Society/Culture Why are young males now more right wing then older males?

[stefcep]

Not really surprising, it's been years in the making with the manosphere stuff, young kids watch Andrew Tate, Adin Ross and Asmondgold. They are basically Fox News pundits for kids

Nothing to do with high rates of divorce where many boys no longer have a meaningful relationship with their father?

Nothing to do with the decline of male teachers who were also often role models?

Nothing to do with classes in English for example teaching themes that are of no interest or worse at odds with the interests and views of boys?

Nothing to do with female teachers not understanding that boys naturally develop and learn in different ways and at different rates and have different interests, goals and objectives and behave differently to girls?

Nothing to do with boys high school academic performance significantly lower than that of girls?

Nothing to do with boys far less likely to gain a tertiary place and then to finish?

The challenges for boys were identified years ago. The outcomes were also predicted years ago. Blaming it on toxic social media influencers is just a simple way of deflecting from the more confronting and challenging causes.

 

[Stan_Darsh72]

Nothing to do with high rates of divorce where many boys no longer have a meaningful relationship with their father?

Nothing to do with the decline of male teachers who were also often role models?

Nothing to do with classes in English for example teaching themes that are of no interest or worse at odds with the interests and views of boys?

Nothing to do with female teachers not understanding that boys naturally develop and learn in different ways and at different rates and have different interests, goals and objectives and behave differently to girls?

Nothing to do with boys high school academic performance significantly lower than that of girls?

Nothing to do with boys far less likely to gain a tertiary place and then to finish?

The challenges for boys were identified years ago. The outcomes were also predicted years ago. Blaming it on toxic social media influencers is just a simple way of deflecting from the more confronting and challenging causes.

End of the day its neoliberalism capitalism.

End of the day we need to get rid of neoliberalism which makes every single one of us just a vessal for corporate interests.

I am 31 years old and 10 years ago I went though my "manosphere" stage, end of the day we need to change the systems.

 

[Gethelred]

Cooldude, stefcep, let's cool things down a bit.

Perhaps less mention of the other's children mightn't go astray.

 

[Cooldude]

Weird, that was a problem? The state of things. Point still stands, if people's children aren't Gen Z or Gen Alpha then they don't understand how kids work nowadays. They grew up with COVID, 3 years of crucial schooling years wiped from their lives, and lived solely on the internet in those years. Getting radicalised by right wing talking heads on the internet during COVID years is a very real thing for Gen Z

All the "our school failed our kids" or "animal farm didn't provide useful themes for ma keedz" is just out of touch boomerisms, I assure you the kids aren't even reading the books and are just using ChatGPT to write their book reviews

 

[Ghost Patrol]

The overton window is moving to the right, this is driven by the media.

Young males are likely more susceptible to this type of manipulation as their brains are less developed than similar aged females.

 

[RedStarUncle]

Nothing to do with high rates of divorce where many boys no longer have a meaningful relationship with their father?

Nothing to do with the decline of male teachers who were also often role models?

Nothing to do with classes in English for example teaching themes that are of no interest or worse at odds with the interests and views of boys?

Nothing to do with female teachers not understanding that boys naturally develop and learn in different ways and at different rates and have different interests, goals and objectives and behave differently to girls?

Nothing to do with boys high school academic performance significantly lower than that of girls?

Nothing to do with boys far less likely to gain a tertiary place and then to finish?

The challenges for boys were identified years ago. The outcomes were also predicted years ago. Blaming it on toxic social media influencers is just a simple way of deflecting from the more confronting and challenging causes.

Show how those things were different 10 or 20 or 30 years ago, depending on whenever you think young males were less likely to identify with far-right politics.

Because I still maintain that all those points, whether you think they're a problem or not, were all basically the same 30 years ago.



I think we only perceive them as a recent "problem", because the media and social media have only started selling it to us as a recent "problem", and therefore the reactionary drift to far-right politics is driven by the media atmosphere.

And if you do think the problems you've identified are real problems... the thing I'd say is they're not going to get addressed in the current political climate because they are the key selling points that the media is going to want to keep telling you are out of control regardless of the reality of the situation.

 

[Saint Shags]

Nothing to do with high rates of divorce where many boys no longer have a meaningful relationship with their father?

Nothing to do with the decline of male teachers who were also often role models?

Nothing to do with classes in English for example teaching themes that are of no interest or worse at odds with the interests and views of boys?

Nothing to do with female teachers not understanding that boys naturally develop and learn in different ways and at different rates and have different interests, goals and objectives and behave differently to girls?

Nothing to do with boys high school academic performance significantly lower than that of girls?

Nothing to do with boys far less likely to gain a tertiary place and then to finish?

The challenges for boys were identified years ago. The outcomes were also predicted years ago. Blaming it on toxic social media influencers is just a simple way of deflecting from the more confronting and challenging causes.

Just curious, when were you last in a classroom?

 

[RedStarUncle]

The more I think about this topic the more I come around to the idea that young males aren't more right wing than older males anymore than they were 20-30 years ago.

I'm starting to think back then there were just as many young men mildly angry at and disconnected from mainstream politics as there are now. The difference now is they have a political movement that appeals to those feelings that wasn't there in the past. In the nineties, an angry young man didn't vote or didn't care and just stuck with listening to nu metal and watching Fight Club while the world patiently waited for them to "grow up".

Today they've got personalities that they're angry because someone has made them that way i.e. by forcing wokeism on the world that is the cause of why they're angry. They're angry for all the same reasons they've always been, but now they've got someone telling them it can be fixed if they vote a certain way and support certain politics.


They're not more angry, and they're not more right-wing... they've just got something to latch onto now. So the question about young men is really secondary to the question of why right-wing populism has become a viable political movement in the first place.

 

[Seeds]

I like this. And I think it's reasonably a part of pushing towards political persuasion as an identity rather than just something you do for yourself so it's a good idea as an answer to the question.

I think it's also important to understand why a lot of equality ideology has moved away from "treat everyone equal" and towards "provide advantage to those who are disadvantaged".

The biggest failing I see in what we learned about as millennials and Gen Xers (as someone close to the fringe in age) is that universal rights have a limit in terms of equality if there are genuine, entrenched advantages and hierarchies in society.

"Anyone can get into university on merit" is tempered by the fact that wealthy white kids are more likely to go to private schools which are better placed to help kids tick the right boxes to demonstrate that merit. "Anyone can get the job if they're qualified" is tempered but a small, but not non-zero, number of hiring bosses who will instantly through away resumes of any female applicant. "Everyone pays tax based on their earnings" is tempered by loopholes that are only accessible if you earn enough to take advantage of them.

So if I'm able to take advantage of any of those institutional advantages, of course I want "everyone to be treated equally" because I'll probably still end up winning. So if you want to help minority groups overcome the hurdles and achieve equality, they need a hand-up.

I'm not arguing whether that's right or wrong or whether we as a society have got that balance right... but it's a very nuanced and continuously evolving concept and it's a disservice to reduce it to "equality of opportunity is better than equality of outcome" or vice-versa.



But again... they don't want to sell it as nuanced and evolving. They want to sell it as the "modern woke mindvirus" that we must stamp out before it destroys us all.

So fix those problems rather then taking short cuts that involve discriminating against individuals based on skin colour and undermining support for human rights.

Invest more in public schooling to mitigate the advantage of private schooling (personally I would ban private schools), invest more in rural regions government services. Impose wealth taxes to mitigate against the rise of rich and poor classes. Governments should fully pay for the cost of maternity leave to businesses to take away all the incentive to hire men over women. This is how you deal with these problems.

 

[Seeds]

The overton window is moving to the right, this is driven by the media.

Young males are likely more susceptible to this type of manipulation as their brains are less developed than similar aged females.

Wait what? We are talking 18-30 year olds. I.e. young people who can vote. Not pre-teens.

 

[Ghost Patrol]

Wait what? We are talking 18-30 year olds. I.e. young people who can vote. Not pre-teens.

Why are you skipping from pre-teens to voting age? What happens in between?

Teachers are quitting due to Andrew Tate's ideology driving sexual harassment and misogyny in class

High school teacher Grace thought she'd landed her dream job. But she quit after one term when male students who were fans of self-described misogynist Andrew Tate made her feel unsafe.

www.abc.net.au

 

[AvantGardener]

Governments should fully pay for the cost of maternity leave to businesses

It is downright absurd businesses need to pay parental leave.

 

[stefcep]

Show how those things were different 10 or 20 or 30 years ago, depending on whenever you think young males were less likely to identify with far-right politics.

Because I still maintain that all those points, whether you think they're a problem or not, were all basically the same 30 years ago.



I think we only perceive them as a recent "problem", because the media and social media have only started selling it to us as a recent "problem", and therefore the reactionary drift to far-right politics is driven by the media atmosphere.

And if you do think the problems you've identified are real problems... the thing I'd say is they're not going to get addressed in the current political climate because they are the key selling points that the media is going to want to keep telling you are out of control regardless of the reality of the situation.

That's actually not true-especially when it comes to the educational outcomes of boys and the lack of role models. You can quickly and easily verify for yourself the decline in the number of male teachers for example, and the rising disparity in academic attainment between boys and girls in the last 30 years.

 

[RedStarUncle]

That's actually not true-especially when it comes to the educational outcomes of boys and the lack of role models. You can quickly and easily verify for yourself the decline in the number of male teachers for example, and the rising disparity in academic attainment between boys and girls in the last 30 years.

https://www.fwc.gov.au/documents/sites/caeremuneration/submissions/c20136333-sub-afei-annexc-140518.pdf

35% male teachers in 1995... 27% in 2015. Declining sure... but that's "roughly 1-in-3" over that time period approaching "1-in-4".

I'm definitely not arguing it's not a problem. It very much is a problem. But I don't think it explains that young men today think significantly differently to young men in 1995. In fact... I don't think young men today even do think that differently to young men in 1995; just they're presented with different answers that appeal to how they think.

Divorces in Australia

The latest figures around divorces in Australia: divorce rate, duration of marriage at divorce, and the extent to which divorces involved children.

aifs.gov.au

Divorce rate higher in 1990 than today.



Can't find anything with a quick Google on male-vs-female academic performance, but going to school in the 90s my memory was we were already talking about how much better girls did than boys at school back then so my guess is the gap is about the same.




I'm not trying to say those points and concerns aren't valid... just that I don't think they explain the original premise that young males now are embracing right-wing politics and Trump/etc. in a way that older generations aren't.

In fact... maybe it's only because Trump/etc. wasn't a viable political force in the 90s that young men weren't gravitating that way politically in the 90s. In which case the reasoning could be all those factors. But the factors don't correlate with the rise of Trump rather it's the other way around and the rise of Trump has harnessed the underlying factors that have been there for a long time.

 

[RedStarUncle]

So fix those problems rather then taking short cuts that involve discriminating against individuals based on skin colour and undermining support for human rights.

Invest more in public schooling to mitigate the advantage of private schooling (personally I would ban private schools), invest more in rural regions government services. Impose wealth taxes to mitigate against the rise of rich and poor classes. Governments should fully pay for the cost of maternity leave to businesses to take away all the incentive to hire men over women. This is how you deal with these problems.

Yes please to all the bolded. And when we start doing all that, we can start talking about reducing the leg-ups needed to equal the playing field.

But if we don't equal the playing field with the above and probably more.... then there will be institutional advantage so "equality of opportunity rather than outcome" will be a lie and an excuse to perpetuate the historical biases.



Not much grinds me more than old white blokes who went to private school then got a free university education then got cushy management roles in the era of the long-lunch and afterwork boys club drinks then send their sons to those same private schools..... complain that it's not fair for the government to spend more money on the education of an immigrant child at a public school than their son at a private school because that's "reverse racism" or some other nonsense jargon.

 

[Seeds]

Why are you skipping from pre-teens to voting age? What happens in between?

Teachers are quitting due to Andrew Tate's ideology driving sexual harassment and misogyny in class

High school teacher Grace thought she'd landed her dream job. But she quit after one term when male students who were fans of self-described misogynist Andrew Tate made her feel unsafe.

www.abc.net.au

I haven seen any literature on older teens.

 

[Ghost Patrol]

I haven seen any literature on older teens.

They are just teens mate. 13 - 17.

Older teens are the voting age ones you mentioned previously.

 

[Blue1980]

End of the day its neoliberalism capitalism.

End of the day we need to get rid of neoliberalism which makes every single one of us just a vessal for corporate interests.

I am 31 years old and 10 years ago I went though my "manosphere" stage, end of the day we need to change the systems.

Yeah I am 44, and probably went through a brief version of that sort of stuff maybe 15-16 years ago. Been moving more to the left pretty much ever since then, and have now come to the same conclusion you have, this is inevitable end point of neoliberalism.

 

[Blue1980]

The more I think about this topic the more I come around to the idea that young males aren't more right wing than older males anymore than they were 20-30 years ago.

I'm starting to think back then there were just as many young men mildly angry at and disconnected from mainstream politics as there are now. The difference now is they have a political movement that appeals to those feelings that wasn't there in the past. In the nineties, an angry young man didn't vote or didn't care and just stuck with listening to nu metal and watching Fight Club while the world patiently waited for them to "grow up".

Today they've got personalities that they're angry because someone has made them that way i.e. by forcing wokeism on the world that is the cause of why they're angry. They're angry for all the same reasons they've always been, but now they've got someone telling them it can be fixed if they vote a certain way and support certain politics.


They're not more angry, and they're not more right-wing... they've just got something to latch onto now. So the question about young men is really secondary to the question of why right-wing populism has become a viable political movement in the first place.

I also people who thought Gen Z would inevitably be more progressive are grossly mistaken. People like to shit on boomers and older people generally as being the more conservative ones. It's never as binary as that, and the generation wars are just click baity pointlessness.

 

[Seeds]

They are just teens mate. 13 - 17.

Older teens are the voting age ones you mentioned previously.

I haven't seen any literature saying older teen females are more mature then males was my point. Have you?

 

[Seeds]

I also people who thought Gen Z would inevitably be more progressive are grossly mistaken. People like to shit on boomers and older people generally as being the more conservative ones. It's never as binary as that, and the generation wars are just click baity pointlessness.

It's not about generation. It's about age. Young people tend to vote more liberal then older people. And for very obvious reasons. Boomers were once hippies protesting Vietnam and voted in Gough whitlam. They only became conservative as they got old.

The fact young men today are not only less liberal then previous generations of young men but are in fact more conservative then older men is utterly bizarre.

 

[Ghost Patrol]

I haven't seen any literature saying older teen females are more mature then males was my point. Have you?

Yes, there's plenty. Have you bothered looking?

females mature faster than males - Google Search

 

[RedStarUncle]

It's not about generation. It's about age. Young people tend to vote more liberal then older people. And for very obvious reasons. Boomers were once hippies protesting Vietnam and voted in Gough whitlam. They only became conservative as they got old.

The fact young men today are not only less liberal then previous generations of young men but are in fact more conservative then older men is utterly bizarre.

Young people voting more "liberal" I think is the misnomer of the whole conversation. I think that's just what we've seen in the last 50-odd years because for those last 50-odd years, the only viable anti-establishment rebellious political movement was the liberal left. Young men aren't looking to be progressive they're just looking to be rebellious, and fascism/alt-right is the new rebellion so they're now voting in that direction.



Society has always been patient with young people voting for rebellion for the sake of rebelliousness. Because whether you're left or right you probably tend towards a more centrist or (small-c) conservative viewpoint as you age. The current political shift we're seeing, while catching up rebellious young men, isn't been driven by them - it's being driven by rural and outer-suburban white voters of most ages.

What the left/Democrats/ALP/UK Labour/etc. need to think about is how they're going to manage electoral competitiveness if they lose a portion of the youth vote that has always helped them when they've succeeded.

2 years ago in Australia there was a sense that Libs had lost their heartland as educated Gen-Xs and Gen-Ys moved into wealthier electorates but maintained sympathy for Greens/Teals/centrist ideals. What might not've been accounted for is that the LNP will make that up with the sons of GenX while maintaining their mortgage-belt advantage over Labor, which actually puts Labor in a position where they don't have the natural demographics to maintain government.

 

[Blue1980]

Young people voting more "liberal" I think is the misnomer of the whole conversation. I think that's just what we've seen in the last 50-odd years because for those last 50-odd years, the only viable anti-establishment rebellious political movement was the liberal left. Young men aren't looking to be progressive they're just looking to be rebellious, and fascism/alt-right is the new rebellion so they're now voting in that direction.



Society has always been patient with young people voting for rebellion for the sake of rebelliousness. Because whether you're left or right you probably tend towards a more centrist or (small-c) conservative viewpoint as you age. The current political shift we're seeing, while catching up rebellious young men, isn't been driven by them - it's being driven by rural and outer-suburban white voters of most ages.

What the left/Democrats/ALP/UK Labour/etc. need to think about is how they're going to manage electoral competitiveness if they lose a portion of the youth vote that has always helped them when they've succeeded.

2 years ago in Australia there was a sense that Libs had lost their heartland as educated Gen-Xs and Gen-Ys moved into wealthier electorates but maintained sympathy for Greens/Teals/centrist ideals. What might not've been accounted for is that the LNP will make that up with the sons of GenX while maintaining their mortgage-belt advantage over Labor, which actually puts Labor in a position where they don't have the natural demographics to maintain government.

Thing is does LNP have that same counter culture rebellious angle to it with Dutton in charge?

 

[Saint Shags]

That's actually not true-especially when it comes to the educational outcomes of boys and the lack of role models. You can quickly and easily verify for yourself the decline in the number of male teachers for example, and the rising disparity in academic attainment between boys and girls in the last 30 years.

So when were you last in the classroom?