this post was submitted on 01 Feb 2024
368 points (92.6% liked)

News

23296 readers
4167 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Boys and men from generation Z are more likely than older baby boomers to believe that feminism has done more harm than good, according to research that shows a “real risk of fractious division among this coming generation”.

On feminism, 16% of gen Z males felt it had done more harm than good. Among over-60s the figure was 13%.

The figures emerged from Ipsos polling for King’s College London’s Policy Institute and the Global Institute for Women’s Leadership. The research also found that 37% of men aged 16 to 29 consider “toxic masculinity” an unhelpful phrase, roughly double the number of young women who don’t like it.

“This is a new and unusual generational pattern,” said Prof Bobby Duffy, director of the Policy Institute. “Normally, it tends to be the case that younger generations are consistently more comfortable with emerging social norms, as they grew up with these as a natural part of their lives.”

Link to study: https://www.kcl.ac.uk/news/masculinity-and-womens-equality-study-finds-emerging-gender-divide-in-young-peoples-attitudes

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] kescusay@lemmy.world 135 points 9 months ago (8 children)

Seriously doubt this (and most polling these days). Gen Z is particularly unlikely to respond to polls or answer unknown callers in general. Until those issues in polling are solved, I take them with a grain of salt.

[–] MicroWave@lemmy.world 80 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (33 children)

Looks like this was an online poll where you get paid if randomly selected:

Ipsos UK interviewed online a representative sample of 3,716 adults aged 16+ across the United Kingdom between 17 and 23 August 2023. This data has been collected by Ipsos’s UK KnowledgePanel, an online random probability panel...

https://www.kcl.ac.uk/news/masculinity-and-womens-equality-study-finds-emerging-gender-divide-in-young-peoples-attitudes

For what it's worth, there's a recent Gallup survey showing a similar trend that published a couple weeks ago:

...Since 2014, women between the ages of 18 and 29 have steadily become more liberal each year, while young men have not. Today, female Gen Zers are more likely than their male counterparts to vote, care more about political issues, and participate in social movements and protests.

https://www.businessinsider.com/gen-z-gender-gap-young-men-women-dont-agree-politics-2024-1

[–] ClockworkOtter@lemmy.world 23 points 9 months ago (1 children)

That's an interesting thing to note. If the people more likely to approve of Tate and his message are the ones looking for easy money then that could indicate a degree of selection bias.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (32 replies)
load more comments (7 replies)
[–] djsoren19@yiffit.net 92 points 9 months ago (1 children)

I'd like to warn all the Americans against generalizing based upon their personal experiences or beliefs here. This is a UK study that sampled a UK population. These results can't necessarily be generalized to any other country, this is focused on the UK culture.

[–] rustydomino@lemmy.world 32 points 9 months ago (1 children)

There was a recent story on NPR that addressed this. I can’t find it now but basically it said that all these studies in isolation have issues but now there appears to be a trend that transcends national boundaries and cultures.

[–] gAlienLifeform@lemmy.world 29 points 9 months ago

I don't know about the NPR one, but Business Insider and the Financial Times had articles recently pulling together a bunch of surveys finding similar trends in the US and around the world respectively

[–] AdmiralShat@programming.dev 66 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (13 children)

I find the internet is super good at locking people into echo chambers. For some reason, I feel especially keen on this when I was super into reddit over the last decade. I could FEEL just how a community would shift into just saying the same 10 things on repeat and any deviation would result in downvotes and messages in my inbox.

But it's not just reddit. Modern video feed algorithms and other social media just need to feed you the same stuff you've engaged with previously.

So what ends up happening is young boys only see the videos of angry purple haired stereotype liberal feminist first year college student get SLAMMED/DESTROYED by Ben Shapiro or Jordan Peterson or a woman who is clearly saying something sarcastic with sad sigma male music in the background and all the comments are calling for her to be put in prison or death.

And that's not to say people don't experience these types IRL and it morphs their opinions, my sister is this stereotype and is pretty fucking stupid and she will get into heated debates on Facebook about stuff she has no idea about. She'll read a headline and form a whole mindset of bullshit around it and never verify if it was just a click bait article posted to Facebook to get ad revenue with no concept of journalist integrity. It's really difficult talking to her about anything political because even though I'm pretty liberal/progressive myself, she'll just say things that are factually wrong and when I try to talk to her about it she takes it as me disagreeing and won't listen to reason or logic outside of her preconceived image of reality. Very difficult person

I often have to look at her and remind myself that people like her are a very small portion of the population and aren't really indicative of the masses.

[–] BaskinRobbins@sh.itjust.works 26 points 9 months ago

I swear rage baiting in the social media era has to be the most lucrative grift of all time. Even being super aware of it I still fall for it from time to time.

load more comments (12 replies)
[–] mightyfoolish@lemmy.world 59 points 9 months ago (4 children)

The wording here is really important. We don't know how masculinity and feminism are being defined here.

Stuff that began with "woman's suffrage" are honored by people in this age group. They think it's normal women vote, have jobs, leave the house etc. Some of this stuff probably isn't even "feminism" to them but just "normal."

Remember that these guys are on social media a lot more than us and see those words misued frequently for click bait, etc.

[–] BluesF@lemmy.world 17 points 9 months ago (1 children)

But that misuse of the word is harming the overall cause. It's not like the need for feminism has evaporated, although it has surely evolved, and if young men think it's harmful... Even if what they think is harmful is not an accurate representation of what feminism is, they aren't going to be supporters of what it actually is if it has the name attached.

Maybe it is time for a new movement with a new name.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] bedrooms@kbin.social 54 points 9 months ago (8 children)

Although I understand the importance of feminism, I never had the impression that feminists are good at PR. Somehow, most articles written by feministsI've read love to stereotype and bash men.

[–] 520@kbin.social 41 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Feminism is something with many internal factions. But yeah, the loudest ones aren't usually interested in genuine discourse. Some of those factions can act every bit as unhinged as 'persecuted' Christians about total non-issues, like Oscars nominations despite womankind as a whole having some very real issues to worry about.

[–] MagicShel@programming.dev 30 points 9 months ago (1 children)

People who say reasonable things most people can agree with rarely get their own platform.

[–] gAlienLifeform@lemmy.world 22 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Also, lots of people who say reasonable things have lies spread about them by misogynists and get made to look unreasonable

[–] MagicShel@programming.dev 12 points 9 months ago

That too, that too. There are a lot of times something sounds absolutely nuts without context (and reasonable with it) and that is frequently used against certain folks as well.

[–] lolcatnip@reddthat.com 22 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

That's selection bias. Reasonable feminists usually don't crow about being feminists, probably because they don't want to be judged based on stereotypes about feminists.

[–] TSG_Asmodeus@lemmy.world 22 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (20 children)

Somehow, most articles written by feministsI've read love to stereotype and bash men.

Does anyone have a link to any of these? I keep hearing recently that somehow this has been a thing for ages, but last I checked "wanting gender equality" was the driving idea of feminism, and that a large portion of women and men agreed with this.

I'm in my early 40's and I definitely haven't seen some deluge of articles by women, who while proclaiming feminism, "stereotype and bash men."

EDIT: Seven downvotes, zero links. Pretty par for the course, guys. I'm not surprised, just disappointed.

EDIT 2: To any men, or boys, reading this who have been assaulted, there are supports for you. Feminism is as much about getting you the support you need that you don't have just as much as it is about getting women the support they need. I can't cover every country here, but if you're from Canada like me here is a government link to services for men and boys in intimate partner violence situations, and for 'general abuse' there is this link. There are people out there who care, please reach out to them.

load more comments (20 replies)
[–] andyburke@fedia.io 21 points 9 months ago (2 children)

... just curious, but are you perusing a lot of feminist literature?

I know I'm not.

But what I do see are the articles that the right wing has decided are rage inducing and fair game and that they plaster everywhere to try to influence people.

So ... maybe worth some thought.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] lolcatnip@reddthat.com 51 points 9 months ago (20 children)

Feminism has a branding problem. The name itself makes it sound like it's about putting women above men. People who don't know better—the kind of people who are disproportionately young—will judge feminism based on the name.

Calling it feminism made sense when everyone "knew" women were generally inferior to men, but since gender equality has become the mainstream view, the name had lost the context that made it work. Combined with the scope creep of feminism that causes it to encompass issues like disability rights and economic inequality, I think feminism is becoming indistinguishable from leftism.

[–] nicetriangle@kbin.social 43 points 9 months ago (1 children)

I think feminism is becoming indistinguishable from leftism.

There might be a reason for that. Where on the right are you hearing strong advocacy for women's rights and equality?

[–] agitatedpotato@lemmy.world 24 points 9 months ago (1 children)

People in politics are painting infrastructure bills as progressive these days, so feminism is one of those leftisms just like repaving roads and fixing bridges that are years out of spec. The overton window must be the window on a plane because it wont stop moving.

[–] Bigmouse@lemmy.world 13 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Believibg in the power of cooperation is already communism in some circles...

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Drewelite@lemmynsfw.com 19 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Problem is that the branding issue is a problem for women too. The vast majority of feminists are great folks who want equality. But it also attracts the self important types that want to use victim status to get ahead or just generally put the other side down. And they're usually the loudest "feminists". That perpetuates the branding problem.

[–] AnarchistArtificer@slrpnk.net 14 points 9 months ago (1 children)

I think this problem is always going to exist when we're talking about large political or philosophical movements. There's no Council of Feminism who gets to decide who "counts" as a "real feminist". I've met self proclaimed feminists whose views are what I would describe as actively anti-feminist, but there's nothing I can do to change that.

An example that comes to my mind is how I grappled with the existence of Trans-Exclusionary-Radical-Feminism and it's adherents (TERFs). It wasn't just their transphobia I had beef with, but so much of their supporting worldview made me want to proclaim that they are "no true feminists". That felt intellectually disingenuous though, because who am I to say what "true feminism" is?

I've come to terms with this kind of discomfort, and it's something that has affected to what extent I call myself a feminist. I still do, but like any word, it's utility depends on context and often it's just not a useful label when it covers such a wide diversity of viewpoints. Certainly it shouldn't be seen as a synonym for "good", which is perhaps how I sometimes thought of it.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] lone_faerie@lemmy.blahaj.zone 19 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Feminism is leftism and leftism is feminism. It's always been that way because it's all about the same issue, equality. Women's rights, civil rights, trans rights, they're all fighting for the same thing. One of my favorite quotes comes from Fannie Lou Hamer, civil rights and women's rights activist, "Nobody's free until everybody's free"

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (17 replies)
[–] LarmyOfLone@lemm.ee 40 points 9 months ago (7 children)

Well the propaganda is working. Surprise, surprise, distribute unfiltered hate speech and people will start believing in this hate speech.

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] Clbull@lemmy.world 35 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (22 children)

I can't say I'm surprised that people like Andrew Tate, Steven Crowder, Jordan Peterson and Ben Shapiro have gained quite the social media following. Society has failed a lot of young men, and the oligarchy that controls our world has a lot to answer for.

Men are disproportionately affected by a lot of the socioeconomic issues currently plaguing the Western world because despite decades of progress towards creating an egalitarian society, men are the ones who are negatively impacted if they cannot provide. Look at the US and how judicial decisions on child custody and alimony are heavily favoured towards women as a very good example of this.

And before you dispute me on this notion, can you offer any other explanation for why the biggest role model for a lot of teenage boys is some bloomy rind dick cheese who looks like a spitting image of the Stonks meme guy?

[–] MirthfulAlembic@lemmy.world 14 points 9 months ago

Because their content is controversial, thus driving engagement, thus being favored by the algorithms of many social media platforms. I still get recommended some of their garbage on YouTube, despite never having watched anything remotely similar to it.

Younger people tend to be easier to influence, and they often lack the experience to smell bullshit. And the more people hear something, the more likely they are to believe it.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 12 points 9 months ago

I can’t say I’m surprised that people like Andrew Tate, Steven Crowder, Jordan Peterson and Ben Shapiro have gained quite the social media following.

I can. Their content sucks. It's whiny and boring and utterly tasteless. Tate's an absolute skeez. Crowder has zero swag. Peterson is an incoherent puddle. And Ben Shapiro... well... just come on, wtf is this?

And before you dispute me on this notion, can you offer any other explanation for why the biggest role model for a lot of teenage boys is some bloomy rind dick cheese who looks like a spitting image of the Stonks meme guy?

Because that's half of what YouTube / Twitch / Netflix / et al serves up anymore. These people are the dregs of modern media, but they and their promoters are everywhere. Its the same way that AM radio is the endless cesspool of senile racists whining about scary foreigners and Daytime TV is washed up fashion models pretending to have the secret to fame, fortune, and eternal youth. The lowest common denominator of mass media is overflowing with gross, juvenile bullshit.

And when you simply cannot escape the morass of filth, that's going to affect you one way or another.

load more comments (20 replies)
[–] AllonzeeLV@lemmy.world 30 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (5 children)

I think a big part of the problem is that, among younger Americans especially, both men and women that refer to themselves as feminists conflate it with benevolent sexism, and not the same sets of social rules for both genders.

Benevolent sexism is a tough concept to swallow for men. It means respecting and practicing the old mores men practiced with women, with none of the toxic expectations. Things like expectations of men being the breadwinners, running to get the door, etc aren't compatible with a desire for equality, especially when correctly rejecting the trade-offs those perks used to be tied to.

The first waves of feminism cleared the way, but in having done so, the newest generation of women are asking "but why don't I get these cool perks I heard about" and men are answering "because we no longer get the social power that facilitated that cool stuff."

Everything is trade offs.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] dangblingus@lemmy.dbzer0.com 29 points 9 months ago (8 children)

I wonder how this reconciles against the other recent report of Gen Z more likely to be LGBTQ than Republican. On one hand, Republicans are the most vocal enemy of feminism and the LGBTQ+ community, but on the other hand, my anecdotal experience dealing with Gen Z dudes are that they're fucking idiot reactionaries who think "feminism" is "blue haired land whale blaming all her problems on men". I'm not here to paint any group of people with a broad brush, but again, speaking anecdotally, it seems that Gen X parents are neglectful as shit and their Gen Z sons are desperately looking for father figures elsewhere.

[–] webghost0101@sopuli.xyz 19 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (2 children)

One thing that may deform statistics is the interpretation of feminism.

Personally i prefer equality and I recognize that the majority of people mean equality when talking about feminism.

In almost all ideological groups theres a section of extremist that listen to the same name. Extremist often yell the loudest and say stupid, hatefull memeable stuff. The post of extremist make ripe content for opposers of the general movement to show how stupid/bad an entire group is.

You can be an otherwise very rational person if the only example of feminism you know is jk rowling then it influenced the decision.

On why its different between generation. In general i observe gen-x and boomers care alot about official definition and proper terminology which leads to narrower thinking but also less Confusion on how to perceive in unity.

Millenials and gen z tend to play More creative with language which can allow much more nuanced communication and fresh perspectives but causes different word meanings within different social groups. Misunderstanding outside of it.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Mahonia@lemmy.world 16 points 9 months ago (1 children)

I think these things are very related.

I'm queer and trans, and I'm not so picky about the demographic that I hang out with. I've met a lot of dudes who wanted to act their best in good faith, but received such vitriol for even showing up in conversations that they stopped bothering. Even as a transgender person, I don't tend to engage much with community because there's so little room for meaningful dialogue that isn't totally prescribed. There seem to be a lot of rules on how you should and shouldn't be. I understand that propping up the voices of those who have historically been ignored is an important thing, but there is something to be said about the fact that men and boys are often actively shunned from specific groups. If you're frequently told that you have no place in community, you're probably going to model a different community around that rejection.

Now what I actually think is happening is that tools of mass manipulation like the more centralized social media platforms are weaponizing the language of social justice to create division and escalation. All media platforms are quite effective at serving the ruling class, but social media is particularly insidious in that it pretends to be real life and the exposure is virtually constant.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
[–] Zink@programming.dev 21 points 9 months ago (2 children)

Young men/boys thinking we don’t need feminism reminds me of healthy people thinking we don’t need vaccines. Just because we’ve improved the world and made a problem less of a thing doesn’t mean we can now forget about it and move on.

There is a lot more to it than that, as evidenced by all the replies already.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] AbouBenAdhem@lemmy.world 18 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

To be fair—they’re asking people to judge the effect of a movement, but only one of the groups remembers what things were like before the movement. It could just be that more gen Zers honestly don’t know the answer.

[–] Aceticon@lemmy.world 14 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (11 children)

The problem is the so called Third Wave Feminism, which is far too often just middle and high-middle class women trying to obtain special benefits for themselves by claimimg the whole group they were born into "is a victim" (even though they themselves were born into and are amongst the most priviledged 1% of people in the World) and hence "must be compensated" in some way which is discriminatory against all those not in the group and which is invariably in a form that is mainly usefull for middle class and high-middle class well educated women in well-of western nations. Hence things like Quotas or the practice of Benevolent Mascism in power situations such as in Court (for example the whole gender-discriminatory idea that the Mother should be prefered as the custodian of children when a couple separates).

This is generally neither fair, nor equal (you know, the whole judge and treat people based on what they do, not based on the genetics they were born with) and even has zero positive effects for the vast majority of women out there who aren't the well-of scions of well-of families in well-of countries: you get loud noises about the "glass ceiling" that stops well-of women from maximizing their income from being in the upper classes, not about the 3000% difference in incomes between those above said glass chieling such as corporate CEOs and the average worker, which includes most women.

This shit isn't Leftwing, it's just a "make believe leftie" facet of "Greed is good" Neoliberal Capitalism: personal upside maximization hidden behind "the group" so that it doesn't just look like naked greed, hence why you see this mostly supported by Liberals in Anglo-Saxon nations, not traditional Lefties.

Previous generations of Feminism (and those who still now fight for Equality and Fairness) are the ones who are deserving of tremendous respect and support, not these pampered, priviledged, greedy people who happen to have been born with 2 X cromossomes and who want to maintain the discriminatory and prejudiced treatment of people base on the genetics they were born with, as long as theirs is the group getting benefited by that discrimination.

It's thus not surprising that amongst those who are not in the groups that benefits form the discrimination these people defend and are exposed to this highly moralistic variance of greed is good, grow negative about it. The thing is made even worse in the US because Politics ther is entirelly in the Moral space (people have no genuine choice on how the Economics is managed in that country since both sides of the Power Duopoly do the same in that field) so you end up with equally pro-descrimination groups on the other side, who just differ in who gets favoured by said discriminationand face off against these, muddling the whole "equality" domain.

It's pretty hard to find a space if you're genuinelly pro-Equality and pro-Fairness and not be confuse by either side of selfish fucker as being in the other side of selfish fuckers.

load more comments (11 replies)
[–] taanegl@lemmy.world 12 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Ah yes, confused men want to uphold the tradition of mysoginy, misandry, the very patriarchy that subverts men to be stupid soldiers and labourers, sacrificing emotional intelligence and their individuality to become stereotypical puppets of the powers that be.

MGTOW energy Indeed. Just the kind of weakness a grifter like Tate loves to exploit.

Dumbasses.

[–] friendlysoviet@lemmy.world 13 points 9 months ago (4 children)

Most of Gen Z is children.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] paddirn@lemmy.world 11 points 9 months ago (2 children)

Is this just a cyclical thing that will swing back and forth like a pendulum? Feminism surges for a few years, following a big sort of zeitgeist-defining event (#metoo being the recent one), but then it sort of just gets taken for granted, attention lags, and a quasi counter-feminist movement emerges that pushes back against that. Have we had this happen before in the past few decades? I feel like recently at least I've seen a lot more men online bemoan the fact that nobody is paying attention to their inner-world. It's not even men bringing up or attacking feminism as a problem, I feel like more of the arguments are careful not to go there, more that society in general just doesn't care that much about men's emotional world. I would assume that along with that, you'd have some men pushing back against feminism or as seeing it as having over-extended itself.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›