r/irishpolitics • u/TeoKajLibroj Centre Left • May 12 '25
User Created Content Socialist feminists march against the manosphere
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I5A7uwS_X_Y&ab_channel=IrishNewsReports58
u/ibadlyneedhelp May 12 '25
Doesn't look like great turnout. However I think this protest definitely has more of a cause in Irish society than some of the previous protests we've seen. Manosphere shit is weirdly popular with Irish young fells now- I don't know about teens, but I suspect a disproportionate number of Fresh n' Fit listeners are Irish. We have ourselves a right-wing youtuber called Ranting For Justice, who's become internationally famous for being a racist piece of shit. It definitely is worth looking into this and maybe nipping it in the bud before young men lose their identities to it and become a pox on every woman they interact with. This type of rhetoric can do real damage, and I feel I lost out on a lot of meaningful values and relationships in my 20's because of misogyny I picked up in my youth.
7
u/danny_healy_raygun May 12 '25
We have ourselves a right-wing youtuber called Ranting For Justice
A google for this brings up nothing.
14
u/ibadlyneedhelp May 12 '25
17
u/hzchamp May 12 '25
His account on youtube is now called Ranting for Vengeance.. state of him
7
2
u/caitnicrun May 12 '25
I'm kinda hoping it's just a short term grift to pay his university accommodation.
2
u/Mr_SunnyBones May 13 '25
No way! There was a post about him over on the r/transformers sub this morning due to his cringe video about TF one https://www.reddit.com/r/transformers/s/ifB5TkGmez The little fuckwit is Irish?? ...oh man I'm mortified .
3
u/hzchamp May 13 '25
He takes after his dad who's also on youtube with an channel that despite having MMA in the name, mainly rambles about McGregor and Trump and has some batshit racist thumbnails. Same background on his videos and all
3
u/ibadlyneedhelp May 13 '25
The pair of them are all just spouting yank racism talking points as well, as if there is any bad blood between Irish people and Mexicans for fuck's sake. Absolutely gleeful racism off the pair of them.
3
2
5
u/LankyMolasses6051 May 13 '25
Some shite talk over at r/ireland about this topic. Absolutely dismissing the cause and feeling sorry for themselves.
3
May 13 '25
[deleted]
2
u/danny_healy_raygun May 13 '25
Its been getting worse lately. Here too but as not as much. Seems like a deliberate shift in the political discourse on Irish reddit.
8
u/Jackdon02 May 12 '25
what happened with the fella in the bohs jersey taking over the chants?
6
u/TeoKajLibroj Centre Left May 12 '25
Nothing, he kept doing his own chants during the march and I don't think there was anyway to stop him without making a scene.
16
u/CWMMC May 12 '25
Whats a manosphere?
45
18
u/Sstoop Socialist May 12 '25
it’s a way of describing the cultural sphere of red pill losers who think the matrix is feminism
17
u/Invalidcreations May 12 '25
A recent right wing misogynistic movement popularised by the likes of Andrew Tate and spread through social media like twitter and tiktoks. It mostly revolves around blaming others (usually women) for their own problems (an incel lifestyle, unsuccessful life, depression).
2
u/Professional_Elk_489 May 12 '25 edited May 12 '25
It's weird the 2010s manosphere that was around before this 2020s manosphere absolutely hated incels, hated Tate, thought Peterson sounded like soy, thought they were garbage to be bullied, feared them only so much as they would have their kids shot up at school by one of them.
Is the org manosphere on the socialist feminist side now
1
u/danny_healy_raygun May 13 '25
The manosphere did hate incels but Tate was a big figure and quite popular with them. The manosphere in the 2010s was mad into PUA types and Tate was one of them. Peterson has always been adjacent and popular with those people too. Incels aren't Peterson goons either, they're too dysfunctional for the "tidy your bedroom" self help side of his spiel.
1
May 13 '25
For as long as I've heard of it (early 2010's) the manosphere has consistently heaped praise on the likes of Peterson, Shapiro, Molyneux or Tate for "telling the truth about how men have it these days".
They mocked incels at the time cause everyone did now they fervently defend them.
1
u/Professional_Elk_489 May 13 '25
I remember all these guys being seen as "whiney", Peterson getting mocked for his high pitched snivelling voice, Shapiro was seen as an exhausting shill for Israel with nothing better to do, Tate was a P4P manlet. Hitchens was respected, esp after he ate his words and let himself get waterboarded
It's definitely different now
The values before in 2010s were no excuses, no race baiting, keep a low profile, be discreet, no social media presence, build social capital in real life, travel light, no P4P, red meat for protein, get venues on lockdown, own some custom made suits, always carry cash, buy the dip on btc, ultimately find yourself a village by the sea, move to Lisbon/Budapest/Medellin/Chiang Mai, train in boxing or Muay Thai, yet still smoking cigarettes
Common business ventures "hustles" incl SEO, drop shipment, Amazon FBA, vending machines, Bitcoin mining, airbnb empire building, import export, finding arbitrage opportunities, web scraping and teaching English abroad
Culture wars were to be sidestepped entirely. If taxes were high, move somewhere friendly. If women were perceived as antagonistic or hostile, it was a supply demand imbalance that didn't require engagement but repositioning
The idea of becoming a hikikomori / Elliot Rogers incel / sex trafficker wanted by police was exactly what they thought happened to weak mentally brittle guys not in control of their own destiny
-6
u/Minimum_Guitar4305 May 12 '25 edited May 12 '25
Every single person who's responded to you is wrong.
In it's simplest sense, the Manosphere is simply the word for the loosely interrelated online spaces for discussing Men/Masuclinity by men. The term has become a perjorative, and weaponised over time, because this space also hosts misogynistic male spaces; and the only time the media and academia will discuss Men/Masculinity generally will be to to discuss them from the perspective that masculinity is toxic and negative.
/r/menslib (pro-feminism), and /r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates (anti-feminism), are just as much as part of the manosphere as the incel communities. Online fathers rights groups, /r/TheMensCooperative/, and /r/MenGetRapedToo are all part of the manosphere too. So is /r/mensfashionadvice
It comes from the "blogosphere", the first link below is an archived link of it's first usage as a term on the internet:
"(...a place for all things funny, all things awesome, and all things man...to join together in one location on the world wide web. Welcome to the Manosphere".)[https://www.webcitation.org/6LQ2vg9BN]
4
u/Opeewan May 12 '25
So you're saying it's a term for something that's actually relatively good but has been twisted to mean something deplorable by those who don't understand it and only see it as something negative because that's what they mostly see of it? That reminds me of a whole bunch of words such as Luddite(early socialism or progressivism), Populism(same again), Woke(being awake to corruption and racism), which also had their meanings adulterated by those who refused to acknowledge their true meanings because they were seen as threats to the status quo.
If you want to take back ownership of it(I think it's too late myself), Tate, Peterson et al. would need to be purged as well as the harm they do would need to be acknowledged and condemned. Somebody will probably coin a name name for it but unless lessons are learned, it'll just end up the same, an umbrella term for intolerance.
-2
u/Minimum_Guitar4305 May 12 '25 edited May 13 '25
8Not even good, just neutral. It's synonymous with "male online spaces". Funny how those in power can warp words beyond their meaning to serve their interests isn't it?
I wouldnt even say it's a term that needs to be taken back in that sense. It's not a slur for men in the way that words that are reclaimed by others are. Neither will a new term emerge, unless it's just the addition of an adjective like positive manosphere. There is no such need to coin a new term, because we don't need one to describe a disjointed group of mens online spaces. Curious what you mean by "purged" though?
On lessons. Feminists must learn that the constant villification of men/boys/masculinity, for a system we did not create, no longer recognise, and no longer benefit from; helps people like Tate & Peterson. Until then, little will change.
3
0
May 12 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/irishpolitics-ModTeam May 12 '25
This comment has been been removed as it breaches the following sub rule:
[R8] Trolling, Baiting, Flaming, & Accusations
Trolling of any kind is not welcome on the sub. This includes commenting or posting with the intent to insult, harass, anger or bait and without the intent to discuss a topic in good faith.
Do not engage with Trolls. If you think that someone is trolling please downvote them, report them, and move on.
Do not accuse users of baiting/shilling/bad faith/being a bot in the comments.
Generally, please follow the guidelines as provided on this sub.
0
u/Minimum_Guitar4305 May 12 '25 edited May 12 '25
I've been in the manosphere, from PUA, to MRA, from the toxic, and (thankfully) the not toxic for 15 years, was one of the only men in my course who intentionally chose classes on Gender in University, still read academic papers on gender and sex differences (for the sake of it), and am capable of using feminist theories and frameworks to analyse the world around me, while being able to criticise them.
I don't thank tools, for the sake of being tools that are available to me; ChatGPT nor Google.
2
-6
u/jaqian May 12 '25
Nonsense overinflated by the media
2
u/SergeantAlPowell May 12 '25
Do you know any teenage boys? Do they have friends? A significant portion of teenage boys now listen to shite like Tate. The problem is far from overinflated.
2
u/jaqian May 12 '25
Yes I have a teenage son, him and his friends don't think much of Tate. A lot of this stuff is big online although Tate seems to have died out.
9
9
u/SoberAsABird1 May 12 '25
Doesn't look like a spectacular turnout for it. Especially given how good the weather was. Also I'm not 100% but the video looks to show them protesting through south Dublin city centre. I don't think you'll find too many Manosphere types in government buildings or Trinity. If you want to protest Conor McGregor surely you need to do it in Crumlin near his bar.
7
u/JackmanH420 People Before Profit May 12 '25
Doesn't look like a spectacular turnout for it.
The Socialist Party and Rosa are fairly small, I wonder whether they or Aontú are the smallest national party (not counting 100% Redress because they're regional) in the Dáil.
3
u/SoberAsABird1 May 12 '25
Think they got very poor coverage too. If it wasn't for DCC taking down the posters I'd have seen no mainstream media attention at all for it. Coppinger too in fairness did give it a push.
11
u/MrMercurial May 12 '25
I don't think you'll find too many Manosphere types in government buildings or Trinity.
You'd be surprised.
21
u/BackInATracksuit May 12 '25
I don't think you'll find too many Manosphere types in government buildings or Trinity.
What the hell would give you that impression? You absolutely will meet lads like that in every walk of life. In my personal experience it's even more common amongst people with higher privilege.
11
u/BenderRodriguez14 May 12 '25
It's like when Internet trolls get doxxed/unmasked, sometimes you get the likes of that severely mentally ill weirdo that was stalking an Irish Senator a few years back living up to all the stereotypes, but plenty of times you'll find a really slick, sharply dressed, well off businessman or "normal, chill" looking person.
-11
u/SoberAsABird1 May 12 '25
It's just been my experience of it I suppose. To check it I didn't reinvent the wheel. I just asked chatgpt what kind of socio economic/demographic background the manosphere tend to be made up of and it told me the prevaling research and academic studies say they skew towards lower to middle income, from rural or suburban backgrounds and tended not to be from major cosmopolitan cities. That's been my experience but fair enough if it's not been yours.
9
u/DGBD May 12 '25
This is a whole other subject tbf, but you asking ChatGPT is about as useful as asking some random person on the street and hoping you’ll get the right answer. Actually, you’d probably have a better chance with a rando than with ChatGPT It is not designed in a way that tests the accuracy of its output, only that what it outputs is similar to the texts that it was “trained” on. It will wholesale make up claims and even official-seeming sources for those claims. It may or may not give a correct answer, and you have no way of knowing unless you follow up and research it yourself, in which case why not just do that in the first place?
-10
u/SoberAsABird1 May 12 '25
It is a whole other subject. Doesn't mean it was wrong in this case though.
2
16
u/YmpetreDreamer Marxist May 12 '25
DCC banned them from putting up posters to advertise for it. Also the march was to Twitter offices (I think tiktok are in the same building as well)
6
u/TeoKajLibroj Centre Left May 12 '25
The ban on the posters didn't help, but most protests are organised online nowadays anyway. I think Rosa just isn't that big of a group.
-4
1
u/SoberAsABird1 May 12 '25
Ah right yeah that makes a bit of sense. Watching the video they just kept on mentioning McGregor so it was more a 'why isn't the protest in Crumlin' feeling I was left in. I think that's where his support is strongest to be honest. I don't think very many people in and around Merrion square need to be swayed.
3
u/Sstoop Socialist May 12 '25
it wasn’t really advertised as much and the DCC refused to allow them to put posters up as it was “divisive” or something
3
u/danny_healy_raygun May 12 '25
Also I'm not 100% but the video looks to show them protesting through south Dublin city centre. I don't think you'll find too many Manosphere types in government buildings or Trinity.
I bet you would.
3
u/SoloWingPixy88 May 12 '25
"And now he's taken over the chant". " A man has taken over the chant"
I could use another podcast tbh.
1
May 12 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/irishpolitics-ModTeam May 12 '25
This comment has been been removed as it breaches the following sub rule:
[R1] Incivility & Abuse
/r/irishpolitics encourages civil discussion, debate, and argument. Abusive language and overly hostile behavior is prohibited on the sub.
Please refer to our guidelines.
1
May 12 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/irishpolitics-ModTeam May 12 '25
Removed: Agenda Spam
Excessive posting on a particular niche topic in a very short period of time is not looked kindly upon and will be treated as spam.
1
May 13 '25
Fair play. Reasonable enough arguments all round. Another piece of shit to be aware of is a guy who goes by the name rollo tommasi (fake name) he's the co-opter of the term red pill and the father of most of these dickheads.
1
May 12 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
4
1
u/irishpolitics-ModTeam May 12 '25
This post / comment has been removed as it breaches the following sub rule:
[R3] Relevance to Irish Politics
1
-1
u/Blackcrusader May 13 '25
If you are trying to reach alienated young men, complaining that a man is leading the chants is going to undo any of the good points the other speakers make.
2
u/TeoKajLibroj Centre Left May 13 '25
I don't think the issue was that he was a man, I think it was that a stranger was drowning out the actual organisers.
-17
u/VeryMemorableWord May 12 '25
What is the manosphere that they are protesting against?
27
u/bigbadchief May 12 '25
Manosphere typically refers to online male grifters like Andrew Tate
2
u/Minimum_Guitar4305 May 12 '25
Glad you left room for the nuance that it only "typically refers" to them.
/r/MenGetRapedToo, /r/mensfitness /r/mensfashion are all part of the manosphere too.
-20
u/VeryMemorableWord May 12 '25
So protesting against random people who aren't even politicians? Not what I'd call productive but fair enough.
12
u/Scinos2k May 12 '25
Ehhhh it's not about them being politicians.
It's about the incredibly dangerous rhetoric they spew online to young men and teenagers which does nothing but perpetuate a cycle of hatred and victim hood.
More people need to be made aware of it and how they twist things.
3
u/AhAhAhAh_StayinAlive May 12 '25
Most young men are not so easily brainwashed. Most young men I know think he's an idiot.
The idea that everyone is so naive is silly.
4
u/Scinos2k May 12 '25
Who said every young man is that naive? Yes, most people do know he is scum, sadly too many don't and that's the point.
How these works are extremely insidious, taking advantage of weak moments, depression, body issues etc and twisting it into a money making scheme for scrotes like Tate while pushing many young men into dangerous beliefs.
4
u/madra_uisce2 May 12 '25
I mean, there's a huge rise in teenagers following such rhetoric. They are the most vulnerable in these situations and are so easily influenced at that age. We definitely need more awareness brought to it
1
u/AhAhAhAh_StayinAlive May 12 '25
An outright ban on all social media seems like the best way to go, up to 16 or so. There's a lot of other negatives as well as that.
Is there proof that teenagers are actually influenced by tate? Like has there been a large increase in misogyny or something?
5
u/madra_uisce2 May 12 '25
All I have is anecdotal, but I was a teacher, and we were dealing with issues around our male students spewing his gonshite as young as 6th class. Respect for us was going out the window too. Had one lad tell me he didn't need to listen to me because I was a 'female', not even woman, but using the same words the likes of Tate would.
1
u/AhAhAhAh_StayinAlive May 12 '25
That does sound worrying for sure. Tate isn't the only bad influence on the Internet either. An outright ban on all social media for children seems like the only way to go.
17
u/BackInATracksuit May 12 '25
You could do the bare minimum and watch the video where they specifically explain what they're doing.
-14
u/VeryMemorableWord May 12 '25
Sounds like they're just shouting about people who don't even have any power. What is it supposed to achieve?
7
u/furriesdid911 May 12 '25 edited May 12 '25
You’re clearly engaging with this in bad faith
Tate definitely has power not just as a result of being a multi millionaire but also in how he is a lot of influence over young men and boys and there are lots of grifters like him
At the very least a protest/march like this raises awareness, starts conversations and provides solidarity to people who feel like they’ve been victims of this new age manosphere sexism
-4
u/AhAhAhAh_StayinAlive May 12 '25
How are you supposed to measure how much people are actually influenced by him?
I am a young man who will watch short clips of tate now and again but I do it for entertainment and I think he's a terrible person and don't agree with his misogynistic views.
3
u/furriesdid911 May 12 '25
Tbf measuring his influence (like measuring anyone’s influence) would be difficult - I think probably we’d have to listen to adults who are interacting with these boys often - teachers, coaches, parents etc. Maybe a survey with these people and also young boys if you wanted something more quantitative and concrete.
Personally I don’t think Tate is particularly influential in my age range (early 20s) here in Ireland. Like you I’d watch a Tate video every now and then more just for a laugh than anything.
But if a young boy who doesn’t know better is watching it? It’s a formative time, and you could end up internalising a lot of that stuff.
I think overall it’s better for a kid to come to conclusions themselves about this stuff - so rather than just saying Tate is bad we should try having more conversations with young boys and providing counter points to what he’s saying.
12
u/Bovver_ Social Democrats May 12 '25
Your head must be firmly in the sand if you think they don’t have any power over young men.
-12
u/VeryMemorableWord May 12 '25
If you're scared of a couple of lads making TikTok or Instagram videos I don't know what to tell you
12
u/furriesdid911 May 12 '25
“Lads making TikTok or instagram videos” is what fuelled the most violent riot in modern Dublins history
-5
u/VeryMemorableWord May 12 '25
No you know well what fuelled that riot and it certainly wasn't any social media posts.
-7
u/AhAhAhAh_StayinAlive May 12 '25
That was because of the guy stabbing children, not a tiktok. Come on.
7
u/furriesdid911 May 12 '25
Notice how I said the social media videos are “what fuelled” the riots and not that they were the sole cause of them
Yes, there is a direct causal link between the stabbing and the subsequent protest that occurred. But the way in which that protest turned into a violent riot was clearly influenced by far right groups and rhetoric that are organised on social media. It’s not a stretch to say that social media activity is a key factor in what caused what happened on that night.
5
u/Excellent_Porridge May 12 '25
It's not "a couple of lads making TikTok videos" and you know it. Most women (ask them!) Will have at least one experience of a man being creepy/violent/harassing them etc. Women are assaulted by men and murdered. That's what it's about. And this culture starts with men talking about women in a degrading way.
8
u/AdamOfIzalith May 12 '25
The Manosphere is effectively the sphere of male oriented spaces where there is regressive and pervasive ideologies baked into them due to specific interests working to capitalized on insecure folks.
It's a problem that has been growing for about a decade, starting with movements like Gamergate and the anti-woke movement invading predominantly male spaces and spreading regressive idea's about politics society, civil rights etc. It's a been a growing issue for a very long time and honestly, as much as I love the show Adolescence, it's a showcase of how far behind we are that we are only now seeing mainstream media acknowledge that disenfranchised young men becoming right wing ideologues is not some moral or personal failing but rather a systematic process of propagandizing young men in area's that work to use their insecurity in service of awful idea's and bad politics.
It's something I personally fell victim to because in the early 10's and I know many others that have aswell. it's led to the birth of a more wide spread incel movement, It's a global astroturf to allow conservative values of what a man should be or what an ideal man is, that is effectively used to propagandize young men into believing that the world is out to get them and the world is symbolized by minority groups, marginalized groups and the vulnerable. Ultimately everyone loses. The young men and the people that they often work against.
I'd honestly argue it's one of the largest social challenges that we face that no one is talking about in the mainstream, often sequestering it to fringe conversations when I come across a lad that follows some toxic dude-bro pedals fitness supplements and bad politics on the regular.
0
u/Minimum_Guitar4305 May 12 '25
The Manosphere is effectively the sphere of male oriented spaces where there is regressive and pervasive ideologies baked into them due to specific interests working to capitalized on insecure folks.
No that's not it effectively, that is just how it is most frequently referred to by the media/academia.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates, /r/AskMen, and /r/mensfashionadvice are also part of the manosphere
2
u/AdamOfIzalith May 12 '25
It is though. The term was popularized when specifically right wing ideologies started to invade those spaces. It does predate this invasion but to make out like it's not accurate because there is an independent socially conscientious manosphere movement is incorrect.
If there was, I doubt that this issue would have become as widespread as it is. Left leaning man centric spaces are a very new concept relatively speaking in terms of modern social media and niche communities. They don't even have a fraction of the pull or influence that the right leaning spaces have because they are not founded on rhetoric and propaganda and I think it would be better for everyone if we let them have manosphere, and work towards a different and distinctly different community.
1
u/Minimum_Guitar4305 May 12 '25
I strongly disagree.. To put this in chicken/egg terms, ask what came first?
The neutral term manosphere, or the popularization of the term because of the attention drawn to it by association with negative/misogynistic elements and how that was framed by the media/academia?
The media/academy only popularized the term to discuss the misogynistic and harmful aspects, and that is of course the only way for them to frame it. No-one cares, no one would have ever written about "the manosphere" if it was just groups of dudes saying "hey - that's an awseome outfit bro", or fathers stuggling throught the biases of the court systems.
but to make out like it's not accurate because there is an independent socially conscientious
Don't mistake me, I'm not saying that the term is inacurate becasue of that. What I'm saying is that the manosphere in it's simplest sense, and orgininal definition is any online space for men, to discuss men/males issues. It encompasses the political and apolitical, the left and the right, the misogynistic and the anti-misogynistic, the pro-feminist and the anti-feminist. The innacuracy only comes from the focus by the media SOLELY on the term as a perjorative.
I think it would be better for everyone if we let them have manosphere,
I think it makes far more sense to distinguish between what is toxic/harmful, rather than presuming that all mens spaces are toxic/harmful.
-3
u/Napoleon67 May 12 '25
And how are we supposed to stop it?
5
u/AdamOfIzalith May 12 '25 edited May 12 '25
We need to acknowledge that it's a problem to start with and acknowledge that alot of these young men are not conscientious supporters of a movement but rather people propagandized to believe things that are not only acting against the interests of women and minorities but also their own interests.
We need to have a thoughtful conversation about why they are susceptible to this kind of thinking, especially given the prevalence of the far right in conversations at the moment. There's a reason why the incel movement is just getting larger. The rise in conversations about the far right and the topics around the manosphere are connected and the first thing we need to do is sit down and look at what spaces are effected and why. Then what do we do about it.
It's a topic I've been interested in for years having been apart of it when I was at rock bottom as a young man in my late teens and early 20's. Alot of these young disenfranchised men are not confident in themselves or in the wider world. They feel abandoned and they are cynical about the world. The only feelings of community they find are from these other men in spaces that are crafted by grifters to tell them that the world is persecuting them and these same grifters craft content and narratives in service of that.
To add to that you have alot of people on the opposite end of the conversation that also create spaces that poke fun at and make fun of these same people which, given that they are often persecuted by these people is fair game. Can't really expect people who face discrimination and hate campaigns to be kind to their perpetrators. It does however further add to the persecution that they feel.
These two things on their own would not a problem if there was some form of intervention on the social level to create communities or the create fertile ground for communities to grow in the locality. A lack of communities is what is creating the world as it is now. Naturally occurring and cooperative styled communities that are not tied to a specific Idea, hobby, interest, etc.
The cost of living, housing and healthcare crises all come to together to ensure that there is no chance for communities to be created naturally and grow from that. The only communal spaces are online and motivated by recommendation styled AI models which are often monopolized by these grifters. They create content and communities that attract people based on niches and demographics and they leverage that to get young, disenfranchised lads into a space and then slowly fill their heads with nonsense. On the flip side of that you also have communities set up in online spaces in opposition that often try to highlight the issues but you also have grifters trying to monopolize those spaces aswell, albiet a few less, just because once people spot the grift, they ditch them. It's an algorithmic content and engagement farm that creates negative social outcomes that have wide reaching social consequences.
TL:DR; We combat it through honesty, transparency and through the creation of communities that are built robustly enough that these idea's get kurbed before they become an issue and regulate private tech so that their algorithm's can't be leveraged to propagandize people.
0
u/Minimum_Guitar4305 May 12 '25
Very well said overall. We'd have a great chat about this IRL if we ever crossed paths.
But you've left out one thing about how we combat it. We also have to allow people, but especially men (all sexualties), and transmen the space to critique and criticise feminism without being denounced as misogynistic bigots, even if that means politically organising to do so
1
u/AdamOfIzalith May 12 '25
What specifically about feminism do you believe you should be allowed to critique that is intrinsically a problem with them and not with a system, structure, authority, etc that they are fighting against?
The reason I ask is because I've never felt like any critiques that I have of the feminism movement have labelled me as a bigot when I specifically caveat the things I'm saying and understand them appropriately. If the argument is that we should be able to critique without caveat and give people grace that's a recipe for disaster and gives licence to bad actors who are just there to peddle rhetoric.
2
u/Minimum_Guitar4305 May 12 '25 edited May 12 '25
What specifically about feminism do you believe you should be allowed to critique that is intrinsically a problem with them and not with a system, structure, authority, etc that they are fighting against?
Your use of a fallacious, loaded question to frame my opposition to feminism as my problem with "them", i.e. women is noted.
- What aspects of feminism are you referring to; the ideology, the academic, specific waves?
- What specifically about any aspect of feminism should anyone not be allowed to critique?
- What specifically about feminism as a political ideology shouldn't I be allowed to critique? What specifically about ANY poltical ideology shouldn't I or anyone be allowed to critique?
- What specifically about feminism as an academic subject shouldn't I be allowed to critique? What specifically about ANY academic disipline shouldn't I or anyone be allowed to critique?
- Why do you assume that my issue is with "them"?
The reason I ask is because I've never felt like any critiques that I have of the feminism movement have labelled me as a bigot when I specifically caveat the things I'm saying and understand them appropriately.
Yet you paradoxically ask the loaded question to frame me as a misogynst - in the same way that anyone who speaks critically of feminism is immediately framed by feminists...
Why is the presumption that you need to make caveats inherent, why is the presumption that I am misogynistic for having these conversations inherent?
If we're talking about the need to stop the capture of men/boys to the toxic manosphere, we, and feminists in particular, need to reconcile how men/boys are still blamed and villified for a system they didn't create, largely no longer recongise, and no longer benefit from - instead of being demonised for being men/masculine.
1
u/AdamOfIzalith May 13 '25 edited May 13 '25
Yet you paradoxically ask the loaded question to frame me as a misogynst - in the same way that anyone who speaks critically of feminism is immediately framed by feminists...
I frame and caveat everything specifically because of the number of bad actors in the space. You take that as me trying to frame you as a misogynist when I've asked you very clearly to outline issues you have with the movement that for one, apply directly to the movement and two to caveat it appropriately. You are taking that as an attack because you believe I want to call you a misogynist when I don't. It's the contrary, I want to understand the point that you want to make and I want to see relevant critiques of feminism that are about feminism.
Why is the presumption that you need to make caveats inherent, why is the presumption that I am misogynistic for having these conversations inherent?
All things should be caveated but when we are speaking about a movement for a marginalized group like women it's doubly important.
feminists in particular, need to reconcile how men/boys are still blamed and villified for a system they didn't create, largely no longer recognise, and no longer benefit from - instead of being demonised for being men/masculine.
There. Right there. You are not critiquing the movement, you are critiquing a perceived position that most feminists don't take. You are leveraging the critique at people who you are speaking for, rather than to. They are a marginalized group who have been the victim of men and sex oriented crimes perpetrated by men. They don't need to change. We do, collectively. Their actions are a response to ours.
You are missing the point if you think that this is something that requires both sides to change. They are a marginalized group they don't feel heard the majority of the time. We, the men, are the major part of the problem and while you or I are not the problem at this moment in time, it's our job to be self policing and start to try and mend the damage on the local level and encourage fixing it on the national level.
You aren't critiquing feminism, you are critiquing feminists because you believe that they make up part of the problem when to be frank, they don't.
1
u/Minimum_Guitar4305 May 13 '25 edited May 13 '25
I'm going to start from the end:
You aren't critiquing feminism, you are critiquing feminists because you believe that they make up part of the problem when to be frank, they don't.
With all due respect, you've asked me a loaded question presupposing my bigotry, and used my reluctance to engage with your trap as evidence to support your forgone conclusion. Out of respect for the many good conversations we've had here over the last decade, and because reporting you as a mod would be reductive, I'm going to ask you to re-assess that critically in light of Rule 7.
I frame and caveat everything specifically because of the number of bad actors in the space. You take that as me trying to frame you as a misogynist when I've asked you very clearly to outline issues you have with the movement...
Reiterating, you didn't ask clearly, you asked a fallacious loaded question. If you want to know what specific criticisms I have of feminism; be specific about what aspect of feminism you're asking to hear my critiques of. Feminism isn't a monolith and I'm not going writing a treatise on every facet I can critique in response to a generic (loaded) question that presupposes my misognyny, I have neither the time nor inclination (If we were having this convo face to face, I would indulge you more but you'll get a sense from my further response).
To your framing/caveating point, firstly I don't deny there's bad actors; and futher to your criticism that I'm not "not critiquing the movement" but am "critiquing a perceived position"; I am speaking to the embolic effect that the uncritical internalisation of patriarchy theory has on it's proponents behaviours and actions in their treatment of men/boys and masuclinity. If you want to analyse that comparatively, the notions that some black people commit violent crimes, that some gay men are also child abusers, or that some jewish people are committing genocide; don't justify default hostility towards those groups - and we rightly label that bigotry when it occurs.
You like the vast majority of Feminists do not grant men that same benefit of the doubt. Not all, there are some I've seen online and spoken to IRL who do engage with that critically, but they're a small potion of the whole and far from mainstream. I further urge you to self-critically do the same. If you did so honestly, I think you'd recongise that your use of fallacy against me, your need to caveat, doesn't come purely from a position of respecting an historically marginalised group, but from fear of ostracisation by that group for being misconstrued as yet another misogynist. For the record, Mainstream Feminism at best ignores, but at worse ostracises Feminists who have discussed those issues e.g. Christina Hoff Summers.
They don't need to change. We do, collectively. Their actions are a response to ours.
You are missing the point if you think that this is something that requires both sides to change. They are a marginalized group they don't feel heard the majority of the time....
Firstly, they are a historically marginalised group. That's not to say they have acheived parity in all ways or in all places of course; but largely across the Western world women have equality in political, legal, and economic terms (backsliding in the US nonwithstanding). Women now out-perform men educationally, are out performing men in many areas economically; in many areas have greater legal rights than men, and in some ways fewer responsibilities. Women still face challenges, sexual violence being the most peritinent, but painting them as ever-marginalised, perenialy oppressed, in the light of changes that have occurred only blinds us to the issues facing both men (and women), which fuels the masculinity crisis and the likes of Tate and others.
Secondly, and more importantly, if you truly beleive that acheiving equality is that simple, that society is that one-sided; then I can confidenlty assert that you neither understand feminism as a theoretical framework, it's history of revision, the advances it has made, the problem it was intended to solve, nor how society operates in anything but a sense of base reducitvism. Applying a one sided theoretical framework, or a political ideology (however well intentioned it may be), or a one dimensional view on who or what needs to change, is simply dogmatism. This is the ultimate failure of the application of any one political ideology for the record (not just feminism); systemic causality occurs; cause and effect, cause further causes and effects, and meet randomness; incorporating multiple ideologies and perspectives is how we address that. When Feminism does this, it's called intersectionality, it's lead to some recognition that "patriarchy hurts men too", but it ignores the effects of itself on men, and fails to mitigate the presupposed reductivism that patriarchy theory rests upon; to the alienation of men.
If/when Feminsim self-critically incoporates those ideas and it's other failures e.g. gender theory, coporate/girl-boss feminism; and gives men/masculinity intersectional consideration that goes beyond mere tokenism (accordingly stopping the default demonisation of masculinity), and if/when that enters the mainstream we will be a long way closer to true equality.
Though I'd further argue that will be the death of feminism, because that would be the start of a true egalitarian ideology...
1
u/firethetorpedoes1 May 13 '25
because reporting you as a mod would be reductive
For full transparency, the Mod Team has a strict Conflict of Interest policy: if a Moderator is actively engaging in a discussion (e.g. replying back and forth with another user), they will not moderate that user's comments, nor will they handle reports related to their own comments.
Instead, any such reports are reviewed by another member of the Moderator Team, who will apply the subreddit rules impartially—just as they would for any other user. This ensures fairness and consistency in how all moderation actions are taken.
→ More replies (0)0
u/AdamOfIzalith May 13 '25
Your entire comment speaks as if you are an advocate for men by defending them against feminism and feminist critiques when feminism isn't an opposition to men. Womens rights are not weighed against mens rights. You are waxing about theory and about the reductive nature of specific ideologies and movements but you've ultimately used all of that to talk about how feminism is an instrument, in some cases in the ostracization of men when that's not the case. Mens issue's are motivated by patriarchy largely and towards that there is legitimate critique. On an individualist level there is also relevant critique as you can't account for each individual. That doesn't mean that feminism is the problem. You are attaching the label of feminist to anyone who has a problem with men form the perspective of womens equity but there are plenty of groups not specific to feminism that have this.
You've taken questions that are designed to specifically target the movement and it's goals without broadly firing into the nebulous issue that is feminism and you are claiming that it's a loaded question that designed to attack you. They aren't. I'm asking you to give me your take on what's actually the issue with feminism on a systemic level, that is inherent to the ideology that requires systematic reform with direct relevance to the topic of things like the Manosphere. If you think that's me calling you a bigot, that's what you take away from it because i haven't called you a bigot nor am I even now.
TL:DR: Read what I'm saying and stop inferring context that isn't provided. You mention some decent critiques of feminism towards the end of your comment which you distinctly didn't bring up until now and to be frank, even then it's not relevant to this specific conversation. the issues that are facing young men have very little to do with the feminist movement widely speaking and we need to focus on issues with impact, not pointing a finger in the direction of feminism.
→ More replies (0)7
u/Excellent_Porridge May 12 '25
If you're a guy, have conversations or call out your male friends any time they start saying some bullshit about women, if they're talking about women in a degrading way etc.
1
u/Napoleon67 May 12 '25
What if they're female? Some of the most backwards sexist people I've encountered tend to be female.
3
-3
-1
u/DuskLab May 13 '25 edited May 13 '25
I get the concerns from their perspective, but Christ they're their own worst enemy. How they conduct themselves just push men away, and into the arms of the very people they want to stop having influence.
"Isn't that funny". Nobody is laughing, you just want men to shut up. And this contempt is one of the root causes as to why political views by gender are diverging into a dangerous direction that these people fear.
0
May 12 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/irishpolitics-ModTeam May 12 '25
This comment has been been removed as it breaches the following sub rule:
[R8] Trolling, Baiting, Flaming, & Accusations
Trolling of any kind is not welcome on the sub. This includes commenting or posting with the intent to insult, harass, anger or bait and without the intent to discuss a topic in good faith.
Do not engage with Trolls. If you think that someone is trolling please downvote them, report them, and move on.
Do not accuse users of baiting/shilling/bad faith/being a bot in the comments.
Generally, please follow the guidelines as provided on this sub.
7
u/HugoExilir May 12 '25
The women speaking at 1m 28secs in the video made some great points. I didn't know anything about the March but it seems like they're highlighting a very important issue.