Skip to content

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

Technology
351 111 1.7k
  • 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.

    Hiring someone over someone else purely because of their race or sex is discrimination, racism, and/or sexism.

    It sounds to me like you’re talking about jobs that illegal immigrants do, especially once you brought up cheap labor. Jobs like those don’t have diversity quotas, because they almost entirely hire from the “diversity” pool.

  • There no way Andrew Tate is cool at a party.

    Someone watches his shit.

  • 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.

    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.

  • in my experience it was the kids in the front whining "Why come they have a black student union and we dont have a white one waaaaah! i am now a victim! DEI! why is that white girl dating a minority waaaaah!"

    the victim complex is strong with them, like the dark side of the force it seduces them. (nice I got some white boys angry)

    There are tons of young black men in the manosphere, too. Or else with whom manosphere ideas resonate. Don't be racist.

  • 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.

    You are making an excellent point right up until your last paragraph. What 15 year old boy wants to be Mr Fucking Rogers? Sure, maybe they want to be him in like 40 years (but only the version of him who was secretly a marine sniper covered in tattoos everywhere his sweaters hid). What does a 15 year old boy who is vulnerable to the manosphere want? He wants to get paid and get laid.

    Trying to shove a 15 year old's raging hormones and desire for rebellion and independence into a Mr Rogers box will only lead to... more rebellion. Give the kids role models who are good people, who also succeed at things they care about.

  • Manosphere men fall pray to the XY problem: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XY_problem?wprov=sfla1.

    They demand the X which is a girlfriend and money in order to solve problem Y which is a lack of social connectedness and decreasing standards of living.

    They believe themselves entitled to X because of that. Actually, everyone (including Manosphere men) is entitled to a solution to Y which affects everyone appart from the bourgois (who still lack social connectedness) but the solution to that is Z which is a wholesale restructuring of our society and economy to one that is maximally democratic and socialist.

    Was with you until that last bit. I'm not opposed to democratic reforms or testing socialist ideas piecemeal. But massive restructurings of society towards utopia have.... a history....

    [Hint: lots of people die]

  • 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.

    I haven't heard men say shit this stupid my whole life. This isn't 'tradition' it's a growing hate movement.

  • 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.

    Yes. Correct. But talk to a boy in Jr. High. They aren't as smart about this as you might hope.

  • 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.

    “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.

  • Succeed at capitalism? That's a fool's errand. Better to point them to the real enemy which is the bourgeoisie and the real solution which is for the working class to form democratic organizations aimed at overthrowing the ruling class and form worker led democratic ways of organizing society.

    Succeed at capitalism? That’s a fool’s errand

    I did it. Lots of people I know did it. The main trick is cutting toxic people out of your life, moving to a better place, and making new friends who are also dedicated to succeeding.

  • “men are simple creatures”, “keep your belly fully and balls empty and we’re happy” ect, like, is that not demeaning to men?

    Personally, not inherently, no. And definitely not in context, context here being the existence of "men are primitive" and "men only want one thing and it's disgusting". Is it reductive, yes, but that doesn't mean it's wrong.

    Catch some fish, chop some wood, smoke the critters, unclog the sink so that stubbles will actually flush instead of cling to the rim, annoying the wife (for incomprehensible reasons, but a well-functioning drain is its own reward), be a rollercoaster for the kids, kick back on the sofa, get your balls emptied, if that's not a satisfying day then you have issues.

    Complexity is not a good in itself. Be only as complex as is necessary to stay simple.

    But as you describe, is that every man?

    Certainly not.

    I'm mom and I'm the rollercoaster, the house repair gal, and I have a higher drive than my husband, though I would never describe our booty time as, "getting my balls emptied" or some female equivalent. It's more like, activity time with my best friend, alas,

    You just sterotyped an entire cohort of people in your description, I hope you understand that.

    I refuse to sterotype my fellow women. I know women, we are all different, and I myself, don't hit many of the sterotypical markers.

    You describe your version of the every man's day here, then say any man who lives differently has issues, because that day isn't satisfying for them. Is that kind towards your fellow men you think?

  • Was with you until that last bit. I'm not opposed to democratic reforms or testing socialist ideas piecemeal. But massive restructurings of society towards utopia have.... a history....

    [Hint: lots of people die]

    Lots of people die in the United States as it is. Homelessness is rising drastically. How long until you're next to be put out onto the street? Your employer can't wait until they can automate your job and fire you.

    Also, the United States has a long history of carrying out genocide even prior to Gaza. Odd given your fallacious implication that capitalism is peaceful

  • 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?

    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.

    I've got a song for you.

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

    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.

  • I tell the guys I’ve spoken with that those ‘entertainers’ are poison, chipping away at their empathy and compassion and pushing them to more isolation and fear - and that they need to be critical of what the influencers claim, and show curiosity for the community around them and engage with it rather than accept the simplistic charade.

    Serious question, and I'm not trying to troll here. Do you tell this same piece of advice to your female friends about more radical feminist content creators?

    I haven't seen any radical female content creators personally, and there certainly doesn't seem to be a large industry of them forming. If there is they're very well hidden and poorly advertised.

    But if that happens I'd absolutely be for talking people away from listening to them.

  • 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.

  • 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.

    Not false at all but a big part imo is also learned, it's like if I have 10 problems, 5 of which are totally my fault, and the only one talking about the other 5 says "ALL your problems are not your fault."

    It's like one person actually fully reflected their experiences back to them, but then peddled a ton of lies along with it.

  • 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

  • Hughes.net?

    Technology technology
    26
    1
    6 Stimmen
    26 Beiträge
    0 Aufrufe
    bombomom@lemmy.worldB
    If you are within visual sight of the mainland, you can use a pair of point-to-point communication dishes to get internet from the mainland and beam it to yourself. These dishes, only having to communicate over a few miles and with direct line-of-sight, are pretty reliable and not terribly expensive.
  • How Apple’s iOS 26 and Google’s Android 16 Will Change Our Phones

    Technology technology
    17
    8 Stimmen
    17 Beiträge
    145 Aufrufe
    adespoton@lemmy.caA
    The one thing I’m continually annoyed about though is battery management. Why, in this day and age, do we not have a smartphone that can last on a single charge for a week? Instead, after a year or two of use, the devices with a glued in battery can barely last 8 hours on a charge. Doesn’t seem all that smart.
  • Dutch MPs want citizens to own the copyright to their faces

    Technology technology
    5
    157 Stimmen
    5 Beiträge
    49 Aufrufe
    I
    Not enough, we own our identify far more than mere copyright (which should be abolished). The protection and ownership of our biodata should be built on copyright. It should be a standalone protection.
  • Bluesky is rolling out age verification in the UK

    Technology technology
    40
    1
    165 Stimmen
    40 Beiträge
    306 Aufrufe
    3dcadmin@lemmy.relayeasy.com3
    you know that the new online safety act mandates age verification for pretty much anything don't you?
  • 430 Stimmen
    42 Beiträge
    201 Aufrufe
    B
    I'm not sure who you're referencing to, but I'm assuming you're not referring to me, because I despise the IDF
  • What editor or IDE do you use and why?

    Technology technology
    37
    1
    26 Stimmen
    37 Beiträge
    170 Aufrufe
    T
    KEIL, because I develop embedded systems.
  • Catbox.moe got screwed 😿

    Technology technology
    40
    55 Stimmen
    40 Beiträge
    257 Aufrufe
    archrecord@lemm.eeA
    I'll gladly give you a reason. I'm actually happy to articulate my stance on this, considering how much I tend to care about digital rights. Services that host files should not be held responsible for what users upload, unless: The service explicitly caters to illegal content by definition or practice (i.e. the if the website is literally titled uploadyourcsamhere[.]com then it's safe to assume they deliberately want to host illegal content) The service has a very easy mechanism to remove illegal content, either when asked, or through simple monitoring systems, but chooses not to do so (catbox does this, and quite quickly too) Because holding services responsible creates a whole host of negative effects. Here's some examples: Someone starts a CDN and some users upload CSAM. The creator of the CDN goes to jail now. Nobody ever wants to create a CDN because of the legal risk, and thus the only providers of CDNs become shady, expensive, anonymously-run services with no compliance mechanisms. You run a site that hosts images, and someone decides they want to harm you. They upload CSAM, then report the site to law enforcement. You go to jail. Anybody in the future who wants to run an image sharing site must now self-censor to try and not upset any human being that could be willing to harm them via their site. A social media site is hosting the posts and content of users. In order to be compliant and not go to jail, they must engage in extremely strict filtering, otherwise even one mistake could land them in jail. All users of the site are prohibited from posting any NSFW or even suggestive content, (including newsworthy media, such as an image of bodies in a warzone) and any violation leads to an instant ban, because any of those things could lead to a chance of actually illegal content being attached. This isn't just my opinion either. Digital rights organizations such as the Electronic Frontier Foundation have talked at length about similar policies before. To quote them: "When social media platforms adopt heavy-handed moderation policies, the unintended consequences can be hard to predict. For example, Twitter’s policies on sexual material have resulted in posts on sexual health and condoms being taken down. YouTube’s bans on violent content have resulted in journalism on the Syrian war being pulled from the site. It can be tempting to attempt to “fix” certain attitudes and behaviors online by placing increased restrictions on users’ speech, but in practice, web platforms have had more success at silencing innocent people than at making online communities healthier." Now, to address the rest of your comment, since I don't just want to focus on the beginning: I think you have to actively moderate what is uploaded Catbox does, and as previously mentioned, often at a much higher rate than other services, and at a comparable rate to many services that have millions, if not billions of dollars in annual profits that could otherwise be spent on further moderation. there has to be swifter and stricter punishment for those that do upload things that are against TOS and/or illegal. The problem isn't necessarily the speed at which people can be reported and punished, but rather that the internet is fundamentally harder to track people on than real life. It's easy for cops to sit around at a spot they know someone will be physically distributing illegal content at in real life, but digitally, even if you can see the feed of all the information passing through the service, a VPN or Tor connection will anonymize your IP address in a manner that most police departments won't be able to track, and most three-letter agencies will simply have a relatively low success rate with. There's no good solution to this problem of identifying perpetrators, which is why platforms often focus on moderation over legal enforcement actions against users so frequently. It accomplishes the goal of preventing and removing the content without having to, for example, require every single user of the internet to scan an ID (and also magically prevent people from just stealing other people's access tokens and impersonating their ID) I do agree, however, that we should probably provide larger amounts of funding, training, and resources, to divisions who's sole goal is to go after online distribution of various illegal content, primarily that which harms children, because it's certainly still an issue of there being too many reports to go through, even if many of them will still lead to dead ends. I hope that explains why making file hosting services liable for user uploaded content probably isn't the best strategy. I hate to see people with good intentions support ideas that sound good in practice, but in the end just cause more untold harms, and I hope you can understand why I believe this to be the case.
  • 4 Stimmen
    12 Beiträge
    66 Aufrufe
    guydudeman@lemmy.worldG
    Yeah, I don’t know how they’re doing it. They’re using some “zero trust” system. It’s beyond me.