Why is the manosphere on the rise? UN Women sounds the alarm over online misogyny
-
I like how you were down voted for it. Hell there's a free online course in my country right know that is not open for everyone, it says in the description that anyone can apply for a chance but only women will be allowed to participate.
I mean it's specifically a girl's coding class, I suppose there's also open classes. Segregated resources are not the same as one side lacking resources.
The trouble with that kind of stuff is usually that the gendered version is some half-assed feel-good BS. There's not a single martial artist, gender doesn't matter, who respects "women's self defence" courses because the stuff they teach there is, at best, useless. More often it's actively dangerous placebo and reading the instructions for your pepper spray will be much, much more helpful.
-
So if a company traditionally had 10 men employees and now has committed to having gender equality, you see this as 5 jobs where men are no longer considered, rather than it historically being 10 jobs where women weren't considered?
rather than it historically being 10 jobs where women weren’t considered
But that's not true.
Hire the best person for the job. Period. If the best 10 people for the job - ie the most qualified, the most experience, interviewed the best, the best culture fit, etc - are all men then that should be fine. Hiring less qualified, worse people simply because they're women or a minority is ridiculous, and it means that more deserving people are missing out.
-
Honestly I think examples like this are counterproductive, the average man will never be considered for one of these positions, nor will the average woman. It is useless to get angry at such a situation as it only serves to engage people in the "gender war" which only serves to distract you from the real issues which are almost completely class issues. Instead of getting angry that some woman "took away" the job of some man who was "more deserving", you should get angry that that person is most likely getting paid a hundred times more than you and will cut your job in an attempt to make the company appear more profitable.
It's not only executive/board level jobs that have "diversity quotas" now.
-
rather than it historically being 10 jobs where women weren’t considered
But that's not true.
Hire the best person for the job. Period. If the best 10 people for the job - ie the most qualified, the most experience, interviewed the best, the best culture fit, etc - are all men then that should be fine. Hiring less qualified, worse people simply because they're women or a minority is ridiculous, and it means that more deserving people are missing out.
There are absolutely jobs where hiring the most qualified person for the job is critical. There are a lot of jobs where the threshold for good enough is far below that, and most companies are at least as concerned at getting the cheapest labor that can fulfill the position as they are at getting the best person (at that lower rate). Adding additional constraints like diversity isn't going to affect those jobs any more than the company's desire to save a buck.
-
Though I’d hardly acknowledge nearly anyone in this thread as a man. Weak shit.
Speaking of toxic masculinity....
"toxic masculinity is when men judge men harshly for being sexist". Totally got me there.
-
According to the Movember Foundation, a leading men’s health organization and partner of UN Women, two-thirds of young men regularly engage with masculinity influencers online.
While some content offers genuine support, much of it promotes extreme language and sexist ideology, reinforcing the idea that men are victims of feminism and modern social change.
So, 2/3 of young men are risking to become incels, right? Because it is hard to imagine a young girl who is looking for a partner with hyperfocus on his own masculinity as well as a partner, who portraits himself as victim? That is sad...
That wording you did there is perfect, that's the exact kind of precise wording people need to be hearing, not this other relational wording junk.
-
"toxic masculinity is when men judge men harshly for being sexist". Totally got me there.
wrote last edited by [email protected]Sure. Real men don't cry. Real men aren't weak. Real men toughen up and don't complain. Real men don't care about injustice if it's them who are affected. That's you.
Nothing to do with people in this thread being sexist: That's your addition to justify your toxicity to yourself. Even if that is the case, that this threat is full of sexist assholes: You're still taking a toxic approach to facing it.
-
I had to do community service in Tennessee, i chose to help feed the homeless at a soup kitchen, anyone could eat there, but there were only permanent beds for women. It was nice they fed the men too but thinking back, where did they go at night?
This was not the case in North Carolina
-
This was not the case in North Carolina
Im glad to hear it! We have enough empty buildings and houses that there shouldnt be any homeless.
-
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.
Thank you for making sense!
-
And these are real words.
wrote last edited by [email protected]Yup, in the UK women MPs were talking about bringing in curfews for MEN
-
Lol, by who?
Who would even be able to enforce this..... The politicians who are mostly men, the CEO who own silicon valley....mostly men. The police who would enforce the law.....oh also men.
You guys are just scared of your own shadows... Some real soft shit going on in this thread.
wrote last edited by [email protected]Men huh, Finland is a feminist govt that has a male-only draft.
Oh & EU is feminist led
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BtXnRwT8K9AFeminists & women are pandered to by those men. Those men are kinda like you. Of course some like you is going to victim blame men.
Another example is the white feather movement -
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/
-
Ohio. Cincinnati, specifically. It's not 100 to 0 women resources to men, it's more like 55 to 5. There are some cold weather shelters for men, and places to eat, but mostly there are zero beds unless you're willing to sign up for a drug testing program, and even then there are costs and limited spaces. There are quite a few women's shelters in the area.
I mean, there are reasons that women need to be away from men sometimes. And it's not because we're having a wonderful time in life. And this "manosphere" is only creating more dangerous situations for us.
-
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.
-
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
Is there even an incentive for solving men's problems?
Uh, yes? Obviously. If there wasn't then "manosphere" content would never be monetized.
-
I can't believe how much shit you are getting while having perfectly valid and rational claims. The fact this fucking chode is claiming your being reactionary while he froths at the mouth with accusations nof misandry is making me feel insane.
You are being too kind, but I will use the privilege reserved for middle aged man to fucking yell at emotional little boys throwing tantrums.
wrote last edited by [email protected]Surrounded by incels, I guess. Mad they aren’t special anymore.
“When you’re accustomed to privilege, equality feels like oppression.” – Franklin Leonard
-
Men huh, Finland is a feminist govt that has a male-only draft.
Oh & EU is feminist led
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BtXnRwT8K9AFeminists & women are pandered to by those men. Those men are kinda like you. Of course some like you is going to victim blame men.
Another example is the white feather movementMen huh, Finland is a feminist govt that has a male-only draft.
Men still make up the majority of the parliament in Finland, though that particular country has a long history of promoting equity.
Oh & EU is feminist led
You mean that the EU has leaders who are feminist..... Men still hold the majority of the seats.
Feminists & women are pandered to by those men. Those men are kinda like you.
Oh no.... People who believe in equality....the tragedy.
Of course some like you is going to victim blame men
How exactly are you being victimized while I am not.... and we're both men?
Another example is the white feather movement
Lol, that was a nationalistic movement to get people to go to war. I don't really think women were really in control of the war effort during WW2.
-
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.
-
Sure. Real men don't cry. Real men aren't weak. Real men toughen up and don't complain. Real men don't care about injustice if it's them who are affected. That's you.
Nothing to do with people in this thread being sexist: That's your addition to justify your toxicity to yourself. Even if that is the case, that this threat is full of sexist assholes: You're still taking a toxic approach to facing it.
Sure. Real men don't cry. Real men aren't weak. Real men toughen up and don't complain. Real men don't care about injustice if it's them who are affected. That's you.
Lol, falsely conflating me telling you not to blame POC and women for late stage capitalism with telling you not to cry is pretty hilarious.
What injustice are you facing that generations of women and immigrants haven't been receiving the whole time?
I'm not telling you not to communicate or build support networks, I'm saying don't blame minorities for the lack of those support networks.
