‘Why do so many men hate women this much?’ CEO’s post on AI, sexism sparks furious debate

A growing online discussion around sexism, women’s representation in the workplace, and the tone of conversations on social media has once again caught attention. What started as a reaction to comments on artificial intelligence and jobs has now developed into a wider debate on gender bias, online behaviour, and the kind of content that continues to circulate across digital platforms.

The issue came into focus after Malin Frithiofsson, CEO of Sweden-based femtech venture studio Daya Ventures, shared screenshots linked to remarks made by streamer Zack Hoyt, also known as Asmongold. These remarks were connected to a viral post discussing women, employment, and artificial intelligence. The post claimed that women’s jobs were created to show “fake parity” in workplaces and suggested that AI would eventually “fix” this situation. It also stated that women should go back to “being a mother or being a pr***ute.”

The content quickly sparked criticism online, with many users calling it sexist and inappropriate.

Viral online post sparks strong reactions

In her LinkedIn post, Malin Frithiofsson highlighted the reach of the content and raised concerns about the type of messages gaining visibility online.

“A man with an audience three times the population of Iceland posted this two days ago. 347K views. 22K likes. 880 reposts.”

She further wrote, “The argument: women’s jobs were invented to fake parity. AI will fix that. After which women can go back to being mothers or pr***utes, and I guess what I should be doing is commenting on the very real conversation being had right now about AI’s threat to the workforce and how female-dominated roles are disproportionately in the crosshairs.”

She added, “But I’m tired, and instead I keep asking myself the same question lately: Why do so many men hate women this much?”

She also included another line, “This entire earth is literally just mothers and their children.”

Founder shares concerns about online abuse

Along with reacting to the viral post, Frithiofsson also spoke about her own experiences with online harassment and threats. She referred to a CNN investigation into what she described as an online “r*pe academy” and pointed out the scale of such content being consumed.

“Last month, I wrote about CNN’s investigation into an online r*pe academy. One site clocked 62 million visits in February alone. This month, a man with 1.2 million followers gets 22 thousand heart reactions for suggesting women belong in two categories: breeders or wh*res.”

She also shared details of personal abuse she has faced online.

“I wonder what it does to women seeing this every day. What its done to me? The literal death threats in my inbox, the AI-generated undressing of my public images, and the investor who last winter literally told me I dream about getting r*ped (!?).”

She ended her message with a quote that she said stayed with her.

“A woman I didn’t know yet told me recently: We're all just trying to walk each other home. It’s the most beautiful thing I’ve heard in a while.”

“And it’s so sad that we all know exactly why we need the company.”

Social media users react to the debate

As the LinkedIn post gained attention, several users shared their reactions, discussing sexism, online platforms, and workplace bias.

One user commented, “The fact that X is still used by many professional journalists and founders as their only social media interaction is SO problematic. I really wish men – specifically men who work in high-profile positions – would abandon the platform entirely. Sexism and misogyny proliferate. Women simply aren’t safe posting there. Like, I know those guys will always be hateful (because the internet is where hateful men congregate), but the fact that legit news outlets still believe X is an authoritative barometer for anything related to factual information or general consumer sentiment is deeply disturbing.”

Another comment read, “Imagine being such a catastrophic failure in life that you rant online about women having jobs, like a pound shop Andrew Tate. What a genuinely embarrassing little man.”

Some users also tried to reflect on the reasons behind such attitudes.

“I wish I knew. Is it that the men are frustrated that we have more of a say? Or are men just more aggressive human beings, and the absence of real war in many countries makes them not able to be their aggressive selves? And that‘s not even meant in a mean way; I am really asking myself what‘s wrong with many men nowadays (or I guess, since the beginning of time),” a person said.

Another user pointed out a pattern in online engagement.

“Unfortunately I can’t say I’m shocked; there’s been more and more hate discourse around lately (or it’s always been there, just took a while to reach my bubble). An open-ended and honest question though – why are the comments of your post written mostly by females? Why is that always the case, and how can we systematically change that?”

Ongoing discussion on AI and workplace bias

The conversation also expanded into broader topics such as artificial intelligence, workplace culture, and gender-based bias in professional spaces.

One user said, “Honestly, it’s exhausting. At least this guy is up front and easy to know and avoid. The real struggle is in the bias lurking in the everyday workplace, which is hidden but shows up in closed-door conversations. Women, now more than ever, need to keep speaking up, keep supporting each other, and not tolerate this. Women also need to be investing even more time in AI, building, learning, and leading here. We need to be at the table and talking about how to use this tech responsibly.”
Disclaimer: This article is based on publicly available social media posts, comments, and statements shared by individuals online. The Times of India has not independently verified the authenticity of all claims, allegations, or personal experiences referenced. The report is intended to present the ongoing online discussion and does not endorse, support, or validate any offensive, discriminatory, or harmful views mentioned in the content. Thumb image: Canva (for representative purposes only)