Support for violence to resist feminism was highest among adolescent boys (28%), followed closely by adolescent girls (21%).
Perhaps most alarming: roughly 40% of boys aged 13 to 17 agreed that women lie about domestic and sexual violence.
These results raise crucial questions going forward. We don’t yet know how these views have changed over time, whether they are on the rise and what the links are between violent extremism and the negative treatment of women.
I genuinely question if this is some sort of trend and not just how it has always been.
Cuz 40% of teenage boys being idiots seems kind of timeless. Definitely lines up with the numbers we’re seeing in adult men.
Right from the start I will state I know the plural of anecdote isn’t evidence. But I have a friend who has given up teaching year 11/12 athletic development and now teaches grade 7 pe. Primary reason is the mysoginistic shit she had to put up with from the boys who felt their gender made them better at anything sports related than her. She would compete in triathlon in her spare time with all the training & commitment that entails, and yet the podgy, vaping 18yo man children would tell jokes with each other about how she should go back to the kitchen “where she belongs”.
When we were discussing this amongst a group that included 3 other female teachers every one of them agreed they are seeing more of that sort of crap every year. My guess would be all the Manosphere brainrot is having an effect. Couple that with kids around that age feeling the urge to be as edgy as possible…
I have noticed once or twice that my sons have started talking that way due to a combination of online and peer influence and I have stepped in to disabuse them of the notion that their chromosomes make them special or superior. But it’s the world they live in and I pity the kids without a parent who is keeping any eye on them.
Thank you for being the kind of parent the world should have more of. Kids are dumb but curious by nature, and need a guiding hand to direct them away from misinformation, propaganda, and other toxic things they have no way to discern from truth before they have the experience to tell them apart.
Parent by choice not by accident so its incumbent on me to do my best, although I would never claim to be perfect, or even close.
You’re right. I guess I was just following the same train of thought as the whole, “There were not less autistics before the internet.” logic.
I only have male friends who teach but they all agree that critical thinking and cognitive function in general have plummeted. And we’re in Canada!
Oh well maybe we should shove them in front of a screen and have them use AI until the scores improve. /s
Seriously when they do the analysis in 100 years we are going to cop so much negativity about our misguided attempts to make education a success by making it more profitable for the corporations that are forever sinking their claws deeper and deeper into our childrens future.
We know that LLMs have a negative impact on learning, mental health and the environment but we keep getting presented the Emperors wrinkled backside and then being told to marvel at it.
Anyway I tend to go on rants if I don’t reign myself in, so I’m going to stop there.
No, I just question the methodology and the message they’re trying to send
It would have been really great if they linked a detailed breakdown of the information gathered in the article. Swear to god every article that says “we did a study” never show the fucking study. Like come on let me see the data.
deleted by creator
Normally Conversation articles link to the study in question, but this one hasn’t been published (yet). Not sure why the editor(s) didn’t just wait for that first. I agree that it’s lacking detail/context and feels a bit incendiary without it.
I guarantee you this study gets absolutely shredded in review.
If anyone can link it to me when it’s public I will post my own review of it. Wouldn’t be the first time I get garbage retracted.
It’s probably paywalled eh.
If it is I wouldn’t be able to find out because it’s not linked to in the article .
I don’t follow
Not sure if this is what they’re referring but am also curious how this survey was conducted.
For example the question “do you believe women lie about DV/SV”. As someone who had a parent lie about related matters, I could answer yes, but is that what the question is actually asking? It seems to be asking if women, in general, lie about them. Obviously, no they don’t, but you can see how a question especially when posed to teenagers may lead to responses easily sensationalised by a news outlet. The inverse of this questions seems to be “do you believe women never lie about DV/SV?”
There’s a reason self reported surveys are a nightmares for academics to use for meaningful data. Worth pointing the rest of the article has a lot of valid and concerning material that isn’t somehow magically undone by the articles research methods.
Regardless thanks for the solid explanation.