Skip to content

Why is the manosphere on the rise? UN Women sounds the alarm over online misogyny

Technology
290 99 0
  • 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.

  • 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.

  • Really, there is no formal system of patriarchy? No kings in your world?

    The Catholic church still to this day refuses to ordain any women into the priesthood: men only.

    Ask a girl in Afghanistan or Saudi Arabia if there's any formal patriarchy when they try to go to school, or drive, or go outside without head to toe covering, or simply go outside unaccompanied by a man.

    In the west there are hundreds of industry bodies, clubs and business societies that wield enormous power and are exclusively men-only - or were men-only until the Civil Rights Act and were then taken to court to have their rules banning women overturned, or pressured for many decades to change their stance, such as the Garrick Club in the UK whom only finally opened their doors to female members last year.

    I'm a man but I'm starting to hate men too with these replies.

    Oh dear.

    The Catholic church still to this day refuses to ordain any women into the priesthood: men only.

    Not my world, but so what? There are also the Roman Catholic Women Priests who felt left out so made up their own story.

    Ask a girl in Afghanistan or Saudi Arabia if there’s any formal patriarchy when they try to go to school, or drive, or go outside without head to toe covering, or simply go outside unaccompanied by a man.

    Again, not my world. But... Have you asked if they want to go to school, drive, go outside, or have you assumed they do? Not being a dick but there are very different opinions generally held by women of different cultures and religions that contrast with others - who's right? (Historically people die over such issues). Also, beyond what Fox news states, there are schools in middle Eastern countries, some are voluntary. Such issues are very complicated and are not black or white.

    In the west there are hundreds of industry bodies, clubs and business societies blah blah blah.

    So? "The Garrick Club is a private members' club in London, founded in 1831 as a club for "actors and men of refinement to meet on equal terms" - you're whining that a men-only club is not ok, but a women-only club is?

    A string of strawman arguments. I think you think your opinions make you look cool though. But it's ok, hate me for my opinions because you can only accept those that are marketed to you.

  • 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.

  • Women have strong support movement on their side. It's not something they gain only through their sex, but rather something they gain I think mostly due to the same gender stereotypes that also act against them.

    That seems like a self inflicted issue.... What are women supposed to do about this? In my life it has usually been women begging their husbands to speak to them or to go to therapy.

    Same stereotypes which isolate men and make them suffer in silence and alone, making showing any sign of weakness a fatal mistake.

    And who propogates and sustains this stereotype? Sounds like you should be mad at men.

    honestly don't see your point here - what commenter above you said is right, and sure as hell they didn't mention that it doesn't work the other way around.

    That would imply it's not simply a mens problem.....

    What are men problems, huh? Like, dunno, expectation to always go after that false masculinity. Also, as far as I understand it, what you quoted above this part is just continuation of the point above it, nothing to add here.

    The person I responded to was saying women were being targeted by capitalistic marketing..... How is that a mens problem. My point is that it's not a mens problem it's a capitalist problem.

    Yeah, but affects genders differently. Men are eaten, ground to a paste and then spat out. Women are bellitled and their work is seen as substandard. One side doesn't make the other any less, both are problems and commenter above you didn't say men have it worse, just that they suffer from it.

    Lol, so it's a class problem.... Of course the poor suffer, that's why we're supposed to have class solidarity, not become misogynistic.

    Men do not get help. We do not have the same societal networks that women have to get together and stand up. And even if women decided to fight for us, it's for naught until we are able to start getting up by ourselves.

    That doesn't explain the blatant misogyny in this thread and in the youth in general.

    kay. What's with that obsession with women? Commenter above you mentioned once that feminism can use men to portray them as evil, which they do because guess who makes them suffer most, and yet due to that you immediately went and threw everything they said as if they did nothing else but accuse women of men's suffering.

    This whole thread and post is about the gender dynamic and the blooming network of misogyny. And because his interpretation of economics is devoid of class consciousness, he and you only focus on the problems of young men, which is a demographic and not a class.

    Women gain on current situation so it makes sense they don't act.

    • Corporations gain on current situation so it makes sense they don't act.
    • Rich gain, and even if not then loose nothing on current situation so it makes sense they don't act.

    How do women gain?
    Who runs the corporations?

    , the incentive is for us to move our asses, take notes from women and build our own support networks. But that is actually fought against by conservatists/right-wingers, because lonely and lost men make cheap and easily influenced canon fodder.

    Who do you think runs the fucking world already...its us, men.

    So obviously nwe don't need much support that is just based on gender. Of the people doing well right now...it's mostly men.

    What separates us and the people who run the world isn't gender..its class. You can't build a supportive class network and only focus on young men.

    Who do you think runs the fucking world already...its us, men.

    I hope you realize how alienating a sentence like this is, for someone who is as stomped by society as many women are.

    This narrative is exactly what prevents any form of class solidarity, and I really can't understand how someone can write it in the same comment where class struggle is raised.

  • Every once in a while my uni has some interesting events (at least based on the description), public announcement sent to everyone, and the last sentence has almost always been some form of "women only". There is usually no gender neutral equivalents to these events and they're done in the name of gener equality. So I very much feel excluded by gender equality.

    Oh no, a place you couldn't go as a man?!?!? How could you ever survive?!?

  • Very well said. I wish I could articulate this as well as you have here.

    thank you!

  • 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

    Are you saying non white people don't know how to use the internet, I'm confused

  • 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.

    Sometimes these things are done for effect and aren't entirely serious. Please learn to tell the difference.

  • 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

  • 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.

  • 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.)

  • Is there even an incentive for solving men's problems? Feminism can use men to portray the ultimate evil; influencers can use that portrayal to criticize men, engage in rage bait, get attention and secure brand deals.

    Capitalism can appease women to promote consumerism wrapped in feminism. Corporations can capitalize on men's loneliness and low self-worth.

    I have noticed that men with low self-worth find meaning in work, which ultimately profits corporations, the money they will earn will be expanded on consumerisms/additions which again can be profited by capitalism and corporate.

    The rich can have as many resources as they want, so why solve it? Other than individuals (men) taking matters in their own hands and rescuing each other I don't think there is enough incentive to help men as community or whole

    Well said, I will note
    Women have been the target of beauty ads for over 100 years already. Media will make us feel ugly so we buy thier products. They feed on our insecurities for profit, and it's been this way for generations of women.

    In the last 10-20 years, I have definitely noticed an uptick with capitalization on men's insecurities. The whole manosphere schtick is about just that, exploiting insecurity.

    I can't reject the idea that with the current P2025 goals, and the billionaires pushing for their techno fudalism, that these things are related in some way.

  • Men are by default worth less really. One man can impregnate many women. If you look at society from a more cynical perspective as just resources, it makes sense that men are inherently far less worth than women.

    Value as people? Pfft, forget it. When was that ever practiced?

    I just want to point out, men are not by default worth less.

  • I get what you're saying, and you're right that blaming "the system" isn't the same as blaming every individual. But in practice, a lot of young men hear exactly that kind of blame coming at them personally. Maybe that’s not what’s intended, but it’s how it lands. Especially when the messaging is constant and there’s no room for nuance.

    Look at how often phrases like “male privilege” or “toxic masculinity” get thrown around without any real context. Not all of us grew up with privilege. Some of us were raised by single moms, worked garbage jobs, got chewed up by the military, or have been beaten down by life. So when someone says we’re part of some oppressive system we supposedly benefit from, it can feel like a gut punch. Not everyone takes it personally, but enough guys do that entire online communities have formed around that frustration.

    And here’s the thing. Academically, I get what patriarchy means. But I think we need to unpack it in a broader way. We should be asking who actually benefits from it. Because it sure as hell isn’t the guy sweating in a ditch or working a night shift at a warehouse. Patriarchy isn’t a blanket of power that covers all men equally. It’s a system that, like most systems, tends to reward the rich. The guy at the top. The one with the money, the connections, and the insulation from consequence. It’s less about gender in the real world and more about class, and when we ignore that, we miss the full picture.

    Not all critiques stay abstract either. I’ve seen feminist writers and influencers say things like “men are trash,” “all men are potential predators,” or “if you’re not actively dismantling the patriarchy, you’re part of the problem.” Maybe that’s not what academic feminism teaches, but it’s out there. Loud, viral, and shaping how these conversations are received.

    Just like you can say the healthcare system is broken without attacking nurses, you can criticize patriarchy without alienating people. But the way it's said matters. If someone walks away from that conversation feeling like they’ve just been blamed for everything, they are not going to stick around and talk. They’ll shut down, get bitter, and start listening to whoever does make them feel seen. Even if that person is a complete grifter or extremist.

    We have to stop just talking about young men like they’re a problem to be fixed. We need to start talking to them, honestly and with some respect. Otherwise, we are going to keep losing them to the worst voices out there.

    Especially when the messaging is constant and there’s no room for nuance.

    Like with #YesAllMen

  • 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.

    Well, after your 2nd post with the same thing I thought this is how you wanna communicate.

  • Get told you’re evil, and the cause of societies problems enough times, you start to believe it.

    My ex wife did it to me, always assumed the worst. So I became the worst. It wasn’t even a conscious decision. I just checked out.

    Simplistic take, but I see it every day.

    If you're hearing men are evil, you may be spending too much time online, or in the wrong places.

    You and your ex are not the whole of society. I've dated shit bags too, I've seen both women and men be shit bags. This is what needs to be avoided, you cant generalize the entire female population because you and your ex wife had a shit fallout. Women shouldn't generalize men in the same way either. I've seen it on the womens side, I call it out or leave the space.

    Sometimes people just arnt meant for eachother. Keep hope and find new love.

    It's good practice to try and not judge new people in your life, based on how an old one treated you. Learn red flags sure, learn your own boundaries, learn what things in life you value, but the whole population is not you, nor your ex.

    I completely agree if you call someone a bitch/dog/liar/asshole/whatever long enough, some people will respond by giving em what they ask. It's tough. I hope youve found healing post divorce and feel happier today

  • 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.

    I think its got merit. Do you recall Steve Bannon when he was just starting out and I quote : "In describing gamers, Bannon said, These guys, these rootless white males, had monster power. ... It was the pre-reddit. It's the same guys on (one of a trio of online message boards owned by IGE) Thottbot who were [later] on reddit" and other online message boards where the alt-right flourished, Bannon said"

    this was him talking about World of Warcraft....

  • 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

  • 108 Stimmen
    23 Beiträge
    0 Aufrufe
    exec@pawb.socialE
    I mean no more live view via the screen
  • 161 Stimmen
    7 Beiträge
    0 Aufrufe
    L
    I wonder if they could develop this into a tooth coating. Preventing biofilms would go a long way to preventing cavities.
  • 1k Stimmen
    95 Beiträge
    9 Aufrufe
    G
    Obviously the law must be simple enough to follow so that for Jim’s furniture shop is not a problem nor a too high cost to respect it, but it must be clear that if you break it you can cease to exist as company. I think this may be the root of our disagreement, I do not believe that there is any law making body today that is capable of an elegantly simple law. I could be too naive, but I think it is possible. We also definitely have a difference on opinion when it comes to the severity of the infraction, in my mind, while privacy is important, it should not have the same level of punishments associated with it when compared to something on the level of poisoning water ways; I think that a privacy law should hurt but be able to be learned from while in the poison case it should result in the bankruptcy of a company. The severity is directly proportional to the number of people affected. If you violate the privacy of 200 million people is the same that you poison the water of 10 people. And while with the poisoning scenario it could be better to jail the responsible people (for a very, very long time) and let the company survive to clean the water, once your privacy is violated there is no way back, a company could not fix it. The issue we find ourselves with today is that the aggregate of all privacy breaches makes it harmful to the people, but with a sizeable enough fine, I find it hard to believe that there would be major or lasting damage. So how much money your privacy it's worth ? 6 For this reason I don’t think it is wise to write laws that will bankrupt a company off of one infraction which was not directly or indirectly harmful to the physical well being of the people: and I am using indirectly a little bit more strict than I would like to since as I said before, the aggregate of all the information is harmful. The point is that the goal is not to bankrupt companies but to have them behave right. The penalty associated to every law IS the tool that make you respect the law. And it must be so high that you don't want to break the law. I would have to look into the laws in question, but on a surface level I think that any company should be subjected to the same baseline privacy laws, so if there isn’t anything screwy within the law that apple, Google, and Facebook are ignoring, I think it should apply to them. Trust me on this one, direct experience payment processors have a lot more rules to follow to be able to work. I do not want jail time for the CEO by default but he need to know that he will pay personally if the company break the law, it is the only way to make him run the company being sure that it follow the laws. For some reason I don’t have my usual cynicism when it comes to this issue. I think that the magnitude of loses that vested interests have in these companies would make it so that companies would police themselves for fear of losing profits. That being said I wouldn’t be opposed to some form of personal accountability on corporate leadership, but I fear that they will just end up finding a way to create a scapegoat everytime. It is not cynicism. I simply think that a huge fine to a single person (the CEO for example) is useless since it too easy to avoid and if it really huge realistically it would be never paid anyway so nothing usefull since the net worth of this kind of people is only on the paper. So if you slap a 100 billion file to Musk he will never pay because he has not the money to pay even if technically he is worth way more than that. Jail time instead is something that even Musk can experience. In general I like laws that are as objective as possible, I think that a privacy law should be written so that it is very objectively overbearing, but that has a smaller fine associated with it. This way the law is very clear on right and wrong, while also giving the businesses time and incentive to change their practices without having to sink large amount of expenses into lawyers to review every minute detail, which is the logical conclusion of the one infraction bankrupt system that you seem to be supporting. Then you write a law that explicitally state what you can do and what is not allowed is forbidden by default.
  • Apple acquires RAC7, its first-ever video game studio

    Technology technology
    1
    1
    0 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    2 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet
  • The Universal Tech Tree

    Technology technology
    1
    1
    21 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    2 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet
  • Fake It Till You Make It? Builder.ai’s $1.5B AI Scam Exposed

    Technology technology
    14
    1
    70 Stimmen
    14 Beiträge
    13 Aufrufe
    W
    Religion and fiat are always at the top
  • 154 Stimmen
    137 Beiträge
    7 Aufrufe
    brewchin@lemmy.worldB
    If you're after text, there are a number of options. If you're after group voice, there are a number of options. You could mix and match both, but "where everyone else is" will also likely be a factor in that kind of decision. If you want both together, then there's probably just Element (Matrix + voice)? Not sure of other options that aren't centralised, where you're the product, or otherwise at obvious risk of enshittifying. (And Element has the smell of the latter to me, but that's another topic). I've prepared for Discord's inevitable "final straw" moment by setting up a Matrix room and maintaining a self-hosted Mumble server in Docker for my gaming buddies. It's worked when Discord has been down, so I know it works. Yet to convince them to test Element...
  • 0 Stimmen
    2 Beiträge
    2 Aufrufe
    B
    ... robo chomo?