The manosphere to man, is as feminism to women

[Breadandsticks]

And isn’t that scary! I believe that some of the people (I sadly know females that also carry some of these beliefs) that are deep rooted in the manosphere believe that the beliefs are equivalent to what the feminist movement is for women.

The difference is, feminism is rooted in a genuine need for change for equality for women and girls and includes law changes, system changes, increased support to achieve a level of equity.

Whilst the manosphere is actually about stroking men’s egos. It’s more about the women you date and the cars you buy over actual help and useful life advice.

It doesn’t seem to be about systemic changes for a fairer “male experience” such as encouraging mental health support (which is happening but not as a plea from the movement), or supporting dads to be equal in childcare. Or even helping boys do better at school (on the back of the stat that girls tend to be higher achievers younger).

This might be simplistic (and over said) but it’s scary that such a movement is brainwashing boys and men.

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.

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.

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...

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.

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.

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.

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

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.

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

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

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?

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.

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 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)

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".

Just to add, I do agree that some things are probably unfairly lumped into the "manosphere" space. And that men discussing the specific issues men/boys face and how to solve them is quite healthy. There are some very non toxic types out there too. I am suspicious of YouTubers selling themselves as the solution to mens/women's needs since they are more likely to be grifters. Anyone talking about "women empowering women" on Facebook is probably trying to hook me into an MLM. Likewise their male counterparts.

Thats a much more succint way of putting it than I managed!

It's not always terribly helpful to talk about boys and girls in education as if they were discrete masses - if many boys benefit from exams, some will nonetheless benefit from coursework; and if many girls benefit from coursework, some will nevertheless benefit from exams! We want equity in education not only for fairness between the sexes, but also for fairness between different sorts of people generally.

I am suspicious of claims that education is "feminised" as people usually bring up reasons like "boys are being forced to sit still behind desks". Boys have been forced to sit still behind desks for centuries, firstly whilst their sisters probably weren't receiving much of an education at all, and for a good while after that during a time when boys and girls were always educated separately. Sitting behind desks was introduced and maintained because people thought it was good for boys, and girls didn't even come into the picture.

When the teaching profession is heavily skewed towards female teachers a more 'feminine' culture most likely takes hold, and boys lose out. Personally feel there is a lot to be said for single sex teaching too. ( I used to teach in secondary schools)

It was thought that Gove's widespread binning of coursework would mean that boys would then overtake girls in GCSEs but this hasn't happened, girls outperform boys in all subjects bar maths (where it is really close) and sometimes physics.

Girls really outperform boys in English. Around two thirds of boys get a 4+ in English but nearly three quarters of girls do. This lack of ability in English probably impacts the rest of their subjects.

Is this because of the feminisation of education? We do know that students who read for pleasure do better in their GCSEs across the board. We also know that boys read for pleasure far less than girls.

It's possible that 'discriminating against boys' and 'discriminating against those who don't read' look pretty much the same in terms of results.

I do think boys tend, generally, to feel more comfortable with structure and hierarchy.

Classic case of equality coming across to entitled people as discrimination against them.

I used to teach English, and if you get the right subject matter and style then boys can enjoy reading just as much as girls; but class readers and novel choices can often be uninspiring and most schools are still using the same novels and class readers twenty, even thirty, years later.

Most English teachers are women and so tend to bring a feminine sensibility to the discourse around literature.

'Equality' is a concept which aims to flatten out the differences between people and between groups of people. But people are different to each other. We are not all the same. And there are general differences between the sexes.

Maybe also because the females of most species tend to band together to support each other with the raising of young. Males tend, more, to be loners and are more competitive with each other.

You often see the best of male friendship with men playing sport together or engaging in heroic type activities ( mountain rescue, firefighting, military etc). Male friendships, at best, can be very enduring and with very close ties.