If you’re anything like my parents, you probably wouldn’t even understand most of the content that floods my social media, no matter how hard I try to avoid it.
Here’s a recent example from Instagram: “Do y’all females ever tell ur homegirls ‘Sis chill you letting too many dudes hit?’” Essentially, that means: “Women – do you ever tell your girlfriends that they’re whores and need to stop letting so many guys fuck them?” The reel, posted by a 19-year-old man, appeared on my Instagram feed without me wanting to see it, or ever interacting with any other similar content. The comments that followed were pure misogyny. “Women see body count as a leaderboard and they try to outdo each other,” was one of them. Translation: all women are competitively promiscuous.
Consider the use of the word “female” in these posts. It is not a neutral term here, it is a term of abuse. It’s used by teenage boys to degrade us and equate us to animals. Boys are never described as “males”, but girls are always “females” – the equivalent of sows or calves, creatures that are less than human. We’re also “thots” (whores), “community pussy” and “bops”. “Bop” stands for “been over passed” and is a derogatory term used by boys to refer to a girl they’ve decided has been “passed around” or had too much sex. Sexual equality has ceased to exist online. It’s absolutely fine for boys to have sex, but when girls do, they are called worthless and referred to as objects. “When community pussy tries to insult me, I just want to beat that bitch up.” That’s a message I saw on TikTok.
I’m a 15-year-old schoolgirl and like most teenagers I spend a fair portion of my spare time on social media, often scrolling through short-form videos on apps such as Instagram or TikTok. All of my friends use those apps, and many spend multiple hours a day on them. I actively try to avoid online misogyny, but I am met with it incessantly whenever I open my mainstream social media apps. It only takes a few minutes before there’s subtle or overt misogyny, such as comment sections on a girl’s post filled with remarks about her body, videos made by men or boys captioned with a degrading joke, and even topics such as domestic violence or rape, trivialised and laughed about.
Don’t use Instagram or TikTok ✅👍
Enragebait is a well known consequence of using a profit-driven Algorithm, i.e. enshittification.
15-year-olds are not being specifically targeted so much as caught up in the phenomena occuring overall.
Teens are too stupid to not use it. Most people are too stupid to not use it. I actually see very little wrong with no one under 16 being allowed on any forms of social media. Among all the stuff like this (that I doubt was really written by a 15 year old, and was more likely made by a person or organization trying to get the law to pass) It fucks up how you regulate dopamine and gives you the attention span of a goldfish.
I’ve seen plenty of misogyny here on the threadiverse. It’s not solved just by not using Instagram or TikTok.
Edit: it’s in this very comment section, in fact.
Read the article instead of the headline ✅👍
The thing is this isn’t a phenomena that’s recent. This type of shitty misogynism has been going on for decades/centuries. The only difference between then and now is that we have social apps that make it easier to spread.
I’m coming up on 70 yrs old and misogynism has always been the bane of my existence.
I’m not quite 70 years old, but I’ve been around for long enough to laugh at this line from the article: “Sexual equality has ceased to exist online”
Only a 15 year old could think that sexual equality ever existed online. It may be hard to believe, but it’s probably better now than it ever has been. Back in the early days online spaces were so male dominated that people had trouble believing that women were even online at all.
The extent of apps promoting and amplifying this hate posting is a recent phenomenon, through the so-called algorithmic feeds. It all needs attacking.
Yep.
The primary problem is that ‘the algorithm’ amplifies all of our worst traits, to the extent that someone is not critical of what it is showing them.
Oh, and its also addictive.
Oh, and its also hugely profitable.
Its a giant ratking of feedback loops, and we really should just use Alexander’s solution to knots.
The underlying biases and bigotry in humanity has ways of addressing and alleviating it.
But apparently, nothing is strong enough to defeat convenient, targeted, personalized reinforcement of basically, your Jungian shadow.
And its very much relevant that all of this is done to sell advertisements and establish brands, which themselves basically just are also selling you validation, a personality, opinions, ‘facts’.
Its the fanciest Skinner Box that’s ever been designed.
good thing these men don’t exist outside of social media! whew, we dodged a big one there…
and i sure hope this school girl doesn’t go to any place regularly where she sees these teenage boys, oh wouldn’t that be unfortunate???
This isn’t realistic to tell a kid who uses social media, it’s like saying “Don’t play Xbox” or “Don’t watch new releases, only watch stuff that’s out on video already”
This isn’t a specific platform problem, it’s a social problem and needs social solutions. The solution we need the most involves a lot of tranquilizer darts and reeducation camps for about 28% of society broadly. That’s probably not going to be realistic, so the second best approach is the one that people are most adverse to trying, which is more active and involved parenting and reducing screen-time as a whole family.
I’m burning out seeing all this “social media on children” talk when it’s the adults’ relationship to social media that is causing the most widespread harm.
It is though. You think the spreading of this content is an accident? They could change the algorithm tomorrow and it would disappear, but they won’t because this division is useful to them.
I guess to elaborate on that point I will say that it’s not a specific platform problem, meaning all the naive Lemmykids here saying “move to fediverse and you won’t have problems anymore” are just playing shell-game with the problem, it’s going to be inherent to ANY platform that publishes content as long as there’s commercial incentive to grab people’s attention.
There’s some truth to that but the lack of algorithmic manipulation will make it easier to deal with. Plus you just have more options here on Lemmy to deal with it. Most instance operators have shown a willingness to restrict or even defederate from other instances when they are consistently shit to deal with.
Sure it is, you just don’t like the answer. Which is strange coming from someone who is presumably on Lemmy because they didn’t like the way reddit was conducting business and decided to leave. You moved to a competing service, it’s also an option to just not use those types of social media at all.
This thread has real orphan-crushing-machine vibes to it. Many just take for granted that of course kids have to use social media. They don’t and neither do you. It’s not the path of least resistance but why would you expect taking care of yourself to be easy in a society designed to do everything possible to beat you into submission and extract value from the lifeless husk that remains?
“But but Lemmy is social media and you participate here. Curious.”
No, not in the same way that Instagram and the rest are. Pseudo-anonymous forums are fundamentally different both in the way people interact with one another and in the types of content they tend to generate.
You seem to be reacting contentiously here, maybe you’re thinking I’m defending this social trend, I’m just pointing out that if you think banning, restricting or taking away social media from youth is an answer, you’re ignoring the massive wall of incentive pushed on people by capital forces to use the largest, most commercially active platforms, and we would have a long way to go socially before this isn’t the most attractive option for adults and children alike.
We have to address this issue with adults and kids alike drawn into this magic realm of dopamine scrolling and marketing. If you just say “stop using this thing you like” without an actual motivation behind it or a way to address the addictive nature of it, you won’t have any more success than if you put a pack of cigarettes on the kitchen counter of a smoker and say “Don’t you smoke these! It’s bad for you!” why are you setting yourself up for disappointment and anger at others?
Like, fucking duh, people know what’s bad for them while continuing to engage in bad behavior, if you can do it fine, great, we’re not talking about how easy it is for you personally to quit bad habits, we’re talking about a larger issue and have to treat populations like populations, not apply your own standard onto millions of people and expect them to handle any of this the same way. This is a social problem, not a moral failing, the moralizing of things that hurt us has been a scourge on actual helping with issues like eating, addiction, sex and literally everything else we try to overcome as a species.
I can’t really follow what your imagined argument is about but it’s kind of annoying and giving self-fart-huffing energy.
First of all, it doesn’t sound like these people actually like these platforms. The article in the OP is about a girl describing the pervasive abuse she experiences while using them. I don’t think it’s unreasonable to say in response “you’re clearly not enjoying this so just stop doing it”. Second, that is fundamentally sound advice to both this girl and the person smoking in your analogy. The fact that both might be hard habits to break doesn’t make the solution any less simple. Simple != easy.
No I’m not. I specifically called that out in my response. As I said, avoiding them as the solution may not be easy but it is simple in concept. Maintaining your health in all forms is hard to do but the steps to follow are not complex.
I have seen people in this thread and others use that argument as a way to sidestep the conversation at hand and pivot to something more juvenile and uninteresting. I added it to head off that line of thinking and prevent this from trending in a pointless direction. If you weren’t about to say something like that then feel free to ignore it but I wanted to make it clear I’m not interested in going down that path with you or anyone else reading the thread and considering replying.
You need to learn about addiction I think, you can ask anyone with an addiction if they enjoy their drug, and they will universally say no, they hate it, they wish they could have it out of their life, but their brains are holding them there. This is the “disease” part of addiction and why you can’t just tell someone to “stop doing the thing that’s hurting you” and that expectation that you can do that is harmful. We have studied and researched this in great detail.
This isn’t even an issue with seeing bad things on your feed, this is an issue with there being a “feed” at all, and your own connection to that feed and what you’re getting out of it, what it’s replacing in your life. You, your parents, your kids, everyone is hitting off this drug and everyone is addicted and hating it. It’s literally an addictive drug but we’re not treating it like one because it goes directly to the brain instead of using a chemical go-between to do the exact same thing as a drug. So whole families are doing this drug night and day and not pulling each other out because it’s not being recognized as a drug with dangers.
I am not sure you really know what you’re arguing, as evident by the continued tangents to imagined conversations so I’ll end it here, take some time to think about what it is exactly you’re making a case for or against.
You’re presenting additional nuance as if it disproves what I’m saying and it doesn’t. I understand that overcomimg any addiction is more difficult than saying “I’m going to stop this behavior”. However, any approach you decide to take is fundamentally just breaking down that ultimate goal into practical steps. I’ve repeatedly said I agree that there are usually more steps involved but you seem categorically opposed to agreeing that changing your behavior is the goal of any addiction treatment and that seems like a you problem more than a problem with anything that I’m saying.
If you just bothered reading instead of vomiting words, you’d learn the problem is persistent to real life, too. Asshole.
Of course it is. Do you think “misogyny exists in real life” is a novel idea to anyone old enough to know what that word means? You can’t opt out of being exposed to it in real life though so unless you’re proposing suicide as a solution I’m not sure how that’s related to what we’re discussing. Dumbass.
Do these kids just not have parents or adult guardians?
The vast majority probably do. For a parent or guardian to be useful in this sort of situation they need to take an active interest and forge a bond with their ward, and this day and age I don’t think that all who wish to do that have the ability to, and there’ll be a decent chunk of people who simply don’t care.
I’ve a parent who didn’t really give a fuck. I ended up hitting up lots of random dudes, making a bid for some kind of emotional connection, and no one in my personal vicinity knew, cared, or cared to know. It was a terrible idea, but my story is hardly unique, I know a handful of people with very similar stories.
Woman: I keep getting catcalled on the street and it’s disturbing my sense of safety.
OpenStars: stop going outside, easy.
Knowing that these sites are bad and the algorithm is part of that doesn’t make “just don’t use those sites” a viable option when most or all of someone’s peers are also using them. That is part of the social media companies’ strategy, to make switching costs so high no one leaves.
I agree with your sentiment here. Obviously, it’s possible to avoid using Instagram and TikTok, and it’s basically impossible to avoid using the street.
On the other hand, if you’re a teenage girl, it may be nearly impossible to not use these big corporate social media sites. A big part of being a teen is socializing with other teens. A big part of being an adolescent is learning to fit in with other adolescents without constant adult supervision. It’s one of the reason that home schooled kids have a rough time once they hit college, university or work. Many remain deeply strange for a long while after that.
If all the other teens in your social group are using Instagram and TikTok and you’re the one person who isn’t, you’re probably going to be ostracized. Liking and commenting on each-other’s social media posts is an important ritual of friendship at that age.
Sometimes parents ban or restrict social media usage by their kids. To a certain extent that can shield the kid, because it’s no longer their fault, and their friends might accept that. But, still, if the kid isn’t on social media, they’re probably not getting invited to in-person events, they don’t know what the important topics of conversation are, and so-on.
I mean, the nerve of saying “don’t use social media” on a social media site is pretty rich. And, don’t think a 15-year old is going to switch from TikTok to PeerTube or something. You might be able to get them to try it out, but you’re not easily going to migrate her entire friend group. The content is also not there. Plus, fediverse sites are inhabited by deeply strange people. I love you all, but I wouldn’t want you interacting with a 15 year old girl.
Well someone has to be first to switch platforms.
False equivalency. Going outside is not similar to using Instagram.
deleted by creator
Looks like you’ve mistakenly replied to the wrong comment. Which is ironic because… try reading? With your eyes?
Yep. Apologies.
Yeah, in general, my answer to “I don’t like using Internet site X” is “well, don’t use that site.”
There are a vast number of sites out there. Use one that you like. I don’t have a very high opinion of lemmygrad.ml, but I deal with that by not going there.
“But TikTok is a big site!”
Okay. I don’t use Instagram or TikTok. I can assure you that it’s very possible to not use them.
“But my friends use Website X!”
Well, making the probably-reasonable assumption that the relationship is symmetric and they also use it because you do, that situation isn’t going to change unless someone decides to use something else.
I think this type of argument is relatively flawed. Obviously I’m very happy to leave one platform for another, but most people dont like change and want to be where thier friends are. I think it’s reasonable to expect them to get over the former, but because of the former they would probably have to leave their friends behind. Thats obviously not viable for teenagers and it’s a rare few that are willing to do that into thier 20s as well.
Seeing as getting people to make a move is so hard I think forcing these platforms not to be so vile would be a good move. We should put the onus on the platforms, not the users.
deleted by creator
Indeed. Not saying that adult women don’t face sexist harassment and that that isn’t a problem to solve, but kids shouldn’t be on social media in the first place. Not to mention that social media is 90% bots anyway. The majority of the blame here falls on the parents.
Why should we police the victims instead of the perps???
Because it’s easier to monitor your children’s use of the internet than to remove dumb men, hateful men, and bots from the internet?
What if we stopped making it profitable to be a hateful guy on the internet by removing the monetization of drama and rage and stopped making contention a career?
Is it? One of those groups famously struggles to program video recorders and it ain’t the kids. Teenagers can probably defeat any firewall you set up, including by gaining access to someone else’s wifi or device. So let’s at least try to police the perps instead of their victims.
Just because one thing is more difficult to do than another doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be done.
Ban those men and their IP addresses off every social media possible.
It isn’t really that easy to monitor or control one’s children’s use of the internet. They’re smart and can be good at figuring out ways to get what they want; more so as they get older. It’s better to stay aware of what they’re likely exposed to, and talk to them and prepare them to recognize harmful things and avoid them.
NO ONE should be on social media in its current state.
Lemmy is social media, too.
The problem isn’t social media. The problem is profit-driven monopolies incentivized to promote high-emotion content. The problem, more generally, is monopolies that no one has hindered since 1974.
Plus capitalism is currently being run by a global pedophilia cabal who owns the media, so there’s that as well.
Oh come on, it’s not like the Trump-Epstein files describe meetings with Musk, oh wait… Zuck, oh no, he’s there too… hmmmm.