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.

So it's ok to hate men based on certain criteria you define? Even if it's due to (your) trauma, that still doesn't make it ok to project hatred towards men.

But there is no formal 'system' like the healthcare system. Anytime a man is perceived as being in charge (for whatever reason and context), it becomes the "patriarchy" and subject to feminist ridicule and hatred, thus generalising hatred on men.

So... What exactly is your definition of what should be posted in the technology community?

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

Of course it's possible. If they don't feel comfortable, then more questions need to be asked as to why they the individual do not and nothing will change until the focus is on individual feelings of those who <feel> marginalised so then inclusive communities can be fostered to work together, and not manipulating the world to pander to those who feel marginalised using anger, derision, and hatred. This leads to better inclusivity, better understanding, which in turn allows for better rules/systems to develop. They can not be fostered by force/anger/because we say so's.

constantly suffer any sort of discimination

"Constantly"? But they don't. They may feel they do due to some mental illness, manipulation by e.g. exclusionary groups that breed hatred of a target etc, but they don't "suffer" constantly. That's just polluted rhetoric in the Western world.

Exclusive communities don't "help" those people who think they're discriminated against to become inclusive, they only strengthen the isolation and strengthen the hatred against those they feel discriminated by, run by people who enjoy the power they have over their victims - the community members.

What some people seem to generally be writing in this thread is that women can have exclusive groups but men cannot because women don't like such groups, all without seeing the irony.

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

I personally browse this community for tech news and updates, this seems more like an American societal problem. Not something happening all around the world. Personally i won't be interested in reading the article because I live in Asia and the society here is completely different. This kind of misogyny is not seen by me.

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.

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

? what do you even mean?

you,'re right, it's not okay. But that can be something genuinely difficult to overcome. And it wouldnt be right to blame them the same way we blame bigots who never experienced anything similar.