault, it’s women’s fault, or society’s fault, or anyone but you. That stuff spreads fast because it gives people something to belong to.
I’m not saying you excuse the hate. But we better understand where it’s coming from if we want to stop it. You don’t fix this by lecturing young men. You fix it by giving them a sense of purpose and identity that doesn’t rely on putting someone else down.
And no, masculinity itself is not the enemy. We need better models of it. Mr. Rogers comes to mind. He was kind, decent, and strong in a quiet way. He didn’t need to bully or dominate anyone to be respected. That’s the kind of example we ought to be lifting up.
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: https://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.
You don’t fix this by lecturing young men. You fix it by giving them a sense of purpose and identity that doesn’t rely on putting someone else down.
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.
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.
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.
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 :)
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.
leading to them not seeing a doctor,
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
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.
That’s what a lot of this comes down to. Loneliness. Disconnection. No sense of value or direction. And then someone online tells you it’s not your fault, it’s women’s fault, or society’s fault, or anyone but you. That stuff spreads fast because it gives people something to belong to.
Yep, and this is how marginalised communities are formed. Same with the text below.
That’s what a lot of this comes down to. Loneliness. Disconnection. No sense of value or direction. And then someone online tells you it’s not your fault, it’s
women’smen’s fault, or society’s fault, or anyone but you. That stuff spreads fast because it gives people something to belong to.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.
Fuck the gender division, let’s all be misanthropes together.
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.
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.
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” etc, like, is that not demeaning to men?
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!
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.
We have failed our men.
These are the type of feminists the world needs.
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)
And internet is telling women it’s men fault.
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.
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
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?
it’s just as nonsensical as claiming that most bullshit is done by men
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.
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?
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
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.
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.
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’.
I get what you’re saying, and you’re right that blaming “the system” isn’t the same as blaming every individual. But in practice, a lot of young men hear exactly that kind of blame coming at them personally. Maybe that’s not what’s intended, but it’s how it lands. Especially when the messaging is constant and there’s no room for nuance.
Look at how often phrases like “male privilege” or “toxic masculinity” get thrown around without any real context. Not all of us grew up with privilege. Some of us were raised by single moms, worked garbage jobs, got chewed up by the military, or have been beaten down by life. So when someone says we’re part of some oppressive system we supposedly benefit from, it can feel like a gut punch. Not everyone takes it personally, but enough guys do that entire online communities have formed around that frustration.
And here’s the thing. Academically, I get what patriarchy means. But I think we need to unpack it in a broader way. We should be asking who actually benefits from it. Because it sure as hell isn’t the guy sweating in a ditch or working a night shift at a warehouse. Patriarchy isn’t a blanket of power that covers all men equally. It’s a system that, like most systems, tends to reward the rich. The guy at the top. The one with the money, the connections, and the insulation from consequence. It’s less about gender in the real world and more about class, and when we ignore that, we miss the full picture.
Not all critiques stay abstract either. I’ve seen feminist writers and influencers say things like “men are trash,” “all men are potential predators,” or “if you’re not actively dismantling the patriarchy, you’re part of the problem.” Maybe that’s not what academic feminism teaches, but it’s out there. Loud, viral, and shaping how these conversations are received.
Just like you can say the healthcare system is broken without attacking nurses, you can criticize patriarchy without alienating people. But the way it’s said matters. If someone walks away from that conversation feeling like they’ve just been blamed for everything, they are not going to stick around and talk. They’ll shut down, get bitter, and start listening to whoever does make them feel seen. Even if that person is a complete grifter or extremist.
We have to stop just talking about young men like they’re a problem to be fixed. We need to start talking to them, honestly and with some respect. Otherwise, we are going to keep losing them to the worst voices out there.
Especially when the messaging is constant and there’s no room for nuance.
Like with #YesAllMen
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.
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.
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?
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.
The Catholic church still to this day refuses to ordain any women into the priesthood: men only.
Not my world, but so what? There are also the
Roman Catholic Women Priestswho felt left out so made up their own story.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.
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.
In the west there are hundreds of industry bodies, clubs and business societies blah blah blah.
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. https://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!
Lol, just like I wrote below earlier, anything where an aggressive woman perceives a man as being in charge, it becomes part of the patriarchy and is a target of ridicule and abuse for such angry women. You bang on about the Garrick club as if you’re pissy because it exists, whilst defending women-only clubs.
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.
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.
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.
But no one owes us any attention. That is why we have AI.
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.
it does not help that women basically treat men as super-predators.
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.
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.
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.
Cool that someone is at least against generalizations.
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.
Very well said. I wish I could articulate this as well as you have here.
thank you!
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.
And how is this done… by preventing exclusive communities and only have inclusive communities.
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.
“Online” and “safe spaces” are oxymorons.
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.
you cannot just claim a community is inclusive. When members in it don’t feel comfortable, then it is not inclusive for them.
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 suffer any sort of discimination
“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.
It’s silly to just claim your community to be inclusive and then invalidate anyone’s experience who feels differently
You mean like the women criticising the “manosphere” because they feel differently?
what do you mean by “criticising the manosphere”?
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
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.
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?
I just want to point out, men are not by default worth less.
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.
Listen to me: try putting maximum effort into improving yourself.
“I will just finally blow my head off next pay. Then maybe they will finally ask if they did something wrong.”
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.
Get some counceling first. Seems like you could use some help communicating your needs.
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.
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.
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.
Who do you think runs the fucking world already…its us, 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.
hope you realize how alienating a sentence like this is, for someone who is as stomped by society as many women are.
How? How am I alienating anyone by telling them something they already know?
This narrative is exactly what prevents any form of class solidarity
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.
Saying “it’s us, men” (to rule the world) is inherently a narrative that avoid discussing the class division,
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.
because being a man is not being part of a social class.
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?
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.
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.
-
Yep
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.
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.
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.
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.
I read the first paragraph, and as a woman, I feel the same! Solidarity!
Poverty isn’t just 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 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 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.
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.
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/
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.
No. I’m illustrating that the machinery of government can and has elevated women and minorities in measurable ways.
Women absolutely make less and hold a significantly smaller portion of the overall wealth in this country.
What I’ve suggested above would benefit them as much as men.
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.
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.)
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?
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.
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
No one even brought up sex or dating. The logical jump to incels here is baffling.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Also the Simpsons, family guy, American dad etc.
When a person has a systemic privilege, sometimes equality feels like oppression to them.
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.
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.
maybe it feels like oppression because it is.
Oppression being committed by who exactly? What demographic currently holds the reigns of power in our governmental and economic hierarchy?
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.
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.
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
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.
That statistics is bullshit that would be 66% of all young men
White, Gen z men literally went 67% for Trump
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.
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.
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
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.
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.
