Support for violence to resist feminism was highest among adolescent boys (28%), followed closely by adolescent girls (21%).

Perhaps most alarming: roughly 40% of boys aged 13 to 17 agreed that women lie about domestic and sexual violence.

These results raise crucial questions going forward. We don’t yet know how these views have changed over time, whether they are on the rise and what the links are between violent extremism and the negative treatment of women.

top 98 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 56 points 8 months ago (14 children)

Holy engagement bait, Batman! What a terrible headline.

Yes, it is a fact that women lie about domestic and sexual violence. I've seen first-hand a family seriously impacted by a false accusation. The son was detained in prison for a year, the parents took out a mortgage on their home to defend the case and finally the girl admitted in court that she fabricated the whole thing. The son was acquitted. These cases happen. Here's a fairly broad paper on the matter discussing several deeper studies spanning several countries including Australia, Canada and the UK.

Among the seven studies that attempted some degree of scrutiny of police classifications and/or applied a definition of false reporting at least similar to that of the IACP, the rate of false reporting, given the many sources of potential variation in findings, is relatively consistent:

  • 2.1% (Heenan & Murray, 2006)
  • 2.5% (Kelly et al., 2005)
  • 3.0% (McCahill et al., 1979)
  • 5.9% (the present study)
  • 6.8% (Lonsway & Archambault, 2008)
  • 8.3% (Grace et al., 1992)
  • 10.3% (Clark & Lewis, 1977)
  • 10.9% (Harris & Grace, 1999)

With that out of the way, let's move on to the elephant in the room:

IN OVER 90% OF CASES, THE RAPES WERE CREDIBLE! FALSE ACCUSATIONS ARE THE EXCEPTION!!

  • source
  • hideshow 14 child comments
  • [–] 21 points 8 months ago

    Tbf that's lies that make it to court, I've been lied about and had friends also be lied about, but the girls (we were all kids at the time) didn't take it to court, they just tried to assassinate our character and get us shunned for life by everyone we knew without involving the system that would make them prove anything.

    Thankfully in my case I had witnesses and in my buddy's he had an alibi, but still, it's a pretty rude thing to lie about. But I think most of the lies shake out like that, they usually don't get reported to the actual authorities, just circulated like a rumor.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 14 points 8 months ago

    this is why i hate the “believe women” thing….
    the problem was people not believing women by default… that’s objectively terrible.
    doing the exact opposite is also terrible.

    (i’ve seen a false accusation too… i also know of people who were SA’d with no investigation and nobody caring)

    i’ve also never heard of someone being prosecuted for a false accusation either… it’s all terrible

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 8 months ago (1 child)

    Wait, I'm probably restarted for not understanding it but does the author claim that 10.9% to 2.1% is 'consistent'?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 8 months ago

    The full paper would give better context of that statement. It's quite accessible and worth reading. The thing that is consistent across all studies, nations and decades is that false accusations are rare.

    It turns out this is actually a fairly difficult topic to accurately measure if for no other reason that a lot of cases (Particularly earlier ones) boil down to 'he said, she said'. Then there is the matter that lots of sexual assault cases go unreported - or are dropped for assorted reasons. Unreported assaults are a huge factor among certain cultural groups.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 6 points 8 months ago (6 children)

    Were there consequences for the accuser?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 8 months ago*

    I had an accuser in college who got kicked out after she accused multiple other men and it was investigated and the cops got involved.

    The reason she accused me is she came on to me and I rejected her. So she told people I sexually harassed her and tried to force he to have sex with me.

    I haven't had any other accusations like that in my life, thankfully. But I have had dating encounters where I either rejected a woman sexually, or simple didn't want to have sex with her that night, and she became hostile and made threats, including saying she would report me for sexual assault.

    The scariest one was a woman I went on a couple of dates with, thought was cool but she got really really like falling down drunk on one of our dates and she insisted on coming home with me. I ended up just putting her to bed on my couch. The next morning she was gone, and send me this crazy nasty texts about how if I was a 'real man' I'd have raped her and she is going to post all about me on the internet because she knows my name and address (she actually didn't know my name). Even when you do the right thing as a guy, for some women, it's the wrong thing because you didn't rape her and she feels rejected.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 6 points 8 months ago*

    So far as I know, nothing (legally). She wasn't on trial. Something may have happened to her later, but I don't think so. I think I'd have heard if it had.

    Of course: everyone who knew her knew about the whole case and its outcome. It would be an inaccurate statement to say she faced no consequences at all. Everyone - male and female alike, was furious with her. And I expect the story follows her around 20 years later whenever anyone Googles her.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 10 points 8 months ago (1 child)

    Almost nothing. Feminist organisations lobby hard to ensure there are no consequences because "it might discourage real victims from coming forward." They don't care how many men have their lives ruined.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 4 points 8 months ago*

    men aren't people to feminist organizations. they are only sources of evil, so if bad things happen to them then they deserved it anyways. there are many feminists who basically think ruining innocent man's life is a 'noble sacrifice' men have to endure as long as rape exists and innocent men are guilty by association of allowing other men to rape women...

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 4 points 8 months ago (2 children)

    Engagement shit like this is so dangerous. Impressionable minds in the target demographic will read the headline and be pushed towards radicalization against women because "apparently it's worse than I thought".

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 38 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (6 children)

    Downvoting not because the topic is unimportant but because the new study is run by this news agency without publishing their questions or methodology. That seems like running for a headline with little concern for accuracy or scientific methods. I could be wrong but until they are more open we don't know

    Edit: If you ignore the authors then the above is a pretty reasonable interpretation but it was written by some university researchers. They are surprisingly unclear (to me) in the body for what study exactly they are referencing to, at least in their opening paragraphs. Still, it doesn't seem to be a survey from the conversation so I'm going to remove the downvote

  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [+] 2 points 8 months ago (4 children)
  • [–] 7 points 8 months ago (3 children)

    The Conversation

    At least the article, published in The Conversation, wrote "we" a lot when talking about data interpretation and I saw no reference to any other researchers

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 8 months ago

    On reread, the body of this article doesn't seem to say anything except "we" and "our research" and I had just woken up and assumed the news agency.

    But the authors are Sara Meger and Kate Reynolds of The University of Melbourne so it's probably their research so I'm probably wrong. It really pisses me off how indirectly news articles point to studies and I think this is a good example of that, but I do think I was wrong about the study being done by a news agency. I'm pretty sure these people would have a pdf on their research websites too so not linking is just hand wavy

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] 2 points 8 months ago* (1 child)
  • [–] 2 points 8 months ago

    So... what my sibling comment says that's timestamped earlier than yours and admits my mistake, but also notes that saying "our" and "we" a lot in the body of an article is very confusing and even if they want to keep broad ambiguous terms they could still do better at linking to the researchers recent work?

    Actually, I'm just a bit tired, thanks for the clarification. It does seem to be a nice premise. I don't think relying on the authors being listed in small print really does much for people that aren't aware of how this entity operates (hence my confusion and the upvotes on my comment). I do really think the editors could do better ensuring there is clarity here given the ecosystem these articles sit in. I appreciate this being early data might be why they can't link to a published reference, but I would be shocked if the authors didn't have something uploaded somewhere to their personal or university websites. But also, I scanned early morning and saw a bunch of "we" and "our" and got on my soap box with a bunch of presumptions before really reading the article

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 31 points 8 months ago (18 children)

    How many of them believe that everyone lies?

    "women lie about DV...", will go both ways. You will also find some that are in those conditions and will not tell others or even try to hide it (for what reasons, I can't really tell).

    Until we know about the actual wording of the survey, there is no way to tell what exactly they are interpreting.
    I also have a feeling that the people who conducted the survey, might be misinterpreting the answers.

  • source
  • hideshow 18 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 8 months ago (6 children)

    Yeah I'm curious how it was asked.

    Cause of course women get abused that 100% is true, but there are definitely some women who lie about it. How many? Who knows. I would like to say only a few but I have no data to support it, I can only say it's most likely non-zero.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 8 months ago (4 children)

    At the same time, there have been quite a few high-profile cases where the women used relevant laws to cause misery to others.
    Because in those cases, even if the defender ends up as not-guilty, he still most probably loses a job and more.

    There is a fundamental problem with how the laws made for these things are executed.
    They end up being inadequate to help enough of the vulnerable women (corresponding to unreported cases) and at the same time, too powerful to prevent malicious use (corresponding to fake cases).

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [+] 2 points 8 months ago (3 children)
  • [–] 0 points 8 months ago* (2 children)

    I don't see anonymity as a big help in this case.
    That just makes us have to believe that regular people want bad for other people, while those in high governmental positions care more of the truthful outcome.
    While in reality, we also require the people to know how well the governmental processes are being executed, to prevent anyone from shirking responsibility.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] 15 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (10 children)

    the banner photo has them looking like thugs, so you think the article has a slant about how young men are evil blah balh.

    the entire article is a frames itself as 'awareness of evil young men' piece and equates young men 'not being feminists' to be alt-right.

    It's a trash sensationalist article, drumming up gender war bullshit and fear. I have two young nephews, who basically refuse to date because their experiences with women have been so full of drama and misery they decided to just give up. They are 16 and 17. They aren't feminists either. They'd rather game whit their friends and play sports because it's rewarding and fun, dating for them has been miserable and exhausting and depressing because the girls they know incessantly lie and cause drama and try to cause fights.

    I feel bad for them because when I was their age, there was no social media an dating was fun. They live in an age where teenage girls basically think all men are trash for not driving Bentley's or whatever nonsense they follow on social media. There is a lot of toxic content aimed at women that is just as awful as the manosphere, but nobody is talking about pointing out horrible sexist content that is for women is 'misogyny'

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 8 months ago (4 children)

    I'd say a truly equal condition would be when the women feel like they have the freedom to not date anyone. But due to how expectations work, I feel like that would be hard to happen for anyone in that age group.

    I have found it, in general, rare for people to get to live their life by their own thoughts and not be swayed by fads in media. At the same time, that is one trait I consider important for anyone to not have to regret their decisions.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 8 months ago* (3 children)

    nobody is forcing women to date. what the hell are you talking about?

    men and women both have social pressure to be in relationships, they also want to be in them.

    however, what is different about things these days is it's way easier to be alone than tolerate being with a shitty miserable partner. I actually have same complaints with dating as my 17 year old nephew, that my choices are be happy alone, or be miserable with someone who hates their life/friends/family and wants to make me suffer too.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 8 months ago (2 children)

    we’d both love to date someone who is happy with their life, but we don’t meet anyone like that

    Yes. That's pretty much how it is for most.

    But their expectations from relationships also get shaped by the expectations on them. And here I realise I am just saying the same thing as you, just in different words.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 8 months ago (1 child)

    sort of, but you are pointing out one of the biggest problems with the whole thing. Also in my experience, it's that people's expectations of relationships are so far out of whack with the reality there really is no point in trying anymore.

    And I've noticed this a lot. Most of my dates now expect me to make a 500K salary or something and think anyone who doesn't is 'not worth their time'. It's an absurd expectation born of defensiveness and seeking fantasy escapism, rather than real connection. And they fill up their lives with social media and consumerism and broadcast that they are so happy on the outside, but they are miserable on the inside because they have no real connections and their external 'standards' they are a requirement for 'happiness' just prevent them from actually making real relationships. And they justify a lot of that by claiming that others expect perfection of them so they should expect perfection of others. It's so... fucked up and self-destructive. But if you bring it up... if you challenge the idea that you can be happy without a 500K income... they go ballistic on you for 'having no ambition' 'being a loser' etc.

    My other favorite thing to do on dates sometimes, is to say something like "I think people are the most beautiful when they wake up and their hair is messy and groggy and they stink a little bit'. It really fucks with these types of people, because for them being a human being who is messy and imperfect is like the thing they are desperately trying to avoid being.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 8 months ago

    Well, considering how the same people think that they need multiple cosmetic surgeries and then fill up more make-up to be "normal", I see where the 500K comes from. Even if I had 500K to burn, I won't be dating any of those, but that's just me not being normal.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] -4 points 8 months ago (4 children)

    Where are you even getting this? This is a deranged reading of this article.

    Cite one part of this that is framing one gender as being essentially evil. It's very clear that it is recognizing a troubling trend vs condemning a gender. You're clearly reacting to something that isn't in this article.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 8 months ago (3 children)

    The picture, as stated in the comment you are replying to.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 8 months ago (2 children)

    The picture isn't about evil hooligans, it just looks like teenage boys to me. The black mark drawn over their faces is not that they are fundamentally evil because of their gender, the background shows the influencers who are putting mysoginistic ideas, signified by a black mark, onto these boys. This is clear going by the text of the article. It isn't even in the subtext of the picture. Youre reading that into it

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 8 months ago* (1 child)

    Really? So where are the 21% of young women in this picture? Are your media comprehension skills so poor that you can not see any gender focus on this article at all?

    "Support for violence to resist feminism was highest among adolescent boys (28%), followed closely by adolescent girls (21%)." This is not even a wide spread and this article is a hit piece about a real issue that is very much made worse by this sort of coverage.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

    The fact that the two numbers are so close demonstrates that the problem isnt just with boys. Youre invested in this being a "hit piece." And as for media comprehension skills, I actually read most of the article. Its probably what you should do before making up something to get mad at a propos nothing.

    Re: picture about "grip her up by her neck" isnt a quote by a teen boy, it is a quote by a grown man, and not one who represents the majority opinion on women. Like I'm dying to understand what you see in this that initiated your comments about it.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 60 points 8 months ago (13 children)

    Misogyny is certainly a huge issue among young men.

    I'm not sure about this research though. It's always concerning when they don't publish the actual data and questions et cetera.

    Perhaps most alarming: roughly 40% of boys aged 13 to 17 agreed that women lie about domestic and sexual violence.

    This one really, really depends on the question. Both men and women often lie and say that their partner doesn't hit them. This is pretty well known actually. You'd have to be pretty naive to think it doesn't happen.

    Occasionally I'm sure that both men and women do lie and say that their partner does hit them, for a variety of complex reasons. An acquaintance of mine, a woman, signed a declaration to say that her partner hit her and then during court proceedings she admitted that was a false statement. Uh oh. Anyhow, it's certainly a thing that happens.

    Does that mean all women who claim to be victims of domestic abuse are liars? Certainly not. But are lies told about domestic violence? Of course.

    Support for violence to resist feminism was highest among adolescent boys (28%), followed closely by adolescent girls (21%).

    This is also curious. Obviously alarming, but how does one use violence to resist feminism? I'm genuinely confused as to what is meant by this. If you had asked 15 year old me, not really knowing what feminism is, I would have assumed it meant some kind of armed uprising of women, and yeah I would have said that in that context violence is ok.

    Some respondents justified violence in the private sphere. If a woman disobeys in the home, a man should be able to control her with violence.

    I notice that this fiery little truth bomb is tempered to "some respondents". How many is some? I guess 2 at least.

    Again, misogyny is a huge problem. It would be extraordinarily difficult to be a female teacher. My son is too young to have encountered this stuff but it's definitely on my mind as we navigate the coming years. However, I think this article is intended to be incendiary rather than tease out the nuance revealed by their "research".

  • source
  • hideshow 13 child comments
  • [–] [S] 12 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 child)

    This was a preview summary of the data that's awaiting publication by the University of Melbourne. It covered 1,100 people aged 13-17, and has been written by the Professor of Educational Psychology & Learning, Faculty of Education, The University of Melbourne.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 4 points 8 months ago

    If they word it like they did in the article I think asking their research question (asked to kids) was itself reinforcing a harmful understanding of gender and the kind of characteristics that can be applied to them. Individuals lie. Entire genders do not. Basically nothing applies across the entire category. In high school (the age of a lot of these respondents) they teach you to watch out for tricky multiple choice questions that sneak in an over inclusive option.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 4 points 8 months ago (5 children)

    This one really, really depends on the question. Both men and women often lie and say that their partner doesn't hit them. This is pretty well known actually. You'd have to be pretty naive to think it doesn't happen.

    I’ve never been hit by a romantic partner. You’re saying that being hit in a relationship is common?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 8 months ago* (2 children)

    I'm a man and I've been hit by several partners. both long term and short term. I've also been threatened with violence and legal action. I also had one partner try to provoke me into violence to 'prove' I loved her.

    i end the relationship when it happens, but it certainly happens.

    many people see absolutely nothing wrong with female on male physical violence. the most frrequenty response I get if someone learns about it is 'what did you do to deserve it?' followed by 'well you must have hit her first, women don't hit men unless they hit them first'.

    I've had maybe 35+ partners in my life, and at least 20% were violent. it's not common, but it's not rare.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 8 months ago (1 child)

    Oh I don’t doubt that it happens, but I interpreted it as “everyone gets hit in a relationship” and that seemed shocking to me.

    I’m glad you don’t put up with that. No one should be abused by their partner, physically or otherwise.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 8 months ago*

    it means beat the shit out of people for having different beliefs than you. or maybe socially shun, isolated, and shame them.

    here on lemmy most of the userbase is totally on board with violence and harassment of people who have different beliefs than them... if you haven't noticed.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 8 months ago

    I agree with you, and want to add that parents need to do better about addressing this issue as well. There are a million opportunities, every day, to demonstrate heathy gender roles and start conversations about role expectations with your child.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 34 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (31 children)

    Read the comments in this thread, read this:

    "Social research has shown boys and men increasingly feel alienated, humiliated or uncertain about their place in the world."

    We just need to call young men stupid one more time guys and gender equality will be achieved. No wonder they feel they're being lied to.

  • source
  • hideshow 31 child comments
  • [–] 20 points 8 months ago (2 children)

    The number of people jumping in to call adolescent boys morons for having a slightly higher response rate to a very poorly framed question is ridiculous.

    The idiots here are the people who wrote the survey.

    Of course women lie about domestic violence.

    They lie to protect themselves. They lie out of fear.

    Some women, though a vanishingly small minority, lie to weaponise the legal system against their partner.

    Labelling this acknowledgment of reality, which has nuance to it, as extremist is just going to make more young men hostile to feminism.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 8 months ago (1 child)

    Yeah from how it has been worded "has there ever been a woman that lies about sexual assault" is a valid interpretation of the prompt and unsurprisingly anyone interpreting it that way will answer "yes, absolutely." Who knows how many of those people actually harbour misogynistic beliefs though.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 5 points 8 months ago*

    what qualifies as a misogynistic belief? we have to be clear about that.

    in 2026 there lots of people who think and argue that women and men having equal rights is misogynistic. like i believe that, and i say that, and i have had people in real life, tell me I'm a misogynistic piece of shit for thinking that. because their POV is that women deserve more rights than men, either to 'right history's wrongs' or because they think women are inherently disadvantaged/inferior to men and must be 'boosted'. or see trans rights, as misogyny.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] -4 points 8 months ago (18 children)

    Training boys to be douchebags is why this is happening.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 18 child comments
  • [–] 21 points 8 months ago (17 children)

    Yeah they're being courted by the far right because the far right aren't calling them idiots. Really not that hard to grasp.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 17 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 8 months ago (2 children)

    The far right are calling them idiots which is the weird thing. You ever pay attention to how those influencers speak to them? They basically neg these kids.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 8 months ago* (1 child)

    Good point, I would be interested in learning more about that. I feel like it may be because the insult is always a precursor to their actual message. For example "you're a loser with no girlfriend, but it's because women only respect alpha males. Here's how you become one..." It uses their insecurity to sell them misogyny and right wing ideology. I think that's structurally different to and mentally easier to accept than how a man might be insulted from a left wing perspective. Example: "you're a loser with no girlfriend because you're an incel who hates women."

    Objectively the left wing one is closer to the truth and heeding its advice would be more likely to socialise them and put them on the path of finding love and companionship, but it's pretty obvious to see which of the two a young inexperienced and insecure man would be more likely to follow.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] -5 points 8 months ago* (12 children)

    I see. They are douchebags because people observed they are douchebags. That makes sense, if you are a fucking moron. The real test is to determine if me pointing out that you are a moron has actually turned you into one.

    Well, reply so we can see.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (6 children)

    People who are treated like outcasts behave like outcasts. The judgment becomes self-fulfilling.

    The solution to this problem is inclusiveness and socialization, not further judgment and ostracization.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [+] -7 points 8 months ago (5 children)

    Its not anyone else's job to fix you.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 8 months ago

    It is not any one individual's responsibility to fix any other particular individual, true.

    Rather, it is the community's responsibility to care for the community. All of the community.

    If you start declaring some members of the community to be undeserving of care, then you are no better than the fascists.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 5 points 8 months ago (1 child)
  • [–] 5 points 8 months ago*

    I agree with the statement at face value, but add, without a proper support system, its impossible to do the inner work for yourself. We need external support, and we have to try for ourselves.

    The whole, lead a horse to water but you cant make them drink. Dont mean we shouldnt still help em get to the water.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 8 months ago

    The absolute audacity to vilify people/put them on blast constantly (bonus points for single mothers and having worse raising outcomes than single dads e.g.) and then act all high and mightly and demanding they "pull themselves up by their boostraps".

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 8 months ago* (4 children)

    If you didn't think I was already a moron why would you call me one? Are you really incapable of seeing how difficult it is for me to engage constructively with your argument while you are constantly interweaving it with personal attacks? I couldn't ask for a better example of how calling people dumb makes it hard for them to engage with your ideas. Again, no wonder young men with no experience are being entrapped by the far right.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [+] -8 points 8 months ago (3 children)

    Yes, this is a stupid post because it was made by a person that was called a moron, not because it was made by a person that is actually a moron.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [+] -6 points 8 months ago (8 children)

    ‘Teenage boys should get to say wildly misogynistic things with no social repercussions’ is absolutely not how you wind up with men who have normal relationships with women.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 15 points 8 months ago

    Or…. ‘Teenage boys repeating the lies they been told by only group not shaming them for existing.’

    They are victims of the circumstances, but because they are male, too many people act like its it’s okay to blame them.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 9 points 8 months ago (6 children)
  • [+] -8 points 8 months ago* (5 children)
  • [–] 2 points 8 months ago (2 children)
  • [–] 17 points 8 months ago (6 children)

    Just remember, folks, divide & conquer is the oldest trick in the book.

    They want us fighting the culture wars so we don’t fight the class war.

  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [+] -8 points 8 months ago (4 children)

    The culture of misogyny vs the culture of "oh dear, we're failing our kids and need to do better"?

    This is a stupid take.

    This is a peer-reviewed well-designed study by an expert in their field. Not a Ben Shapiro video.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 8 months ago

    If it's a peer-reviewed study, would you mind linking the actual study? Because it doesn't seem to be published; i.e., hasn't been peer-reviewed yet.

    If it's well-designed, then surely the survey questions will stand up to scrutiny, correct?

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 8 points 8 months ago (2 children)

    The OP didn’t link to a peer-reviewed well-designed study. They linked to a “news” article that purports to relay the information from the study, but no doubt presents much of it out of context and to an audience who lack the expertise to really understand it.

    I was referring to men vs. women, or gays vs. straights, or residents vs. immigrants, or any one of the hundred other arbitrary divisions being constantly foisted onto us.

    The study may well be measuring these divisions, or their effects, but that’s not my point at all.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] -3 points 8 months ago (1 child)

    The Conversation is a well known resource for highly-factual and unbiased wording and phrasing in their material.

    Trying to frame them as a culture war peddler throwing "men vs. women" divisions to stoke flames is some bullshit.

    13578

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 8 months ago

    Peak comment. Did you RTA? Because it does the opposite of what you propose, no factual evidence, and largely biased language.

    So...? We're just supposed to take their word that the sky isn't blue because in the past they've said the the sky is blue?

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] 6 points 8 months ago (3 children)
  • [–] 6 points 8 months ago (2 children)

    Questionable methodologies aside, I think you're right about this and it's an important point. So many people want to treat misogyny like it's the personal failing of individuals, when the problem is radicalization. People act like these are inherently disturbed people who would have arrived at their hateful opinions no matter what influences they were exposed to. That's basically an essentialist take and doesn't acknowledge the complexities of human psychology and development.

    You can't address a cultural or societal issue at merely the individual level, because it's like rescuing starfish from tide pools. For every one that you save, there's always a million more. And personal shaming doesn't help the situation at all.

    So many young men and adolescent boys are vulnerable to this radicalization because they've been ostracized from their peer groups. They commiserate about their situations with others like themselves. And these predatory manosphere influencers know this and they capitalize on it.

    People throw around "incel" like it's not only an insult, but also this morally repugnant and irredeemable sort of subhuman thing. How does that encourage anyone to self-examine and decide to do better? Society has already rejected them and made it clear that it will never open its doors to them again. And it even emphasizes that it's outside of their control, i.e. involuntary.

    How is that supposed to cultivate healthier views of women? It's literally telling men "You're worthless because you can't get laid." How do you expect them to react to that in any way other then "Oh gee, then I guess I'd better learn how to get laid." And then they start down an algorithmic rabbit hole of "dating coaches" and pick-up artists which sucks them into the manosphere grift.

    Every time I see "incel" used as an insult or approbation I flinch a little, because it only cements the demise of healthy gender relations a little more each time.

    These people started as socially awkward weirdos and loners. They were bullied and ostracized, and turned to the only spaces where they felt accepted. It's no wonder they wound up being negged and radicalized by predatory grifters.

    I've pointed this out multiple times all along the way while witnessing this slow downfall, and people always say the same things. "Redpill/blackpill chud INCEL, no one likes you, these people aren't worth defending, no one healthy or reasonable would let themselves be radicalized, or maybe if they weren't inherently flawed they wouldn't be friendless to begin with, etc. etc. etc." and it all boils down to the same thing: conform or die; the friendless deserve no pity.

    It's fucking hopeless...

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [+] 2 points 8 months ago (1 child)
  • [–] 2 points 8 months ago

    Yup, and anyone who actually tries to find a solution makes themself vulnerable to ridicule, scorn, and accusations when they inevitably fail.

    Much safer just to stand on the sidelines and point the finger. Nobody blames the people who never even tried. The people who tried and failed take all the blame.

    It's really short-sighted if you think about it...

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 10 points 8 months ago

    More than 17% of all Australians agree feminism should be resisted with violence.

    This stat in itself is wild. 1 in 6 Australians think feminists should be physically attacked. Who are these psychopaths? Which part of our society has let us down so badly and how do we fix it?

  • source
  • [–] 5 points 8 months ago

    @CurlyWurlies4All @Fleur_ @Fishnoodle after reading all the comments here, only 1 person commented on the what I think is the reason they published this article.The fact that social media influencers are driving a wedge between boy and girls.And the solution.... That attitudes can be changed with education shifts, and some success is being had in Australian schools.To me the article was to deliver the message. Social media for kids is bad. Changing the curriculum is a good thing.

  • source
  • [–] 13 points 8 months ago* (1 child)

    I don't think that a poll which indicates that one in five girls supports violence to resist feminism should be interpreted without any reservations, as this article seems to be doing. The number of adolescents who support endorsing violence in order to mess with uptight pollsters is apparently quite high...

    As for lying - it's a matter of fact that people, including women making accusations of serious crimes, sometimes lie. Maybe there's more to that question than is presented in the article?

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] [S] -2 points 8 months ago

    Just a reminder that this is a summary of an academic paper by a reputable university.

    In our research, we differentiate between interpersonal experiences, anchored in close relationships, and intergroup conflict that has generated a sense of “us” versus “them”: men versus women. We then examine how this intergroup social conflict is driving radicalisation.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments
    view more: next ›