Why is the manosphere on the rise? UN Women sounds the alarm over online misogyny
-
“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.
wrote last edited by [email protected]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?
-
Someone watches his shit.
Just because the youtube algorithm promotes outrage doesn't make it right.
-
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?
wrote last edited by [email protected]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.
-
Well, after your 2nd post with the same thing I thought this is how you wanna communicate.
wrote last edited by [email protected]Let's try this again: If, as you say "women do empathy, men do resilience", then why should childcare be 70:30? Why not 50:50 so the kids get taught empathy and resilience in equal measure? Also, how can you even be empathetic if you lack in the resilience department.
-
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.
-
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.
Women and men-only clubs have a lot of value. We have women only clubs at work because our industry is pretty male-centric, so getting women access to good female mentors is super important because they're distributed across the company. Men can be good mentors for women too, sure, but anytime there's a minority, it's important to connect them to help them recognize and point out implicit biases. We have groups like that for racial minorities as well, and I think it's great.
Men and women also bond differently, so having a gender-specific club can lower barriers to connecting and finding support. That's true for other characteristics as well, like sexual and gender identity, race (I'm a huge fan of our black chamber of commerce in our predominantly white area), age, etc.
We should embrace and celebrate our differences, not try to hide them away. Let everyone have their own club, and maintain rules against intolerance as well.
-
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.
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
-
There are tons of young black men in the manosphere, too. Or else with whom manosphere ideas resonate. Don't be racist.
there was also tons of jews who supported hitler. The 'manosphere' pretends to be inclusive to men when its just a white nationalist spin off.
"see we have some black supporters! dont mind what we have planned for them after we take-over please! grrr! those pesky woman wont let us get laid! focus on that not the swastika in the background!"
-
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.
-
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"?
-
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.
-
White, Gen z men literally went 67% for Trump
wrote last edited by [email protected]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.
-
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.
-
Tate's influence took a step back, but a lot of dudes are trying to take his place.
i was thinking j peterson, and roegan. they convinceed alot of men to switch sides. both ironically are funded by putin.
-
There no way Andrew Tate is cool at a party.
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.
-
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.
-
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.
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
-
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
-
Let's try this again: If, as you say "women do empathy, men do resilience", then why should childcare be 70:30? Why not 50:50 so the kids get taught empathy and resilience in equal measure? Also, how can you even be empathetic if you lack in the resilience department.
Because more women than men want to be in daycare, it's unrealistic to expect the same amount of men want to be in daycase as women. And the gender ratio of employees doesn't mean thats also the ratio of what kids will take away from this. Does this mean that in daycare without any men the kids have only 50% of the care they need? Of course not.
Again, ONE DOESNT EXCLUDE THE OTHER. Everyone has empathy and resilience, but so far in general women tend to be better at empathy and men in resilience. Why force one to do both, when both can thrive in what they do better?
-
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.
wrote last edited by [email protected]Bruh
You just sterotyped women so fuckin gross here. Jesus christ
