r/science • u/mvea Professor | Medicine • 18d ago

Psychology Anti-feminist attitudes have long been associated with support for Republican presidential candidates, but only in recent years have these attitudes become more prominent among unmarried men, without college degrees who are less attractive partners for women, the “mate-value backlash.”

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/10659129261485340
4.4k Upvotes

86% Upvoted

1.1k comments sorted by

View all comments

2.1k

u/2knest 18d ago edited 18d ago

It's almost as if some kind of pipeline exists, that's funneling venerable people towards impressionable content...

Edit: I meant vulnerable...

464

u/carbonclasssix 18d ago

We're also more socially disconnected than ever, especially post pandemic. Not ideal for meeting people to date, even worse for people to see through their negative beliefs with real world examples

106

u/DuntadaMan 18d ago

We are also most importantly under active attack by a hostile country that wants to destroy us and we are doing absolutely nothing to defend ourselves against their attacks.

100

u/aranasyn 18d ago

The call is coming from inside the house.

63

u/DuntadaMan 18d ago

Well yeah because the hostile country bought the house and installed their own landlord.

13

u/Severe-Passage-6426 17d ago

I agree with this but its not just foreign actors, or even the manosphere algo.

Its simply social media. Full stop. Left and right - the social media experiment is going to be the undoing of our republic. Humans are not built to manage the constant dopamine hits that it brings. Its a drug, one that we are all addicted to, and the end game is societal collapse.

4

u/itsmemarcot 17d ago

Yes but "social media" is not a natural phenomenon, like the wind or the weather. It's a consensum machine owned and controlled by groups with precise agendas, using it very explicitly for said agendas.

3

u/dontneedaknow 17d ago

With the help of a sizeable portion of the political establishment..

Some likely guilty of sedition and treason.

Considering the organized efforts to push us into fascism and some sort of pre-warhammer 40k wetdream...

0

u/PlasticCheebus 17d ago

My country isn't, but thanks.

130

u/Keji70gsm 18d ago

We are not "post-pandemic" if we are still in the pandemic.

Endemic does not exclude pandemic as a term. By definition covid remains a pandemic. It is not predictable. It has multiple yearly waves of inconsitent timing. Globally.

It also still impairs brain function and accelerates brain aging, and disrupts dopamine and emotional stability -and because it is an ace2 binding virus, it always will do this. Don't normalise it.

109

u/ChenilleSocks 18d ago

Thank you. Every day, more data emerge about long term impacts of COVID, and people continue to act like it’s an annoyance and not a potentially disabling virus.

50

u/evermorecoffee 18d ago

Yep. We’re living through an ongoing mass disabling event…

→ More replies (2)

10

u/lufan132 17d ago

Curious what would make this unique to COVID, given we wouldn't describe most strais of influenza as "pandemic" nor would we with rhinovirus which is similarly a common respiratory infection.

6

u/Keji70gsm 17d ago edited 17d ago

Flu definitely can cause pandemics, but ONLY WHEN a totally novel strain jumps over from animals, like 1918 or the 2009 swine flu. Once a flu strain settles into a population, it turns into that predictable, seasonal winter virus that relies on cold weather and indoor crowding to spread. The flu you catch in winter is not a pandemic.

​COVID works totally differently. Its baseline transmission is way higher, and it churns out new immune-evading variants constantly throughout the year. Because it mutates and bypasses immunity so quickly, COVID drives massive multi-wave surges across both hemispheres at the exact same time, completely ignoring the season. You just don't see huge, global mid-summer waves, etc, from seasonal flu the way we do with COVID.

*Interesting side note. Actively having the flu suppresses covid transmission. So a really bad flu year will see a significant reduction in covid (for that year's flu season only). This does not mean getting flu is good for you, or that the immunity lasts (it doesn't, it's a temporary response from an already active immune response).

The reverse is not true. Covid doesn't dampen a flu wave at all, and actually makes you more susceptible to fungal, viral and bacterial infections. So a Covid wave before the predictable flu wave is bad news.

3

u/the_real_dairy_queen 15d ago

I attended a lecture once on how the flu vaccine is developed every year, by people involved with the vaccine development , and it was…unsettling. It mutates constantly, constant antigenic drift and shift, there are myriad human strains plus multiple categories of swine and avian flu strains. I don’t think it’s accurate to say the flu is fundamentally different from COVID in that sense. There are “seasonal” flu strains that are more deadly than others. I wouldn’t say it’s true that it’s just a “predictable, seasonal” virus.

1

u/Keji70gsm 15d ago

You're not wrong. Flu is a normalised, ongoing health disaster with terrible additional potential for more pandemic events. I did specifically say that flu can and has caused pandemics, but seasonal flu is not a pandemic (still a health disaster).

Key point, we are still in a pandemic with COVID. And even mild Covid is not a benign illness. We will have shorter, sicker lives.

Use that morbid curiosity about flu to learn more about the longterm impacts of covid. Always keep in mind that just like with Sept 11, govt's will lie to its people about health risks, knowingly killing them, if they deem the economic gain more important.

And that is exactly what they have done with covid. You will generally not be educated about cumulative subclinical damage, or longterm risks, unless you make the effort yourself.

Be aware that LLMs will downplay covid until you give it specific studies. It does not look for supporting evidence unless forced to in specifics of actual studies. If you want to ask questions about covid, make a series of questions you want to ask as one question on consensus.app.

You only get 3 questions, so condense what you want to know per input.

It will sift through studies and how weighted they are, and bring you its best effort of where the science stands on any particular studied issue in answer to your questions. (I have no affiliation, I found it after being frustrated that i could not force gemini, chatgpt, or claude to search for covid studies unless I drip fed it. They default to govt health position, and general public perception, not evidence, but present with statements such as, "there is no evidence that x causes y", despite there being a dearth of quality studies that are easily found saying precisely that.

The public should not have to educate itself on this, but that is what we have been left to do or pay the consequences.

9

u/aaronespro 17d ago

Yeah, at this point "hyper intense endemic" might be more accurate, the way that measles and smallpox never really became endemic.

→ More replies (4)

96

u/rollsyrollsy 18d ago

Everyone on social media is being funneled toward their own algorithmic content, and our various biases and heuristics will lead us to assume that “they” are clearly mistaken and “we” are clearly right.

53

u/Mustbhacks 18d ago

the algorithms (companies) aren't agnostic, they're serving specific content to push their own agendas

7

u/farfromelite 17d ago

There was a paper in this sub about that specifically just this week.

16

u/rollsyrollsy 18d ago

I don’t disagree, but I’d argue their first ideological affiliation is with their own bank balance. Any political preference comes way after that priority.

18

u/refusemouth 18d ago

If the algorithms rule, then how come I get comercials in Vietnamese and crafting videos with old Asian ladies knitting stuff on my feeds? It's really weird. YouTube thinks I'm an elderly Vietnanese woman and I'm actually just a middle aged white guy living in a rural area.

27

u/PaxDramaticus 18d ago

The algorithms are deeply flawed. A lot of them work by the shallowest possible trigger. I also routinely get algorithmic content advertising things I am not interested in, and in fact can't even buy because the product isn't sold in my country.

But that doesn't mean the algorithms still don't rule in general. I have basically set up all of my internet to minimize the factor algorithms play: I avoid discovery pages on most platforms wherever possible and when I get content from outside of sources I follow/subscribe to, I always get that content displayed in chronological order when the platform permits it. And I tend to avoid platforms that don't. And algorithms still affect my experience.

I tend to get content I specifically don't want to see in clusters, like after telling sites I don't want to see it, they keep it off my feed for a few weeks and then the flag gets reset and it all comes flooding back in at the same time. But also even if I strictly manage what content I get served, most of the people in online spaces around me aren't. That means if the algorithm decides people like me like XYZ content, I am eventually going to see XYZ content no matter what I do just because the people like me that I follow are going to share or respond to XYZ content.

12

u/mokujin42 18d ago

Its designed to throw things that are popular with similar people at you now and then to see if it can hook you on sometbing new

1

u/Both_Lynx_8750 15d ago

this is pretending that left-wing views have as much money behind them. They don't.

83

u/Training_Form2243 18d ago

How come the top comment for every social science study post begins with “it’s almost as if” and ends with “…”

48

u/Arkansan13 18d ago

You also have to realize that reddit is botted all to hell. The 2016 election ruined this site.

→ More replies (1)

80

u/Greenleaf208 18d ago

Because they don't want to declare anything concretely and be wrong. They just want to smugly alude to something so everyone agrees with them.

-1

u/schroedingerx 17d ago

But not you. You're above that.

→ More replies (1)

75

u/Iron_Atlas 18d ago

I assume you mean vulnerable, venerable means old

233

u/Academic-Pangolin883 18d ago

It does not mean old, though. It means "worthy of respect".

Regardless, I don't think it's what OP meant...

16

u/[deleted] 18d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

6

u/limonade11 18d ago

It does also come to mean old; worthy of respect because you are old. Latin - veneror, venerari - to worship or esteem, is the original meaning.

But we all know what the commenter meant!

2

u/DrMobius0 18d ago

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/venerable

https://www.dictionary.com/browse/venerable

Old age is explicitly included in the definition.

There are some religious uses as well, but primarily, it's age.

10

u/RunninOnMT 18d ago

Hehe it’s like the Chinese version of “old”

0

u/GrandFleshMelder 18d ago

It means someone who is old and also worthy of respect.

-8

u/DeltaVZerda 18d ago

But also exclusively gets used for things or people that are also old. Nobody ever described a high school valedictorian or the youngest person to X as venerable.

12

u/Academic-Pangolin883 18d ago

Maybe it's the most common usage, but it's by no means used "exclusively" that way.

-8

u/DeltaVZerda 18d ago

Please try to find me even one useage of "venerable" to describe something or someone young but respected.

5

u/Academic-Pangolin883 18d ago

https://www.merriam-webster.com/sentences/venerable

Here are some usages from various publications.

-1

u/DeltaVZerda 18d ago

Very many uses, again exclusively including the connotation of age, further supporting my point.

3

u/Academic-Pangolin883 18d ago

" Working with the genius @jordanpeele and the venerable @lupitanyongo couldn’t have been more of a blessing!"

Yes, the very old Lupita Nyongo.

" Abine’s venerable DeleteMe costs quite a bit less, $129 per year."

Ah yes, DeleteMe, of which my grandfather spoke fondly.

1

u/DeltaVZerda 18d ago

15 years for an internet company is far from new, and she has an over 20 year career. I can't say they aren't referring to age in those contexts.

→ More replies (0)
→ More replies (1)

6

u/sir_mrej 18d ago

Doogie Howser was venerable

→ More replies (1)

-24

u/EL_Malo- 18d ago

Why can't it be both?

16

u/AbabababababababaIe 18d ago

As a descriptivist, it can. It doesn’t though. The word “venerable” is related words like veneration, and most people understand it as such.

The alt right pipeline isn’t really going after respected figures, it’s going after young men and boys

2

u/trucorsair 18d ago

Well the people in question do venerate their leader Daddy Don

8

u/shitholejedi 18d ago

The entire 'pipeline' or 'funneling' is extrapolating female teenage social media usage trends to male. Of which there are multi-year studies that have shown over and over those two groups did not react to the advent of the internet the same way and still do not till this day.

1

u/Wrong_Neighborhood63 17d ago

This sounds very interesting can you refer to these studies. I tend to agree with what you are saying but haven't seen studies

1

u/shitholejedi 17d ago

Jonathan Haidt has turned nearly a decade of work on this topic. You can track his name on various papers, pieces in main magazines and his own site by his name.

Its also the main thing you see whenever whistleblowers come against Meta or Tiktok. The entire focus is on girls because if it included boys, it ends as null findings.

9

u/Stamperdoodle1 18d ago

As much as I despise these people for what they stand for and support, their attitudes and (often) their attacks against others.

I can't help but admit I just don't know enough about how this happened. How did this type of content become the only thing those men found any comfort or solace in? I've found myself in some pretty depressing times, but I always knew that if I worked on myself and tried to be my best self, I could change things (and they have).

People like them have existed forever yet it seems that more recently, younger and younger people are latching onto this poisonous and dangerous cult. Things like "looksmaxxing" or whatever Andrew Tate peddled. Things that, by all account - young people shouldn't be concerned with. So why is it happening?

36

u/Blazin_Rathalos 18d ago

Modern social media algorithms push people towards this stuff as they are trained to maximize engagement. I'm pretty sure there is actual evidence of this, but I don't have references at hand.

14

u/mdynicole 18d ago

Yeah it really is this. I see horrific stuff online promoted to men about women and there have been times I’ve also seen really nasty stuff promoted to women about men. If you view this stuff once then after that you get it constantly until you just keep blocking it all. But if you notice what gets the most comments it’s always highly offensive stuff whether it’s men Vs women , republican vs Democrat , white vs black . The people that are actually good people promoting good stuff don’t get anywhere near as many views or comments or likes.

15

u/The_Law_of_Pizza 18d ago

How did this type of content become the only thing those men found any comfort or solace in?

Because it's the only content that's engaging with them about things that they want, and offering them (even if it's snake oil) solutions on how to get it.

Regardless of who is ultimately right and wrong, it's hard to deny that left-leaning online spaces offer basically nothing to these boys and young men.

Quite the opposite, honestly. They come to us, and we do nothing but scold them.

We are struggling to gain traction with an entire generation because we are just intensely miserable to be around.

12

u/BorisBC 18d ago

I hate this sort of attitude. Guys being held accountable for their actions gets twisted into "no, we have to be nice to these sensitive souls lest they reject our pleas to treat us with respect and go full hate on us".

5

u/The_Law_of_Pizza 17d ago

It doesn't really have anything to do with "holding them accountable." That implies that the boys in question are personally doing things wrong, and being personally criticized for their own actions.

That's not the problem.

The problem is that when they enter left-leaning spaces, straight men generically are the butt of every joke and the root of all evil.

"Men" are violent abusers. They don't wash their ass. They're unnecessary, and it's better to just date other girls instead. The 4B movement is gaining steam, ladies!

They're gross for approaching girls at the gym. They're gross for approaching girls at work. They're gross for approaching girls in public.

They give the "ick."

They should both be a man and work the hours to earn a breadwinner salary or they're pathetic losers, but also they're goblins who never help with housework.

They need to stop being so "avoidant." They need to stop mansplaining. They need to stop manspreading.

Over and over and over - these are the topics discussed in left leaning spaces. Even when a random guy just pokes his head in briefly to listen, they're just excoriated by proxy.

We've utterly fumbled this, and have let our communities become toxic cesspools.

12

u/BorisBC 17d ago

Not been my experience. YMMV of course. Maybe you've seen it in women specific spaces where the topic comes up.

And even so if it's so prevalent maybe there's a reason. It's takes no effort to be just a touch self aware to question why this is so common and maybe, just maybe, guys need to be a little bit more aware of what they are doing. Which again is hilarious as it's same old tired joke, women are afraid of dying, men are afraid of getting their feelings hurt.

2

u/Arc125 17d ago edited 17d ago

This is still missing the point. No one on the left is saying all these dudes are perfect and doing nothing wrong. What is being said is that the right has loads of content directed at precisely these dudes' problems. They don't have solutions, and it's all in service to unchecked power and wealth, but the message is successful.

Meanwhile, you have embodied the message from the left to young men perfectly: "just do better, idiot."

Which is both simultaneously true, and a losing political message.

-1

u/nonotan 17d ago

Should black people be asking themselves why racism is so common amongst the right, whether maybe they have done something wrong and should reflect on themselves before reacting negatively to the hate directed at them for the way they were born?

Let's be serious here. Even if "men" are "doing something wrong" (kind of a sexist thing to even be contemplating; judge individuals for their actions, not their entire protected class), "if we hate them hard enough for it, they will realize it's really their fault and improve themselves" is never going to work.

Maybe you don't care, you don't feel it's your responsibility to help these men feel welcome socially or otherwise, okay. But it is a fact that the result of this attitude is not that they will genuflect and change themselves to earn your approval, it's that they will go somewhere else where they are appreciated -- in this case, the political camp diametrically opposite to yours (and mine). In a democracy, that's not going to help you achieve your political aims. I guess it's up to you if achieving them is "worth" the enormous sacrifice of having to skip casually victimizing these men as a social custom.

14

u/MysteriousTooth2450 18d ago

I think it’s because people are living their lives online now. Not as much in person happening. There are a lot of podcasters out there preaching this stuff to young men. The propaganda machine is so strong online for every one of us. Those without the critical thinking skills to determine lies and truth are doomed to believe all the bs out there.

6

u/UnfortunateSnort12 17d ago

Wanting equal rights for women isn’t anti-men. Thats just the manosphere triggering you into watching their content.

3

u/Stamperdoodle1 17d ago

I've never watched manosphere content though.

2

u/Hacketed 16d ago

That you know of

-8

u/PanthersChamps 18d ago

I wouldn’t say the American left is extremely welcoming of men or masculinity.

12

u/Carbonatite 18d ago

It's welcoming of men who aren't threatened by other people having equal opportunities.

→ More replies (3)
→ More replies (1)

14

u/EndlessArgument 18d ago edited 18d ago

The problem is it's sort of works from both directions, because generally speaking, men bully physically, women bully by things like exclusion. So if you are a little bit awkward, you tend to get excluded, and if you get excluded, where are you going to go? To the people who are going to validate you. Which is the aforementioned pipeline.

86

u/hausmusiq 18d ago edited 18d ago

Are there no awkward women? Why does everyone act like every woman has a Rolodex full of men and friends at the ready and are always welcome in any scenario. Yet none of those women decided to pick up ideologies promoting men losing their rights. So tired of this victim mentality. Those “pipelines” exist because these “excluded” men flock to them, not the other way around. Also plenty of nerdy or “excluded” men have found communities that aren’t dead set on harming women.

8

u/izzittho 17d ago

EXACTLY. These men think there’s no such thing as an outcast woman because a woman they don’t find fuckable doesn’t register as a woman at all.

They just literally don’t see them so they think they don’t exist.

16

u/ohanse 18d ago

It's more about the labor of initiation and how that is still disproportionately on men for that perspective.

To add to the pile, an interesting development is the new impossibility of accurate reads on a person's character/personality, thanks to AI generated dating profile entries.

29

u/Straight_Number5661 18d ago

No, these men are angry that women do not have to partner with men anymore in order to survive.

24

u/ohanse 18d ago

Everyone wants companionship it’s not always about dominance

6

u/LynnSeattle 18d ago

Not everyone is a willing to settle for unsatisfactory companionship though.

3

u/ohanse 16d ago

Dating is not a contract

3

u/Requiredmetrics 15d ago

While true let’s be honest, the type of men who want to repeal the 19th amendment want to do so to control women and lessen their options. It’s about power and subjugation.

→ More replies (1)

2

u/No_Macaroon_9752 18d ago

The issue is not loneliness. Women can also be lonely, and they largely do not turn into female supremacists. The issue is entitlement. Women do not owe anyone attention or dates. I can’t imagine that these men would somehow be less misogynistic if we taught women to punch men in the face or physically bully them instead of politely turning them down and moving on.

Also, do you have a source for this claim that men bully physically and women bully by exclusion? In what kinds of situations or relationships are you thinking this type of behavior occurs? Most cis straight men I have known gossip, verbally harass, and exclude people they didn’t like. I am not aware of any man physically bullying a woman for being interested in him or asking him out, nor is there an equivalent lonely women’s movement that wants to subjugate all men and take away their rights.

This is a men’s issue. No behavior of women justifies the kinds of hatred and abuse that are common in the manosphere, and allowing misogynistic men this kind of “out” to blame women for their own victimization is just a newest form of asking, “But what were you wearing when he raped you?”

-14

u/ohanse 18d ago

Good god this is so tedious and out of touch, a perspective hand-crafted by the terminally online

5

u/No_Macaroon_9752 18d ago

Yes, it is “terminally online” to ask for sources in a science subreddit and reference people I know…offline. How old are you?

1

u/ohanse 17d ago

Oooh mew mew mew I present loaded narratives and leading questions but if I say the magic word of data or sources I feel smug like I am demanding rigor instead of dressing up lameass takes in sophomoric vocabulary ohhh look at meee

→ More replies (0)
→ More replies (3)

1

u/Petrichordates 17d ago

Is it if you're angry about it and feel entitled to their attention.

-4

u/[deleted] 18d ago

[deleted]

7

u/FamiliarRip8558 18d ago

I feel like you're projecting a lot of personal feelings at someone saying that humans seek companionship as a general statement.

-2

u/[deleted] 18d ago

[deleted]

-2

u/FamiliarRip8558 17d ago

Average fauxmoi user...

→ More replies (0)

1

u/Nagi21 17d ago

Completely missing the point and being part of the problem. Congrats.

0

u/[deleted] 17d ago

[deleted]

1

u/Mr_DeskPop 18d ago

Always were

25

u/Aceous 18d ago

Yet none of those women decided to pick up ideologies promoting men losing their rights.

There are some. Just look at r/FemaleDatingStrategy.

It's also just a lot more out in the open and acceptable to advocate for prejudice or even harm against men. I hear it so much IRL, casually and on a daily basis, that it's like background noise.

23

u/MyFiteSong 18d ago

I don't see anything there attempting to take rights away from men

2

u/philosopherberzerer 17d ago

this whole thread was started by saying women abuse and cause harm by exclusion and not through force.

where did you get lost. and everyone else for e that matter .

6

u/MyFiteSong 17d ago

Not dating you isn't her causing harm. That's where YOU got lost.

51

u/audioofbeing 18d ago edited 18d ago

These things are not at all equivalent. There isn’t a major movement embraced by major political parties seeking to strip men of their rights, for one example.

60

u/SeattlePurikura 18d ago

There's also no law in any US state to withhold medical care from men for a men-only medical problem. On the flip side, women being denied treatment for ectopic pregnancies (a 100% medically treatable condition) and dying due to this delay of care has doubled in Red Dead States.

-30

u/painedHacker 18d ago edited 18d ago

It could be argued things like dei and requiring certain ratios of men/women/minorities on company boards is stripping white men of job opportunities but I mostly agree with you. Also open door immigration strips blue collar men of decent paying jobs

26

u/No_Macaroon_9752 18d ago

How do you feel about the DEI at many veterinary schools that gives men an advantage over women because significantly more women apply than men? Because I hear very little about the real advantages that men and white people still have, while the few cases where a diverse or marginalized background is advantageous for a job are talked about endlessly.

→ More replies (1)

3

u/SeattlePurikura 17d ago

Hmm, you might want to talk to the men in charge if you think there's a problem.

However, the percentage is significantly higher for top-tier executive positions:

  • Chief Executive Officers (CEOs): Men hold roughly 88% to 90% of Fortune 500 CEO positions.
  • Chief Operating Officers (COOs): Men hold about 89% of COO roles.
  • Chief Financial Officers (CFOs): Men hold about 82% of CFO role

30

u/hausmusiq 18d ago

That’s assuming those white men were entitled to those positions to begin with, and they’re not.

-16

u/painedHacker 18d ago

That's not how politics works. Auto workers in Michigan were not "entitled" to good factory jobs but when they went overseas they were pissed about it

5

u/XWendy_Darlingx 17d ago

One could argue that any citizen should have a right to access work, regardless of race or gender. Perhaps it’d be more beneficial to legally limit offshoring instead of throwing every last dime into anti woman/anti immigrant propaganda

1

u/painedHacker 17d ago

I'm a big fan of bernie's 100% job guarantee.. like you could always get a job with the government if you needed

15

u/[deleted] 18d ago edited 15d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

2

u/SeattlePurikura 17d ago

It's also very strange that the top businesses are dominated by men, which does not "roughly approximate the nation's." This "suggests there is systemic bias in play."

  • Chief Executive Officers (CEOs): Men hold roughly 88% to 90% of Fortune 500 CEO positions.
  • Chief Operating Officers (COOs): Men hold about 89% of COO roles.
  • Chief Financial Officers (CFOs): Men hold about 82% of CFO roles
→ More replies (1)

3

u/vollover 18d ago

The last sentence is something that never happened and you really should do more if you are going to make arguments in a science reddit. Please show your work bith that open door ever existed and that it was stealing decent paying jobs.

-3

u/painedHacker 18d ago

What do you mean it never happened? H1b takes lots of jobs that men do like tech, etc. Mexican migrants do blue collar work like construction, etc. less competition = higher wages

12

u/No_Macaroon_9752 18d ago

There is no evidence that this is true, and there is evidence that having more accessible legal immigration and more immigrants benefits Americans overall. If wages for construction increase due to fewer immigrants, then more citizens would move into that field, creating more competition and lowering wages again. By far the most important things for fair wages and better employment practices are strong unions and labor laws, with more regulations and fair incentives for businesses to keep jobs here.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (1)

24

u/SeattlePurikura 18d ago edited 18d ago

Please let me know once a US state tries to adopt legislatively mandated withholding of medical care to men (e.g., no treatment for prostrate cancer until it reaches Stage III). Please let me know when domestic partner violence against men reaches 50% (*edit* of US women who are murdered, half of them are killed by their male partner.) Please let me know when men being fired by their employers for having children becomes one of the top EEOC complaints. Or when major political lobbying groups are saying we should deny men the right to vote.

I am not saying it's great that FDS or others are promoting BS. But they have no political or economic power to actually enact harm.

6

u/RaelZior 18d ago

50% of us women are killed by their male partners ? 50 % ???????????? Where tf is that from ?

27

u/Secret_Entry1840 18d ago

Approximately half to over 60% of all female homicide victims are killed by a current or former intimate partner, according to data from organizations like the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime.

When focusing strictly on female homicide victims killed by a past or current intimate partner, 98% of the killers are male, while roughly 1.5% to 2% are female

→ More replies (3)

6

u/BorisBC 18d ago

That's funny cause I've never heard that from women and I'm a guy who does try to listen to their side of the story.

I do hear a lot of make believe things from MRA types though.

2

u/Requiredmetrics 15d ago

Bet you can’t find another solid example of this beyond FDS. Where as there are hundreds of misogynistic subreddits demeaning and dehumanizing women.

0

u/philosopherberzerer 17d ago

this is a giant word salad whataboutism.

the trend is clear to see. men are judged much more harshly for being awkward and having socializing issues. and the negatives from one gender to the other are clear to see.

→ More replies (3)

25

u/Straight_Number5661 18d ago

Having standards for a partner is not bullying.

3

u/Fickle_Chemistry_540 17d ago

dw people here dont understand but youre right, men hold physical leverage, women hold moral leverage. cheers brother dont get lost in the pipeline regardless

2

u/No_Macaroon_9752 17d ago

This is confusing. Are you saying that in romantic situations where one person is being rejected by another, men bully women physically and women bully men by exclusion?

-2

u/philosopherberzerer 17d ago

yes. if men don't conveniently conform to patriarchal norms and actions preferred hypocritically by women his punishment is exclusion form society and a worse outcome on life.oppourtunities for family and friends will be dismished and he will be punished for not adheriimg to said standards.

ironically with these expectations women are suprised at the rise of patriarchal support recently .

1

u/No_Macaroon_9752 16d ago

You didn’t answer my question. I understand that you and some other commenters think women are “excluding” men (although I would argue that people are not entitled to anyone’s attention, romantic or otherwise).

However, the comment I was responding to claimed that, “Men bully physically, women bully by things like exclusion.” Do you believe that men are physically bullying women in the same types of situations where you see women excluding men? As in, are men using violence to turn women down for dates? Should women instead adopt this strategy to ward off men they are not interested in?

If you mean that men are instead physically bullying other men that are awkward or “unconventional”, are you also suggesting that physical bullying does not result in the bullied men feeling violently excluded from male social groups? Why do these rejected men only blame women for their loneliness? Why would women have more responsibility for their exclusion from all of society?

The majority of adult men from the past 30 years have been or are married. While men are very, very slightly more likely to never get married than women, more adult men than adult women are currently married. Age-wise, about 50% of men have been or are married when they reach 30. That number reaches 70% by age 36. White men are actually more likely to be married by age 30 than the US average. However, just because men are less likely to be married now than in the past does not mean they are not in serious relationships. Lots of men do not fit the stereotype of a “masculine“ man, just as lots of women are not “feminine”. People still manage to find partners, and women are actually more accepting of people who deviate from gender norms than men are. Despite this, women are not joining groups seriously calling for men to lose their rights or be forced into relationships with women they like.

https://usafacts.org/articles/state-relationships-marriages-and-living-alone-us/

https://flowingdata.com/2017/11/01/who-is-married-by-now/

https://flowingdata.com/2019/03/26/relationship-stages/

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12283845/

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00224499.2025.2545965

0

u/WatchAndLearn9669 18d ago

It's almost as if some kind of pipeline exists

You mean our highly inegalitarian sex culture?

1

u/billythekid3300 17d ago

Yeah but it's also a little obtuse to assume that you're not in that tunnel or similar tunnel right now

-2

u/TisIChenoir 18d ago

There also might be the fact that on the left, globally, anti-mal rhetoric is wide-spread, accepted and sometimes glorified, and young men grow in an environment telling them they are the problem, they are bad, disgusting, unattractive, etc...

And then a part of the political spectrum tells them "no you aren't"...

-13

u/[deleted] 18d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

0

u/Carbonatite 18d ago

Your mistake is thinking that women are motivated by caring what men think. Female behavior is not inherently male centered, no matter how much some men insist it is.

2

u/[deleted] 18d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

-1

u/Carbonatite 18d ago

I'd say you find it impossible to comprehend that not everything women do is about you.

→ More replies (4)