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.
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.
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.
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
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.
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!
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 statistics is bullshit that would be 66% of all young men
Sounds reasonable.
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.
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”?
Am I tripping, out of touch with reality? These people really don’t seem to understand the problem and that makes me seriously question their methodology.
The manosphere is easy to understand. People hate doing work and taking accountability. So just blame the problems on someone else, and watch my podcast and buy my shit.
The manosphere is one symptom of a much larger problem. Look at it in isolation and you’ll miss the big picture. Authoritarianism is on the rise globally. Loneliness is reaching epidemic proportions. Society’s traditional institutions are a distant memory. All we have remaining are loose groups of people shouting at each other as the spectre of war lurks in the background.
But the manosphere doesn’t need to be a symptom of those problems. That’s a choice.
Another choice could be that men band together to identify the real problems and address those.
For example. In the manosphere, women are considered gold diggers. Well, because of the patriarchy, men are told that it is their job to provide, and that their value is tied to how well they provide. So you have men who think it’s their job to provide money, and then are complaining when women see them as a source of money. This is stupid. Men could stop trying to be providers, and instead try being people who are interesting to talk to and nice to be around. That would solve both the golddigger problem and the loneliness problem. It would also start to address some of the capitalist problems, where people are willing to self-exploit, just to get a little more money than their neighbor.
Yes, it is a choice. However one of the biggest problems is that so many of the good choices are gone. I’m talking about the positive social institutions and community organizations people used to belong to. The third spaces.
Communities have fragmented. Neighbours hate each other. Both of my neighbours hate our family. One is a childless, alcoholic husband and wife who also hate each other (they used to be nice years ago) who also hate us and give us creepy looks all the time. The other is green lawn-obsessed neighbour who hates us for the pine trees we have growing on our property and refuse to cut down (at our own expense) to suit their tastes.
We’re a society of severely mentally ill, isolated, confused, and angry people. Our villages and communities are all gone. We’re all a bunch of islands unto ourselves.
I like saying that society is a hot gas.
It is a mass of small particles that barely interact with one another, heated up by the heat of anger and hate, floating in a large space aimlessly.
My type of society would be a liquid, where particles are free to move but close to other particles.
Indeed. Capitalism breeds this crap by focusing on competition excessively and creating an environment where it’s almost mandatory to participate. People need to be looking to exploit people at all times and that is a deflating concept for people.
People also need to go offline. The apps have been taken over by scammers and bots. It’s time to flush again. Which is also related to capitalism.
Am I tripping, out of touch with reality? These people really don’t seem to understand the problem
How so? Can you explain what do you mean here exactly?
In my experience the problem isn’t the masculinity influencers. Those are just the symptom of misandry in media and a near-total lack of support in society for men, especially young men. When you go on social media almost all discussion concerning men is about how they are the root of all evil, and everything they do is wrong. It’s a never ending stream of shaming with no clear way out. You’re damned if you do and damned if you don’t: If you try to defend yourself or talk about your own problems as a man, it is labeled as misogyny. “Be vulnerable and open up” they say but if you do it’s “don’t center men you privileged fuck” or “you’re being a crybaby”.
All this pressure is an impossible equation to solve for a young man who has been pushed by misandrists into insecurity and longs to be accepted in his community. Not just because society’s demands are internally inconsistent, but because they clash with patriarchal ideals among the typical women you’ll meet IRL.
I’m past 40 and while in my head I still consider myself progressive, I used to show it much more when I was younger. I was honest about my insecurities, I would try not to take up too much space as a man, would try to split responsibilities equally, and so on. At every turn this has caused me problems in relationships, not least with my wife of 10 years who left me for some muscular macho guy because she “doesn’t feel like I can take care of her”.
So now, while I wish society was different, I try to balance on the needle of acting like I’m not as progressive as I am so women don’t “get the ick”, while not tripping into what would be labeled misogyny. It’s an extremely difficult game to play and it frustrates me to no end that this is where we’re at. I’m moving in soon with a woman who I’ve been dating for a couple of years and it’s clear that she desires that I take a leadership position in the home, whereas I’m just longing for a partner who will share the burden with me instead of becoming my subject. But I feel like I have to play that game or she’ll eventually lose interest. Too many women want someone to replace their dad.
Bell Hooks wrote about this already in 2003. But somehow it is completely lost on these UN Women pundits that nothing will change unless everybody (including women) change. You can’t just blame it on “masculinity influencers”. Why are these influencers gaining popularity? Because they offer some way out, some positive message for young men who are completely starved for positive role models.
I am convinced that a woman’s voice will count 10x more than the manosphere, if it offers compassion and guidance rather than hate. But such voices are extremely rare.
FWIW, the “men’s health awareness month” has brought me some hope in this. It’s the first time in a decade that I’ve seen women in media stand up to defend and show compassion for men, and I think young men will suck that up like a sponge.
I’m past 40 and while in my head I still consider myself progressive, I used to show it much more when I was younger. I was honest about my insecurities, I would try not to take up too much space as a man, would try to split responsibilities equally, and so on. At every turn this has caused me problems in relationships, not least with my wife of 10 years who left me for some muscular macho guy because she “doesn’t feel like I can take care of her”.
It always seems to come down to traditional gender roles being dehumanizing. Men traditionally aren’t allowed to be “weak”, women traditionally aren’t allowed to be “strong” (but there’s been some work done on that). It took me a while to fully internalize (not just know) that, first and foremost, both are people with all the complexities that come with that. I personally would rather die alone than live every day in fear that I’m not pretending well enough to fit a stereotype. I’m probably over-dramatizing though, just really can’t stand stereotyping.
I’ve seen two things out of “Men’s Health Awareness Month”:
- The rainbow hair squad bawling about “No it’s Pride Month”
- People posting lazy image macros with lies like “It’s okay to show your feelings” in them.
I have no fucking interest in National Whatever Day or Something Awareness Month. They always end up an exercise in worthless busybody tokenism, and the more of them we put in place the more hilarious collisions we’re going to find. I got a great idea, let’s start observing National Temperence Week as the first week of May, so that we can generate pointless anger at the people drinking Corona and margaritas on Cinco De Mayo. I can hear Latinos now saying “Oh what the fuck have the white people made themselves mad about now?”
The messaging I have seen about “Men’s Health Awareness Month” has mostly been addressed to men saying things like “It’s okay to share, it’s okay to cry, there are five lights.” His lived experience has shown that no, it is not. He is overwhelmingly expected to be stable, and any display of weakness will permanently lessen his worth in anyone’s eyes. Telling HIM to open up when those are the consequences he knows await, addressing the problem as a change HE needs to make is just pissing up a rope.
I’m going to use the movie Fight Club as an illustrative device here: Pretty much all of the men in this setting find their social and emotional needs unmet by the structure of society. The buzzword you see thrown around today for this is “lack of third spaces.” The men in the testicular cancer group have basically only one pain to share with each other: loss of family, marriages, jobs etc. The men respond strongly positively to Fight Club, which at first is basically an underground bare knuckle boxing ring started by a mentally ill man. I have a hypothesis that something like a pickup game of basketball would have served much the same function, that what the men in this setting really need is time to do physical activities with other men, to form those bonds the way men actually do.
On that note, I’ll be right back.When you go on social media almost all discussion concerning men is about how they are the root of all evil, and everything they do is wrong. It’s a never ending stream of shaming with no clear way out. You’re damned if you do and damned if you don’t: If you try to defend yourself or talk about your own problems as a man, it is labeled as misogyny. “Be vulnerable and open up” they say but if you do it’s “don’t center men you privileged fuck” or “you’re being a crybaby”.
This is a sentiment often repeated by manosphere influencers and there’s no actual tangible evidence it exists and I think that’s the real issue. The influencers aren’t at all a symptom of a problem men are facing, they are selling men on a problem that doesn’t exist (for money).
I have never at any point in my life (which encompasses the entire lifespan of the internet) been subjected to any significant amount of misandry online or in person. When men talk about experiencing misandry online, it’s almost always in the context of them making comments on content geared towards a women’s issue and invalidating the women’s issue while simultaneously making it about themselves.
You mention being a progressive at heart, forced to cloak yourself in more perceived masculine features as if they are at odds with each other. I too am a progressive and I have never felt like that’s been at odds with my masculinity. I’ve never had a problem taking leadership roles, using force to solve problems, even violently when necessary, and I know how to put my emotions aside in order to get things done. At the same time I have no problems sharing my feelings or being vulnerable with the people I love and trust. I’ve never had an issue following a woman or being in an equal partnership like my marriage is. You can be all these things and my experience with women is that the right ones love you for it.
The real issue is solely man-created and exists solely in the mind, and the manosphere exists to tell you in its not in your mind, that’s it’s real, and that it’s everyone’s fault but your own. They monetize your attention, they sell you supplements and books, none of which are actually designed to help you solve your problems, because if you escape your cycle of self destruction, the money stops.
You mentioned that you’re dating a woman and you feel like you have to hide who you are for her to love you? My friend that’s not you being masculine, nor is it you being “progressive”.
Real masculinity, the kind that these influencers refuse to sell you, is having enough self respect to be yourself. If you want to open up and share your feelings with someone then that’s what you’re damn well going to do. And if she isn’t ok with that then she can find someone else.
This is a sentiment often repeated by manosphere influencers and there’s no actual tangible evidence it exists and I think that’s the real issue.
This is why I feel there is such a disconnect. I just have to open TikTok to see this, so if researchers are not finding evidence then I’m very curious how that’s possible. Heck, you just need to look at the same masculinity influencer content they are talking about to see it, because it’s not just them making shit up from nothing - they will often use clips of misandrist women to get their point across. So they basically find the evidence for you.
During men’s mental health awareness month this has been particularly easy to encounter as there was a trend of women making as much noise as possible with the caption “me when it’s time to take a moment of silence for men’s mental health”.
I’m glad that you never felt being progressive was at odds with being masculine. But many men, especially younger men, are struggling with this. The fact that you don’t doesn’t change that.
I just have to open TikTok to see this, so if researchers are not finding evidence then I’m very curious how that’s possible.
TikTok is incredibly algorithm driven and ultimately driven by the content you consume and interact with. When you go online and “see something everywhere” you have to look at it under the lens of what’s being targeted at you, vs what you encounter in more neutral spaces. When you open TikTok, the percentage of misandrist content you encounter is not representative of all content on the internet. No matter how niche or rare any given subject is, your algorithm will find it and server it to if it thinks you’ll engage with it, positively or negatively.
My TikTok contains zero misandrist content, but that doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist at all either. In order for the researchers to experience what you experience, they’d have to build an algorithm profile tailored to that content. But that would be useless, because it would prove nothing. It’s a question of “Is the world full of misandrists out to get men” or “have the men surrounded themselves with misandrists”.
You have effectively done the latter. Both online and in your personal life. Now when I say this is “your fault” I don’t mean to say that you’ve gone and done this on purpose. The algorithms have a heavy hand to play in this of course and that’s a real issue. But at the end of the day, how the algorithms target you is a result of your engagement and behavior. The more you rail against your perceived world of misandry, the more the algorithm is going to inundate you with it. “Society” hasn’t done this to you, nor have women as a group of people.
I don’t want to delve too much into your personal life here, but you’ve shared that you’ve intimately connected yourself with a woman who you don’t trust will accept you for who you are. I won’t call your girlfriend a misandrist, but you’ve painted her as one of the women who are part of the problem you’re perceiving. You live with her now, so you have to experience that frustration every single day of your life. But like… is she holding you against your will? Should I contact the authorities? If not, then this is another example of you imposing this issue on yourself. You’ve literally surrounded yourself with someone who you perceive to be part of a problem that has deeply and negatively affected your life. Why would you do that, and how is that very personal decision you’ve made society’s fault?
What these manosphere influencers have done, is taken a very personal issue with young men, and instead of addressing the problems these young men have, it expands the issue into a global, societal one that doesn’t exist. And because these men now blame society, they won’t work on fixing the actual issues they have, which only makes their problem worse, and cements their negative world even further. It’s a giant pit of quicksand and the more you struggle the faster you sink.
You’re straying from the point which is that this content exists, is widespread, and is ultimately the root cause. This isn’t hard for a serious researcher to see if they could just be bothered to sit down with the people they are “researching” and actually discover what their online life looks like. Whatever opinions you have on my personal life and choices are irrelevant. The reason I brought my personal experience up is that I think it is representative (and at odds with what UN Women is saying) and an obvious reason why men seek their refuge in masculinity influencers. You can criticize my life all you want, but as far as I’m concerned that only underscores my point.
The misandry is also not limited to algorithm-heavy outlets like TikTok - when I talk about media I mean all social media including Facebook, Reddit, Instagram but also old media such as newspapers. When the #killallmen and #ihatemen hashtags were popular on Twitter the women promoting it were given their own columns in newspapers and a platform in podcasts by national state radio, at least here in Sweden. One popular “feminist” profile, Natashja Blomberg, would for example publicly say “I wonder if it’s a daughter or an abortion” when she was pregnant. She garnered support and was platfformed both by prominent political party leaders and news outlets. She was given her own column and given space in podcasts, where she could complain how disgusting she found her own son to be and how nobody is interested in what men think.
You can’t just let this go on for years, without being challenged, without offering alternative positive messages, and believe that men will just shake it off. They’re turning to these influencers because they were pushed there. I whole heartedly disagree with your assertion that the problem is only in people’s heads, but even if it is, society has a responsibility to help those people and it doesn’t.
You’re straying from the point which is that this content exists, is widespread, and is ultimately the root cause.
The content does exist, but there’s no evidence it’s widespread and it’s definitely not the root cause. It looks widespread to you because you’ve surrounded yourself with it, and you were enabled to do so because of the abundance of manosphere and maybe concurrently, misandry content that you’re engaging with. I hear you that there is a real problem aggravating this whole thing, but I don’t think it’s society, or women, or feminists. I think it’s male grifters preying on the vulnerable.
And to be clear I’m not criticizing your personal life. You are living the life you’ve chosen and I’m not passing judgement on it. It’s just perfectly representative of the fact that the problems you’ve explained that you’re facing were directly caused by decisions you made for yourself. You are the one who’s criticizing your relationship because it isn’t what you want, yet, it’s the one you’ve chosen. If you told me instead you were perfectly happy, I’d be nothing but happy for you.
Ultimately what I’ve chosen is to be the person I want to be. I have no guilt associated with being a man, nor am I ashamed of my masculinity. I don’t listen to influencers who tell me that women hate me, nor have any women told me they hate me. I have had no shortage of women who love me exactly as I am, despite the insistence of those who are convinced society hates men. I’ve met women who didn’t like men, but they have certainly been in the minority and I am not going to get all bent out of shape because there is some subset of people in the world who don’t like me.
I am very happy being a man and I just wish that for others. But I think that comes from getting right with yourself, not making society fix you.
Nah, I can attest. Misandry has populated a lot of online spaces with most content that even mentions men painting them in a terrible light. (Man or Bear is the most prominent example). The fact that teens are growing in this ambiance that hates them just for being CIS male is going to be terrible for them. Modern feminism has lost most of their male supporters because they’ve just gone down the deep end instead of keeping with their originals ideals of equality. Tho, I geniely believe that feminism should have ditched the name for equality, in the 2015s. It’s more associated with misandry than equality right now among other men.
deleted by creator
I can attest that that isn’t at all true. Your perception has been warped by these influencers very much on purpose to see conflict where there isn’t any. Society, or women, do not “hate men” just for being men. And this persecution complex and victim mentality is what’s destroying the minds of these young men today.
Believe me, when you give up looking for ways to feel victimized on a daily basis, you’ll stop finding them.
No? I don’t genuely see any of those “Influencers” you keep mentioning. This is talking about my own experience online. I go online and I see hate and the only one being called out is the mysoginistic one. I don’t follow Jordan Peterson nor Andrew Tate (I can’t really even name any others). This is the perception of someone that accepted feminism on their growing years and basically has just grown completely detached from the movement. Following their advice has led me nowhere so I had to find my own way.
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.
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
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.
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.
Also the Simpsons, family guy, American dad etc.
Pretty much. Misandry feeds misoginy and viceversa, if you don’t temper your discourse and make it reasonable someone else will come and make you temper it
When a person has a systemic privilege, sometimes equality feels like oppression to them.
It’s quite simple, gender equality should stand for equal opportunity for both genders, but it’s not. I only see women being pushed into places with traditionally male majority, but not men being pushed into places with traditional female majority. And worst of all, equal opportunity should not mean we will hire a less competent woman that a more competent men, to fill out some 50/50 quota.
This is exactly the result of abusing gender equality.
I only see women being pushed into places with traditionally male majority, but not men being pushed into places with traditional female majority.
As a positive counter-example, I’d like to give a shoutout to German childcare. In 2022, 17.9% of under 20yolds, 12,6% of under 30yold childcare professionals were men, contrast with 2% among 60 and older. There’s been an active effort both from the professional organisations as well as operators to increase the ratio, right-out masterplanned it, and they’re making strides. As a side-effect: Plenty of young female childcare workers now don’t feel weird at all about wrestling with the boys. Not that “boys need movement because their gross motor skills develop before fine motor skills” was unknown back in my days but the vibe was either “grandma watching you build wood block towers” or “grandma watching you at the playground”.
There’s three aspects to this: They recognised that “women know better than men when it comes to childcare” is BS and recognition was given to masculine styles of parenting, with that the pattern of dealing with the few men that were in the field by “promoting them out of sight”, that is, into administration, was abolished, and finally an active push to advertise the job to men.
Not sure whether the ratio will ever reach 50:50 or whether that’s even important at all, stabilising at 1/3rd or such would be plenty to ensure that things are even-keeled. If you rather become a construction worker I’m not going to tell you to go into childcare instead, and vice versa, not everything that’s not 50:50 is due to gatekeeping. Women aren’t going to become saturation divers en masse, and that’s fine.
There is nothing that needs or requires 50/50 nor is there any benefit to society by forcing it besides being able to say “now it’s equal”. Childcare should ideally be 30% men and 70% women because women are natual caretakers and excell at emotional and social tasks. Men are needed there to provide strict authority for kids when they are not behaving well and for developing skills such as sports, engineering and emotional reslilience.
Your first sentence is completely sensible, the rest is completely toxic and also BS gender roles. Don’t project your emotional and social incapacity on me.
If my wife were to tell my kids “wait until your father comes home” a) they’ll get off 110% scot-free because they already suffered enough dread and b) she’ll get an earful. Ideally, though, of course, you’ll date someone emotionally and socially mature enough so that won’t be an issue. Someone who can stand up for herself, is actually competent, and doesn’t make your kids hate you.
Also please explain: Women are good at emotional stuff but then you need the man to do the emotional resilience thing… what? I know plenty of women who I’m pretty sure could beat you up and work with plenty of brilliant female engineers, and are you accusing me of not caring. Am I just pretending to care about people? Does caring about people not come natural to you? Maybe that’s a thing you should mull over.
You went into extreme edge cases to prove your point. Of course both genders can do both, but why would I want to put the burden of getting the kids in check with my wife when I am supposed to be the man in the house? Will I just put the burden on my wife and say “hey, you are mature and strong and independent - handle it and let me get a beer”.
As for the emotional part - women can teach kids empathy, men can teach kids not to cry immediately if you fall down once. Both are emotional aspects but they are exactly the opposite aspects and complement each other. Kids do need both. Women happen to be better at empathy, and men tend to be better at regulating emotions.
Whats the problem in gender roles, if it suits the people? Why force people into a different role, that they don’t want to be in?
but why would I want to put the burden of getting the kids in check with my wife when I am supposed to be the man in the house?
You want to be a housekeeper? More power to you then but if your wife is an engineer and earns the money why do you suppose she can’t teach kids about it?
She’s the housekeeper and does tell the kids “just wait until your father gets home”? She’s training them to hate you, alienate them from you, that’s a giant red flag. Make sure to connect up with them or you’re going to have a hard time in custody court.
As for the emotional part - women can teach kids empathy, men can teach kids not to cry immediately if you fall down once.
Nope. Both are very capable of doing both. Again: Please don’t project your hangups onto others. Female fainting is just as much a trained behaviour (ultimately, an act the actor believes themselves), as male callousness.
Whats the problem in gender roles, if it suits the people? Why force people into a different role, that they don’t want to be in?
I’m not forcing anyone here, it’s you who’s drawing lines in the sand, “men shall do this, women shall do that”.
Boys, on average, like to wrestle a hell a lot more than girls, are interested in mechanical things more, when playing they care about outside things. Girls, on average, develop their fine motor skills well before boys, and their play focusses on social scenarios, in a bounded (inside) context.
Let them learn in the order and manner as they see fit, that’s absolutely fine and natural. But you’re an adult, not a kid, your competencies should, by now, have expanded beyond that initial set and focus. If you’re under the impression that “women are better at this, men are better at that” then you’re either 12 and/or are living in a society which actively stifles human development.
I absolutely never said most of the things you claim here that I have said. I never said that one gender can’t do what the other can. Will you stop putting words in my mouth?
If you’re under the impression that “women are better at this, men are better at that” then you’re either 12 and/or are living in a society which actively stifles human development.
This seems awfully ignorant. I guess you think also men are equally good at giving birth and breastfeeding? If so, no need to discuss anymore. Let’s agree to disagree.
I guess you think also men are equally good at giving birth and breastfeeding?
No I think you’re better at putting words in my mouth than I am – allegedly – at putting words in yours. Speak about going to extremes to attempt to prove a point.
I feel like a Cassandra since I was warning about this for years now.
The gender equality narrative got too focused on excluding men specifically, instead of including the less represented gender in each profession. Somehow the idea was that men are privileged in the system and women oppressed, while the truth is that both men and women are oppressed.
Divide and conquer was a small step away from that point.
I only see women being pushed into places with traditionally male majority, but not men being pushed into places with traditional female majority
Genuinely curious, got any examples of “traditional female majority places” that masculine individuals cannot enter/participate in?
Daycare, men who work with children in general. It feels like taboo, and I assume it’s because the general opinion seems to be that men that want to be around children are most likely pedophiles. I never heard of a program to include more men in daycare.
Excellent example, and I sincerely appreciate you engaging in good faith discussion!
I agree that being masculine should by default not be a barrier - social or otherwise - from working with children.
How do we begin to change that as a society?
Although I can’t think of the solution myself, I also don’t see how advancing equality for feminine individuals would hold back equality for masculine individuals.
As mentioned in another comment, a lot of these problems seem to stem from the enforcement of dated gender norms.
Thank you, I am actually shocked by such positive feedback, as I never expect anything positive in online discussions :D
Well, there is not much that needs to be adjusted in traditional values. Or, to put it lightly, that was never the problem to begin with. In traditional roles, both genders use their advantage to the max, and it has worked for millenia.
The issue is that there is a smaller % of both genders, who wish to do something “out of the norm”. Men who want to work in childcare and women who want to drive trucks. That small % should be able to do so, without discrimination. That’s it. That’s all to it, why this entire woke thing blew up. We should preserve the traditional roles as they have proven themselves to work effectively, but we need to adjust it to be flexible for things that don’t fit in the traditional norms.
From somewhere came the narrative that men are gatekeeping women from all important positions, and women in fight for their rights to be equal went the same route to basically gatekeep men in the name of equality. And now we are in this weird limbo where the genders seem to undermine each other whereever they can.
This is one where I think the ball is very much in the women’s court.
I’ve seen a trend of vertical videos of fathers playing with their children, with a caption similar to “my latest ick.”
Millennial men are the most engaged cohort of dads in living memory, and women have responded pretty poorly to this.
Not OP, but positions like nurses or teachers are very female dominated. It’s not like males cannot reach those positions, but there are social obstacles to that. To make an example from my country, in Italy primary school teachers are > 90% female. I believe in kindergarten they reach 97 or 98%. This is also partially the result of strict gender roles than discriminate both men and women in terms of caring for children (I.e., women are de facto forced to do that, men are pushed away), which then reinforces the social practice of women doing all the caring jobs.
This is IMHO a problem for both men and women, but probably it’s not from the same perspective as what OP meant…
The difference is that, typically, the lack of women in male-dominated fields is due to them being actively pushed away from things they want to do, while the lack of men in female-dominated fields is due to those fields being less prestigious/well-paid (often due to being traditionally female) and them not wanting to pick them in the first place. But when they do decide to enter those fields, nobody’s actively trying to stop/discourage them.
Superficially there may seem to be similarities in circumstance, but the amount of agency men and women have to enter opposite-gender-dominated careers is vastly different.
And how are women pushed out of “man jobs”?
And how are we fixing that?
Is it bosses that aim to have male coworkers turning down women? How is that different than bosses wanting artificially 50/50 turning down men?
Is it not being represented in advertising? How is that different than what happens now. Where most advertising displays just women? Or if there is both a man and a woman, the woman is usually centered in the picture or doing a more important/powerful role.
By “encouraging” women in the workplace, what you see is things being done to men that you complain was done to women.
Better paid jobs are usually more risky, competitive and harsh with short deadlines, that why the are paid more than jobs where you can just do your shift and happily go home like daycare or teaching. It happens that men simply naturally want the adrenaline and excitement that comes with the first because they want to prove themselves.
If you look into history, men where those that went hunting which can be dangerous, while women were those who collected berries and nursed children, not much danger there.
As a man, I actually thing women are crazy for not wanting to keep being a houswife a thing. It’s like being the CEO of the house. WFH guaranteed, you are the one making plans and deadlines, minimal stress, and you have probably enough spare time to do whatever you want as a hobby on the side (unless you have small children). I truly don’t see the downside, I would thrive in home improvement and gardening…
The extreme depression and anxiety exhibited by women in the 1950s contradicts your claim.
True, if we are talking as if today was 1950 and the socioeconomic situation were the same. But it’s not. There’s almost 80 years of progress and the socioeconomic situation is not even comparable. So, although true it was a problem 80 years ago, its a bit shortsigthed to claim same applies today.
The 1950s was when women were relegated to the role of housewife. You are asking why women don’t want to be relegated to that role.
It’s the same in female fields, it’s not just prestige. Men face increased scrutiny when working with children. Male nurses are expected to perform the more physical parts of the job almost exclusively.
There are 2 issues here that are being mixed.
One is women not being allowed to positions of power. The other is with women being underrepresented in certain fields (e.g., stem).
The second issue is what I am talking about and I don’t think at all that men “choose” not to try certain careers in the same way women don’t “choose” not to study stem and pursue stem careers. For both, social pressure and expectations, an existing field dominated by the other sex with all its implications are factors of discrimination. Strict gender roles are damaging for both men and women, and this is a perfect example.
There are 2 issues here that are being mixed.
One is women not being allowed to positions of power. The other is with women being underrepresented in certain fields (e.g., stem).
I think it’s fair to mix them, to an extent, because I think the degree of underrepresentation is often directly proportional to the prestige/pay/power of the field. Both are symptoms of the same underlying issue, which is bigots discounting women’s competency and refusing to entrust them with things of importance.
But, whats the difference from a male that also wants to get to the same position, and is also not entrusted with the thing of importance? I see plenty of this scenarios play on a daily basis by males who want to get on top but are blocked by fellow males. Its the same situation, why would we need to provide help for the women but not for the men? Would you say that properly competent person would overcome this issue, regardless of their gender?
positions like nurses or teachers are very female dominated.
I’m sure it varies from country to country, but in the US women could not study medicine until the late 1800’s and the US Army did not allow female physicians until 1940.
It’s not unlikely to think we have many people today who were alive before women practicing as physicians was common place.
I’m convinced it’s less of a matter of a group “dominating” a space but rather being pigeonholed/forced into it due to a lack of options, and these circumstances have impact that are still felt to this day.
I’m not sure about Italy but in a lot of the US becoming a school teacher requires a college degree and has wages that do not keep up with the cost of living.
You can look up articles of teachers losing their jobs for doing sex work or provocative modeling to earn extra income because their job does not pay enough.
Doesn’t seem like that big of a win? Unless I’m missing something?
Edit: re-read your reply and realized I did not read it properly the first time. That’ll teach me to comment in the wee hours LOL. I greatly appreciate your response! Leaving the original reply in place for the sake of context.
Like another comment stated about Germany, even in Italy medicine faculties have a majority of women today as well.
I agree that in general teacher jobs are not glamorous or high-paying, but it’s still a very important role in society and we can still discuss how it’s a problem that there is an effective (social, mostly) barrier for males accessing (lower level) education jobs.
I do believe that this is essentially another symptom of a wider problem related to gender roles.
I do believe that this is essentially another symptom of a wider problem related to gender roles.
Certainly agree with you there and I really appreciate your nuanced take.
I think many miss the greater overarching message that forcing gender roles only serves to hold us back as a human race.
I’m sure it varies from country to country, but in the US women could not study medicine until the late 1800’s
In Germany at the moment around two thirds of medicine students are women and I wouldn’t be surprised if it’s the similar in most western countries.
It’s a little over 50% in the US, and is largely due to women out performing men in school.
It blows my mind how comments that don’t fit the narrative of the liberals get down voted to doom and canceled, by the same groups that want “equality”, but only if it’s their definition of equality.
I’m all for equality, which is why I can’t stand left-wingers or right-wingers. They’re all full of shit.
Explain how you can cancel a comment ?
Personally, I don’t mind seeing when comments are heavily down voted. If an opinion is unpopular, that’s ok, especially in some areas where you generally know there’s a likely bias in the audience.
What annoys me is seeing comments removed / silenced by mods when the comments dont align. If the comments calling for explicit violence or using overt slurs, by all means censor. But many online spaces will eliminate even respectful / neutral comments simply because they aren’t in line with that narrative.
Point in case. The moment I mentioned it, the down votes started pouring in.
Humanity has lost the capacity for critical thinking and civil communication.
Let me guess, the men will have their internet traffic monitored & have curfews ??
Oh & be put on a watchlist for merely talking in a raised voice against women.
Because I kid you not, these are real suggestions
And these are real words.
Yup, in the UK women MPs were talking about bringing in curfews for MEN
And a Missisipi Lawmaker proposed making ejaculation without fertilisation of an egg illegal.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contraception_Begins_at_Erection_Act
Sometimes these things are done for effect and aren’t entirely serious. Please learn to tell the difference.
These are lawmakers who have the power to change your lives & your instinct is treat any issue that may affect men’s lives in a negative way as a joke.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wBQybc2l-gU
E.g: Trump is sending foreign men to El Salvador to a torture camp. Yeah, it’s only funny when it happens to othet men, when your govt does this to YOU, you will be singing a different tune.
I think I’ll speak up for men here, You need a Men-Only Lemmy/Mbin/PieFed instance. So that you can at least speak up about your issues without being laughed at or downplayed by misandrists
What you are saying doesn’t quite tally with reality. Your argument style seems to be to take things which have some element of truth to them and then take them entirely out of context inferring some kind of semi-paranoid hatred in others where it may not exist.
I could imagine that some people might say you have extreme views.
I am a man who believes that more needs to be done for men, but I think your jingoism does a disservice to the true problems many men face. It is so paper thin, overly simplistic and easy to see through that I believe you are only riling up hatred and will not possibly solve any real mens problems with your current approach.
Honestly, your arguments are a parody of real issues. Stop.
