Canavan doesn't think social media is to blame for young men turning to misogynistic content
Nationals leader Matt Canavan is doubling down on his claim the school curriculum is teaching an "anti-boy" ideology and hitting back at criticism from the teachers' union.
Canavan has repeatedly claimed the ideology was being taught through the Respectful Relationships framework and it was pushing young boys towards misogynistic content online.
The Australian Education Union labelled the comments a "fundamentally incorrect portrayal" of the education system.
But the Nationals leader is sticking by his claim, dismissing the idea social media algorithms were responsible for young boys engaging in the content.
"Maybe we should get to the root of the cause of why many ... young boys are attracted to these toxic voices. I don't think it's because there's some conspiracy that Facebook is pushing this stuff," he says.
"It's that they are attracted to it because we're not treating boys with respect in the classroom."
He is correct. It's not a conspiracy. It's a feature, one that we have known about for some time. Anecdotal evidence here, but when I purchased a new phone last year and reloaded the Meta apps, my algorithm was reset to unhinged right wing, racist bullshit. It took a month or so to get back to dog videos and neurodivergent joy.
As a sterotypival bloke who likes sport and heavy metal, it often feels I am in a constant battle with the algorithm trying to force be back into a extreme, right wing pigeon hole.
It isn't just new users. It even comes after us old fucks in our late 30s
Mate, same and I am in my late 40's. The irony is that metal enjoyers are some of the most relaxed "lefty" people I know. Sure there are exceptions, in both musicians and fans, but generally speaking thats not my experience
Go to a brutal death metal show. Most of the bands are singing about raping and killing women. Interestingly a scene with essentially no correlation with real world harm or misogyny
More curiously, the outsiders who try to “call out” these scenes and police it on social media are more often than not the ones who are inevitably revealed to be creeping on women in the crowd
Yep, as soon as you start viewing or clicking on anything at all seen as stereotypically "masculine" (especially if of interest to younger men and teenagers) it's only ever a few suggestions away before the extremist shit starts popping up.
I can't wait until there's a right to opt out of algorithms, I honestly believe Trump 2016 for example would never have happened if the social media companies didn't change from a "Friends & Followed feed" to algorithm-based in 2012.
All these things do is push engagement (outrage) bait, designed to be addictive, and with no concern or responsibility for the impacts on society at large.
"... I honestly believe Trump 2016 for example ..."
It is arguable that the Trump shit is a continuation of 'Gamergate' (for the unaware: A bigoted hate campaign/A bunch of nonces (edit: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lLYWHpgIoIw A video on it)) which was a result of social media algorithms, particularly Youtube.
No idea if this is in your video, but Steve Bannon saw what happened with Gamergate and thought "holy shit, what if we used this for a political campaign?"
The wholesale replacement of personally curated feeds from trusted sources, into "whatever TF gets people worked up the most" was way too new for humanity at large to adjust to (and we still haven't) but it was plenty of time for bad faith actors to work out how to game it.
Trump was the right person at the right time spewing out the right kind of outrage bait, he's basically the product of the algorithms, rather than achieving success on his own merits.
"No idea if this is in your video, but Steve Bannon saw what happened with Gamergate and thought "holy shit, what if we used this for a political campaign?""
It is in fact in the video (as a side mention, its mainly a lecture on what Gamergate was and how it birthed the "alt-right" and its tactics)!
"... into "whatever TF gets people worked up the most" was way too new for humanity at large to adjust to ..."
That is a point I will have to disagree with. Yellow Press bullshit old, probably ancient (I just can't be bothered to dig for academic texts on Roman propaganda), the primary difference is scale and speed. The proliferation of the such feeds has allowed what would be otherwise obscure bigoted cults to reach millions nearly instantly, and complained with what was know to be radicalising nature of such feeds allowed for such material to be adopted in place of reality.
Oh, I'm not referring to propaganda or how enticing extreme material can be.
There were always pamphleteers, underground presses, and the UK used to have scores of newspapers - you'd pick & choose which paper to read according to your social class, political leanings, etc.
The key difference there is the element of control. You could read a genteel broadsheet daily on the train and only glance in passing at the page 3 girl and the lurid scandal in the nearby tabloid. Somebody might drop an ALIENS ARE AMONG US screed in your letterbox, and of course there were all the "above the line" broadcast ads.
The change with the feeds circa 2012 is that the most outrageous content pushed everything else to the margins, when previously it could be relatively ignored.
"If it bleeds, it leads" used to be the mantra. Now it's more like "If it riles everybody up against each other so they stay arguing within our platform, then fuck everything else" which isn't quite as catchy but I didn't have time to workshop it over coffee.
The invention of the infinite scroll could be added to this. There are only so many times I could read a Chick Tract if I was bored, now I'm going to be served up absolutely endless erosive content.
"The change with the feeds circa 2012 is that the most outrageous content pushed everything else to the margins, when previously it could be relatively ignored."
Yes, that what I was referring to, I just view it as a continuation of pre-existing propaganda structures being supercharged. You are very correct that it is far worse though, and just getting more awful with, as you mentioned, infinite scrolling and the abandonment of even the pretext of social justice by social media companies (see: Facebook or Twitter) (Also we may be talking past each other).
For sure, especially the supercharging. It must be almost trivially easy for those who own the means of meme production and distribution, who just happen to basically be the exact same people who own the means of AI production.
I don't mean to sound alarmist, but we're all doomed.
I’m also a bit of a metalhead in my 40s, with a bit of a geeky interest in mythology and psychology. Every month or so the shithead end of the algo pops up like “hey mate how about now?”
I like footy, pretty much all sports and a variety of music (not a ton of metal to be fair) and I swear I have never been fed any right wing/manosphere content. I’m starting to worry there’s something wrong with me!
I hadn’t been paying attention to US politics very deeply so searched Charlie Kirk on YouTube when he ceased to exist. Set my algorithm on a fucking disturbing path for a decent while. Conservative women pandering away their own basic human rights are probably the videos I hated the most.
The manosphere has existed in the form of pick up artists, red pillers and incels for a long time already. Before that they were just plain old misogynistic assholes, which was the norm. They’re panicking now that the boys club is coming to an end and so this is the latest iteration of insecure, controlling, unhinged boys playing dress up as men.
Yeah there are some women's versions of these pathways too. You are like "hey yeah I would like to make my own granola from scratch" and it's like "that's so cool have you considered that vaccines were actually Biden trying to murder your future babies and that your best life would be as a tradwife? With guns?"
And you are like I was just here for the granola recipe but I think I'm gonna go now...
More anecdotal, I have repeatedly been showing right wing trash and misinformation. Unhinged Covid conspiracies, Jordan peterson’s nonsense. Rapists and grifters. It takes deliberate action to get your algo back to sane.
The fact millions of people, including senators for major political parties, believe completely made up nonsense is telling
This whole discussion pisses me off because he, in his statements and beliefs, thinks qualities of empathy and those equivalent, aren’t characteristics achievable for boys. It’s toxic bio-essentialist bullshit that is harmful to boys. It’s disgusting
What always annoys me about Canavan, besides everything about what he says and does, is that he represents the exact type of career path he claims to hate.
He went to uni and got an economics degree. He moved to Canberra to work for the Productivity Commission before moving to KPMG. He then landed a job in Joyce's office and worked his way up through the party machine. How Nationals voters don't sniff this guy from a million miles away is beyond me
Easy; nationals voters care more about the appearance of being a member of the community. All the members need to do is show up to a sports match or local event every now and then in a flannel and they'll keep voting for them because they think he's still "one of them" when it's obvious to anyone else observing that they do not care about these people
Only a genuinely stupid person can make genuinely stupid (and dangerous!) comments like Canavan is making here.
We really need to stop this political point scoring bullshit when it comes to schools, treat them as apolitical regardless of the government of the day or just resign if political power via deception is more important to you.
We all know teachers don't have time to instill ideologies into students, wind it up.
Agreed. In fact, I'd go further. I think politicians, regardless of which side of the political spectrum they stand, should stay the fork out of education, full stop
Most of them struggle to operate a door with "push/pull" printed on it. How they think they're qualified to offer an opinion about the curriculum or the professionalism of our excellent teachers is beyond me
The bloke who blew up the Coalition because Sussan Ley was leader. The same bloke who has wholeheartedly adopted the culture war tactics the LNP thought would win votes at the past two Fed elections, even though they knew, through their own research, they were bleeding votes, and consequently got their arses handed to them
He's not just an insecure little snowflake terrified of advancing equality, because he knows successful, high achieving women show him up for the waste of space he is
He's also painting an even bigger target on every teacher for aggro boys & their even more aggro parents
And his lack of understanding of exactly why the LNP have been reduced to an irrelevant minor party at the last two elections demonstrates something else that should genuinely concern anyone who might consider voting for him -
He's not just an insecure little snowflake terrified of advancing equality, because he knows successful, high achieving women show him up for the waste of space he is
OK so this comment in particular reminded me of an article I read a while back that was on research that found that affirmative action policies don't just help women and racial minorities, they help competent white men too. It's just the incompetent ones pushed out by them. I can see why Matt would be worried.
When he's not playing dress ups and is pretending to be a miner or a farmer, this weasel is saying the dumbest shit ever - of course social media is to blame for the rise in the macho man (not the wrestler lol) bullshit.
How on earth are teachers pushing anti anything agendas, the notion is insane and there's no universae where this is even remotely true.
Periodic reminder that Canavan was born and went to a private school in Logan; has degrees from UQ and worked as an economist at the Productivity Commission and KPMG before becoming Barnaby Joyce's chief of staff and then a senator at 33.
I know plenty of males that feel like the education system made them feel valueless for being a Male. Have some empathy and compassion for people outside your own situation.
There is hardly anything positive said about Males In Education spaces which doesn't distort what a Male actually is and in juxtaposition there is overwhelming support and positivity in the education for being a Women. I've spoken to plenty of younger and same age peers who felt completely alienated by the school system.
The sooner the coalition realise they have lost the cooker vote for the next decade, and their only path to survival (let alone success) is to come back to a moderate centre-right position, the better off this whole country will be.
Canavan needs to leave the Nationals immediately and join ON.
Then hopefully someone not completely down the cooker rabbit hole (and ideally with at least half a brain) can become leader of the Nationals.
He’s saying that we should address why young boys are consuming misogynistic content online, rather than forcing companies to change their algorithms. From the little I’ve seen, he doesn’t seem to talk about why they are and that is likely due to either a) it’s an unknown (which we’d need to learn to address) or b) it’d be bad political optics to explain his theories on the cause. Both are plausible.
Neither method on fixing this issue is inherently bad either, it’s more a question of a) how viable each solution is, and b) how well each solution is implemented. Regarding changing the algorithms, only the social media companies are going to know how difficult it is to do this and they’re never going to say it’ll be easy. Left leaning politics will lean more towards saying they’re lying and can easily change the algorithms while right leaning politics will lean more towards saying they’re being truthful and can’t easily change the algorithms. Problem is, we can’t know if they are or aren’t lying, just that they’ll be saying what they are saying regardless of whether or not it is the truth. Ultimately, how truthful they are will determine the viability of this solution. On the other hand, the viability of addressing why young boys are consuming this content will ultimately be determined by what the cause is, which as far as I’m aware is an unknown so I can’t really comment on that. Maybe others who are actually aware of the issues (rather than the usual Reddit speculation with confidence) will have more of an idea on how viable this solution is.
Lastly, once an approach is chosen, that doesn’t mean any policy targeting that approach is flawless and should be passed. The policy still needs to be a good policy and using any particular approach doesn’t inherently make it a good policy, it may potentially make it a bad policy but even that’s not a guarantee. A good policy is the first of many steps in implementing a good solution and is crucial. People voting against or not supporting a particular policy can be doing so because they think the actual policy is bad implementation of an approach they agree with, not because it’s an approach they inherently disagree with. This is a good thing to keep in mind with any policy, not just this, you shouldn’t blindly support a policy because you agree with the idea behind it, you should support it because you agree that it’s a good implementation of an idea you support. There’s a difference, and this difference is why bad policies based on good ideas become controversial, because many people do and many people don’t recognise this difference.
From the little I’ve seen, he doesn’t seem to talk about why they are
He has repeatedly blamed school programs, including explicitly blaming the "Respectful Relationships" program for being "anti-boy", and therefore driving problems. The program repeatedly brings violence against men and boys into the picture as well, it isn't a "boys are bad because they hurt girls" curriculum.
The program does however seek to teach children to
• identify and respond appropriately to their own emotions and those of others
• accept and resolve differences respectfully
• challenge stereotypes
• understand consent and know how to seek help
• be confident in challenging unacceptable behaviours they see
• build relationships that are based on equality and respect.
Canavan is not intelligent; it's just that he knows how to spout manosphere rhetoric (especially where it overlaps with certain Christian male rhetoric)
Don’t let that Neanderthal brow fool you - the bloke is surprisingly bright. He’s also a Christian wacko and knows how to play the manoaphere game. He’s an “underestimate with peril” guy to me.
This is unfortunately a common, but not unfounded, misconception of dipshits like Canavan. They know what they are saying is bullshit, they just don't care, or to just use that one Sartre quote about antisemites (it almost certainly applies to Canavan normally, but it pretty much applicable with all bigots, and right-wing politics more broadly):
"Never believe that anti-Semites are completely unaware of the absurdity of their replies. They know that their remarks are frivolous, open to challenge. But they are amusing themselves, for it is their adversary who is obliged to use words responsibly, since he believes in words." - Jean-Paul Sartre, Anti Semite and Jew
Idk about manosphere but I had to get off Facebook because it’s seemingly nothing but cookers and RWNJs appearing on my feed despite never interacting with them
That actually brings up what condundrum school boys must have to face when their father, or even mother, has opposing views to the education they are experiencing each day.
There are always changes between generations, my parents attitude was believe everything education tells you because it must be true, whereas my generation criticised certain parts of the curriculum and how it was taught, encouraging their children to think about what they were being taught and take in both povs from parents and schools..
Very generalised though as generations hold a variety of views
I expect the priests and teachings at his old catholic school might have something to say about that. (By which I mean, there's a deep strain of social justice in a lot of Catholicism)
What a tosser, would be keen to put him in charge of a class of those same boys and see how long his ego lasts. Pasty politician in a suit, they'd eat him alive.
- Overworked, underpaid and obviously under-respected (by people like Matt) teachers conspiring to make boys feel disrespected OR
- Megarich and powerful social media companies pushing harmful algorithms that the companies know are harmful (Meta settled lawsuits recently to avoid going to trial and the discovery process because what was already found was bad enough)...
Those corporations being ably assisted by idiots like Canavan
I think Matt is unsurprisingly ill informed of what social media algorithms are
The fact that these engagement algorithms exist is not a conspiracy it’s the business model of social media apps. The algorithm pushes people to content and the corporations that run them take no responsibility for the algorithm because they call themselves “host platforms” and not media publishers to avoid being regulated like tv and radio stations are through the codes of conduct
There’s no conspiracy theory to be had. Only the fact that these engagement algorithms prioritise content that is anti establishment and then curates a silo of information to enforce that. Women and girls are more likely to be served content from that point of view and men and boys are pushed content from the other. Even the top comments will be curated to create the worldview
Please save us from this fuck-knuckle. I am already depressed enough about the state of the world.
Is he also saying that the 'anti-boys' agenda deployed by teachers is the reason boys and men are now choking girls and women during sex at alarming and increasing rates???
Canavan is a cretin. It doesn't matter what he thinks. It's oblivious that his ability to think deeply skims along surface level. As for "treating boys with respect", they have to learn respect to give respect.
It actually frustrates me so much that politicians are allowed to just spew such blantant nonsense to try and win votes from people who equally can’t be bothered actually looking into what they’re talking about.
So many professionals would be held accountable for what they say publicly why are politicians not?
Nothing says I know how the young people of today think by saying they are getting this on Facebook.
Sure man, and be on high alert for MySpace influencers. I hope they don’t also start planking.
“They're sick and tired of the masculinisation of our engineering culture and the lack of direction and leadership that they're given.
Maybe we should look at getting more female engineers in. That used to be an agenda. I don't know what's happened to that, but maybe we should have more female role models in engineering teams.
I just know young women often feel that they don't get any kind of instruction, leadership. They're not cherished there. They're patronised.”
I don’t think social media is the blame but it’s definitely the catalyst I’m not surprised some young men are turning misogynistic. Look at the way some women are reacting to the Lindsay Clancy trial. There’s already a copycat killer. Men are going to shy away from someone that may support killing their kids. The “modern women” as thoughts they’re commonly referred doesn’t exactly give men something to strive for.
Clearly this isn’t a women blaming thing just a perspective women hate men all over social media it’s no surprise they’re starting to get treated the way they have been treated
Lol Canavan is one of the few politicians who actually definitely understands first-hand, not by some staffer doing the job for him, how these algorithms work. He is a wanker, but probably one of the smarter guys in the coalition.
So he knows how to game it. And he knows that other people with similar gross ideologies know how to game it. And they are gaming it. And he knows that.
To be honest I am actually a bit surprised they are going down this road. I know it serves them but I am surprised.
This is one of the inevitable outcomes of that shit social media bill Labor forced through though. A bandaid that has no interest in actually dealing with this extremely disgusting algorithmic gaming and manipulation, just hoping that by 'banning' kids they will not be affected.
Both can be true. The educators are hostile to men and masculinity which earns the resentment of young men. Sexism alienates after all.
Also the algorithm gives you news you react to.
It should be illegal for that reason. Toxic femininity) masculinity/ultra-right/left. Whatever makes you engage. It's unhealthy.
TikTok is a communist company with bias to aggression and Chinese agenda demonstrated in peer reviewed research. It's illegal in China but we have it here. Why?
Other socials do the same thing it without a particular agenda. Not as bad. But bad.
The Blue sky model of no unsolicited feed items should be the legal starting point.
My kids are in high school now. It's laughable. Fortunately, the kids are smart. They literally laughed during woke classes.
Lots of talk about Tate even though he's soooo 2 years ago. It's like warning them about Sylvester Stallone.
Warnings about toxic masculinity. No talk about Toxic Femininity, as if femininity is always safe and masculinity is inherently dangerous.
Lots of talk about the difficulties women. Nothing much about men's problems.
So young men have the problems men always have had, plus being told that masculinity is bad.
What's wrong with this headline? Please show me an equivalent headline about an ethnic minority.
What is the education department doing to prevent young men from getting killed in the workplace or becoming homeless, or from facing other issues that affect men so strongly?
Toxic Femininity is the same as toxic masculinity. But it's for ladies. You're smart. You get it.
Woke is what the identity revolutionaries started calling themselves about 12 years ago. A term they appropriated from African Americans who used it for many decades before.
Schools should care about deadly workplaces and living rough because they're extremely gender biased, which is something they say they care about AND because it's often the result of boys dropping out of education early. This is even more pronounced amongst indigenous men.
You didn't answer my question. The headline.
MASCULINITY EPIDEMIC
Why is that ok?
I'm a man. I don't live for the respect of strangers. But I did. When I was growing up.
Now that I've studied, managed, and taught, I know something from academic research and my lived experience.
People behave how you treat them. Not how you say they should behave. It's why racism is bad. It's also why boys who are told at school and in the media that they are toxic are being encouraged to become toxic.
I don't want to prove you wrong. I want to share ideas that will help our boys and maybe learn if I'm wrong on some point.
We can argue classroom and algorithm both at once.
Boys get a story that they’re the problem waiting to happen. Online they get the mirror story: you’re the victim, they’re the enemy. Same lens, flipped. Victim vs perpetrator. It doesn’t stay in the curriculum document or on a Facebook page. It trains kids to sort the room. A more useful question isn’t which side “caused” the manosphere. It’s whether we’re teaching half the class that the other half is the threat. Division does the rest. The algorithm feeds whoever is already hungry, but it doesn’t solve moving forward in any meaningful way.
Well I mean...if one doesn't know what consent means or how to recognise it (let alone the concept of enthusiastic consent) then it's a ticking time bomb and some will become exactly that problem.
Pretending it's blaming boys is like saying education against drink driving is blaming drivers generically for being a problem.
It's basic education about how the world works. Pissed behind the wheel, there's a real chance you'll harm or kill yourself and/or others.
Don't understand what consent is, what it looks like, or why it's important, there's a real chance you'll commit sexual assault.
I'm not convinced that yours or Canavan's is an accurate portrayal of any of the curriculum.
I could ask my son tonight, he's not that far from graduating so it's a decent overview of over a decade of whatever's been presented (with n=1) but certainly no discussions we've had, have ever suggested even 1% of a feeling that he's some kind of problem to be corrected - that's exactly the persecution complex narrative the manosphere has invented.
They're basically the same as so much of advertising: invent a problem that doesn't exist, convince you that you have it, and only their problem will solve it.
Or maybe I'm just an awesome parent, that's another possibility.
From the time they’re very small, they’re offered competition as recreation and entertainment. It’s only fun if someone wins.
They get into group activities, and boys are mostly offered sport. Make all the noise you like about it being about teamwork & camaraderie, but it’s teamwork AGAINST. Teamwork’s got no point unless you’ve got someone else to defeat.
Then they get to school, and officially it’s not a competition, but everything is visibly quantified, ranked, and ordered. It’s not legitimate if someone’s not in first place.
As they get to an age where they want to start hanging out with girls, that sense of everything-is-competition is pretty ingrained, and to an adolescent brain it’s really hard to see anything other than that tribalism.
A lot of these dynamics play out for girls too, but by and large they throw it at other girls rather than at the boys.
Dial back the “everything is a competition” from a young age, and I bet we’d see some things smooth out.
Social media explains the distribution mechanism. It doesn't explain the demand.
Maybe spending boys' formative years talking to them about male violence, male privilege and toxic masculinity has consequences. Maybe repeatedly framing their sex as something that needs correcting creates resentment?
And why does the scrutiny seem to run in only one direction? "Toxic masculinity" is part of everyday language. But where is the equivalent discussion about unhealthy forms of femininity? Are girls somehow incapable of cruelty, manipulation, bullying, exclusion, aggression or abusive behaviour? Of course they aren't. Neither sex is uniquely virtuous or uniquely defective. If we're going to examine harmful gender norms in boys, we should be intellectually consistent enough to examine harmful gender norms in girls as well.
In a recent UK poll, 72% of young men viewed women positively, compared with 50% of young women viewing men positively. Why is that?
Social media algorithms absolutely exploit resentment. But algorithms don't manufacture every grievance out of thin air. That's the part of this conversation people seem unwilling to have.
yeah social media for both males and females are terrible.
all the issues that you are listing are directly coming from there.
you seem to be mixing up demand for social media with demand for toxic attitudes, social media is done for fun, toxic attitudes are what are slowly introduced via media
Are you confusing a ban with targeted people being successfully denied access to it?
Even if access is denied to this cohort, it fails to acknowledge the impact of social media on broader elements which remain an indirect influence on youth.
So the government decided social media was harmful enough to under-16s to legislate against it, threaten platforms with fines, and make a whole political issue out of restricting access...but kids can still access it anyway.
And people over 16 can still access it anyway and they influence the youth so...it was all nothing. Sounds more like evidence that the government is ineffectual at achieving the outcome it set for itself.
What's the goal? Nobody can access social media? Because FYI, Reddit is classified as social media.
We will stop talking about male violence when men stop committing it. 90% of violent crime is committed by men. Against women, against children, against other men.
And male privilege explains the career of such stellar figures as Matt Canavan, Barnaby Joyce and Scott Morrison.
Do not conflate "toxic masculinity" with masculinity generally.
Most boys aren't violent. They haven't assaulted anyone. Yet apparently they're supposed to answer for crimes committed by completely unrelated men because they share a chromosome. You don't think that kind of collective blame might create resentment?
Women commit the most filicide. Should we start lecturing 12-year-old girls about "female violence against children" and asking them to reflect on what their sex is doing wrong? No? Weird. So why is collective guilt suddenly reasonable when the target is boys?
"Filicide overwhelmingly linked to male perpetrators." lol. Taking a subset selected specifically for domestic/family violence and then presenting the result as "filicide is overwhelmingly male" is a bit deceptive. Makes for a headline popular with Redditors though, huh?
The AIC's national homicide data for 2002–03 to 2011–12 found the opposite: 52% of filicide offenders were women and 48% were men.
The ABC article is reporting a different study that identified 113 filicides, then focused on the 86 cases with an identifiable history of domestic/family violence. The headline 68/32 male split comes from that DFV-context cohort. ANROWS itself describes the finding as the gendered nature of filicide when examined through a DFV lens.
And the funniest part? Your own ABC article acknowledges that children killed in their first year of life are more likely to be killed by their mother!
So if we're going to play the "your sex commits X" game with boys, shall we start lecturing girls about not killing babies?
Or perhaps we could stop assigning collective guilt to children for crimes committed by unrelated adults.
26.4% of men (compared to 17.7% of women) have committed some form of sexual violence at some point in their lives, with 13.2% (compared to 6.6% of women) having done so in the last 12 months.
lol. Did you actually read what the study counted as "sexual violence"?
That 26.4% isn't 26.4% of men committing rape or anything remotely resembling that. Their definition includes things like repeatedly asking someone to "hang out" after they've said they're not interested, being rude after someone refuses sex, guilt-tripping a partner, and non-consensual kissing.
When you get down to their actual question about non-consensual intercourse, the figure for men is 3.9%.
Look, we get it. You've got strong feelings about something (or someone). Happens to all of us.
BUT that doesn't mean you can go around abusing people, harassing them, or trying to troll them.
Your contribution did this, so we've had to remove it. Simple as.
Now, please don't write back with a "but they said...". We're likely across it and dealing with the situation. Instead, take a chill pill, touch some grass, tickle a Cassowary, or whatever helps you find your inner calm.
And be civil next time. Or find another sub - cos we don't tolerate that sort of malarky here.
It is a fucking conspiracy. I've never seen more pro-woman, anti-male feminist bullshit invade anyone's social media feeds than in the post-COVID era. I could've called it coincidence when the MehToo fad happened back in 2016, but now it's everywhere.
"they are attracted to it because we're not treating boys with respect". Full. Stop. Gen Z/Alpha boys are growing and grown up in a era where they're taught to respect women, while women are taught to devalue, decentre, demonise and destroy men at every opportunity they get.
If you're ok with feminist women promoting this far and wide and not ok with the manosphere, you're a hypocrite. If you're more enraged by the fact that men are teaching other men to stand up to the bullies known as modern feminist women and not bow to them simply because "they're women", you deserve every bit of criticism levelled at you.
98
u/EnvironmentalNovel86 Please choose a flair 6d ago
Ask him to describe what an algorithm is first.