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.
Pretty sure I’ve commented this on Lemmy before, but I’m gonna drop a link to this Struthless video again because I think it’s pretty good at getting the point and really reflected my experience as someone who was once a “young man on the internet”, too.
Because they are being completely alienated. The hater haters are also on the rise. Those have even more troubled minds and it’s the same on and on until the bottom. It’s very easy to reach out to these young males, and fix them. But instead whine. They are straight up looking for role models and only dickheads speak their language. Like… Tell a lost male to “man up” instead of expecting young males to have feelings is kinda dumb. It’s been happening in history over and over. It’s just on the rise to then start to wane to then rise again slightly lower the next time when people forget about caring for young males again. They aren’t easy so I get it but Jesus with the influencer dicks becoming their fathers… It’s so pathetic
I haven’t heard men say shit this stupid my whole life. This isn’t ‘tradition’ it’s a growing hate movement.
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.
Fuck you. Losers that can’t be laid. Yes. When they are constantly told to man up and get girls… Where do you think they go? Wtf is wrong with you. You replied to this with exactly the lack of equipment to handle the manosphere they were talking about. Without compassion you are even worse as you ruin your and others chance to fix it. Hateful and completely useless to say these things. You really think the kids think “I’m gonna be an asshole” for no reason? It takes time to be brain washed by the pick up artists. It just speaks to them
They are losers for not following positive role models in their lives like coaches, older siblings, and teachers. They follow the youtube algorithm shoved down their throats.
I do feel bad because there is no job market for young men and women that pays anything.
And yes, having having coached little league ball for decades, kids will be assholes for no reason.
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.
Right, listen to that manosophere and you can commit some R or SA … Is that what you mean by “get laid”?
Oh, finally. The sexless/incels is a tiny part of the manosphere. We see them because we want to. You don’t need to respect women in order to get affection, you need it to build love and trust
Yes. Correct. But talk to a boy in Jr. High. They aren’t as smart about this as you might hope.
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.
No only in a podcast of his environment with slave girls that are punished if they don’t agree
Kids in my daughters class did a project about ‘an issue that is important to you’. They could pick anything.
Most of the kids talked about interesting and positive fields like environmental protection/space exploitation or some sport they love to participate in. Three of the boys chose to talk about ‘men’s rights’, and according to the teacher who I spoke to about it afterwards they were echoing Andrew Tate shit.
They were 10 years old at the time.
None of their parents are divorced either, so theres no ‘woe story’ from dad in the background to put any framing around this.
However, their parents are all conservative and all let their kids access Youtube with no oversight. So social media and lax/indifferent parenting are very much grooming the next generation into hateful misogynists like Tate.
Someone watches his shit.
Just because the youtube algorithm promotes outrage doesn’t make it right.
deleted by creator
You are making an excellent point right up until your last paragraph. What 15 year old boy wants to be Mr Fucking Rogers? Sure, maybe they want to be him in like 40 years (but only the version of him who was secretly a marine sniper covered in tattoos everywhere his sweaters hid). What does a 15 year old boy who is vulnerable to the manosphere want? He wants to get paid and get laid.
Trying to shove a 15 year old’s raging hormones and desire for rebellion and independence into a Mr Rogers box will only lead to… more rebellion. Give the kids role models who are good people, who also succeed at things they care about.
You do realise that the behaviour you’re describing is largely programmed, yes?
Apart from the urge to blow loads everywhere
I don’t understand how you think they would not want to be Mr Rodgers? It’s not in their biology. They look for role models and only grifters pretend to know how to get girls. It’s so idiotic. Mr Rodgers gets girls. If they only understood that truth they would flock to imitate him
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.
Yes and also that men are evil. Literally that they feel excluded and scared to participate because of their gender. They don’t dare talk to girls. Because of the other assholes that ruined it. They are told it’s what women like. It’s not true. But these are the ones being caught in the net. Not the asshole, but the timid ones.
Not false at all but a big part imo is also learned, it’s like if I have 10 problems, 5 of which are totally my fault, and the only one talking about the other 5 says “ALL your problems are not your fault.”
It’s like one person actually fully reflected their experiences back to them, but then peddled a ton of lies along with it.
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
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 :)
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.
Was with you until that last bit. I’m not opposed to democratic reforms or testing socialist ideas piecemeal. But massive restructurings of society towards utopia have… a history…
[Hint: lots of people die]
Not necessarily. Lots of people haven’t died in Rojava or in the areas of Southern Mexico controlled by the Zapatistas. Authoritarianism was the problem with restructurings you allude to, not socialism.
Lots of people die in the United States as it is. Homelessness is rising drastically. How long until you’re next to be put out onto the street? Your employer can’t wait until they can automate your job and fire you.
Also, the United States has a long history of carrying out genocide even prior to Gaza. Odd given your fallacious implication that capitalism is peaceful
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indonesian_mass_killings_of_1965–66
Top tier whataboutism.
Anyway, my point is that any time someone says “I know exactly what I’m doing. Follow me in my massive restructuring of society!” The results typically land somewhere between a massive waste of money for unappealing infrastructure, to everyone dies in war and starvation. The particular political bent doesn’t matter. Restructuring a society is like cutting all the leaves off a tree so you can put them where you think they should go.
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.
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.
If a dam is leaking, smacking it and tell it to be more ‘dam-like’ will only break the dam eventually. For the people drowning, “the dam should have held, because that’s what dams do”
For people who want to improve our world, the goal needs to be defined as reducing gender conflict by increasing mutual gender respect. These words you’ve shared do not invite respect, but conflict. It is a phrase of someone who does not offer support, but demands submission.
Now it’s easy to reply “yes, I am demanding that men to stop killing women, and if that’s “submission”, so be it”. It’s of course a correct position.
But it would not be what you said. And there are a thousand ways to twist that phrase to deepen the conflict, out of context, or even subverting that context. And the conflict then only depends.
Resentment is a knife. It’s a tool of division, not unity. We should not use it to divide people by gender.
Succeed at capitalism? That’s a fool’s errand. Better to point them to the real enemy which is the bourgeoisie and the real solution which is for the working class to form democratic organizations aimed at overthrowing the ruling class and form worker led democratic ways of organizing society.
Succeed at capitalism? That’s a fool’s errand
I did it. Lots of people I know did it. The main trick is cutting toxic people out of your life, moving to a better place, and making new friends who are also dedicated to succeeding.
Tell that to a child slave in a cobalt mine.
Being “dedicated to succeeding” is a one-way ticket to burnout.
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.
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.
I have commented stuff like this before, and gotten it deleted (or gotten summarily banned). I have been searching for spaces where this sort of discourse is even allowed, where non-vagina-havers get to say that many men suck but it’s not only their fault and they certainly can’t fix it in a vacuum.
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
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.
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.
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.
“Unwomen” rings a bell for me.
I looked it up, and in Margaret Atwood’s novel The Handmaid 's Tale, Unwomen were infertile women sent to clean up toxic waste in the colonies.
:(
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
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.
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.
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.
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.
-
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.
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’.
deleted by creator
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?
I haven’t seen any radical female content creators personally, and there certainly doesn’t seem to be a large industry of them forming. If there is they’re very well hidden and poorly advertised.
But if that happens I’d absolutely be for talking people away from listening to them.
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.
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…
people like peterson, tate are largely responsible for thier recent changes too, although they are the latest symptom. peterson specifically is well funded by russia. i also see them discuss incel-ism in many online games too. almost always certain youtube videos like trek, star wars and disney will get these people in knots.
It’s worth diving into what they are classifying in this influencers group. They even point out that some of it offers helpful and genuine support. But it sounds like they would even consider a men’s therapy or coaching business in this group, or even something like that Mankind Project. I am just guessing but that kind of group is a world away from the typical toxic manosphere stereotype.
FD Signifier and Noah Samsem are “masculine influencers” too, this is too broad of a definition when there’s a lot of dudes doing it in a healthy way too.
probably better to call them hypermasculinity/toxic masculnity influencers.
Hasan Piker as well
That statistics is bullshit that would be 66% of all young men
White, Gen z men literally went 67% for Trump
they also showed increased support from gen-xers and milleneals for trump too. when alpha come of age, i fear for them too. this also goes for POC men that went for trump.
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.
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!
“men are simple creatures”, “keep your belly fully and balls empty and we’re happy” ect, like, is that not demeaning to men?
Personally, not inherently, no. And definitely not in context, context here being the existence of “men are primitive” and “men only want one thing and it’s disgusting”. Is it reductive, yes, but that doesn’t mean it’s wrong.
Catch some fish, chop some wood, smoke the critters, unclog the sink so that stubbles will actually flush instead of cling to the rim, annoying the wife (for incomprehensible reasons, but a well-functioning drain is its own reward), be a rollercoaster for the kids, kick back on the sofa, get your balls emptied, if that’s not a satisfying day then you have issues.
Complexity is not a good in itself. Be only as complex as is necessary to stay simple.
But as you describe, is that every man?
Certainly not.
I’m mom and I’m the rollercoaster, the house repair gal, and I have a higher drive than my husband, though I would never describe our booty time as, “getting my balls emptied” or some female equivalent. It’s more like, activity time with my best friend, alas,
You just sterotyped an entire cohort of people in your description, I hope you understand that.
I refuse to sterotype my fellow women. I know women, we are all different, and I myself, don’t hit many of the sterotypical markers.
You describe your version of the every man’s day here, then say any man who lives differently has issues, because that day isn’t satisfying for them. Is that kind towards your fellow men you think?
You are completely overthinking it. I readily acknowledged it is reductive. And my example was an example, a vibe. I do not, in fact, fish. Nor consider desert dwellers to be less masculine or something.
A typical male experience in a hetero relationship is that women are overly fussy over many things, I think most of it is culture (a generalised fear of a catty mother in law not considering you good enough for her son causing a fear of losing your partner because he might listen to her instead of you) so when we hear “men are simple” we don’t hear “men are stupid” but “finally, someone who understands the pointlessness of having seasonal napkins”. If you wanted to say “men are stupid” you’d have said “men are primitive”, it’s not hard to tell apart. We do, in fact, have social and contextual awareness, I freely admit that we use obliviousness as a conscious strategy.
Are there men who are totally into decorative towels? Sure, but if we hedge everything with “but not everyone does that”, “of course, all people are unique and different” then communication becomes a chore. It’s like hearing “sunscreen is important” and insisting “of course, if it’s winter that’s a different issue, we wouldn’t want to essentialise weather to be carcinogenic”. Come on.
And our interaction here, ironically, falls into a similar pattern. “No, really, it’s fine that we don’t have decorative towels” – “There must be a deeper meaning behind this, a social force, someone pulling his strings, why would anyone not want to have complex things like decorative towels, what is the meaning of this, am I on top of the situation”… no. He meant what he said, exactly that, and nothing more: My hands are dry, the towels didn’t make them dirty again, that’s all I need from a towel. I want my pants to have pockets so I buy them with pockets instead of worrying whether they ruin the silhouette and agonising over compromises. There’s a lot of freedom in simplicity. That inner mother in law, though? Of course everything is complicated, how else would she be able to drive you crazy.
Bruh 🤢
You just sterotyped women so fuckin gross here. Jesus christ
