‘Andrew Tate is a symptom, not the problem’: why young men are turning against feminism
www.theguardian.com
Teachers describe a deterioration in behaviour and attitudes that has proved to be fertile terrain for misogynistic influencers

Despite the triggering headline, this is a pretty good article that talks about how younger men are falling for this horseshit

  • bouh@lemmy.world
    1·
    11 months ago

    So we’re back at square one: you don’t understand, and either you don’t care or you don’t see the problem.

    I guess you’re left blaming men and social networks for turning young men mysoginistic fascists.

    • gapbetweenus@feddit.de
      1·
      11 months ago

      Sure, if pushback and arguments is not understanding and not caring in your book. You could also try to explain your opinion, if you believe I misunderstood you. That’s up to you buddy.

      guess you’re left blaming men and social networks for turning young men mysoginistic fascists.

      That is not my opinion at all. Except that social media is defenetly playing a role in spreading populist idea. But there is also an underlying reason for those ideas to become popular in the first place.

      • bouh@lemmy.world
        1·
        11 months ago

        You wrote it yourself, you don’t understand what I’m talking about eventhough I explained at length. It’s not up to me. I explained at length already.

        I understand the statistics the article is talking about. And I think I understand why. If you want to understand, you’ll need to make the effort.

        • gapbetweenus@feddit.de
          3·
          11 months ago

          You wrote it yourself, you don’t understand what I’m talking about eventhough I explained at length. It’s not up to me. I explained at length already.

          No, I wrote that I pushed back and made arguments. It’s your personal assessment, that I didn’t get your point. If you were genuinely interested in a conversation - you would try to understand my point and where the misunderstanding might be.

          I understand the statistics the article is talking about. And I think I understand why. If you want to understand, you’ll need to make the effort.

          And other people have other opinions on why and discuss those opinions. That’s why we are here. You can try making an effort to be understood and try to understand others or just be upset why nobody agrees with you.

          For example you wrote:

          guess you’re left blaming men and social networks for turning young men mysoginistic fascists.

          Wich is clearly misunderstanding of my opinion. So I just corrected you. It’s not that hard.

          • bouh@lemmy.world
            1·
            11 months ago

            You only answered one sentence in my whole comment and ignored the meaning of everything else. That’s what I mean. You even started with saying that I was sidetracking the conversation when I was actually refocusing it.

            If you want to make this an actual discussion, write your point instead of making it a quote ping pong.

            • gapbetweenus@feddit.de
              1·
              11 months ago

              Sure, if you are interested in my personal opinion I will gladly share. Just to be sure we are on the same page: we are talking about why the new right and conservatives are able to reach young men and where and why progressives fail to do so? Agree or did I miss something?

                • gapbetweenus@feddit.de
                  1·
                  11 months ago

                  We live in a time where everything is changing rapidly, which includes gender roles in society. Those stayed rather stable over longer periods of time, but industrialization and two consecutive world wars changed western societies rather drastically. Women became rather completely independent of men in economical aspects and simultaneously pushed for more rights and participation. But this also changed the relationship dynamic and what women seek in a relationship. While previous generation could look at their parents for role models, newer generation had to come up with their own. At the same time over the last 20 years people (in the west) started to grow up in a less certain and secure world. While at the same time internet arrived and changed a lot of ways we interact with other people, while at the same time providing populist with a perfect tool to reach their audience.

                  So to put it together, we live in a completely different and much more complex world form previous generations. It’s not just gender roles people are struggling with. And that is always a perfect time for populist to come around the corner and provide simple solutions. So populist and conman took on themself to sell the old romantic story of better times long gone by (conveniently their audience wasn’t alive back than, so they don’t know) just with modern tools. And easy answers that are sold in an entertaining way will always find buyers. Especially since it’s pushed by algorithms right down peoples throats.

                  • bouh@lemmy.world
                    1·
                    11 months ago

                    Populism works since Caesar, and there wasn’t Internet back then… Napoléon? Hitler and Mussolini? Do you know how it went in antic democratic Athen? Populism goes with democracy. Internet has nothing to do with it.

                    The society is more complex than ever? I read it at least twice: in a XVth century book, and in an antiquity one.

                    But this is beside the subject. You’ve said nothing here to explain why the reactionaries (the alt right, the far right, populism) are benefiting from this more than the left. Are you saying that the left can’t win? Are you saying that we should shut down Internet?

                    You need to go farther in your analysis. There always were political forces opposing each other. The progressists were wining for women until recently. Why is it changing when young are so much more informed and educated than people were 50 years ago?