One of the Internet’s greatest characteristics is that it allows people from a diverse variety of backgrounds to come together in support of something. The Internet can help spotlight issues that don’t get talked about much in the wider world, such as rape culture (#YesAllWomen) and Aboriginal issues (Idle No More). However, because this is the Internet and there are a wide variety of people, some other movements that are perhaps not based in facts have sprung up and gained some traction.
The most obvious right now is the “anti-vaxxer” movement.
In 1998, The Lancet published a study linking the measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccine to instances of autism. After an investigation by journalist Brian Deer, the study was found to have been fraudulent, not based on scientific practices, and was ultimately retracted in 2010. But this was the catalyst for the anti-vaccination movement that has now caused the resurgence of the measles and whooping cough in North America.
The anti-vaccination movement relies on the above discredited article, misinformation (I saw one commenter say they were against vaccines because they included fetal tissue, which they don’t), and their own perceptions (such as the multitudes of people who say their baby started acting differently immediately after the vaccine).
There was even a study done to determine the most effective ways to convince anti-vaxxers that it’s better to vaccinate, including scientific evidence that vaccines are not linked to autism; images of children with measles, mumps, or rubella; a fact sheet about the dangers of measles, mumps, or rubella; and a story about a baby who almost died of measles. In all cases, parents were less likely to vaccinate their children.
It’s interesting to note that the anti-vaxxer movement didn’t take off in North America when the paper was published – it’s not until fairly recently that more parents are choosing not to vaccinate and diseases that were once eradicated are coming back. And why is this? Because now people can write blog posts about their negative experiences with vaccination, which get read by other anti-vaxxers and used as evidence that vaccines are dangerous. Because anti-vaxxers can connect with each other and attract more people who are on the fence about vaccination. In this way, movements can snowball.
Another big movement that has taken off with the advent of the Internet is the general men’s rights movements. I’ll be clear here: men do face problems that women don’t face (to start with, their emotional problems aren’t treated seriously). However, the men’s rights movement is more about hating women, whether it’s bemoaning the fact that they can’t hit them, saying they should stay in the home, or calling all women who say they were raped liars.
In recent years, the men’s rights movement, which is generally relegated to its own corner of the Internet, has been spilling out as a direct response to more women speaking out about inequality. Women are using the Internet to have a voice, and men are using the Internet to silence those voices with ridiculous complaints such as whining that they have to open doors for women, they have to pay on dates, and they can’t get into the club for free. Right, because that is definitely comparable to the fact that 83 per cent of disabled women in Canada will be sexually assaulted and 38 per cent of sexually assaulted women were assaulted by their partners. But by all means, let’s give men free entry to the club. Once again, the Internet provides a place for like-minded people to gather and loudly state their opinions when in the past it wasn’t so easy to join up with other people who thought the same as you.
While a lot of good things have come out of the Internet (crowdfunding for the less fortunate, movements like #IBelieveThem, and funny animal videos) we unfortunately have to take the good with the bad, and that means having to fight back against men who believe they’re being oppressed when there are a lack of male emojis.
