I'm pretty much forced to hang out with the people who accept me which tends to be the left, but the (general) left also expresses hostility towards males. I just want to be treated like a human being and other males to get treated like human beings, not only does misandry hurt me, it hurts me even more seeing other males go through it.

"A Pennsylvania woman who falsely accused an innocent man of trying to rape and kidnap her has been sentenced to less than two years in prison.

Anjela Borisova Urumova, 20, filed a false police report against 41-year-old Daniel Pierson. The claims landed Pierson in jail for a month on a $1million bail and he was charged with multiple felonies." (Daily Mail)

Friedrich Nietzsche cautioned, “Beware that, when fighting monsters, you yourself do not become a monster... for when you gaze long into the abyss, the abyss gazes also into you.” This rings true when looking at modern progressive movements, particularly fourth-wave feminism and "woke" culture. Their goals, equity, justice, safety, sound noble, but the tactics, propaganda, fear-mongering, and silencing dissent, often target men as the problem. Some of these echo Nazi authoritarianism, prompting a question: In battling societal "monsters," have men been cast as the new villains, pushed too far by methods mirroring the ones they claim to oppose?

This isn’t about equating ideologies, Nazism’s genocidal horror is unmatched, but about noting parallels in control and persuasion, especially when ideology merges with institutional power to enforce compliance, hitting men hard.

Propaganda: Simplified Narratives, Men in the Crosshairs

Movements simplify messy truths into emotional rallying cries. The "bear vs. man" debate started as a safety discussion but became "ALL women prefer the bear," framing men as more dangerous than wild animals. It’s propaganda, akin to Nazi slogans like "Ein Volk, ein Reich, ein Führer," stripping nuance to unite and vilify, with men as the target.

This isn’t random noise. Corporate giants like Disney, Nike, and Google bake it into ads and policies, like diversity quotas that can edge men out. Democrats in the U.S., Labour in the UK, the Greens in Germany push it via laws and campaigns, think #MeToo rhetoric, gender equity rules. Nazis had Goebbels controlling media. Today, it’s corporate PR, political platforms, NGOs, and algorithms, a coalition amplifying a narrative that paints men as the enemy. Less dictatorial than Hitler’s crew, maybe, but slick at crafting a fake consensus against men.

Fear-Mongering: Men as the Eternal Threat

Fear drives it, and men bear the brunt. Fourth-wave feminism flags "systemic patriarchy," "toxic masculinity," "rape culture" as ever-present dangers. Stats like "1 in 4 women face assault" blare from NGOs, universities, government PSAs, funded by taxes or corporate dollars. Biden’s team pushes "systemic violence" policies, Europe funds "gender-based harm" drives. It’s not just activists, it’s a system keeping men as the threat, fueling an "men vs. them" divide.

Nazis made Jews the "enemy" through schools, laws, society. For men, it’s not extermination, but the fear engine’s similar, institutional power hyping a vague foe to keep tension high. The targets differ, patriarchy’s abstract, not a group to gas, but the parallel’s in how power sustains a siege mindset against men.

Cancel Culture: Men Silenced by the System

Cancel culture’s no mob, it’s systemic, and men feel it. Gina Carano’s fired by Disney over a tweet, Kathleen Stock’s career tanks for gender questions. HR and universities enforce this, not just outrage, but rules. Germany’s NetzDG pressures platforms to censor "hate speech," often anything men say that bucks the line.

Nazis used Gestapo, blacklists, burnings. Today, it’s social and job loss for men who speak, less violent, but the principle’s there, crush dissent. Both demand purity, no room for men’s nuance. The parallel’s not in brutality, but in power silencing men who stray.

The Establishment’s Role: Men Sidelined

This isn’t fringe, it’s mainstream. Amazon’s DEI, EU gender policies, Hollywood’s feminist reboots, it’s corporate and political core. Nazis had one Führer, total control. Now, it’s CEOs, lawmakers, admins, a spread-out network, but they align, pushing a narrative that marginalizes men with eerie efficiency.

Gazing Back from the Abyss

Nazism sought supremacy, genocide. Progressives aim for equity, change. One’s deadly, the other’s corporate, pervasive, not soaked in blood, but deep in culture, schools, work. Yet, when ideology grabs power, it turns dark. Propaganda, fear, silencing, they choke open talk, especially for men.

Nietzsche asks: In staring at "patriarchy," have progressives reflected the control they hate, casting men as monsters? Have men been dragged too far down a path where dissent’s heresy, conformity’s forced by a web of power? Seeing this isn’t defending old evils, it’s checking if the fight’s pulling men, and everyone, into a new abyss.

Everything Is About Sex, Except Sex, Sex Is About Power

Oscar Wilde quipped, “Everything in the world is about sex, except sex, sex is about power.” Fourth-wave feminism’s crusade proves it, flipping sex into a battlefield where power’s the prize, and men are losing. The push to "dismantle patriarchy" often means stripping men of influence, jobs, voice, framing masculinity itself as a sin. Marriage rates drop, fatherhood’s mocked, men’s spaces vanish, society frays at the seams. It’s not equality, it’s a power grab, repressing men to keep them down. Nazis crushed groups to dominate, this trend dismantles men’s roles to reshape the world, same game, different stakes. Men aren’t just in the abyss, they’re being held there, powerless.

This article talks about how we can understand the real motivations behind behaviors, including the manipulative power plays men often deal with in relationships with women.

https://www.mg-counseling.com/blog/secrets-of-understanding-motivations-counseling-men-texas

have no idea why but something i posted will not take and i was not blocked because i posted something for a little while that took and it was not deleted because it was not up long enough and i only post this because i worked insanely hard on it and i think it is very important for male rights and it can be found on my for lack of a better word blog on this site or click my name bassically i gues sis what i intend to say...

this should be about male rights and how we can better sersue a better future and create a better identity for men and male children and also for transgender people...

not only that it goes into various different issues and especially circumcision also known as child genital mutilation and the wave of transphobia sweeping over the country in recentb years and how both conservativism and feminism has hurt men and society and what we should do as a result of this...

this also talks about the male identity and how it can be imporoved and does not get as detailed as i liked but as i talked about above it is a lot about that also if anybody is interested.

I am from Ethiopia and i was hearing an interview about Ethiopias war and famine for the last 7 years and a professor who was interviewed said that for the last 7 years only women and children suffered from war and famine. He said men can hunt and eat while women can’t, imagine for the last 7 years of war in Ethiopia most men and boy get conscripted and they are last in food and water supply, men and boys are also most likely than women and girls to get killed by armed personnel. while all the professor said only women and children suffered, how to counter this kinds of misinformations? I already replied to his article on google website but they will like delete it because it says “ you comment is awaiting moderation”. How can any man say this against his own gender? Especially educated professor? How to counter it?

I use to think that many of the women that attack men are radical feminists however I now think it’s just plain old hatred of men.

Women (especially young women) have internalised men are bad. These women have been free to do as they please to retaliate against men for this ‘badness’ because quite simply the environment allows it and encourages it (e.g. courts being lenient with women… There’s many cases of this recently).

The media industry, government, entertainment industry and pretty much all domains at this point have been infected whereby they tolerate the abuse of men and even enable it.

So next time you think you’re dealing with a radical feminist that is concerned with doing away with the patriarchy and seek equality then maybe double check and ask yourself ‘is this just plain old male hatred’?…

Do you guys think the same at this point? It doesn’t strike me as purposeful aggression for an aim (e.g. suffragette terrorist activities for greater equality)… It just comes across as hatred from extremely entitled women because they truly do believe men are bad from all the internalised messaging. Thoughts?

Recently I've seen a huge rise of women saying how they should all start refusing to give birth to males and have an abortion whenever the child is male.

At first I thought it was only a few people saying this, but after doing more searching through communities like the 4b, it's become clear that a large number of women think this way.

"We need to eliminate the key to our struggles--males"

"Don't. Birth. Boys."

"We CANNOT have sons"

"Abort all male babies"

"Why would I want to raise my own oppressor"

These are some of the exact things they have said.

To me this seems like blatant and obvious misandry, they're not even trying to hide it, and there's nothing that can justify it at all.

They believe that outright eliminating males from society is the solution to all their problems. I am deeply sickened by this and feel like this is a topic that seriously needs to be addressed.

So I went on a date and at the end I asked if I could kiss her.

While kissing her I ran my hands over her back, ass and boobs. I can see now why this is going too far for some but for my sex life it was a standard thing. When one would go too far the other would break away and tell them to stop that. Like a girl might bite me and I’ll tell her to stop or maybe there’s too much tongue and she’ll tell me to ease up.

I get a text from this girl telling me she didn’t consent to the groping and doesn’t want to talk to me.

I honestly feel awful and went on reddit elsewhere only to be told I’m a creep. And I was a creep, I did something this girl didn’t like and I should’ve asked first.

But now I‘ve got this major anxiety about consent.

I thought I was doing it right, but it seems there’s a lot more on my shoulders than I realised. I use to depend on my partners telling me both yes and no. And I’m worried that I’ll be too in the moment or misread something as pleasure and forget to ask for consent.

Then there’s past experiences where women have told me it was a turn off when I asked as opposed to just using body language, or other times where I’ve done something on instinct and she’s later told me she was glad I picked up on that. That crap just mixes in and confuses me.

We all make slip ups but I didn’t think sexual assault was one of them. How much of consent is my responsibility and how do I do better?

I've seen a wave of posts and comments lately framing Adolescence as a straightforward critique of toxic masculinity and the corrupting influence of figures like Andrew Tate. While I understand where that interpretation comes from, I think it's also dangerously reductive and honestly, a missed opportunity for a much deeper conversation.

Yes, Jamie’s behavior is disturbing. Yes, themes of entitlement, rejection, and control are present. But if we only look at this story through the lens of patriarchal violence or misogyny, we risk ignoring the broader, more complex crisis that many young men are currently living through.

The reality is that Adolescence is not just about “bad boys” who feel entitled to girls. It’s about a generation of boys growing up in emotional isolation, without male role models compatible with today's society, without emotional literacy, and without any cultural script for vulnerability, failure, or even basic connection and often bullied by other teens. It’s about boys who spend their youth online, absorbing warped ideas about sex and identity, while feeling completely invisible in real life.

Many of the young men who fall into incel or redpill ideology aren't just angry or hateful. They’re lost. And significantly, there's a disproportionately high presence of neurodivergent individuals in those communities: boys and young white men with autism, ADHD, social anxiety, or depression. These are often people who struggle with social interaction, who’ve been rejected repeatedly, and who feel they have no place in a society that increasingly communicates in emotional codes they can't decode.

Reducing all of this to Andrew Tate is absurd. Men — especially young men — are not a monolith. In fact, men are arguably the most demographically diverse group on the planet, across race, class, neurotype, and life experience. Treating them as if they’re all equally "privileged" or inherently dangerous just because they're male is both lazy and counterproductive.

Yes, we need to call out misogyny (and we should do the same towards misandry). But we also need to recognize that if you offer young men nothing but shame and blame, don’t be surprised if some of them end up clinging to the first ideology that offers them a sense of belonging — even if it's toxic.

So maybe Adolescence isn’t just a story about male violence. Maybe it's also a story about what happens when society — including progressive movements like feminism — fails to address male pain with anything more than contempt or silence.

I’m not here to defend what Jamie represents in the show. But I am here to say that if all we take away from this show is “toxic masculinity is bad,” then we’re not just missing the point — we’re avoiding the hard questions entirely.

Has anyone noticed how differently it’s viewed between men and women?

For instance if a man has trouble ejaculating or getting hard it’s always the same half cocked (pun intended) stuff.

‘Oh it’s death grip, you wank too hard’

I mean, it’s a now a medical syndrome for gripping your penis. I mean the other response could be ‘work on your kegels love there’s no traction on the tyres’

‘Porn addiction’

I mean, I guess but it seems like a cop out of an answer.

‘You’re masturbating too much’

Been doing it since I was 12, there’s no way I could possibly masturbate too much. I’ve reached super saiyan levels of mastubatory perfection.

However a woman has issues it’s never

‘Try putting down that 8,000v vibrating cock machine’

If I said I’d got a Swedish super suck 9,000 with tingling haemorrhoid simulator I’d be sick.

No medical syndrome for having something rattling your clitoris at breakneck speed…

Or

‘Maybe you just need to be more romantic to him outside the bedroom, maybe put the kids to bed, make sure the dishes are done. Give him time to relax’

‘It’s no wonder he can’t ejaculate when you berate him constantly, be kind, give him cuddles, sit down and watch Mythbusters with him’

‘Give his fart box a tickle’

I dunno, men have got to feel guilty about wanking now.

Wank syndrome.

First, let me say that this issue probably varies a lot by location. It's most likely only a first world problem, and my guess is, only for some parts of the first world at that. So, if anyone wants to say this is, or is not, true where you live, it would be informative to say what region you live in. I'm in the Northeastern USA myself. Also, yes, this is not the biggest issue in the world, not claiming that it is. But it is annoying, and a silly thing to happen.

Anyway, I've started to notice that I no longer see men shirtless in public much at all. Obviously I'm excluding the obvious exception of beaches and locker rooms. (Might be other exceptions I'm not thinking of right now). I mean I can't even recall the last time I saw a male jogger shirtless, and that is weird. Construction workers used to go shirtless on hot days. I'm in my mid 60s, so I can definitely recall when men went shirtless if it was convenient. I jog. A long time ago, if it was warm at all, I used to jog shirtless. No more. I live in an apartment. Not too long ago I did step outside without my shirt on. Only went about 10 feet away from my door, and somebody went WOO WOO. I mean WTF!

No, there are no laws stopping you. It just seems to be understood that you do not do that. WHEN DID THIS HAPPEN??? Is this some a$$hat attempt to be sure men don't have any privileges that women do not have? Is this just more insane political correctness? And for those who say if women cannot do it, then men should not be able to do it, like feminists do, I have a question. If there is no difference between the amount of sexuality between the male and female chests, as feminist maintain, then how come a man who grabs a woman's breast without her consent gets charged with SEXUAL assault? I mean if in this matter, men's and women's chest are equal, shouldn't he just be charged with assault? Nobody considers a woman grabbing a man's breast to be sexual assault! So, yes, there is a difference, no matter what feminist say. What do you guys think?

Before you ask, no I wasn't falsely accused but I loved in a constant fear of that happening, I love the country i was born and I'm leaving but currently it's very complicated because there are a lot of innocent in jail for this kind of accusations; and no, I'm not searching a country where man have privileges and machismis common, I'm not even looking for a country where I can out in jail someone for injury, i just want to know I won't lose my job or house for a false accusation.

I was planning moving to Canada (still planned because I have family there but want to have a backup plan) but I saw that men from there have same problems.

If there isn't any country like that it's okay, just wanted to be sure.

https://ag.ny.gov/press-release/2025/attorney-general-james-announces-guilty-plea-former-nypd-officer-criminally

Attorney General James Announces Guilty Plea of Former NYPD Officer for Criminally Negligent Homicide

Bernadine Ramtahal-Thomas Was Off-Duty and Driving at High Speeds on the Palisades Interstate Parkway After Consuming Alcohol When She Struck a Tree, Causing Her Husband’s Death

February 3, 2025

NEW YORK – New York Attorney General Letitia James today announced the guilty plea of former New York City Police Department (NYPD) Officer Bernadine Thomas, 36, of Maybrook, Orange County for causing her husband’s death while driving at speeds of up to 109 MPH with a blood alcohol content of .10 on the Palisades Interstate Parkway in Rockland County on February 26, 2023. Thomas pleaded guilty today to Criminally Negligent Homicide before County Court Judge Kevin Russo in Rockland County.

Thomas will remain out on bail until sentencing on May 7, 2025. For pleading guilty to the charge of Criminally Negligent Homicide, she will serve five years’ probation. Thomas has waived her right to appeal.

In the early morning hours of February 26, 2023, Thomas, who was off-duty at the time, was driving northbound with her husband in the passenger seat on the Palisades Interstate Parkway when their car went off the road and struck a tree. Mr. Thomas was declared dead at the scene.

Pursuant to New York State Executive Law Section 70-b, OSI assesses every incident reported to it where a police officer or a peace officer, including a corrections officer, may have caused the death of a person by an act or omission. Under the law, the officer may be on-duty or off-duty, and the decedent may be armed or unarmed. Also, the decedent may or may not be in custody or incarcerated. If OSI’s assessment indicates an officer may have caused the death, OSI proceeds to conduct a full investigation of the incident.

2007: Queens: Man Sentenced for Crash That Killed Wife - 4 to 12 year prison sentence

2012: NY man gets prison for DWI deaths of son, woman - 7 to 21 year prison sentence

2015: Designated Driver Faces Prison for DWI; 3 Passengers Hurt - 1.5 to 4.5 years

2017: Amherst Man Sentenced For Deadly DWI Crash - 2 to 6 years

2021: LI Man Receives Prison Sentence After DWI Crash Kills Passenger: DA - 2.75 to 8.25 year prison sentence

2023: Manhattan Man Sentenced to 7 Years in Prison for DWI Crash that Paralyzed Passenger - 7 years prison

2024: Queens Man Sentenced to Up to 7 ½ Years in Prison for Killing Passenger in Drunk Driving Crash - 2.5 to 7.5 years

In Mexico in these days there is the debate about the approval of the so called Ley Alina (Alina Law), a law according to which women (and only women) will not be punishable if they claim self-defense, neither for homicide nor for excess of self defense. Self-defense will be assumed as the default if they declare it, and questioning it will be considered "second revictimization" and therefore much more difficult to get. So both false self defense unidirectional male victims and bidirectional/mutual violence victims will get a double standard treatment. I quote from the law which is already valid in Baja California:

“Excess in self-defense shall not be considered when the woman is the victim of physical, sexual or femicidal violence, or when she has been in danger of being so, and at the time of the act she can prove that she has been in a state of fear or terror or is in a state of confusion that affects her ability to determine the appropriate limit of her response or the rationality of the means employed.”

And:

"Legitimate self-defense shall also be presumed, unless proven otherwise, in the event that the woman is a victim of physical, sexual or femicidal violence, or in the event that she was in danger of being a victim and repels the aggression. In these cases, the State Attorney General's Office or the jurisdictional body, as the case may be, must act with a gender perspective to determine the legitimacy of the legitimate defense. The same criterion will be applied when a third person acts in her defense."

For more informations:

https://youtu.be/VCatyILa9nU?feature=shared

This is also in accord with the Bangkok Rules. The Bangkok Rules, or formally, "The United Nations Rules for the Treatment of Women Prisoners and Non-custodial Measures for Women Offenders", say:

"Alternative ways of managing women who commit offences, such as diversionary measures and pretrial and sentencing alternatives, shall be implemented wherever appropriate and possible"

"When sentencing women offenders, courts shall have the power to consider mitigating factors such as lack of criminal history and relative non‑severity and nature of the criminal conduct, in the light of women’s caretaking responsibilities and typical backgrounds."

And:

"Appropriate resources shall be made available to devise suitable alternatives for women offenders in order to combine non‑custodial measures with interventions to address the most common problems leading to women’s contact with the criminal justice system."

I'm a female. One of the very few that aren't raging misandrists. And no, I'm not a pick me girl. I have self respect.

Recently, there was a case of a famous singer in a band I liked being accused of a sex crime. I emphasize on accused. Not guilty or innocent yet, still on trial. Knowing what his personality seemed like on camera, he was pretty shy and quiet. Not saying that everyone is the same off camera, but that's just how he comes off.

So I'm neutral on this. He doesn't strike me as the type to do something like that, but it's not impossible, so I just don't have a strong opinion.

But the entire fandom has basically turned on this guy with no proof of what he's done. Making jokes of him singing in jail, blurring his face in their videos humiliatingly, burning his photocards, making versions of their songs without him (while he was literally the best vocalist, lol), and commenting under every old video of his with "he was such a monster and we couldn't see it."

But what I've learnt from so many similar accusation cases in the South Korean entertainment industry, there's a good majority of the time that the famous person accused is innocent.

People were even making baseless tumors that the victim was a minor, or that he was grooming them for years (?).

I talked to my friend about it yesterday, saying that she should stop hating on him, because he's not guilty or innocent yet, but she hit me with the, "always believe the victim," mentality.

Girls be lying. We be lying sometimes. Especially if it's a celebrity. Idk how we haven't figured this out by now.

Here's a youtube short about how fearful women are because of the feminist demonization of men as predators. I've seen this myself. When I go to the store in the daytime all of the women are alone. When I go to the store at night, I literally cannot recall the last time I saw a woman who did not have a man with her. And remember, men are far more often victims of violence than women are. Two to 3 times more likely to be murdered for example. And the CDC says men are just as likely to be raped as women are. I know very few men who have never been beaten up. Here's the youtube short. EDIT: Read the comments under that video. If you read them chronologically, you see a mix of comments questioning the fear as not realistic and some say it is. But when you order it the top comments first, then you ONLY see comments expressing sympathy for this female fear. The default attitude of most people is to express sympathy for anything women say, justified or not.

https://youtube.com/shorts/FtTxMUNmJjg?si=DdWL5126OvHQ-8K4

"The NHS has been there for us for over 76 years, but as set out in Lord Darzi’s independent report, it is in ‘critical condition’. To make sure it’s here for the next 76 years, doing all it can to support the health of everyone, we need your help.

We launched Change NHS in October 2024 to hear your views, experiences, and ideas, which will shape a new 10 Year Health Plan for England. Since then, we’ve had over 175,000 contributions from people.

You’ve shared your pride in the NHS and your support for its founding principles, but also the hard truths about your experiences. Too often, you can’t get a GP appointment, an ambulance, or treatment when you need it, and staff don’t have the resources they need to provide the care they want to give to patients."

This woman is a monster and the video shows the tactics female abusers often use. Imagine how this would be treated if the roles had been reversed.

Since the Labour Party won the last elections in the UK, it's vital to discuss the party's planned policies. One of them is articulated in the manifesto https://labour.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/Labour-MANIFESTO-UK-2024.pdf:

We will do more to stop violence that happens to women and girls. For example, we will have special teams of people in every police force to support women and girls.

Bear in mind that it happens in a country where over 70% of all murder victims are MALE. Nevertheless, men and boys are not mentioned as included in any policies aimed at reducing violence against them (a far, far greater social problem than VAWG). The male gender is only included in more 'universal' plans that bring up the subject of people's violence against other people, with no mention of how equal men's and women's risk of getting assualted is:

There is too much serious violence. And many people don't feel safe in their own communities.

No, many MEN don't feel safe in their own communities. Just read the study https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/crimeandjustice/articles/homicideinenglandandwales/yearendingmarch2021:

In the 1960s, the proportion of homicide victims was fairly evenly split between males and females but have since showed different trends. The number of female victims has tended to fluctuate between 180 and 250 a year from the 1960s, although there are occasional years where the number has been higher than 250. In contrast, the number of male victims increased, reaching an average of around 550 a year between year ending March 2001 and year ending March 2005 

1. These shows are designed to frame young male singleness as dangerous. Not flawed. Not misunderstood. Dangerous.

The formula is predictable:

• A quiet, socially awkward boy

• He’s not sexually active, maybe rejected

• He spirals into obsession, then violence

• Always directed at a girl or symbolic representation of female safety

They don’t just present a cautionary tale—they create an archetype of fear: “The sexually frustrated, single, isolated male is a ticking time bomb.”

That is character assassination against young masculinity.

⸻

2. This narrative is pure fantasy—it doesn’t reflect real statistical risk.

Let’s be honest:

• A teenage boy’s biggest threat is not himself—it’s the system he lives in

• Most teen boys are more likely to be:

  • Suicidal from loneliness

  • Bullied for being awkward

  • Shamed for expressing attraction

  • Falsely accused, or misrepresented, with no recourse

But instead of addressing this, these shows build the myth that: “He’s a danger to others just because he’s not sexually fulfilled.”

That’s not storytelling. That’s gaslighting.

⸻

3. These shows fuel shame around masculinity, not solutions.

The irony? They claim “toxic masculinity” is the problem—but they reinforce the very shame that pushes boys into alienation.

• They shame male libido

• They shame male stoicism

• They shame male independence

• They shame male rejection

Then they act shocked when a boy feels lost or angry.

They don’t care about helping boys—they care about making sure the audience fears them.

⸻

4. Feminist media refuses to show women doing harm—even when it’s more common.

Let’s ask honestly:

• Where are the movies about false accusations ruining young men’s lives?

• Where are the stories of women using family court as a weapon?

• Where are the characters who manipulate, emasculate, cheat, lie, or destroy men psychologically?

Nowhere.

Because the agenda isn’t to reflect both sides—it’s to sanitize female wrongdoing and demonize male presence.

It’s not about who causes more harm—it’s about who they want to be seen as “safe” in the narrative. And that’s always the woman.

⸻

5. These shows do more to pressure boys than “toxic masculinity” ever did.

Here’s the psychological trap they create:

• A teenage boy watches

• The “villain” is a loner who’s misunderstood and single

• The “victim” is a pretty, popular girl

• The message is clear: “If you’re like him, you’re one step away from being a school shooter.”

That’s not entertainment. That’s emotional warfare.

It pressures boys into shame and confusion for just existing in their natural state—and then blames them for how they respond.

⸻

6. These are not just movies—they are psychological operations.

They condition young viewers (especially girls) to: • See men as unstable

• Avoid introverted or awkward boys

• Assume male desire is dangerous

• Associate male singleness with violence

And they condition boys to:

• Be ashamed of attraction

• Feel defective for being single

• Fear rejection because it means villainy

• Suppress their masculine energy or else be labeled toxic

This is not fiction anymore—it’s social programming.

⸻

Netflix and similar platforms aren’t just showing stories. They’re creating a worldview: that men—especially single, young, masculine men—are dangerous by design, and women are always in the right, always victims, always good.

This isn’t balance. This isn’t honesty. This is cultural gaslighting of the highest order.

And the most ironic part? They claim to fight “male toxicity” while injecting the very poison that breaks boys in the first