5 ms·
Not celebrating international mens day isn't a problem (although I bet some may disagree with me). It's kind of a political take in the same vein as "Black Live
by dotandgtfo 3y ago
Not celebrating international mens day isn't a problem (although I bet some may disagree with me). It's kind of a political take in the same vein as "Black Lives Matter" vs. the counter "White Lives Matter".
Jumping into these "reactionary" mens rights positions as a counter to feminist issues is the wrong way to do it and understandably makes people a bit angry. Just as in if real life someone is telling you about an issue - countering with a "buuut, group Y has it bad too..." would probably make someone double take a bit. It's unproductive, but normal on social media because it's engaging and creates a hot comment section.
In my opinion some major male problems are related to:
* Mental health, suicide and the lack of services and support for men.
* How the education system works better for females than males.
* How platonic relationships with males have been systemetically decreasing.
* How in rural societies women are more likely to move to the cities and get an education leading to men having way less romantic options.
If you bring these topics up with women they'll probably sympathise and maybe also agree that these are issues that our society should be assisting with solving. How it should be "solved" may be up for debate. But framing it as a counter position to the feminist movement isn't the right way to do it. But very normalised online, which feeds into my point of the internet exaggerating issues as most debates you see online is controversial by design of the algorithms and content creators trying to get engagement.
Disclaimer: I'm from Norway, which gives some context. But I think these issues are pretty common across the westernized world.
- revelio 3y agoYou're conceding the point, right? The OP asks why is the focus only on teen girls? Why not on everyone who is getting sadder? The answer is: society and especially academia is systematically biased against men for political and ideological reasons. So you respond, when men ask for equally good treatment to women that is a "political" demand that is "reactionary" and "understandably makes people a bit angry". It's a restatement of the original claim, rephrased because you seem to agree with this anti-male bias, but that doesn't change what it is.
- Eddy_Viscosity2 3y agoIt's not so much that "academia is systematically biased against men for political and ideological reasons" as much as men themselves (as a generalized group, exceptions exist) are resistant to admitting that any of these issues are a significant problem, and asking for or seeking help for them if they were. It's the old standard of not wanting to appear weak or needy. This is a real thing with men (as a generalized group, exceptions exist) and also plays a powerful role is shaping how society treats men's versus women's problems in this context.
- dotandgtfo 3y agoI'm not conceding any point. I am trying to say that the way the internet works inherently filters information to us based on how emotionally engaging content is. Maybe you aren't exposed to the counter points because they aren't that engaging but there's tons of research being done on men as well. Incels and Japanese Hikikomori, conspiracy theories and online extremism is more male oriented. Also, objectively there's tons of studies of the mental health effects on males online but the consensus seems to be that gaming doesn't have as a negative effect on boys as social media has for women - which a lot of boys screen time revolves around. But boys are also affected by this. The focus only being on teen girls is objectively false. We literally have no idea what this technology is doing to us, and the research communities are scrambling to figure out the effects of social media and technology on all of us. But these are extremely time consuming and hard things to do conclusive studies on. I do concede that girls were the first group to be broadly reported though. Probably because that age and gender group is especially vulnerable to the damages caused by social media and signs clearly starting showing up in 2012-2017 in a greater degree than boys of the same age group. Also it doesn't surprise me that a group who is constantly monitored by authority (parents and schools) are the first to be reported on. Males aged 20-60 are more likely to isolate themselves and not reach out creating far greater "dark cases". My original point is that the internet exaggerates and selectively filters for engagement. If your knowledge on this topic is primarily from online sources optimised for engagement you have an incomplete view on the area. I'm not trying to change your mind on this topic in particular. I'm just saying that the internet inherently exaggerates and removes nuance (and I've felt a bit of that lack of nuance in your comments) and that this affects everyone and every single topic online today. Including me.