With surveys reporting that an increasing number of young men are subscribing to these beliefs, the number of women finding that their partners share the misogynistic views espoused by the likes of Andrew Tate is also on the rise. Research from anti-fascism organisation Hope Not Hate, which polled about 2,000 people across the UK aged 16 to 24, discovered that 41% of young men support Tate versus just 12% of young women.
“Numbers are growing, with wives worried about their husbands and partners becoming radicalised,” says Nigel Bromage, a reformed neo-Nazi who is now the director of Exit Hate Trust, a charity that helps people who want to leave the far right.
“Wives or partners become really worried about the impact on their family, especially those with young children, as they fear they will be influenced by extremism and racism.”
Just use a manometer.
Toxic masculinity, feeding itself, empowered by the forces of capital who desires culture war above class war.
God damit this sentence makes me want to blow my brains out. It’s too fucking thick in bullshit. You ever notice how the right will just call someone a pedo or gang member and that really works. It’s not like they go " he’s just socioeconomic poverty based victim of modern prison system" like just get to that point. Andrew is a grown man who targets children.
That’s… Their point? Either you misread what they said or you wrote your response wrong.
I love just saying “toxic masculinity” anywhere online, even if you’re deep in the bowels of Lemmy, you will get a few reactionary turds who just see the term and lose all cognitive ability to think and mash the downvote button between heated breaths and tears streaming down their faces.
edit: and it continues, very predictable. Seriously guys, just be honest if the term makes you feel shit, you will find truth by pursuing those feelings and the questions around them, literally you will figure out why you’re actually unhappy. Don’t pull back, push through. Yes, I am provoking, and if it’s provocation that has an effect on you, that’s a HUGE sign that you can figure out a big truth about yourself and the world if you spend like, 30 minutes in uncomfortable silence asking yourself “why” about things and being painfully honest in your replies until you hit bedrock.
^ This reply shows me you don’t understand what men like Andrew Tate are selling. He’s selling validation to these boys and men, and you’re providing a perfect marketplace for that product to sell like hot cakes.
When you reply like that to these people, the mental picture of grown men having hissy fits and “mashing downvote buttons with tears in their eyes” might feel good in the moment, but those men and boys aren’t actually reacting like that. Instead, the message they get is they were right the whole time, that people like you really do just hate men and masculinity, and that people like Andrew Tate are the ones “on their side”.
I get that it feels good to trigger people you don’t like, but all you’re doing is making Andrew Tate’s job easier. Don’t you think he’s already making enough money as it is?
Well said. Looking down on impressionable men with this sort of smug contempt is how we go further down the path.
Thank you, and I fully agree. I truly hope we’re not so far down that path that bringing these boys back to sanity is impossible. Liberal western society spent a lot of time neglecting these boys, and that’s ruined a ton of trust these boys once had in society.
Literally all that right-wing extremists like Tate had to do is tell these boys, “Hey, everyone seems to think you’re the problem. I’m here to tell you that you aren’t a problem - rather, they are the problem, and here’s how to deal with them and get yourself ahead” and before you know it, they were eating out of the palm of his hand.
It’s pretty clear to me that looking at boys as “the problem” instead of as human beings has a lot to do with the mess we’re in right now.
Can I look down on them with disgust instead?
Can I look down on them with disgust instead?
Andrew Tate would probably thank you for doing so. Without contempt and disgust from folks like you, he wouldn’t have nearly as large of an audience, nor such an obscene amount of money.
If they need validation from the likes of grifters and scumbags like Andrew Tate then they are already too far gone.
He’s a fucking tool, and I have no idea why he appeals to young men. There’s so many other, manlier, kinder folks out there who can provide that same validation.
I disagree. Maybe if they received validation from their families and community, they wouldn’t need validation from grifters? I think it says quite a bit about society when people feel the need to purchase the same kind of validation that they used to receive for free from their own communities in ages past.
Nobody likes being told they’re worthless, they’re a loser, they’re an incel, or a “stupid bro”, or that all of their struggles aren’t valid. If everyone around them is telling them those things - Including you - Then validation becomes a rare and valuable commodity… A commodity that someone like Tate can make a lot of money selling to people.
There’s so many other, manlier, kinder folks out there who can provide that same validation.
And yet, those “other, manlier, kinder folks” are not out there doing that, are they? Instead, many of them are calling these people losers and incels and lost causes beyond all redemption, just like you are right now.
Why should they listen to those “other, manlier, kinder folks” when they aren’t acting very kind to them?
Maybe they’re too far gone, but you’re talking about impressionable young boys, like 10-16. At those ages we as a society agree that a lot of all childrens personalities aren’t dictated by their own choices since they lack the life experiences and cognitive abilities to function as an adult. Instead they’re highly impressionable, influenced by their social sphere and nowadays their social media feeds.
So sure, maybe you could say they’re fucked from the jump, but understand that they are not taking as active of a role in who’s forming their thought processes like a 25 year old getting hooked on Tate is.
I’ve been a 10-16 year old boy. At no point was anyone like Andrew Tate “cool” to me. He’s not witty, he’s not talented, he’s done nothing XTREME. He’s clearly putting up a massive front to pretend to be interesting and for some reason - microplastics, smart phone addiction, whatever - it’s working.
Back in the 90s we would have called him “poser.”
Tate just talks into a microphone with his stupid friends. If that’s what is considered “cool” to today’s teenagers then they’re definitely too far gone.
I honestly don’t even know what to say lol. How do you think anyone forms an identity ever? We have - I was going to type decades - but centuries of case studies and writing about why people get roped into cults of personality and insane belief systems despite looking like lunatics from the outside.
What do you even think is happening to these people? Based on your previous reply the answer is “I have no idea” which should tell you you should look a little deeper into what’s happening.
Its the Boisphere. No men are involved.
To answer the headline: divorce, I hope.
Divorce is in many case the trigger. The MGTOW-community was/is a lot of divorced men who feel mistreated by society, and blame women for it.
Just based on what I see women doing around me all the time, there were probably some warning signs. Looking for a dude that’s “traditional” or whatever is asking for a dude that’s going to see you like a form of livestock. It’s partly a politics thing, but largely an assholes thing.
41% of young men support Tate versus just 12% of young women.
WTF those are both shockingly high.
I support Tate…
…Being locked in prison for the rest of his life.
I disagree.
Usually it’s the ‘modern’ women who have been convinced to be treated like livestock. Nothing very traditional about going to raves or wearing pasties.
If you just translate the figures to “41% of young men, 12% of young women are stupid assholes”, they make a bit more sense.
Still, 41% sounds absolutely critical level, like we need to stop all society and have a conversation, because that is so uncool.
Fucking 41… Like that is a plurality. That is a whole fucking lot of wrong people. That is entirely too many bros. I’m not sure I can impart just how disappointing that number is.
Occasionally my partner does or says some things that remind me of the “manosphere” aka 4chan neckbeards.
And when it happens, we talk about it. I don’t pretend or let it go as “he doesn’t mean it” or “he doesn’t know what he’s saying”. I don’t get mad and he doesn’t get mad. We have an adult discussion and I’m careful not to talk down to him.
A perfect example was that he sometimes says “females” when he means “women”. I explain that it’s not a swear word but it’s still derogatory. I explain why. Once I did, he understood and stopped doing it.
It doesn’t have to be a big deal! Communication is key!
Communication is key
Sure, but honestly it sounds tiring if this kind of discussion is a recurring thing.
Yeah, why can’t he just agree with you on everything right out the gate?
As long as you also made sure that if he does say it again he has to pronounce it like tamales
I laughed at this and now I’m going to do that in my head whenever I see that word
it’s still derogatory
It logically isn’t. While you think that, and anyone spending their future with you should mind it, it doesn’t make it true.
It is if you say “man” and “female” instead of “male” and “female”. While it can be a noun, it’s mainly used as an adjective to describe sex.
It’s like saying “A black owns the shop.” Instead of “A black man owns the shop.”
Notice how calling someone “a black” is kinda icky?
if you say “man” and “female” instead of “male” and “female”.
That’s extra cringe if they do: that person needs to sort out their words. Is it not derogatory if they say “male” and “female”?
Notice how calling someone “a black” is kinda icky?
It’s hard cringe & awkward: certain to provoke odd looks.
Referring to someone as an instance of their gender could be icky & cringe. That it’s also derogatory doesn’t follow: the easiest counterexample is “a male”.
What makes you the ultimate authority on what terms a woman can consider “derogatory”? Where do you get the power to decide what words other people should use to describe their own feelings? What makes your opinion about it more valid than those of others?
Have you considered that the same word can make two different people feel two different ways? Unless you’ve got the power to know exactly what another person is feeling, there is nothing that makes your thoughts more valid than the thoughts of others in this matter. Doubling down that “derogatory” isn’t the right word to use gives the impression that you don’t believe “female” actually feels derogatory to a lot of women. Gotta wonder why that might be.
What makes you the ultimate authority
Where do you get the power to decide
What makes your opinion about it more valid
I don’t need to be or decide it and it’s not my opinion: the language community is the ultimate authority of their language. Their collective choices establish observable conventions. Linguistics is dedicated to that approach.
What makes your opinion about it more valid than those of others?
Have you considered that the same word can make two different people feel two different ways?
Subjectivist fallacy: your opinion/feelings don’t make claims true. Up doesn’t mean down because someone feels that way.
Language has conventional, established meanings.
Another comment fully argues, explains, & criticizes your argument, which I won’t bother to rehash here.
Way to absolutely miss the point.
I don’t need to be or decide it and it’s not my opinion: the language community is the ultimate authority of their language. Their collective choices establish observable conventions. Linguistics is dedicated to that approach.
A not-insignificant amount of women think using the term “female” is derogatory. Women who feel that way are part of the “language community.” You’re talking like we’re some outsider group, whose use of English is less valid than yours.
Language has conventional, established meanings.
Language is alive - it evolves, it changes. As well, English famously doesn’t have an established body to define meanings. Rather, English words are based on common usage. Women commonly experience the usage of “female” in a derogatory sense. We didn’t designate it this way - all we’re doing is pointing out that it’s used in this way. Just because you don’t feel a derogatory sense from a given word doesn’t mean those that experience it that way are wrong.
If you had gone out to research the usage of “female,” including how people perceive it in different contexts, you’d see just how many anglophones disagree with you. But those people would probably, by and large, be those who’ve experienced that word in a derogatory way - in other words, they’d be women. So how about we stop acting like this is a semantics issue and get to the point you’re really saying, which is that women’s experiences and opinions are somehow worth less than yours.
A not-insignificant amount of women think using the term “female” is derogatory.
many anglophones disagree with you
And a nonsignificant amount don’t. That doesn’t establish a generally accepted convention of the language community.
Language is alive - it evolves, it changes.
True: still not a conventional definition per earlier remarks.
English words are based on common usage.
Exactly: convention.
Women who feel that way are part of the “language community.”
Incomplete evidence or composition fallacy.
whose use of English is less valid than yours.
Nope, not implied & it’s not about my use, either. It’s about observed, established convention: see earlier remarks (notice a pattern yet?). The lack of consistency across usages indicates that derogatory meaning is not a convention.
all we’re doing is pointing out that it’s used in this way
And plenty of innocuous instances exist as discussed before. That doesn’t make a word itself derogatory:
I don’t deny derogatory instances. Do you deny nonderogatory instances?
Just because you don’t feel a derogatory sense from a given word doesn’t mean those that experience it that way are wrong.
It’s simple overgeneralization: people can draw wrong conclusions about their observations, especially if they disregard conflicting observations (incomplete evidence fallacy). Observing derogatory uses while disregarding nonderogatory uses doesn’t justify any conclusion about a word’s conventional definition.
It varies by message, so it’s not the word itself.
get to the point you’re really saying, which is that women’s experiences and opinions are somehow worth less than yours.
Straw man fallacy. Not implied.
Maybe you follow the logic I wrote, but the conclusion still feels wrong, so you’re unwilling to accept it. Let’s unpack that feeling.
The conventional definition that the noun “female” isn’t derogatory feels wrong, because sexists use that word in an ugly way, and opposing that would feel relieving. What can we do with these feelings? Here’s one idea: even though it’s not generally accepted, let’s make the noun “female” an official dirty word. Let’s accept the premise of their sexism that “females” are lesser and take it further than they did: spread it to the broader community, normalize it into the official language so everyone accepts the noun for an entire gender is a dirty word. The sexists might even be grateful.
Would that feel better? If so, then extraterrestrial anthropologists studying you might reasonably conclude you’re a misogynist. Otherwise, you might want to tell your feelings “Fuck you, feelings! Stop making me do stupid shit!”. Alternatively, understand your feelings & guide them better.
I literally just blocked an NSFW lemmit of misogynygonewild and it blew my mind it was even a thing. Fucking trash.
“Do you regularly watch videos by Jordan Peterson?” kinda needs to become one of those before-first-date screening questions.
12% of young women support Tate? That’s way higher than what I expected :( I can’t understand why would any woman support someone who makes a fortune out of exploiting and abusing women openly
Tradwife content is on the rise for women as well, more and more young people are buying into this mythical simpler past as the world gets more complex, alienating and difficult.
You want a trad wife? Get your sorry ass to work buying her cars, clothes, houses, furnishings so she can focus on making your home. Kids in private school, high class vacations, all of it.
Provider is a title that is earned and I doubt even a thousandth of these blowholes are up to the task of being a trad husband.
As long as it’s mutually wanted. One of the women interviewed for the article started building her career later in the marriage, and cites her husband’s anger at her increasing independence as a major factor in their divorce.
That is something I’ll never understand. Like, if I became incredibly ill or died or lost my fucking mind or something, I would be happy knowing my partner or spouse wasn’t suddenly completely fucked and could manage without me on their own if it came to that. I think honestly that’s what alot of what this comes down to. These selfish dudes are mad that women are now in a position to take or leave a relationship and hunt for one that will be a positive addition to their life instead of needing to be in one to be allowed to survive, which men, as a whole, have nearly universally only had the sole privilege of in society, and some apparently can’t deal with that going both ways.
It’s surprising to me that married people are falling for this shit. I thought it was just incels desperate for anything that might give them a chance or an excuse.
it isn’t about being single, its about the modern hell world instilling extreme helplessness in vulnerable people, and they seek any answers whatsoever. the manosphere happily provides ‘answers’ in exchange for money
It has also seeped into every aspect of male culture. You want to watch a YouTube show about cars? Sure. The first couple episodes are normal and then they start sliding in dumb shit.
You listen to a podcast about working out? Same thing goes. It’s little stuff here and there. Sometimes it starts as a reoccurring joke, but it keeps happening until they actually believe.
I also find there are a lot of young people who aren’t comfortable on computers and basically believe whatever they see on the internet, much like an older generation.
I opened a new YouTube account and watched some videogame videos. Rust if you’re curious. I’m a woman and this game is played by mostly men. At some point my husband was struggling with his mental health, we were in gridlock so I tried to look up male perspective mental health videos to see if i could understand him better or reach him in a new way.
Those two searches alone, unlocked a flood of bullshit into my feed. I couldnt believe the garbage I was bombarded with.
It is akin to how women are pummeled with beauty ads and standards (buy this to be pretty!) since we are young.
They figured out how to market this same insecurity to men. Wild stuff
Edit: except they aren’t just selling “self care” like they do to us, they’re selling hate-
Spoilers: there were signs
Sometimes it’s easier to stay with the devil you know than chance the devil you don’t.
You don’t need to stay with a devil at all.
Some women are apparently terrified of being single. I’ve known some who have never been single for more than a few days since they turned 15 or something. I know it can sometimes be more complicated than that, but it’s a contributing factor.
I would argue that being single equates to being alone … and women who are alone are vulnerable as hell.
So (at least sometimes) the devil you know is safer than the devil you don’t.
I’d argue that women who are in abusive relationships or relationships with potential manosphere abusers are less safe than if they were single.
