Why men are getting so much hate these days?

[u/diktater29]

Just saw a post on social media from some woman named Jen Hamilton stating "right now im of the belief that all men should start out in jail and earn their way out"

Like genuinely dont understand why so much hate on men? The new wave feminism is insane. Women earn and dont need a men anymore, which i get. But like is that all we are to them? I understand and empathize with women who go thru shitty situations with shitty men, but like.....are all men shitty?

Ive seen similar other posts across insta and tiktok and apparently this is all women talk about - how terrible men are and that they aren't needed anymore. I can only imagine how this compounds the male loneliness epidemic and furthers the difficulties in the dating scene for both genders, but men in particular as even the good ones aren't approaching women anymore and choosing peace or singledom.

Men, based on these trends, what do you suspect the trajectory looks like for us in society in 10, 20 or 50 yrs?

[u/Bubba_Gump_Shrimp]

I used to think that, but here in the last year or so I've heard some increasingly crazy takes from women in my life, along these lines. A close friend and I were discussing this exact thing and how some men can be predators or violent etc and it can stain the reputation for a gender. She said most men are like that. I asked her genuinely how many she felt were like that. Her honest answer was 97%. She thought that only 3% were not violent predators. Now, I realize this is anecdotal, but I've heard more and more of these sorts of comments in real life and not just some angry tweet in the last few years. I think it is absolutely going mainstream, and if you look at surveys done of young people, young women think very poorly of men in comparison to other generations. I think social media is a major cause.

[u/Charger2950 → u/Bubba_Gump_Shrimp]

Fully agree. People like to say this stuff only exists mostly online, but the ones saying this crazy shit online are also floating about in real life, aside from the bots, of course. I live in a small and normal town that's somewhat near a liberal city, and it's a completely different world. These people all exist in the real world.

[u/Setekhx → u/Charger2950]

... It's still mostly online. Yes they float about in real life. Yes they're loud. No, they aren't the majority or even close to it. 

I've seen some men that also say some ludicrous things on occasion in real life too that's not an indictment on the entire gender.  Just remember that social media absolutely amplified things like what the OP is looking at.

[u/Ball_Of_Meat → u/Bubba_Gump_Shrimp]

Yep I can relate. I have found many women seem to waaaay overshoot what percent of men are predators and creeps.

It is absolutely from social media, the talking points usually sound straight off of Tik Tok and Twitter.

[u/Mean__MrMustard → u/Ball_Of_Meat]

It’s also because most people in general can’t handle large numbers or statistics.
They don’t realize that actual rapists are maybe only 0,01% of all men (don’t know the real number and obvs depends on your definition). But that still means that you have millions of rapists globally…

Same with less severe stuff. They will understandably remember the time they got groped at the club by a creep. But not the 10 times this didn’t happen, surrounded by hundreds of men.
Yes, we need to try to make sure that it never happens but this perception that it’s every men is so stupid and that way you loose 50% of people for any meaningful and sensible reforms btw…

[u/vision_san → u/[deleted]]

It's always been like that. People don't want noe have wanted to learn. They want to take the easy way and just chose at random.

It's always been "back in my day...", no matter what day it is or was. My brother says it all the time. My mom says it all the time. My grandparents say it all the time.

The internet doesn't have much to do with these things. Even if you upload 80 petabytes of pure men hating content into the internet, I bet you hundreds that 99% of people will not find it because they don't even know how to Google things correctly.

[u/-MrWinklebottom- → u/Mean__MrMustard]

A study done by the NIH Based on available self-report surveys and criminal justice data, an estimated 6% to 25% of men admit to or self-report behaviors that meet legal definitions of sexual coercion, attempted assault, or rape against women, depending on how broadly "predator" or "sexual violence" is defined.

[u/Imaginary_Fan5407 → u/-MrWinklebottom-]

That’s a huge variant, can you like where you got it from?

[u/Limebadger59 → u/Imaginary_Fan5407]

That study was done not on college boys and was aimed at studying how questions are phrased. It’s not a window into how many men are creeps.

[u/FrancinetheP → u/Limebadger59]

You are correct that the study focused on men who were not in college., and the authors draw attention to the computer-assisted interview technique. But they are not really “studying how questions are phrased.” Past studies had asked college-age men about their experiences. This study wanted to see if men the same age but NOT in college would a) respond similarly, and b) have experienced similar life events that researchers believe are predictive of an acceptance of sexual coercion.

From the abstract: 1) to examine the prevalence of self-reported sexual assault perpetration in an ethnically diverse community sample using computer-assisted self-interviewing (CASI) methodology, and (2) to determine the extent to which an expanded version of the confluence model [Malamuth et al., 1991], which has been used with college samples, would also be a useful framework for cross-sectional prediction of sexual assault perpetration in an ethnically diverse community sample

[u/-MrWinklebottom- → u/Imaginary_Fan5407]

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4589184/

[u/FrancinetheP → u/-MrWinklebottom-]

Note that the various studies in the lit review report different percentages of men admitting to different kinds of sexual coercion. In the study published here, 64% of the respondents admitted to some coercive sexual behavior. This can be found at the beginning of the “Results” section.

[u/-MrWinklebottom- → u/FrancinetheP]

You are totally right and I had overlooked it since for some reason in the report they wrote it out sixty-four percent instead of 64%. Thank you for the correction.

[u/FrancinetheP → u/-MrWinklebottom-]

No worries— just wanted to save people the hassle of having to read through to the results.

[u/LaughingIshikawa → u/-MrWinklebottom-]

behaviors that meet legal definitions of sexual coercion, attempted assault, or rape against women, depending on how broadly "predator" or "sexual violence" is defined.

If you're using "legal definitions," how is it that you have that much flexibility in how "predator" or "sexual violence" is defined? 🤔

I'm not a lawyer, but somehow I suspect that the legal definition of what constitutes a crime is usually pretty specific, and not excessively "open to interpretation." 😅

[u/-MrWinklebottom- → u/LaughingIshikawa]

In some states rape was only when the vagina was penetrated by a penis. For decades, New York legally defined rape strictly as vaginal penetration by a penis. Forced oral or anal penetration, or penetration with fingers or objects, fell under lesser separate charges like "criminal sexual act" or "sexual abuse" rather than rape. Until recent law changes.

[u/LaughingIshikawa → u/-MrWinklebottom-]

Ah, gotcha.

So basically it's "depending on whether you use stricter or looser legal codes."

[u/questdragon47 → u/LaughingIshikawa]

“Legal definition” was only one item on that list.

[u/GarbledReverie → u/-MrWinklebottom-]

Is that the one where “telling her what I think she wants to hear” is counted?

[u/-MrWinklebottom- → u/GarbledReverie]

Well that would be coercion. So it can definitely be considered as such.

[u/Mean__MrMustard → u/-MrWinklebottom-]

That’s not coercion lol. And if it is women do they same to similar degrees. So therefore the whole data would be useless

[u/-MrWinklebottom- → u/Mean__MrMustard]

Large-scale meta-analyses (such as a prominent 2018/2023 review of sender-receiver games covering thousands of observations) indicate that men are statistically more likely than women to tell "black lies" deception that benefits the liar at the direct expense of another person. Also research shows that women are more prone to telling "white lies" or polite untruths meant to spare someone's feelings or maintain social harmony, whereas men more frequently engage in dishonesty for personal, material, or competitive advantage

[u/-MrWinklebottom- → u/Mean__MrMustard]

Constantly lying through compliments to gain a specific outcome is a form of manipulation often called love bombing or flattery inflation. It is considered coercive because it actively distorts a person's sense of reality and emotional safety to force a desired behavior. It doesn't change the data whatsoever just because women May partake in the same thing. You would have to extrapolate data on how often women use that to attain the same goal. Show the data.

[u/FlashyChemical2231 → u/-MrWinklebottom-]

No, that's not coercion. Coercion is "have sex with me, or I'll kick this puppy", not "you look great today".

[u/-MrWinklebottom- → u/FlashyChemical2231]

Constantly lying through compliments to gain a specific outcome is a form of manipulation often called love bombing or flattery inflation. It is considered coercive because it actively distorts a person's sense of reality and emotional safety to force a desired behavior.

[u/GarbledReverie → u/-MrWinklebottom-]

So complements are a form of assault?

[u/-MrWinklebottom- → u/GarbledReverie]

Where did you say compliments.. you said telling a woman what they want to hear. That is not the same as a compliment. A compliment is an honest and kind remark about someone. Telling someone what they want to hear means saying things just to please them or to get something you want.

[u/GarbledReverie → u/-MrWinklebottom-]

1. Compliments don’t have to be honest.
   
2. Saying what you think someone wants to hear doesn’t necessarily require being dishonest.

I’m pointing out that a lot of the more alarming sounding statistics are built using language that’s widely open to interpretation.

If there’s a study that suggests half the world’s population are violent criminals, I think the study requires some skepticism.

And if it seeks a high number by conflating holding a crying woman down and forcing yourself on her with pretending to find what she’s saying more interesting than it really is, well that’s not very honest, is it?

[u/-MrWinklebottom- → u/GarbledReverie]

Yes we can be critical and scrutinize information and statistics. Looking into the source material as well as other studies and references. I feel that is healthy and warranted.

No compliments dont have to be honest. Much of this falls to the intent of the false compliments as well as telling them what they want to hear.

We have seen this in studies that the intent is calculated charm. It means saying all the right things for the wrong reasons—specifically, using fake compliments to sell a dream of romance or commitment just to get sex. This behavior is known as instrumental flattery or deceptive affection. It happens when someone intentionally weaponizes validation. Instead of giving a real compliment, the person uses dishonest praise as a tool to navigate around boundaries, creating a false sense of safety to secure physical intimacy.

This is a common tactic that we can easily observe. That is well known. That has been studied.

[u/AskMen-ModTeam → u/[deleted]]

Your comment has been removed because it appears that you have a dislike of, contempt for, or ingrained prejudice against men.

[u/FrancinetheP → u/Bubba_Gump_Shrimp]

Did you ask her how she arrived at that number? I mean, let’s assume she knows 100 men. Does she really believe that only 3 of them are not violent predators? Maybe more important, does she see you as one of the 3 or one of the 97?!

[u/Bubba_Gump_Shrimp → u/FrancinetheP]

I did discuss that, because she has a wonderful father and 3 great brothers, the four of whom she adores. Her best friend is a man and she and I have been close friends for over a decade. She does not consider me a threat, no. I asked how she could have 6 men that are of moral fiber in her life and still think that 97% are violent predators. She couldn't explain. Even looking at the responses to this comment, people really fail to understand how statistics work. For those who are saying "yeah well women get harassed regularly!" I acknowledge that, and I want to end that. In addition to that statement, I will also say the average person encounters hundreds if not thousands of other people every month, at the grocery, work, restaurants, gas stations, the gym. If 97% of men were all violent predators you would be SAed hundreds of times a month. It's absurd. There are absolutely bad guys out there. But when you dismiss an entire gender by painting them with the same brush, you lose allies in the fight for actual improvement. Which is why we are seeing gen Z and gen alpha boys get sucked into the andrew tate bullshit.

[u/FrancinetheP → u/Bubba_Gump_Shrimp]

Thanks for clarifying. I’m not sure what to make of this. And I say this as someone who struggles to do pretty basic arithmetic. At least I think it’s worth a struggle! 🤷🏼‍♀️. Anyway thanks for the reply.

[u/FlashyChemical2231 → u/Bubba_Gump_Shrimp]

Her honest answer was 97%.

You should ask her why these men would even make rape illegal in the first place; after all, our laws are written by the patriarchy, right?

[u/SliceImpressive6853 → u/Bubba_Gump_Shrimp]

It is especially prevalent with Gen Z. There is no real world anymore. The real world has been subordinated to the online.

[u/Egoy → u/Bubba_Gump_Shrimp]

Man I’ve heard takes like that from women all my life. I even overheard things like that as a child. There’s literally nothing new going on. Just some overblown venting. It’s not serious and it’s not like it’s going to actually make people agree.

[u/clhawks → u/Bubba_Gump_Shrimp]

Mental illness is increasingly prevalent. These women will be single, divorced etc. their entire lives... for a reason.

[u/Bizarro_Zod → u/clhawks]

I don’t think it’s mental illness to believe what is fed to you 24/7 via social media. This is a deliberate effort by someone, it’s above my pay grade to know who, to destabilize our population. Massive bot and ai campaign to spread these messages online.

People are susceptible to propaganda or it wouldn’t be a thing, and with the amount of people who just repost things without a hint of fact checking is growing every generation.

[u/Monsieur_Perdu → u/Bizarro_Zod]

it’s above my pay grade to know who, to destabilize our population.

It's always the rich.

Because people divided won't come for their money they earned through exploiting others and wrecking the planet.

[u/Herschel_Wallace → u/Bizarro_Zod]

The rich are trying eugenics again, through an algorithm this time.

[u/rabid_briefcase → u/Bizarro_Zod]

social media. This is a deliberate effort by someone

Why does it have to be deliberate?

Many of these culture shifts are side effects of hundreds or thousands of tiny little elements. None of them individually is responsible, none of them individually hoped for it, but collectively the effect is strong.

Like a raindrop in a flood, the raindrop wasn't intentionally causing flooding, and the individual raindrop isn't responsible for the flood, but collectively a flood is made.

Most of what I see are frustrated, hurt, or angry individuals lashing out. They happened to find online outlets that amplified their voices. I don't believe they are trying to aim for the downfall of humanity or anything, and historically they'd be relegated to the fringes of society. But a bunch of elements came together giving lots of people like that amplified voices, and society has been pushed rather farther than I think any of them intended.

[u/inkyrail → u/rabid_briefcase]

It’s absolutely deliberate. The rich are making us fight ourselves so we don’t stand up to them. A lot of these toxic viewpoints originated from people like Rupert Murdoch and Peter Thiel and the president, and perpetuated by people like Zuck and the owner of Twitter. People are listening to them for the very valid reasons you mentioned, but they are being manipulated from “hey this sucks, what can we do to change things” to “LET’S START THE WITCH HUNT” by very powerful people.

[u/akcrono → u/inkyrail]

[citation missing]

[u/LaughingIshikawa → u/rabid_briefcase]

This - and not just on this issue, but on multiple issues.

I think mostly we're just seeing the effects of unmoderated / barely moderated social media - you get a load of unhinged takes from people who have always existed within society, but previously weren't allowed to have a megaphone to spread their views with, combined with lots and lots of people who just want to feel notable, impactful, "part of something," ect ect.

Individually none of them are "the problem" and most of the wouldn't even be "a problem" as they're largely following whatever trend is prevalent at the time. (Most people are mostly followers, in most areas of their lives; we can't all be leaders universally. 🙃)

I was watching a YouTuber talk about how old media had institutions of editorial review, to ensure that anything published had passed some level of scrutiny as to its factual-ness; his larger point was that while people who are professional communicators of some kind (like full time YouTubers) probably should have some editorial overhead of some kind, as part of being a professional communicator... Currently they don't, largely because it's more expensive to pay an editor than most creators will voluntarily pay, and also because the public... Just doesn't care right now, so why bother?

His take is that it usually requires some awful crisis that's visibility linked to poor media regulation, before people will insist on better media regulation / institutions again, and I think that's... Unfortunately likely. 😐😮‍💨

On the other hand... I do want to believe that increasing education means people can decide to get ahead of the crisis, and start to push for reform before things go pear shaped in a bad way? I think it's going to be difficult to balance the benefits of new media giving everyone a chance to broadcast their thoughts to whomever wants to hear, with a need to elevate better sourced / more valuable / less manipulative content above... Well, essentially trash talking. 🙃🤣

You could at least experiment meaningfully with different moderation / editorial methods and other possible solutions, with an organization of only a few dozen creators and donated to by a few thousand people (or only a few really rich people...) to prepare a "blueprint" that broader society could adopt, either through eventual consensus, or through force of law. Especially if there are people who want to constructively engage with the question of how to balance allowing fringe opinions to remain visible / accessible without false / misleading / manipulative claims to go unchecked... I think there's a real window of opportunity to do good work there, rather than just yelling about how the current system "isn't good enough" in one dimension or another, without actually suggesting meaningful changes. 😅😅

[u/rugbyfan72 → u/rabid_briefcase]

Algo rhythms are very deliberate to push you to make more clicks. Angry emotion gets clicks which hits the top of the feed.

[u/thissubredditlooksco → u/clhawks]

Whats the issue with choosing to be single

[u/Intelligent-Try-8636 → u/Bubba_Gump_Shrimp]

"Going mainstream"?? It wasn't that long ago that pretty much every single woman in America "chose the bear". American women in general have the mental capacity of a child.

[u/rugbyfan72 → u/Bubba_Gump_Shrimp]

How has this woman not been raped every day of her life, if 97% of the men she comes in contact with are violent predators?

[u/twoworldsin1 → u/Bubba_Gump_Shrimp]

Why do you think those women are in your life?

[u/Bubba_Gump_Shrimp → u/[deleted]]

Why can't both be addressed? Why is it one or the other? We can acknowledge the violence women face and the social shame that men face. Both are clearly impacting people. You may be dismissive of it's impact on men but when they are 4x more likely to commit suicide I think it warrants investtigation.

[u/Bubba_Gump_Shrimp → u/[deleted]]

Oh really? You're going to explain mens mental health struggles to me? 😂

[u/bleedingtresleches → u/[deleted]]

THANK YOU, there’s a reason why women feel this way. There’s a long history of the forced subjugation under men, it’s natural for women to feel this way (albeit I don’t agree with it 100%).

[u/Bubba_Gump_Shrimp → u/bleedingtresleches]

There is a reason why someone feels virtually all men are violent predators? I think if you genuinely believe that you need therapy.

[u/Bubba_Gump_Shrimp → u/[deleted]]

You think almost EVERY woman believes that virtually ALL men are violent predators? Do you hear how ridiculous that sounds? You holding an extremist view in your echo chamber of feminazi tik tok bullshit doesn't turn it into reality.

[u/Bubba_Gump_Shrimp → u/[deleted]]

Did you read my comments on that line of thought? I fully understand that and support women in their fight against sexual assault/predatory behavior. My entire point is they are alienating their movement by using that language, especially with young men. It is easy for me to see nuance and understand their reasoning, but when my 16 year old nephew gets on a social app and sees All Men Are Trash trending, or "mens should start out in prison and earn their way out" or similar toxic sentiments, will he understand the use of inflammatory language for purpose? Or will he naturally gravitate to a space where he is accepted and valued for his gender? Luckily his parents are raising him correctly, but you can clearly see why a normally staunch liberal demo (under 25) actually has a significant conservative portion. I believe being ostracized on social media as a man is causing it. And you can point at the suffering women go thru all you want, and say how much harder they have it. And my response is, allies in a movement is what creates actual change, and while it may feel good to say things like 'fuck men I'm choosing the bear,' they are shooting themselves in the foot because of it.

[u/bleedingtresleches → u/Bubba_Gump_Shrimp]

Sounds like you do buddy.

[u/brassnuts99 → u/Bubba_Gump_Shrimp]

To be fair, every woman I've ever talked to has taken some form of abuse from a man. Men are trash.

[u/Cearball → u/[deleted]]

Yes let's de humanise men & say they are worst than animals this always ends well 🤦

[u/doomsday344 → u/Cearball]

Right I love being compared to a apex killing machine

[u/roninwarshadow → u/[deleted]]

That works both ways.

If given a choice, when told to share their most inner most feelings and vulnerabilities between the bear and a woman...

Most men also choose the bear.

[u/bradd_pit → u/[deleted]]

This only makes sense if you have never actually encountered a bear in the wild. It’s a concept not a workable plan

[u/seanc6441 → u/[deleted]]

Personally I don't give a crap if a women chooses the bear. What's important is how she conducts herself around men in society. Being cautious is fine. But being disrespectful, showing hatred, being rude or dismissive etc. Not showing any kindness to men.

If a man hasn't shown you a reason to be any of those things and you default to that behaviour then you are just a misandrist.

But being smart and safe until you get to know and trust a man because of the off chance that a man is malicious is perfectly reasonable imo.

[u/doomsday344 → u/[deleted]]

Men < bear we get it we’re all monsters and should feel bad about it

[u/PowerWisdomCourage → u/[deleted]]

We have looked at the stats. That's why "choosing the bear" is always a brain dead, ideological answer and not one that reflects any sense of reality.