Why is the manosphere on the rise? UN Women sounds the alarm over online misogyny
Technology
324
Beiträge
110
Kommentatoren
0
Aufrufe
-
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?
-
Having been homeless before, the resources were not different for me or my partner, male, at the time. Separate sleeping quarters obviously. But the same exact resources.
Genuinely what are you talking about...Where is this?
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.
-
Eh. Nothin' to lose.
What are men’s problems? What problem do we suffer that also doesn’t affect women?
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.
Same stereotypes which isolate men and make them suffer in silence and alone, making showing any sign of weakness a fatal mistake.
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?
I 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.
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?
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.
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.
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.
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?
What commenter above you is alluding to is the point of the whole post - 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.
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.
'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.
All in all, as far as I understand the comment above you, all boils down to:
- 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.
Which are answers to question at the beggining:
Is there even an incentive for solving men’s problems?
IMO, 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.
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.
-
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.)
-
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.
Also the Simpsons, family guy, American dad etc.
-
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.
Lol, you aren't accepting their argument because they didn't say please and thank you?
You are accepting that women are a more disadvantaged labour class, but are being a prissy little prick because they are upset about it? That's the softest shit I've ever seen.
Show some class solidarity for your sisters, the most disadvantaged need to be lifted first. Stop whining like a 4 year old, we men have every advantage in this system compared to our counterparts. Though I'd hardly acknowledge nearly anyone in this thread as a man. Weak shit.
Though I’d hardly acknowledge nearly anyone in this thread as a man. Weak shit.
Speaking of toxic masculinity....
-
Having been homeless before, the resources were not different for me or my partner, male, at the time. Separate sleeping quarters obviously. But the same exact resources.
Genuinely what are you talking about...Where is this?
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?
-
The dumb dad is fucking disgusting, it's in pretty much every animated show for kids.
And sitcoms.
-
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.
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.
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.
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
