Skip to content

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

Technology
290 99 0
  • 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.

    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

  • This is a sentiment often repeated by manosphere influencers and there’s no actual tangible evidence it exists and I think that’s the real issue.

    This is why I feel there is such a disconnect. I just have to open TikTok to see this, so if researchers are not finding evidence then I'm very curious how that's possible. Heck, you just need to look at the same masculinity influencer content they are talking about to see it, because it's not just them making shit up from nothing - they will often use clips of misandrist women to get their point across. So they basically find the evidence for you.

    During men's mental health awareness month this has been particularly easy to encounter as there was a trend of women making as much noise as possible with the caption "me when it's time to take a moment of silence for men's mental health".

    I'm glad that you never felt being progressive was at odds with being masculine. But many men, especially younger men, are struggling with this. The fact that you don't doesn't change that.

    This is a sentiment often repeated by manosphere influencers and there’s no actual tangible evidence it exists and I think that’s the real issue.

    This is why I feel there is such a disconnect. I just have to open TikTok to see this, so if researchers are not finding evidence then I’m very curious how that’s possible. Heck, you just need to look at the same masculinity influencer content they are talking about to see it, because it’s not just them making shit up from nothing - they will often use clips of misandrist women to get their point across. So they basically find the evidence for you.

    Why has no one here said "links"?

    People here just talk in circles instead of providing concrete support.

  • 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.

    Bring back periods in initialisms. U.N.

  • Excellent example, and I sincerely appreciate you engaging in good faith discussion!

    I agree that being masculine should by default not be a barrier - social or otherwise - from working with children.

    How do we begin to change that as a society?

    Although I can’t think of the solution myself, I also don’t see how advancing equality for feminine individuals would hold back equality for masculine individuals.

    As mentioned in another comment, a lot of these problems seem to stem from the enforcement of dated gender norms.

    This is one where I think the ball is very much in the women's court.

    I've seen a trend of vertical videos of fathers playing with their children, with a caption similar to "my latest ick."

    Millennial men are the most engaged cohort of dads in living memory, and women have responded pretty poorly to this.

  • 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.

    When a person has a systemic privilege, sometimes equality feels like oppression to them.

  • Let me guess, the men will have their internet traffic monitored & have curfews ??

    Oh & be put on a watchlist for merely talking in a raised voice against women.

    Because I kid you not, these are real suggestions

    And these are real words.

  • 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? Why should they be special? You’re arguing that because young men were given special status before we should bend over backwards by sacrificing others to their success? Women should continue to be underpaid, undervalued, treated as secondary to men’s success? Nevermind the barriers to any sort of professional and societal success as a woman to begin with.

    What social contract? Again, the one that puts male wants and needs ahead of others?

    That is what you’re arguing, no?

    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.

    Instead of stating anything at all respectfully and with a level head, you're shoving things down someone's throat (LMAO) for having something to say about what misogyny is to a group of people (some men) that understand where misogyny comes from, how young men internalize misogyny and then go into management to perpetuate it, and how's it's used in terms of capital markets to sell vibes to people (men and women) that feel attacked by a real issue.

    People like you are a dime a dozen.

  • 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.

    Instead of stating anything at all respectfully and with a level head, you're shoving things down someone's throat (LMAO) for having something to say about what misogyny is to a group of people (some men) that understand where misogyny comes from, how young men internalize misogyny and then go into management to perpetuate it, and how's it's used in terms of capital markets to sell vibes to people (men and women) that feel attacked by a real issue.

    People like you are a dime a dozen.

    That’s not what I said. That’s not what I said at all. And “falling for bullshit” was encompassed by the premise that men have been told since forever that they are special, not necessarily directly but often indirectly by omitting the difficulties others face. Of course you’d make up some redpill crap that even discussing the outgroups that somehow the act places them above men’s issues. But hey, whatever smug rationalizations you’d prefer for your narrative instead of discussing the substance of what was written.

  • Bring back periods in initialisms. U.N.

    100% lol

  • No, this is a misrepresentation of my argument.

    From the 70's to a few months ago, governments have made it a fundamental priority to elevate women and minorities, and it's worked. (Go look at the demographics of college enrollment, at least here in the US, if you don't believe me.)

    I'm arguing that to fix misogyny you have to fix the fundamental economic crises affecting young people.

    But I appreciate that you were very quick to demonstrate the point I made about the fashionability of blaming young men and pretending these problems simply don't exist.

    Way to misrepresent my argument. Thanks for the downvotes without trying to have a discussion.

    My opinion is that society in general has elevated men above others. That is still mostly true, from entertainment to employment. Yes, there is no argument that there has been effort, more or less to offer others some of the same benefits men get, but it’s still token in many ways.

    Now pay attention, I said society, I did not blame men for this (though they had a hand by aiding and abetting the status quo), there’s an huge cultural momentum behind male over-representation.

    As far as the economy, a nebulous “we need to fix it” is gesturing nebulously at an economy that effects everyone, but it’s hard to take you seriously when you only discuss the economy needing to be fixed in the context dealing only with young men.

  • That statistics is bullshit that would be 66% of all young men

    It depends how broad their "masculine influencer" definition is...

    I think whether it actually matters would depend more on if they're consuming "masculine influencer" content exclusively , without any concept of other world views.

  • 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.

    The dumb dad is fucking disgusting, it's in pretty much every animated show for kids.

  • I feel like a Cassandra since I was warning about this for years now.

    The gender equality narrative got too focused on excluding men specifically, instead of including the less represented gender in each profession. Somehow the idea was that men are privileged in the system and women oppressed, while the truth is that both men and women are oppressed.

    Divide and conquer was a small step away from that point.

    Same, I've been saying it for a decade that the current anti-men direction can only mean that young men will push against that and not in a nice way.

    Well, guess who was right? Feminism has come all the way from something great and noble towards utter shit.

  • Yes, it is a choice. However one of the biggest problems is that so many of the good choices are gone. I’m talking about the positive social institutions and community organizations people used to belong to. The third spaces.

    Communities have fragmented. Neighbours hate each other. Both of my neighbours hate our family. One is a childless, alcoholic husband and wife who also hate each other (they used to be nice years ago) who also hate us and give us creepy looks all the time. The other is green lawn-obsessed neighbour who hates us for the pine trees we have growing on our property and refuse to cut down (at our own expense) to suit their tastes.

    We’re a society of severely mentally ill, isolated, confused, and angry people. Our villages and communities are all gone. We’re all a bunch of islands unto ourselves.

    I like saying that society is a hot gas.

    It is a mass of small particles that barely interact with one another, heated up by the heat of anger and hate, floating in a large space aimlessly.

    My type of society would be a liquid, where particles are free to move but close to other particles.

  • 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.

    And what about the women in that same boat? I'm confused by your argument

  • And what about the women in that same boat? I'm confused by your argument

    I'd suggest you read the entire thread.

  • 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...

    Masculine influencer. Another masculine influencer. Not going for "male influencer" here that's just the top of my head list of people who a) happen to end up in my youtube feed and b) look really cool to pubescent boys. Silverback energy: Big, strong, just, kind.

  • Way to misrepresent my argument. Thanks for the downvotes without trying to have a discussion.

    My opinion is that society in general has elevated men above others. That is still mostly true, from entertainment to employment. Yes, there is no argument that there has been effort, more or less to offer others some of the same benefits men get, but it’s still token in many ways.

    Now pay attention, I said society, I did not blame men for this (though they had a hand by aiding and abetting the status quo), there’s an huge cultural momentum behind male over-representation.

    As far as the economy, a nebulous “we need to fix it” is gesturing nebulously at an economy that effects everyone, but it’s hard to take you seriously when you only discuss the economy needing to be fixed in the context dealing only with young men.

    Respectfully, your hostile and reactionary tone demonstrated quite well that you had no intention of discussing things in a rational manner. You toss around terms like 'redpill' like they're Halloween candy, and it demonstrates that even having the discussion is enough to set off your temper. I even gave you an example of the imbalance in economic opportunity favoring women and minorities, and you just ignored it.

    And that's fine.

    Be angry, but the least you could do is try to be productive.

    The problem is the systemic impoverishment of young men is the root cause of all this, and that is what needs to be fixed if you want to fix misogyny.

  • I’m sure it varies from country to country, but in the US women could not study medicine until the late 1800’s

    In Germany at the moment around two thirds of medicine students are women and I wouldn't be surprised if it's the similar in most western countries.

    It's a little over 50% in the US, and is largely due to women out performing men in school.

  • 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.

    Instead of stating anything at all respectfully and with a level head, you're shoving things down someone's throat (LMAO) for having something to say about what misogyny is to a group of people (some men) that understand where misogyny comes from, how young men internalize misogyny and then go into management to perpetuate it, and how's it's used in terms of capital markets to sell vibes to people (men and women) that feel attacked by a real issue.

    People like you are a dime a dozen.

    I think this person sees someone pointing out the problems facing young men and automatically thinks 'incel'. It can be disorienting to see people who don't hate women advocating for young men.

  • Uber, Lyft oppose some bills that aim to prevent assaults during rides

    Technology technology
    12
    94 Stimmen
    12 Beiträge
    0 Aufrufe
    F
    California is not Colorado nor is it federal No shit, did you even read my comment? Regulations already exist in every state that ride share companies operate in, including any state where taxis operate. People are already not supposed to sexually assault their passengers. Will adding another regulation saying they shouldn’t do that, even when one already exists, suddenly stop it from happening? No. Have you even looked at the regulations in Colorado for ride share drivers and companies? I’m guessing not. Here are the ones that were made in 2014: https://law.justia.com/codes/colorado/2021/title-40/article-10-1/part-6/section-40-10-1-605/#%3A~%3Atext=§+40-10.1-605.+Operational+Requirements+A+driver+shall+not%2Ca+ride%2C+otherwise+known+as+a+“street+hail”. Here’s just one little but relevant section: Before a person is permitted to act as a driver through use of a transportation network company's digital network, the person shall: Obtain a criminal history record check pursuant to the procedures set forth in section 40-10.1-110 as supplemented by the commission's rules promulgated under section 40-10.1-110 or through a privately administered national criminal history record check, including the national sex offender database; and If a privately administered national criminal history record check is used, provide a copy of the criminal history record check to the transportation network company. A driver shall obtain a criminal history record check in accordance with subparagraph (I) of paragraph (a) of this subsection (3) every five years while serving as a driver. A person who has been convicted of or pled guilty or nolo contendere to driving under the influence of drugs or alcohol in the previous seven years before applying to become a driver shall not serve as a driver. If the criminal history record check reveals that the person has ever been convicted of or pled guilty or nolo contendere to any of the following felony offenses, the person shall not serve as a driver: (c) (I) A person who has been convicted of or pled guilty or nolo contendere to driving under the influence of drugs or alcohol in the previous seven years before applying to become a driver shall not serve as a driver. If the criminal history record check reveals that the person has ever been convicted of or pled guilty or nolo contendere to any of the following felony offenses, the person shall not serve as a driver: An offense involving fraud, as described in article 5 of title 18, C.R.S.; An offense involving unlawful sexual behavior, as defined in section 16-22-102 (9), C.R.S.; An offense against property, as described in article 4 of title 18, C.R.S.; or A crime of violence, as described in section 18-1.3-406, C.R.S. A person who has been convicted of a comparable offense to the offenses listed in subparagraph (I) of this paragraph (c) in another state or in the United States shall not serve as a driver. A transportation network company or a third party shall retain true and accurate results of the criminal history record check for each driver that provides services for the transportation network company for at least five years after the criminal history record check was conducted. A person who has, within the immediately preceding five years, been convicted of or pled guilty or nolo contendere to a felony shall not serve as a driver. Before permitting an individual to act as a driver on its digital network, a transportation network company shall obtain and review a driving history research report for the individual. An individual with the following moving violations shall not serve as a driver: More than three moving violations in the three-year period preceding the individual's application to serve as a driver; or A major moving violation in the three-year period preceding the individual's application to serve as a driver, whether committed in this state, another state, or the United States, including vehicular eluding, as described in section 18-9-116.5, C.R.S., reckless driving, as described in section 42-4-1401, C.R.S., and driving under restraint, as described in section 42-2-138, C.R.S. A transportation network company or a third party shall retain true and accurate results of the driving history research report for each driver that provides services for the transportation network company for at least three years. So all sorts of criminal history, driving record, etc checks have been required since 2014. Colorado were actually the first state in the USA to implement rules like this for ride share companies lol.
  • Build Custom WordPress Themes Easily with WP 1-Click

    Technology technology
    1
    2
    0 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    2 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet
  • 137 Stimmen
    29 Beiträge
    2 Aufrufe
    J
    Yeah, I was going to say that TV wasn't much of a news source to begin with. The real issue is that social media for news is probably worse - now everyone can be spoonfed the news they want.
  • 36 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    0 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet
  • Is Google about to destroy the web?

    Technology technology
    86
    1
    241 Stimmen
    86 Beiträge
    28 Aufrufe
    B
    I hate google enough to pay 5$/mo for Kagi - it puts a smile on my face everytime I go to search and know that I'm not supporting google
  • 1 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    1 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet
  • 137 Stimmen
    16 Beiträge
    7 Aufrufe
    H
    My ports are on the front of the router. No backdoors for me, checkmate Atheists.
  • 148 Stimmen
    8 Beiträge
    3 Aufrufe
    L
    Whenever these things come up you always hear "then the company won't survive!" CEO and managers make bank somehow but it doesn't matter that the workers can't live on that wage. It's always so weird how when workers actually take a pay cut, that the businesses get used to it. When the CEOs get bonuses they have to get used to that too.