"I think the idea that you can somehow just invent like a progressive version of Andrew Tate or somebody and just throw them online, add water, and here's this new, suddenly globally famous alternative, that's not how online influence works. but the bigger issue for me is that the best antidote to an unserious online male role model, I'm using that term advisedly, is an in real life flesh and blood actual man."
"It's almost like they're watching hardcore porn. They slam the laptop with the same kind of moral fervor as if they caught them looking at some pretty kind of horrible porn. And that's the wrong response. It's a natural response, but it's the wrong response. Instead, you've gotta have curiosity. You've gotta figure out like, "Well, why are you interested in this?""
Online influence cannot be manufactured by creating a progressive version of a controversial figure. The most effective antidote to unserious online male role models is the presence of real-life, flesh-and-blood men: teachers, coaches, fathers, uncles, and neighbors who model what it means to be a man. Boys and young men tend to trust visible behavior more than verbal instruction. A lack of visible male role models creates a vacuum that online figures fill. Parents should avoid punitive moral panic when they discover troubling online consumption and instead approach with curiosity, asking why the young person is drawn to that content and engaging in open dialogue.
Read at Big Think
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]