And as usual, in an act of irony, men are the biggest misandrist, and my biggest source of pain. I don't like this social contract where I get fucked over no matter what. I'm just going to abandon it, and lead a massive exile with me. I already have a solar panel, and plan to get more.

it does not help that women basically treat men as super-predators.

let's do without these stupid kinds of generalizations, alright?
Very few women actually have resentments towards (all) men. And many of them do so as a result of trauma.

Like what privilege? Not being able to vent or show negative emotions ever? Being shit on for having a penis? Fear and loathing? Being first one to be drafted for war? Being threated as an expendable resource that has no right to complain about anything, and that should just shut up, and work in some hellish factory until their health gives out, then die?

Power isn't everything you know. It's why I'm more than happy to become as independent of society as possible. Why I'm happy to see the nukes fall. You just want to use me, and leave a corpse behind. Just want to accuse me of other men's crimes.

Well good luck ever manipulating me again, now that I know what's up.

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.

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.

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.

That's because most of the misandry is ironically caused by men. You can't fucking breathe the way you want, without another man finding a weakness in that, and shitting all over you.

Cool that someone is at least against generalizations.

Better paid jobs are usually more risky, competitive and harsh with short deadlines, that why the are paid more than jobs where you can just do your shift and happily go home like daycare or teaching. It happens that men simply naturally want the adrenaline and excitement that comes with the first because they want to prove themselves.

If you look into history, men where those that went hunting which can be dangerous, while women were those who collected berries and nursed children, not much danger there.

As a man, I actually thing women are crazy for not wanting to keep being a houswife a thing. It's like being the CEO of the house. WFH guaranteed, you are the one making plans and deadlines, minimal stress, and you have probably enough spare time to do whatever you want as a hobby on the side (unless you have small children). I truly don't see the downside, I would thrive in home improvement and gardening....

Spenders? That's not what it's all about. You simply need less men to keep humanity going, and you basically just exist to do the heavy lifting, and protect women from beasts (that are no longer a threat). So if you are born a man, you lost the lottery. You are forced to engage in dumb, detrimental behavior, or be ostracized. You are forced on a death march.

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.

You went into extreme edge cases to prove your point. Of course both genders can do both, but why would I want to put the burden of getting the kids in check with my wife when I am supposed to be the man in the house? Will I just put the burden on my wife and say "hey, you are mature and strong and independent - handle it and let me get a beer".

As for the emotional part - women can teach kids empathy, men can teach kids not to cry immediately if you fall down once. Both are emotional aspects but they are exactly the opposite aspects and complement each other. Kids do need both. Women happen to be better at empathy, and men tend to be better at regulating emotions.

Whats the problem in gender roles, if it suits the people? Why force people into a different role, that they don't want to be in?

we should change our own environments so that they don’t feel the need anymore to have their own space.

"we" unequivocally means "men", right? And how is this done... by preventing exclusive communities and only having inclusive communities. "Online" and "safe spaces" are oxymorons.

but why would I want to put the burden of getting the kids in check with my wife when I am supposed to be the man in the house?

You want to be a housekeeper? More power to you then but if your wife is an engineer and earns the money why do you suppose she can't teach kids about it?

She's the housekeeper and does tell the kids "just wait until your father gets home"? She's training them to hate you, alienate them from you, that's a giant red flag. Make sure to connect up with them or you're going to have a hard time in custody court.

As for the emotional part - women can teach kids empathy, men can teach kids not to cry immediately if you fall down once.

Nope. Both are very capable of doing both. Again: Please don't project your hangups onto others. Female fainting is just as much a trained behaviour (ultimately, an act the actor believes themselves), as male callousness.

Whats the problem in gender roles, if it suits the people? Why force people into a different role, that they don’t want to be in?

I'm not forcing anyone here, it's you who's drawing lines in the sand, "men shall do this, women shall do that".

Boys, on average, like to wrestle a hell a lot more than girls, are interested in mechanical things more, when playing they care about outside things. Girls, on average, develop their fine motor skills well before boys, and their play focusses on social scenarios, in a bounded (inside) context.

Let them learn in the order and manner as they see fit, that's absolutely fine and natural. But you're an adult, not a kid, your competencies should, by now, have expanded beyond that initial set and focus. 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.

And how are women pushed out of "man jobs"?

And how are we fixing that?

Is it bosses that aim to have male coworkers turning down women? How is that different than bosses wanting artificially 50/50 turning down men?

Is it not being represented in advertising? How is that different than what happens now. Where most advertising displays just women? Or if there is both a man and a woman, the woman is usually centered in the picture or doing a more important/powerful role.

By "encouraging" women in the workplace, what you see is things being done to men that you complain was done to women.

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.

Yep, and this is how marginalised communities are formed. Same with the text below.

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 men's fault, or society’s fault, or anyone but you. That stuff spreads fast because it gives people something to belong to.

And is why both POV are bad and should be removed from Lemmy. The owners of such communities get off on having their own army, not that they think they're helping the cause.

by "we" I mean everyone who has the ability to do so.

And how is this done... by preventing exclusive communities and only have inclusive communities.

you cannot just claim a community is inclusive. When members in it don't feel comfortable, then it is not inclusive for them.

We just have to let people who constantly suffer any sort of discrimination have their own space. When they feel welcome outside of it they'll feel less need to be in their own "exclusive" space. Blaming them for segregating themselves is thinking of it the wrong way.

"Online" and "safe spaces" are oxymorons.

I don't think they are. The fediverse is a great tool for it. There are servers that have the intention to offer a safe environment for certain identities.

Nothing against the article but why is this in /c/Technology ?

If something has word online/Internet on it does not mean it has something to do with technology.

YEAh and because a woman gave birth to that man, it's women's fault.!!1

Logic is good.

We have failed our men.

These are the type of feminists the world needs.