The manosphere to man, is as feminism to women

I can answer your question on education alone. Broadly in the UK there has been a push back into a grading system based on exams etc. The initial move to more coursework in the UK was done for a range of reasons (not explicitly to favour girls) but the move back to less coursework was done explicitly for the reasons you mention: Because it was disadvantaging boys. However, even under a system more designed to help boys (exams you can cram for) girls are still outperforming. I don't think that means boys are useless or that we should stop trying to even things up for them however.

Broadly speaking, the educational model of "large groups of children sit in silence and listen to what the teacher is saying" disadvantages a larger number of boys than girls. But that's a very old model of teaching - it goes back to a time before girls were even allowed/thought capable of learning. The problem is it's also the cheapest way of teaching children so it's never going completely away. Alternative methods of support -, one to one teaching assistants for those that need it etc all cost money which requires more to be spent on education. Which is actually more of a voting issue for women than men. I suppose one of the issues I have with "the manosphere" (I agree with you it's too broad a term) is that I have never really heard any of them advocate for things that are proven to improve boys educational prospects. In fact spending on teachers/TAs is decried by the more toxic end of the manosphere since those TAs are more likely to be female and therefore it's a pro-female policy.

If you look at how much is spent on boys in education than on girls, you will likely find more is spent on boys. They are more likely to need one to one support, more likely to need specialist schools, more likely to cause disruption, more likely to use the most recreational space (football fields). I'm fine with that. But if you were to take an "equality of opportunity not equality of outcome" attitude you would argue we should severely reduce this spending on boys to make it fair. But I have never seen feminists arguing for that. I have seen "manosphere" bros argue that though when they perceive girls/women/other groups are the ones getting the "advantage".

In my opinion (man here) there is much less political solidarity amongst men compared to women.

My theory is that this may be because inequality amongst men is greater than amongst women (more billionaires, more street homeless and prisoners)

This is my experience too and in the past such men often quietly disappeared from education by 14 or 15 to go and learn a trade under a family member. It was certainly the case for my dad who made a great career in the trades - and who has very obvious ADHD which obviously would not have been diagnosed in the seventies.

In what way does feminism advocate for the abuse of men or violence against men?

Please enlighten me or knock off trying to legitimise the manosphere as having equivalence with feminism.

I'm not sure your premises are sound, OP, I am not convinced that peopel do really see those things as equivalent.

With regard to education - are we saying that if a policy disadvantages one sex it only matters if that was the intent?

I've been there, and I can't deny this.

No, the manosphere is a toxic alternative universe populated by bros who hate women.

I spent a bit of time in the manosphere 15-20 years ago, I'd say it has no equivalence with feminism. I was always interested in how fathers were treated in the family courts, and this was a big part of the grievance industry that makes up the manosphere. Easy to cultivate and wallow in quite a bit of sharp judgmentalism, as I certainly did back then.
However, despite quite a bit of negativity, the First Wave Manosphere types (Fathers For Justice etc) don't have a lot in common with the current Second Wave ones, the pure online hyper toxic Tate/influencers take.
For me, taking a big interest in trans ideology a few years after divesting myself of the Manosphere, and by association becoming aware so much more of the female take on things, plus a Jordan Peterson type approach to buck up my ideas and think more clearly rather than wallow in ultra cynicism that informed my views on all things feminism up until 15-20 years ago, means the Manosphere holds no interest for me anymore.
I've also got older, got married, speak to way more women than I ever did in my bachelor days, whether friends, relatives of my wife, my clients, female employees, and even the women on MN (yes, you lot out there, lol).
If I told you all that what got me glitchy 15-20 years ago was...nearly every newsreader or public media face being a female, and wall to wall Kardashians.
I kinda cringe when I think what used to occupy my thoughts negatively.
I don't think I liked Julie Bindel at all, either. Lol.

Sorry for the derail into educational policy - I found something about the motivation for changing modes of assessment, and as I thought, feminism wasn't one of them, far from it.

Under the influence of New Right ideas, Conservative governments in the 1980s and 1990s have been attempting to change the educational climate in Britain. By emphasising vocationalism, standards, parental choice and teacher accountability, they aim to achieve a more 'entrepreneurial' education system. To this end, three broad categories of change can be identified in education and training policy since the 1980s:
1. Changes in examinations and assessment ..
Carla786 you might be interested in the source of that quote
Changes in educational policy and systems in Britain in the 1980s and 1990s
Changes in educational policy and systems in Britain in the 1980s and 1990s | Springer Nature Link

Anecdotally, I come across a lot of young men through work who didn't engage with school as it is now but who I think would have got on brilliantly in a trade style school from about age 12 and would probably have left with actual qualifications if taught in a hands on less desk based way.

Yes, good post....I think there may be some things that disadvantage boys more, and if so, that should be changed. It's complex though. One thing may be that boys who'd prefer technical work had better options and could leave earlier some time ago. That wasn't changed to benefit girls or hurt boys, though..

There's a lot of discussion about boys being punished overly for being disruptive- but otoh surely the old system of corporal punishment hurt boys far more than girls? I did read a blog post by a man once who argued that boys find verbal punishment more upsetting than corporal (on average) so the change wasn't beneficial. I don't agree with corporal punishment at all but I suppose it could be true for some.

That's an interesting point - when grading systems were changed, I don't believe sex/gender came into it, I think it was on purely pedagogic grounds. I think it predated feminism having any influence on the educational system - to the extent that it actually has-
'Discuss in 2,500 words'
I have the feeling that whatever system is in place - coursework, exams, etc - as long as girls perform better, it will always be argued that the system in place disadvantages boys.

Given that girls do better than boys in exams, having exams disadvantages boys.

No wait... girls do better than boys in coursework, so having coursework disadvantages boys...

'A woman's place is in the wrong' starts in school, it would appear.

Could you elaborate more on how the education system is femininised and thus geared towards female interests & ways of learning? I've been reading up on that & it's an important topic...

I don't really see the manosphere as equivalent in any way to feminism. Issues such as educational attainment gaps don't form part of the movement.

There are parts of the manosphere that are generally positive but poorly implemented, specifically the self-improvement side. Self-help, exercise and self-esteem building can be great, but there is an overt grift within that culture of "coaching". It's a pyramid scheme.

What's far more worrying is the thinking around women. There must be some sort of underlying reason for it, but I think it's too simplistic to think that it's because (some) men are pining for days past of being the family provider with the trad wife in the home. Despite it now being normal for families to have two working parents, the burden of childcare, housework, etc is still normally the role of the women. So I don't really understand what they are seeking if that's the case. They are clearly angry and trying to push back against something, I just don't really understand what, and that's probably what is needed before this can be unravelled and meaningfully challenged.

I don't know what exactly you are referring to, but I'd guess the "manosphere" covers all sorts of very good and very bad things, much like "feminism" covers everything from women fighting for women to women fighting to end women's and LGB rights on the alter of trans.

I think that it is undoubtedly true that feminism was / is needed to try to fight for equality in a way that the manosphere is not. But, of course, it is also true that men face specific issues and that men getting together to talk about them is a good thing. I think there is a strong argument that one of the specific issues that men face is ensuring that the world is geared up to promote equality between the sexes, and not to give one sex an advantage.

Obviously in many ways men do have that advantage, and feminism is there to fight that.

But education for example. Boys do comparatively better when given exams they can study hard for at the last minute. Girls do better when there is more coursework. By definition we can choose a grading system that favours boys, or favours girls, or we can try to pick a middle ground which advantages / disadvantages both equally. I don't know enough about education to know which sex is benefitting most by the current grading system, but I do know enough to be fairly confident that the education system over all is somewhat feminized, and that some boys will be struggling as a result. Some boys would thrive more in a system more geared for male interests and ways of learning.