Summary
The “femosphere,” a growing online space for women, mirrors the misogynistic “manosphere” with toxic ideologies, including anti-gender equality views and strategies to “conquer” men.
The term describes communities like Female Dating Strategy and “dark feminine” influencers who reject liberal feminism, advocating traditional gender roles as empowering.
“Femcel” influencers urge their followers to give up on gender equality and use men for financial gain – in the name of feminism.
Critics warn these spaces mix conservative and feminist ideas, creating “anti-feminist feminism” that appeals to those disillusioned with mainstream feminism.
While less linked to violence than the manosphere, researchers caution against its potential for radicalization and harm.
Our FEMCEL memes are cheeky and fun. Their femcel memes are tragic and cruel
Wait, femcels are a legit thing? I thought that Lemmy meme group was just a joke.
Pretty sure it’s mostly a trans group on here.
deleted by creator
That’s not what happened in this situation, but it is how we got those flat earther idiots. Femcel was a term used for years, even back on reddit, long before the API controversy and the exodus to Lemmy.
Indeed. Wouldn’t surprise me if it was inspired by the redpill sub
“Female Dating Strategy”, at least, has been around on Reddit for years and years.
I think that the femcel meme group here on Lemmy seem much happier to just post about being horny and I think pretty clearly don’t subscribe to this ideology at all.
“Femcel” influencers urge their followers to give up on gender equality and use men for financial gain
I’m kinda struggling with the math here.
You might be able to date several men simultaneously and get some free dinners and maybe trinkets and baubles, but it would seem difficult to get much more “financial gain” than that given that most men don’t have enough money to say, rent a posh apartment for their side dish.
The only way to really get “financial gain” is through marriage, which of course is a game that has been played since the dawn of time, but is not particularly engaging content in that you need to be married for several years to be able to separate and carry off a significant chunk of the marrital assets.
Surely, if you had the requisite appearance and guile for any of this the quickest and easiest pathway to financial gain would be taking money from incels on onlyfans.
On one hand? Woo equality I guess
On the other? This shit again? We gonna get a Femdrew Tate or some shit? Eesh.
One can’t dream that they will marry each other and finally leave the rest of the world alone?
There are some seriously scary trad wife content creators.
In the femosphere, as in the manosphere, there’s an overarching belief that life is about survival of the fittest, that men will always hurt women and that will never change, so strategies are needed to conquer the opposite gender.
I’m not a massive fan of the guy they nailed to a tree 2000 years ago for saying maybe people should be nice to each other once in a while, but the violent reaction to that suggestion no longer surprises me.
To be fair, he also suggested if they worshipped other gods, they’d be punished in hell for it. That’s why I’m not a massive fan. But I like the ‘be nice to people’ part.
Jesus or God did?
Two very different ideologies.
Jesus and God are part of a trinity, so that’s not really an “or” situation, unless you’re one of the minority of Nontrinitarian Christians. But I was thinking of John 3:18 in specific:
Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because they have not believed in the name of God’s one and only Son.
God really mellowed out after having a kid. Jesus even says he speaks for God. So, yeah, becomes an “or” situation. Just ask the Jews.
The rest, even if I knew enough theology it’s not worth debating with a random person on the internet.
Just ask the Jews what?
How much maintenance goes into our space lasers, obv.
We’ll the Torah does not include the new testament, all the Jesus bits, I think that’s probably what he’s getting at.
And I don’t think we need to pretend that the Bible has one consistent message all the way through anyway. There are dozens (or more) examples of pretty major contradictions in the bible. That clarifying question of “god or Jesus said that?” Is really not a crazy question.
Look we just need to move around small bits of green paper and everything will be fine.
And then the Vogons show up…
It must be Thursday. I could never get the hang of Thursdays.
Oh freddled gruntbuggly
Thy micturations are to me
As plurdled gabbleblotchits on a lurgid beeApologies for misspellings. That’s from memory.
It’s okay. The important thing is you counterpointed the realism of the underlying metaphor of whatever it was the poem was about.
I think you might have a future in poetry. That was deeply moving.
Really? I was tortured.
Shouldn’t have forgotten your towel
That guy is a made up story. No more, no less.
Edit: oh my, so much salt. Just keep downvoting me if it makes you cope better with the facts. It’s OK.
What an insufferable way to be. No one honestly cares either way
What an insufferable way to be.
Well, it’s more just not the appropriate place and kind of missed the point entirely.
No one honestly cares either way
Unfortunately this is very much not the case and that’s a big chunk of the problem. There’s groups out there that really really care (one way or another) and are more than happy to murder you and anyone else who doesn’t all while telling themselves what great people they are.
I’m sure you would’ve also been defending someone if they dropped into the thread just to remind us that Jesus is always watching us
No I wouldn’t have, it still would have been entirely off topic (and off topic for like 99% of the content on here). Just because one guy is being a moron doesn’t mean you have to act like a moron as well. I didn’t downvote your last comment because you weren’t entirely wrong, but this one definitely is. A simple “Not the point” to the original guy would have been a far more appropriate response.
People need to know that no one likes their shitty obnoxious atheism redirections. Be mad about it I guess.
And people need to know nobody likes their shitty obnoxious christian redirections. Be mad about it I guess.
Well that certainly isn’t true.
I’m referring to lemmings, most of whom wouldn’t care. Did Jesus exist? I think he probably did but I honestly don’t care because the impact would be identical either way. It will never be proven either way so dropping into threads just to redirect the conversation to atheism will always just be dumb and annoying
Baselessly saying “I think he did” is dumb and annoying and you definitely care. Ppl who say nobody cares…care more than anyone.
I didn’t bring up the irrelevant idiocy because I don’t care. Thanks for identifying yourself as this type though
You keep commenting like someone who cares would do, rather confusing.
Lol til “cope” = “being bored by a boring and irrelevant topic”
That’s not really my point.
Is there a humanosphere as well? Or would that just be plain ol’ Fediverse?
I think that’s just most people.
Yes, but what most people think is not represented properly on mainstream social media, unfortunately.
Lots wrong in this article…
“I used to be a feminist before I saw the effects of third wave feminism,” Batra said. “This has forced women into masculine roles where they are pursuing men.”
But that’s dumb, for a shit ton of reasons it works out best when women are the ones who first show interest rather than men hitting on anything that moves
I think if it were true that women made moves first sometimes, it would help all of society in ways we cannot even comprehend. It would not be a bad thing. But it’s still pretty rare in the places I’ve lived.
You need to move. Everywhere I’ve ever lived in the US and UK (until I got into my current monogamous relationship), many women would make the first move. And believe me, I’m not a handsome man.
Experiences vary dude. What I’m saying is on display in culture all over the world, and not just as my experience though.
She used to be a feminist until she realized that performative anti-feminism could be a nice little earner.
Do you mean there’s lots wrong in the movement or the actual article because that’s just a direct quote
I meant there are lots of things wrong in the article.
But that quote was dumb.
I realize that’s almost exactly word for word what I said the first time, but I can’t think of any easier way to say it.
It’s two distinct statements, I guess it would have been clearer to put:
But:
“Quote”
Instead of putting the “but” after the quote but that just seemed cumbersome and it flowed better keeping the text together
Ah gotcha, I misunderstood
I feel bad for all the dumb guys who get robbed blind by all these con artist grifters. Whether it’s someone like Andrew Tate or some OF model, they’re getting taken for a ride.
If there’s some young man reading this who has or is considering giving money to a manosphere grifter or some cam model, just know they don’t know you, they don’t care about you, they only want your money. You’re nothing but a mark to them. Get off the Internet, go to church, or go to school, or to the library, or do some volunteer work in your community. Meet a nice girl, in real life, treat her right, and cultivate a real, lasting relationship.
Yeah, don’t give your money to people give it to the church.
Can’t tell if you dropped the /s here or not…
/s is for cowards. If your sarcasm doesn’t come across then you’ve done it poorly. If you’re really wondering, yes they were bring very sarcastic.
We get it, you’re anti-inclusion.
If you can’t tell, better safe than sorry, get your wallet out. It could be your eternal soul on the line.
Ah, the original grifters for thousands of years.
Irrelevant to this post.
I think it’s relevant, but I admit I failed to acknowledge a critical part of this situation: the ways in which women are harmed by these circumstances. Obviously, there are the direct effects of the kinds of misogyny peddled by men like Tate, but there are also the less direct and mostly unintentional effects of the broader movement that helped create the conditions that made the manosphere possible.
Liberal feminism tried to liberate women, but unintentionally ended up confining them to a different kind of prison, one in which they would remain the person primarily responsible for keeping house and caring for children, but in which they would also be the sole financial provider, as well. Liberal feminism convinced women that it would be liberating for them to take on both traditional, household gender roles, but all it did was saddle women with an even greater burden.
Meanwhile, the movement to make women independent left a lot of men lonely, bitter, and resentful, ideal for manosphere grifters and parasocial cam models to exploit. It really was a scenario that ended up making essentially everyone worse off. It also absolved men of any of their previous responsibilities.
I think people need to abandon the idea that freedom comes from independence. Independence can be liberating, but it can also be isolating, and burdensome. A person who lives totally self sufficiently, alone in a cabin in the woods is independent, but also lonely and saddled with the entire burden of survival. Many hands make the burden light, fewer hands make it heavy.
Where liberalism fails time and time again is in its antisocial tendencies. Liberalism’s focus on the atomized individual so often disregards relationships of interdependence, or even sees them as antithetical or hostile to individual freedom. But this mentality ignores the inherently social nature of our species, as well as the absolute material necessity of social arrangements.
they would remain the person primarily responsible for keeping house and caring for children, but in which they would also be the sole financial provider, as well.
Huh? Sole? House-husbands? I don’t think I’ve ever met one. The norm across the vast majority of working- and professional-class people I’ve encountered is for both partners to be working or, if wealthy enough (the minority) for the woman to be the stay-at-home child-raiser.
I could definitely imagine many, if not most women being disgruntled at the current socio-economic situation (at least in the US) where they’re expected to both work at a paid job full-time (just like their spouse) while also doing a majority of the unpaid child-rearing work.
The norm across the vast majority of working- and professional-class people I’ve encountered is for both partners to be working
I’m sure that’s true, but I was thinking specifically about single, working mothers. You’re right, though, it’s not only single mothers, these realities affect women who are in relationships as well.
Liberal feminism convinced women that it would be liberating for them to take on both traditional, household gender roles, but all it did was saddle women with an even greater burden.
I disagree wholeheartedly with this sentiment with regard to early liberal feminism. Liberal feminism allowed women to vote, go to school, have a bank account without their
owner’shusband’s permission, get divorced, and gave women the freedom to choose what they want for their individual lives. If a woman wants to pursue a life full of traditional gender roles liberal feminism does not stop her from doing that.Liberal feminism succeeded, though not completely as there are still inequalities that exist, in liberating women within the context of a capitalist society. It roughly brought them up to the oppression level that of a man in a capitalist society. I’m not going to argue that it wasn’t a missed opportunity to bring upon a socialist revolution, it certainly was. And in hind sight was sorely needed as among other things it would have likely eliminated the chance of existence for in/femcels and the blight they bring upon the world.
Meanwhile, the movement to make women independent left a lot of men lonely, bitter, and resentful…
Honestly, that’s a problem for those men to deal with. It is also pretty obvious that a certain group of men would be bitter and resentful now that society makes it harder for them to chain down a woman.
I think people need to abandon the idea that freedom comes from independence.
This is an easy thing to say when the only people you’ve ever been dependent on were benevolent. What happens when you require support from someone that does not allow you to make you’re own decisions or respect your bodily autonomy? You also need to recognize that feminist women can, and still do, engage in loving mutually supportive relationships. The goal of liberal feminism was/is to allow women to be independent not to mandate that they are.
TBH I cannot really tell if you’re arguing that Liberal Feminism did not go far enough and should have been Socialist Feminism or that Liberal Feminism went too far by allowing a woman to live a life independent of a man.
You make a lot of really good points.
I should start out by saying that I wholeheartedly agree that it is a very good thing that women now have the right to vote, go to school, have a bank account, etc. I think those are unequivocally good things, and I am not advocating for a reactionary return to a time before liberal feminism did successfully liberate women in many very important ways. I should have expressed that, that was my oversight and I can certainly see how my comment made my position on that unclear.
Honestly, that’s a problem for those men to deal with
Well, that’s the thing, I don’t think it is just their problem, I think it’s our problem.
This is really my issue with liberalism, it’s inherently antisocial and hyper individualist, and thus fails to account for the ways in which we are interdependent. In fact, the power dynamics that you allude to in this statement…:
This is an easy thing to say when the only people you’ve ever been dependent on were benevolent.
…only exist because of liberalism. It was supposedly the right of husbands to have authority over, and, yes, even ownership of their wives and children, which is an antisocial concept. Some of those husbands were more benevolent than others, just as I’m sure some slave owners were more benevolent than others, but ultimately both power dynamics existed because of the supposed individual “rights” granted to those men by god or nature. Using liberalism to liberate women from institutions that liberalism helped create, isn’t ever going to work.
Like I mentioned before, to be a wholly independent person is going to live a brutally difficult life of isolation. There’s a reason we evolved to live in communities, because it aided our survival, both as individuals and as a species. We benefit from living in healthy, stable, high functioning communities, and so we should each be interested in the well being of everyone in our community, even the lonely, isolated, hapless young men. Not by returning to a time when they would be given ownership and authority over women, but by helping them understand that they are a part of a community, that they benefit from being a part of the community, but that being in the community comes with certain responsibilities and obligations.
I guess they have been empowered to choose how to live thwir lives as they please.
I’m here for it. Andrew Tate and his garbage made the bottom rung of men extremely visible and avoidable. Now the bottom rung of women will be emboldened to express their smooth brains too. They both can all fall in love and feed each other’s rage endorphin addiction.
I think most of the problems we have in society are from isolating and ignoring these communities.
Police think everyone is a crook. Doctors think everyone gets cancer. Mechanics think that every Nissan rogue will have its transmission fail at 100,000km.
It’s a perception bias. If I wanna change the mechanics mind, I need to get him out of the shop, into the real world. Let them drive around some rogues who’s transmissions DO work.
We basically provide the tools to sequester these communities and are surprised what crawls out of the petri dish.
The real problem is that our spiecies is nolonger subject to Darwinian evolution.
We still are, the pressures and traits for reproductive success are just unintuitive.
The gender war continues, and my nonbinary ass is sitting back and not getting involved.
“If there’s war between the sexes then there’ll be no people left…”
… Only left leaning people.
Ace here. I feel you. I may be male presenting but I have no interest in anything beyond platonic, and even then that’s a stretch.
I’ve got some ace friends, we all see the insanity in the world, then focus on playing a board game. Current favorite: Terraforming Mars
Great game! I just played it yesterday for the first time in at least a year and it’s still amazing.
First they came for the gendered minorities…
The best part about being in the middle is that both teams hate you! /s
I personally identify as a non-conforming man and the amount of hate I get from traditionalists on both sides is deeply disappointing.
Genuine question, what do you mean by non-conforming?
It means I’m not trans, and I wouldn’t go so far as to say I’m non-binary - but I don’t like or accept the gender norms of being a man. I refuse to conform to societal expectations about what a man should look like or how a man should act.
Interesting. I’d have to say I’m the same. I mean I’m very cis and very straight but I hate traditional gender roles and norms. I’m wearing women’s yoga pants as I type this.
Yeah, people feel threatened by any behavior that doesn’t conform to their norms. I practice apathy towards their attitudes, and keep an eye out for violence.
Ditto, given my ADHD, love of fantasy and other things I’ve always been an outsider. Their judgment is their problem - my partner loves me as I am and that’s not only the opinion I care about the most but also the only one that’s really relevant since I’ve no intention of forming either a platonic or romantic relationship with any hater.
The only real thing that hurts is when my expression hurts my loved ones. I recently had to go to a funeral in the south and I dressed normally for my flights and transit but eschewed a skirt and wore slacks to the ceremony.
Thankfully as a large man, while I’m a friendly giant, I am a giant and physical threats are extremely rare. But I do have trans friends who have faced real danger.
I’m ok with this on one condition…
Fucking hell I lost
But so have all of you.
The only winning move is not to play.
“It’s incredibly conservative, but it’s trying to reframe it as being this empowering strategy.”
That is the exact vibe I got about whatshername shooting the dog.
They had this some 20 years ago, only then it was called “The Rules”.
Thankfully this is a community that was left on reddit. Same with the manosphere.
There seems to be a lack of gender culture war bs on lemmy that you see on a lot of other platforms. It’s good that there is a pretty progressive consensus on gender here. Probably enforced by a legion of trans people, and to that I say thank you for your service.
The Blahaj mods are doing everything possible to fuck this up
Can you explain yourself? I haven’t seen much other than positive messages and commiserating over the future of the queer community from Blahaj.
I think they’re referring to the recent drama over that Drag troll which caused a bit of a ruckus over on Blahaj and elsewhere.
There literally is a femcel meme community on blahaj.zone.
And it is unironically the best meme com on lemmy
Thanks for sharing this. TIL that femcels exist.
