Teachers describe a deterioration in behaviour and attitudes that has proved to be fertile terrain for misogynistic influencers

“As soon as I mention feminism, you can feel the shift in the room; they’re shuffling in their seats.” Mike Nicholson holds workshops with teenage boys about the challenges of impending manhood. Standing up for the sisterhood, it seems, is the last thing on their minds.

When Nicholson says he is a feminist himself, “I can see them look at me, like, ‘I used to like you.’”

Once Nicholson, whose programme is called Progressive Masculinity, unpacks the fact that feminism means equal rights and opportunities for women, many of the boys with whom he works are won over.

“A lot of it is bred from misunderstanding and how the word is smeared,” he says.

But he is battling against what he calls a “dominance-based model” of masculinity. “These old-fashioned, regressive ideas are having a renaissance, through your masculinity influencers – your grifters, like Andrew Tate.”

  • Candelestine@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    8 months ago

    If you don’t want to parent your own son, there is someone out there willing to do it for you. They will not do a good job.

    • fine_sandy_bottom@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      This is a really great point, but notably in this article there’s a guy trying to “do it for you” with at least good intentions telling young men about feminism.

      IMO, he’s doing a pretty terrible job of it though. You’re not going to reach tate followers by telling them about feminism.

  • badaboomxx@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    8 months ago

    I really think that tate is an imbecil, and his fanbase are just being manipulated.

    It is sad to see that boys think that this idiot is someone who deserve attention.

  • Socsa@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    Men benefit significantly from feminism, through the breakdown of male stereotypes, and the expansion of how normative masculinity is defined. Not that benefiting cishet men is necessarily the most important thing in the world, but the idea that feminism puts men on the losing end of some zero sum game is simply wrong.

    Honestly it could not be more clear in my own experience. There is a ton of diversity in the human experience, and the masculine experience is part of that. You deny your own freedom when you put yourself and others in a conformity pigeonhole. And you additionally deny yourself access to this diversity of experience when you do it to others. But I also kind of understand why this nuance is initially lost on children, and suspect that experience plus education will help immensely.

  • El_guapazo@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    8 months ago

    I see this on my school campus quite a lot. When the male teachers direct students from using an exterior door, they usually just say ok and then around. When the female teachers are on duty and day the same things, they get verbally abused. If I’m out there with the female teachers, there aren’t any issues.

    • ParsnipWitch@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      8 months ago

      Sadly, this is even an issue at university. As a lecture assistant I will just get ignored or not taken seriously by some groups of young male students. They will talk loudly, ignore my request to not talk during lecture or exercise. My male colleagues don’t have such issues and it angers me more each year…

  • Commiunism@lemmy.wtf
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    8 months ago

    While feminism is far from perfect, especially smaller circles that want to have unfair divorce rights for women or whatever, people like Andrew Tate are both the problem (as in, spreading the classic incel rhetoric) and the symptom (why young adults and teens follow people like him).

    Though not only him, but also a lot of right-wing youtube channels are pushing false narratives in order to get outrage clicks and to radicalize people against things like feminism. You have youtube videos that say how “feminism is trying to ruin men” or “crazy feminists want to remove sexy girls from video games” or “feminists don’t care about men”, and given the amount of right-wing youtube videos that get hundreds of thousands and not millions of views, a lot of people do believe it. In reality, however, men do have issues and feminists are acknowledging them and are trying to do something about it (for example, toxic masculinity being responsible for male loneliness for instance), but also things like patriarchy, discrimination and so on.

    Hating feminism and/or women isn’t going to solve male loneliness. Actual societal-level change, something that feminists are striving for, is the answer.

  • CliveRosfield@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    People hyperfocus on the 1% of crazy feminists instead of the other 99% who are actually normal and reasonable. Sadly that 1% are doing more harm to the public image of feminism than good.

    We live in an age of twitter screenshot outrage and that pathetically emboldens some peoples beliefs so the root cause really is social media. Nothing more nothing less.

    • LadyAutumn@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      I really dislike the way you’re portraying feminism as a brand and trying to assign responsibility onto individuals for the public perception of that brand. It’s not the responsibility of any woman to convince men that they deserve rights, that they deserve fair political power and representation. If someone is dissuaded from supporting women’s rights because someone said something they didn’t like or agree with, that person is a misogynist and unlikely to have ever actually supported women’s rights in any meaningful capacity.

      The caricature of the “crazy feminist” is also in and of itself misogynistic, and is used to silence feminist activism all the time. Not that there aren’t legitimate extremist parts to the movement, particularly in the 60s 70s and 80s when feminism had yet to make many major strides towards female liberation. Just that the label is often used to dismiss things like the pink tax, the wage gap, and discussions of rape culture and intersectionality.

      • CliveRosfield@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        I really dislike the way you’re portraying feminism as a brand and trying to assign responsibility onto individuals for the public perception of that brand

        Feminism is a brand in the same way civil rights are. There’s a reason why MLK succeeded where Malcolm X failed, Gandhi successfully took back India, Obama won the 2008 election, etc. This all has to do with how they’re perceived to people not part of their movement. Without a good brand none of these movements would have ever succeeded. And yes it is up to the leaders and each individual member of these movements to uphold a generally good perception. Thinking otherwise is ridiculous. You have to win over the population, always.

        It’s not the responsibility of any woman to convince men that they deserve rights, that they deserve fair political power and representation. If someone is dissuaded from supporting women’s rights because someone said something they didn’t like or agree with, that person is a misogynist and unlikely to have ever actually supported women’s rights in any meaningful capacity.

        In an ideal world no, but we are not in an ideal world. If someone is a mysgonist what is so wrong with sitting down with them and discussing topics like normal human beings and showing them why that’s wrong? Just completely shutting them out like how you’re describing is exactly how you embolden an opposition group. Imagine someone on twitter was actually just simple minded and based their opinions on one tweet and didn’t actually hear the other side properly? A lot of people like that exist. And if your attitude is “oh they’re misogynistic and never cared so I shouldn’t even bother” then you’re just digging your own hole.

        The caricature of the “crazy feminist” is also in and of itself misogynistic, and is used to silence feminist activism all the time. Not that there aren’t legitimate extremist parts to the movement, particularly in the 60s 70s and 80s when feminism had yet to make many major strides towards female liberation. Just that the label is often used to dismiss things like the pink tax, the wage gap, and discussions of rape culture and intersectionality.

        See what I, and I’m sure many others dislike is the way you derive misogyny from a simple example. A lot of people simply don’t see anything wrong with calling out the “crazies” of a group. Am I islamaphobic for calling out terrorists? No. Am I anti-christian for calling out the Westboro Baptist church? No. Am I misogynistic for making fun of clearly unhinged people on twitter? No. Extreme examples of course, but you get the picture. The instant jump to misogyny when genuinely crazy, unhinged, insane feminists get made fun of is ridiculous. Like I said, >99% of feminists are completely normal and sane. There is nothing wrong or hateful for calling out the crazy people in any group.

        • LadyAutumn@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          8 months ago

          Studies have shown for 50 years now that trying to convince a bigot to stop being a bigot is literally not possible. You cannot force someone to stop being bigoted. You can’t convince them women should be able to divorce their husbands if they already believe that women shouldn’t be able to.

          We gain nothing by even speaking with them, literally nothing. MLK didn’t just by himself win the civil rights movement, first of all. Nor did he come after Malcolm X or something. They were both a part of the same movement at the same time. The most effective tactics he employed had nothing to do with appealing to the humanity of white supremacist segregationists. The most effective tactics employed were the ones that broadcast injustice to the entire black community, promoting solidarity and resulting in widespread demonstrations, protests, and both passive and active civil unrest. MLK did not call for white saviors to come save them. He fought actively against the system that upheld white supremacy. He appealed to those who already believed that black people should have rights by broadcasting injustice that was self-evidently wrong.

          Gays didn’t get rights by begging at the feet of homophobes. We got rights by throwing bricks at them. We got rights by rioting, causing unrest and disrupting the homophobic as much as possible. We wouldn’t be here if black drag queens in the 60s hadn’t punched back.

          • JohnDoe@lemmy.myserv.one
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            8 months ago

            i think the notion of ‘convincing’ is the issue. it really needs to be done by men, it’s not as though what women are saying is factually incorrect or the content is off, it’s often the opposite i find. when i say what women or feminists i respect say i always seem to get a better response than if a woman said it or the original author said it.

            it’s such a shame, there’s already a ton of work done by a sizeable proportion of the population and it’s ignored or misconstrued :/

      • homura1650@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        8 months ago

        Feminist and women are not synonyms. Feminism is a political movement. Every political movement needs to advocate for itself. That is the way politics works.

        • LadyAutumn@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          8 months ago

          Feminism is a political movement in the same way the civil rights movement was/is a political movement or that the gay rights movement is a political movement. It’s a rights movement. It’s a resistance movement, resisting patriarchy and misogyny.

          It is self evidently true that women deserve rights. It is not the job of women to convince you they deserve rights. Feminism organizes women against the systems that oppress them. It does not appeal to the humanity of misogynists.

    • WhatAmLemmy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      The only time I ever hear about that 1% is from the conservative propaganda machine, or MSM rebuttal. They hold zero power outside of the conservative cinematic universe.

      At this point I consider it nothing more than manufactured outrage.

          • captainlezbian@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            8 months ago

            When recently? Because if you mean 30 years ago, yeah. But by the 00s it wasn’t anymore. And before the 80s it wasn’t yet. It was a powerful force in the second wave.

  • Son_of_dad@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    I also blame CBC and other supposedly legit sources for giving this fuck air time and even asking him about the Israel/Palestine war as if his opinion matters.

    Also so called journalists like this who remove all responsibility from Tate for being a rapist piece of shit

  • TWeaK@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    8 months ago

    “A lot of it is bred from misunderstanding and how the word is smeared,”

    The same could be said about “communism” and “socialism”. The words have been turned dirty, such that people shy away from what is objectively a good thing when done honestly and to the letter of the principle.

    • Scubus@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      To be fair, the term “feminist” was highjacked by the radical feminist movement. They very much do not believe in equality, their motto is “kill all men”

      I think it’s easy to see why that would turn people away. Hence why I describe myself as an equalizer, not a feminist.

      Edit: my statement was very reasonable and I’m willing to engage in discussion about what I have witnessed. If you think I’m pushing an agenda or trying to convince others of anything, feel free to check my post history. However, if you accuse me of pushing an agenda or lying or anything else, you are engaging in false faith and will be blocked. I have a long history of supporting women’s rights, as evidenced by several posts I have made. But I will not stand for being accused of being a right winger.

      • TWeaK@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        I think again that was one that was actually hijacked by the right wing. There is far more fearmongering about hardcore feminists than there are hardcore feminists.

        • Scubus@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          8 months ago

          While your second statement is true, there are still far too many extremists. I find it very difficult to believe that all the hatred I viewed from feminists on Tumblr and r/FemaleDatingStrategy and many other sources(like my ex who fell into that stuff) were right wingers. Just like one incel is too many(and you don’t hear people claiming incels don’t exist), one person calling for the death or enslavement of half the planet is too many.

        • Scubus@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          8 months ago

          Fuckin lmao, you are so full of shit. You know damn well you’ve seen so many Tumblr posts, tshirts, and other bullshit that says the same things. “Kill all men” “All men are evil” “Low value men”

          I guarantee you’ve seen all of that, it’s not at all uncommon. You choose to ignore it because you don’t like it. But that’s not how the world works. Other people, surprise surprise, don’t want to be associated with a movement calling for their death.

          Enjoy your narrative, but welcome to the real world

          • fkn@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            8 months ago

            I haven’t. And now I believe you even less and think you are intentionally spreading rumors or lies because you have an agenda.

    • merc@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      Communism kind-of smeared itself. Everywhere where communism has been tried on a national scale, it has become authoritarianism.

      Maybe it would be a good thing if done to the letter of the principle, but just like Libertarianism or Anarchism, it seems to be incompatible with human nature, at least so far.

      But, socialism isn’t even a foreign idea. A lot of US institutions are socialist. The mail delivery is done by an arm of the government. Streets are paved by the government. Firefighters are government employees. The water delivered to your house is almost certainly by a government-run entity. People retiring without having saved enough are taken care of by the government. There’s medicare and medicaid.

      A full capitalist system would have nothing done by the government that could be done by a business. No FDA, Pinkertons instead of Police, most army functions handed over to private contractors, every road privately owned and maintained, etc.

    • FenrirIII@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      8 months ago

      Kind of like Critical Race Theory. If properly understood and applied, people would benefit from the knowledge and empathy.

      • TWeaK@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        8 months ago

        Pretty much exactly the same, except CRT got knocked down before it even had established itself as a positive thing.

        • Pips@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          8 months ago

          It was already established. It’s just a theoretical framework in various social studies. It was deliberately bastardized by the right as they were seeking something to hate. It wasn’t even in the public consciousness, just something academics used and that get taught in some higher ed classes. It’s a very useful framework but it’s not something that you’d actually teach a kid.

  • yeah@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    8 months ago

    If men and boys are finding current models of masculinity to be difficult - which is what Tate et al prey on - perhaps they have more in common with feminists. The patriarchy harms everyone.

    • JohnDoe@lemmy.myserv.one
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      contemporary feminism (and the wave immediately before) have done a lot more for me than how men have told me I ‘ought’ to act. fine, I’m not as manly or a man as far as some are concerned. what is really annoying is the apathy and close-mindedness of most of these men who interacted with me negatively.

      asking a few questions is enough to make them emotional (which is fine when they do it and not ok when others do it in a way unlike their own) and more intensely emotional than nearly all women i’ve interacted with. that too is fine, it becomes a pain when i’m taken to be some kind of enemy or other by standards it seems like they cannot apply to themselves.

      i want to say they are gaslighting, only, i really don’t think it’s intentional. there’s a genuine misunderstanding and that’s annoying as heck.

  • AdolfSchmitler@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    8 months ago

    I feel like a lot of people confuse feminism for straight up misandry. #killallmen? #maletears? These were started by so called “feminists” but this is the definition of misandry.

    And people wonder why young men don’t like feminism when this might have been their only exposure to it.

    • 3rdwrldbathhaus@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      The mis-characterization of feminists into “feminazis” started with Anita Saarkesian. I remember gamers coming after her hard during gamergate for literally no reason at all. If you go back and watch old Feminist Frequency episodes she wasnt saying anything insane at all. They were all solidly rational observations about the way women were portrayed in games.

      • kamenoko@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        The term feminazi began long before gamergate and the movement was a genuine protest against the relationship between game studios and the people pretending to be journalists and honest reviewers.

        I watched as the incels and right wing nut jobs rolled in and made it about who Zoe Quinn was fucking. What people don’t remember is that she was a narcissistic sociopath who ruined anyone who crossed her and got actual feminists chased off the internet. Reframing the debate to be about slut shaming allowed the incels and the faux feminists to hijack any meaningful dialogue and all the reasonable people distanced themselves from the issue.

      • nature_man@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        Almost none of it is created to stoke anti-feminist attitudes, but it is certainly spread to do so.

        There was this great tumblr post a couple years ago that I can’t seem to find anymore about how when feminists spread phrases like ‘all men are trash’, even if in context it doesn’t seem offensive or bigoted, people who dislike feminism will spread it to people offended by it without the additional context and say “look, see! Feminists hate all men! They hate you! Why would you as a man want to help people who hate you unconditionally?!”, and unfortunately the people most vulnerable to that type of manipulation are teenage boys, who aren’t exactly likely to seek out the context that’s been removed

        • atx_aquarian@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          8 months ago

          Of course, we both understand how “all men are trash” could be said without bigotry within the right context, but for everyone else that doesn’t understand, would someone mind explaining or clarifying?

  • Minotaur@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    8 months ago

    I’ve always felt like these things are cyclical in a way - just in that people are constantly rebelling against the last generation.

    When I went to high school in the early 2010s there was this huge movement of like… positivity and sunshine and wellness and feminism and good times for all. Bob Ross was on everyone’s mind and Pharrell’s “Happy” blasted on the stereo, people wore really bright and mismatched and often gaudy outfits.

    This was seemingly “in response” to that mid 2000s emo/grunge/depressed aesthetic which was very dark and moody. And now, in response to that 2010s positivity we seem to get this really jaded, “actually, feminism sucks and becoming a ‘trad catholic’ is chic” movement.

    It’s annoying, and I’m sure we’ll see an opposite shift again in 5 years.

    • LarmyOfLone@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      I’ve always felt like these things are cyclical in a way - just in that people are constantly rebelling against the last generation.

      That implies that it’s somehow a natural cycle, but this is dangerous because it ignores and “Laissez-faire” the fascist propaganda that is blasted deliberately into our global society. It started with fox news and talk radio where funding from fascists helped spread “misinformation” and now continues on social media, where the same funding takes place. The strategy behind this funding is that fascism works when socio-economic circumstances get worse and worse, and allow further exploitation.

      Additionally, controversial viewpoints are rewarded by more engagement and clicks - and so become part of the strategy of AI algorithms.

      You should absolutely not assume it gets better on it’s own, without enough people pushing back against it and without the rules of how the system is allowed to work being changed. Gen Z is just as susceptible to propaganda as Boomers.

      • Minotaur@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        8 months ago

        Yeah, but I think a lot of it is just high schoolers trying to be different than the last generation. I don’t think that Fox News was in charge of people getting really into Bob Ross 10 years ago.

    • Cryophilia@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      Jeez, you must have gone to high school in a rich neighborhood

      For most people 2009-2015 or so was an impoverished hellhole. Everyone was recovering from the great recession. Societal outlook was fucking BLEAK.

      • Minotaur@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        8 months ago

        I did not. You can have poor economic conditions but still a cultural zeitgeist focused more on positivity, inclusion, and “wellness” than usual

          • Minotaur@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            8 months ago

            If it helps you, imagine the following - as I believe your personal experience may be clouding things slightly .

            Directly prior to the very “Emo / goth / punk / skinny jeans” time of around 2004-2010 was the early 00s. Now, in some ways the early 00s were very bleak. It was post 9/11, the economy did not like the possibility of a major war, and simply put many people genuinely thought it was some end of an empire time where further attacks on US soil might become common. At the same time, it was still the era of boy bands, brightly colored and flashy technology and clothing, blonde hair, and going to the mall + beach with your friends. Bad things were occurring, but the cultural zeitgeist for that age demographic was still in a “bright and positive” phase

    • Herbal Gamer@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      weird cause I got really depressed around that time because I was an unemployable highschool dropout during a recession so I fucking hated that happy song.

    • jandar_fett@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      8 months ago

      I respect your thoughts on this as they’re very fleshed out and sound like something that could be accurate, but the big problem i see is that your experiences in high-school are extremely biased by your age and limited experience with the wider world at the time. I’m not singling you out btw, because my saying this is based on my own self-reflection of earlier years. Before you are fully integrated into society and also, your frontal lobe is literally still developing until you’re in your mid twenties, it is hard to assess the state of things imo. There is definitely a capitalist/media centered cultural zeitgeist that pervades everything, and I’m sure has profound effects, I just can’t buy being able to fully grasp it in highschool or earlier. I look forward to your reply.

      • Minotaur@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        I hear you, I just want to reiterate that the discussion at hand (from the OP down) is specifically talking about that specific high school age bracket, which is why I’m invoking it so much. Culture is obviously going to be different between age groups, and a lot of that difference is imo a direct “opposition” of that previous group.

        Just very anecdotally, I remember seeing a goofy little post, very clearly made by a gen-z individual, stereotyping millennials as this kind of chronically depressed, down on themselves type. Which I thought was kind of funny. Even something like the “trend” of “being depressed” the next generation will recognize and (consciously or subconsciously) change their own behavior based on it.

        I don’t think there’s too much to say. I am largely just spitballing on a pattern I’ve noticed at least with fashion and “aesthetics” in that age group over time.

        Appreciate the conversation as well. I’m new on the site and it really is like night and day compared to trying to have a polite little conversation on Reddit.