"2025 is the year of the boy" Article recognizes Men's struggles, yet still manages to splice in some harmful finger pointing and deflection

63daddy · 2025-12-30T21:07:55+00:00

One doesn’t need to read beyond the subtitle to see the purpose of the article is portray males negatively and as problematic.

I’ll be the first to admit some male influencers aren’t the most positive, but let’s compare that to the horrific messages many feminists spew, but we rarely see such articles calling out feminist negative influence.

Rough_Maintenance306 · 2025-12-31T10:53:47+00:00

Pro tip. The Guardian has an open bias. They’ve got the likes of Jessica Vallenti writing for them. Enough said

bulimic_squid · 2025-12-31T09:51:56+00:00

I saw "The Guardian" and that was enough

Capital-Box164 · 2025-12-31T13:32:04+00:00

Oh look! it's the guardian. There's no shit that the men working there hit themselves with hammers everyday

batalibnyaqub · 2025-12-31T14:52:23+00:00

The Guardian is leftist and feminist publication. Their mental priority is always going to be how things affect women and girls. The female-primary, gynocentric worldview and imperative is the default. They don't want men to be healthy, happy or successful on their own terms. It's all about serving, suffering for, prioritising, and being better men (for the sake of women and the female social order).

brainquantum · 2025-12-31T13:08:04+00:00

This is quite clear on the direction taken by the issues linking radical feminist thought, the notion of equality as officially presented in the mainstream media, and the problems its proponents are currently facing.

Fundamentally, they sold feminism as an approach aimed exclusively at establishing equality/parity between men and women in all areas (private/professional/sports, etc.). Of course, when considering the more radical feminist currents, I think it's important to take into account that in their approaches they operate within a framework where the power dynamics between men (oppressors) and women (oppressed) are a zero-sum game. Consequently, to achieve equality (which, in their logic, amounts to empowering women in professional and private circles of influence), it is necessary to create a situation, a system, where the oppressor class, men, is disadvantaged and ultimately loses its footing, both in terms of career prospects and education, etc.

Therefore, the difficulties men encounter in these areas, including their physical, emotional, and psychological health, are not an accident but the result of a deliberate strategy of destruction (or deconstruction), at least in the most outspoken feminist circles.

Now, lately, more and more statistics are emerging that show the catastrophic effects on men's success of numerous social reforms that not only exclusively favor women but often discriminate more and more explicitly against men. The negative impact on men's well-being, boys' academic performance, and young men's career and educational prospects is quite clear if we refer to the published indicators. Therefore, all of this becomes difficult to hide, minimize, or ignore, and consequently, the mainstream message that seeks to portray feminism as an exclusively egalitarian movement is increasingly blocked.

What can be done? Obviously, they cannot admit that feminism, in its present form, has nothing to do with a question of pure equality, a 50/50 fair play; that would destroy everything for them. On the other hand, they cannot bring themselves to make the necessary decisions to remedy the state of affairs for men.

I mean, for example, subsidizing organizations that would address the problems encountered by men (health support, help with mental health issues, reducing the number of suicide attempts, etc.). This is for two reasons. The first reason is that it would also automatically amount to acknowledging the very negative effects of the reforms, and the second reason is that, since they conceptualize everything in terms of gender struggles taking the form of a zero-sum game, many feminist associations oppose the recognition of these problems because, according to them, it would mean redirecting resources from feminist associations to associations that support men. That is to say, supporting the oppressors at the expense of the oppressed, which is unthinkable.

So yes, there remains the last option, which consists of "intelligently" blaming men for their own problems. By "intelligently," I am referring to all those concepts linked to the so-called "toxic masculinity" and all those discourses blaming men for how bad they are and for just about every societal problem. These discourses have flooded and permeated all debates on gender issues for a very long time now.

So, they quietly managed to introduce and validate the idea that men, as a gender, are "sick," without ever actually using the word "sick." Sick in the sense of being supposedly ill-equipped to live within the new set of social constraints and the emerging societal reality imposed to them. So it should be up to men to make the effort to supposedly change and adapt.

What made men "sick" then? Well, following this path, these terrible influencers who spread this "toxic masculinity" virus and rendered men unfit are to be blamed. We agree that between a Jordan Peterson and someone like Andrew Tate, there is a very wide range of individuals or groups, more or less influential, who discuss or appropriate issues related to masculinity. But interestingly, they are all often labeled "misogynistic" and propagators of harmful content. The exception exists for some MRA guys who write a lot about apologizing because being a men, affirming their devotion to feminism and finally "softly" blaming men for their own issues anyway...

So the cycle is complete... men are in a deplorable state solely because of their "toxic" nature, supposedly exacerbated by harmful influencers. The avalanche of negative statistics concerning their situation is directly linked to the growing influence of these influencers, and the major societal changes imposed by ideologues/pro-feminist ultimately have nothing to do with it.

Title	"2025 is the year of the boy" Article recognizes Men's struggles, yet still manages to splice in some harmful finger pointing and deflection
Author	Dependent-Match4726
Upvotes	101
Comments	6
Date	December 30, 2025 4:05 PM UTC (6 months ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/1pzlwda/2025_is_the_year_of_the_boy_article_recognizes/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/2025-is-the-year-of-the-boy-article-recognizes.1570057 https://theredarchive.com/post/1570057

Comments