Note that this poll only targetted around 3000 UK adults aged 16+. Nonetheless I personally think the trend this poll highlights is worrying and worthy of discussion.

Also note I changed the original title to not use the terms “Gen Z” and “baby boomers” since I think putting in the ages is clearer.


Some choice quotes:

On feminism, 16% of [16 to 29-year-old] males felt it had done more harm than good. Among over-60s the figure was 13%.

One in four UK males aged 16 to 29 believe it is harder to be a man than a woman.

37% of men aged 16 to 29 consider “toxic masculinity” an unhelpful phrase, roughly double the number of young women who don’t like it.

The figures emerged from Ipsos polling for King’s College London’s Policy Institute and the Global Institute for Women’s Leadership.

“This is a new and unusual generational pattern,” said Prof Bobby Duffy, director of the Policy Institute. “Normally, it tends to be the case that younger generations are consistently more comfortable with emerging social norms, as they grew up with these as a natural part of their lives.”

But Duffy said: “There is a consistent minority of between one-fifth and one-third who hold the opposite view. This points to a real risk of fractious division among this coming generation.”

Prof Rosie Campbell, director of the Global Institute for Women’s Leadership at King’s, said: “The fact that this group is the first to derive most of their information from social media is likely to be at least part of the explanation.

In the meantime, social media algorithms are filling the vacuum, she said. “This could be something that changes when young men enter the workforce but we can’t take that for granted given how important social media is in the way we understand ourselves.”

  • jarfil@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    10 months ago

    being clear that these issues stem from the devaluing of femininity

    Men […] not demand everyone get off and get on a different train

    I don’t disagree, but I also don’t know what word could be used to both point at that, and at the same time not allow being misinterpreted as “female superiority ideology”.

    For example, in Spain we have a “Ministry of Equality”, which is basically in charge of implementing the “4th wave of feminism”, without directly referring to feminism by name, while its name leaves no room for misinterpretation:

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ministry_of_Equality_(Spain)

    Are other societies ready for that? Dunno, even here there is opposition from the right, but I think something like that would be the proper next step.

    “All Lives Matter” doesn’t work

    It doesn’t work because it’s the argument US cops use to do what they do: “All Lives Matter (…starting with the cop’s)”.

    It would only start to work, once gun ownership got severely reduced, cops had to pass a rigorous training, including in de-escalation, and had a mandate to protect civilians above their own asses.

    Like, I’ve recently watched a video of body cams where cops decided to turn on FBI agents. Most of the involved were white, on both sides, with some black, also on both sides. All the cops, including their supervisors, acted as a bunch of entitled assholes, and only some got dinged for it. “All Lives Matter… but cop lives matter most”.

    “Black Lives Matter” will keep working better in the US, for as long as there is racial profiling, and a lack of consequences going on. Hopefully, at some point in the future, it could be changed to “Civilian Lives Matter”… and ultimately to “All Lives Matter”… but the US seems to be far away from that point yet.

    • Smoke@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      10 months ago

      If the name was “Black Lives Do Matter” it’d be harder to misinterpret, wilfully or otherwise.

      • jarfil@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        Dunno. They both sound basically the same to me, maybe because I’m not a native speaker. What would be the difference?

        • Smoke@beehaw.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          10 months ago

          They’re meant to, it’s a more specific version of BLM with the same intended meaning, meant to make wilful misinterpretations by talking heads /right wing dingdongs as "Only Black Lives Matter" harder to sell.

          • jarfil@beehaw.org
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            10 months ago

            Hm, so… “Only Black Lives Do Matter” would not be grammatically correct? or sound too long? or is there a connotation difference that I’m missing?

            • Smoke@beehaw.org
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              10 months ago

              That’s not the problem at all, the meaning of "Only Black Lives Matter" makes the movement sound like a black supremacist movement.

              • jarfil@beehaw.org
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                10 months ago

                I understand the problem, what I don’t understand is the solution. Wouldn’t “Only Black Lives Do Matter” make it also sound like a supremacist movement?

                • Smoke@beehaw.org
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  ·
                  10 months ago

                  The current phrase is Black Lives Matter, which can be interpreted as:

                  • Black Lives Matter (as opposed to other lives), or,
                  • Black Lives Matter (as opposed to not mattering).

                  .

                  My proposal would be to emphasise the latter meaning and make the first one more difficult to present, hence:

                  • Black Lives Do Matter