And, articles like this are my evidence that it's just not me doing a "get off my lawn".

made by John Pavlovitz on his Substack. "Parents, if you don't want your sons to be lonely, stop raising them to be misogynist assholes." Amen to that!

UNSUBSCRIBE to AMAZON, FACEBOOK, INSTAGRAM, and all the other crap that does continues to support all the evil that is slowly but surely destroying the World, all societies, not only the USA, are vulnerable to these disgusting behaviour and the more it happens the more people will think its normal. Many blame the parents but some of the parents are very good in trying hard to teach their kids good manners, empathy and good behaviour but social media destroys all that, some parents don't even know what it is their kids are looking at, and yes, they should but kids have ways of doing it away from home.

UNSUBSCRIBE, UNSUBSCRIBE, UNSUBSCRIBE, UNSUBSCRIBE, UNSUBSCRIBE! Nothing will be done until people take action and leave them, THEY CANNOT EXISTS WITHOUT US, so UNSUBSCRIBE, UNSUBSCRIBE, UNSUBSCRIBE.

I have done my part, I don't belong to any of that crap, Amazon is next, I just need to get some things done, and then I will not be a member until they stop supporting the evil bastards in the WH.

UNSUBSCRIBE, UNSUBSCRIBE, UNSUBSCRIBE, UNSUBSCRIBE, do it, it is easy and the most patriotic thing we can do today. We have to hit them where it hurts more, their pockets, their bottom lines.

I don't have any social media accounts.
I get all the interaction I need here at DU & a musician's forum.

or people would have already done it. Why should the companies continue to be allowed to proceed like this unregulated?

doesn't stop people from lining Zuckerberg's pockets by continuing to give him clicks and views.

Why WOULD they regulate? We aren't doing anything to require it.

Maybe it happens, but I've never seen it. Probably this 15-yr-old hasn't seen any boys standing up for her. Why would she ever trust any of her male peers?

To an article that contains some good points, imho:

https://www.eait.uq.edu.au/blog/2023/06/case-for-saying-women#:~:text=The%20words%20'female'%20and%20',while%20'male'%20is%20not.

IDK if using 'Male' in this context is derogatory or not. If so, then tough boogers to you. How about engaging with the subject of my comment or don't you think men have a responsibility here?

social media is a place where hate speech thrives. Toxic masculinity isn't something that you see much among people who share Democratic values of equality, opportunity and respect for others. Yes, of course those responsible for the bullying behavior should take responsibility, but saying that does little to help the quoted opening post.

a lot of the reason for the proliferation of toxic bro/girl-hating rhetoric.

going on social media.

It's no different than the old days. If there was a neighborhood where bad things happened, we simply didn't go to that neighborhood.

I have no social media accounts.
Closest I come to that is DU & a similar forum for musicians.
I don't even go to chemistry forums anymore. Once I retired, I quit. And, there were no toxic influencers there. Still have no use for them.

... who blame women and girls for all their failures.

Many years ago my mom worked for a scientific journal in a field that was still dominated by men. Occasionally they'd publish a paper where the first author was a woman and some of the letters the journal received in return were vile, unpublishable, and far beyond anything that might be dismissed as academic rivalry.

The modern internet has given misogynistic losers a platform that they never had before.

and there are few to no controls.

In this case the bad neighborhood is the world….yet the men and boys are free to roam. Carry on!

you're saying she was asking for it. Got it.

someone would come in and say something like that

That was my immediate take. She should be able to go on social media. It's the boys and men who cause the problem.

Thanks for posting this.

The people making bad choices are the predator little bratty boys. Jeez.

yes, quite

You have to understand that kids don't have that mentality. There's no way a 15 year old is quitting Instagram. I'm far from 15, but as a Gen Xer, I can relate.

it's totally unrealistic to tell the girls they should get off social media. And it's a selfish point of view, actually. "I do the right thing--you don't" which is a version of "I Got Mine." Dripping with Superiority. Social media is where teens and young adults live. To be cut off from contacts with friends is cruel, especially after these companies have made vast amounts of money off of them and hooked them all into it.

as a means of cutting the instances of rape in Israel.

She replied along line of: Why limit women if men are the ones raping. Maybe men should have a curfew.

Asking a sexual assualt victim what she was wearing.

adequate moderation.

People are equating this to women in the past being blamed if something happened when they were out alone. It's not quite the same. This is more like don't go into the biker bar on your own. You have to go outside to shop and work and survive. There's no reason to go into the biker bar.

But if it is that important to the fifteen year olds, and it really is a terrible hardship to avoid instagram and twitter and facebook, the fifteen year olds and their parents any anyone else who cares about them should be boycotting and loudly demanding better moderation that makes the place safe for the fifteen year olds.

It seems that you’ve ignored the two alternative options the author suggested: 1. A ban on under 16 use of social media. 2. Society show its disapproval of this online behavior. Why go straight to asking a victimized demographic stay away from social spaces that are a large part of social activity? Is it because of distaste for social media? It is not like a biker bar in that a biker bar is not the only public place someone can go have a drink and socialize. The point is also that social media is so ubiquitous that the attitudes shared on it bleed through to society and to boys that are vulnerable to this hateful rhetoric. I think the argument the writer is putting forth is to consider a ban on social media use for children under a certain age so they won’t get exposed and acclimated to express misogyny. A 15yo has taken the time to write a piece about something that has a major impact on her and other girls’ and women’s lives and I feel the least we can do is not be dismissive of her concerns. Bikers will be bikers you know.

that I think a massive protest against this is one of the only ways this will change, which I think is the same as "society shows its disapproval." And I would love to see a ban under 16.

We may be talking past each other. Yes, these societal changes would be great. I would love to see them, and I do think they're the answer.

Problem is, there doesn't appear to be any will by Zuckerberg to institute either of these changes, and there doesn't seem to be any will for the public to fight for them. (A fight that would probably need to include a boycott by the girls and women affected, and those who value them.)

So maybe those things will happen in the future, though I don't see evidence of change any time soon.

So my concern, the concern central to my arguments, is that child today. She is being abused. And to protect children from being abused, keeping them off instagram, in my mind, is not blaming the victim. And frankly, if it is blaming the victim, I don't care. I wouldn't allow my loved one to be subjected to that kind of soul-killing abuse if there was anything I could do to stop it.

Last edited Mon Feb 23, 2026, 09:10 PM - Edit history (1)

I agree we are probably talking past each other to a degree, because I agree with the boycott idea. I also think it’s ultimately dismissive of her piece to suggest and applaud the “just don’t go there” solutions. She took the time, thought, and energy to write to the Guardian not for personal advice, but to advocate for change. You said “good point” to Greg’s “Stop It's no different than the old days. If there was a neighborhood where bad things happened, we simply didn't go to that neighborhood.” Even discounting the privilege his analogy assumes (that one doesn’t work or live in the “bad” neighborhood), what if it’s not just a neighborhood? It’s not really a good point because going to that “neighborhood” in this case is a central part of social interaction. It’s only made worse by the command “stop” being the whole of the title. Stop thinking about this issue because the solution is easy as modifying your social access to avoid bad actors full stop? I’m sure she has thought of that, so it’s really not offering a solution as much as admonishing her for not taking this “easy” solution rather than drawing our attention to this problem.
Your full response was more nuanced, but is dismissive of the role social media plays in social acceptance and furthermore dismissive of the content of the article. It’s dismissive because it didn’t engage the content of the article but rather just offered a solution regardless of its contents. One need not even assume either of you have read beyond the headline. The writer’s suggestion of banning children on social media is not outlandish as it has come about in Australia and is being considered in a slew of European countries, including the UK where the writer is presumably from. It’s certainly not certain how effective any of this might be, but that’s an argument to be had.

I told you I support that, though I don't think it will happen here anytime soon. ( https://www.yahoo.com/news/articles/more-countries-banning-teens-social-190905127.html)

I won't engage with your opinion about other people's posts. And no, I didn't engage every aspect of the article. One doesn't always. I was answering the multiple people who were saying that taking this child off instagram was "blaming the victim."

My whole point about the other post is mute, because it was not you that issued the response I credited to you. I was curious about the cognitive dissonance I found in your posts, but regrettably not curious enough to get who posted what straight. I think I confused your reply in #21 with someone else in #5. While I think it is good personal advice to advise the child to leave instagram, I also don’t believe it is a real solution or anything like not going to a certain neighborhood or biker bar. The writer stated that they aren’t safe from the behavior offline either. “Victim blaming” might be a little strong, but “ If your phone cut your hand each time you picked it up, you'd return it. You'd change phones” at least has the implication that she is either to blind or naive to have thought of this solution herself. It also assumes there are adequate alternatives socially. As a parent and a person who hates social media, I agree with your solution as a personal one. I disagree with it as support for other’s dismissive responses to the article.
Probably, most of all, because I mostly agree with with you about things, I apologize again for being mischaracterizing some of your responses. Thank you for engaging me.

other idiot boys like them, to read their stupidity.

That girl needs to get out of Instagram, Facebook and all the other crap that is bothering her, why continue to look through that? Real friends will continue to be her friends whether she is part of those toxic websites, or not, and if they stop being her friends? then they were never friends, but the jackasses boys will not have her to bully, and the will weaken them in the end.

... through their penis."

Telling progressives and Democrats to turn off the news so they won’t have to hear TSF.

because they watch the news.

One similarity I see is that telling girls they can’t use social media misplaces the source of the problem and may enable the problem to continue and worsen. The problem is the bad behavior by other users. Similarly if Dems and Progressives are told to ignore the news, the problem continues or worsens, because the observation of bad stuff is not the problem.

I don't. I don't see massive protests by parents demanding that we make this space safe for women and children, I don't see people simply walking away in their millions from this abusive consumer product. So I don't see this girl's plight improving any time soon unless she turns it off.

And let's be clear. This is a consumer product. And it is abusive! If your phone cut your hand each time you picked it up, you'd return it. You'd change phones. You wouldn't keep picking it up. You wouldn't stand for it. We should teach our girls to do the same.

I replied to a post with a very mild comment criticizing sexist behavior. I was immediately swarmed with attacks (probably many of which were bots). To my surprise, blocking every one of them greatly reduced the frequency of such comments. And the algorithm connected me over time with many posters who shared my views on related topics and who posted informative stuff (much like DU). I still have to block occasionally, but the function definitely works on Threads and enables the user to enjoy the benefits with very little annoyance from misogynists.

I just hate to think what happens to a girl's brain with this stuff washing over her every day.

and read/post on Threads. I use Instagram only to look at posts by my favorite tennis players. I don’t post there and don’t think I’ve ever gotten a nasty message from anyone there.

Zuckerberg (partially) owns both I think, so some people object on those grounds.

Rachel Maddow likes BlueSky a lot.

Before that, saloons banned them outright, or had separate "ladies entrances" and private rooms

Maybe we should bring that back for social media?

WTF?

with a wide brush much?

Huh?

I’m not sure why you felt “some” was wide as “some” in logic just means at least one member and colloquially just means at least a small number.

she could just stop going on Instagram since she has determined that it is causing problems in her life. She, and she alone, has the power to change her life.

The MISOGYNISTS on the platform are.

I'm sure you don't realize you can inadvertently come across as supporting institutional misogyny

If this were a person of color describing pervasive racist attacks on social media, would you advise they leave?

See Post #14.

And if, in your example of racist attacks, the person receiving the racist attacks was a child - was MY child - I would definitely forbid the use of instagram.

Social media is the arena for a lot of our culture's ills. I don't think we should expect our children to be the ones to effectively fight and change those ills. Especially when we adults have no idea how to fight and change them.

OF COURSE when it's your child, you move to protect

I was addressing the misogynist nature of the platform itself. Women and minorities have a long history of protest, occupation, arrests, refusing to move on buses, etc to force legal actions to change those public spaces. But we don't expect kids to do the same.

I have no idea

I don't go near it. I find it filthy in every way. But people just don't seem to be able to give it up or mount an effective protest to make it non-abusive to women.

It's always a balance between protecting your child and helping them build freedom and independence, I think.

The social benefits of communicating with a large group of peers, more or less anonymously, are many. The dangers, too, are many.

I'm not a parent of a teenager or of anyone, actually. If I were, I'd probably consider having my own anonymous account on platforms my children used. I'd also know my children's screen names. But, I wouldn't interfere with their communications. Instead, I'd watch the conversations of others on similar threads to the ones your children might be part of.

Then, I'd do what I was talking about earlier - call out dangerous posters who treat others with disrespect or misogynistic posts. Not in any thread my own child was participating in - I'd avoid the appearance of shadowing her. However, if I found that someone with a screen name there was harassing my child, I might keep an eye on that screen name in other conversations and speak up as an anonymous peer.

A delicate balance, again. But life's full of delicate balances, it seems.

Now, I don't use instagram. Not at all. Nor any of the other media that is primarily used by adolescents. I don't relate to that age group. If I had children in that category, however, I would be interested and would see what the media were like and keep an eye on it, if not directly on my child.

I'm sure what I'm saying will be unsatisfactory in some way, but that's what I'd do if I were in a position to do that.

to change men's abusive behavior toward women and there's no reason to expect that will do so now.

And this ain't delicate in any way. It's an assault on these children's psyches.

Beats doing nothing.

who should wean themselves off social media and sit alone on their pedestals polishing their haloes?

Take action. Call a community meeting. Brainstorm resistance. Group therapy.

Better than just paying for expensive psychotherapy for the daughter alone. Or later when she seeks it out for herself when she becomes an abused and fearful adult. This is systemic child abuse and will have a major effect on vulnerable girls for their entire lives. They will grow up feeling alternating anger and hopelessness. It's not healthy for boys either. It is a grave wrong to teach children to put up with abuse from society--to be taught at a young age that they are inferior because of their skin color, gender, sexual orientation, economic condition, etc. This has been hurting all of us for a long time. Passivity now is not an option. It just sends the old message in a new and even more brutal way--the message that girls just have to put up with abuse and boys rule. Have to work to bring about change in this as in everything else.

Easy for Moms to look the other way and coo to the girls that they should "just ignore." Easy for Dads to pretend it doesn't exist.

Everybody Stop Ignoring-- is the bottom line.

And until that does happen, for the reasons you describe about these girls having lifelong problems that result from this, I'd keep that fifteen year old - my fifteen year old and your fifteen year old, and any others who we value -off it.

I guess adults can only start by listening ( ex. to the girl in this original link) and determining what THEY think they can do to start changing that environment and make it safer for kids.

This is an arena that's WAY beyond the capacity of "parental controls" etc to handle

not even then. But we have to credibly make the demand.

And we can't forget this is not a lifeline. This is a consumable product that we can take or leave.

telling women what to do.

(and the fact that 13 "people" recced this garbage shows just how big this problem is)

from happening to her?

Here's the thing Greg, it's not just this girl. You aren't going to find very many girls or women who have not encountered misogynistic comments on social media. It's a huge problem and it's growing worse. One girl logging off won't stop it. It will keep happening to the next girl, and the next one

In noting that "It's the same as it always was" you confirm that...Yeah, THAT is the problem --
- Misogyny...Same ugly old misogyny, now just delivered through a new medium..The question is Why?..Why do men, generation after generation, hate women so much?

Instead of telling girls to simply find a better way to hide from male hate, maybe you guys should start addressing the hate itself -- Its roots, its destructiveness, and its elimination.

... are the very definition of WEAKNESS. They are, in fact, superior to NO living thing. Well, maybe slime mold, but only just barely.

Suppose social media platforms required them to use their REAL names, and not some made-up handle. They might be a little more circumspect in their comments, if they dared to make any at all.

These creatures with Y chromosomes they have not earned deserve to be exposed for the snake shit they really are.

Is GiqueCee your real name?

... but, as I mentioned in another response, Facebook does require your real name. And I would imagine that any cretins that did dox a woman could be just as easily tracked down and prosecuted for such behavior.
I'm just thinking out loud, I guess, about to how to combat these malicious turds, but it may be like trying to turn the tide with a teaspoon; there'll always be lowlifes like Fuentes, Tate, and Kirk who are irredeemable skid marks, and whose rhetoric validates the mental defectives that follow them. They make me ashamed to be a man. Make that an OLD man! I'm just a year and change shy of 80, but I never tire of learning, especially learning how to be a better person.
I'm certain that the anonymity afforded by fake names emboldens and enables such wastes of skin, but maybe if that mask was ripped away, such cowards would think twice. But that assumes that they are capable of actually thinking at all.

... but in a previous DU incarnation, when I posted political cartoons and occasional rant videos, I did use my real name, and would have no objection to doing so again. Facebook does require one's real name.

Good luck

Thank you, milestogo.

The movie about him "The Social Network" showed how his platform was used for guys to "rate" a girl's looks. He was apparently dumped by a girlfriend and that started his revenge against women.

He was the nerd's nerd, if that makes sense. Creating "FACEbook" was his way of trying to elevate himself within the manosphere, of which he hadn't yet entered. Then all the "bros" would pat him on the back and acknowledge his presence in the world. Until then he was pretty much invisible to everyone.

"On October 28, 2003, 19-year-old Zuckerberg, a Harvard University sophomore, is dumped by his girlfriend, Erica Albright. Returning to his dorm, Zuckerberg writes an insulting post about her on his LiveJournal blog. Zuckerberg creates a campus website called Facemash by hacking and downloading photos of female students from house face books, then allowing site visitors to rate their attractiveness. After traffic to the site crashes parts of Harvard's computer network, Zuckerberg is given six months of academic probation."

The generosity of women never ceases to amaze me.

Thanks for the info.

Telling girls to simply “log off” or “don’t go there” ignores the reality that social media is woven into social life and that the hostility follows us into spaces we didn’t choose. The real issue isn’t our presence online I think, but rather a much broader failure to challenge the misogyny that is allowed to thrive there.

The solution is not to avoid social media. The solution is for everyone to reject sexist and misogynistic nonsense verbally as soon as it appears.

Men can do that, too. And should.

Not always true, but too often.

Anyone can help change that, though. Simply refute misogynistic nonsense, bluntly and decisively. Whenever and wherever you encounter it.

And ... seriously?

No. This is not the solution.

On sites where screen names are used, I usually have no idea about whom I'm engaging in conversation. So, I'm not really curious enough to enquire. I deliberately have a screen name that identifies me as a man. Most people, however do not do that, and I understand why.

So, I just do whatever it is that I do, all the time trying to avoid such characterizations. Do I succeed? I don't know.