Young, Male and Anti-Feminist – The Gen Z Boys Who Hate Women

[MondayYogurt]

Sorry it's Vice, but possibly worth discussing: www.vice.com/en/article/dyv7by/anti-feminist-gen-z-boys-who-hate-women

Half of young men in the UK now believe that feminism has “gone too far and makes it harder for men to succeed”. These are the results of a significant study published in July 2020 by anti-extremism charity HOPE not Hate. The study, Young People in the Time of COVID-19, surveyed 2,076 16- to 24-year-olds on their ideological beliefs.

@Brefugee and @FOJN: aaahhhhhhhh... OK! 😊

@Alcemeg

I'm a feminist and I don't really understand why everyone's being so horrid to *@TriteMale*. Did I miss something? He seems like a nice man and from what I've read, is defending himself against some goady comments rather than trolling/derailing the thread.

You're kidding, right, @Alcemeg ? That poster has been goading women and trolling, goading us into a response so we look like the aggressive feminists. They refuse to answer any questions or actually engage in good faith or in any meaningful way. They complained about males suiciding, as if only males suicide. And when shown there is more than enough organisations set up to raise awareness of male suicide - far more than there is for women; radio silence. Then excuses that they were working, yet still replied to other people but ignored the posts showing the enormous amount of support and awareness male suicide has. Their tactic is deliberate and manipulative. Refuse to engage, ignore all facts, just troll and goad women posters. They are being horrid.

On the other hand, I think some posters spend so much time reading about male violence online that they become a bit mono maniacal about it, when in real life most men aren't beating up and murdering women (even if the people that do are mainly men). Not that it should be ignored, mind.

That's hilarious becasuse 2 women a week are murdered by a partner or ex-partner and they aren't all in the freaking news. You really need to step back, buddy, and think about what you're saying here.

And again - to anyone who doesn't know why this kind of "male ally" or "devils advocate" type commenters: they are just engaging you to suck up your energy, take up your time and derail conversations. If you, as many of us obviously are, discuss feminism on the internet it is infuriatingly common.

And like the Gen Z boys who are following them and aping their actions they do talk a lot about how nobody pays attention to men's issues (clue: plenty of feminists do, that is what equality means) and "waahhh we're not the centre of attention" they are not actually that keen on setting up organisations, raising awareness or generally contributing to things that make men's lives better. On the (often rare) occasions they do, you will find women working alongside them in numbers that doesn't reflect the numbers of men who in the past helped set up things like women's refuges.

I don't often use the word feminist about myself (although i do get the word "feminazi" chucked at me with boring regularity on twitter) because i prefer to let my actions/words speak for themselves. But when asked? Sure. I'm a feminist and I'm not ashamed of that.

Thanks for picking that up, @Brefugee. Women don’t need to read about male violence - we experience it, or the threat of it, every day.

@CokeDrinker I did wonder if I'd missed something... and clearly I did!

New to this malarkey 😉

Don't get me wrong - violence against men is also a concern, male suicide and bad mental health is a concern etc etc (as I've mentioned before i spend a lot of IMD along with several feminist friends tweeting about resources targeted at men's health, mental health etc)

I do the same on IWD (more of it, tbh, as is my privilege) and get constant "wahhh what about da menz?". On Men's day? do I get "what about da womenz?" (some, these days, ironic ones) but i do get a lot of women (and men) retweeting and engaging with the subject. What i don't get is women sucking the oxygen out of a conversation about men's health.

But. It is a difficult line to tread. Thinking in particular about the Gen Z boys/men of the OP, in particular. Feminists don't owe MRAs or the disingenuous questions/comments an education. We spend so long pointing them in the direction of good resources etc. (I did use to use a page set up with good, reliable feminist resources but i've lost that).

But, if they are genuine questions, or you think there may be an audience who are not joining in the conversation - it is a good idea to provide links to the good resources rather than risk them googling and ending up reading the hogwash that the MRA/Incels post.

Perhaps what we need is a website like i mentioned before, that provides good reliable links, facts and statistics? (mind you, IME the hard-core Incels/MRAs just ignore it)

I've just been out to do some gardening, I saw three teenage boys walking along the middle of the road, there is no pavement so not unusual although most people walk on the side of the road, a car came up behind them, sounded the horn to alert them, the boys moved and then one of them said something I didn't hear and another said, "it was a woman as well", one of them called after the car, "get back in the kitchen". I was outside my house and because they know where I live I said nothing.

Are they misogynists because of feminism or am I a feminist because misogynists exist? It's a depressing state of affairs in 2021.

Hang around on the non-trans threads here and you'll get familiar with the tactics soon enough alcemeg
You can try to be reasonable about one thing (e.g. male suicides) and the next hot button will be pushed (e.g. parental alienation maybe, or that there's no evidence for a gender pay gap, or that women commit just as much domestic abuse as men).
It's very rarely a discussion, just a tactic to derail the actual topic at hand. In this case that our teenaged boys are being radicalised into misogyny via the Internet.

Thanks, @QuentinBunbury. Seems there is much to learn 😔

But you want to educate everyone else

Can you elaborate? That is not an argument that I've seen.

Personally, I think the reason that feminists don't particularly talk about fatherlessness is because there's very little point in the person left to do the work and the best they can fretting about something that is outside their control.

Sorry PleasantBirthday, I had forgotten about this thread.

I was referring to the professional and academic types of feminists. For quite a while now, there's been a pervasive ideological viewpoint that there are no differences between women and men, and this mindset extends and influences all sorts of areas and issues including parenthood.

Apart from pregnancy and childbirth, which some feminists grudgingly accept is something only women can do, there is a view that everything else about raising children is something that can be done, or should be done, equally by either a mother or a father.

Now I completely understand the underlying reasons for this angle. Given women's historical oppression and the fact that women still predominantly bear the load of caring and parenting, there's been a big drive to emphasise 'sameness' over 'difference'. And yes, the basics of childcare in terms of cleaning, feeding, bathing etc can be done by anyone and men should be stepping up and participating in it equally.

However, there is always a flip side to any ideological position and unintended consequences even if it is well-meaning.
My personal view is that there are some things only fathers can do in terms of raising children and some things only mothers can do. Or rather, the role of a father is distinct from the role of a mother in some aspects.

Boys and young men are less likely to get involved in gangs and other disruptive behaviour if they have a good father figure to turn to. I suspect there might be similar findings when looking at the young men drawn to incel/MRA stuff. Happy to be proven wrong. Fathers, or even male teachers, do seem better placed to deal with angry, angsty young men. They help shape their identity and sense of place in this world. Daughters too are less likely to get pregnant as teenagers if there's a good father figure at home.
That doesn't mean mothers don't also influence and positively shape their children's lives. Of course they do.

Yet, I detect there's an uneasiness for some (many?) feminists to openly say something like 'the role of a father is distinct from the role of a mother' or 'Children generally need the influence of fathers as well as mothers growing up'. Why? It's not viewed as progressive. Only conservatives and far-right Christian types say these things because the progressive types have left a vacuum in the discourse.
Again, I totally understand the underlying reasons - there a protectiveness around single mothers because of the blame and shame heaped on them, there's a fear of a slippery slope leading to same-sex parents being vilified etc. I get those fears, but I also think it should be possible to have honest, balanced conversations about such issues without people taking it as a personal criticism.

There is a lot published by academic and professional feminists on male violence and hostility towards women. It is helps shape public policy and public perception. It's great work, but I also feel there can be glaring omissions, like the article that started this thread. There's emphasis on this vague, malign force called 'The Patriarchy' but I've not come across anything mainstream that talks about the impact of fatherlessness on male violence and aggression.
I'm not saying it's feminism's job to solve issues around fatherlessness or the general lack of male role models, but isn't anyone interested in exploring it in relation to the dynamics between women and men?!

Anyway, I've briefly tried to put my thoughts into words. It's awkward typing on my phone as I could waffle on for much longer if I'd use a laptop. Hope that makes some sense. I'm still not clear why this thread was started in the first place if no one thinks it's worth discussing why young men are vulnerable to being groomed like this - no one falls into extremist ideology just like that. There's underlying discontent, anger and frustration that is exploited by MRAs etc.

@TriteMale

So, I'm a troll because I won't immediately do as I'm told and read a load of material and respond immediately upon the command of another poster.

I fully understand that it can be an indicator of bad faith if a poster states controversial views or 'plops and runs' whilst refusing to engage with any counter arguments or elaborate on their view.

However, that's not what is happening here. This is a thread about men's interpretation of feminism, and I have attempted to give a male perspective of why so many men think it has 'gone too far'. I'm entitled to hold an opinion and to discuss it on a discussion board, and me going away and reading a load of info on male suicide charities is a completely pointless exercise and irrelevant to the the views of the young men I'm discussing.

I already understand the context/origin of memes like 'men are trash', 'kill all men', and 'male tears', but the point is that many young men do not and will take them at face value. Attempting to 'educate' me, a random man on a message board, will not change this.

See, I completely agree with this!

Never mind men being nervous of feminism -- I feel a bit intimidated by this thread myself. I can see that there's a whole world of subtleties and red flags and buttons and stuff that I have been merrily floating around unaware of (excuse my ignorance), but not for lack of support for the basic principles. I think it would be a shame if discussion becomes impossible because you need to be so highly politicised that it all ends up like one of those rarefied debates by academics who insist on talking in Latin, and there's no place for less acutely refined input.

I'd hate to offer my opinion on a male-dominated forum and be told I was womansplaining/trolling the thread.

Obviously there is tension here between some of us who have seen all this over and over and over.

PP comment about feminism pushing the "no difference between genders" - hmmm. Disingenuous. Not sure. I've always understood it to mean: fathers can parent. Most feminists I know push fervently for equal access to parental leave. Fathers For Justice should, in theory be right up with this because if they could show they habitually did 50% of parenting, they wouldn't (their view) get shafted over access/custody after divorce.
Their children wouldn't have to go without so much (because RP has less disposable income) if employers assumed fathers as well as mothers are parents and took time off for sick children, reduced hours etc etc.

No difference in genders in respect of ability to hold senior management positions, want a career, want academic achievement etc.

It is noticeable that when public sector organisation's carry out banding exercises for pay reviews, dinner ladies and hospital cleaners go up to the equivalent Band for refuse collectors - when it would clearly benefit the public purse to band the (overwhelmingly male) refuse collectors down.

I was refused a pay rise in the 00s because I'm mit head of family/main breadwinner even though the father of my children was on 18 months parental leave. That is the "no difference" between genders tge 2nd wave fought for

nonny I think there are two factors at play. 1) Suggesting that men and women naturally are "better" at certain roles is a foundation of the oppression of women, because the stuff women are traditionally seen as better at is devalued or ignored in favour of the stuff men are traditionally seen as better at. 2) absent fathers is not an issue caused by women or feminists. Absent fathers is usually a decision taken by those men themselves - either to walk away from their children or to be abusive/violent so it's not safe for their children to be in contact. Feminism wants to tackle the root causes of both those things but somehow we are doing it "wrong"

I'd hate to offer my opinion on a male-dominated forum and be told I was womansplaining/trolling the thread.

You'd be told a LOT worse than that if you came onto a male-dominated forum and started giving your opinion "as a woman" using the same kind of manners and social grace that male poster here is using. Really, a lot worse.

Makes a big deal about male suicide.

Says going away reading information that outlines the extraordinary amount of help there is out there for male suicide, debunking their argument, is 'pointless' and 'irrelevant' to the men who suicide.

Wonders why they are accused of trolling and goading.

Nonny you're not in favour of families with same sex parents then I'd guess?

It's not a load of info on those sites they're very accessible.

I managed to browse through them easily enough when I got the links.

I don't understand why someone who cares about the issue wouldn't even have a look tbh and also wasn't familiar with at least 1 of them already iyswim

I'd hate to offer my opinion on a male-dominated forum and be told I was womansplaining/trolling the thread

Going on male-dominated twitter social norms, you'll be told to shut up / die / get raped. Actually. Which is a lot worst than asking the annoying man who thinks its only a TINY proportion of men who do bad things to woman (news flash buddy, it really isn't) to go away.

I'd hate to offer my opinion on a male-dominated forum and be told I was womansplaining/trolling the thread.

I post a lot about football. Luckily à lot is in German and very few vile replies. But in English? Blimey sometimes it's just not worth the hassle. Luckily I know what I'm talking about, so I do get agreement too but it's... À bumpy ride.

And the time I posted a comment about weapon handling/radio procedure in films/TV - that hurt a lot of broflakes who wouldn't know one end of an AK47 from the other. Again luckily I à) know my stuff and b) a couple of recruits I'd trained showed up

I'd hate to offer my opinion on a male-dominated forum and be told I was womansplaining/trolling the thread.

No one can be this naive, it literally isn't credible.

@NonnyMouse1337

Can you elaborate? That is not an argument that I've seen.

Personally, I think the reason that feminists don't particularly talk about fatherlessness is because there's very little point in the person left to do the work and the best they can fretting about something that is outside their control.

Sorry PleasantBirthday, I had forgotten about this thread.

I was referring to the professional and academic types of feminists. For quite a while now, there's been a pervasive ideological viewpoint that there are no differences between women and men, and this mindset extends and influences all sorts of areas and issues including parenthood.

Apart from pregnancy and childbirth, which some feminists grudgingly accept is something only women can do, there is a view that everything else about raising children is something that can be done, or should be done, equally by either a mother or a father.

Now I completely understand the underlying reasons for this angle. Given women's historical oppression and the fact that women still predominantly bear the load of caring and parenting, there's been a big drive to emphasise 'sameness' over 'difference'. And yes, the basics of childcare in terms of cleaning, feeding, bathing etc can be done by anyone and men should be stepping up and participating in it equally.

However, there is always a flip side to any ideological position and unintended consequences even if it is well-meaning.
My personal view is that there are some things only fathers can do in terms of raising children and some things only mothers can do. Or rather, the role of a father is distinct from the role of a mother in some aspects.

Boys and young men are less likely to get involved in gangs and other disruptive behaviour if they have a good father figure to turn to. I suspect there might be similar findings when looking at the young men drawn to incel/MRA stuff. Happy to be proven wrong. Fathers, or even male teachers, do seem better placed to deal with angry, angsty young men. They help shape their identity and sense of place in this world. Daughters too are less likely to get pregnant as teenagers if there's a good father figure at home.
That doesn't mean mothers don't also influence and positively shape their children's lives. Of course they do.

Yet, I detect there's an uneasiness for some (many?) feminists to openly say something like 'the role of a father is distinct from the role of a mother' or 'Children generally need the influence of fathers as well as mothers growing up'. Why? It's not viewed as progressive. Only conservatives and far-right Christian types say these things because the progressive types have left a vacuum in the discourse.
Again, I totally understand the underlying reasons - there a protectiveness around single mothers because of the blame and shame heaped on them, there's a fear of a slippery slope leading to same-sex parents being vilified etc. I get those fears, but I also think it should be possible to have honest, balanced conversations about such issues without people taking it as a personal criticism.

There is a lot published by academic and professional feminists on male violence and hostility towards women. It is helps shape public policy and public perception. It's great work, but I also feel there can be glaring omissions, like the article that started this thread. There's emphasis on this vague, malign force called 'The Patriarchy' but I've not come across anything mainstream that talks about the impact of fatherlessness on male violence and aggression.
I'm not saying it's feminism's job to solve issues around fatherlessness or the general lack of male role models, but isn't anyone interested in exploring it in relation to the dynamics between women and men?!

Anyway, I've briefly tried to put my thoughts into words. It's awkward typing on my phone as I could waffle on for much longer if I'd use a laptop. Hope that makes some sense. I'm still not clear why this thread was started in the first place if no one thinks it's worth discussing why young men are vulnerable to being groomed like this - no one falls into extremist ideology just like that. There's underlying discontent, anger and frustration that is exploited by MRAs etc.

Very pertinent points. It's an elephant in the room.