worried about partner

Scott what is the female equivalent to Peterson, MRAs and incels, though? The man-hating, man resenting feminist is a stereotype, feminists have husbands, brothers, sons, male friends and relatives too. Feminism is not about hating or resenting men, it is about equality of opportunity for women and addressing systematic inequalities.

I think it is quite reasonable, for example, to resent the fact that women do the majority of the childcare and domestic work and are the main sufferers of poverty and austerity as a result. Does that mean I resent men? No, it means I see the structural inequalities and think a more equal society benefits everyone. Oh, and I would like a bit more leisure time.

Do I hate certain men who have harmed me? No, I have felt fear, sadness, and most recently anger, but these are private emotions and no, I do not hate these men and certainly not all men because of this.

These are individual examples, yes, and I note you acknowledge the mulitplicities of feminisms, but I challenge the view that there is an equivalence between even some strands of feminsim, and extreme incel and MRA discourse.

ScottCheggJnr it's not about accessing that stuff. I read all kinds of weird stuff online, I like to see what is out there. It's about watching stuff like that alone, and what effect it has on the relationship.
It doesn't sound like a discussion, it sounds like he has his secret online misogynistic persona. If he was watching this stuff with the OP and discussing it with her that's one thing, but if he's becoming resentful and hateful in secret and isn't open to discussion, and she seems nervous about having that discussion - you can see the actual content is only part of the issue. Where it's relevant is the fact she is a woman, and the questionable online content is misogynist. It would be similar if he was consuming white supremacist content and she was black. There's an element of the personal to it, no matter how dispassionately he might be viewing that content. Added to the fact he's consuming it alone, yes, I'd be worried.
Whether the content is justified or should exist isnt the issue.

I'm not disagreeing that there's pretty misogynistic stuff out there, but in many ways it's the flipside of the type of feminist who resents men. I can see why disadvantaged men become bitter when repeatedly feeling told they're privileged - it's a bit like how certain demographics are seemingly more at risk of falling for nationalistic/racist ideologies.

Yeah Oink, I agree. JP himself, controversial as he is, isn‘t the problem. Rather, what OP‘s partner made of it is. Reminds me of my ZeroHedge experience, which has mostly nonmainstream market analysis, geopolitics... controversial, libertarian, gossipy, tinfoil hatty maybe, but that is it. But in the comment section, some link to Storm front level stuff is never far away. Question is, when you stumble upon some such link and realize what is written there, do you go down that path or do you employ your critical thinking skills...

ScottCheggJnr
This is true, but the feminist line is that those men at the bottom are adversely affected by patriarchy.
Or that they fall into various demographic groups that can be covered off by intersectionalism.
I still think OP has got a problem on her hands, thinking about it more. She doesn't say her partner has started to disagree with her more or discuss his opinions or that they disagree etc, but that he's watching echo chamber misogynistic videos online. And if I was with someone who started getting obsessed with race, religion, conspiracy theories, misogyny, whatever - I'd be worried. If I was a member of the group the echo chamber polemics were ranting against, I'd take it pretty personally.
There's a discussion to be had on JP's influence, his overreach, where he is right and where he is wrong, but the issue the OP has is her partner is being pretty weird.

Tbh, I often find MRAs to be not that dissimilar from certain types of feminists (not all obviously as there are so many permutations).

Long lists of why their sex is the most oppressed etc.

To be fair, it seems to me that men often occupy the positions at the very bottom as well as at the top, and there are many men who aren't particularly privileged.

I agree with the pp who mentioned equality of opportunity Vs equality of outcomes. However people who rant about it often fail to realise equality of opportunity has to take into consideration the fact some people have a head start and some are held back. So for example offering a scholarship based on academic merit, assessed by an exam, favours well fed, well rested and well prepped kids over intelligent kids from chaotic homes, who might have more raw ability but who won't pass the exam. Conversely, if we take forced equality of outcomes to the extreme we end up with people in outcomes they didn't merit, with the well fed, well rested and well prepped being left behind through no fault of their own. The solution is often difficult and expensive, and that in this example would be to ensure all children had a chance of a decent primary and secondary education, weren't in overcrowded homes, had enough to eat and were parented well, and that the exams were not able to be crammed for.
At the moment those who lose out on opportunities ringfenced for ethnic minorities, women, or underprivileged people shout loudly and are echoed by the alt-right, but little mention is made of ensuring an equal starting point.

If I were OP, I‘d tell DH that I have watched ‚why women destroy Nations‘ and feel this requires a response. Then I‘d sit him through the movie ‚the downfall of Berlin - Anonyma‘ and remind him that it were men, German men, who started the war and thus brought this mass rape of ‚their‘ women upon them (leading some women to choose one particular protector/,lover’/rapist over being randomly raped by anyone, to keep their sanity), which happens to reflect a rather universal truth that said ‚women destroy nations’ video conveniently forgets.

Exactly what Juells said.

See if you can find ways to channel his anger toward more appropriate targets, combined with ideas for constructive action instead of just fuming.

He sounds like fucking hard work, why should anyone have to put the work into finding ways for him to channel his anger?

Wife work.

""See if you can find ways to channel his anger toward more appropriate targets, combined with ideas for constructive action instead of just fuming."
This sounds like good advise"
Have a look at the Men and Boys Coalition - its a group of charities, researchers etc who work on men's issues (ie things that affect boys and men disproportionately and we need to deal with as a society)but not in the anti-woman way you get with groups like Justice 4 men and boys.
www.menandboyscoalition.org.uk/

Op, from my own experience I say it's likely he had questionable views before hand but they didn't become apparent till recently. Men aren't likely to share their views on women with women until they become emboldened/lose all sense of boundaries in response to someone like Peterson.

Can you imagine getting taken in by these videos? I'd guess not, because you don't have the same latent misogyny.

Long story short, I have a pretty limited relationship with my formerly very close brother - someone who I'd also have described as intelligent and reasonable.

The vector in which JP and a lot of his adherents come into conflict with feminists is opposing the principle of equality of outcome (as opposed to equality of opportunity), as it stands many social programs instigated by progressive identity politics, of which modern feminism is a branch and expression of succeed in only sowing division and conflict as well as not actually succeeding in their stated objectives.

Burble burble burble burble burble burble burble burble burble burble burble burble burble burble burble burble burble burble burble burble burble burble burble burble burble burble burble burble burble burble burble burble burble burble burble burble burble burble burble burble burble burble burble burble burble burble burble burble burble burble burble burble

I have looked as the ‚how women destroy nations‘ vid, too.

The premise that women do not deserve the same freedom as men, but that it is something for men to give or take away is startling. The subjugation of women is indeed seen as the natural state.

Also, talk about ‚the plank in your own eye‘. Men destroy and subjugate other Nations (and by going to war and losing often their own) all the time, but of course, it is women‘s fault if they try to survive the shit men rain upon them.

I will say that I do find the attitude of some leftist women disconcerting (and I count myself on the left), when it comes to conservative Islam and its patriarchal Structures. (Men on the Left often hold similar views, but I‘d expect women to be more considerate of women‘s rights).
I have seen a Green (female) politician take the side of a conservative Islamic organization‘s representative against Ahmad Mansour, a (leftist) psychologist who works with muslim boys so that they learn to respect their sisters‘ boundaries and freedoms.

I have seen modern, hip ‚feminists‘ hush women‘s organizations, who pointed out the sexual violence in German refugee camps and the need for separate bathrooms - because racist discourse. (Nobody said these problems would not exist if the camps were filled with Westerners ffs).

There is a problem that some on the Left defer to conservative Islam too lightly, thereby leaving Muslims who want to open their ‚parallel societies‘ up in the cold. And that is bad for women.

But blaming the destruction of societies throughout history on women, when it was always men who called the shots and drowned everything in blood is preposterous. Talk about victim blaming.

Yes, our relationship is not great at the moment but surely the sensible things is to try and work things out and find mutual understanding rather than give up without even trying

Doing the wifework by taking on the job of doing all the trying, isn't going to change the fact that you are in a relationship with someone that hates women, of which you are one.

The last person I heard using that word was one of my low ability year 8 students, who when I challenged him was unable to describe either feminism or nazism (which is unsurprising as he is also unable to write in full sentences or reliably identify where to use capital letters). The cause of his choice of word? A girl had taken his pencil sharpener without asking.

Whoa, highIQ - I was actually reading and rationally considering your points until I hit ‘feminazi’. The last person I heard using that word was one of my low ability year 8 students, who when I challenged him was unable to describe either feminism or nazism (which is unsurprising as he is also unable to write in full sentences or reliably identify where to use capital letters). The cause of his choice of word? A girl had taken his pencil sharpener without asking. You’re not demonstrating your username very convincingly.

OP I hope you get sorted - sounds really distressing and hard to navigate.

Jew = that's transphobic!

It's coming to something when your typos are the most sensible part of your post, highIQs

Though I'm sure that the problem is just that my ladybrain isn't up to parsing your meanderings of utter genius.

I would also be worried in your shoes, OP. Is it an immediate LTB offence? Maybe, maybe not - only you can know that. I happily co-exist with a husband whose political opinions are often quite different from mine - we disagree on ecomomic principles, trade, militarism, the size of the welfare state and a whole bunch of stuff.

But if his world view involved him needing to believe I was inferior, or spending a lot of time listening to, reading and watching people with views that lead to some pretty chilling conclusions, then that would be a whole other kettle of fish. Our relationship couldn't survive that.

I'd quickly lose respect for someone who fell for JP's facile, one-sided pseudo-intellectual waffling, and failed to see the poorly-disguised anger and hostility behind it.

OP, Having looked up 'How Women Destroy Nations', it's clear that's pretty awful stuff. It may be too late to get him out of this weird fixation (assuming that's all it is, of course). But you could perhaps try relationship counselling - having to explain himself in front of a third party might shock/embarrass him into realising how indefensible these ideas are.

I find the emotional reaction to JP on here quite by some astounding, both from some critics, but particularly from supporter HighIQ.

Ironically, JP gives at times what amounts to ‚relationship advice‘, telling people that for a good marriage it is important to value what the partner does, not jump to what one is not happy about but value all the things partner contributed, and as PP said: self-restraint.

As for HighIQ Peterson has his blind spots. When he asks women why they would not prefer to have a career in fields they are good at (not STEM) he Shows his own biases. For one he ignores that those abilities are statistically distributed. Think of it as two overlapping Gaussian curves, then he ignores that it is not one feature that makes you good in STEM (e.g. Synthetic vs analytic thinking) and then he ignores that his own biases will be present in a lot of men in powerful positions in STEM, which is exactly what makes it harder for women, as their work is much more often doubted / minimized than that of male colleagues. There are studies that show the same paper goes through peer review more easily and with more praise and less censure, when the author names on the paper are male.

It is ironic HighQ, how emotional and ad hominem you got -‚Feminazi‘ - really? - while droning on about JP critics‘ irrationality.

The irony of using a username like HighIQ

Bullshit mate

Strange they bring spam too.

I do find it strange that some people set up alerts for mentions of JP on the Web. These threads are an infallible bat signal for devotees and they're sure to bring their daft, misogynist terminology with them. It's like a blast from the past - to about a decade ago.

I’ve read Jordan Peterson’s book and found it interesting. Most of what he writes about has nothing to do with sex or gender. But he also says some things which are absolute bollocks.

The Peterson thing is a bit of a red herring though, given that the OP’s DP is watching all kinds of woman hating stuff with names like ‘how women destroy nations.’

OP, you’ve two problems. First is that your partner has got into some kind of misogynist online bubble of conspiracy theorists. Secondly, your partner goes through multiple phases and lacks core values and a strong sense of who he is.

You’ve said he’s impressionable. If you go in and try and talk him out of it, how long will that last before he latches on to some other person with some other catchy idea and starts believing that?

He can be a very clever person and still have that core of who he is and what he values missing. And if that is the case, who are you actually in a relationship with?