Misogyny is thriving in our schools. Why aren’t we doing more?

It's just an extension of extremist Christian white nationalism/neonazi shit. They realized terminally online young men were very vulnerable to this sort of grooming way back before gamergate even. It was definately weaponized in the US against Clinton and Harris. It's 90% political in origin.

It is arguably true that many young men are shat on by the world we have created for them compared with the past. Stupid fucking gig economy, home ownership, cost of living, transition from manufacturing to service economy. But the people enslaving their brains are the same people with a foot on their necks keeping them down economically and socially. Pull back the curtains and its a handful of mega rich cunts protecting their fortunes by raising a compliant army of cucks to distort the democratic process.

Young men need to open their eyes and tell the sketchy old pedo dudes trying to manipulate them to fuckoff, NYPA!

Do parents have any role in raising their children anymore? I never see it mentioned...

Personal responsibilty approaches to behaviour change have never worked and never will work. You might as well be shouting into the void for all the good it will do. You need to address these sorts of issues at the societal level.
I'm not sure if it was what you are going for, but one explanation is that the ever accessible dopamine hijacking bullshit spreading machine of social media is diluting the fuck out of parents influence.
Couple this with a new requirement of dual incomes to subsist.
So yes parents do have a role, and they are being squeezed out of it like a zit. The outcomes suck for everyone. I don't know why it's not mentioned, likely because it's hard to ignore the egregious impacts of unfettered capitalism if you start asking these questions.

I'm not doing more because I'm not in schools and I don't interact with kids. This is a problem I have very little influence on.

The Manosphere is a problem all over the world. Turning men against women is another distraction from the class war. We all need to be turning against billionaires, but it's hard to convince young people/men of that.

I think about this often. Follow me here because this may seem convoluted but I don't have a better way of explaining it out loud. These are just my two cents.

There is a very consistent "power fantasy" that is delivered to men from early childhood. There is a core logical fallacy to all these power fantasies tied directly to their gender which is essentially a birthright to power.

The harsh reality is that there are no gender based birthrights to power IRL.

Instead of truly observing power dynamics, they create a coagulated malformed response which is to construct the thing they were promised (power by birthright). "Manosphere" content provides a framework of loop holes and logical fallacies to get them closer to the right to obtain power simply via subscription. The subscription process is mostly performative often via mimicry aligned role models. This aligns extremely well with fascist agendas and is easily exploited.

I've seen this manifest in weird arguments like "Women only have rights because Men give it to them" as if it's some sort of kindness or a handicap in a sport to award others with basic rights.

Its all very gross

Aren't most teachers women? Why aren't women doing anything to address this, something is clearly failing in their classrooms.

In primary school most teachers are women, but in high school - which is what we're talking about, it's pretty balanced.
More to the point though, something is failing in classrooms. That's what the article is about, hence the title "misogyny is thriving in our schools". Obviously it is not being caused by the teachers. The teachers do not want this to happen. It makes for a horrible work environment - especially for the female teachers. Programs and strategies are being implemented to try to address the problem, but the root of the problem is not from the school itself.
I hope that answers your genuine good-faith questions on the topic.
- Wrong, in High School (and every other teaching field) the majority of teachers are women.
  https://www.acara.edu.au/reporting/national-report-on-schooling-in-australia/staff-numbers
  Obviously the teachers do not want this to happen, but they are the ones in the position to teach otherwise and so I ask, why are these women not doing so?
Is it our responsibility?
- Well it's men's responsibility every other time, and you've driven us out of education, so yes.
Err, these boys aren't being taught Misogyny 101 in the classroom...the female teachers are often the victims here. Asking them to solve this problem is delusional.
- 101? What are you a yank?
Why do you blame teachers, apparently because they're women, and not their parents?
This is the result of giving "conservative" misogynists a platform instead of a black eye.
- you're weird...
  You ask a question, then instantly answer it
  You then resort to physical violence.
  good show...
i don't know how things are in Australia, but i do know how misogyny is so common in American schools. you can't think of it as being individual failures on behalf of the teachers. you have to think of this as entire system of patriarchy that selects for individuals who are less likely to resist it.
firstly are the weed out systems:
a school teacher needs 4-6 years worth of higher education to be eligible to teach meaning a school teacher is more likely to come from a wealthier, more conservative background
a school teacher is paid poverty wages, making them more reliant on spousal support, creating a soft reinforcement of traditional gender roles
teachers are hired by administrators who are usually men, men who can have unaudited privilege in the system of patriarchy, creating bias in what they consider "professional" for a teacher towards someone who will fit into this overall system
then there's the reinforcement systems
you are genuinely correct that most teachers are more progressive when it comes to social issues, but they are also making poverty wages meaning they're more reliant on the job. they're more desperate and therefore less likely to upset the apple cart
teachers are not the only people who interact with kids. administrators are usually who operate the punishment system in a school. this punishment system creates an interplay between the nurturing mother stock character and the disciplinary father stock character. the disciplinary father stock character in his role will often hand children mysogynistic views very directly.
- a school teacher needs 4-6 years worth of higher education to be eligible to teach meaning a school teacher is more likely to come from a wealthier, more conservative background
  Most Australian university students have their study 100% funded upfront by the Australian government and only pay it back over time if they earn above a minimum threshold, so the connection between socioeconomic background and university education isn't as strong as in the US (though it definitely still exists).
- a school teacher is more likely to come from a wealthier, more conservative background
  I couldn't find stats for Australia, but in America teachers are statistically more likely to be Democrats than Republicans, so I don't think this is supported.
  It is also worth noting that, though I couldn't find anything on Australian educators' political leanings, teachers are one of the most highly unionised workforces in the country, and our centrist party (the one the media and many in the general public would call "centre-left", like your Democrats) has explicit ties to the union movement.
  a school teacher is paid poverty wages
  In Australia they're paid quite well. It doesn't scale as highly for the average teacher as it does in many other highly educated jobs, but the base salary is pretty good. There's the important caveat that teachers are largely expected to spend their own money on classroom supplies, though.
  teachers are hired by administrators who are usually men, men who can have unaudited privilege
  Teachers in Australia are hired by the department based largely on very impersonal factors like qualifications. There's not a huge amount of room, at the level of classroom teachers, for that kind of bias to have as much of an effect. What more personal decisionmaking does happen is done largely by principals, who are former teachers themselves. Because hiring is done at the department level, principles can get involved in decisions like who gets a job at which school, but the fact that they have a job at all is much more impersonal. The promotion and hiring of principles and other non-classroom positions may be a different question.
  That said, I'm not disagreeing with your main point. It is a systemic failure. At a scale far larger than merely within schools.
- If you don't know how things are in Australia, why are you entering the discussion?