'Andrew Tate phenomena' surges in schools - with boys refusing to talk to female teacher

You sound like the alpha male people. We're not wolves. We are capable of complex conversation, and we can behave properly out of respect for others and not out of fear.

Maybe children would be less receptive to tate-like figures if it didn't seem like the whole world wanted them dead.

It is extremely effective at making sure people behave the proper way. It's the same philosophy behind small, weak prey being scared of big, strong predators.

Beating children into submission might be convenient for you, but its almost certainly not the correct way to handle the situation.

I know it'll come across as an unpopular opinion, but some of them just need their ass kicked. Literally went to high school with a kid who was insufferable, a prick to everyone. One day he started bullying one of my buddies who proceeded to beat the shit out of him. He told his football coach he ran into a mailbox on his bike when he had to explain his face looking like it did. After that he was the nicest kid ever - he realized "being tough" wasn't all it was cracked up to be. I guarantee a few of these kids just need to get punched in the face one time and they'll start rethinking the "alpha male" ideology.

I should be saying that to you. You're comment implied that it's better for assholes to not interact with women. The only way to reduce misogyny is to encourage more interaction with women.

I'm not saying everyone should bang everyone else, I'm just saying your attitude towards these idiots is also idiotic.

Good, grbage humans won’t pass on their genes

Edit: Keeping this here so you don't edit your first original comment:

You think avoiding women will let you have kids?

What do you mean? Garbage humans pass their genes on all the time.

In many cases, they have an *easier* time passing on their genes.

I wouldn't call kids indoctrinated by a charismatic speaker "garbage humans".

Truly living up to your name

Yes, because when this happens to "normal people" it is never publicized as much as when it happens to a celebrity. It's kind of by-definition.

But I am not disagreeing with you. I just don't know enough about andrew tate and this whole situation to have a good opinion here.

What is interesting is how non-vocal many of these "concerned citizens" are when the criminal justice system does the same thing to normal people. It is why I have a difficult time believing the concern is really about justice and due process in many cases.

Let's hope that that's it!

Sounds like the Lizardman Constant at work again!:

https://gwern.net/doc/sociology/survey/lizardman/index

It's even more insane that young women (!!) support a misogynic douchbag. What's wrong with them?

See, the thing is, these are all allegations. It won't be proven until his trial in 2027 whether he did any of those things or not (well okay, apart from the misogyny thing, he's admitting that one loud and proud). Despite the fact, he's had money and assets ceased and was sent to jail, which goes against some pretty fundamental values that many people are taught growing up (e.g. *Innocent until proven guilty*). So I can definitely see how many non-misogynists or even feminists would be on Tate's side even if they disagree with his messaging.

You don't actually need to talk to the teacher to pass a class in most cases.

I don't think the kids doing this are doing well in school anyways, but it is possible to never say a word and still get an A from your schoolwork.

yes I do. what I don't need is wokescolds today thank you

King of all the chinless chuds.

You don't need to resort to body shaming to shit on him

What about the picture where he's sat in trunks and there's literally no visible bulge?

>Well, yes. Thats the whole idea of grades.

Not trying to talk shit, but I believe you misunderstand how grades like that work on a larger scale.

If a teacher flunks one or two kids, that means there's a problem with those one or two kids.

If a teacher flunks every kid in the school, that means there's a problem with the teacher and/or the school.

Make sense?

Well, yes. Thats the whole idea of grades. But since we are using this messed up system to sort people in "good" and "bad" at least grow a spine and sort them according to good and bad.

Said with with Red Forman's voice and facial expressions, it would be perfect

*"That's what you get when you don't talk with your teachers and spend your time on social media, dumbass!"*

"That fucking stupid *removed* woman teacher gave me an F because (insert misogynistic mental gymnastics to make it her fault for being female here)"

when i was in school, for that i’d get sent to the principals office, then suspended, and if i kept it up, expelled….

Why do you think handing out massive numbers of "F"s will change these kids' behavior?

That might work when there's only a few kids screwing up and there's social pressure on them to change for the better, but right now the social pressure is going in the opposite direction because of people like Tate. The boys will just say they're getting "F"s because teachers/women/"liberal educators"/whoever just hate boys and masculinity, and people like Tate will validate their views there.

I get that the idea of flunking these kids to "teach them a lesson and show them how wrong they are" might provide a nice, satisfying dopamine hit to you in the moment, but all it's going to do is make the problem worse.

Idiocracy isn't just a great movie that holds up, it's a accurate depiction of the future and it has electrolytes, it's what plants crave

**looks around**

… the future is now.

Broken clock yadda yadda

I don't mean that about Facebook. Facebook transitioned the Internet from being a cyber ecosystem of absolute freedom and anonymity where people existed freely with expression to a an extension of non-cyber life, I feel like people understood the internet was place where people were free, because it wasn't real. The internet was not real life and that was almost universally agreed upon. After facebook the Internet became a place connected to real life identity and it became a base standard. ...I think this helped create the real-world enshitification of our physical social communities. The transition to the idea that the Internet is real life is something that wasn't talked about or agreed about.

Parents should do a lot of things that they won't because they are trapped in a stupid cycle of 'it was good enough for me its good enough for them.'

Yes, because they think "I'm too old I don't understand that anyways.". That's what my grandmother says when she needs her PC fixed, "I'm too old I don't have to know that." - well, guess what, if you call me every week for a problem that you could've fixed yourself by googling 3 minutes, it's probably not a bad idea to learn it.

Parents are responsible for their kids, and they should be learning what their child is doing and understanding it so they can intervene if shit goes south.

And also educating themselves. The kids will learn stuff, including slang, memes and concepts that are unknown to parents that don't spend as much time on these platforms. So they won't even recognize problematic ideas.

Forums with paywalls have always been way more civil so I agree.

The problem is that parents - apparently - have no interest in educating their children anymore. They just place their kids in front of a PC or give them an iPad so they can watch TV or something.

Forbidding people from accessing the internet is going to raise a generation of children unfamiliar with it and then drifting off completely. Just look at the NK soldiers when they were shipped to russia and first had access to the internet. Half of them became porn addicts.

The problem is unfettered access, not access at all.

Honestly, at this point, I'm on board with just banning social media algorithms entirely. No more personalized feeds. You can have a website that publishes whatever you want, but you can't tailor individual feeds to individual people. People can replace their "feed" with what the original internet was meant to be - visiting a series of websites. Want to read nothing but right wing blogs? Fine. You can spend all day navigating to different URLs for them. But no more spoon feeding individually personalized content to people.

It turns out that method of content delivery is just a very dangerous and damaging technology that really fucks with the workings of the human mind. If you tell AI to build an ideal feed model for a person, it builds a nightmare that traps human beings in skinner boxes.

We can ban these algorithms. We don't have to continue to tolerate their existence. And in the grand scheme of history, it would be no different than a thousand other things that we discovered, at first thought was a panacea, but eventually decided the benefits weren't worth the costs. Asbestos is a fantastic fireproof insulator, but we willingly let those benefits go in lieu of its severe respiratory effects. DDT is an incredible pest killer and insecticide, but it also was rendering entire species of birds extinct. Targeted, individually tailored social media algorithms create entertainment feeds that can entertain us to such degrees that the kings of old would lament their jesters in comparison. But what these algorithms are doing to us, what they are doing to our society? On political polarization? The effects they are having not just on children, but of people of all ages? We as a society need to recognize that the benefits just aren't worth the costs. We are tearing our civilization apart for the sake of cheap entertainment.

We need to ban targeted social media feeds. We have faced technologies like this before. We have made the choice before to give up the benefits of these things for the sake of the greater good. We've done it before, and we can do it again. It is time we ban targeted social media feeds.

Dude, we're all stupid. We are all effected by the Internet and propaganda algorithms. We are not superior, most of us just don't realise we're programmed. Exactly the same as Gen Alpha, Zoomers, Gen X and Boomers. We're all profiled and we all see how everyone else is a victim of indoctrination. That's how this works, social engineering innit?

is like letting them walk NYC alone at night during the 70s.

One can get smart doing such—at times very quickly.

Facebook was tame.

It's twitter, reddit, instagram, and tiktok that really set people off. They just weren't prepared to handle the forces at play when you let people communicate with no accountability.

Glad I grew up realizing that most people on the internet are just losers who can't function in the real world so they use the digital space as a crutch.

Really makes it easier to deal with the hysteria, apathy, narcissism, insecurity, and cognitive dissonance I see from many users.

No, "time outs" aren't the problem.

From what I've seen and experienced, Western liberal educators spent a ton of time focusing on the success of women and girls - which was necessary, I'm not trying to vilify women's equality here - but unfortunately, the pendulum swung from "girls don't need an education because they'll just be homemakers, focus on boys" to "ignore boys, because girls need to catch up" and has been stuck there for a while.

We can't fix a problem that we refuse to acknowledge even exists, and we need to start admitting that we really *have* been pushing boys and men to the side for years now - Yes, even the white boys whom we also assumed were so "privileged" - and that we're going to have to make some steps to amend that by reaching out to boys and treating them in ways they will respond positively to, if we want to resolve this issue.

The alternative is letting men like Andrew Tate take the wheel and mentor these boys as he sees fit, which is obviously a terrible idea.

I can't help but notice that all of the radical fascists that have taken over all of media and politics all happen to be of the age that were given timeouts. Seems that none of them learned how to respect other people's free agency.

So what happens when they grow up and start beating *you* senseless because they learned that violence is a quick and easy way to get people to do what you want them to do, rather than something to be used as a last resort?

Its also just kinda gay. Wanting a man to dominate everything you do is just gay

I remember in the first few years after 9/11 when you had Islamophobes talking about Islamic radicalism and comparing western culture to Islamic culture in what was, retrospectively, the most arrogant and extremely naieve view imaginable. Basically envisioning the entirety of the west in the late 90s and early 2000s as the west always being like that and the then status quo was done via some philosophical debate and innate characteristics instead of whatever was politically and economically convenient at the time.

I wonder where those people are today? Seeing just how legit fragile their whole order really was and how quickly it is unraveling.

Has anyone ever referred to your speech impediment as "the queen's english"? Did it bother you? Congrats, you were successfully indoctrinated into being a sexist white pig without even realizing it! Good show old sport pip pip

The communities are fine, we need fewer racist comments.

We're gonna need better lemmy communities with less censorship.

Holy shit did i actually find the thing we can be racist against the whites with? You're all sexist pigs because you're white?

I'm a white male in the UK and not once have I ever felt the need to be misnogy and sexist

Nice ragebaiting lmao.

Racist

Uhh, I mean, yes. But that's not the big own you think it is. He is SPECIFICALLY targeting children. It's the entire basis of his grift.

If their dads are so shitty, how come they got to have kids?

Who keeps having sex with these awful men and enabling their toxicity?

Hm yea I guess so. I’m at the age where I grew up without it for a portion of time and then dealt with it in my teens. I never really used it that much though, and don’t use it all now, except for sites like these.

For sure. It’s too much to keep up with, and now, it’s getting harder to tell what’s real or not.

That's what I used to think to until I got deeper into it. The problem is that when I got deeper into knowing the scene "real" rap turned into real crime.

One of my favorite lyrics about hiphop;

"I used love her, but then they kidnapped her,

Dragged her through the mud and shaved the fuckin hair off her."

Whether it's mainstream or street, it gets hunted until it can be monetized legally or illegally. Sure there are exceptions though.

Spitting for a click/gang is just as whack as spitting for the industry owners. It's all the same evil.

Brother Ali is great example of someone that stayed authentically true and matured as human being. Listen to his first album, and then listen to satisfied soul.

I’ve had that realization a few times. I’ve been listening to rap music enjoying the beat, and then my brain shifts focus to the words, and I end up turning it off.

I didn't really grow up listening to rap (as I grew up listening to all different kinds of music) but imo "real rap" is more like poetry and has a message or story to tell.

Children's Story by Slick Rick

Literally anything by Digable Planets

Most of Q-Tip and ATCQ's stuff

There are others, but that's all I can think of off the top of my head right now.

You’re not wrong. Parents can be contributing just as much to the problem. I guess the only common source would be social media in general.

What if their parents are shitty and encouraging this type of behavior?

The Andrew tate type people tend to have kids because they want sex and that's all they think about. They don't think critically about contraception, or long term decision making. Then they either abandon the child/mother, or raise it to be an asshole.

Except social media raised the current parents of the Day. It's been 20 years dude. People don't know any different.

Ironically jokes about the internet raising children is very old. There was a comic strip in Mad Magazine from the late 90s that had a boy go ask his mom 'mom, if God made everything, who made God?' She replies to go ask his dad, and when he does his dad replies, ' go ask the internet!'

It is still funny, but given the incredible amount of disinformation out there it just is a really bad idea.

I grew up on hip-hop music. I still am addicted to it... But damn that culture is awful. Most regular people think it's just entertainment and art.... But that culture is deep and evil. I get disgusted with myself after listening to "real rap". I understand and feel it but at the same time feel as though I'm nurturing a negative part of my soul when I listen to it or celebrate it.

I guess I related your comment to music raising me in the 90s and 00s.

There's a lot more to flesh out, but I agree 100% with this basic principle. I'm looking back & idk other than the occasional spanking when I was very little, most physical discipline was administered by my father. Even if I crossed my mother.

It reinforced traditional gender roles, and frankly I think it subconsciously implies....a solidarity & mutual respect between the partners in a marriage. My father stood up for, and backed, my mother. They parented mostly gently, but also firmly, in lockstep. Were they perfect? Of course not. But generally speaking I think it worked pretty well.

I'd think by their fathers, so that it doesn't pidgeon hole them into further misogyny

They can listen to Tate all they want, provided they get straight As.

(or maybe 1 hour of Tate for every 3 hours of feminists such as Gloria Steinem)

.... It might have been kickboxing. I was half remembering him being _some kind_ of sport-fighter.

Nwm then, guess I would not kick his ass.

Was it mma? I thought it was kick boxing. Martial arts and right wing extremism have a long history together.

Yeah before he was a Youth Pastor for the Church Of Misogyny (where jesus is replaced with EVEN MORE MISOGYNY) -- He made his name as a competitive MMA fighter.

How is he at pistol duels?

I bet I'd kick his ass

Tbh he'd probably win. He's a decent martial artist.

3 games each with a woman: chess, poker, and billiards (1 8-ball, 1 snooker, and 1 carom)

Speaking of Sacha Baron Cohen, here's Ali G's take on feminism.

He is a complete character like Borat, he just doesn´t know.

I do wonder if he’s playing an act or just found a way to make money…it’s shitty either way.

I was pretty surprised. The high school represented in the movie seemed extremely toxic, worse than what I recall from high school.

It's not bad. In context o think showing it to kids may lead them to think it's the norm among boys

I watched Adolescence yesterday. I'm curious what you think of it.

People are talking about showing that show Adolescence in schools. They are basically dubling down. At this point you are more likely to get Republicans to respect women.

Yeah, the left should have done more. It's not too late. We can recognize young white men and turn things around. Do not hate your gender; hate toxic masculinity.

Firm like will beat the crap out of you for your disobedience? Firm like will treat women like shit?

Firm how, exactly? Because in the tranditii sense, it's never said out loud, but firm always means one of those things

They exist. But it's Tate that always gets talked about making him the default

The alt right owns men?

Nah

Currently there are a lot of younger men attracted to that because theybahmmhave so many "role models" there.

The solution isn't that hard, give them positive role models.

He probably doesn't care one way or the other. I doubt he wastes much thought on it.

He's doing whatever he thinks will make him money so he can spend that money to get laid. In his world, a lot of what he says is probably correct because he's constantly reaffirmed by the opposite sex.

Meanwhile, the people criticizing him on reddit tend to have a harder time. We'd be fools to think kids don't realize this. They haven't been conditioned to ignore reality like many people on these forums.

Even Andrew Tate himself is a victim of this. I sldont see Tate as evil

Victim, possibly. Not evil? Fuck no, I bet he's fully aware of the shit he does, how bad it is for people that listen to him and society as a whole, yet he keeps doing it. That's evil.

Won't happen. We have gendered these political issues so much the alt right owns the entire gender. I vote dem, but doesn't mater because so many people see the entire group as nothing but dangerous fascists. These kids are being told the alt right is their pary and they get from both sides. Now they are are Worthless shits.

There's a distinct lack of firm males in our society.

We're literally going to have to create the male role models that are needed.

I could be both, but I am not.

You can be both?

No

What these boys need are good role models

I grew up with being bullied, star trek, and karate. All taught me a lot about what it is, means, and implies to be good, be bad, and how to behave like a proper human being.

Today's kids have weird or no role models at all and most of them are just lost. Even Andrew Tate himself is a victim of this. I sldont see Tate as evil,.i see him as a sad little man that always needs to posture lest someone sees what a real loser he is. Even the raping is just him kicking others down to make others think he's so strong whereas in reality he is such a pathetic little man. I know the type, unfortunately.

In any case, i think we need much more wholesome YouTube channels where we have real men showing how real should behave, both through strength and thoughtfulness

This doomer shit is worse than useless - it encourages apathy and inaction.

Hey, I am not evil! I am Sexy!

Not all of humanity or we would not even be here.

I read a VN where aliens were asked to intervene, and solve the problem of humans being evil.

The main idea behind the aliens is that emotion is literally toxic to them. If you persistently shout at one in anger, the alien can actually die.

After some major periods of civil unrest, half of humanity started to advocate a symbiotic relationship with the aliens. They're inserted into a human subject, replacing most of their biological functions, but also adding the weakness to strong emotion.

You can see how people bound to an alien wouldn't support Tate. Tate wants to spread hatred, or strong feelings of superiority, but those feelings could actually hurt someone bound to an alien. Therefore, people bound to aliens would rather exile or imprison Tate instead to end the threat he poses to their health.

Amusingly, the alien people get so powerful in the VN that Tate and a bunch of supremacists who hate him have to work together so they don't get wiped out.

So these centrists?

https://youtube.com/shorts/fpEjHCW-lLk

And surely you're aware of the "No true Scottsman" logical fallacy?

The only people driving people away right now are centrists... which is why those of us on the left are so worried.

You. You call your own allies intellectual cowards. You're part of the reason the left drives it's own support away.

It's a problem with human psychology where we can't accept a modest approach to *anything.*

This is nonsense, the rightwing has clearly evolved this way but provide evidence the leftwing has or stop repeating this narrative of "both sides".

Y'all will "both sides" everything right up until a conservative yells a slur at you and kicks you out the door as you get deported to a brutal prison in an authoritarian country because conservatives decided you weren't worthy of basic human rights.

Then again maybe you will still sit in your cell shaking your head saying to yourself "damn, both sides got so extreme" .

**edit** how about you provide some evidence instead of just downvoting like an intellectual coward?

What a great example of what they were talking about!

What's my type? You couldn't have made my point for me any harder than you just did. You just irrationally lashed out at an ally.

This is really it.

It's not even a left vs. right debate at this point. It's a problem with human psychology where we can't accept a modest approach to *anything.* Everything has to be blown out of proportion and distorted to the point it's not even representative of reality.

Either people are 100% with you, or they're 100% against you.

I blame reddit and forums like these, honestly, for playing a big role in creating this divide.

Maybe it’s because all we hear from your type is how immigrants are the root of all problems, “all lives matter” and junk like that.

Thanks for writing out your thoughts like this. I try to make this point again and again in different settings but it often does not illicit a thoughtful response.

I honestly don't have a strong sense of how Tate can be so popular. But if I had to guess, I'd say the "no sense of community" is probably the biggest thing.

The internet has become a gathering place where communities and social bonds are formed. I can imagine a heap of people who are struggling socially in the real world seeing, and then seeing Tate and his community offer an 'answer' to that - supporting those who feel rejected, and putting the blame squarely on others. That's what I see as the draw that brings people in. They feel safe and secure in their haven of hatred. Any opposition to them is from people that are weaker and less important. -- Which then makes leaving the group almost impossible, because you'd have to degrade your own view of yourself - joining the people who you think are weaker and less important.

So this Tate thing is rot that has taken root because of a gap in more healthy support structures. (I don't see an easy solution for it though!)

A big part of this is the shallow takes on feminism that are so pervasive.

And to be clear, it’s not feminism itself that is the problem. It’s the complete lack of nuance we have when discussing topics as a society. The idiots outnumber the thoughtful people, and when an idea becomes mainstream, the dumbest possible take is the loudest and the easiest to spread. So actual feminism got out-yelled by idiots taking the idea to the most illogical extreme.

And that leads to light misandry. And even if it is light, it’s so pervasive that young boys now feel like they’re being overlooked and ignored, demonized and generalized with the worst men have to offer.

And again, I have to stress, that this isn’t _because_ of feminism, it’s because of the lack of nuance surrounding all discussion, but in this case, the discussion around men/feminist issues. It’s much easier to spread “all men are garbage” than it is to spread “women have historically faced complex issues that, together, are a societal stumbling block resulting in less favor in everyday life and a harder, more complicated existence.”

And when this is the case, men like these assholes step in to tell boys, “fuck women, you are a king and you deserve everything.” And what little boy isn’t going to be empowered by that? We need to have space for men in modern society that is supportive and open, because right now the only “support for young men” comes from assholes trying to capitalize on the complicated feelings of suddenly feeling like they’re being unfairly overlooked.

Now, that also has to take into account that if the boys are ever overlooked, it’s because there have been centuries of unequal treatment for women, and that has to start to be righted somewhere. And it’s only been in the last, like, 30-50 years. And in all that time, we haven’t taken the high road to equality, we’ve taken the easy road hyperbole and simplistic solutions, which doesn’t solve the existing problem, it just gives us new ones—like this exact problem we’re dealing with now.

No positive father figure in their lives. No sense of community. Stigma from male role models that want to step up but fear being branded a PDF.

What we need to figure out is what made him so persuasive to young boys

Why is this a mystery to people? Everything is falling apart and most adults are in denial about it, kids are going to follow people like this because they sense the nihilism of the moment that their parent's can't handle confronting.

We do need to get rid of Andrew Tate though I will settle for him going back to jail, but his popularity isn't a mystery. **There is a very clear pipeline to make money as a conservative influencer, this is then ultimately an issue of money being poured into manipulating children.**

We only talk about the absolute worst men. We have raised them to think that the right is the party for them because otherwise they are being told over and over that they are dangerous predators and nothing more.

You can do both

Because all we hear about men from the left is that women would rather be with bears, and that men are useless. And that they are oppressing everyone with their privilege.

You tell some poor white kid he's privileged, he's not going to be your friend or sympathetic to your causes.

I don't think messaging from the left has really done anything to win them over. It's not necessarily that Andrew Tate is telling them anything amazing. He's just a voice not blaming them for everything.

The problem isn't that we need to get rid of Tate. They are like flies and there will always be more like him.

What we need to figure out is what made him so persuasive to young boys - that's the real problem. We need to know why young boys are willing to listen to bullshit like his, and we must figure out what we can do to correct that.

“There are too many assholes in the world because people let them get away with it.” - Mr Inbetween

Tho he seemed to be mixing up Islam with just the Najdi culture.

He already converted to Islam

Plus safeguarding is a really important part of teaching. These children need to be protected from this, for the sake of them and other kids they have contact with

Yeah, as a trans person around children, I do awful things like use my influence to encourage children to spend more time taking walks in nature and teach young boys that girls are humans too.

Truly equivalent to the influence of Andrew Tate.

Literally his own words. About his only words that got to my feeds. I keep my feeds clear as I can of Nazi/MAGA/misogyny/toxic stuff.

Weird, looks like tate himself doesn't only have sex for children.

Seems like your cherrypicking is just that, cherrypicking.

Maybe he wouldn't be such a 'role model' if he had a harder time getting laid. Not sure what we can do about that, though

**Andrew Tate is a rapist, what we did about it was put him in jail, and then we put conservative rapists in power who find solidarity with Andrew Tate, this isn't rocket science how we got here.**

“Sex is for making children. Any man who has sex with women because it ‘feels good’ is gay. Oh my pee pee feels good this is great!”

Why any teenage boy would hear that and not unsubscribe is beyond me. They are the other way round. They don't want children, they just want sex with women. That's normal for a **heterosexual** teenage boy.

No, unchecked consumerism is how we ended up with the society we have.

Andrew tate keeps getting rewarded with sex because he has money. He has no reason to change and never will until the pussy faucet gets turned off.

Maybe he wouldn't be such a 'role model' if he had a harder time getting laid. Not sure what we can do about that, though.

part of being an adult is doing the work in front of you that needs doing, regardless of "ought"s "supposed to"s

we all benefit from the next generation learning to treat others properly, regardless of our own parental status

This shitheaded take is how we ended up with the failing society that we have

If youre a teacher you need to quit. Now.

No it isnt our job to raise someone else's kids but it is our job to educate them. Not just on curriculum. Teaching isnt just shoving curriculum down students' throats, calling it a day, and getting your summer vacation.

Our job is to help students succeed as people. The curriculum is one small part of that. Being a role model and teaching kids how to be better people is a part of that. If you didnt sign up for that, find another job.

The world is full of shit teachers and I cannot stand teachers who dont take this job seriously enough to understand the responsibility it comes with. Do better or find different work. For your sake and the sake of your students.

Sure, but the children *are people*; they do not have the experience of wisdom to make choices and rely on adults to teach them wisdom from their experience.

It's not your job, but those kids are the ones paying for their parents' value system, and so the adults teaching them aren't teaching them well. Children are people, and are being let down. Theyre not kitset projects for parents.

One day those people will be expected to make their own choices, and the only foundation they'll have to decide with is what they're taught now. It's not your job, but it's everybody's civic responsibility to contribute to a healthier collective society, and children are a part of that.

Actually when you live in a democracy it is. Or at least, if you don't you still get the consequences when these kids start voting.

If a psychopath has an influence over children in their formative years, it is your absolute responsibility to educate the kid and the parents.

It’s not your job. It is rewarding in and of itself though.

The great part about Boys and Girls Clubs or being a CASA or face painting at a festival etc is that you *don’t* have to raise them. The undivided attention of adult who seems to genuinely like and care about them for like 15 minutes is the kind of shit that changes kids lives.

I’m not saying “organize community talks at your local library about positive masculinity” or “become a Big” but - maybe a cousin says something shitty at dinner, and you bring it up gently in a chat? Or be a positive role model in spaces where you encounter young men: in video games, on forums, outside…

The best way to create a society where men are allowed to cry and express their emotions is to teach boys and young men these things are okay.

think again. do you want someone else's kids to grow up to be misogynists who will vote?

I've already raised 3 wonderful & respectful children into mostly functional men, but if I had ever gotten a call like that, the child in question wouldn't have had a phone or seen another webpage until after they moved out as an adult.

Alternate idea: it’s not my job to raise someone else’s kids.

As I said, it wasn't as bad as today, but it was there. It has just evolved because society has evolved - young men are now actively being shamed for literally just being a man. I've been working with school kids and many boys aged ~14 were close to crying when telling how they are treated, and you know shit hits the fan if a boy in puberty is close to crying lol. Hell, even I have experienced some of that. Now, I grew up online and am way too sociopathic to give a shit about anyones opinion, but young men (usually) aren't like that.

Many en in the west are constantly shit on by large parts of society (unless they literally flagellating themselves) because patriarchy and supposed benefits we all have, so - quite obviously in my opinion - they are turning to pro-men "influencers" like tate because between all his misogynistic shit, he's telling them what they want to hear. That's a major point why the dems lost in america - they kept shitting on men, which is why trump has received major support FROM young men.

And now, feel free to shit on me for stating the facts - I know many lemmy-people don't like to hear that actually, not all men are shitty people and hit and rape women daily.

>Dunno when you were 10 or 13, but I will assume it’s not true.

It was in late 00's, and in Poland if that's relevant.

Stuff like “Boys don’t cry, you’re not a girl are you?” were very common in the 80s and 90s. It wasn’t as bad as today, but the foundations were already in place.

Sure, but that's not really some hardcore misogynist shit, like what is happening today.

Well from what I see it affects mostly old people and younger ones (at least if you trust media, I don't have any contact with people younger than 20, except my brother which is 6, so it doesn't really count). Millennials are probably the least affected ones.

That won't keep him safe...

https://youtu.be/O2djHEIxPVs [sfw]

No thank you for the link???

Damn kids...

Get off my lawn.

Grumble

Oh, well yeah okay I thought you were talking about comic books lol.

You never heard of web comics?

Allow me to introduce you to oglaf.com

I'm not a bro, but my 9 year old son isn't allowed to watch YouTube unsupervised, because when I was 9 I found my way to 4chan.

Comics?

I think I just won't put a web browser on my child's computer.

Should solve so many problems before they even appear.

Propoganda will be the fall of the USA, and as you had diagnosed, it started in the 90s.

Fuck the war on drugs. All drugs should be legal. Even social media apparently.

And I'm telling you there's no difference.

You think this is the first time a kid told a teacher they won't listen cause they're a woman? No way. Might be another form of it but it hasn't gone down they just can point at some people spouting this shit.

Hating women is like man's oldest past time man

You're talking toxic masculinity, he's talking about these children being inundated with propaganda via social media. Very few middle and high school students watched Fox news in the 00's whereas now it's being algorithmically jammed down their throats.

Social media is going to cause the fall of the USA and it's so fucking sad to watch. Social media needs to be scheduled as/like a drug.

Depends what OP meant by "problems like this". The specific problem in the headline sounds new; teachers were teachers when I was growing up.

They are just as dumb as us Americans. They did Brexit before we elected Trump.

Derp. UK, wtf are u smoking over there? I thought we were supposed to be sane continent.

Isn't this story about the UK?

I was a rotten kid growing up with distant parents and a hostile sister.

If I'd had access to porn and comics without leaving the house, I'd have become one of these people.

This is why the tech bros don't want their kids growing up looking at screens.

Yes lol

Is everybody going insane because of social media

Well I can tell you its broken the minds of most of the old people I know, especially fakebook. Old people are seemingly unable to tell fact from fiction online, I mean all people have trouble with that to an extent but its hitting the older people especially hard. Most of them seem to think everything they are seeing from pure political propaganda to obviously fake advertising is 100% real.

We are headed for a world where half the people believe nothing and the other half believe everything which will be a disaster.

When I was 10, or 13 there were literally no issues like this at all

Dunno when you were 10 or 13, but I will assume it's not true. Stuff like "Boys don't cry, you're not a girl are you?" were very common in the 80s and 90s. It wasn't as bad as today, but the foundations were already in place.

Divide and conquer 1%er propaganda systems.

Sorry but that's absolutely not true.

Boys not being allowed to cry, being man enough, strong enough has always been a thing since before anyone who touched the Internet was born.

This isn't new at all.

Murica is doing typical murica things.

That's really, really interesting thanks.

Hey! Sorry for the delay. I am an infrequent poster at best.

When kids have access to phones, then they want to be on their phones. They rush through their work, don't pay full attention to their instruction, and have no distance from their friends in which to process their lives.

Rushing through their work and doing a shit job in order to get back on their phone sets up power struggles in the classroom with children who become offended if you tell them that their work is insufficient. Since they were not fully paying attention to the lesson, they have to go back and correct mistakes, which they view as 'cutting into their time'.

The biggest behavioral impact is that once phones are in the mix, the conversation in the friend group never stops. Arguments continue, jokes continue, complaints continue, and all of this spirals and escalates on itself. Kids get stuck into online arguments with people they then see at lunch. So, you have kids talking mad shit online, creating this culture of anxiety and fear that keeps the students on edge. Grudges continue on for years. Literal years, over stuff that would have been forgotten in a week if it wasn't constantly recycled in the friend group for content.

Finally, kids who are removed from their phones freak out. That constant conversation that they know is happening is now inaccessible to them, and they know how they talk about each other. Now they have to worry about not knowing who has beef with who, what is being said about them, and not understanding the latest ridiculous meme or joke.

So, in answer to the specific behaviors that cell phones cause, there is no direct answer. Rather, take a school, give bullies access to everyone all the time, amplify every disagreement, argument, or compromising picture or piece of information, add in a constant distraction to the task at hand, which reduces reflection and growth, keep kids in constant contact with their parents and stymying their independent development, and then ask which behaviors are the result of that. Is it the violence? The disrespect? The apathy toward classroom instruction? The anxiety? The reliance on constant reassurance from either looking something up or receiving real time feedback from their parents and friends? It is tough to say.

What is easy to say, based on a lot of experience, is that when you stamp out cellphone culture, everything improves by every metric. Grades go up, discipline goes down, positive interactions with peers and kindness become the norm, and kids are able to just be kids while they are at school.

I don't doubt you. Can you give examples of how it's changing their behaviour?

This is absolutely a kind of rage-bait.

I don't doubt that there's a growing segment of misogynistic boys who have been influenced by Tate and our society's general check-out when it comes to being communal and supporting each other and the absolute bullshit mess that social media and online dating has created for young relationships, the statistics are abysmal and worrying...

But that said, the large majority of all Americans at any age are still pretty much just getting through it like always.

These kinds of stories, while beneficial that they are highlight and showing us problems that need to be addressed, all they're doing without a prescriptive solution or counter-point is just wedging this division in our community further and further apart. It's making girls scared of boys. It's making boys scared that girls will think they're horrible misogynists, and thus they will be defensive at the ready accusations and the exchanges spiral from there.

It's revolting that we cling to hateful figures so readily. They give us validation for pent-up frustration and anger at a system that has abandoned us. That's why it's addicting to read about horrible things and horrible people. Which *makes* horrible things and horrible people. Our addiction to hating people is *creating* people like Tate, because our desire to hate someone makes us click on these stories over and over and feel that righteous outrage that seems to make everything make sense. It's addicting and we need to recognize it and stop imbibing in it.

I mean, I've worked as a teacher for eleven years and I don't know a single person who doesn't think that social media contributed to declining behavior standards. When I say, 'a single person', I am referring to other teachers or administrators. I am not using hyperbole. Nobody thinks it is good, everyone thinks it's bad, and every year we tighten the noose.

This is across three school districts and nine grade levels.

Yeah. It's sort of insanely ironic, to me, that it seems like the prevailing attitude in this comment section is to just eat this, hook, line, and sinker. Everyone's consuming internet disinformation that reinforces their biases right here. The exact thing they're complaining about, with the newer generation. Just as low, in terms of literacy, or the ability to distinguish. Everyone's so insanely eager to cite whatever anecdote their friend's friend who works at a school gives them, without a second thought, about how the kids today are just worse than the kids of yesteryear, and how social media is surely to blame.

Reactive response to just ban your kids from using technology at all, which is a pretty good way to get them alienated from their peers and also not prevent anything at all since their peers will probably also be fully willing to expose them to whatever they get exposed to.

It's awesome to see every generation become boomers over time, really cool.

Teachers have been complaining about the "manosphere" shit for a while

Great way to raise a serial killer.

This comment shouldn't have been removed:

"Based on my life experience, I don't think you are as innocent as you try to make yourself seem."

Yep, I believe you.

A lot of times people who teach in schools were not the popular kids, but they were not unpopular either. (Because no one unpopular would want to be in a school given how unpopular kids are treated.) And it's almost like these teachers and admins want to relive their glory days, but this time they are cool, and they do this by actually trying to be liked by the popular kids, lying to themselves and thinking if things had been slightly different they would have been really popular instead of just mildly liked or that somehow they've become cooler. And popular kids certainly innately see this and milk it, exploiting it for all its worth. It's disgusting and pathetic and enables all sorts of bullshit. The popular kids give the teaxhers admins the occasional joke and smile, making them the cool teacher or admin, cementing the cycle of favoratism. It's actually worse than just lookism, there's this weird psychological interplay between people just on the outskirts believing they could have been in the inner circle and people highly socially intuitive exploiting that, plus neither verbalizing the phenomenon. Ocassionally administrators are teachers were really popular in high school, making it even worse, but mostly it's the "almost popular" kids who wind up back in school and allow a corrupt unsafe bullying environment to evolve/devolve.

Fake Sky News is also a rage machine.

Thank you for understanding. It's clear how few people are actually equipped to help kids like these.

Gotta love how many self-identified leftists we have that are actually confused authoritarians.

These kids already have been left behind by someone

It's like bullies. People always come down hard on bully kids. They rarely act like that naturally, they learned this behaviour. They're probably being abused at home. Coming down hard on them just makes them more angry and confused.

You have to figure out what is making the kids act the way and address that.

Agreed.

It's a good thing most of the people on these forums don't have much influence on the outside world.

These kids already have been left behind by someone and they filled the void with people telling them it wasn't their fault.

And your solution is to leave them even more behind? That's just compounding the problem.

The solution is guidance and therapy. What you're describing is retaliation.

>Second (and I’m not sure how we would do this) cut them off from the internet.

There are a whole bunch of ways to monitor, limit, and even cut off your kids internet usage. If you get your kid a cell phone or computer, you can install apps to monitor and limit what they watch and when. The fact that parents just let their kids freely use the internet with no supervision blows my mind.

Maybe check if Sky News is making stuff up first?

Makes sense in one of the most consumerist places on earth.

actually the correct response, yeah. the same people who control the social media algorithms, the same people who have been pushing andrew tate, are the same people who control society more broadly. that the response is always instinctively to just hand over more control to them is extremely cool.

You are the one pearl clutching.

The rise of criminal assholes like Andrew Tate has to do with ADULT MEN VALIDATING these figures all the way up to the most powerful adult men on earth.

Why do you think turning up the centralized censorship dial is NOT going to directly benefit people like Andrew Tate when Andrew Tate is exactly the kind of person the people who have control of that dial actually want?

I am in support of more human moderators moderating social media for kids, but in an empathetic way of giving kids more actual human attention, not as an authoritarian impulse to fix things by always just tightening control over others.

I missed a comma before "algorithms" it seems.

The kind of "extreme authoritarianism" you're pearl clutching about is literally the age ratings system that was in place in the late 90s. Get a grip.

Countries, especially influential ones like the UK, that are suffering from this BS should band together and fine the shit out of megacorps like Google for allowing this filth to fester and the harm it's done so far, and also threaten to revoke their operational rights if they don't agree to strict moderation going forward.

Twenty years ago, the media that kids had available for consumption was age rated.

It was, still is, was ten years before, and trust me that didn't stop me one bit.

What's different then and now is the degree of choice people employ in their media consumption. It's not like there was no Nazi propaganda on the net in 1990, it's that who the fuck seeks that stuff out. The feeds that were choice-free were, yes, sanitised (TV, radio, though if you stayed of long enough TV would show rather interesting things), but also numerous. Like at least seven TV channels over the air, and plenty of radio stations (though most played shoddy music). Imagine having seven tiktok feeds you can't fast-forward but switch in between. On current algorithmic platforms, you skip something, get shown the next thing, algorithm learns about you, about how to draw its hooks specifically into you. Back in the days, you couldn't skip, switched away, and if there was only uninteresting stuff on the other channels you switched off. Internet? Age of web rings, search barely even existed. Anyone remember altavista?

I roamed the library, inhaled multiple series of books whole-sale, but in between, there was always this magic moment: Browsing. Looking at things, shaking them a bit, see if they're *actually* interesting. Great availability of things, yes, but also limited time, and preferences, so you got picky.

That's the skill that's getting lost: People are outsourcing their consumption choices to algorithms. Worse, ones who care about nothing but retention, how can they keep you hooked so you watch more ads.

...which btw ties back into youth protection. Ratings etc. exist but the general consensus in youth psychology is that as soon as youth seeks something out by themselves, they're ready to consume it. Ratings are there so that kids don't stumble across things inadvertently, not so that they are completely unable to consume it. A hoop to jump through, maybe some secrecy, all that is a proper framework, "they think it's not for me, I think otherwise", puts the mind in the right inquisitive-but-cautious frame. That, however, presumes a choice algorithm that's running in your head, and not in the cloud.

And meanwhile, "media literacy" is understood as "spotting fake information". BS. Any information will become true to anyone if you allow it to be fed to you without getting your own agency involved. The question is less "are kids able to sniff out BS" -- they by and large are. The question is whether they have the power to say "I choose not to continue down this path", whether they have trained that muscle. Because without that no amount of skill in spotting bullshit will save you.

With social media being dominated by US style "freedom of speech" algorithms and US style acceptance of the impossibility (or even undesirability) of regulation and with completely unaccountable megacorps running them while giving very minimal if non-existent attention to who is watching what, we have a complete lack of age rating. We have given up on the idea of protecting childhood it seems.

...and you have clearly given up any pretense of not being extremely authoritarian it seems, what the hell does "freedom of speech algorithms" even mean? Rhetorically you are completely mixed up about what is going on and what the solution is, I am amazed you made it here to the fediverse.

We had agreed as a society that certain things should not be visible to children until they grow up.

Do you have evidence the systems we employed to do this actually didn't make problems worse? As far as I can see, it is also just overly righteous adults desperate to fix the world in ways that don't make them look inwards and question the policies they support and the beliefs they hold.

Oscar the grouch would be a anti vaxer and complain about immigrants taking their bins.

Don't condescend me, I am talking about TV and US media in general.

Ah yes, the Sesame Street to MAGA pipeline.

..and that centralized system of culture disemination played a major hand in creating the crisises we are in now.

Back when media for kids consisted mainly of broadcast TV shows and books. It's not some mythical past; it's my childhood.

unfortuatly the healthy way to deal with a situation like that is to remove yourself from it which children are not allowed to do.

Using the internet to avoid dealing with problems in real life is an unhealthy crutch.

So is pretending the internet is not part of "real life" like it's 1998.

Yeah, absolutely. Having been in a marriage with an abusive person, there is zero reasoning with them once they're in that state.

I agree. Try arguing that to a conservative judge in the south and you will simply be sent home with your abusive parent, who is likely enraged about having to defend themselves from the "law".

Homophobia *is* abusive. Regardless of the intentions. Ignorance of that fact doesn't excuse it.

I think muad'dib is just projecting and maybe you are, too.

Using the internet to avoid dealing with problems in real life is an unhealthy crutch.

I think you underestimate the sheer number of homophobic parents that aren't necessarily abusive but would be if their kid ever came out. There are a lot of people I've talked to that their online escape was the one thing that kept from killing themselves.

I'm not saying that it's healthy but there are a lot of kids in a situation that they can not escape from because of the way that society treats children. Children are treated as something that is closer to property than an individual when it comes to things like law enforcement and emotional abuse.

I mostly disagree with that. Cocooning up into a terminally online person makes one's life worse, not better.

Straight up abusive parents are another thing of course. But even then those kids need sheltering, not the internet.

Closeted queer kids with bigoted parents need online safe spaces.

This is a very dangerous line of reasoning that will play right into the hands of fascists.,

Tankies are permanently stuck in backwards day. Left is right and right is left. They do this because they're just fascists that don't like to be associated with other fascists. So they call their fascist group "leftist", but they hate democracy, liberalism, the jews, etc just as much as any other fascist.

https://helpfulprofessor.com/leftist-vs-liberal/

Fox news liberal... lmfao

Most media is liberal though. Liberalism is a (right-wing) hegemonic ideology. CNN, Fox, NYTimes, NYPost, NPR... All liberal.

Not so much for leftism though. It's "strange" how the right-wing conflates the two.

You know you're actually right on the money, and it's a little startling that it never occurred to me before. Shit.

Yep, that's why the only way to be a good parent nowadays is to not give your kids smart phones or computers of their own. There was a time when it was kinda ok for them to have those devices, but that time is permanently in the past.

And, part of the reason for that is section 230 of the Communications Decency Act of 1996.

No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider.

If a TV station or radio station has a call-in show and the caller swears, it's the station that gets fined. If the station runs a late night informercial where someone is defamed, the station is liable. But, do it online and you're fine. The YouTube algorithm can pick out the juiciest, most controversial, most slanderous content and shove it into everyone's recommendations and only the person who posted that content is responsible.

Section 230 makes sense in some situations. If you're running a bulletin board without any kind of algorithm promoting posts, then it makes sense that you shouldn't be held accountable for what someone says in that bulletin board. But, YouTube, Twitch, Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, etc. have all taken it too far. They don't personally create the content, but they have algorithms that analyze the content and decide who to show it to. They get the protections of a bulletin board, while curating the content to make it even more engaging than a segment on Newsmax or MSNBC.

It used to be that to put something in front of kids it had to approved by some sane adult.

I love how you got a ton of upvotes by vaguely gesturing at the past.

When was this time you speak of?

What has changed is the social fabric of society has been ripped up.

The solution is to give those laws teeth. Harsh regulations on platforms that serve unmoderated content open to everyone. Enforce transparency on content serving algorithms. Massive penalties for security breaches. Ban platforms that don't comply.

If you're worried about state actors having access to your clearnet data, that's pretty much unavoidable in the internet age. You can lessen that by pushing against the digitization of society. You shouldn't need a smart phone or internet service to live daily life.

Support brick-and-mortar stores, your local library, a local hobby group. Campaign against always-online car features, IoT e-waste, traffic surveillance laws, etc... Don't make me choose between subjecting children to a stream of unregulated bullshit and the right to privacy. It's a false dichotomy propped up by our need for digital convenience.

>Because that data is stored and passed on to third parties in most cases. Because data breeches are a common occurrence nowadays. Because gorvernments and companies can use that data against you later on.

I'm just curious... How did you sign up for internet service? Can you walk me through the process?

>You used to have to show your ID to rent a movie in person, why is doing it online any different?

Because that data is stored and passed on to third parties in most cases. Because data breeches are a common occurrence nowadays. Because gorvernments and companies can use that data against you later on.

"Oh, that person has a nasty burn on his face? Why don't I save that and pass this information to a face cream company?"

"Oh, this person is a refugee from another country? Why don't I just pass this information to the government so they can see what they're watching?"

It's most definetly not like buying liquor when you briefly show your ID to the cashier.

>If you (rightfully) are concerned about data collection and surveillance, push for legeslative protections on that topic

The EU and California have already done that and the results are rather poor since it's difficult to properly enforce. You can slap fines on said companies, but that's only a setback. It doesn't stop them especially when you have a weak government like the US has right now.

>This is a completely separate issue with a very clear root cause.

No, it's not. You're sacrificing privacy and liberty for everyone just to fix mostly a parental issue.

It’s not social medias fault. This is POOR PARENTING. Plain and simple.

Sounds like absolving social media to me.

The complexity of social media engineering and the scope of its impact is unprecedented. It's not at all the same thing as video game or TV panic. When you account for how much real-life peer discussion is driven by these platforms, protecting your child from this toxic rhetoric is nearly impossible.

You used to have to show your ID to rent a movie in person, why is doing it online any different? If you (rightfully) are concerned about data collection and surveillance, push for legeslative protections on that topic. This is a completely separate issue with a very clear root cause.

He didn't say that. Social media companies should be punished and regulated to a certain extent, but saying that they're the only ones to blame here is frankly bollocks. It's the same discussion we've had with violent video games.

Ignorant parents use this to excuse their lack of action for their kid's use of social media. What they could and should do is to not allow kids access to it or to monitor their traffic. This however requires willpower, time and effort to understand and implement this into daily life. Which either they don't have or don't want to do. This brings us to one of the causes of the low fertility rate for younger generations: it takes more nowadays to raise a child and younger generations are more responsible about raising kids than older generations.

Excessive regulation of social media for kids will massively affect our privacy. Certain European apps now require facial or id verification to use in order to prove you're old enough. I don't know about you, but I sure as hell don't want to give out my ID or let them photo my face just to watch a movie just because some parent isn't responsible enough to educate their kid.

As a parent with kids who are starting to dip their roles into the digital age, I would also say this is mainly a parenting issue, but the economic "squeeze" is the other part.

There are so many tools available to manage the content your kids consume - ad blockers, family accounts with monitoring and management, ect. I may be biased as I'm in the IT profession, but if you live in this digital age and claim ignorance on anything technology related then it's no wonder we are on the state we are in.

Many of the responsibilities the US government agencies used to take on themselves have been eroded to be handled by the individual, coupled with a subscription society for the or day to day appliances and tools we use. After working a full time job M-F, and if I don't have after hours tasks to handle I get maybe 1 hour worth of family before it's time to pack it up for the night. Weekends are typically house work or chores. I consider myself fortunate to have that much. Squeeze in management of my kids content intake and that's just more time taken away from everything else on the list.

I'll do it though because I'll be damned if my kids grow up like these kids are now.

If you believe there should be no accountability or oversight for the richest companies ever that have deep personal access to billions of people across the globe, you should wake to the realities of the 21st century.

No but a generation? Yes 1000%. Parents are responsible for their children. Their media usage, their behavior at school, literally everything. A child can not be held accountable by themselves. It won’t ever happen without teaching them. Parents are responsible for teaching their kids manners.

If you believe the answer to this problem is banning social media, you are not looking any deeper than this article and are falling for click bait.

iPad babies.

So over a few years millions of parents decided to collectively take a hard pivot into bad parenting? Couldn't possibly be an unprecedented media environment with algorithmic targeting?

People won't even take accountability for believing this phony clickbait headline.

Poor parenting is certainly an issue, but saying "it's not social medias fault" is like saying the opioid epidemic "isn't Purdue's fault". The people who manufacture and distribute the addictive and harmful product should be the first ones we go after. No amount of individual accountability will solve the problem as long as multi-billion dollar corporations are pumping this shit out 24/7.

My Dad went to a catholic school, in America, in the 70s and 80s, and it was that way back then.

As an old enough Italian, I can assure you that my friends who attended those schools in the 90s still received the same treatment and especially that teachers in public schools who attended those schools kept telling us of how they dreamed of doing that to us.

Wow, just wow.

Are you Drax?

Nah, that is One Hour Photo kind of apologetics.

They're likely all the way in for this kind of culture because they are victims of those same kinds of places. People who grow up in catholic school are the ones who grow up to be catholic schoolteachers. Who grow up and send their kids to catholic school. That's kind of how it works.

I am just saying that they don't know what they are asking for with this behavior: such places already exist and they are abusive to their own members.

Abuse isn't the solution to miseducation.

Imagine believing that catholic school cures people of their misogyny. Wow.

The nuns at my father’s Catholic school were brutal. They would slap you with a yard stick if you talked back.

I mean, he’s having an easier time getting laid than most of the people criticizing him on these forums so…

That's a bit of projection. Especially when a lot of people shit talking him on these forums are very likely in polycules...

Some of that's okay.

I mean, he's having an easier time getting laid than most of the people criticizing him on these forums so...

Who do you think adolescent boys are going to listen to more?

Or he's your friend's weird, 28 year old brother, whose room is only lit with black lights, and UV reactive posters, has no job, smokes weed all day, and trips all the time, who tells you Mayans invented cell phones.

Look at my post history. There's plenty for them to do.

https://sh.itjust.works/post/36531366/18139286

Go ahead, you keep enjoying have shitheads running around and keep lamenting how there's nothing to do.

Your point isn't supported by either graph

Why don't you look at all Bachelor Degrees for White Males (seems to be biggest followers of misogynist influencers)

2012-2021 (excluding COVID years as edge cases) :

https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d24/tables/dt24_322.20.asp

6% drop in bachelor degrees for white males vs 1% drop for white women (aligning the races makes it more of an apple to apple comparison)

My point is that stupid, discouraged boys are easily influenced by right-wing misogynists. You want fix this, fix the next generation before it's too late.

>On the internet, people have to be more honest.

I... don't think that's how it works lol.

I'm glad that people can't hide behind a face anymore. In the old times, and this still happens in some places, people will get away with abuse because they're good at using their faces to manipulate people. Preachers, community leaders. They used body language to win people's trust and gain positions of power to abuse people, especially children.

On the internet, people have to be more honest. Video chat is unpopular, so most people are only using words to communicate. Sometimes voice. You're looking straight at someone's soul with less distraction from the physical plane. It's safer.

I wouldn't trust a guy who I've only ever met in the flesh. Ugh, creepy.

It’s interesting my friends kid is 13. A couple of years ago they were able to take a trip across country to visit their online friends that they spend all their time with in games. Those kids are all girls. This life style truly isn’t exclusive to one gender. The father works a 9-5 and the mother is a stay at home mom with some side hustles for extra cash. Their kid seems to be kind but who knows what she is really getting into online. This world is like a caricature of itself.

A lot of them spend their free time in their bedrooms, gaming. Their only friends are online gamers that are in other parts of the world. They have no actual physical interaction.

I've even seen posts where young men in their 20s are finally making enough money that they can finally visit online friends that they've known for years, often describing them as "best friends."

https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d24/tables/dt24_318.45.asp

TLDR: men are twice as likely to get a stem degree. Which is down from 30 years ago which was 5x

I have no confidence you'll read those stats so I'll just leave them here for anyone else to see just how confused you are. There's a minor bump due to an increase in girls in STEM funding. An increase that still does not have parity with the cultural inertia of boys in stem.

I would also include the death of the “third place”. Because even if you work enough to survive, where do you spend your time outside of the home with other people in your community without spending money? Even worse options if you want kids allowed.

One of the only places I know of is the library. But I’d be very surprised by an 8-10 year old boy spending their time at the library.

>Jackasses like Tate get to influence the children, because there is a void that has been left empty

I'd like to amend this to say that there is void that support "boys". There's a lot of encouragement for the development of girls into STEM, into sports, into everything else but there's no encouragement for boys. Boys are left to fend for themselves and if they don't get the right support and encouragement at home, they end up ripe for influencers like Tate.

I would argue that those factors aren't a direct cause, but the isolation leaves them vulnerable to things like this. The internet used to be wide open and your semi-random traversal of independent sites would still expose you to a diverse array of people and content.

The pursuit of profit led to massive, accessible, engagement driven social media platforms. Optimization for ad views meant segmenting demographics and serving them distilled content. The hyper specific content led to these demographics living in echo chambers based on their flavor of polarizing content.

The Tate-sphere is built around exploiting that isolation and selling bogus solutions. There's no specific reason the algorithm funnels into it other than it's catches a broad user base on a charged topic => $$$. The algorithm could just as easily push young men into fighting for socially beneficial causes, but anger is a strong emotion that gives the most money.

It's not either or. It could be both. In rhis case, most of these reasons can be traced back to the perversion of capitalism.

You and I are getting the same algorithm cuz I’ve seen the same stuff on insta. I had to deleted it finally. Couldn’t tolerate the intolerance and stupidity. Just a circkejerk of losers.

Ah I see. Yeah the more insecure you are the more money they can make from you. Especially the more unattainable the ideal is.

It was just the "goal" aesthetic I was trying to meet as a young woman. So many of my classmates developed an eating disorder or just started using drugs because the "strung out supermodel" look was what everybody wanted.

Its just a precursor carrying the same message kids are gettimg today. That you're worthless if you don't look the right way, and you should hurt yourself to look the right way.

How does heroine chic relate? I may have been too young to remember anything besides the look

It's honestly wild to me that people in my age bracket can grow up with heroin chic, and think it somehow just vanished into the ether. I don't know why it's so hard for them to understand that kids are just getting hit with an evolved form of the same bullshit message that you're worthless if you don't fit a specific aesthetic.

Thanks! I feel the only new things here are simp and rizz if I'm honest. Simp seems to have gone the way of woke in that it's lost most of its meaning, but when I see it used on YouTube it's sinister AF. Tbh I've noticed this a lot on YouTube of late, high degree of racist and misogynistic comments in videos that feature a woman doing something "incorrectly" or if something criminal happens and it's not readily apparent what the race of the perp is.

I'm aware of red pill/redpilling - it's the specific slang I'm curious about. My knowledge/experience with Tate is primarily through the news and a few profiles by the likes of Robert Evans, which basically means I'm coming in with the negative viewpoint and no real experience of his content.

Without knowing the slang it likely passes me by as "well that's how the kids talk these days" so I'm likely missing significant dog whistles all the time. I like to be aware - allows me to be vigilant and keep a check on myself.

I'd argue it's not the inevitable outcome of capitalism. The grifters are connecting and feeding off each other like never before though. Trump/Tate/Farage/Rogan/Jones/Brand/Peterson/Shapiro are a few that spring to mind. They're probably not sitting round planning stuff (well Shapiro probably is in the dorkiest way possible) but they amplify each other, vouch for each other etc etc.

They're parasites with no moral compunction, they spot a glitch where they can get support, money and power and exploit the shit out of it with no regard to the consequences.

To my mind they harken back to the bullies of the 90s (and I'm sure before) and appeal to that mindset, wokeness bothers them because it represents progress that patches the glitch. I could ramble for hours but I've no solution, I wish someone did.

"How did we get here from there?" One step at a time.

Not all consequences are immediate.

Consumerism. Consumerism is the problem.

We have sold out.

Capitalism is an inadequate reason for all this, because we had decades of capitalism without this level of shit and toxicity.

Welcome to capitalism baby!

It'll get you laid!

Nothing is more toxic than obsessing over money and status. Literally will poison your soul and ruin your life.

I don't really see this as something new. None of it really. There have always been backward ass people. They have always called other kids losers and ostracized them. There has always been a classroom full of kids dragging everyone around them down. School never solved these problems so how am I supposed to react when I hear it's getting worse?

I don't know much more than you, but they said it right in the comment. "They are obsessed with their value"

Such as, "High value man" "low value man" ect

I do know my 14 year old nephew is obsessed with making money in ways I never saw in my youth cohort

Rizz, alpha/beta/sigma, mid, simp. A lot of importance placed on your value, your masculinity and a lot of overlap between gaming and red pill content.

You got kids mewing trying to get their jawlines looking nice. Little girls obsessed with makeup and skincare. It’s wild and people think it’s all innocent. It’s not. It’s early indoctrination.

It's from the Matrix, maybe you've seen it. For those who haven't here it is without giving any major spoilers: at one point one of the main characters tells the protagonist that if he wants to learn the truth he could take a red pill that he offers to him, but if he wants to remain oblivious and continue to live normally he should take a blue pill. They're using this analogy to describe how the media peddles as normal what they consider wrong values and ideas like lgbtq tolerance, feminism and so on.

Needless to say, Tate is a big fan of that movie. So much so that he named his "course" the Matrix Academy. One of my former classmates actually paid for that nonsense. It was just a discord server and the lectures were useless. All the information there could be found for free on the internet by just doing a Google search or watching a few videos on Youtube.

I'm clueless, what slang are we talking about here, I doubt I'd know it if I heard it.

It was a toilet comment. I can only take so long before people notice I'm gone.

Unlike the reference series, the comment was not done in 1 take and didn't have the budget for professional editing.

Just read it out loud (even in your head) and you'll notice it's adding pauses for emphasis. Whether it's good style or not is a different question, but the why seems pretty clear.

Either a 3rd grade drop out, or someone too old to remember what they learned in 3rd grade.

why periods in weird places?

The series is addressed in the article

Yes, I was just open for discussion.

Thanks for telling me! And thanks for giving people a chance to explain them self, I appreciate that about you :D

I think you got downvoted because it wasn't clear what you were saying, so people misunderstood. That's why I asked, because I don't like to assume I know what people are saying, I prefer to have them tell me.

If I understand your comment, you are wondering out loud. Perhaps some of the other readers thought you were trying to make a point about something.

Thank you for elaborating!

I'm actually not sure why so many people down voted my comment, but I'll try to explain. This article is about boys who don’t respect women or girls. I read another article about girls trying their best but still struggling due to pressure. So I’ve read two very extreme cases, and both articles present it as something widespread. The big issue seems to be social media.

It made me wonder how kids are doing in school, are they more ambitious now but struggling because of mental health? I saw in the comments that a lot of kids are doing poorly.

Just to clarify, I think it’s bad regardless of the reason or how many kids are affected, gender doesn’t matter, and my comment was never about that.

How did you (and maybe others) read my comment? I want to learn to communicate better for next time.

I'm not sure I understand what you're getting at. Can you elaborate for me?

With the “no child left behind” act, it’s really turned into pass every kid no matter what.

I fucking hate that act so goddamn much.

Lol, you know society screwed up when there's a "Student Parking" section at your local elementary schools.

Also known as kicking the can down the road.

If you don’t fail a kid in elementary school they’re gonna fail in high school. If you don’t fail them in high school they’re gonna fail in university or in life in general.

Life has consequences for making mistakes and not learning from them. If we try to shelter children from their mistakes and bad habits then we raise adults who are poorly equipped for handling the challenges of life.

When I was in first year of university I met so many nice, seemingly-well-adjusted people who hit a brick wall with their coursework. I believe around a third of my peers failed to graduate at all in their programs. Many dropped out or transferred to other departments or other universities.

But here’s the thing: my peers had already been subject to a rigorous selection process to get in (only about 10% of applicants were admitted). If you had put all applicants through the rigours of the coursework far more would have failed.

The really tragic part of this whole story is when you factor in the degrees of the consequences for failure. In elementary school the consequences for failure would be very low. Children who are older than their peers tend to outperform them anyway. In university, however, the consequences for failure are very high (thousands of dollars wasted on failed courses that need to be repeated).

The consequences for failure outside of school (real life as they call it) are even higher: unemployment, homelessness, incarceration, and even violence and death.

I remember there being someone held back a year. I think it happens.

That's not how it works in the UK. Everyone progresses through school regardless of how you perform.

With the "no child left behind" act, it's really turned into pass every kid no matter what.

Everyone talks about reading, did y'all know for a number of years schools stopped teaching phonics and instesd introduced sight words? Aside from many parents handing over an ipad instead of reading to their young children- the schools dropped phonics for the last 5 years or more in place of "sight words". I believe they've seen the damage and have gone back to phonics now, but there is a whole generational cohort who got fucked now.

Im glad I read to my son. Im glad I never gave him Internet access outaide of supervised educational time, or watching cat videos together. My son, who is in special education for learning disabilities, is one of the best readers in his class, and this year(6th grade) started in with Gen Ed and is excelling there too!

Reading is so good for children. As a toddler and beyond it is easy to bake into bedtime routines. Bedtime took 30-60mins, and we created so many memories for both of us. I'll always remember the silly voice I used to read the Dogmans' "haw-haw-ha-ha" laugh. Close familial bonds keep these kids from feeling alone and turning to social media for support.

No one fails. You can't drive yourself to elementary school.

That's good, just fuck 'em without disregard. Great model to follow.