More than a quarter of women aged under 25 hold a negative view of men, according to a recent poll for The New Statesman. This “new radicalism”, said the outlet, challenges the “prevailing narrative” that the so-called gender war is being driven by radicalised young men.

A “growing army” of female influencers broadly referred to as the femosphere is “urging” women to adopt a more cynical mindset when it comes to the opposite sex, said Sarah Ditum in The Times, and to “ditch their romantic delusions” and “be more aggressive in the dating game”.

What is the femosphere?
The term comes from the concept of the manosphere – a loose, online-based community promoting a view of “traditional masculinity”, with men in a dominant position while women are subservient. The femosphere flips manosphere terminology on its head: instead of “taking the red pill” (embracing the belief that society does not value men), the “pink-pill philosophy” encourages women to break with the egalitarian conventions of liberal feminism and see men as the “problem sex”.

What does that mean in practice?
Femosphere philosophy urges women to avoid casual relationships with men and to “adopt a more emotionally distant, calculated approach” to dating, said NBC News. Mirroring the “pick-up artists” of the manosphere, the femosphere has its own “female dating strategists”, said The Guardian. They include “dark feminine” influencers who “encourage women to find men to support them financially”.

The appeal is understandable, feminist theorist Sophie Lewis told the newspaper. The promise of liberal feminism that women could “have it all” has left many “saddled with both productive and reproductive labour”. The femosphere offers liberation from the “double shift”.

Is it a bad thing?
Femosphere influencers say the movement is about “empowerment” of women rather than hatred of men. They claim to be “pushing back against dating norms that have historically disadvantaged women” by adopting a mindset that “encourages self-worth, boundaries, and higher standards in relationships”, said NBC News. But critics say it risks “turning dating into a transactional or manipulative experience”, where “authenticity” takes a “back seat to strategy”.

“Our season continues exactly as planned, uninterrupted and at full throttle,” said LIV Golf’s chief executive, Scott O’Neil, in an email to staff on Wednesday night, hours after an emergency meeting in New York.

“But what about beyond this season?” said The Telegraph. O’Neil’s email was an “attempt to calm ferocious speculation” that the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia’s Public Investment Fund (PIF) is “pulling the plug” on the controversial franchise, into which it has already sunk $5 billion (£3.7 billion).

‘Dying days’
LIV Golf was “supposed to be the breakaway tour that changed golf as we know it”, said BBC Sport. It “certainly managed to disrupt the status quo”, with the help of the “eye-watering” amount of PIF funding, but the tour’s net losses have totalled more than $1.1 billion (£810 million) since it was established in 2021.

If they ever make a documentary about LIV, “it will look a lot like the one about that calamitous Fyre Festival”, said Sean O’Brien on TalkSport. Some of the game’s big names who rejected offers to join the tour, including Tiger Woods and recent Masters winner Rory McIlroy, have been shown to be “on the right side of history”. The tour’s only purpose was to “make rich men absurdly richer”.

Changing world
PIF announced a new five-year strategy on Wednesday to make up a budget deficit of $73 billion. The fund is set to “narrow” its funding focus and take stock of a “decade-long spending splurge”, said the Financial Times.

For a while, the soft power of sport was a “critical driver” in Saudi Arabia’s repositioning, said The i Paper, but the “world has changed since then”. Criticism of the country’s approach to human rights has, “if not washed clean off”, at least “shunted down the list of global concerns”. The Kingdom is still a major investor in F1 and football, including as hosts of the 2034 men’s World Cup. But for now, Riyadh will focus on events that “serve a PR purpose” or “promise a return on investment”. “Golf falls outside both metrics.”

A visitor tries an oxygen chamber at the FIBO fitness and wellness trade show in Cologne, Germany. The hyperbaric treatment, combining hyperoxia and hypoxia, is designed to enhance athletic recovery.

Ina Fassbender / AFP / Getty Images

Kent: Barming Place, Barming
A magnificent Grade II* Georgian house set in approx. 1.5 acres of gardens. Built in 1768, it boasts a striking red-brick facade and plenty of period features, including a stone balustrade and elegant stone detailing, as well as a roof terrace with views over the Kent Weald. 7 beds (1 with terrace), 4 baths, kitchen, 5 receps, office, workshop, swimming pool, sauna, garden, parking. £2.35 million; Inigo.

Gloucestershire: Dover House, Painswick
Handsome Grade II* house built in 1720, with atmospheric period interiors featuring intricate rococo scrollwork. 4 beds, 2 baths, kitchen, 2 receps, garden. £1.1 million; Inigo.

Cumbria: Fiddleback Farm, West Woodside
This remarkable circular Grade II* farmhouse is nestled in just over 8.5 acres of mature gardens. 5 beds, 5 baths, kitchen/ dining room, 3 receps, garden, outbuilding, parking. £750,000; Finest Properties.

Norfolk: The Tasburgh Hall Estate, Tasburgh
A superb country estate with a neo-Jacobean manor dating back to the 18th century. 7 beds, 6 baths, kitchen, 4 receps, 4-bed guest/leisure wing, 2-bed gatehouse, fishing lake, tennis court, garden, parking. £2.75 million; Sowerbys.

Carmarthenshire: Pant y Ffynnon, Llanfynydd
A charming country house built c.1796, and set in approx. 12.5 acres surrounded by verdant rolling hills. 4 beds, 2 baths (1 en suite), kitchen, 3 receps, garden, parking. £815,000; Inigo.

A question for those desperate to cut benefits to fund defence: who exactly are you willing to impoverish?
Polly Toynbee in The Guardian
“The benefits budget is now a magic money tree,” writes Polly Toynbee. Conservatives and Fargists making “wild promises” of “tax cuts, more police” and “more bonuses for marriage” always promise to fund them through welfare cuts. “More unexpected was the klaxon” from Labour peer George Robertson to cut benefits to finance defence. Yet the “catastrophic overspending and failures” of the Ministry of Defence amount to “many billions wasted”. “At least nearly everything dispersed by the DWP arrives in the pockets of its intended targets.”

AI has an Awful Image problem
John Thornhill in the Financial Times
“AI dread stalks” the US “amid worries over job losses, child safety and the environmental impact of giant data centres”, writes John Thornhill. The industry is responding with “mixed messaging”, promising to “cure disease, tackle climate change and usher in an era of radical abundance” while also warning of “job disruption” and “existential risk”. These “tech titans” should show that AI is an “invention for inventing” that, as well as boosting productivity, can “transform creativity and scientific discovery”. 

J.D. Vance’s theory of Trumpism is no match for the practice
Leader in The Economist
The US vice president’s “theories of governance keep taking a beating” from Donald Trump’s contradictory “practice”, says The Economist. J.D. Vance positioned himself as an isolationist but claims a Middle East war “makes sense this time because America has ‘a smart president, whereas in the past we’ve had dumb presidents’”. Such “righteous hypocrisy” is part and parcel of his role as “chief ideologist” for a movement that “has no ideology” other than promoting “the instincts, impulses and glory of one man”.