Following the recent Louis Theroux documentary on the manosphere, I sat down again with George from The Tin Men to talk about why so many boys and young men are being pulled towards harmful messages online, and what often gets missed underneath that conversation.

We talk about fatherlessness, the lack of positive male role models, how boys are spoken about in schools and society, men’s mental health, domestic abuse against men, and why gender issues are so often framed like a zero-sum game.

This is a conversation about what boys are growing up around, what men are carrying, and what it would actually look like to take their struggles seriously without turning that into a criticism of women.

Takeaways:

→ Why the manosphere appeals to boys and young men

→ The role fatherlessness and missing male role models may be playing

→ Why men’s mental health and domestic abuse against men are still overlooked

→ How schools, media, and culture shape the way boys see themselves

→ Why gender issues are so often framed like a zero-sum game

Follow George:

→ Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/thetinmen/

→ YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@TheTinMenBlog

→ Website: https://thetinmen.blog/

→ X: https://x.com/TheTinMenBlog

→ LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/thetinmen

Hello and welcome to the Lonely Chapter, a podcast for people who are doing okay on the surface but quietly unsure how to live well. Today's episode is with George from the Tin Men.

Following the recent Netflix Louis Theroux documentary on the manosphere, we talk about why so many boys are being shaped by harmful messages online and what might sit underneath that, from fatherlessness and missing role models to how boys are spoken about in schools and wider society. We also get into men's mental health, domestic abuse against men, and why gender issues are so often framed like a zero sum game.

If you're new here, please do follow or subscribe wherever you're listening. It really helps the show reach more people who might need these conversations. Let's get into the conversation.

George.

Welcome back to the Lonely Chapter podcast.

Today is the only topic I can see to start with is Louis Theroux's Manosphere documentary, which came out a week or two ago, and it's put the manosphere back in front of the mainstream media. There's been so much conversation around it. Everyone's got an opinion. What did you make of that documentary?

What did it get right and what things did it miss?

Obviously misses a lot. It's only 90 minutes long. And also, I mean, I'm in this space. I mean, it didn't tell me anything I didn't already know.

These TV shows that come and go every year, obviously the last one being adolescence, they are great entertainment, but I don't know how informative they are. It was definitely better than Adolescence in terms of a documentary.

Well, adolescence wasn't documentary at all, but as a piece of filmmaking, that is fair. It was a lot better and I enjoyed it. I love Louis Theroux.

I feel like he's the right character for the manosphere because he's so antithetical to everything they stand for. He's like a skinny bean pole of a man, very intelligent, really difficult to rattle. I've never seen him rattled ever.

So, yes, I'm a big fan and I enjoyed it. I understand a lot of people's people have criticisms across the board. Some people say he didn't go in deep enough.

Some people say he didn't criticize or attack the manosphere, but that's just not what he does. People that watch his shows, he doesn't judge people, he doesn't castigate them.

I've seen him interview literal neo Nazis, and he didn't have a go at them. That's not. He creates the show and then you make the judgment yourself. But yeah, a Lot to be said. I. I'm being.

Whenever these things happen, adolescence, or the man versus bear thing, or the women only train carriages. These are like hot button topics that happen every six months. And I get. I'm the one that gets wheeled out into popular radio TV shows.

And I did a LBC Sunday, just gone about it and I had like five minutes to get everything across and I think I did all right. So, yeah, I. It annoys me, these shows, because no one ever talks about the issues unless it's anchored to some sort of lightning rod moment.

This time it's Louis Theroux.

So I just wish we would talk about it for the other 364 days of the year because then ironically, there wouldn't be a problem because we could actually solve the issues that cause. That push people, boys into the manosphere. So, yeah, maybe I'm asking too much

more frequently talking about it. Isn't it like you say, it seems to be there's something new every six to 12 months that sparks this big conversation.

And as you pointed out, it's 90 minutes long. So there's so little that you can get across in that time.

And if you're not in the space like yourself where you're talking about these things, understanding these things, learning about these things, you come out of that thinking that you know everything and people then have this big voice on such little information. And is there an element of. Obviously there's an aspect of trying to expose the area and trying to look at the problem and what's getting out online.

Is there part of it that also puts these people in the spotlight and gives them a bit more cultural significance than maybe they deserve?

Yeah, yeah. I mean, I don't think people. I don't think boys, new men take them that seriously. I don't think they're particularly great.

Well, they're definitely not good role models. I don't think they're very successful. I don't think they're particularly rich.

I don't think they have us anywhere near the influence that the world seems to think they do. I saw an interview of Louis comparing them to sort of wrestling characters.

You know, wrestlers have that big Persona, that fake sort of media Persona, like the Hulk Hogan he has. Like, he's just completely different to what Hulk Hogan's like at home watching tv.

And yeah, they're big and they're macho and they're loud and they're bombastic and they're. Yeah, they like more unlikable. And that's sort of a cartoon character rather than a real life person. I don't think they're like that in real life.

I would love to have seen what they're like when the cameras aren't rolling.

Yeah.

But I think it's not real. I think it's just an act. But it doesn't mean it's okay because ultimately we don't know if it's real.

And that's the problem of social media and streaming. Like, we're not. The boundary between what's real and what's not real is blurred. We.

With wrestling, you turn on TV, WrestleMania starts, you know, it's not real, and then it's over. But with this, it's. The boundaries are blurred, so we don't really know what's real.

So it's a little bit more pervasive in that sense and more dangerous.

Yeah, it's a great comparison to wrestling, I suppose is. When I.

When I was watching the documentary, the thing I felt mostly was sort of sadness for them because you can almost see they didn't really believe what they were saying. They were doing it for this addiction to the fame and the money and the clout that they get from it. And at times, I just felt sorry for them.

I was like, you're so far into it that you can't get out in

that sense that we are the problem, really. I mean, Louis the problem, because he's the one that's giving them the attention.

The guy HS Tikki Toky, who was saying how, like something about if he had a gay son, he would disown him. I don't think he really believes that. And then he says that for clout, for clicks and likes and shares to generate controversy.

And then Louis Theroux rolling up with Netflix is. That's why. That's exactly. He's done it now, Warden. So, I mean, my policy for the manosphere has been the same for quite a while. And that's.

Just ignore it and it'll go away. It'll go away. Like you don't. You certainly don't blow oxygen on it. Not to put a fire out. You starve it of oxygen.

You don't blow on it with Netflix shows and multiple Netflix shows and news broadcasts and magazine articles. That's endlessly creating more and more notoriety because that is what they want. That is the currency they want. They want more eyeballs on them.

And now they've got on number one Netflix. So what On. Yeah, it's dangerous. And that's.

That's the problem is us giving them the exposure Men like that are going to exist all the time, unfortunately.

Yeah.

But we can choose to ignore them.

Absolutely. Yeah. Yeah. Talking about it more just brings them back out.

And since that thing I've seen, they're now getting spots on, like, Piers Morgan and he's obviously looking for clicks and likes, they're looking for more clippable moments, and it's just a sort of endless spiral. So, like you say, you almost need to be the bigger person and step back and just not engage with it. Yeah, we're talking about it now.

I know. A bit of problem, aren't we?

Yeah, I mean, I. I filmed a podcast once for a very famous conservative podcaster, and she was saying that the people that made the documentary about Lily Phillips were monsters, to use her terminology, monsters. And then after we finished filming her podcast, we were driving home, we were like, well, aren't we monsters? That's not what we've just done.

We've made a documentary about it. So, yeah, we're. We're now part of the problem, Sam. Yeah, well done.

And I mean, I. I didn't even know who HS Tiki Toky or that Justin Weller was before watching that show. I've learned that as a result of watching the show, and now I've.

I don't follow them, obviously, but I've definitely looked at their content and, yeah, that would have happened. So nuts, since I shouldn't have watched it.

Yeah.

There are two sides to it for sure.

What are some of the main issues that are leading young boys and men to be drawn into that sort of messaging, do you think?

I've been asked that a few times. I've been asked what draws young men and boys towards these manuscript influencers, and to me is really quite obvious.

I don't understand why people don't know that we're talking about Lamborghinis, we're talking about millions of pounds, we're talking about Penthouses, we're talking about sun, sea and sand. We're talking about beautiful women, of course. Who doesn't want that as a young boy? That is.

I mean, that just couldn't be more personification of the dreams of a young boy than if he'd asked a boy to write it down himself that they are living what is perceived to be a life of luxury. So, yeah, it's like a man in a Lamborghini with a beautiful woman and inside the glove compartment's a big wad of cash.

And then people are like, oh, what is it that draws the boys to the manosphere? I was like, have you not watched a documentary? That sounds great.

I mean, I drive my mum's Nissan Micra, so I'm not one to talk, but I just think it's quite obvious they present an image that is they, they present as attainable, but it's not attainable. And for those like you and I, bit more maturity. We know it's not real. That's not real happiness, those things.

Yeah.

Although there's definitely part of my brain that's like, oh, yeah, Lamborghini, millions of pounds. I. I know, I know enough to be like, that's not real.

Yeah.

It's a fake promise. It's a poison chalice. And that isn't the key to happiness at all. There's much more to life than those very superficial things.

But the appeal is quite obvious.

I think what's more interesting is the fact that usually what boys want or think they want is there are sort of guard guide rails to that, often through a parent, typically for a dad. And parents are the ones that guide the boy that you don't actually want that lifestyle.

Like, if a boy could do whatever he wants, he'd be dead within the first two years of life because he's probably eating a massive handful of Play doh. But normally there's a parent who's like, don't eat the Play doh, don't watch hst, we don't need that. That's not.

And then that's where the parent comes in with those guardrails. And that obviously hasn't happened. There aren't enough male role models to do that.

There aren't enough positive male role models more generally to lead boys to a more positive way of life. And that's the bigger picture.

When you say that when they're.

There aren't enough positive male role models, do you believe that there aren't enough, or do you believe that we are giving the role model status to the wrong people and we're not promoting the right ones?

Well, people ask me for role models. People ask me for recommendations of role models on podcasts all the time. And I always answer, dads are the best role models to boys.

The father, the good fathers, positive fathers, present fathers are the best role models for boys. And then obviously uncles, grandfathers, teachers, those are the real normal men that are in, present in a boy's life and are good men.

That's the real role model. And to answer your question now, there's not enough fathers.

I think assuming like 1 in 5 boys in the UK doesn't have a father at home, and that's a big problem.

And then that's compounded when that boy leaves the home, for example, goes to school, and then 80%, or 85%, if you're talking about primary school, of teachers are female. So hundreds of thousands of boys leaving home and then 80% of them won't have a male teacher.

They'll then come home and there's, again, no father figure. A lot of the role models on TV and social media are very poor, as discussed.

A lot of the messaging is very negative around boys, so they're just looking for, like something. Something positive or something aspirational. And then in comes HS Tiki Toky or Justin Weller or Myron Gaines to be like, oh, hi.

And then the Pied Piper and he'll play the tune and then the boys follow them. So it's not. It's not rocket science. Makes a lot of sense if you look at the context of the situation.

But, yeah, that's why I think we need more good dads at home and we need to show more respect to fathers about the importance of fathers so they are more empowered to step into those roles. But, I mean, solving the fatherlessness problem is a massive issue and we've not even begun because we haven't even. The government.

The government haven't even admitted it's a problem. So how can we solve a problem if we're not even willing to admit it exists?

Yeah, how do you think, hypothetically, if the government did admit that as a problem, fatherlessness, how would we begin to fix that problem?

It's a hard question, isn't it? I mean, I always go to people that are working directly with these boys.

So shout out to my friend Sonia, who is the managing director of an amazing CIC community interest company in Essex called Lads Need Dads. And as is described on the tin, that's what it does, it gives role models to boys who don't have a dad at home.

So these are the boys, the one in five boys that I talked about. And as a friend of Sonia's, she says one third the boys that she helps hurt, their fathers have died. So one in five dads won't live till 65.

A lot of the boys who don't have dads, it's not like the dad's left, or is it some sort of deadbeat? He's often dead. So that could be one third of the problem and that's obviously massive.

So, yeah, I think not being dead would be a great thing for fathers to be parts of their son's lives. So that's, that's. And then how do we solve that problem? Well, that's another massive. So it's like a, it's like turtles all the way down really.

I mean, how do you solve fatherlessness? Well, many ways. One of them is through helping men live longer lives. And how do you solve that?

Well, there's lots to say about that and then how do you solve that and that and that.

But we're not actually really addressing these problems because they're left open to be speculated upon by people like me who are not qualified because no one else is doing the job. And I only get to speculate on it.

When people actually want to talk to me, which is five minutes at a time, maybe five minutes a year, I will have the microphone literally to speak to the nation. And that's not enough. It's not enough.

So the real solution is let's talk about this a little bit more and let's give the microphone to men and people like Sonia and let's have a grown up conversation that isn't just cultural panic and fear mongering and gender wars and that sort of stuff. But I don't, I don't know. I mean, there's a big problem with incarceration. A lot of boys about dads, the dad's in jail.

A lot of it is a boy who hasn't got a dad. His dad often, often didn't have a dad.

So a boy that grows up without a father at home, he is more likely to be an absent father himself and then his boy is more likely to be an absent father. So it's like a, a downstream thing that gets worse and worse and worse.

So if you can bring one dad in, the boy he raises is more likely to be a present dad. And then that goes down and down and down. So that will solve a lot.

And then, yeah, just more empowerment of dads, more respect to men, more appreciation that dads are not babysitters or second class parents or paedophiles.

I get a lot of dads who go to playgrounds for their own children and they'll get some, not often a woman tapping them on the shoulder, excuse me, what are you doing here? And he's like the same thing as you. That's my child.

So that's the sort of attitude that makes being a father very difficult and certainly is not empowering.

So it's not good enough to ask that fathers provide equal responsibility because they can't do that unless we're willing to give Them equal respect and equal rights. They don't even have equal rights. So there's a few reasons in there, but I'm sure there's many more. But we just got to ask.

Start by asking about questions, really.

Do you think there's an element of it that I'm thinking of my personal experiences and things I used to do when I was a young boy and a young adult. Things like scouting, youth clubs, playing sports.

And obviously looking back on it now, a number of those men that were coaching me in sports or leading me in the scouting probably had an impact on how I've developed as well as my dad. Do you think that now with kids maybe being less active and outdoorsy and being inside on games and the screens and stuff like that does.

Could that be an element of it?

Yeah, yeah. I mean, I live in London. We've had one third of our youth clubs closed down in the past 10 years.

So not just youth clubs, but libraries, sports centers, after school clubs. All the things that boys could do to bond with each other and find those male role models are disappearing.

And then the ones like Boy Scouts accepting girls now, like, I don't necessarily agree with that. I don't like the fact that Girl Scouts as a separate thing was quite gendered in terms of how they treat girls.

And I want Girl Scouts to do, you know, the canoeing and the rock climbing and the raft building. But I think we should keep Boy Scouts for the boys. In America it's just called Scouting America.

They don't even call it Boy Scouts, but they still have Girl Scouts. So boys can't join the Girl Scouts, but girls can join the Boy Scouts. And that's. I don't think that's right.

Yeah, we've got guides here, haven't we? Girl Guides, Scouting and Guides.

I mean I did, I went to Boy Scouts and I loved it. I mean I just, like I said, my sister went to the Brownies and all the stuff she was doing just looked shit.

Like I swear she'd got an ironing badge or sewing badge and she doesn't want to do that. And I totally feel for her. So I would like them to bring more of the so called boy skills in.

But I don't think we should be allowing girls to join Boy Scouts because there's something important about single sex spaces for boys and men and women and girls and they should be protected.

And it goes right up, not only obviously early life Boy Scouts, but right up to men's sheds now, which is sort of typically for older men who are very lonely. And the name, the clue's in the title. Men's sheds is a shed with men in it and often a workshop with tools and things to fix.

And the amount of good these sheds do, they're all over the country and the world in many ways. And they basically full of lonely men that build and fix things for local families, including toys for children. And they're going gender neutral.

I don't know. I think it's about maybe one third of men's sheds now, except women, including the one near where I grew up in Loughborough.

And I don't think that's right. Like, yes, let's have a women's shed for women and only women.

But there's something special and important, spiritual almost about men's sheds and men's spaces. And then of course, that goes down to the boys.

So I think if I was the Prime Minister or mayor of London, I would just be shoveling money into youth clubs for both genders, boxing groups, libraries, sports centers, leisure centers, after school clubs especially. And then I'd be trying to bring back Boy Scouts and Girl Scouts to give them something to do. And yeah, otherwise.

Yeah, otherwise they're going to be swiping on their phone all day at home or on the streets during up to no good.

You mentioned earlier on the topic of the TV shows that had been coming out, you mentioned adolescence. And obviously it's been almost a year now. I think it has been a year since that first released.

It caused a huge discussion again, like we're seeing now around the incels boys, violence and all this, all these topics that again, are way more nuanced than that drama, not a documentary showed. How has it affected the conversation over the 12 months? And like, what do you think it's taken away from the conversations that we should be having?

Well, it added nothing, as I feared it wouldn't. And it's taken away a lot of time and a lot of eyeballs. I mean, there are people that I know who could done so, so much good with that exposure.

I mean, the screenwriter of adolescence went and testified in Westminster directly to like Keir Starmer and the Equalities Commission. And it's like, what is. Sorry, what does a screenwriter know about incels? Nothing. And you can see he knows nothing.

If you watch the TV show and if you just do a bare minimum amount of research into the psychology of incels, shout out to William Caselo for doing that research. But I don't think we've moved anywhere. If anything, we've probably vilified incels more. We've pushed them further away.

We've created more fear and hostility and misunderstanding around them and they likely feel a lot more alienated and disenfranchised as a result. And we've created more notoriety. A bit like they feed off the same thing as the manosphere. They want notoriety. And yeah, Netflix show. I'll do it.

That will definitely do it. Congratulations.

And this is interesting how all of the so called incel experts that were banging the drum like you said a year ago, where have they gone now? Yeah, they got nowhere. They weren't actually interested. They just wanted to spotlight themselves. And those of us who were here before.

Adolescents are still here now and we don't get any, any of the limelight. I know there was Ross Kemp, he was the latest TV hard man to throw his hat into the ring for the manosphere.

And he released his five part documentary series on Sky a month ago and it was. And that involved lads and dads. She, Sonia was in that and she did a great job. But he was more or less the same.

It was more or less just him walking around looking odd and just talking about how much he cares about women and girls and violence against women.

And I saw a clip from that.

I think it was William Costello he was having a sit down with at one point and he, he almost came in with this idea that there's a massive percentage of incels that become murderers. And he basically asked William that question, like, what percentage do? And it was such a small number. He was like 7 between 7 and 15 worldwide.

And like you could just see the cogs in his head just fall apart because he'd sort of had this big idea in his mind and it turned out to not be quite as big as he thought it was.

Not even quite. Nowhere near as big. Yeah, let's just go over that.

I mean, thank God for William Costello for bringing some semblance of reality to that TV show because he would have completely gone off the rails if it wasn't for him. But the image of something like Ross Kemp comes in. Yeah, William, tell me about this epidemic of violence by incels against women.

How many murders have there been by incels? And then William's just like about 7 to 15 worldwide. And he's like a thousand. 7 to 15? No, he's like, no, just literally 7 to 15 worldwide.

And he'S like just in the UK. He's like, watch my lips, Ross. 7 to 15 in the entire world. Like that. You can almost count down to two hands, mate.

It's not turn off Netflix, Ross, and then come and live in the real world, do some real work. And if it hadn't been for that, I don't know what would have happened.

I mean they also interviewed Damon who is another friend of mine and he was the guy that did the Ofcoms study. Ofcom commissioned his company to study the manosphere and he came back last year with a headline grabbing finding that totally did not surprise me.

Saying that we overestimate the threat the manosphere poses to women. And that was, that's what he found from his research commissioned by Ofcom.

So this is like the online harms regulator themselves, not some politician looking for votes or some guardian so called journalist. It's the Ofcom and they didn't like that. He got a lot of stick from Ofcom for writing that. And it's like what do you want bad news that's good news?

What do you want? Do you want to live in this world of fear all the time?

It's not like I said I was saying earlier about we do overestimate the threat of the manosphere. It is, it's just like these cartoon characters. I don't think boys take them seriously.

I think we should give boys a lot more credit that they are able to discern the ridiculous pantomime from the actual good life advice. And guess what? There is good advice in there too.

There is aspiration on the vice, but there's also a lot of misogyny and homophobia and anti Semitism that was kind of shocking. But to see, to see this, these storylines being told in a very narrow way by TV hard men. Stephen Graham, Ross Kemp. Danny Dyer did one too.

His is actually pretty good. I'm just over it. I'm kind of bored.

And the annoying thing about the Ross Kemp thing is that they contacted me last year, the end of last year before pre production started and they told me about it and they were like we want to make a documentary, five part series about boys falling behind education, men struggling at work, experiences of violent crime. I was like this sounds great, I'd love to help. I've got the A. I can give you the A list of people you can interview.

And I gave them the top five people I believe in the country who over the past 10 years have done the most meaningful work within boys in education, domestic violence, male suicide, fatherlessness. And they ignored all of them apart from Sonia. And they came back with some bullshit instead.

So it's annoying where they could have made a really good documentary with really powerful Knowledgeable, influential voices that I personally gave to them on a silver platter. And they were like, nah. And they didn't even respond to them. They totally left them on red. So I felt a bit embarrassed.

And when the trailer came in I was like, oh, what a joke.

It's crazy. Like, like you say you've got these TV hard men who don't know anything more than what they've just seen online.

And then you've got people and doing something like this gets them to lobby at Parliament, like you said earlier.

And then you've got people who are doing real work, like people I've spoken to on this podcast, who I know, you know, Dr. Susie Bennett looking at male suicide Martin Seeger, Mark Brooks, who's done loads of work for men and boys over the years. Yep.

Susie Bennett with two of the five. They had two.

I mean, Martin Seger was excellent as well and I think I would have recommended him too, but it was Susie Bennett, Mark Brooks, Sonia Duncan, Craig and Ali Fogg. Those, those are the five that I thought were great.

I'll have to go on that list and finish off the, finish off the vibe.

Yeah. I mean, I consider, I consider Mark Duncan Alley to be the original Power Rangers of a space. And they are excellent.

Those are the people that should be in there, given the facts across, looking at what they've seen and what they've actually studied with their proper qualifications.

And they deserve it. They've been here for ages. They've been for them, they've been shut on in the mud for way longer than I've been here. And yeah, I've been shot on too.

I didn't recommend myself for being that in documentary, but they deserve it. They put in the hard work. They deserve a little bit of national tv.

Yeah, they're working in the shadows, aren't they? Yeah, a lot of the time.

Totally.

On the topic of government, last year, International Men's Day, 19th of November, the UK government published its Men's Health Strategy for its 10 year vision. Have you had a look at that and what do you make of it?

I mean, it's better than nothing, which is what we had this time last year. But it's certainly not enough.

My big fear is that the government will think that strategy is enough and they'll be like, that's the box ticks, let's move on. But it's definitely not enough.

And I know, I mean, Mark Brooks especially was heavily involved in that, both publicly and behind the scenes, like twisting people's arms in Westminster and God bless him for that. But it's not enough. And Ali and Duncan, but it's nowhere near enough. I know.

I mean, I've been critical of the amount of money they've given to male suicide, which is about £3.6 million, I believe, at the top of my head, which is nothing. £3.6 million. And that spread over three years. So it's about £1.2 million per year. And think about how many men there are.

Think about the biggest risk to every man's life under 50 is him killing himself.

So here we have the biggest risk to life for all young men in this country, and the government are like, here's a million pounds, 1.2 million pounds per year, that'll do. And it's not. I mean, I looked at how much money the House of Commons spend on catering and I think it's about £6 million a year.

So you've got Keir Starmer spending more money on perspective, spending more money on sausage rolls and bags of crisps than he is on literally saving men from the biggest risk of. To their life. And it's. That's what annoys me, because it's. I guess the labor government got quite a lot of credit for doing that strategy.

But I don't know if the amount of money you don't get, you know, you shouldn't get that amount of credit for just a few million quid.

Yeah.

And it's nothing. It's nothing, comparatively speaking.

Yeah. It's like when people talk about what we need to do, or you can say the right thing, but until you do the action to back it up, it's.

It means nothing. And by putting that amount of money in, is. Is effectively showing the action does not back up what they're saying.

No, I know. Don't get me wrong, it's still good. It's still 3.6 million more than we had. So I appreciate that and I hope we never go back to where we were.

But it's. Like I said, it's not. It's nowhere near enough. I mean, it just put down context.

The government, earlier this week, they announced funding for women in prison and they've donated. They've announced 32 million pounds for women in prison and nothing for men in prison. That's. That's what makes him worse. And for what?

For what sort of things? In.

For women, for every. For prison in general. There's a massive problem with.

People have experienced abuse, people have had traumatic brain injuries, people that have dependent children who need them. Like we Talked about fatherlessness. A lot of those men are in prison.

People that have mental health issues or addiction problems that shouldn't be in prison, people that have been criminally exploited. A lot of young men are exploited, coerced into crime and sent to prison. They shouldn't be there. That's true for men and women in prison.

Some of those are more true for women, but they're definitely true for men.

And this 32 million pounds is basically to help the women in prison not fall into homelessness, not going to drug addiction, not to reoffend and come back to prison to help them with traumatic brain injuries. A lot of prisoners have traumatic brain injuries. To help me with mental health. All the stuff, all the good stuff, I love that. I love that so much.

But, you know, I also love. I like applying that to the men in prison, considering they are 96% of the prison population. So I don't understand.

You have a problem like I've listed, and then you put all the money into just 4% of the people impacted. Tiny little wedge. And yeah, 32 million pounds, which I welcome.

But if that were to be proportionately given to men, we would need hundreds of millions of pounds. But they've given zero. Zero pounds. So, yeah, that frames it.

And like I said that that puts in proportion that's 10 times more than they've given to male suicide. And there's a lot more men who are at risk of suicide than women in prison. So it's just.

I don't how to square this idea of men enjoying structural privilege when the facts like that happening just this week. Just this week. There's examples of that all the time.

So, yeah, yeah, as you say, it's putting it into perspective and hoping that this is the start of something bigger and not just a, we said we'd do something, we've done something, now be happy with it.

Yeah.

So, yeah, it's hoping that we sort of keep pushing and I'm sure all these people you've mentioned will keep banging the drum and keep putting evidence forward to push for more action and maybe more investment in the future.

Yeah, I remember. It's a weird example to give, but I remember doing a documentary. My. My real life job is documentary filmmaker.

Remember making a series of documentaries about renewable energy and it was centered on a. A race between people that are building the most sustainable car, electric, hydrogen or petrol powered. And it was all over the world.

And he'd entered a race in Assen and then the winner got a thousand pounds. A thousand pounds. And it And I. And then they had a big check at the end. A big check. And I was like, you do not get the big novelty check for £1,000.

If it was a million pounds, you get a big novelty check. But that's my issue with the men's health strategy. You don't get the big novelty check for a few million quid.

It's a few pence per man, per day you've donated to male suicide. That is not. You don't get to give yourself a big pat on the back and have the big photo opportunity. That's not enough.

If it was £100 million, yeah, sure, give yourself a big pat on the back, mate. Have a big novelty check. But it's not. It's not enough. It's not. It's painful. To quote Susie Bennett, painful.

That's what my life is worth to the government.

Few p. Yeah, I suppose. Framing it like that. Yeah. It shows. Shows what they potentially think of us

money.

Aside from that strategy, are there any sort of big tier, big ticket items that they've missed, you think?

Oh, yeah. Domestic violence and intimate partner violence.

I mean, considering it's a men's health strategy and considering intimate partner violence against women is a women's health issue, it's. It is a. Is literally a women's health issue and it is considered, politically speaking, classed as a women's health issue, quite rightly so.

To see no mention, as far as I'm aware, of intimate partner violence or sexual violence or abuse or domestic abuse or any sort of family violence brought up within the men's health strategy, it's massive, glaring omission. It's. It's shocking. I know there's so little. There's very little research on the impacts domestic violence has on a man's health, but we can look at.

There's a lot of research on how it impacts women's health and there's huge meta analyses that have been done by leading journals that have found that violence against women has a greater detrimental impact to a young woman's life than smoking cigarettes or illicit drug use or high cholesterol diet. So in many ways, you're excluding something that is more damaging to a person's health than smoking from the men's. From the actual health strategy.

So there's no reason for them to do that other than it's deeply unpopular. So it seems like they're just rolling abused men under the bus for their own popularity. Yeah.

Do you think that is a reason? That it's deep? Just as simple as it's deeply unpopular because I know you've spoken to people before. Erin Pizzi, who started was it refuge?

She set up Refugee uk. Yeah.

And her story. And from our previous conversation, the statistics on domestic abuse in both directions. And it's still something that we just do not talk about.

Is it simply that it's unpopular?

I mean. Yeah. I mean unless you've got a better idea.

I mean we all know talking about male victims of abuse, particularly abuse by women, is unpopular, especially to talk about it in the scale in which it's happening. I mean in November just gone. We just had the latest ONS stats come out, which is a crime survey of England and Wales. So here we have the.

The best, most recent, biggest data set available in the UK from the government themselves, not private charity. And it found 41 of domestic abuse victims are men. 51% of people currently in an abusive relationship with are men. So it's 41, 51.

It's this huge percentage and doesn't even get mentioned like it gets laughed at, sneered at. People roll their eyes and deeply unpopular to talk about.

We all know it is deep down we know it's certainly not heralded as sort of progressive politics like talking about violence against women is. And it's good that we talk about that. But it's always a great way to drop a lead balloon at dinner party, bring that to the conversation.

Yeah.

So yes, I think we know that

it's interesting anything a lot of things talking about men's issues and I think Chris Williamson has spoken about it. Doing this like land acknowledgement of. You've got to first admit that women have these problems before you can then speak about the men's problems.

And it's like talking about it in this zero sum way where if we talk about one person's struggles, we're taken away from someone else's. Why do you think we look at it or why do you think some people look at it that way?

Because they're scared. I think it's fair. And I was gonna say they're cowardly, but I don't think that is cowardly. I think it is fair to be scared.

What they're afraid of is real stigma. And also the more people do that, the more other people follow suit. So I've, I've been a longer Chris, I've been in his ear on that very case.

So he's probably echoing my words to him. Okay. And I've been. I mean I've been hassling people like Richard Reeves that stop doing that.

You don't need to constantly apologize for saying basic things. What you're saying is not controversial, doesn't require this, like you said, ground clearing or just disclaimer every single time.

Like anyone that watches Richard Reeves or me knows we're not misogynists. You just judge us by what we're saying. We don't need to constantly plead and plead and plead.

And I feel like the more you do plead, the more it makes me doubt. Doubt you. I mean, it's a bit this equivalent to someone saying, oh, I'm not. I'm not a racist.

And now I'm gonna say, well, now you're gonna say something racist, aren't you? Yeah, it doesn't. Like, you didn't need to say that. And having now said that, I now you planted that seed in my brain. And then you're.

You're also reinforced. Yeah. And then, not to mention, you were saying a precedent, people, especially like Richard, that you're setting a precedent, that this is shameful.

We should. We should apologize. This is something to be apologized for. This is something bad. And it isn't. It isn't. And I understand why he does it.

He does it less now, and that's probably because of people like me hassling him. But I don't think long term, it will get you anywhere. I think short term, it might make people listen more. But ultimately, you're only reinforcing.

Like I said, these are things we should apologize for, when in reality they're not. There's nothing to apologize for. And it's important that we say these things also, this pragmatically.

I mean, I remember looking at a graph on YouTube just yesterday, and it showed I lose like 50 of my followers, my viewers, within 30 seconds. Like, the viewing, it falls off a cliff.

So If I spend 30 seconds of a podcast speaking about women and girls, I've lost 50% of what little exposure I get talking about something that is ultimately not relevant to the cause. So I just want to get straight to the point. For many, for pragmatic reasons, too.

There's. It's also.

It's strange to me because when I was doing my episode with Martin Seeger, I thought popped into my mind and I said to him that men's issues are women's issues and women's issues are men's issues, because whatever gender you are, you've got someone else in your life somewhere, whether it's a husband, a father, a brother, a partner, and vice versa for men with women in your life. So why wouldn't you want them to have that support. Sometimes we're just thinking about ourselves, but we're not thinking about our loved ones.

I get that too. That was what Richard said to me.

I asked him this point blank, why do you always do this ground clearing or especially when you try to talk to women, why do you always have to lead of it's good for women too? And he said, because I want to talk to women's interests. And I find that so insulting to women, if I'm honest.

It seems to be framing that women only care about men's issues when it's of direct benefit to themselves.

And as someone of many thousands, tens of thousands of women following me, more than Richard, none of them have ever messaged me saying, how do I benefit from this? What do I get out of this? No one's ever never had that message, not one single.

But I've had thousands of women contact me saying, how do I help my dad, my husband, my son?

So this idea of framing men's issues as to the benefit of women or anyone else is I think, again, I get it, but long term, you're only taken away from the key message, which is men deserve this in their own right. Men deserve this in their own right. It's not about how does it help everyone else.

I mean, I got called out for it myself because I got it wrong, because I. One of the things I talked about not long ago was the suicide rate in the construction industry, which is astronomical.

And 7,000 people in SU in 7,000 men in construction have died by suicide in the UK in the past 10 years. And to frame that in my post, I showed how many buildings they could have built. Libraries, football stadiums, tower blocks.

Could they have built had they not died.

And people got really annoyed at me because they were like, it's not about the buildings that we're missing as a society, it's the fact that they're dead. Like, I'm sorry you don't get your new cinema complex, mate, but these men are dead.

It's not about the fact that we're missing out as a, as a society. So I get what you're saying and I think that's an important point two ways too. But ultimately men deserve these conversations in their own right?

Yeah, absolutely.

And I think there's sort of like what you spoke about earlier with the boy Scouts and the Girl Scouts and having sort of single gender spaces is really important to protect.

And I suppose the way, I mean, it is more where it comes together and you have those conversations on both sides but you also choose when to cross them over. Because there are things that I can learn from women's lives that I will need to know at some point. Stuff like menopause. What's that?

Like, if no one tells me, and I can't sit in a room of men and be told what menopause is like and how best to support someone. So I suppose that's.

It's more.

Those conversations need to happen on both sides and then at the right time, that crossover comes.

There are, there are obviously ways in which men's and women's issues are symbiotically linked. And I, I often talk about those, and that's important too. So I agree to some extent.

But this is when people incessantly say, it's good to have healthy men and women, so it's good to have healthy men in your life. And I just get, I get a bit frustrated of that because it's not about having good men in life. It's about them being happy for themselves

in their own lives.

But there's things I talk about where helping fathers spend more time at home and giving them equal rights to paid parental leave, that helps women, the mother return to work and then to continue on her career trajectory. And that will close the pay gap.

So if you look at countries that have more men taking time off work to raise children, those countries experience a much smaller pay gap between women and men.

So that's a great example of like a win win, where a dad more time at home with his children and mothers and women in general getting paid on average more close the pay gap and give men more time with their kids. That's great. I love that. So that's an example where what you're saying is fair, but it's when people, that's the first thing they reach for.

That's where I get annoyed.

Yeah. Yeah, I understand that.

In terms of what we spoke about before, we mentioned about sort of the words you say and then the actions that you back it up with. So it seems like a lot of the conversation over the last 10, 20 years maybe has been about getting men to talk more and how many times we've.

We've heard that reframed in different phrases. It's okay not to be okay.

It's like men talk, but we've never really given them the action to back that up and the spaces to do it and explaining how to do it and how to listen. How do we take that next step into doing the actions and not just the, the words

the men can talk Thing is something I'm constantly flip flopping between.

Sometimes I think it's sort of superficial, just kind talk, it's just like, yeah, I appreciate intentions but it's not really, it's sort of, again, it's, that's a pat on the back that isn't that you've not actually gone all the way there. But then sometimes I talk to people and that is really what a lot of men need.

And going back to construction, I was speaking to a guy yesterday who set up a men's circle in a construction site for his men, for his friends that work in construction. And it's quite literally life saving what he offers to construction workers who are obviously they've quite the apex end of that.

So the masculine, hyper masculine men don't cry, men don't talk.

And to see him in that space, getting men to talk and share their feelings, I mean it's impossible for me not to be like, you're actually saving lives.

Yeah.

So when I speak to people like him, I'm like, actually is pretty good. So I. But at the same time I do feel like it's, it is not enough. Because a lot of the things they're talking about are not solved by talking.

He'll be talking about the financial pressure people in construction are placed under and the amount of time they have to work.

He talked about this thing called working doubles where people on building sites will work eight hours, they'll have half an hour sleep in a corner and then they'll do the night shift for another eight hours, go home, sleep four hours and then they're back in the morning. And that's not just one or two nights, they'll do that for weeks or months and that is horrible. They shouldn't have to do that.

And then the transient style of construction where you're working for agencies, you're not working the same people every single day, you're changing unfamiliar faces. And then the physical elements of it, there's loads of things structurally that need to change in construction.

But at the same time the talking bit is great because it's sort of, you can get that done straight away. So talking is good, clearly, but it's still not a complete solution.

Yeah.

And you also answer your question.

But yeah, it does. I mean the, the action in that I suppose is setting up the group.

So yeah, whilst the talking is a simple part, there still needs to be that spark that sets it up. And I've seen Ben west has been popping up on my Instagram recently. I don't know if you've come across his reason to stay website.

I have, yeah, yeah.

His brother died by suicide a few years ago, I think, and he set up this website on the anniversary of his death to where people can either write or read a letter and a reason to stay. And it's such a simple idea, but it's been so well received and he's spoken about it since and it is saving lives. That is the reality of it.

And again, it's nothing major, but it's just doing that next step rather than just saying we need to talk to each other.

Agreed. Yeah.

It's like a short term solution, but the things the men and women that arrive on that website suffering with are not going to be solved through reading a message. I'm sure that will bring them back from the brink a lot of times. And it has, I agree and it's great, it's done that.

But if the thing that's causing their distress has not been resolved, then the solution hasn't been presented and they're just going to come back again, aren't they? So it's about short term solutions and then long term solutions. And I know everyone's saying Ben west built this website.

I don't think he built that website. I think there's probably the similar thing. He's a bit like the Ross Kemp.

He's the guy at the front and behind him are probably a whole team of people that are working tirelessly to build that website. But I have no idea if that's true. I imagine it probably is. So good for Ben.

But more credit should be given to whoever actually built that website and is probably doing tireless work who's not getting anywhere near the media exposure of Ben West. But I mean, I know Ben, I've worked with him before and he's a good guy. And I like, I love the website, it's beautiful.

Yeah, yeah. Like I say, it's a short term thing, but it's, it's something.

And I suppose the longer term stuff is what we've been speaking about is that what can the government do, what can we start putting in place to actually look at the causes and not just the symptoms?

Yeah, well, I mean, and there is obviously a time when someone's in suicidal crisis and they need help now. They don't need some sort of petition to be signed, they need to help literally in that very moment. And that's where the website comes in.

That's great. That's, that's the short term solution. But my main issue is that's not the box ticked. Let's move on.

There are massive structural things that are pushing men to suicide and women to suicide, but talking specifically about men that need to be addressed too, in tandem with that. And that's the long term goals. That's the more, that's the hard, the harder, more popular work that I'm trying to do.

But I do recognize there is a need for the, the short term interventions like the website.

Yeah, yeah, I've, I've spoke to you. Last time on the podcast, I mentioned that I did some a year on the phones for the Samaritans. So sort of seeing the effect of that.

And you get people who do call multiple times and they have spoken to you before and then people that are new and it's the first time maybe they've told anyone what they're going through.

So you had Martin Seeger. Did he talk to you about his work of Samaritans?

He did, yeah. Yeah, explained about that.

Well, I'll piggyback off that by telling you again. But he, he was commissioned by the Samaritans because the men calling the Samaritans were not on the phone for as long as they're women.

And considering three and every four suicides is a man, that doesn't make much sense. A lot of people would say, oh, men can't talk, men are toxic, men need to open up, cry, whatever.

But Martin, as a smart man who I admire, did not say that. And he instead didn't tell the men calling to do anything differently.

But he helped those pick up the phone to understand the lived experiences of men.

And I think he spent like a year doing various workshops with the Samaritans, the people answering the phones, to help them understand what is it like to be a man, what did they go through, what are their experiences like? And then a year later, the problem was more or less solved and men were calling longer, but it was the same. Men were calling.

Nothing had changed on their end of the phone. But the Samaritans picking up the phone had a more compassionate and holistic understanding of the men's experience. And that says it all.

It's not about telling men to talk or talk in a different way. It's about the people picking up the phone are not listening appropriately or in a way that a lot of men want to be heard.

It's education, isn't it, of an experience. When we look at the things we've spoken about in relation to the government and things we want to see there.

You mentioned about how Maybe you're unsure that whether it is something they're going to push forward with or whether it's something that they're just doing to tick a box. What would make you truly sort of believe that a government is understanding men on a human level and not just for their vote, if you like.

It's going to take a lot. I think an amount of money that is proportionate to their ambitions would be great.

I think if they took that 3.7 million and made that 370 million, that'd be excellent.

And I think if they looked at women's health strategy and they saw the various things that are rightly considered women's health, like we talked about, sexual violence, domestic violence, intimate partner violence, those should also be considered men's health issues. And then various policies. I'd like to see.

I'd like to see within that sector a violence against men and boys strategy, which is a bill that was proposed last year, I think probably this time last year, that's now failed, disappeared.

So I'd like to see the government support that bill, considering, like I said, 41% of domestic abuse victims in England and Wales are men, and all of those men are considered victims of violence against women. That has to change.

Yeah. That's a really interesting thing, isn't it, that they are classified that way. Do you know why that failed, that bill?

Unpopular? I was talking to Mark about it and he was just like, it's not going to pass, mate. And I was just like, oh.

When it started, I was like, this is it, guys, we've done it. And then Mark was just like, yeah, no, this is not going to. It's not going to fail. It's not. It isn't.

It's not like it's a big red red stamp of failure, but what happens is that it's not allocated enough time to be discussed in Westminster and it sort of fizzles out and that's what's happened. It. I don't know why it's failed, but I imagine because we didn't get a support, obviously, that's literally why it failed.

It wasn't given assigned time to be debated for the second reading and it probably wasn't given time because it's deeply unpopular and the Labour Party are not interested in supporting male victims of abuse.

And people like Jess Phillips, who is the Minister for Protecting Women and Girls, she cares little, has very little, other than absolute disdain for male victims of abuse and is just a terrible person. So I guess I'm not surprised there weren't really, it wasn't a labor bill, it was a conservative bill. So it's just not a vote winner, is it?

Think about what politicians really want. They don't want anything really, other than ticking a box for your vote. And they don't get votes for campaigning for abused men.

They get them for campaigning for abused women. And they get. That's the whole prison thing, the women in prisons. That's a big old ticket. They love that.

Let's get abused women out prisoned and I'll tick that box too. But if you start to talk about abused men in prison, you ain't gonna get a tick, you're gonna get the opposite. They'll go for someone else.

So that's what I don't understand about the patriarchy theories. It's not about who is in the position of power or what sex they are, it's about who put them in power and what policies got them that power.

Because where are the policies for men and boys? We just got a men's health strategy of a few million quid, which is peanuts. But the policy for women and girls is enormous, and rightly so.

And that's where power is. That's, that's what real power is. It's in who's a policy for who. Who's voting for that policy and how is it received by the public.

So, yeah, I don't know. I mean, even a men's health strategy took a long time, a long time. But we're a long way off the rest of it, I think. But yeah, what, what?

I want more money, more policy. I want various different bills changed, like the Violence Against Men and Boys bill. I want Sexual Offenses act changed so.

Which you may, may or may not be aware, but women can't be found guilty of rape in this country because of the legislation on sexual violence. That needs to be gender neutral. And it's wild. It's wild how? I mean, you're obviously a firefighter, you're not a fireman.

And I think it's correct that we refer to you as a firefighter because there are also 10% of firefighters are fire women. So let's go gender neutral. However, 40% of domestic abuse victims are men. 40%. That represents one and a half million men.

There aren't one off million fire women, but there are one off abused men and every single one of those men is gendered as a woman. So there's way high percentage of abuse of men as abuse victims in relatively speaking and in absolute numbers.

And every single one of them is gendered as a woman. And yet we rightly call firefighters fire fighters because there are women and they need to be represented.

We need to say there are women there too, and we need to acknowledge the brave work they do. But we don't carry that across to men. Abused men. It's weird. We don't quite. And the same with sexual violence.

Yeah. Martin Seeger has a theory about it, isn't he?

Gamma bias.

Yeah, Gamma bias. That's it. Yeah. The idea that when we talk about the positives, we will neutralize it, whereas when we talk about the negatives, we gender it one way.

Yeah. Oh, yeah. We'll absolutely gender things when it's bad for men, like violence against women, male violence, male privilege, toxic masculinity.

We gender that all day. But when it comes to the good things that men do, we won't gender that at all. I mean, I know often we'll have a man.

If someone, you know, if there's a terrorist attack, we'll say he is a knife man. But then when it's men who are the ones who put themselves in harm's way, including firefighters, and thank you very much for that. Firefighters.

This is so interesting how you see a headline, it's like, knife man brought down by Good Samaritan. And you look at a photo and it's like, well, they're both.

He's also a man.

It's just. It's five men beating the shit out of a terrorist with a narwhal tusk and a fire extinguisher. They're all men, but we only see knife man.

And the rest are heroes. Good Samaritans, bystander, whatever, Member of public heroes. Let's just start.

It's interesting once you see the world through that lens and how we gender the bad things men do and we erase the good things men do, the male heroism, in that example, we end up with a disproportionately negative view of men that harms everyone, including of most of all, men.

Anti misogyny lessons. Is that correct? Have I got that right?

I didn't know when the date was,

but yes, I think a brief Google, it said September 26, so I assume the new term next year. What do you make of that?

Just stupid, isn't it? Like that's not going to solve anything.

I mean, the post I put out today was a really good, really good opinion piece about misogyny and Specifically that policy by the British Medical Journal and they were just like, it's not, it's not going to do anything like misogyny isn't like that.

You can't understand misogyny unless you look at the lived experiences and the environment within which the boys and men who are misogynistic grow up and become that way. It's not some pathology to just expunge. It's not, it's not like some ghoul under the bed.

It's a complex societal problem and some guy coming in of a PowerPoint presentation and showing it to a bunch of 11 year old boys is going to do precisely nothing apart from cost money, which we don't have.

Yeah, well, yeah, the money put into that versus what could go in on top.

3.2. Move that money into the male suicide thing. That'd be nuts.

But then also the second problem is that it's not, there's no, no one's talking to young girls about how to respect children or boys either. I don't think it should be gendered. If we're going to do a series of workshops to help children show respect, that's what should be.

We should be helping children show respect to other children and adults on a non gendered basis. I'm sure there's ways in which it presents differently boys and girls, but girls are not like some saints that are incapable of anything wrong.

They're. They're also children and they also need to learn these important lessons.

So it's about my issues with that policy is that firstly it's quite reductive attempt to address important problem of misogyny. And also it's completely one sided.

Boys more likely to experience physical violence, girls more likely to experience sexual violence. But ultimately both are vulnerable.

And it's not just boys doing it to the boys because the same data captured perpetration and maybe there's a probably a 5% difference between perpetration of violence by girls and boys. It's still a significant number of girls are doing it too. So I'm a big fan of complete solutions which I hope has come across in a podcast.

And if you're just talking to half of children, that's not a complete Solution and it's a massive waste of money. Yeah, yeah.

Like you say, it doesn't need to be gendered. You could just have a class that teaches you how to be a good person.

Like look at values, look at things that relationships and in both directions and how you can be the best person you can.

Yeah, totally. I mean, helping children understand the lived experience of children and humanized children is a really important thing, I think.

But we're not repenting. We're bringing this goody and baddie narrative, man good woman, good man, bad narrative right down to schools and teaching that to 11 year olds.

And it's part of like a wider set of so called lessons that are just political. There seem to be political statements that we're pretending are lessons that teach.

I mean, I think it's 41% of children or boys in this country have been taught men are a problem to society. So two in five, and I think maybe a third of schools teach children about toxic masculinity. That's not education, that's horrendous.

Yeah.

And now you add to that these misogyny lessons.

It's like, well, I guarantee you the boys after those misogyny lessons going to go in one in one ear, out the other and they're going to go on fire up TikTok and they're going to be brought back into the next generation of manosphere grifters.

Louis the Real will fire up another documentary, he'll make some cash out of it and we'll be back again this time next year talking about the exact same thing.

It's interesting, like thinking about hearing that message and the words toxic masculinity and being told that men are a problem is difficult enough as an adult because you sort of understand the bigger picture and you can put some cases back against it.

But as a child, when you're developing and you don't really understand the world as well and you're looking at this adult, it's like, well, this adult knows the world. Surely they're way more wise than I am. And then they're telling you something like that.

You, you, some people, yeah, I think like you said, it will go in one ear and out the other. And then some people depending on the person it goes in and they then start to tell themselves, wow, I must be a problem. Like, what can I do?

And it would almost stun that person's development because they're overthinking something that may not even apply to them.

Yeah, I mean, yeah, it'll go into some People's brains and it'll rattle around and cause huge amounts of damage.

And especially without, like we talked about a lot of poise about the positive role model to positive male role models and about the positive messaging around men when they're deprived of those things. These messages are amplified even more.

And it's like you just totally shape the landscape of that boy's life and like his self worth and self identity. And I think it's kind of horrendous.

I think, I mean, I know one of these people, one of these organizations got shut down on the charge of domestic terrorism because what they were saying to boys and I'm like, that's actually kind of, kind of good.

Yeah, I like that idea that you're bringing these ideological lessons into schools to children who have to go, they can't opt out and you're telling them they're fundamentally broken because of their sex. And like what that is terrorism.

I think it's because certainly got an ideology and there's a political motivation behind it and it's more money to be spent and it's utterly shameful. And it's not just schools we learn. These boys are taught these horrible lessons even before they arrive at school.

I was sent a badge, a photo of a badge from one of my followers last week. And on it it said fresh boy tears. And it was basically a badge that was making fun of boys who cry.

And it was like a little carton of juice and it was, oh, fresh boy tears. A bit like the equivalent of those horrendous mugs that say male tears. But this one is for the boys.

And the guy who sent it to me, that was given to his three year old son at a birthday party.

Wow.

These are lessons that we're teaching boys at the youngest possible age that it's embarrassing and shameful to just cry and to show pain.

And he's not even arrived at school and he's been taught that lesson for being mocked at the idea of crying for a boy and to be given that badge by a grown adult at a party is horrible. An act of child abuse in its own right. I think that is horrible. So parents doing that, like they should be ashamed of themselves. Yeah.

I mean, I can't imagine feeling in a position where I would even do that if I was that parent giving something like that out to kids.

That's my child, that's my child. I would go fucking berserk if that were my child. I'd be like, you, where is this?

Last time you go over There for sure.

No, I'll definitely go over there. I'd go over there myself and I'd have a great time talking to them. But I just think who are you to shame a boy for crying?

And he's not nowhere near old enough to discern what is just a stupid joke versus what is actual advice. And that's gone into his head and I imagine it was given out to all the boys and girls and like, what is that? Just give him a lollipop, that's fine.

Lollipop's fine. Just go old school. A bit of cake. That's what I used to get.

But no, now we're making political statements with our party bags and it's like that is just. Those parents are the ones that need the lessons. They're the ones that need the lessons on how to show children respect.

And it comes down to that. Education doesn't. It is education.

And that's hopefully by talking about these sort of things today and putting it away in a cross that isn't argumentative and instead constructive may change your mind.

And I have had, I have had episodes on this topic with yourself and previous people before have mentioned and I've had comments on there from people who have changed their mind by listening to it. So it's a small impact but it's, it's something and I think.

But it ripples outwards.

It's like you said, like I talked about the fatherlessness thing, if you can get one man to be a present father, the child who he's a father to is more likely to be a present father themselves.

So there's two people we've helped in this, that's two birds of one stone and then that, that child will more likely to be a father and that child and then you're creating a ripple effect. So it isn't just one person, that's just a first domino. So give yourself some credit. And even if it was just one person, that's excellent.

Like you can prove someone's life more than before. That's one more than most people help. And I wouldn't diminish that so easily. I think that's a good job.

Yeah, I appreciate it. Looking at the ONS studies, obviously you mentioned the ONS statistics on domestic abuse.

How much of the stuff that we have discussed today comes down to that, do you think?

I think Unemployment's definitely a problem across the board. I think a lot of the industries that men are dominating are, are the first chopping block for a lot of the jobs being lost to automation and AI.

I know there's been studies done in America where I think of the 15 biggest jobs likely to grow the most in the next 10 years, 13 are dominated by women and only two dominated by men. And one of those is janitor.

Right.

So it's definitely an issue.

If you think about the jobs men typically do, factory work, like long haul driving, that sort of stuff, heavy industry, those are jobs that are going to be lost at automation. Like think about how many men drive trucks and taxis and vans. That's all going to be gone.

The waymos are driving around London now, aren't they really?

Yeah. Like lorry drivers are going to be gone, factory line's going to be gone, heavy industry is going to be gone.

Like all of these things are male dominated jobs that are just disappearing and even like agriculture, mining, they're all male dominated and they're all disappearing. So it's definitely going to get worse before it gets better.

And if you think about place that in the context of education and I think maybe 2/3 now of higher education graduates in the UK are female. It's not like these young men are being retrained. We're not looking at that.

Like girls are getting further and further and further ahead of boys in school. So it's like there's another generation of unemployed boys, young men coming up and potentially more. So it needs to be a big course correction.

And then in the only times we do talk about getting more of one gender into other gendered work is women in stem, which I have some patience for and I am a believer in to an extent. But I don't see any opposing efforts to get boys and men into these women female dominant industries.

And a lot of the research finds that the hiring bias that men experience trying to get into women female dominant industries is far higher than the opposite. So the big girls club is also a thing, not just a big. The old boys club and the old girls club.

It's goes both ways and there are industries where I want to see more men like first and foremost teaching, teaching not only helps the men but it helps the boys. Like male teachers are desperately need schools for the reasons we discussed. More men in therapy and psychology in general would be nice.

More men, healthcare, a lot of healthcare and stuff. Now women, more men's social work would be great. The caring industry in general would be good. And these are all industries that are growing.

Care industry, health industry, education, they're all booming.

They get there some of the biggest, the fastest growing jobs, which we've called them heal, which I believe stands for health, English, administration and learning.

Okay.

I think that's right. And those are massive. That's a much bigger industry than stem. Way bigger.

And they're all dominated by women and there's no effort to get men into them, apart from Richard Reeves, who's doing a great job in that respect. So we're not seeing the same effort to get men into the jobs that are most promising for the future.

Meanwhile, things like automation, AI and exporting jobs, generally speaking to the developing world are losing disproportionately way more male jobs. So double edged sword. It's a double whammy in that sense.

And that's why I, I imagine that's why employment rates are, Unemployment rates are getting worse and worse for young men. But I haven't heard that stat and it's. Yeah. Shocking but not surprising.

Yeah. Well, I think it was Mark who posted that only yesterday. I think so I think it's quite a recent. Up until January this year. Yeah, yeah.

And I mean the topic of identity and meaning comes into that, I suppose people.

I've spoken before about how people link their meaning and identity to their job and I don't think that's necessarily a good thing per se because you can lose a job, you can lose these things. So if you're tied into it completely. But I can also understand why having a job that you care about gives you a sense of meaning.

And you can have multiple meanings and like kids, your work, your partner, all of these things, your community work. But occasionally we do fall into the trap of. It's like when you go to, you meet someone for the first time, you say what do you do?

It's like you're asking what my job is and that's it.

So when people lose that and people are unemployed, I can see why they sort of fall out of that space and maybe don't feel like they have an identity or meaning or when they retire. When they retire, exactly.

I mean there's a lot of life left. In many ways it's the golden years of your life.

But if you spent your whole life building your identity and your friendship groups around your work, as a lot of men do, when you retire it's what do you retire to? No, I mean some of the most depressing suicide stats are of those of men who are older, so as particularly 85.

Plus, a man who's over 85 is 15 times more likely to die by suicide than women of the same age. I think a lot of that's down to loneliness and a lot of that's down to a lacking feeling of purpose.

Yeah.

And that's why they need men's sheds.

Yeah. Loneliness is a massive, massive stem stuff.

And it's like, definitely would encourage not just men to find more meaning in life than their job, but to help society value men for more than just their job.

That's like going back to the construction worker thing, where I did that post where I said 7,000 men in construction died by suicide in the UK in the past 10 years. Look at all the things they could have built. And then people.

My own following had a go at me being like, it's not about what they could have done, it's the fact that they're worth more than the buildings they can build. They're human beings. And then we shouldn't be measuring men primarily on their output, but on who they are. But I mean, it's also important.

I think men like to be needed and they like to have purpose as well.

Yeah.

And they like to be meaningful. So I don't want to be like, I'll get rid of that. But we need to add. Yeah, you'd add stuff to that, not just take away.

Yeah, absolutely.

Looking back at everything we've discussed today, and obviously the conversation around online as well, if you could change one message about what boys and young men are hearing today, either online or in the classroom, what would that thing be?

There's nothing wrong with being a man. You're not toxic, you're not broken, you're a man or boy. That's good. You're not toxic, you're not dysfunctional girl.

And there's nothing shameful about being a man. And men do amazing, incredible things that keep the world going. Right now, this very conversation is made possible by men.

When I go and have lunch immediately after this call, it's going to be the food and the fridge stocked by men, cooked on an oven, powered by men, with lights, powered by men, with water coming out of a tap. That's made possible by men. And that's a wonderful thing.

And it's sad that we don't appreciate the fact that men keep the world going and keep us alive, literally speaking. And they don't get anywhere near enough credit.

And it must be hard being a boy not being taught these lessons and being too often taught that men are only capable of bad things and Never being taught the incredible good that men do, too. So, yeah, that's what I'd like to say to anyone of that age listening. And I'm sorry you have to get that from me.

That should be something that you hear regularly.

Agree. So, George, to finish off my episode, something I like to do is ask my guest to leave a question for the listener.

So I like to listen to podcasts myself and go away and have conversations on the topics with friends.

So if you could leave a question for the listener now to go away with to a friend, a family member, or even a stranger, what question would you leave them with?

I mean, a lot of the talk of the town right now is around angry men with the manosphere and all that stuff. These are young, angry young men we're talking about. But anger is a secondary emotion. People are not angry for no reason.

They're angry because of something else. Behind anger is a different emotion. So I'd challenge your viewers to ask, what is behind anger? What is making these angry men angry?

What are the emotions that are driving that angry outburst?

And can you challenge yourself to have some compassion for such a man, even though he is acting in a way that directly, at least in immediate vicinity, looks bad, but maybe he's going through something. I think about Justin Weller from the Louis Free documentary. He was abused by his mum.

I think about our friend HS Tikky Toky, who was abandoned by his father, restrained from his dad, and might well, is that. Is that what's behind anger for those men and boys? Yeah, say that again. But is that. If that. Is that what's behind the anger for men and boys?

And if so, are those manosphere men deserving of compassion, too?

Yeah, what's behind the anger is a great question. And yeah, I spoke to a behavioral sort of expert who was talking about anger as an emotion and how we often look at it as a negative straight away.

But it's a really useful emotion because it tells us something's wrong. So exactly what you're saying there, just peel that back and work out why. Why are you angry or why is someone else angry?

That's a great question.

Yeah, love it. George, thank you so much for coming on. I really appreciate your time today.

If people listening want to find more of you and keep up to date with what you're doing online, where can they do that?

Primarily, I'm on Instagram at the Tinmen, all one word. But I'm now expanding into YouTube with more of this sort of stuff. So podcasts and that's the tinmen blog on YouTube soon.

Working on my website the Tinmen Blog and then other than that x the same name. So is LinkedIn the Tinmen blog or

the Tinmen on Instagram, the Tin Men or the Tin Men blog everywhere. But I'll link it all below. So anyone listening, can you scroll down and click the links?

If you have enjoyed this episode and you think that someone you know would find some value from it, please do share it with them and send it across. And if you haven't already, please do subscribe or follow the show wherever you are listening or watching. It really helps the show grow.

But lastly, from me, thank you for listening. Stay curious and I will see you in the next one.

Sam.