this post was submitted on 24 Aug 2025
180 points (93.3% liked)

No Stupid Questions

43095 readers
1455 users here now

No such thing. Ask away!

!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.

The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:

Rules (interactive)


Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.

All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.



Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.

Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.



Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.

Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.



Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.

That's it.



Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.

Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.



Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.

Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.

On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.

If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.



Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.

If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.

Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.



Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.



Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.

Let everyone have their own content.



Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here. This includes using AI responses and summaries.



Credits

Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!

The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

The more I hear people talk about it who aren't cis-het men, the more I hear criticism about the concept. But so far, I've only heard people say that it's stupid, that it's not a thing, that it's men's own fault etc. But I've yet to understand where that criticism comes from. I don't want to start a discussion on whether or not it's real or not. I just want to understand where the critics are coming from.

(page 3) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] surewhynotlem@lemmy.world 105 points 2 days ago (12 children)

Some is valid. Men aren't taught how to make and maintain emotionally open friendships, with men or women. It's seen as weak or weird to cry on front of your bros when you're sad. This leads to loneliness. This is real.

Some is not valid. Men claiming that they're not getting laid and it's women's fault is bullshit. Or that women have impossibly high standards and are gold diggers. It's nonsense.

The problem is that the "women hating incels" have coopted the term, and their garbage deserves to be mocked.

[–] FoxyFerengi@startrek.website 57 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (28 children)

The sheer number of men who suddenly have no support in their life because their relationship has ended, that soon struggle with suicidal thoughts should really point to the first thing you said. Men and women are socialized differently as children and this is one of the most common results when we reach adulthood. It will take an enormous shift in society and ingrained values to fix that

That second point, yeah, women don't need to get married to survive now. My grandmother couldn't have her own bank account when she was a young adult, and banks would have laughed her out of town if she wanted a mortgage. My parents got married young because that was still kind of expected, especially in rural America. I haven't dated in years, because it's frustrating, and I have been able to, and lucky enough, to buy a home on my own finances. That's not high standards, it's just that I didn't need to get hitched to have financial stability

load more comments (28 replies)
load more comments (11 replies)
[–] SoftestSapphic@lemmy.world 7 points 1 day ago (4 children)

There's basically a lot of modern "feminists" who have decided that two wrongs make a right.

It's good that women feel comfortable expressing themselves and trying to dismantle the patriarchy since it hurts us all. But many of them don't stop there and end up crossing the line into misandry and blind hatred of men.

This results in these "feminists" saying some pretty bigoted shit like "white men can't experience racism and sexism" as well as harassing men for seeking support.

This group mocks the male loneliness epidemic out of spite like other bigot groups.

[–] leftytighty@slrpnk.net 3 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (3 children)

The "white people" idea has some merit when you consider that whiteness has usually been an arbitrary group of races and cultures that define the dominant group in western society. The whole "Italians and Irish weren't once considered white" thing.

Obviously individuals can experience hardship and you might even argue that preferring non-white candidates or other affirmative action is harmful (I'm not going to, but you can).

My position on this is that everything is a patch on fundamental inequality and I'd rather just get to anarcho-communism so we don't have to solve 100 individual problems caused by historical racism and the capitalist machinery that lets that manifest as unjust distribution of wealth.

Regardless of age and gender and familial success in past generations we should all be equal.

(I'm not gonna argue that either)

[–] SoftestSapphic@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago

Yeah, I agree. Wealth redistribution would fix most social and economic problems overnight.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] TubularTittyFrog@lemmy.world 8 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (4 children)

It's socially acceptable to hate and be biased against men. Especially white men, and especially working-class white men.

It's not so socially acceptable to hate on wealthy white men. The point is you have to become a wealthy white guy, or get bent.

You will also notice the discussion is frame that any man who isn't independently wealthy is a failure at life and undeserving of friendship/love. The advice is always 'get rich and get fit' as if that is the solution to your loneliness. It isn't.

FWIW I never had issue with romance/friends most of my life. But I have had them the past 5 or so years. I'm a middle-class white guy and my social interactions are falling apart. Esp when people find out I don't fit the archetype of 'rich white guy'. I've had so many people be friendly to me and then they find out I don't own a home/drive expensive car/etc and they immediately stop interacting with me, because all they want from me is money. I've also been accuse of various forms of bigotry more in the past few years when previously I never dealt with that ever in my life.

I think it's mostly just the ill-affects of social media and people's warped expectations. I know a lot of people living good lives... men and women both, but they always depressed and angry because they aren't millionaires. And frankly I find that attitude alienating and it also makes me want to isolate, since so much of what new people I meet talk about is their anger at not being wealthy. And if you ever question this or suggest maybe life isn't so bad? Well you're clearly a bigoted proto Nazi...

It wasn't like this 5-10 years ago. I feel like I got my first taste of 'men are awful' social media fueled BS in the 2010s. Now it feels like that's just he default belief of most people. It's really hard for me to find a lady romantic or unromantic, who just wants to constantly shit on men generally. And to find men who also don't shit on other men. And everyone where i live is in this weird scramble to distance themselves from whiteness and masculinity.

For me, I am feeling less and less lonely the more I am alone. Mostly because my perspective isn't the same as most people's. I am very happy and comfortable and appreciative and that doesn't vibe in a world full of very bitter people who think if you don't subscribe to theri flavor of bitterness, you're a traitor. I recently bailed on some of my volunteer/community orgs because they have been consumed by judgemental nasty people and they were making me depressed being around people who just want to be miserable and pissy all the time and blame white men for their own personal failings. My favorite is the gender-skeptical types working in low-wage jobs and being angry at 'white men' for preventing them from having stable jobs... but the truth is these people are totally unreliable and would be horrible at professional work. They are their own worst enemy.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] unknownuserunknownlocation@kbin.earth 71 points 2 days ago (1 children)

When people have created a narrative that "white x y z men" are responsible for all the evil in the world (I'm exagerating, but you get my drift), it creates a very difficult situation when those people are facing some serious difficulties. The intellectually lazy thing to do in that case is to brush it off or minimize it, like in the ways you've described. And unfortunately, that's the route those same people will take, since identity politics are intellectually lazy (and lacking compassion, but that's another story).

The unfortunate part of it is that the right has taken advantage of that wide open flank, which is one main reasons we're in this current clusterfuck.

[–] sunzu2@thebrainbin.org 54 points 2 days ago (5 children)

The comment section here speaks for itself.

These idiots are still doing the culture war when we should be fighting the class war.

Blaming a bunch of 20s something losers for "patriarchy" is peak useful idiot behaviour.

[–] pdxfed@lemmy.world 19 points 2 days ago (1 children)

That flank. Sigh. I remember the turn after Occupy. It went from economics to being cool to just broadly bash men. I specifically remember outspoken, angry women at marches and protests and was like wait, where did the economics go? Like 60% of Republicans wanted wealth reform during occupy. It unfortunately coincided with really great--though apparently transitory--improvements in lgbtq rights. It was so weird to me that self-labeling "feminists" were suddenly talking like it was a zero sum game; for women to rise and improve and build and grow, men had to be put down. That is of course the language of someone seeking power, a charlatan, but it became quite normal. Even questioning the broad criticism of men wasn't appropriate in "liberal" press or circles for a good decade. The whole "yeah but bashing men isn't right/fair or clumsy” finally started working into the Atlantic, NYT and other large publications in 2023 but the damage had been done.

It of course drove lots of men right to the tall radio, podcasters--and those were young adults then--i can't imagine what it was like growing up since then as a young person with the normalization of some of this stuff.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] hoshikarakitaridia@lemmy.world 39 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Cis man here.

It's an issue. It comes in lots of different colors and flavors but it all stems from social issues.

There's lots of reasons, some men were never taught about social relationships, men tend to generally be less interested in social interaction thus giving them less experience, some men are ostracized when talking about their social struggles, and these are on top of preexisting environmental factors and preexisting mental conditions.

At this point it's important to say: it's not a contest for genders. Trans people have it hard, nb people have it hard women have it hard. It's just that this is one of the rare times men's struggles are not addressed properly.

I can tell you I probably have about 50 men in my life that I ko and wo are nice but if I had to talk to a man about my struggles socially, there are 2 men.

Now couple this with the fact 90% of men I had deeper conversations with told me they are struggling with depression and some of them having suicidal ideations, it is fair to assume we have a problem.

For me, the depression is always exacerbated by social isolation. It makes sense - not getting some feedback from other people can get you into crazy headspaces and there are thinking patterms that literally make you hurt yourself just to make it stop.

There's another aspect: we are social creatures and as soon as you don't get enough "social exposure" it's harder to learn social cues and "get the vibe", and other people notice. So the more you isolate, the harder preceding social interaction become and the harder it is, which in turn incentivizes isolating. A vicious cycle.

Now not everyone has these issues and I would never say that it's the most important issue in our current society but every time I hear suicide statistics by gender it really puts into perspective that we should get to know those people who we have failed.

One thing I also wanna address is the idea that "men are never taught how to socialize", because I think it implies a lot of things. First, I'm sure a lot of men are not, but a good number of men are. I was for example. It didn't help, but that was never the issue for me. Second, it implies men want to be taught. I spoke to a group of 2 men and 2 women with mental disabilities about if they ever considered complete social isolation. The men said yes and the women said no. I think this is really significant and can give insight into why this is affecting men more than other genders. I would infer from this that women always see the benefit in social interaction, and men pursue social interactions rather as a means to an end. This might be a stretch but this supported by other observations of friends and family.

This topic is really important and I hope it gets talked about more - for the benefit of everyone who wants to see people become happier. The men affected by loneliness, as well as the people who deal with them.

[–] squaresinger@lemmy.world 9 points 1 day ago* (last edited 12 minutes ago) (1 children)

men tend to generally be less interested in social interaction

Is that the case, because they are men, or because they are afraid?

Piggybacking on this comment: it's incredibly rare for men to get approached, it's incredibly common for women to get approached.

Both of these situations have downsides, but right now we are talking about men, so let's ignore the downsides for women right now.

If you are the one who has to approach somebody if you want to start up any kind of relationship (from casual acquaintance to friend, to romantic relationship), that means you will be on the receiving end of rejection, by definition. If you are in the "approaching" role, and you'd reject somebody, you just don't approach them. So by definition, it's quite rare when being approached that you are rejected by the person who approached you.

So while women have to reject a lot of approaches they don't want, men get rejected quite often. A socially inept woman is a wallflower, a socially inept man is a creep.

If you have been rejected too often (and maybe too harshly), this might easily turn into a sour grapes situation ("I can't do social interaction, so I don't want social interaction") due to fear of rejection.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] iii@mander.xyz 48 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

It has very large implications on society, many of which in contradiction with established progressive policy.

So it's easier to ridicule and/or downplay, than to apply compassion, and change course.

[–] Mighty@lemmy.world 33 points 2 days ago (6 children)

I feel like that's a easy statement for people to upvote. But I don't really see an answer to the question. What is the course? Change what? And what established progressive policy?

Not trying to antagonise you at all. Just trying to dig deeper

[–] iii@mander.xyz 11 points 2 days ago* (last edited 17 hours ago)

But I don't really see an answer to the question

That question being:

I just want to understand where the critics are coming from.

To repeat my answer: It comes from a lack of empathy, as it's easier to downplay a problem than to take it seriously.

Whenever a statistic isn't fair towards a group, be it income, housing, ... corrective measures are being implemented. Unless that group is men, such as the homelessness, suicide, incarceration, lower education, ... Then it's seen as "normal" due to "toxic men".

[–] DebatableRaccoon@lemmy.ca 28 points 2 days ago (4 children)

From the feminist side, there's a lack of empathy towards men because "they did it to themselves" and from most other camps it's "men are supposed to be tough, stop being a pussy".

[–] Aatube@kbin.melroy.org 30 points 2 days ago (4 children)

though a sizable amount of feminists instead characterize men as also victims of the patriarchy, a system they didn’t choose to be part of

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] celeste@kbin.earth 29 points 2 days ago (3 children)

Most of the criticism of it I've seen is about how the concept's been warped to mean women aren't putting out enough for specific men. Other people will also point out that modern society is isolating in general. People who aren't men who are experiencing loneliness might have some skepticism about the idea it's a man specific issue.

There's also some wariness because topics about issues men face can translate for some men into a violent rage towards women. As seen with the involuntarily celibate movement.

People of all types can take genuine grievances and find a target to take it out on. Like income inequality translating to hatred of immigrants. And violence towards them. When you're the mistaken target of those grievances, it can be simplest to want to get away from the conversation unless the person starting it is clear they aren't targeting you.

Those are my guesses as to why people are skeptical.

https://www.npr.org/transcripts/1263527043 Some discussion in here about the topic, but also criticisms of the topic.

https://trinitonian.com/2025/02/14/unpacking-the-myth-of-the-male-loneliness-epidemic/ This opinion article criticizes how influencers drive the conversation, to its detriment.

https://www.fridaythings.com/recent-posts/male-lonliness-crisis-incel-men-friendship-mental-health This person brings up the idea that women are wary of the idea because it seems like they'll be expected to individually solve it regardless of their own wants and needs.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›