A community for discussing events around the World
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! 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.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
News [email protected]
Politics [email protected]
World Politics [email protected]
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
the hairs prickling up on her legs
Some incel somewhere: "WTF IS THIS WOKE BULLSHIT!?!?!?!"
I feel like I'm in a different universe to most people. Only chance I get to call anyone out for anything is littering and playing music loudly in public. Honestly feels like confirmation bias, but I'm sure I'm wrong.
I mean, if you went to 4chan you could presumably call out more, but it'd be kind of like yelling into a hurricane. Toxicity is self-concentrating in really anonymous online spaces.
IRL bigots tend to hide their shit from non-target non-bigots.
Pro tip - I'll absolutely snitch on the guys I know that you probably shouldn't date. Maybe you have a male friend that's the same.
It's insane to me that the greatest threat to women is dating men. Who the hell is raising these guys? Even in my worst days I never blamed women for my dating problems - I blamed myself. Therapy helped with that problem though. But the motives of mass misogyny are just opaque to me. Sort your shit guys, don't be a bastard.
The internet is raising them. They aren't going outside and saying these things where at least one man would smack him upside the head in order to correct bad behavior. They aren't going outside and trying this shit on women who will reject their bad behaviors. Or worse running to legal trouble for harassing or assaulting women. Whereby it used to be the guy would self reflect and realize he's doing it wrong.
The internet is telling them stories about how these behaviors are what the "alpha" males are doing to successfully get all the women. What is the bullshit stat? Like 1% of top men get 99% of women or some stupid shit.
The internet lies to them, painting a dark twisted world. And then these guys go out to the real world to treat women in the way they think the world is some kind of dark world. They get extreme negative experiences. Which to them proves that the internet was right about everything.
Expecting men to beat the shit out of people doing the "wrong" things is also a really big problem and isn't a solution either.
I remember in the late 80s when i was really young hearing about gay bashing as if it was a perfectly okay thing to group to and go do.
I remember people talking about Freddie Mercury coming out as gay and not feeling comfortable asking why that is a problem for fear of being targeted myself.
I don't have any answers
beat the shit out of people
It's not literal. You seriously don't know what social conditioning is???
gay bashing
I have no clue how you derived homophobia from this.
This is either a troll or poor reading comprehension.
it's so easy.
99% of men are disgusted by this type of thing, but with billions of people and instant communication. this type of thing is bound to pop up. and because normal people aren't looking at this type of thing, they're echo chambers of degeneracy. but it really bothers me when people use sex based generalizations for things like this. millions of people isn't very much on a global scale.
I think it is more widespread than you imagine. If admiration for Andrew Tate is an indicator of seriously misogynistic attitudes, then the statistics (for the UK) are quite shocking:
Nearly a quarter (23%) of 15-16-year-old boys have a positive view of Andrew Tate compared to only 10% of girls at this age.
Furthermore, one-third of dads (32%) view Andrew Tate favourably compared to 10% of mums. This positive view is even higher among young dads: 52% of 25-34-year-old dads compared to 19% of mums.
Additionally, 49% of 25-34-year-old dads believe their child has a positive view of Andrew Tate.
Source: https://www.internetmatters.org/hub/research/research-into-online-misogyny-and-image-based-abuse/
Maybe my opinion is influenced by my geographic position. I never would have imagined that many people of my generation support him. Where I live, saying you like Andrew Tate would be like saying you support Putin, maybe worse.
Man these numbers are horrific we need to bring back McCarthyism but for these people
Are you or have you ever been a supporter of Andrew Tate
As a man, it's also reasonable to say this is nearly non existent among women. Does it happen? Of course. But not nearly to the scale it happens among men.
It's moreso a matter of semantics. If someone says "Men are disgusting", you don't have to take it literally. It's conveying the meaning that there is a large enough amount of men that are doing this that it is a massive problem in nearly every woman's life. The saying would be a bit less valid if it was so extremely prevalent. But as it stands, I can go up to just about any young woman, and they more than likely would have (at least) been sexually harassed by a man.
So sure, with as many people as there are, it's "bound to pop up" but saying it that way seems to undermine just how prevalent it is. And correcting a statement that expresses the sentiment that this is a large problem by saying "But not all men are bad" is counterproductive. They are talking about the systematic issue among men. You could instead respond with "Yea, we need systematic changes" or something along the lines that address the concern they are raising.
But as it stands, I can go up to just about any young woman, and they more than likely would have (at least) been sexually harassed by a man.
Thats's most certainly accurate, since in the US, 1 in 5 women have been raped over the course of their lives.
So, Sexual harassment would be far more likely. I'd guess, 4 in 5 women, if not 5 outta 5.
When I said it's "bound to pop up" I was talking specifically about the online communities mentioned. I don't disagree that there are systemic problems but I think that they were focusing on a specific and small subset of a larger problem.
I might be wrong about this, correct me if that's so. but because most men aren't rapists, yet a surprisingly high number of women get sexually assaulted/raped, It seems like the problem is not that most men are predators, but that our society is letting the minority that are get away with it repeatedly.
because most men aren’t rapists, yet a surprisingly high number of women get sexually assaulted/raped, It seems like the problem is not that most men are predators, but that our society is letting the minority that are get away with it repeatedly.
It's much muddier than that. Most cases of rape are someone the victim trusted. And most of those cases don't ever get reported to authorities. So there are many men may have taken advantage of a woman, and that woman see's him as an abuser, but nearly nobody in that mans life even knows about this. The victim may stay silent for any number of reasons. There are almost definitely cases like that involving men you know, but are unaware of what they did. As for the solution to these cases? Societal norms need to change. Consent needs to be required every time no matter what. There should never be pressure for sex, and peers should not encourage pressuring a woman into sex. Instead, the man will say the person stepping in is "cock blocking" when in reality they're defending someone who doesn't want to have sex with them. Men will back up other men in an attempt to help their bro "get their dick wet". They will get women drunk in hopes they will have reduced inhibitions, or perhaps so drunk they don't even remember the night. This is not as simple as "lock up the bad guys" when very few cases of rape involve being snatched up off the street.
When I said it’s “bound to pop up” I was talking specifically about the online communities mentioned.
Gotcha, I misunderstood what you were saying. I do still disagree that groups like that are bound to pop up, at least not as much as they are right now. I think womanizing groups are far more common than dedicated racist groups online. Racism has taken a massive downward trend over the last hundred years. Of course, it is not fixed, very far from it. But I also think it is undeniable that racism is less of a problem than it was 50 years ago. That is the kind of societal change we want. If the internet were around 50 years ago, the insane number of group chats dedicated to racism would have been far larger than they are now. Bringing awareness to these issues, and especially men standing up to other men, is what will help bring a decline to the number of vocal sexist pigs and their echo chambers.
99% of men are disgusted by this type of thing
wow. naive.
Yeah, these days I'm thinking it might actually be a double digit percentage that's onboard. The manosphere has enough reach to affect elections now, which I did not see coming.
i did. saw it in 2016 and had a hunch before that.
the only thing that shocks me anymore is how naive most of you are.